A Missed Opportunity?

"Does Obama understand that saying he has consistently denounced him is not the same as simply saying, 'I denounce him'? A weak response -- reminiscent of Dukakis. (By the way, why is it somehow only a question for Jewish Americans that Farrakhan is a fascist hate-monger? It's a question for all Americans.) Obama's Farrakhan response suggests to me he is reluctant to attack a black demagogue. Maybe he wants to avoid a racial melee. But he has one. He needs to get real on this. Weak, weak, weak. Clinton sees an opening and pounces. She wins this round. He is forced to adjust. His worst moment in any debate since this campaign started. I'm astounded he couldn't be more forceful. His inability to say by himself, unprompted, that Farrakhan's support repels him and he rejects it outright really unsettles me."

Those who are assuming an easy Democratic win this year, guess again: An LAT poll has McCain beating Hillary 46-40 and Obama 42 to 40, which is essentially a tie.

"The Arizona senator also scored higher marks than Clinton or Obama for experience and strength. On the issue of 'honesty and integrity,' he beat Clinton and was tied by Obama. McCain is viewed favorably by 61% of all registered voters, including a plurality of Democrats.

"And the survey showed McCain's advantages extend even to some domestic issues. On the economy, a subject that McCain has joked about his own lack of expertise, voters picked him over Democratic front-runner Obama as best able to lead by an 8-point margin -- 42% to 34%."

Speaking of John McCain, he raced over to reporters after his warmup act, Cincinnati radio host Bill Cunningham, lambasted Obama:

"Senator John McCain apologized Tuesday after a conservative radio host who helped introduce him before a rally used Senator Barack Obama's middle name, Hussein, three times, while disparaging him," the NYT says.

Cunningham "lambasted the national news media, drawing cheers from the audience, as being soft in their coverage of Mr. Obama compared to the Republican presidential candidates, declaring they should 'peel the bark off Barack Hussein Obama.' He went on to say, 'At one point, the media will quit taking sides in this thing and start covering Barack Hussein Obama.' "

Did I hear some Hillary aides cheering his assault on the media?

What awful staff work by the McCain campaign, since Cunningham (who later lambasted McCain and said he'd back Hillary) is well known as a conservative flame-thrower. And while McCain said he'd never met the talk show host, Cunningham told CNN last night that they had met twice. Still, I think McCain was able to contain the damage.

At Real Clear Politics, Tom Bevan wonders why Hillary kept the gloves on for so long:

"The Clinton campaign's biggest sin this cycle was buying into their own hype of inevitability early on and underestimating Barack Obama. They didn't attack him when they should have because they felt they didn't need to. Big mistake.

"Clinton's critique of Obama's foreign policy naivete is based on two things he said last summer. On July 24 in a CNN/YouTube debate, Obama said he would meet with America's enemies without preconditions. A week later (August 1), perhaps in an effort to shore up his tough side in response to the criticism he'd been taking from his first comment, Obama said he would launch a unilateral strike on terror targets inside Pakistan, a US ally . . .