WASHINGTON – The top U.S. commander in Afghanistan is welcoming the White House decision to send more combat troops, saying they are needed to set the stage for a turnaround in the war.

Gen. David McKiernan told reporters at the Pentagon on Wednesday that the extra U.S. troops will be sent to southern Afghanistan, where he said there have been insufficient security forces to confront the insurgents.

President Barack Obama on Tuesday approved the dispatching of 17,000 more U.S. troops to Afghanistan to stabilize what he called a deteriorating situation. They include an Army combat brigade and a Marine expeditionary brigade and will join the approximately 30,000 U.S. troops already there.

McKiernan said that while extra U.S. troops are necessary, there also is a need for more contributions from international civilian organizations.

WASHINGTON – As President Barack Obama prepares to send troops to war for the first time as commander in chief, a new report says a “game-changing” strategy is urgently needed in Afghanistan to save the faltering international campaign.

“All is not lost in Afghanistan,” RAND Corp. experts said in a paper being released Tuesday by the congressionally funded United States Institute of Peace.

“But urgent measures – what might be called ‘game-changing steps’ – are now needed to stem an increasingly violent insurgency,” said authors Seth G. Jones and C. Christine Fair.

Obama has been reviewing several options for a troop build up that he and commanders want in Afghanistan. Defense Secretary Robert Gates is to sign troop deployment orders after he gets a nod from Obama.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Monday that Obama will make the decision shortly about how many additional troops to send to Afghanistan.

“Without getting into broad timelines, I don’t think this is anything that involves weeks,” the presidential spokesman said, underscoring that Obama’s move would come shortly.

The new think tank report adds to the growing consensus among officials and private analysts that sending more troops to the now 7-year-old war will mean little without a new strategy.

It faults international donors for not delivering all the aid promised. It says strategies are splintered and some efforts have been counter productive because nations working there don’t even agree on whether the biggest threat is al-Qaida, the skyrocketing drug trade, or other issues.

The report says efforts to build a police force have been disappointing, and that work to disarm former combatants and militias is “all but moribund.” It notes that U.S. intelligence indicates Afghan officials are involved in the drug trade; traffickers have bought off hundreds of police chiefs, judges and officials, and it suggests the immediate firing of corrupt officials.

“The United States and its international allies must re-examine their core objectives in Afghanistan,” it said, adding that the first priority must be stopping the use of Afghanistan and neighboring Pakistan as a base for terrorist groups like al-Qaida and the Taliban.

Officials also must stop hoping they can build a central Afghan government strong enough to keep order across Afghanistan, the report said. It asserted that such a goal goes against the country’s history, and it recommended that tribes and local organizations must be fostered as well.

“It is unlikely the United States and NATO will defeat the Taliban and other insurgent groups in Afghanistan,” the report also said. So any additional troops sent should be used to mentor Afghan security forces on how to control the country themselves, it said.

Identifying and narrowing the goals in Afghanistan is part of a broad U.S. government reassessment of the war effort that is under way.

U.S. commanders have said they could send an additional 30,000 troops to Afghanistan this year, nearly doubling the American contingent. Gates has said two brigades could be ready to go there by spring and a third by summer.

Obama is expected to initially approve only part of a military request and decide on more after that.

WILLIAMSBURG, Va.- Vice President Joe Biden warned Friday that the United States faces a tough – and dangerous – task as it shifts the military from Iraq to Afghanistan.

“The road remains incredibly, incredibly perilous” in both countries, President Barack Obama’s No. 2 told House Democrats just before embarking on the first foreign trip by a top Obama administration official.

Obama made an Iraq drawdown and an Afghanistan buildup a foreign policy cornerstone of his presidential campaign, and the administration is set to move forward toward both goals in coming weeks.

The president dispatched Biden to a gathering of House Democrats at a retreat southeast of Washington to deliver an assessment of international challenges ahead. Biden’s somber take on foreign policy – in contrast to Obama’s feisty campaign-style pep talk on the economy the night before – appeared intended to lower expectations for an immediate troop withdrawal in Iraq and a quick turnaround in Afghanistan.

“The progress is real in Iraq,” Biden said before invoking a bit of football lingo. “We’re on the 20-yard line moving in but there’s an awful lot to be done.”
 
He said the administration must be “very deeply involved” not just in drawing down troops in a careful manner but also in helping Iraqis reach true political reconciliation. “We’re going to have to get in there and be much more aggressive in forcing them to deal with these issues,” he said.

In Afghanistan, Biden said, “The economic and security and social conditions there are daunting” and the United States has “geography, demography and history working against us.” Returning to football analogies, he said the United States has 80 yards in that country to bring stability and eliminate terrorist strongholds.

“We have a long, long way to go there,” Biden said.

But he also says the deteriorating situation and Taliban resurgence is a global problem, and there is no solution in Afghanistan without Pakistan.

“We’ve got to make Afghanistan the world’s responsibility, not just the United States’ responsibility,” he said, eliciting cheers.

The U.S. has some 33,000 soldiers in Afghanistan, and Obama is expected to send another 30,000 this year as his administration shifts its focus from the war in Iraq to the Afghan conflict.

Biden, the former chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations committee, spoke to the Democratic rank and file just before leaving for a security conference in Munich, Germany. He also was slated to hold bilateral meetings with Russia, Georgia, Germany, France and Britain.

(Richmond Times-Dispatch, 02-01-09)
Donald Nuechterlein, a political scientist, is the author of “America Recommitted: A Superpower Assesses Its Role in a Turbulent World.” Contact him at nuechtd@cstone.net.
CHARLOTTESVILLE, Va. – The United States has fought four costly wars since 1945 and none of them ended as World War II did, with complete victory.

In Korea, after nearly three years of huge American troop casualties, the war ended in 1953 in a draw with North and South Korea divided along roughly the same border they had at the start of the war.

The Vietnam war, begun in 1965, was an even costlier one for U.S. troops. And it ended in defeat when North Vietnam’s army took control of the south after Congress cut off funding for U.S. operations in 1975.

The third and fourth wars, in Iraq and Afghanistan, are still in progress. Although the outcome in Afghanistan is not clear, Iraq appears to be on track to become a stable but fragile democratic state.

In Afghanistan, U.S. and allied forces that ousted the Taliban regime in 2001 now find a resurgent Taliban that threatens security in large parts of the country. Many experts conclude that Afghanistan is a fractured country, threatened by Taliban forces in the south and east, and by warlords elsewhere. Unlike Iraq,
Afghanistan has never had a government that controlled the entire country.

In all of these wars, the presidents made difficult choices: Agree to an unsatisfactory outcome (Korea), accept a stalemate and eventual defeat (Vietnam), persevere to achieve success (Iraq), and, until recently, neglect the enemy’s resurgence (Afghanistan).

LET’S EXAMINE the choices made on Vietnam and Iraq by presidents Richard Nixon and George W. Bush and consider the alternatives President Obama has as he deals with Iraq and Afghanistan in the coming years.
A noted historian, Margaret MacMillan, authored an excellent book two years ago titled Nixon and Mao: The Week That Changed the World. She recounts how Nixon and his national security adviser, Henry Kissinger, secretly planned a presidential trip to China in 1972 to end a 23-year freeze on U.S. relations with Communist China. Here, according to MacMillan, is the situation that Nixon faced when he entered the White House in 1969:

“The Soviet Union and its allies had watched with pleasure as American power failed to crush North Vietnam. American allies had watched uneasily as their superpower showed its weakness. Their publics had increasingly turned sour on the United States; in Canada and Western Europe, huge demonstrations demanded that the United States get out of Vietnam. Much of the criticism, and not just from the left, was disturbingly anti-American. The United States was portrayed as an international bully.”

Nixon believed that opening relations with China would persuade both China and the Soviet Union to support a negotiated settlement in Vietnam that preserved the south as a viable state. Although he succeeded in withdrawing American ground troops in 1973, he failed in Vietnam when North Vietnamese forces took over the south in 1975 and forced a humiliating evacuation of all Americans.

In Iraq in 2007, George Bush faced this difficult choice: whether to withdraw American forces, as domestic and international opinion was demanding, or order a surge of forces in an effort to reverse the downward trend in security that threatened to turn into full-scale civil war. He chose a surge. After a year of sustained operations, it brought security to nearly all of Iraq’s cities as well as countryside.

WHAT ARE Barack Obama’s options in Afghanistan and Iraq?

U.S. commanders in Afghanistan have asked for 30,000 more troops to fight the Taliban and to strengthen the Kabul government. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said last week that he has recommended about 12,000 additional troops. Yet, none of our NATO allies, with the exception of Britain, Canada, and the Netherlands, is willing to add to current forces. Germany doesn’t currently permit its troops to engage in combat.

If the president adds troops in Afghanistan, he will need to decide soon whether to seek a negotiated settlement of the war, one that doesn’t result in a withdrawal of American forces. Secretary Gates has stated that the United States will continue to pursue al-Qaida leaders hiding in neighboring Pakistan. The alternative to a negotiated settlement is adding many more combat troops in an effort to stabilize the entire country.

The president’s choice in Iraq is far easier. He will be able to withdraw the troops within 16 to 18 months and be reasonably confident that the new government, which assumes power this month, will take responsibility for policing the country. Washington will continue to provide logistic, intelligence, and training support.

If things go well in Iraq in the next two years, Barack Obama will see the country’s successful transition to a stable, democratic government. And if so, part of the credit will go to George Bush, who was not willing to accept a defeat.

WASHINGTON – President Bush said Friday that the fight in Iraq has been longer and more costly than expected, but he defended the U.S.-led invasion, saying the world could not risk leaving Saddam Hussein’s power unchecked.

In a speech he was delivering later on Friday, Bush defended his Middle East policies, claimed some progress and outlined his view of what President-elect Barack Obama will inherit there. Bush said state-sponsored terrorism continues to destabilize the region, people still live under oppression, political and economic reforms are advancing “in fits and starts,” and Iran’s uranium enrichment remains a threat to peace.

The president said that while it’s true that Iraq’s Saddam Hussein was not connected to the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the decision to oust him cannot be viewed in isolation.

“In a world where terrorists armed with boxcutters had just killed nearly 3,000 people, America had to decide whether we could tolerate a sworn enemy that acted belligerently, that supported terror and that intelligence agencies around the world believed had weapons of mass destruction,” Bush said, referring to intelligence reports that later proved false.

“It was clear to me, to members of both political parties, and to many leaders around the world that after Sept. 11, this was a risk we could not afford to take,” the president said about the Iraq war, which has claimed the lives of more than 4,200 U.S. military personnel.

Bush also credited the Iraq invasion that deposed Saddam with persuading Iran to suspend its nuclear weapons search. He noted the U.S. intelligence community has timed Tehran’s halting of a key part of its nuclear weapons program to 2003 – the year the war began.

“The defeat of Saddam … appears to have changed the calculation of Iran,” Bush said.

More broadly, he defended his administration’s approach to diplomacy with Iran, which so far has been unsuccessful.

“We have made our bottom line clear,” Bush said. “For the safety of our people and the peace of the world, America will not allow Iran to develop a nuclear weapon.”

Bush said that after Saddam’s regime had been toppled by U.S.-led forces, his administration chose to stand by the Iraqi people, help nurture a budding democracy – even launch a military buildup when increased violence threatened to tear the nation asunder.

“When Saddam’s regime fell, we refused to take the easy option and install a friendly strongman in his place,” he said. “Even though it required enormous sacrifice, we stood by the Iraqi people as they elected their own leaders and built a young democracy.”

Earlier this week, Iraq’s three-member presidential council signed off on a new U.S.-Iraqi security agreement, which requires the nearly 150,000 U.S. troops to leave Iraq by January 1, 2012. It also requires American soldiers to withdraw from Iraqi cities by the end of June 2009. On Thursday and Friday, Bush called several Iraqi leaders, including Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, to thank them for their work in getting the agreement approved.

Bush said his policies in the Middle East have not always been popular and sometimes have fallen short of the administration’s goals. “For example, the fight in Iraq has been longer and more costly than expected,” he said.

Bush called the Israeli-Palestinian conflict the most “vexing” problem in the region – something that his administration has been seen as slow, at least in his early years as president, to aggressively mediate.

Still, he noted that he was the first U.S. president to call for a Palestinian state and said he sees progress toward reaching a two-state solution. After months of publicly insisting that an agreement between the two sides could be sealed by a year-end deadline, which was set by the two sides and Bush last November in Annapolis, Md., the Bush administration has conceded that it will hand the fragile, unfinished U.S.-backed peace effort to Obama.

Bush recalled the status of the Middle East talks when he came to office, following former President Bill Clinton’s inability to forge an agreement at Camp David in 2000. The collapse of those talks gave way to the Al-Aqsa intifada, which broke out a couple of months after the Camp David peace summit in July 2000.

Bush said that in 2001, more than 500 Israelis and Palestinians were killed. He called the late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat a “terrorist who stole from his people and walked away from peace.”

He also criticized former Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. “Sharon was elected to fight terror and pursue a ‘Greater Israel’ policy that allowed for no territorial concessions,” he said. “And neither side could envision a return to negotiations or the realistic possibility of a two-state solution.”

Even as the U.S. presence is on the verge of receding in Iraq, America needs to stay engaged with that key Middle Eastern nation, two international experts said in Richmond on Wednesday.

“Iraq could be a positive force in the region,” said former Iraqi defense official Nazar Janabi.But, Janabi said, “that will require some strategic patience” on the part of America.

Beyond that, said former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq David G. Newton,”America has an obligation to leave a viable [Iraqi] government behind.”

Besides, Newton said, “We do not want to have to go back there a third time.”

Janabi is now with The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, and Newton is with the Middle East Institute in Washington.

The two spoke to about 150 people at a World Affairs Council of Greater Richmond program at the Omni Richmond Hotel on Wednesday night.

Continued engagement with Iraq is important because that country has about 10 percent of the world’s oil reserves, and sits in the middle of one of the world’s most volatile regions, Janabi said.

“It could be come a terrorist safe haven and the scene of future regional wars,” he said, “or it could become a stable and prosperous U.S. ally.”

And the U.S. has a moral obligation to the Iraqis to help repair the damage of the war, Newton said.

“What matters now is not how U.S. presence in Iraq started,” Janabi said, “but how it will change in the next four years.”

America’s infusion of troops into Iraq last year — the “surge” — has reduced violence and that “makes other things possible” to help build a stable society there, Newton said.

Though he decried the Bush administration’s decision to go to war in Iraq, “we can now have more hope,”

Newton said. “You can talk about success, if you define it carefully.”

Still, the retired diplomat said, “the progress made in Iraq is fragile.” Violence could easily flare up again.

The challenge facing the United States, Janabi said, is to prevent the emergence of authoritarian regimes — civilian or military — again in Iraq.

“It can do this by ensuring free and fair elections in Iraq in 2009, in the hope that this leads to the emergence of countervailing centers of power to check that of the central government,” the Iraqi analyst said, “and by maintaining a residual presence in Iraq beyond 2011 to deter the military from undertaking a coup.”

Janabi served from 2004 to 2006 as director general for defense policy and requirements in the Iraqi Ministry of Defense. He now focuses on Iraqi and Middle Eastern security issues and democratization in the region.
Newton served as the U.S. ambassador to Iraq from 1984 to 1988 and as ambassador to Yemen from 1994 to 1997.

President Bush said Tuesday that he regrets some of his statements on the war on terrorism over the last eight years and said he wishes he had not spoken in front of a “Mission Accomplished” banner only a month after U.S. troops in Iraq were deployed.

Congratulations, Mr. President-elect. Take a moment to relax and savor your victory – but not too long. There already are plenty of pressing matters piling up in your in-box:
 
ECONOMY: This is problem No. 1. The nation is in the midst of the greatest economic crisis since the 1930s. Unemployment now stands at 6.1 percent, and economists predict it could go as high as 7.5 percent in 2009. Consumers are pessimistic about the future and cutting back on borrowing and spending, the lifeblood of America’s economy. A painful recession is looming and in many parts of the country it already has landed with a sickening thud.

The good news? Congress has come up with $700 billion to bail out the sinking financial system by buying toxic mortgages. The bad news? Everybody wants some of the money and the program is rapidly changing to dole out money in unexpected directions. Shifting gears, the government decided to buy stakes in banks. Automakers and the insurance industry are clamoring for help. Others are, too. Many Democrats want Congress to pass another economic stimulus bill. Americans already have lost trillions of dollars in investments, savings and college accounts. What’s your move?

ENERGY: You’ve promised to move quickly to deal with the country’s energy problems and reduce U.S. dependence on Persian Gulf oil. But oil prices have plummeted and the political will to act may be waning as well. Getting agreement from Congress, where Democrats and Republicans have long-standing differences on the best approach, won’t be easy.
  
There are sharp divisions over offshore oil drilling and precious little federal money available to help develop alternative energy sources such as wind and solar. Increasing use of nuclear power would require finding a way to deal with nuclear waste, a politically volatile issue. You’ve said the government needs to act quickly to address climate change; the hard part will be working out the details with Congress for a plan to cap carbon dioxide and other greenhouse emissions.

FOREIGN POLICY: Iraq and Afghanistan may get most of the attention, but there are a host of other pressing foreign policy issues. At the top of your agenda is Iran’s nuclear program. While Iran denies trying to build a bomb, most experts say that’s the goal and your pressing task is to choose an option to stop Iran. Diplomacy with economic and political concessions remains the preferred approach. But there is the issue of whether to threaten Iran, either implicitly or explicitly.

U.S. policy on Pakistan needs retooling. Generous aid and warm embraces have not eliminated Osama bin Laden and other al-Qaida leaders thought to be hiding in frontier regions. U.S. decisions are pending on whether to expand U.S. attacks in those areas and whether to support the government as it moves ahead on reconciliation with some militants.

Russia, once on a promising path to democracy, has retreated somewhat. Apart from domestic crackdowns on the press and other hardline tactics, Russia has taken steps to revive its influence in Ukraine and other former Soviet republics and is in a tense standoff with Georgia on the future of two breakaway provinces. The question is whether a way can be found to restrain Russia while retaining its vital support on Iran’s and North Korea’s nuclear programs.

Pyongyang has reached a tentative agreement to get rid of its nuclear weapons and capabilities in return for economic and political concessions from Asia and the West. However, it continues to zigzag on tough terms for outside inspections. A careful eye must be kept on whether North Korea backtracks on its commitments, obtained with promises of economic assistance.

In the Middle East, a pause is in order while Israel sorts out formation of a new government. But even before that is accomplished, decisions are needed on how much to intervene in the Arab-Israeli dispute, including whether to appoint a special U.S. mediator, and whether to outline a U.S. framework for a settlement with the Palestinians.

GLOBAL FINANCES: World leaders will meet Nov. 15 in Washington to address the global financial crisis – the first in a series of summits to address what could be a long and deep economic downturn. The first meeting will focus on the underlying causes of the crisis and the principles that should guide any reforms. President Bush will play host for the meeting, but the White House is promising to seek input from the president-elect.

GUANTANAMO BAY: There are about 250 detainees at the Guantanamo Bay Naval Base in Cuba. The current defense secretary and chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff both want to see the detention center shut down, and it was a rare area of agreement on the presidential campaign trail, too. The hard part will be making it happen. Where to send the prisoners? How to try them? And how to shut down the Gitmo center itself?
 
HEALTH CARE: 45 million Americans don’t have health insurance, and expectations that coverage can be broadly expanded were stoked by both sides in the presidential campaign. Now comes the time to act. But history has shown that interest groups and patients become more wary of overhauling the system once they learn the details and potential trade-offs of a specific proposal. And the financial crisis made significant changes even more unlikely because any proposal will be costly.
  
HOME FORECLOSURES: Each day from July through September, more than 2,700 Americans lost their homes in foreclosure. That number, up from 1,200 a day a year ago, is a sign that the mortgage industry and government programs have done little to help troubled homeowners. The mortgage market’s troubles have proved to be far more serious and intractable than most in government or the private sector had predicted a year ago. All eyes are on Washington to see if the government can craft a fix.

INTERROGATION: The war on terrorism continues, and that means more prisoners and more interrogations. The military has its own set of rules restricting how interrogations can be carried out. But what rules should govern CIA interrogations? Will waterboarding be on the list? The technique – which critics liken to torture – remains an option for the agency, according to its chief, but has not been exercised since 2003.

IMMIGRATION: Now that the voting’s over, pressure to revisit immigration reform will build quickly from Latino supporters, immigration groups and some business interests. Larger Democratic majorities could help to move a bill through Congress, but those majorities will be built, in part, with Democrats from conservative districts who are wary of going too far. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has said Democrats may have to give up some of their priorities in immigration reform to get an agreement, such as giving illegal immigrants a path to citizenship.

KATRINA FAMILIES: By March 1, you will need to find homes for as many as 11,600 families who were displaced after the 2005 hurricanes. Temporary housing for these families expires at the end of February.

MEDICARE/MEDICAID: Both of these government programs face huge financial problems. The expense of delivering promised benefits under Medicare, the giant health care program for older Americans, is expected to rise much more quickly than tax revenue. And Medicaid’s growing strain on federal and state budgets is unlikely to abate over the coming decade as the cost of providing health care to the poor is expected to increase by 7.9 percent annually.

SOCIAL SECURITY: The venerable retirement security needs a fix. Currently, 34 million retirees and their dependents receive monthly benefit checks, as do 6 million survivors of deceased workers and 9 million disabled workers and their dependents. Government experts project the Social Security trust funds will begin paying out more than they collect in payroll taxes in 2017, and be exhausted in 2041.

TERRORISM: The threat of terrorism is an ongoing reality in the years since the Sept. 11 attacks in 2001. Government planners worry about a window of vulnerability in the first days and months of a new presidency. Adversaries may try to take advantage of the shift in administrations, and the president-elect must be prepared for an early test. There are countless details that come with facing the threat of terrorism. For one, the government must find a way for America’s police officers and fire fighters to talk to each other during disasters. It’s been more than seven years since the 9-11 attacks, and this problem has not been resolved.

TRANSITION: You have 77 days to put together a government. This is the first wartime presidential transition in 40 years, and the first in the age of terrorism anxieties that became a reality after the 9-11 attacks. By one count, there are 7,840 presidential appointee jobs to be filled, including 1,177 requiring Senate confirmation. Some recommended deadlines: Try to choose your Cabinet members by Christmas, and have them briefed and ready for confirmation hearings by about Jan. 10. Try to have 100 appointees in place by April 1 and 400 by August. Those are worthy, but ambitious goals: No president has been able to complete confirmation for more than about 25 Cabinet and sub-Cabinet appointees by April 1, or more than about 240 by its eighth month.
 
WAR: The United States is fighting two wars at once. There are 152,000 U.S. troops in Iraq and 32,000 in Afghanistan, where violence has escalated and American casualties are running higher than in Iraq. An immediate challenge: the U.N. resolution that governs the presence of U.S. troops in Iraq expires at the end of the year. The U.S. military has advised Iraqi authorities that it will have to shut down security and service operations in Iraq if the year ends without a security agreement or a renewed U.N. mandate for American forces. Then come the larger questions of when and how to draw down U.S. troops in Iraq, and how many more troops to send to Afghanistan.

GREEN, Ohio – Presidential rivals John McCain and Barack Obama united to help narrate an opening to the World Series telecast Wednesday highlighting how baseball – America’s pastime – has drawn the country together in challenging times.
 
Taped by Obama on Saturday and McCain on Sunday, the opening features a montage of images from the Civil War through the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and notes historical parallels to the economic turmoil and two wars that now grip the nation.

“Throughout our history, this country has faced times of peril. But standing by our side, as it does tonight, has been baseball,” says actor Michael Douglas, the lead narrator.

Obama, striving to be the country’s first black president, quotes 19th century baseball player and sporting goods manufacturer Albert Spalding saying, “It received its baptism in the bloody days of our nation’s direst danger, when soldiers North and South were striving to forget their foes.”

McCain notes the contribution Jackie Robinson made as the first black player in the major leagues, quoting Martin Luther King Jr.: “He was a Freedom Rider before freedom rides.”

Obama also starts, before McCain picks up and then they both finish together, John F. Kennedy saying, “I think that both baseball and the country will endure.”

Despite the unity of purpose, the message carried no small measure of irony within the presidential campaign.

McCain, in one of the voiceovers taped after he appeared on “Fox News Sunday,” quotes President Herbert Hoover saying, “Next to religion, baseball has furnished a greater impact on American life than any other institution.”

On the campaign trail, McCain criticizes Obama for proposing to raise taxes on the wealthiest Americans at a time of recession, noting the last president to do that was Hoover. McCain said that triggered the Great Depression – an event depicted in the film.

“That didn’t work out too well,” McCain says wryly on the stump.

Meanwhile, Obama was helping introduce a World Series between the Philadelphia Phillies and Tampa Bay Rays after McCain criticized him for expressing allegiance to both teams during visits to the swing states where they play.

Obama, a self-professed Chicago White Sox fan, subsequently reiterated that he will root for the Phillies in the best-of-seven series. McCain is a fan of the Arizona Diamondbacks, who last won the Series in 2001.

McCain’s wife, Cindy, and her children own a minority stake in the Arizona Diamondbacks.