So far, Bush is the only one who has made it his stated, unending goal since 9/11. Other presidents have either not done it intentionally, or stopped when they realized they were doing it.

This is one of the best statements Obama has made yet.

As previous posters have stated there's a reason we have a CENTCOM commander. His purvey is the wider region.

We had one Admiral Fallon, who the Bush Administration fired for precisely this reason. Fallon argued that more troops needed to be sent from Iraq to Afghanistan and that the Administration's saver-rattling when it came to Iran was not helpful. He was cashiered.

Petraeus' purvey is Iraq. It makes no sense to think that Petraeus, any time soon, would voluntarily argue that more of his troops need to be sent from Iraq to Afghanistan. This would be like asking Eisenhower if he thought it was a good idea to send some of his troops to the Pacific, or Grant in 1865 if he wanted to send some of the Army of Potomac men to Sherman out west.

No sane commander would ever answer yes to this.

Petraeus' job is to handle Iraq. As other posters have pointed out, he knows nothing about Afghanistan. So asking him if he thinks troops should be sent there, makes only marginal sense. He can address one side of the equation (Iraq) but not the other (Afghanistan). It would make far more sense to consult the CENTCOM who's responsible for the entire region.

The point, which many of us told you ad nauseum until you yelled us down, is that Bittergate has done absolutely nothing.

It hasn't eroded her support, it hasn't helped hers. Pennsylvanians are smart, thinking people who were able to actually read his comments and understand what he was trying to say.

I for one am not shocked. Nor are any of us. But Hillary supporters are on here, like Notorious W.E.S., trying to do what they always do which is disagree with math and disprove what the polls show.

The "Tuzla" sniper story did her more harm, while Bittergate didn't hurt Obama at all. Already knew this. Could have told you it. Did tell you it. Don't mind that you ignored it. A little peeved now that the Clinton supporters are still choosing to disagree with fact.

Here's another poll for you. Quinnipac, which is among the most accurate and polled the most people this time around with a relatively large sample size of 2,100 people.

"

April 15, 2008

POLL: Quinnipiac University Pennsylvania Dems

Quinnipiac University

Pennsylvania - 4/9 through 4/13

Clinton 50%, Obama 44% - unchanged from 4/3-4/6

From the release: "There was no noticeable difference in the matchup in polling April 12 – 13, following widespread media reports on Sen. Obama’s ‘bitter’ comments."

Update: More on results from Quinnipiac by race, education and gender here.

-- Mark Blumenthal"

You asked me why I'm only looking at the polling of Democrats. Easy because only Democrats can vote in the PA primary. Don't know if you caught it or not.

Jim Webb is one of the major sponsers of this bill. He's also one of the leading V.P. candidates, whichever Democrat wins.

The guys got a grip like a bulldog. Reportedly he was one of the few people in the Marines who could make Ollie North sweat.

McCain's gonna regret this from now until November. Webb will make his life a living hell. I definitely wouldn't have done this.

Yes, we understand people's points about the general. But quit distorting reality here. There are not "polls here to support everyone's point of view."

The media's spent the past 5 days running non-stop with this story, Hillary Clinton's drinking shots, and pundits were calling this the "demise of Obama."

That he came out of that with NO difference at all, zero loss of support in the polls, is not a wash. That's a huge deal.

If she's up BEFORE the comments, and she remains up by the same margin, it's not dependant on our point of view. She made ZERO progress. That's not good.

I'm sorry but I refuse to be part of the Clinton supporters continuing refusal to understand facts and math. I was derided for only counting the Democratic polls by the same people who deride me for (supposedly) claiming the Democratic campaign is over.

So which is it? I'm sorry but you people can't have it both ways. Either polls matter or they don't. They can't matter when she's winning and not matter when she's losing. Either the primary is still going in which case I can and must count the Democratic polling results, or you have to admit it's over and she lost. But you can't keep trying to have it both ways only when it's beneficial to your candidate. Especially since she's the one losing.

Quinnipac shows her as up 6 points. The same margin she was before the flap. SUSA shows her up 14 points, an actual loss of 6 percent support. Gallup shows Obama up 11% nationally.

These are the 3 main polls everyone's been using all campaign season. They're also the most accurate.

You cannot deny fact simply by wishing it as so. She is NOT gaining in any major polls. If she is please provide them.

They either a) do not exist or b) are some minor county poll no one's heard of. My guess is you don't even have that much. There are simply NONE, zero major polls that show her gaining. Period. To deny fact is folly.