Should the candidates be talking more about Iraq?
A US soldier of 3rd Battalion, 320th Field Artillery Regiment, looks toward Iraqi soldiers pushing forward during a joint patrol in a market area in Mahmudiyah. Click the Play Button to see what Jack and out viewers had to say. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
A new report out today from the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction.
The Iraqi government is keeping thousands of dead, injured and missing soldiers and policemen on the payroll. Let me just run that past you again. The Iraqi government is using your money to pay thousands of dead, injured and missing soldiers and policemen as a way of compensating or caring for their families. This completely outrageous news comes from a report by the Special Inspector General for Iraq Reconstruction. It also says Iraqis have a shortage of officers and still rely on coalition forces for substantial logistical support.
The Iraqi army was supposed to be able to stand on its own two years ago. We're now being told they might get around to it by September of 2009.
This program to train Iraqi soldiers - and continue to pay the dead and missing ones - is costing American taxpayers $20 billion dollars. The report comes as Congress prepares to take up President Bush's request for another 108 billion dollars for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
And the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff today is accusing Iran of increasing arms and training support to insurgents in Iraq.
These news items were not known when a new USA-Today Gallup Poll was taken that shows sixty three percent of Americans say that the United States made a mistake in sending troops to Iraq. That's the highest "mistake" percentage Gallup has ever measured for an active war involving the United States.
Only Sixty-one percent of Americans in May 1971 said the Vietnam War was a mistake.
Here’s my question to you: Are the presidential candidates going to have to spend more time talking about Iraq?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Does Reverend Wright’s interview help or hurt Barack Obama?
[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/04/25/art.rev.wright.ap.jpg caption=" Rev. Jeremiah Wright."]
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Just when it seemed like the controversy surrounding Barack Obama and the Reverend Jeremiah Wright was dying down it's back. Reverend Wright is now speaking out for the first time since the story broke.
Wright, who was Barack Obama's pastor, was thrust into the political debate a couple of months ago when clips from some fiery sermons he has given in the past suddenly appeared on YOUTUBE and immediately afterwards almost continuously on television. The controversy forced Barack Obama to give a speech on race relations which seemed to quiet things down.
Now, in an interview tonight on PBS, Wright says the repeated airing of these sound bites is "unfair" and "devious." He doesn't apologize for anything he said. Obama has called Wright's words wrong- and has said that they "express a profoundly distorted view of this country."
When asked how he feels about what Senator Obama has been saying about him- Wright said quote:
"It went down very simply. He's a politician, I'm a pastor. We speak to two different audiences. And he says what he has to say as a politician. I say what I have to say as a pastor. But they're two different worlds." unquote
This isn't all we can expect to hear from Jeremiah Wright. He is scheduled to speak at the National Press Club on Monday and is the keynote speaker at an NAACP dinner in Detroit this weekend.
This is all happening while North Carolina Republicans are airing an ad in their state focused on the Obama-Wright relationship.
Here’s my question to you: Does Rev. Wright speaking out now help or hurt Barack Obama?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Why has the govt. refused to secure our borders?
Dusk falls over a section of the US-Mexico border fence near Campo, California. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
President Bush once called it "the most technologically advanced border security initiative in American history."
He was talking about the "virtual fence," a twenty million dollar hi-tech detection device along the Arizona-Mexico border designed to keep illegal aliens from coming into this country. Trouble is it doesn't work.
Now the government is scrapping the prototype, just two months after Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff approved it. The system is failing to alert border security agents of illegal crossings.
Agents began using the fence in December and it has been responsible for more than three thousand apprehensions. The problem is more than 3,000 illegal aliens enter the United States every day.
Time for Plan "B." The government will replace the virtual fence with a series of towers with communications systems, cameras and radar.
In case you're keeping track, 9/11 happened six and a half years ago. And since then in the name of national security the Bush administration has spied on Americans without a warrant, approved torture of terror suspects, ignored the Geneva conventions, made airline travel more complicated than going by covered wagon, invaded a sovereign country that had done nothing to us, and bankrupted the treasury. But they haven't secured the nation's borders.
In fact, illegal aliens with torches, hacksaws, ladders, and bungee cords have come right through miles of existing border fence. Holes in the fence are big enough for an average-sized woman to squeeze through.
And border agents in Texas, Arizona, and California often have to repair the same sections of the existing fence every day.
Here’s my question to you: Why in the years following 9/11 has the government refused to secure our nation's borders?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
What is McCain accomplishing with his “touring”?
Sen. John McCain tours New Orleans' Lower Ninth Ward, Thursday on his "It's Time for Action" campaign Tour. (PHOTO CREDIT: AP)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
As the Democrats slug it out for their party's nomination, Senator John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee, is spending the week going where Republicans fear to tread. McCain is on another tour. This one he's calling his "Time for Action" tour- and it's taking him to parts of the country that have never seen a Republican.
He wants to convince voters in these areas he says have been "forgotten" that he cares about them. He said earlier this week quote "There must be no forgotten places in America, whether they have been ignored for long years by the sins of indifference and injustice, or have been left behind as the world grew smaller and more economically independent." unquote
Monday he was in Selma, Alabama; Tuesday, it was Youngstown, Ohio; yesterday was Inez, Kentucky; and today he toured the lower ninth ward which was devastated by Hurricane Katrina.
He told the residents of New Orleans that if Katrina had happened on his watch, he would have immediately landed his plane at the nearest Air Force base and come over personally. It took President Bush more than a week to get to New Orleans after Katrina.
Touring seems to be McCain's activity of choice while he waits for the Democrats to get their act together.
He just completed his "Service to America" biography tour earlier this month. That one was designed to help voters get to know more about John McCain and his family. The Rolling Stones don't go on tour this often.
I mean it's not as though John McCain is unfamiliar to us. Besides being a famous war hero, McCain is now serving his fourth term in the United States Senate. And he spent some time as a congressman before that. And he made an unsuccessful run for President in 2000. We know who you are.
Here’s my question to you: What is John McCain accomplishing by all his "touring”?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Is Clinton deluding herself?
Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
"I won the states that we have to win." That's Hillary Clinton after winning the Pennsylvania Primary on Tuesday. She also said it would be hard to imagine a Democrat winning the White House in the general election without winning states that she has won like Ohio and Pennsylvania. True enough, but she's not the only Democrat who can win those states.
And at the end of a six week bruising battle for Pennsylvania, Hillary gained a grand total of ten delegates.
Barack Obama still leads Clinton by about 130 delegates and will likely get those ten right back in North Carolina regardless of what happens in Indiana.
The New York Times points to surveys showing that Obama could draw the same majorities from blue-collar voters against McCain as Clinton would in a general election. National polls also show that Obama does slightly better among groups that have typically voted Republican in the past like men, those who are wealthy, and independents, suggesting he might actually do better in the big states than Clinton.
Some analysts even suggest that Obama is better poised than Clinton in the general election to win in states that typically go to Republicans. State like Colorado, Iowa, Missouri, and Virginia- all of which he won in the primaries.
These ideas are surely not lost on the remaining uncommitted superdelegates. Clinton trails in pledged delegates and popular vote, not including Florida and Michigan, as well as number of states won, and she is rapidly losing her edge in superdelegates. Recent polls also suggest more than half the country doesn't trust her.
Here’s my question to you: Is Hillary Clinton deluding herself about her chances for the nomination?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
How much do rising food prices worry you?
A man walks out of the Cristo Vive church with food supplies handed out to the needy March 5, 2008 in Hialeah, Florida. (PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The United States is known as "the breadbasket of the world." We have always had plenty of food, and it's always been cheap. Suddenly, not anymore.
A new USA Today-Gallup poll shows 73% of us are worried about rising grocery bills, and almost half say food inflation is causing a hardship for them.
Suddenly sharply rising food prices are right up there with the 80% of Americans who are concerned about record-high gasoline prices. According to AAA, the average price of a gallon of unleaded gas is now $3.53.
The government says that food inflation has been running at a 5.3% percent annual rate in the last three months. The largest price increases are for items like white bread, milk, eggs and bananas.
While higher prices are hurting Americans, they can wreak havoc in other parts of the world – places like Haiti, Pakistan, Egypt and India. The United Nations says that high food prices could mean more than 100 million people will go hungry.
Shortages and hoarding of some items are also leading some stores in the U.S. to ration food. Reuters reports Sam's Club is limiting sales of various kinds of rice "due to recent supply and demand trends." And it's been reported that a Costco warehouse in California is limiting purchases of flour, rice and cooking oil.
Here’s my question to you: How much of a concern are rising food prices in your household?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
New York Times blames Clinton for negativity
Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
You could call it "an un-endorsement." An editorial in today's New York Times says Hillary Clinton is mostly to blame for the negativity in the Democratic race. This is the same newspaper that previously endorsed her.
Titled "The Low Road to Victory," the Times editorial argues that voters are getting tired of this competition which is increasingly mean, desperate and filled with pandering. They call on Clinton to acknowledge this negativity which is hurting her, Barack Obama, the Democratic Party and the entire 2008 election... and may also be part of the reason why she didn't win Pennsylvania by as large a margin as she could have.
The Times points out that on the eve of the primary, Clinton became the first Democrat to play the fear card and "wave the bloody shirt of 9/11." Clinton aired a TV ad that evoked Osama bin Laden, Pearl Harbor, the Cuban missile crisis and the 1929 stock market crash – an ad described as being "torn right from Karl Rove's playbook." The Times writes that if Clinton has any hope of winning over undecided superdelegates, not to mention the voters, she "has to call off the dogs."
Exit polls from Pennsylvania suggest there's something to this. People say they are getting tired of the tone of the campaign and they think Clinton bears more responsibility for it, with two-thirds of Pennsylvania voters saying she went too far in her attacks.
Here’s my question to you: The New York Times blames Hillary Clinton for most of the negativity in the Democratic race. Do you agree?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Why can't Barack Obama close the deal?
[cnn-photo-caption image= http://i.cdn.turner.com/cnn/2008/images/04/23/art.obama.plane.ap.jpg caption=]
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Barack Obama missed another chance last night to knock Hillary Clinton out of the race. He beat her in Iowa, she came back and won New Hampshire. He reeled off eleven wins in a row, she came back and won Ohio and Texas. He had another clear shot at her last night and missed. It raises a question that gets more serious with each passing primary.
Why can't he put her away? Despite outspending Clinton more than 2-to-1 in Pennsylvania and waging a more aggressive campaign in the final days, Obama came up short again with many of the voters who form the traditional base of the Democratic Party. Clinton crushed him among white, blue-collar voters by 69 to 30 percent. She also won older voters, women and whites.
The last 6 weeks have tested Obama in a way he hadn't been before. There were the comments from his Pastor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright which he had to address, his own "bitter" remarks, and a debate performance that wasn't his finest and raised other questions like his ties to William Ayers, the former Weather Underground member.
Obama will get another chance in two weeks to perhaps end this race if he can win in North Carolina and Indiana. And it's worth noting that he continues to lead where it matters – in delegates, states won, popular vote, and he's narrowing the superdelegate gap with Clinton.
But she has succeeded in dragging him onto her playground. Obama got more aggressive and more negative in the closing days in Pennsylvania. And that might have been a mistake. He got where he is on a message of hope and the promise for a new kind of politics.
Here’s my question to you: Why can't Barack Obama close the deal?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
Should Clinton quit if she doesn’t win Pa. by at least 10 points?
(PHOTO CREDIT: GETTY IMAGES)
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
The winner of today's contest may not necessarily be the candidate who gets the most votes. In other words, all eyes will be on the margin of Hillary Clinton's victory, provided that she wins as expected.
The Los Angeles Times suggests Clinton could win but still lose. If Obama keeps the results closer than expected, he could be considered the winner. Some uncommitted superdelegates say Clinton needs to win by at least 10 points to show she hasn't lost her touch among working-class voters in a state like Pennsylvania.
If Clinton can pull that off in a state where she was outspent by more than 2-to-1, she can then try to persuade uncommitted superdelegates to support her. But if Obama keeps it close or delivers an unexpected win, the pressure will mount on Hillary Clinton to give it up.
Hillary Clinton is in trouble. A recent poll shows Democrats, by 2-to-1, think Obama is the best candidate. Some Democratic elders are starting to call for the nomination process to end sooner rather than later. She is behind in number of pledged delegates, the popular vote and the number of states won – and her once commanding lead among superdelegates is down to fewer than 30 ahead.
Insiders tell the New York Daily News the only way Clinton will drop out soon is if she loses today in Pennsylvania and runs out of money. Speaking of which, it's reported that Clinton's campaign is in debt to the tune of several million dollars.
Here’s my question to you: If Hillary Clinton doesn't win Pennsylvania by at least 10 points, should she quit the race?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
McCain: more important to cut taxes than balance budget
Click the play button to see what Jack and our viewers had to say.
FROM CNN's Jack Cafferty:
Cutting taxes and stimulating the economy are more important than balancing the budget according to John McCain.
The presumptive Republican nominee is taking issue with the Democrats' suggestion that he's out of touch on the economy. McCain says he'll cut taxes even if it means running up more deficits. McCain thinks it's Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama who are out of touch since they want to raise taxes during a recession.
McCain says his economic plan is solid, based on extending President Bush's tax cuts – the tax cuts McCain opposed until he got the nomination. Now all of a sudden he thinks they're terrific. He thinks federal spending is the problem and pledges to "scrub" every government agency of wasteful spending. Where have we heard that before?
John McCain is also backing off from his promise to balance the budget by the end of his first term. Flip flop – just like with the Bush tax cuts. Now he says it may take two terms. And by then it will be somebody else's problem.
Today's Wall Street Journal reports that McCain's proposed $650 billion in tax cuts per year – mostly for corporations and upper-income families – would either make the federal deficit "explode" or require unprecedented spending cuts equal to one-third of all federal spending on domestic programs.
One expert says the chances of McCain cutting spending by that much are "nonexistent." In fact, a study of federal spending going back to 1976 shows there's never been a cut in domestic spending as large as what McCain is proposing.
Here’s my question to you: Do you agree with John McCain that cutting taxes is more important than balancing the budget?
Interested to know which ones made it on air?
@jackcafferty on Twitter
Recent Comments