and besides, CNN has confirmed that "White House aides privately acknowledged to CNN that the remarks were aimed at the presidential candidate and others in his party."

What's frustrating is that Bush's inappropriate comments are such a gross distortion of Senator Obama's clear foreign policy positions. He's consistently drawn a distinction between meeting recognized heads of state who may be hostile to the USA, and not meeting terrorist or radical organizations. Speaking with President Hugo Chavez of Venezuela for instance is not at all the same thing as sitting down with the narco-terrorists FARC in Colombia. Chavez may be a buffoon and a pompous ass, but he's still an internationally recognized head of state, and merits a certain level of consideration and diplomatic accomodation accordingly, however distasteful it may feel to us.

Don't forget that Obama disapproved of former President Carter's meeting with Hamas, and has stated that as President he would not meet with Hamas until they renounce terrorism and recognize Israel.

Senator Clinton understands well these distinctions. Although she criticized Obama's willingness to meet with the nations of Cuba, North Korea, and Iran, she never accused Obama of wanting to negotiate with terrorists, and she would never, ever have stooped so low as to draw a ridiculous comparison with the appeasement of Nazis. Apparently, Bush either doesn't understand these nuances, or doesn't care about them.

The biggest winner from Bush's reckless misadventure in Iraq is clearly the nation of Iran, with greatly expanded influence arising from the disappearance of a hostile Baath party led by Saddam, and the emergence of a Shiite dominated and closely allied state in Iraq. Bush's foolish invasion has inadvertently boosted Iran's fortunes more than anything Europeans or American liberals ever did.