Hotline After Dark -- Not Budging

CBS' Couric talked separately with Barack Obama and John McCain last night.

Couric sat down with Obama in Jordan:

Couric: "You raised a lot of eyebrows on this trip saying even knowing what you know now, you still would not have supported the surge. People may be scratching their heads and saying, 'Why?'"

Obama: "What I was referring to, and I've consistently referred to, is the need for a strategy that actually concludes our involvement in Iraq and moves Iraqis to take responsibility for the country. ... What happens is that if we continue to put $10 billion to $12 billion a month into Iraq, if we are willing to send as many troops as we can muster continually into Iraq? There's no doubt that that's gonna have an impact. But it doesn't meet our long-term strategic goal, which is to make the American people safer over the long term."

Couric: "But do you not give the surge any credit for reducing violence in Iraq?"

Obama: "No, no ... of course I have. There is no doubt that the extraordinary work of our U.S. forces has contributed to a lessening of the violence. ... So this, in no way, detracts from the great efforts of our young men and women in uniform. In fact, that's one of the most striking things about visiting Iraq is to see how dedicated they are, what a great job they do."

After the jump, more from the interviews and Novak talks Veepstakes.

(KATHERINE LEHR)

Couric: "But talking microcosmically, did the surge, the addition of 30,000 additional troops ... help the situation in Iraq?"

Obama: "You've asked me three different times, and I have said repeatedly that there is no doubt that our troops helped to reduce violence. There's no doubt."

Couric: "But yet you're saying ... given what you know now, you still wouldn't support it ... so I'm just trying to understand this."

Obama: "It's pretty straightforward. By us putting $10 billion to $12 billion a month, $200 billion, that's money that could have gone into Afghanistan. Those additional troops could have gone into Afghanistan. That money also could have been used to shore up a declining economic situation in the United States. That money could have been applied to having a serious energy security plan."

Couric: "Do you think the level of security in Iraq ... would exist today without the surge?"

Obama: "Katie, I have no idea what would have happened had we applied my approach, which was to put more pressure on the Iraqis to arrive at a political reconciliation. So this is all hypotheticals. What I can say is that there's no doubt that our U.S. troops have contributed to a reduction of violence in Iraq" ("Evening News," 7/22).

And Couric spoke with McCain via satellite:

Couric: "Prime Minister Maliki and Senator Obama seem to be on the same page when it comes to a timetable for the withdrawal of U.S. troops by 2010. Are you feeling like the odd man out here?"

McCain: "Prime Minister Maliki, General Petraeus, Admiral Mullen and the other leaders in Iraq have all agreed that it's conditioned-based. Senator Obama said the surge would fail. He said that it couldn't succeed. He was wrong. He said he still doesn't agree that surge has succeeded now that everybody knows that it has succeeded. I said at the time that I supported the surge. I would much rather lose a campaign than lose a war. Senator Obama has indicated that by his failure to acknowledge the success of the surge, that he would rather lose a war than lose a campaign."

Couric: "Senator Obama says, while the increased number of U.S. troops contributed to increased security in Iraq, he also credits the Sunni awakening and the Shiite government going after militias. And says that there might have been improved security even without the surge. What's your response to that?"

McCain: "I don't know how you respond to something that is such a false depiction of what actually happened. Colonel McFarlane was contacted by one of the major Sunni sheiks. Because of the surge we were able to go out and protect that sheik and others. And it began the Anbar awakening. I mean, that's just a matter of history. ... To deny that their sacrifice didn't make possible the success of the surge in Iraq, I think, does a great disservice to young men and women who are serving and have sacrificed. They were out there. They were protecting these sheiks. We had the Anbar awakening. We now have a government that's effective."

McCain, asked why he believes Iraq is the central front in the war on terror: "Well, one reason is because that's what Osama bin Laden said that it was. He said, 'Go to the country of the two rivers.' That's what General Petraeus says, who I think is extremely knowledgeable. That it is the central battleground. And Afghanistan is very tough. And there's a number of great challenges there. And we have to employ the same strategy there that succeeded in Iraq. And we can succeed there. We've got the problems on the Pakistan-Afghan border. ... But we can and will succeed there. And if we hadn't succeeded in Iraq, then the complications would have been incredibly more severe."

Couric: "Your campaign released a video today complaining about what you call the media's love affair with Senator Obama. Clearly you believe you're getting unfair coverage. Why do you think that's the case?"

McCain: "I don't think so. ... It is what it is. I'm a big boy. And I'm enjoying every minute of the campaigning. And I'm certainly not complaining. And, in fact, I think its fun to watch" ("Evening News," 7/22).

WALK THE LINE

There was a lot of reaction to Obama saying even knowing what he knows now, he still would not have supported the surge.

Politico's Allen: "Senator Obama is trying to walk a fine line here. He is taking advantage of or benefiting from the results of the surge that he opposed. So, one way to frame the fall election is which decision was more important -- Opposing the war in Iraq or opposing the surge? ("Hannity & Colmes," FNC, 7/22).

Dem strategist Hilary Rosen: "I think what Obama is saying is that the surge was part of a failed policy from the beginning, and we don't know what would have happened if that policy had not taken place. And so you can't just dial the clock back on one thing. You have to dial back the clock on everything" ("Election Center," CNN, 7/22).

CBN's Brody: "The squirming by Obama on the surge talk is clearly not good for him or his campaign. Because ... what's going to happen in September at that first debate, it's going to be Obama and McCain mano-a-mano on that soil and that surge question is going to come up and it's not going to be a comfortable moment for Obama" ("Situation Room," CNN, 7/22).

NBC's Mitchell, on Obama saying he trusts his own judgment on Iraq: "The confidence that he expressed was really pretty extraordinary. Here you would think that he was debuting on the world stage and would be on a listening tour with the generals. Instead, he was telling them what he thinks" ("Race for the WH," MSNBC, 7/22).

I'M JUST BUZZED

And syndicated columnist Robert Novak appeared on "Hannity & Colmes" last night to discuss his report that McCain will reveal the name of his VP selection this week.

Novak: "It was discussed, I know, in the the McCain camp whether they would announce somebody this week. All
the signs are that that's not going to happen. It was leaked to me that it was going to happen. And I checked it out with another senior source, who indicated wouldn't this be a good time to do it, so I just put something out on the Internet. I didn't say it was going to happen. I said that a source that's close to the campaign suggested that it's going to happen. I'm afraid that the McCain campaign looks a little desperate, as if they're putting out this word to get some buzz so that Obama's trip to the Middle East won't take all the headlines."

Novak, on Mitt Romney: "I think that he is the front-runner right now. They're getting along very well, which they certainly didn't do during the primary season. I think the McCain people like the money he would bring in. They think he would really jump up the campaign in Michigan, which would be a great get for the Republican Party. But ... Romney has some problems on the ticket. I think he does scare off evangelical votes. ... It really isn't a safe choice. And I think that maybe McCain ought to think about a safe choice."

FNC's Colmes: "With your information that there might have been an announcement this week, do you believe that McCain has already chosen that person?"

Novak: "I don't know whether he's chosen or not. They're keeping it very tight. And some of the people I
talked to on the campaign this week, after I reported what they had told me earlier, now are saying that they don't know what's going on. But the name that's on the top of every list is Mitt Romney" (FNC, 7/22).