Did Obama Make a Gaffe Last Night?

    The Clinton camp has gone on the attack after the debate, in the light of Barack Obama's comments last night that he'd be willing to meet with foreign leaders from "rogue nations" such as Iran and Cuba during his first year in office without preconditions. Both Hillary and Edwards responded at the debate that they were unwilling to make that pledge, with Clinton saying that lower-level diplomatic contacts should come first, to avoid having the president used by our enemies.
    Today, Hillary turned up the heat, calling Obama's comment "irresponsible and frankly naive." Clearly, the Clintonites see this as an opportunity to make their point that Obama is too inexperienced to be president.
    But did Obama really make a gaffe? Exactly what would a negative ad look like attempting to exploit his statement? "Barack Obama has foolishly said that he would meet with Fidel Castro without any conditions," the narrator might say. That's probably not what Obama meant since, of course, meetings aren't set up between foreign leaders unless there's something to talk about, but so what? The guess here is that the average voter doesn't think it's a terrible idea to leave the door open to talking with enemies; minds sometimes change and Obama's approach would certainly be a refreshing contrast to the present policy.
    A dispute over semantics and diplomatic protocol is the kind of thing the media loves after a debate but that voters hate. And by going negative, Hillary looks like the personification of the "old politics" that Obama is running against. To bolster her case, the Hillary forces called on Madeleine Albright, secretary of state during her husband's tenure. Is that really the image Hillary wants to convey?
    Call it counter-intuitive, but the hunch here is this exchange helps Obama.