It's time for a new episode of the PinkerCorn show on Bloggingheads.tv. Jim Pinkerton and I discussed President Barack Obama's recent news conference and the prospects for health care reform. When Pinkerton claimed that average Americans are growing skeptical of Obama, I accused him of projecting. We also gabbed about two matters that did not come up at that press conference: the Iraq war and the Afghanistan war. Since the Afghanistan war quickly became "the other war" after George W. Bush invaded Iraq, I opined, it remains insufficiently covered by the media, even though thisis an expanding conflict. (The monthly death toll of US and NATO soldiers is up in Afghanistan.) But you can hear and watch for yourself:

You can follow David Corn's postings and media appearances via Twitter.

Is Barack Obama trying to do too much at once? Should Timothy Geithner go? Jim Pinkerton and I ponder all this and more in our latest Bloggingheads.tv diavlog. And, once again, we argue over global warming because Pinkerton continues to insist that it ain't happening and that all those scientists who say it is are part of some politically-driven plot. Yes, he does. Really.

By the way, this was filmed hour before Chas Freeman withdrew his name from consideration as head of the National Intelligence Council. In the diavlog, I said that Freeman might survive and that the issue was only at Defcon 4 or so. So once again we learn, beware making predictions. By the way, in the above diavlog, Pinkerton predicted that Obama will serve no more than one term, and I was forced--practically against my will!--to remind him (oh so gently) that he had predicted that Obama would lose about 40 states in the November election. A lesson to us all.

You can follow my postings and media appearances via Twitter.com by clicking here.

That's what Jim Pinkerton and I take on in our latest Bloggingheads.tv diavlog. Pinkerton thinks the stimulus and the Geithner bailout are going to lead the country to hell (even faster!). I contend that these are both good-faith efforts (though I'm less kind about the bailout), and we better damn well hope for the best. And we discuss the mess in Afghanistan. We also debate the Reagan years. Anyone remember those dead nuns in El Salvador?

Neocon former Bush speechwriter David Frum (who helped coin the "Axis of Evil" phrase) wonders "why Democrats recoil from Gaza." But have no fear, he has the answers. Dems just aren't fans of military action, he says, and they are suckers for negotiations. But, worse, according to Frum, "Democratic attitudes are poisoned by the influences of an anti-Zionist hard left, a vociferous faction whose ideology can bleed into outright anti-Semitism."

Yes, the anti-Semitism card. This is the main thrust of his article.

No doubt, there are people who don't fancy Israel's attacks on Gaza due to their own anti-Semitism or anti-Zionism. But Frum is engaged in the time-honored tradition of rigging the debate (j'accuse!) on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Might the recoiling he speak of--and I've not seen many Democratic officials (certainly not President-elect Barack Obama) engage in such recoiling--be due to a legitimate concern about the proportionality of the military action, the wisdom of this attack, or the humanitarian toll of the operation?

Before proceeding, let me state that the Gaza rocket attacks are human rights crimes, and Israel has the right to defend itself. But that does not mean that in retaliation for about a dozen deaths caused by the rockets from 2004 on, the Israeli Defense Force ought to blow up schools and hospitals in Gaza and kill scores of civilians. This is how Physicians for Human Rights-Israel described Monday's shelling of a UN school:

The Republican debate on Wednesday night--brought to us by CNN and YouTube--prompted me to wonder, is Mitt Romney more of an empty suit than I had previously assumed? He is a presidential candidate with almost nothing interesting to say. Rudy Giuliani does his tough-guy act. Mike Huckabee speaks authentically about faith and conservative values. John McCain is passionate about the surge and about banning torture. What stands out about Romney in terms of his words and ideas? Zilch. Romney can stick to his talking points, especially when assailing Giuliani for not having deported every illegal immigrant from NYC when he was mayor. But he offers no interesting arguments, notions or proposals.

Moreover, at the debate, Romney froze several times when tossed a quasi-tough question. (For a full account of his stumbles, see my report on the debate here.) Shouldn't he be able to adeptly handle queries about the use of torture, the Bible, and his own previous stance on gays and lesbians in the military? (He was all for letting them serve; now, of course, he ain't.) Well, he didn't on Wednesday night.

At the debate, each candidate was allowed to show a so-called YouTube-style video made by his campaign. Romney's offering was by far the most bland of them all. Here's the text:

It's an election like no other. An enemy lurks, waiting to strike. Our Main Street economy is competing with mainland China. Legal versus illegal doesn't seem to matter. Basic values like marriage are suddenly open to debate. For these challenges, ordinary isn't good enough. We need the leader who gets the big stuff done. Take charge, demand results, no excuses. Mitt Romney, the right experience, the right values, the right time.

This is practically a parody of a campaign ad. There's nothing within it that's distinctive. The pitch is merely a series of buzz phrases. You could plug in the name of any other GOP contender and the ad would still work. Vote Romney: The Generic Republican Candidate. I'm tempted to say this is almost insulting to the intelligence of GOP primary voters, but his strategy may be working, for Romney is still in the lead in the polls in Iowa and New Hampshire. But the more exposure he receives--and the less of the right stuff he displays--the more he could slip in those crucial states and elsewhere. The guy has a face for politics, but that handsome jaw may be made of glass.

Which reminds me: experience. Note the use of the E-word in Romney's ad. This campaign season has seen questions hurled at Barack Obama about his experience, particularly in foreign policy. Why have such queries have not been thrown at Romney? Yes, he did deal with a bunch of foreigners when he ran the Olympics in Salt Lake City, but as governor of Massachusetts he did not develop much of a foreign policy profile. And the manner in which he talks about national security often rings hollow--or wrong. In an earlier debate, he claimed that George W. Bush had no choice in 2003 but to invade Iraq because Saddam Hussein had not allowed inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency into Iraq. But Saddam had done so. Wasn't Romney reading the newspapers in 2003? This gaffe received little media attention, but it demonstrated that Romney was misinformed on a critical aspect of the Iraq war. It also demonstrated this: he has the potential to say something really stupid at an important moment. The clock is ticking and the race is on: Romney versus...himself.

WE INTERRUPT THIS BLOG.... To bring you news of the latest installment of "PinkerCorn" from Bloggingheads.tv. It's up and available for your viewing pleasure. In this rematch, Jim Pinkerton and I discuss the Annapolis conference and recent developments (pre-debate) in the GOP and Democratic nomination battles. A slice of the show can be seen at The New York Times site by clicking here.

CORN ON NPR. On Friday, I am scheduled to appear on NPR's The Diane Rehm Show. Check your local listings, or listen to it on the web at 10:00 am, Washington time.

Scheduling note: I won't be blogging on Friday. See you next week.