Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (But Not in a Racist Way)

During the campaign, a great deal of attention was paid to Barack Obama's pledge to meet with foreign leaders, even those of hostile nations. In the first presidential debate, Senator Obama explained, "Now, understand what this means, 'without preconditions.' It doesn't mean that you invite them over for tea one day. ... There's a difference between preconditions and preparation. Of course we've got to do preparations, starting with low-level diplomatic talks, and it may not work, because Iran is a rogue regime."


Well, tonight the President-Elect had his first chance to sit down with opposing leaders, forgoing "low-level diplomatic talks" and apparently more than tea was served.


Last night, Obama had dinner with several of the most prominent conservative columnists in the country. Hosted by Washington Post columnist George Will (yes, "THE George Will"), the dinner featured our terrorist-sympathizing, arugula-eating, terrorist fist-jabbing hero squaring off against Will, William Kristol and David Brooks of The New York Times (yes, they do employ a few token conservatives, seen below), and Charles Krauthammer of the Washington Post.


The guest list was not formalized, so it is unknown who else was there. More importantly, the menu was not released either; we may never know if arugula was served.


Now, if a meeting like this had occurred under the Bush Administration with critical members of the media, I would have had two theories:

A) It's a sting operation designed to set up members of the liberal media and give Bush an excuse to throw them in Gitmo.
B) I'm dreaming.

Regardless, I guarantee that every journalist would have left dinner with a clever, new nickname courtesy of their Commander-in-Chief.

Does this sort of meeting signal a more open presidency, one that will listen to opposing views and not merely toe the party line?


All I know is that, for many liberals, the idea of the President talking privately with conservative columnists may actually be more frightening than the idea of a one-on-one meeting with Ahmadinejad.