also, "the Poles contributed troops to the invasion of Czechoslovakia." (A Times headline the weekend after the debate summed up Ford's performance in one word: " Oops !") Finally, step five: the other candidate can't just let it sit there. The transcript of Carter's reply begins with the note "[chuckle]." He goes in for the absurdity -- "I would like to see Mr. Ford convince the Polish-Americans and the Czech-Americans and the Hungarian-Americans in this country that those countries don't live under the domination and supervision of the Soviet Union behind the Iron -- uh -- Curtain" -- but does so on his own terms, not by trying to out-Cold Warrior Ford. Rather than making Helsinki sound scary, as Frankel had, he attacked the Ford Administration's secrecy and failure to live up to its idealistic sections, and then begins talking about Alexander Solzhenitsyn. He also talked about the Ford Administration having "to be subpoenaed" to get information on a trade deal -- after quite enough subpoenas in the Nixon years. Ford, in other words, did not build his gaffe by himself. In the first Obama-Romney debate, elements two through five were notably absent, thanks both to the candidates and the moderators. We had more action on all fronts in the second one. Now tonight's, like the Soviet Domination debate, is about foreign policy. Could the moment be replicated? In a purely topical sense, it might be tough, since neither Russia, nor Eastern -- or Western -- Europe is specifically slated