Political Punch

I'm not as offended about what Black or HRC said as I am with the politics of fear. Vote for me or else the other guy won't know how to keep you safe from probable death.

Sounds like a protection racket to me: if you pay me $200 every Tuesday, then no one will come to your shop and bust it up. Feels like the same underlying sentiment.

"I don't see a disadvantage to Obama in that say with regard to Pakistan, if he had actionable intelligence he would strike there."

Because striking your allies is always considered bad policy. Assisting your allies in a strike is good policy. His is a very uninformed and naive view of the politics of the Middle East.

Obama says things like that to look tough. It is an attempt to offset the feminine personality he projects otherwise. That is the essential thrust of his campaign: the feminization of America.

So yet another attack that occurs under the watch of current administration (Republican), is a good thing for the Republicans.

More outstanding reasoning by the American people that voted for Bush - twice.

It's a fact. If the voters are focused on National Security they'll choose McCain over Obama hands down. Had Hillary been running, the Dems would have a chance. The lady was right in what she said, and so was Black.

Bottom Line is John McCain would be better apt to handle the situation than Obama would.

Hillary would handle it better than Obama would.

Since a was a kid, and I'm in my 50's,
I've always heard that in wartime or when foreign policy is the primary issue then it's best to vote Republican and in other times it's best to vote Democrat. Many of us wouldn't agree with this but regardless, to this day I still hear it. So for anyone to say that in the case of another 9/11 or if Israel or the US opted to attack Iran in the near future (before the election)
that it could benefit the Republicans,
so what? I don't think in 2008 that would necessarily be true that the Republicans would be the beneficiary of such , but that belief has been out there forever and I would assume there has been a historical basis for such. So what Clinton and McCain's advisor said isn't anything that couldn't be said by many.

I actually feel sorry for John McCain on this one. I really don't think he thinks in the terms of political advantage from attacks on US soil. It shows the character of people thinking in those simplistic terms.

I don't even blame Hillary on this too much. She seemed to be talking about short term political advantage because Republican leaders would most likely have a strong military response and rhetoric.

I don't see a disadvantage to Obama in that say with regard to Pakistan, if he had actionable intelligence he would strike there.

GOP: Your post was seen and appreciated.

i have to agree the way that people are so easily scared or lead to hate that if there was a terrorist attack people wouldnt think bush went into iraq and one of his MANY reasons was to fight them over in iraq vs here and in turn made them more angry and if a attack happened he failed at the mission miserably they would just want to vote mccain to go into total war mode against anyone who breathed with out our permission in another country..

Not that I'm any Hillary fan but really, it's far worse when you say the attack is going to help you.

---dwj91--I am not a Republican and never have been. I was a registered Democrat until the socialist Obama and the corrupt DNC committee took over the party. I am now a registered independen
So, before jumping to the wrong conclusion, think a bit. Oh, I forgot, thoses following the corrupt Obama do not think.

Scoot: Yeah - it's funny, they usually put the caveat "since 9/11" after that comment of no terrorist attacks. Ultimately, though, it happened on all of our watch. There is plenty of blame to pass around for 9/11. Some would have us believe that one party or the other is better at protecting us when the truth is that we all are responsible for safeguarding our freedoms.

Miguy wrote:"I think it works both ways: McCain's argument is that Bush's policies are successful because we haven't had a terrorist attack on our soil."

I must have missed something. Didn't 9/11 happen on Bush's watch?

The media will have a job for a long time to come because they can get themselves hyped up about these types of comments. The GOP guy said it because it is true. Hillary said it because its true. George Bush actually drew direct benefit from such an event. There is NO NEWS here!
========================================
Obama, no need to vet the guy, it would be a charade! There's really nothing there!
========================================

The bottom line is that Charlie Black shouldn't have said what he said.

There is no excuse.

A terrorist attack on U.S. soil should NEVER be spoken as a "big advantage" by someone in a campaign.

I think it works both ways: McCain's argument is that Bush's policies are successful because we haven't had a terrorist attack on our soil. If there were an attack, heaven forbid, it would lead to retribution against all supposed enemies within arms reach.

My 3 1/2 year recently taught my 1 1/2 year old how to "go berserk". This entails them running around screaming and flailing their arms around wildly, swinging randomly at anything in sight. In some ways, it seems that this is what our foreign policy has been reduced to...

Wow,I love how we are walking on eggshells so as not to offend Obama. We can' even have an opinion on anything because that is so not obamacally correct. But of course he can play victim anytime when he throws in that race card. I think Clinton stated the fact then---that people perceived the republicans as better for National Security - heck the polls did show that at the time. Even if it's just a perception, it does not necessarily mean Obama is good for nationnal security either.

thanks for reminding us why she's not the nominee.

Mary said: Sometimes speaking the truth hurts and the Obama supporters hate the truth. He has distorted his background and his policy views since he started his campaign for president started. Now he is distoring again on TV tonight what the McCain camp is going to do. I just can not believed this man and know he is not presidential material. He is a dud. He will loose in November. He is a socialist and America is not ready for a socialist.

Obama will lose in November LOL!!!!!!!!!! You keep dreaming Mary. We will not vote and put another old dinosaur into the White House to keep things the same way for another 4 years. You Republican/Conservatives can't even match us in voter turnout, enthusiasm about a candidate, money, etc. The definition of insanity is to keep doing the same thing over and over and expect a different result. It is INSANE to put McSame in the White House.

Here is the Truth.

Charlie Black:
"I deeply regret the comments -- they were inappropriate,"

Why does he regret it?