If we are attacked, then hasn't the BFEE FAILED AGAIN!?

[GregW]

After all, aren't THEY responsible for our security? If they have let AQ in, THEY HAVE FAILED US (yet again).

Makes us glad we have a missile shield, eh?

[amber dog democrat]

1. no it would still be Clinton's fault

Give the Chimp administration a break, They are doing the best they can.

[Jacobin]

8. Correct answer.

btw, the original poster must Hate Amurka.

/sarcasm

[GreenPartyVoter]

2. The point is that they will SAY we WOULD have been attacked

then trot out some wort of info or "proof" that they did their jobs and prevented the attack. :eyes:

[lovedems]

3. It certainly would make all of his "we are safer" propaganda go down

the toilet.

I don't see how an attack would help him at all. I *do know* that if we are attacked, they will spin it in a fashion that "Al Queda doesn't want Bu$h to win in 2004! You better vote for Bu$h, a vote for Kerry is a vote for terrorism!".

I can hear it now.:cry:

[Virginian]

12. "Al Queda doesn't want Bu$h to win in 2004!... " spin.

Then we will have to get the truth out before they can get the spin out.

"I don't feel very safe with Bush as POTUS."
"This hasn't happened during any other administration."
"Our National Guard is protecting Iraqis when it should be here protecting us?"
"What is our Coast Guard doing in Iraq when it should be here protecting us?"
"Why were the budgets of our Police force cut when we needed them to be arresting these terrorists?"

? ? ?

[Poiuyt]

4. The public doesn't seem to think that way

For some reason, the polls show that the public still thinks that Bush is better than Kerry as far as dealing with terrorism. That's the one area where Bush is way ahead.

I know, it doesn't make sense to me either.

[Kahuna]

5. Yes. And there won't be a new COUNTRY for them to attack..

So, a new attack on us wouldn't really benefit them. People are giving him high marks for terrorism because there HAVEN'T been any attacks inside the U.S.A. since 9/11. If we're attacked no one will have any reason whatsoever to vote for him.

[AntiCoup2K4]

6. No, they didn't fail

They will get exactly the result they have been hoping for. The Bush Criminal Empire has been looking for creative ways to "eliminate the undesirables" for the better part of a century now. And in the event that another terrorist attack happens, it ain't gonna be in Freeperville Nebraska. It's gonna be in a city with one or more sizeable minority populations. Jeb already hinted at San Francisco. Wouldn't that fit their plan perfectly? Wipe out all them "sodomites" and "DummyRat" voters at the same time?

[chookie]

7. This is their Talking Point

All the Flying Monkeys and Republican Twinkies are crowing, in spite of being witness to America going to hell in a hand basket, that "The President's policies are obviously working, because we have not been attacked since Sept 11."

Watch for new Talking Point to emerge: "This attack on American soil is proof that America needs the Resolve of this popular war time president."

The only thing Orwell got wrong is the year....

[Goldmund]

9. It's not a logical issue. It's a psychological one.

Or maybe a psychiatric one. Look at his popularity after Sept. 11th. His approval ratings literally doubled in 2 days, and that wasn't enough time to do anything right or wrong.

I think what we deal with in situations like that are primal instincts, not political logic. The tribe has been attacked by an outside element, the tribe must huddle together and unite, and coalesce around the current leader, no matter who he is. There would be no other leader to unite around.

So, I don't think the effect would be quite what it was after Sept. 11th. There would be many people who would raise points like you have. But the primal effect of uniting would still be visible, I'm sure.

Zogby did a poll in April, in which they found that after a hypothetical second major attack, Bush wins 50-39 against Kerry.

[The Magistrate]

10. Yes, Mr. W

You have it right.

It would be an utter and abject failure, and seen as such by the people. It would knock the last poor prop out from beneath their position. Their claim to be the protectors people could rely on would be "not worth the shrapnel in Kerry's ass!"

"LET'S GO GET THOSE BUSH BASTARDS!"

[VOX]

11. Look for numerous reports about "Attacks thwarted!!!"

The media will be fed some menacing photos of central-casting "terrist" types, and their backstories will feature planned dastardly deeds involving dirty bombs (more photos), etc.

But the day will be saved -- and so, don't you see, all you true American voters, how safe and secure you are here at home under the watchful eyes of BushCo? :mad:

My best guess is that the administration is pumping up the noise now so that it can soon demonstrate how "efficient" it is.

All illusion, of course.