McCain Top Adviser Says…Terrorism Helps Republicans
McCain Top Adviser Says…Terrorism Help Republicans — by Catherine Morgan (cross-posted at The Care2 Election Blog)
The Republicans and the McCain campaign intend to run on the politics of fear. But, we already knew that. The question now is…How far are they willing to go to get elected? Would the administration ignore a terrorist threat for the good of the party? Watch this video and let me know what you think in comments…
Here is what other bloggers are saying…
From Wonkette: The D.C. Gossip…
Top McCain strategist Charlie Black — the one who lobbies for Iran — dominated this afternoon’s 2-hour news cycle by saying in an interview with Fortune magazine that if we had a terrorist attack right now, “Certainly it would be a big advantage” for John McCain. This line, of course, meant everyone had to feign shock over an accurate political truth, but voiced thus — that if there were a terrorist attack today, Barack Obama would be behind it, potentially hurting his electoral prospects. After a scolding from McCain, Black has come out with an apology.
No Incentive To End Terrorism…
If terrorists attacked, people would be more likely to vote Republican. This probably doesn’t strike you as surprising, but think about the implication of this for a second.
The implication is that there is no incentive for Republicans to actually fight terrorism.
Now before you accuse me of being a leftist and a communist and a hippie tree hugger and all the wonderful attacks usually brought to bear on anyone who says anything contrary to the White House line, hear me out.
I’m not saying that Republicans are not doing anything to fight terrorism. I’m merely saying that there is no incentive for them to do a good job.
Why? Because the global war on terror is one of the few issues that wins Republicans elections.
More terror = good for Republicans. More war = good for Republicans.
What I am arguing is that with terrorism being such a big benefit to Republicans, why would they go out of their way to try and end it?
Whoops! Can’t be honest in public…
I´m sorry, but I don´t see a problem here, other than one of McSame´s top advisors is being honest. Who benefited from the 9/11 attack? The neo-cons and the most unpopular incoming president in history? Now, who would benefit more than McSame?
“Naturally the common people don’t want war; neither in Russia, nor in England, nor in America, nor in Germany. That is understood. But after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in any country.” Hermann Goering, 1946
What do you think about Charlie Black’s comments?
