I respectfully disagreee. Another attack will be viewed as a sign of deep incompetence, especially given the fact that not one official was fired after the greatest intelligence failure in U.S. history.
I tend to agree. Rather, it'll be seen as incompetence after the DNC machine chants "incompetence" 24/7 for a couplf of weeks...beginning in the first few hours after the attack.
On the other hand, any action taken will be billed as a "political ploy" by the Democrat propaganda machine, just as is happening now.
The Democrats are taking a real threat that could cause real deaths, and turing it into a political ploy. It's a version of the same Lose Lose Situation they've been using since 9/11/01. They want to tie the president's hands. They could care less about the consequenses.
>>Another attack will be viewed as a sign of deep incompetence
Timing of the attack would seem to be critical. As one of the pundits said while discussing the recent Homeland Security announcement, if the attack comes a week before the election, I think people will tend to rally round the president. If it comes a few months before the election, then there is time for people to begin asking why the present administration could not stop the attack.
Would Kerry/Edwards do better? HIGHLY doubtful, but considering how many people are swayed by the media w/o using their gray matter, such an attack could be used by the lefties to get a considerable number of people to vote for Lurch.
the key people responsible for 9-11 were fired on January 21st 2001 - Sandy Berger and Bill Clinton, and the rest of that gang.