I think the cRATs thought they could ride the anti-war position the way many did during Vietnam. Unfortunately, when defending your country and your culture against an aggressive, unappeasable force like islam, "anti-war" isn't a position that makes sense.
I think the democrats have been led into a blind alley by John Kerry, Howard Dean, and the other warmed-over hippies in the party.
I wonder how the Lieberman/Lamont contest would have looked if this thwarted attack had been uncovered two weeks ago.
Or as late as Monday. I have no doubt in my mind Lieberman could have pulled it off.
Anti-war sentiment has always been strong in the Democratic Party, going back further than Vietnam. Think of Joe Kennedy prior to WWII. Look at Lamont's family history.
OTOH, the Democratic Party had, for a long time, a national security conscious wing. But that wing has died off in the last several decades. Thus the party has drifted more to the moonbat corner as time progressed, to where we now have a seated Senator (and their VP candidate 4 years ago) who lost a primary election he should have won handily. Simply because the one issue he didn't tow the party line on WAS national security. All in the midst of a war on terror they refuse to recognize. This should go down as one of the worst cases of political timing ever seen.