Wow, so Hillary Clinton thinks Al Queda will attack if Obama is elected?

[TeamJordan23]

I cannot believe she has stooped this low:

Al-Qaeda watching US election: Clinton, in Obama swipe

DOVER, New Hampshire (AFP) — Hillary Clinton on Monday warned that Al-Qaeda watched US elections, urging Americans not to risk electing an inexperienced president, in her latest implicit swipe at rival Barack Obama.

In one of her most overt plays of the national security card yet, the senator from New York noted that days after Gordon Brown became British Prime Minister, militants planted bombs which failed to explode.

"I don't think it was by accident that Al-Qaeda decided to test the new prime minister," Clinton said here, referring to two devices which did not go off in London and a car which was crashed into Glasgow airport in June.

"They watch our elections as closely as we do ... they play our allies."

The former first lady's comments day before the New Hampshire primary, in which Obama is poised according to opinion polls to inflict a second damaging defeat on her White House campaign, after his Iowa caucuses victory last week.

"Let's not forget, you are hiring a president not just to do what a candidate says he or she will do in an election," Clinton said.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5jB8n288YSUL-mMk3_2pTlq43xjoA

[Radical Activist]

1. She's adopting the Rudy tactic

How ironic...and disgusting.

[Der Blaue Engel]

2. That's not what she said

She said you need an experienced person who has a plan IF terrorists choose to test the new leader, not that they would attack if Obama was elected. She's trying to say that she would handle such an event better than he would.

I don't particularly care for her playing the terrorism card, but let's not characterize it as something it isn't. She did NOT pull a Cheney. It was not "vote for me or the terrorists will attack."

[yourout]

4. It's a carefully rewrapped version of Cheney.......new and improved for the Centrists of the world.

It was an incredibly stupid remark.

[PretzelWarrior]

5. it is sad she's using the terror/911 bogeyman. Cheney

couldn't do it any better. That kid of sh!# has got to stop. All would handle hypothetical attacks better than the Pet Goat guy.

[BenDavid]

7. DBE, that was one outstanding post. Thank you

[Alamom]

25. Second that TU. nm

[still_one]

11. I disagree, I think it is an extremely subtle way to say the same thing

without even giving a good reason why she would handle such an event better than he. In fact she has demonstrated just the opposite by her vote on the IWR, which effectively removed ANY accountability from the executive branch by Congress

She may nuance all the words she wants, or have Bob Kerry and others on her staff imply that Obama has a "Muslim" background, and then come out and say those comments were NOT approved by her campaign, and in no way meant to imply that anything bad about Obama and his Muslim past. BullShit. Her campaign knows exactly what they are doing

This crap is going to backfire bigtime on her campaign, and rightfully so

Her campaign is history

[Elidor]

16. The distinction is so small as to be all but meaningless

"If the terrorists attack, you're safer with me in charge." It was pretty disgusting.

[Der Blaue Engel]

17. Like I said, I didn't care for it myself

But though it may be a small one, I think it's an important distinction.

To claim, as Cheney did, that voting for one's opponent would actually incite a terrorist attack is more than just exploiting an issue.

She's not my candidate, but I just don't think it's necessary to claim she said that about Obama, which would be beyond disgusting, when she didn't.

[Bright Eyes]

3. Straight from the Rove playbook.

Just wait till Hillary's cheerleading squad tries to spin this!
:popcorn:

[Botany]

6. Right from Karl Rove

no class ... no shame

[still_one]

8. If this is true, then Hillary deserves to lose in a big way

If you want to critisize Obama on the issues that is one thing, but to imply that AQ would asume "Obama's inexperience" would encourage him is plain trash

Clinton camp you better think hard and fast why your candidate is starting to fall in the polls. She voted for the IWR, she voted for the Kyle/Lieberman ammendment, which effectively called for permanent U.S. presence in Iraq as long as Iran is perceived a threat.

If the Clinton camp continues to throw this kind of crap around, and if she gets the nomination, I might just sit out election out, because she would have completely failed by these tactics to distinguish herself apart from the republican candidates

[Rageneau]

13. It isn't true -- it's spin that the MSM and her opponents are concocting.

What she said was that, in England, there was a bombing the day after a new PM was elected; that terrorists watch our elections, and may very well "test" our incoming president that way -- with a terror attack.

Then she said: 'IF such a thing took place the day I was the new president, I'd be ready to take immediate action.'

IOW, she stressed her own ability. She did not EVER suggest that voting for someone else would lead to an attack. (That's what republicans do.) She DID hint that terrorists might be less likely to launch such an attack if they knew the new president was ready to take action. But how is that untrue?

Do not pay attention to what the MSM says. They hate Hill like they hated Bill. Check the videotapes themselves to see what Hillary actually says.

[still_one]

18. If she suggested that the terrorists would NOT launch an attack if they thought

the new President was ready to take action, then she doesn't UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM

The terrorists don't give damn, they aren't a country, they are located within different countries, some of which are our suppossed allies like Saudi Arabia and Egypt.

The way you fight that kind of terrorism is working with those countries, not making stupid statements that the terrorists would never launch an attack if they thought there would be retaliation, that is exactly what the terrorist want so innocents can get killed

Though Kerry was a weak candidate, he was right on when he said that the terrorist problem required something more like a police action

[Quixote1818]

9. Usually Hillary's stuff doesn't bother me that much but this is so gross

I can't think of the exact words to describe how this shit makes me want to vomit.

:puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke: :puke:

[OHdem10]

10. This was part of the discussion on talks shows. The GOP

do believe such an attack will happen. They used Obamas name
because at this point in time, it appears he has a chance
of becoming President. Commander In Chief is part of the
presidency.

HRC was probably reitering the news shows.

[MrSlayer]

12. Way to use the terror card.

There is little I hate more in today's politics than the scare tactics. Fuck Al-Qaeda, they are nothing to fear. That's exactly how all the candidates should answer any question about the terror group.

[sandnsea]

14. A great Democrat anybody would be proud to vote for

:eyes:

I do not understand how anybody can say they'd be proud to vote for this shit.

[Pachamama]

15. And Hillary's experience is what that leads us to believe she's the one to know how to respond?

:eyes:

Oh, that's right....that she would have Bill by her side to ask what to do????

Gimme a break....She had me on the emotional tears part and then this comment is where she lost me. I'm sorry, but to all the Hillary supporters out there that try to sell her ad nauseum, its comments like this and even the concept of "experience" being a direct correlation of who she sleeps next to at night that really turns me off. I consider her no more or no less capable of making a decision than Obama or Edwards, should the Boogie Men decide to attack us.

[killbotfactory]

19. She'll know what to do

If Al-Qaeda attacks, just invade an oil-rich nation. Problem solved.

[Tennessee Gal]

20. Sick of the fear factor, Hillary. Get it!

We get this from the right wing fanatics all the time for 7 years. I thought Hillary was smarter than this.

[Liberal Dose]

21. I'm not surprised, but it's still disgusting

Not surprised because,

Hillary said:

"If we can demonstrate that the people responsible for planning the nuclear attack on our country may not themselves be in a government or associated with a state, but have a haven within one, then every state in the world must know we will retaliate against those states," Clinton said. "There cannot be safe havens for stateless terrorists who are in these networks that are plotting to have the proliferation of nuclear weapons ... that could cause such havoc. So I think we have to be very, very clear: Deterrence worked during the Cold War in large measure because the United States made it clear to the Soviet Union that there would be massive retaliation. We have to make it clear to those states that would give safe have to stateless terrorists that would launch a nuclear attack against America, that they would also face very heavy retaliation."

Bush said the same thing using one sentence:
"We will make no distinction between the terrorists who committed these acts and those who harbor them." -- George W. Bush, 9/20/01

:hi:

[Bonobo]

22. The politics of fear indeed.

[KennedyGuy]

23. You mean..you INFER thats what she said..

where did she say that..I didn't see the word Obama anywhere there..
Isn't is appropriate to claim that she would be better at fighting terrorism than her opponents?
Would Obama say he would be better?
Oh..I forgot..no one asked him.

[Essene]

24. disgraceful

truly disgraceful

[A-Schwarzenegger]

26. No, just if he wins in New Hampshire.