So, now everyone wants to jump on the national-security band-wagon:

Democrats and Republicans alike rushed to invoke yesterday’s terrorist scare in Britain in congressional campaigns, underscoring how a series of national-security-related developments are refocusing and sharpening the political debate three months before the midterm elections.

Campaigning in Connecticut, Sen. Joseph I. Lieberman, who lost Tuesday’s Democratic primary and is now running as an independent, said the antiwar views of primary winner Ned Lamont would be “taken as a tremendous victory by the same people who wanted to blow up these planes in this plot hatched in England.”

[…]

The events have emboldened Democrats to challenge Bush more forcefully on national security issues, especially Iraq.

“This latest plot demonstrates the need for the Bush administration and the Congress to change course in Iraq and ensure that we are taking all the steps necessary to protect Americans at home and across the world,” said Senate Minority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.).

[…]
Unlike in the 2004 election, when Republicans clearly benefited from the terrorism issue and a general sense of insecurity among many voters, the politics are muddled this year. The latest Washington Post-ABC News poll, conducted last week, found Democrats with an eight-point edge when people were asked which party they trusted more to handle terrorism issues.

The people who said that the Democrats were better at handling terrorism issues must have been toking some heavy duty stuff because there is no way that anyone who knows anything about the war on terror would say that. And anyone who leaves me a comment on this better have one instance when a Democrat has done anything to protect us from terrorism. The only thing I’ve heard them say and do is trying to take away the tools to help us combat terrorism and one big example is their stopping the Patriot Act.

And questioning the use of money surveillance programs:

In what was an apparent reference to this year’s controversies over the administration’s surveillance programs, Bush told reporters: “It is a mistake to believe there is no threat to the United States of America. And that is why we have given our officials the tools they need to protect our people.”

BTW, now that we have a real life example of why money surveillance programs are so important, do you think that the NYT and LAT understand why they are critical to our success? I don’t.