TNR BLOGS

December 01, 2008 | 11:48 AM
December 01, 2008 | 11:20 AM
December 01, 2008 | 10:16 AM

December 01, 2008 | 11:22 AM
December 01, 2008 | 11:10 AM
December 01, 2008 | 9:57 AM

July 26, 2008 | 2:24 PM
July 23, 2008 | 1:55 PM
July 17, 2008 | 3:56 PM

December 01, 2008 | 12:00 PM
November 29, 2008 | 3:23 PM
November 29, 2008 | 2:18 PM
COLUMNISTS
TODAY'S STORIES
23.06.2008
The Terror Card


CNN:

Sen. John McCain distanced himself Monday from comments made by a senior campaign adviser suggesting that McCain would stand to benefit politically from a terrorist attack on U.S. soul.

In an interview with Fortune magazine, McCain senior adviser Charlie Black said that the Arizona senator demonstrated his fluency in foreign policy and security matters following the assassination of Benazir Bhutto in December of last year.

Bhutto’s killing, Black said, was an “unfortunate event.” But, he argued, McCain’s “knowledge and ability to talk about it reemphasized that this is the guy who's ready to be Commander-in-Chief. And it helped us."

Asked if McCain would stand to benefit from a terrorist attack on U.S. soil, Black answered: “Certainly it would be a big advantage to him.”

Campaigning in California, McCain shook his head when asked by CNN about Black’s comments.

“I cannot imagine why he would say it,” he said at a press conference. “It’s not true. I’ve worked tirelessly since 9/11 to prevent another attack on the United States of America. My record is very clear.”

It wasn't so long ago that Democrats hestitated even to accuse Republicans of using security-related scare tactics, lest they seem whiny and weak. Now John McCain feels the need to distance himself from one of his own aides, who was only responding to a press question. Not that that's an excuse. (Actually, McCain's statement is doubly odd--he answered as though Black had implied McCain was somehow encouraging an attack, which was not at all his point....)

P.S. Do we assume it's true that a big attack would help McCain? I think a lot depends on the particulars. Another failure of the homeland-security bureacracy would further discredit Republicans. An attack clearly linked to anger over the Iraq war could also hurt. There's no way to know in advance; but here's hoping it's all hypothetical anyway.

Update, 5:45pm: Obama campaign statement:

“Barack Obama welcomes a debate about terrorism with John McCain, who has fully supported the Bush policies that have taken our eye off of al Qaeda, failed to bring Osama bin Laden to justice, and made us less safe.  The fact that John McCain’s top advisor says that a terrorist attack on American soil would be a ‘big advantage’ for their political campaign is a complete disgrace, and is exactly the kind of politics that needs to change. Barack Obama will turn the page on these failed policies and this cynical and divisive brand of politics so that we can unite this nation around a common purpose to finish the fight against al Qaeda,” said Obama campaign spokesman Bill Burton. 

--Michael Crowley

Posted: Monday, June 23, 2008 5:35 PM with 12 comment(s)

Comments

You must be logged-in to comment.

Not a subscriber? Click here to get a digital or print and digital subscription to The New Republic!

blackton said:

It is going to be a long, long 5 months of this. Charlie Black made an honest mistake since he obviously meant that McCain is better to handle an attack, not that one would be welcome. Luckily for Black though, I doubt in this fast spinning race it will dog him. At least I hope not.

June 23, 2008 7:57 PM

tomeg said:

Just another day. What did Obama say about a "silly season?"

June 23, 2008 8:08 PM

dbhuff said:

Yep, I'm becoming more and more disappointed, where's the new politics again?

June 23, 2008 9:34 PM

WaltB said:

That we've been 'kept safe' is the last desperate hope for Republicans to point to in Georgie's Presidency.  Obviously, if something were to happen, they think this will reinforce how they should be kept in office - not that they caused such a level of hate against us that it was inevitable.  All they've done for years now is attempt to foster fear in us in order to justify stripping away freedoms we used to take for granted.  Enough is enough.

June 24, 2008 8:11 AM

dbhuff said:

Does the Obama campaign think their response actually generates any VOTES? In the primary he did respond more gracefully a couple of times and probably got some votes that way. This kind of response is red meat for the base, but a turn off for indies.

And it woudl have been better to challenge the statement directly. "If there was another attack, then 6 years of the Bush policy of aggression and non-negotiation will have been shown not to be effective. My policy of tough negotiations, coupled with necessary action and improving our image will be the choice, and I'm ready to have a debate about the effectiveness whether or not there is another terror attack. Meanwhile, I'm certain that Mr. Black was only expressing a feeling in the moment of an interview, and not suggesting anything nefarious and that all of us are working together as Americans to prevent any further attacks on American soil or American interests."  I'm sure he would say it better...

June 24, 2008 10:11 AM

Daily Intelligencer - New York Magazine said:

But many people think what he said was actually plain old common sense.

June 24, 2008 11:41 AM

WoodyBombay said:

Black's comments reflect a fairly popular conservative meme - Americans are fat, lazy and self-absorbed and have COMPLETELY FORGOTTEN the lessons of 9/11, and it's going to take another attack for them to get in line, sacrifice and pull together for the common good.

The only surprising thing is that usually that sentiment is usually voiced out loud by your nuttier right-wing extremists, not savvy lobbyist politicos like Charlie Black.  

You really have to contort yourself by bending over backwards to make Obama the villain here. I'm just sorry he passed on the opportunity to remind everyone that Black is a filthy lobbyist who worked for Ferdinand Marcos and Jonas Savimbi.

June 24, 2008 12:44 PM

cthulhu2008 said:

You might wonder if we could harness the awesome wealth and technology of our age to make everyone fat lazy and happy. But no... we have to find ways to make ourselves miserable like worrying about extremely rare terrorist attacks and eco disasters.

9/11 was a hijacking. Arabs have been hijacking planes for decades and big whoop they did it again, but this time with a clever twist. People just need to get over it.

June 24, 2008 2:57 PM

thejauntyboulevardier said:

This is my take: I have had a few discussions with GOP types - not many mind you but a few - who have expressed to me that what this country needs is "another attack"! Why, I ask. What they tell me is that after the first attack, the country was so "united". I try to probe more but they get suspicious and clam up.

What I think they may mean is that by being "united" we, as a country, were more Republican. 90% of the country supported The Decider and in the aftermath of the 02 midterms, the GOP kicked ass.

I don't believe that these nostalgic GOP types don't really want another attack and its attendent death and horror: I would venture to say that what they really miss is the poltiical advantage that 9/11 gave their party and their partisan agenda.

That is my take, for what it is worth...

June 24, 2008 3:47 PM

butchie b said:

Nonsense.  I know of NO ONE who wants another attack, Dem or GOP.  That sort of talk is loony.  Maybe those "not many mind you" GOP types think they want an attack, but they are misguided.

It's bad form, sort of like when Dems root for recession so they can gain some political advantage.  I've heard that from soem Dems, but I doubt that most believe that way.

June 24, 2008 4:50 PM

thejauntyboulevardier said:

butchie,

I reread my post and it should have read...

I don't believe that these GOP types actually want another attack...

butchie, don't be so dismissive of this issue. Every now and then, I have read a blurb where some congressman or preacher voices this sentiment. Again, I don't think that they are wishing horror on our country, but they miss their political terrain that followed the attacks. At least that is my take...

June 24, 2008 5:02 PM

butchie b said:

Perhaps, Cookie.  But they are woefully misguided, and should be set straight at every opportunity.

June 25, 2008 1:28 PM