Clinton under fire for terror comment

Democratic rivals criticized Hillary Rodham Clinton on Friday for her comment that a terror attack before the election would help the Republicans.

On Thursday, the New York senator told supporters in Concord that she could defeat any Republican nominee, in part because she already knows how her opponents will go after her and because she is good at handling the unexpected.

“There are circumstances beyond our control, and I think I am better able to handle things I have no control over,” she said. “It’s a horrible prospect to ask yourself ‘What if? What if?’ But if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world,” she said. “So I think I’m the best of the Democrats to deal with that as well.”

Rivals took strong issue with her on Friday.

Talking with reporters in Wolfeboro, former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards said he would focus on keeping America safe — not scoring political points.

“If we’re talking about America being attacked, the last thing we should do is be engaged in political calculation,” he said. “What I believe is that it is the responsibility of a presidential candidate, a serious presidential candidate, and the president of the United States when you’re talking about something as serious as the potential for America to be attacked, to focus on what’s good for America, not politics, and what needs to be done to keep this country safe, which is what I would do as president.”

Likewise, New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson said in a statement, “We shouldn’t be thinking about terrorism in terms of its domestic political consequences, we should be protecting the country from terrorists.”

Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd said in his own statement, “Frankly, I find it tasteless to discuss political implications when talking about a potential terrorist attack on the United States.”

In a response to the criticism, Clinton campaign spokeswoman Kathleen Strand said Friday night, “Senator Clinton was making clear that she has the strength and experience to keep the country safe.”


Associated Press writer Philip Elliott contributed to this report.


  1. adamrussell

    Actually a warning of the fact that any attack will be met with a republican taking advantage of it can only wilter such attempt. Meaning that repubs will be hesitant to make hay when they know that Hillary predicted they would. It was a perfect head-off.

  2. Wayne K Dolik

    Billary is simply power mad. Billary has made no effort what so ever in her campaign to 1. Restore Habeas Corpus, 2. Return to the Rule of Law. 3. End the use of Torture; in many cases innocents. 4. End the war in Iraq. 5. Even to end the endless spying on American Citizens.

    Billary is as guilty of playing the fear card as the Bushies. Billary wants all of Bushies power and more. Wake up and smell the coffee. The two party system has been hijacked.

    America needs to change between the two ruling family’s. There is a fork in the road, and good Americans need to take it. Decide for your selves.

    It’s “Against all enemies both foreign and domestic”. That is the sacred oath we take in The United States of America. I am amazed how stupid some people are. Do you really think “Bush Light” will solve our problems?

  3. CheckerboardStrangler

    Never mind that another attack would nullify all the crowing the last few years…how Bush has kept us safe, etc.
    Never mind that it would put Bush at an
    0 for 2 record, the fact is another attack WOULD seal Bush’s ambition to be President for Life or at the very least SEAL a permanent one party Republican Soviet.

    It doesn’t have to make sense.
    What else HAS made sense these last seven years?

  4. Electric Bill

    Of course a terror attack would help the Republicans. The attacks of 9/11 made the Bush Presidency, or at least they put off the moment when he was revealed as being a brainless turd for several years. The entire Republican mantra is fear, fear, fear. Why shouldn’t they want to see this reinforced by action?

  5. Nogood

    Hillary Clinton is 100% correct! It would not surprise me that at this very moment, plans are being made by Bush and his “Mafia family” to lanch some sort of action so they can declare martial law and by so doing the election of 2008 will be put on hold, Bush will still sit in the Oval Office. Far fetch? Dont bet against it.

  6. SEAL

    Nogood: I’m sure Bush’s people have told him he would never survive declaring Martial Law. The level of hatred of him is off the scale for too many people. However, his seething contempt for the unwashed masses just might cause him to do it. The more you tell him he cannot do something the more inclined he is to do it.

    In a way I wish he would do it. It would cause the people to take action and the end result would be the best thing that could happen for this nation. Americans will not accept martial law. They would remove all those of the White House gang. I guarantee it.

  7. ekaton

    I’m kind of hoping for a mutiny among the top generals and admirals in the event that Bush would issue orders to attack Iran. Not a military coup, just a refusal to follow illegal orders.

    Kent Shaw

  8. SEAL

    These polititions are so stupid it boggles the mind. Of course they should prepare to sidetrack any advantage the republicans could acquire by hypothetical conditions. Hillary did just the opposite. She gave them an advantage should they conjour up another false flag. How dumb can she be?

    What she should have done was to point out how they botched the intel, allowed 9/11 to happen, and, if another attack occurs on their watch, they certainly aren’t doing a good job of keeping america safe. Put the onus on them where it belongs. Hopefully, that might derail any plans Bushco has for al Qaeda attacking all the convienience stores to destroy the twinkies and deprive americans of their sugar.

    Hillary Clinton is running a non-stance campaign. A defensive campaign. She said so. that is the opposite of what she and all the democrats should do. They have been provided so much ammunition they would never run out of ways to make the repugnants look bad. But they all have a fear of the repugnant party. They have folded every time they have been challenged. Kerry gave the election away by not debunking the swiftboaters which would have been simple to do.

    But Hillary is the worst of the bunch. She is so gun shy from past experience she has built a wall to hide behind. There is a very large segment of the voters that have made up their minds about her long ago and she has no chance to change that. Also, she is the one candidate that will motivate the religious base to go to the polls. If any other dem is nominated many of them will stay home, not caring, because they have no candidate to inspire them.

    I hope either Richardson or Dennis can get rolling and take over. They could if they would attack with an intelligent and controlled furor. Obama seems to be folding up and while Edwards makes better statements than anyone else he just doesn’t have the ass to be president. They need to turn Hillary’s “experience” campaign around on her. She has very little. Being first lady does not count and that experience was very bad. She failed at what she tried to do.

  9. bryan mcclellan

    A false flag on the Good Ship Twinkie,swiftly gunning,but shooting blanks of sugar coated nonsense(the need for a village with her as the top idiot). AN Irascible image of little HEAD SPACE and TIMING.This is no ordinary Broad,she could have shot bill when she went to the closet to put on the power suit ,but upon finding a blue dress with the reality that the dream was tied to it,still she opted for the drug called conformity of political expediency,unwaveringly she there by adhered to which rules,those that seek power must follow in D.C. Dear Mrs. Clinton ,stay in the Senate where you can do the most good for a change,and the least harm.Your voting record sucks…Susan,Helen,JudyB,LFTL,Sandra, and all the ships at sea, I wish to stir no umbrage of the fair sex,This is not a gender based argument to me.Nixon,Ford,Carter,bush,clinton,bush,clinton is just too much…

  10. bryan mcclellan

    Thanks Carl:I couldn’t resist using some of your post, hope you don’t mind.Twinkie got me rolling.