On Hardball the subject of Cheney's dire warning that a Kerry election would trigger a terrorist attack came up. The guests were Tony Blankley, Roger the guy from U.S. News/World Report, and someone from WaPo. I was amazed that they basically bought into it as a good, legitimate argument for a campaign (in the U.S.A.) to make against the other party. That's one. Suggesting that the other party is simply so treasonous that they can never be trusted is acceptable for scoring political points.
That's maddening enough, but they totally ignored the innumerable terrorist warnings that we've had in this country since 9/11. If we give the Administration the benefit of the doubt, those were all true warnings of true, possibly imminent terrorist attacks. The obvious counter to Cheney is to point out that we've been under horrendous (and real) threats all along, with the Bush administration in power. So what is he suggesting, that with Bush we will be spared all these threats in the future?
It seems to me that Chris Matthews is a fairly smart guy. But how he can fail so miserably in the face of these pathetic partisan jabs, and even add to their treacherous effectiveness (fear and smear as legitimate) is beyond me.