The notion is that people routinely flock to strong leadership in times of fear, regardless of consequence.

But Obama has effectively cast himself and his administration as strong in terms of foreign policy and military affairs. Polls reflect this; in the event of another high-profile attack, people will "flock" to Obama, not an untested GOP candidate.

The first is a reflection of being ignorant, incompetent & most of all, afraid. The second reflects being knowledgeable, able & truly brave.

What if all they planned to do was talk the talk while enriching themselves and staying in power by any means necessary. Bin Laden good for them?
Remember the biggest lie of the RWs meme was that they kept America safe - 9/11 happened on their watch.

I agree that the Obama administration reflected the second.

You're husband is definitely onto something that is driving the rushpublicans crazy. In the past decade they've lost two of their key issues to the Democrats and to President Obama in specific: Defense and Economics. Killing bin Laden and the destruction of what was left of the AQ infrastructure = "winning the war" that the rushpublicans couldn't do in 6 long years. His handling of the economic collapse (cause by 8 years of rushpublican fleecing of regulations and the treasury) that's seen the markets rebound and the economy starting to turn around is one that Millard ties himself up with constantly.

So with those issues off the table that's why we're hearing about woman's reproductive health and a fantasyland where all sorts of boogiemen and fears are whipped up (Iran) or exagerated (Keystone)...totally detached from reality but the only way the wingnuts can stay someone on the same page...other than their racist hatred of President Obama.

We're still a long way from October and November and who knows what landmines can be set off to try to derail the Obama campaign. I'm kinda glad (in a morbid sorta way) that we're seeing a gas spike now...generally the ebb and flow of these things mean the price will drop back down later this summer and once again it will sink back as a major issue...but that doesn't mean something else won't crop up. The price rises in the wake of this latest spike could still be felt then and that could make this administration vulnerable.

As far as an attack on the US...one flaw in his logic. Such a crisis would play into President Obama's hands as the country would rally around him and that could help his chances not only to win but to turn the election into a blow out.

As it stands right now the rushpublicans will be so divided and distracted that by the time the general election rolls around they'll be spending as much time trying to "unite" as they will going after this President.

Only the names have changed, the game remains the same.

. . . the defense industry looks just fine, with their replinished backlog of high-tech goodies which are sold as alternatives to the hazardous use of ground forces for their 'pollyandish' misadventures.

Moreover, I wouldn't assume there's a lot of hunger for the pace and scope of the unbridled militarism of the Bush era. As callous as they seem in their deployment orders (and they just might be, to some degree), I don't believe that these commanders are sanguine about endlessly sacrificing their platoons and regiments in defense of these dubious regimes.

That said, there's still going to be a ready reserve of optimism in any military command about the the efficacy and effectiveness of the use of military force. Whether there's a complimenting amount of support from the civilian leadership in those calculations of cause and effect of military action abroad is going to be the question ahead. That pursuit doesn't need the old bogey men to leap into action. All they need to do is invent a new one . . .

We're so used to the Bushian military posturing and it's calculated overreactions, but I wouldn't expect for this administration to direct their response to any attack on our soil or on our interests abroad in a way which would so inflame and divide the nation, as in the past. We've recalibrated our triggers with this Democratic presidency. Hopefully, if successful, it'll have some lasting, guiding effect on the future ones.

...and there were US citizens in Georgia who confirmed it was the Georgian army that started the conflict with Russia.

Putin later came out and said it was to help get MKKKlan elected.

I wouldn't put it past conservatives to not only welcome and attack but cause one.

They are disgusting.

If Obama gets the economy humming on 8 cylinders vs 5 then what case will the GOP have for having economic answers?

2 dem presidents 2 improved economies.

2 con presidents 2 broke economies

the difference this time is they do not control the Executive Branch, but I sure agree with your general points

Any theory that requires rational actors at the voting booth is suspect.

The ReTHUGlicans got nothing real to run on, so the Koch Bros are going to gin gas prices up to $5 and FAUX NOIZ Mouthbreathing Nation will eat it up like free sliders.

That, and their "old reliables" of Gawd, Guns, and Teh Ghey.

I get the political rantings from the NRA and they're already screaming about how Obama's just waiting for his second term to personally kick our doors in and take our guns.

just as gas prices usually rise in the spring, they usually drop in the fall

Obama and Cameron have already gone public stating that they will use reserves to keep prices down.

Rush Scumbaugh - old and out of touch.

I believe it was in September of 2000, as George Bush was running on the "elect a Texas oilman to lower gas prices" wisdom, that President Bill Clinton first threatened to use the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to combat prices. They had inexplicably risen from historic lows just in time to benefit George W. Bush's campaign.

Bush, of course, denounced Clinton's idea, then after he was elected re-filled the SPR when oil was over $100 a barrel, and then eventually began using it to drive the price down by selling it at a huge loss in an attempt to swing the 2006 mid-term elections.

I have a feeling this President has noticed this little game. It will not surprise me to see a price-manipulation scheme exposed across multiple cities, and I'll expect them to be heavy Republican donors, too.

from $10 between Bush nomination and inauguration to $30. Then it dropped to $20 because he didn't attack anybody. Then the Sept 11 attacks came and we were off to the races.

There's about a 36 day supply in the SPC. What would do more to lower prices is to work out a deal with Iran which then takes the significant speculator cost component off the table.

regardless of evidence to the contrary. You won't change their minds. The people who support Obama now are not going to turn to the RW even if there was another attack. They saw and remember the response and the aftermath when the RW was in power.

Every objective person credits Obama on taking out Bin Laden.
Not one ReTHUG primary candidate has even mentioned the name Bin Laden - not once.

a killer for the right. They certainly did care after Obama had him killed though...

Precisely - that's hubby's point - they cared way too much after Obama took him out and therefore showed their hand. They tried to play down what could not be played down because they had played it up!!!! It was pretty much checkmate!!!

From my POV, there seemed to be much more prolonged display of the "Mission Accomplised" rhetoric. The cheering, the back slapping, the protrayed sense that we are safer etc. Not so much on "Bin Laden is dead". I'm not exactly sure why it hasn't been made into a much much bigger deal.

and they have no intention of allowing Obama to receive the deserved accolades.

was to make this point. Bush* leaving him alive was a blank check Barack was going to cash. I never doubted this.

by behaving so desperately and demanding that they be given credit for killing someone they ignored for seven plus years. They were terrified when Obama killed him.

Which is why you hear very little about foriegn policy and "keeping America safe" from Republican candidates. Obama has the perfect response, "ask OBL about how weak I am on defense..." He has even used it and will use it again in the debates if the subject comes up, which is why republicans will avoid it.

The last thing any of them want is to be cornered into a position where they have to speak well of Obama for this, particularly to his face.

Apparently they are attempting to run on the economy and vaginas.

He leads both Romney and Santorum on the question by 25 points.
The removal of OBL will make it near impossible for the GOP to attack Obama on the issue.

It is the only reason W.'s approval was so high after 9-11.

If there is an attack then odds are Pres. Obama wins big. He did get Bin Laden and he is the one most would trust to go after the attackers.

Their goal is $6 gas.

I don't give a rats ass about Hubby.