NPR Poll: Any chance we can hide this from Karl?

Dems clean up in this poll with eye-popping gains on security issues. Except for one...

snip>
It's not uncommon to see polls where Democrats beat Republicans on domestic issues, such as the economy and jobs, health care and Social Security. But in this poll, when asked which party they trust more on issues such as the Iraq war, foreign ownership of U.S. ports and attention to homeland security, majorities chose the Democrats. Only on the question of Iranian nuclear weapons do the president and his party come out ahead.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5284936

Can ANYONE explain that? And is there ANY chance that won't be exploited by a desperate regime with 58% disapproval ratings?

by Bushco before the year is out.

And there's some more motivation for them. How can people be so obtuse?

As crazy as these people are, they aren't going to nuke another country just for politics. I know I'll be slammed for saying that, but being overly dramatic is just that, being overly dramatic. I DO however think that Bushco is in the market for another war starting climate. I just think they want to rattle the sword and look tough for the American people. Even if Iran could make a Nuclear weapon by years end, they would still be years behind us in technology and delivery systems. It's like building a ship in your basement, they would still need time to get it out. I'm not convinced at all that we will be nuking anyone anytime soon. Airstrikes on Iran's nuclear facilities? Yeah that's likely, but not nukes.

just 5 years ago, unthinkable.

Substitute a "q" for the "n":

"Even if Iran could make a Nuclear weapon by years end, they would still be years behind us in technology and delivery systems."

How many explained this before we invaded and killed a hundred thousand in Iraq?

the latest drumbeat. They will figure out that they were wrong about Iran, say about 3 years from now, after the damage is done.
:dunce: :silly:

with this republican Congress and the Bush Nuclear Technology Agreement with India..If the repubs try and push this through this will show that the Repubs are truly not acting in the best interests of Americans

is actually one of the best friends we have in that part of the world. I actually am not as against this deal as many of you might be. The thing I don't like about it, is that this deal will increase India's nuclear arsenal, which will trigger another nuclear arms race between them and Pakistan. I'm all for improving relations with India otherwise.

snip>
Summary: On Hardball, Chris Matthews, Dana Milbank, and Pat Buchanan discussed what they agreed were the likely political benefits to President Bush and congressional Republicans if he were to launch a pre-emptive war against Iran.

On the March 15 edition (7:00 p.m. ET hour) of MSNBC's Hardball, host Chris Matthews, Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank, and MSNBC political analyst Pat Buchanan discussed what they agreed were the likely political benefits to President Bush and congressional Republicans in November 2006 if Bush were to launch a pre-emptive war against Iran. Buchanan posited: "I don't think he's going to do it for political reasons, but if he did do it for political reasons, you'd do it in October," because "you'd get right up the polls ... you'd win the election." Matthews, who confessed to being "staggered by the possible truth" in Buchanan's comments, invited Milbank to comment. Milbank noted that "here is undoubtedly a rallying effect," but, according to Milbank, the question regarding a possible war against Iran launched partially -- or purely -- for political gain is: "Exactly when do you do the action, and exactly how long do you stay up at the top of the heap here?"

http://mediamatters.org/items/200603180001