republicans, is this helping, or hurting your party

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I saw him on TV today (you know, me being at home all day) and his basic premise, which is a huge assumption, is if we have another 9/11 during Obama's presidency. Based on that assumption, Taranto thinks Dick Cheney would be the most credible and strongest voice in the Republican party regarding national security. And that somehow Republicans would flock to Cheney lock and step based on that one policy position alone.

I think it's reasonable to assume that Cheney would have folks ear if something on that scale took place on American soil again, but the majority of Americans just couldn't swallow another four years of Dick Cheney. Not even the most loyal Republican feel that way.

National security gravitas aside, I don't think Cheney has the physical stamina to run a national campaign for two years. But then again I didn't think John McCain could endure such a grueling schedule either.

All that has been said about Cheney I do feel that he took protecting us from another attack is something he took very serious rather you agree with everything he did and how he did them is another story. The people wanting to attack us are ruthless and sometimes you have to fight fire with fire and I think Cheney understood this.

[CRedskinsRule]

Sadly, my first expectation for reading this was that someone had caught another Republican in some base scandal. The expectation of what that might have been forced me to open and read. Very disappointing post.