In a post called "politicizing Terror", some guy named Ed writes:

From a purely political point of view, the question demeans the audience to which it was asked and exposes the poser as the poseur she [Hillary Clniton] is. Most hilariously, she used this hypothetical [would Republicans benefit from another terrorist attack] to explain how she deals with negative attacks from Republicans. It's hard to get more negative -- and more foolish -- than to speculate that a terrorist attack would give the GOP an advantage, and that she's prepared to take political advantage of the situation should it arise.

Golly.

In his first interview as the chairman of the Arkansas Republican Party, Dennis Milligan told a reporter that America needs to be attacked by terrorists so that people will appreciate the work that President Bush has done to protect the country.

"At the end of the day, I believe fully the president is doing the right thing, and I think all we need is some attacks on American soil like we had on [Sept. 11, 2001]," Milligan said to the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, "and the naysayers will come around very quickly to appreciate not only the commitment for President Bush, but the sacrifice that has been made by men and women to protect this country."

That's Dennis Milligan, head of the Republican Party in Arkansas, June 07.

"Americans trust the Republicans to do a better job of keeping our communities and our families safe ... We can also go to the country on this issue because they trust the Republican Party to do a better job of protecting and strengthening America's military might and thereby protecting America."

And that's Karl Rove, telling the Republican National Committee in 2002 that they should use the War On Terror as a political tool.

So, "Captain" Ed, how is Hillary Clinton doing anything but agreeing with what big names in the GOP itself are saying ? And those are just a couple of explicit instances. The idea that a new attack would unite the country around the President and the hawkish elements of the Republican party is so obvious that it hardly needs to be spoken.

Seems to me like Ed's trying a bit too hard to find a way to get himself (and his readers) angry about Hillary Clinton.