Wow, here's a radical idea....

[Jade Fox]

The reason Americans think the Democratic Party is "weak on terror" or "weak on security" is because Democrats don't stand up to Republicans.

Makes sense to me. Here's some more from the article:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ellis-weiner/my-wife-just-figured-it-o_b_30192.html

Could anything be more (retrospectively) obvious? (I'm not saying no one else here has realized this. But I hadn't, and I haven't read anyone, anywhere, making as big a deal about it as should be made. So indulge my enthusiasm.) This picks up on everyone's ecstasy over Bill Clinton's sharp and, really, pretty unrelenting retort to the odious Chris Wallace recently. Arianna correctly chided him on coming late to the partisan game and hoping he'll do it some more.

If the people in the sloshy political center know anything, it's that Republicans diss Democrats and are their mortal enemy--even if everyone deplores it. The combat that plays out every day in the news is not between "us" and "the terrorists." It's between the administration, its enablers in Congress, and the saloon loudmouths on talk radio, and the Democrats. And who's winning?

[thethinker]

1. Yes they look weak

because they are spineless.

A good for instance, is the democratic "leaders" were breaking their necks defending Bush's honor last week. This week when Clinton was insulted on national TV, where are they? Silent, as usual.

When the leaders speak out, the grassroots supports them. The "leaders" need to grow a spine and start taking a stand on some issues. They also need to stop voting with the republicans.

I cannot believe their silence on torture. They truly disappoint me on this issue.

[Jade Fox]

2. There is already a post over on Huffpo...

criticizing Clinton for losing his temper or whatever during the Fox interview. I don't know what it will take to get the Democrats to realize they can't win this fight by being nice.

It felt so good to see Clinton get mad. I'd love to see the whole Democratic party get mad!