Nobody Happy Over Hillary's Terror Comment

The context:

"It's a horrible prospect to ask yourself, 'What if? What if?' But if certain things happen between now and the election, particularly with respect to terrorism, that will automatically give the Republicans an advantage again, no matter how badly they have mishandled it, no matter how much more dangerous they have made the world," Clinton told supporters in Concord.

"So I think I'm the best of the Democrats to deal with that," she added.

Chris Dodd: "Frankly, I find it tasteless to discuss political implications when talking about a potential terrorist attack on the United States."

John Edwards: "Senator Clinton’s remarks are deeply troubling. After nearly seven years of George Bush and the politics of fear, the American people deserve a President who will focus first on keeping America safe, rather than calculating the political consequences. Unfortunately, Senator Clinton is seemingly taking a page straight from the GOP playbook that got us into this mess — using fear of another terror attack as a political tactic to bolster her candidacy, and that is just wrong."

Bill Richardson: "Senator Clinton seems to think that President Bush has made this country safer. I disagree with her. Our failed policy in Iraq is making us less safe."

Barack Obama: Clinton is obsessed “with what she calls the Republican attack machine. I think we need a candidate who is obsessed with unifying this country again."

When EVERY major candidate jumps on one of your comments, suffice to say you stuck your foot in it. Furthermore, because this statement is so symptomatic of a defensive, cautious, mushy-middle crouch that recalls the Democrat-lite DLC of the past, a mindset no Democrat wants to return to, I think it could end up being a real turning point. The national polls don't mean a thing right now. Incidents like this, if they become part of the campaign narrative, do.