There's not enough hours in the day

Let's look at Douglas McKinnon's latest article for factual errors. It has as it's theme that Democrats are soft on terror and that Terrorists want us to elect Democrats. Unfortunately for his theme, he fills his article with speculation, wishful thinking, and outright lies. Let's start near the beginning.

Because if we get this one wrong, Islamic terrorists will almost certainly strike into the heart of America.

Half truth - most terrorism experts including those in the Bush Administration believe that we will get hit again regardless of whether or not we consistently elect Democrats. In fact it's an interesting catch 22. If we are hit with a Republican in the white house it's proof that we need to redouble our efforts towards implementing Republican methods of fighting terrorism. If we get hit with a Democrat in the White House it means we need to abandon Democrats and adopt Republican Methods of fighting Terrorism.

I'm going to print this as a block then take it apart.

Political correctness has made us a weaker nation because it has killed some truths. The paramount truth most liberals, and most in the media, will not allow to be spoken, is that if you are in favor of comprehensive immigration reform, if you are in favor of ending or scaling back the “Patriot Act,” if you are in favor of stopping or even criminalizing warrantless wiretaps, if you are in favor of preventing our spy satellites from being used to protect our homeland, if you are in favor of never using facilities such as Guantanamo Bay to house murderous terrorists, if you are in favor of never letting our allies interrogate terrorists, then you are opening up the United States to a horrific terrorist attack.

First of all political correctness has not killed this particular "truth." Republicans and Conservatives, including elected and appointed officials, have been saying this since September 11th. Hell not a few days after the attacks there was a bumper sticker quoting President Bush saying "You are either with us (with a Republican Elephant off to the side) or with the Terrorists (with a Democratic Donkey off to the side)." So political correctness is apparently toothless because it certainly hasn't stopped Republicans from making these kinds of attacks.

On the other hand, common sense and decency might have stopped some Republicans / Conservatives from issuing this laundry list.

Being "in favor of comprehensive immigration reform" means being in favor of closing the borders as well as providing for some guest worker program. While you might be suspicious of it, favoring it does not mean you want to open America up to a terrorist attack. Presumably having documented guest workers in America is better than not having any records on them.

The next set deal with threats to our civil liberties. McKinnon is in favor of abandoning our civil liberties in favor of programs of questionable value. There are elements of the Patriot Act that are probably useful correctives, but there are also clearly some real questions about how it has been used. Why our government requires warrantless wiretaps is also a pretty big question. Why can't they make do with warranted wiretaps? Why is asking a judge so damn hard?

Then we get to torture, both doing it ourselves (Guantenemo) or getting our allies to do it. There is a real question as to the value of torture outside of the fantasy world of 24. You are incentivized not to tell the truth but to tell the torturer what he or she wants to hear. That, plus the moral questions raised, makes opposing torture not nearly as cut and dried as McKinnon would like it to be.

He then moves on to Hillary Clinton.

Senator Hillary Clinton is a far-left liberal . . . she has to successfully deceive enough Americans into believing she is a “centrist” -- instead of the committed socialist she is . .

If Hillary Clinton is a far left liberal and a committed socialist than I am a frog. She's a moderate right wing candidate who, of the Democratic nominees, is most likely to continue the failed policies of the Bush Administration.

He then posits a scenario that would occur if Clinton were elected President. Representatives of Al Qaida, Hezbollah, and Venezuala place three suitcase nukes in America and threaten to set them off if Hillary Clinton doesn't capitulate to their insane demands. Hillary Clinton, being a weak kneed liberal immediately capitulates. That is the future if we don't take this election seriously (i.e. vote for the Republican).

At this point I find myself wondering if McKinnon himself even takes this seriously.