According to The Hill, Democrats are tired of clapping their hands over their ears every time the GOP mentions national security, and see 2006 as the time to forthrightly shatter the myth of Republican competence on terrorism. When the Republicans attacked the Democrats on security yesterday, the Democrats were ready, sending out decorated general Wesley Clark to rebut the charges. And Reid and Pelosi seem delighted to be engaging this fight, with Reid happily predicting that each time the GOP runs this play, they'll net fewer yards, and this time they'd get stopped at the line of scrimmage.
Meanwhile, the Corner is collapsing in paroxysms of glee over Bush's brilliant move on detainees today. For reasons I don't quite understand, Mario Loyola seems to think Bush "stole the terms of debate from the Democrats, and rewrote them, all in a single speech. It will be delightful to watch in coming days and hours as bewildered Democrats try to understand what just hit them, and then sort through the rubble of their anti-Bush national security strategy to see what, if anything, remains." I'm not terrifically sure what the political implications of today's move are, but it seems to me that Bush was forced by the Supreme Court to stop holding detainees illegally, and by Congress to stop torturing people. That he's decided to say he'll do these things is being greeted as a victory of epic proportions by the Corner crowd. The soft bigotry of low expectations, I guess.
Update: Spencer Ackerman has some further thoughts.
