Remarks after a dry-run for trans-atlantic plane bombings was stopped in Britain…

Bush:

President Bush called the foiled plan to blow up passengers aboard U.S. bound airplanes “a stark reminder that this nation is at war with Islamic fascists,” but unlike past incidents, critics were quick to challenge his priorities in fighting terror and his credibility in protecting the nation.

“This country is safer than it was prior to 9/11. We’ve taken a lot of measures to protect the American people. But obviously, we’re still not completely safe, because there are people that still plot and people who want to harm us for what we believe in,” Bush said from the tarmac of an airport in Green Bay, Wis., where he traveled to deliver a speech on the economy and stump for GOP candidates.

Lieberman:

Sen. Joe Lieberman set out on his go-it-alone re-election campaign Thursday and seized on the terror arrests in Britain to argue that his Democratic opponent, Ned Lamont, does not fully understand the danger facing the nation.[…]

“I’m worried that too many people, both in politics and out, don’t appreciate the seriousness of the threat to American security and the evil of the enemy that faces us — more evil or as evil as Nazism and probably more dangerous than the Soviet communists we fought during the long Cold War,” Lieberman said.

The foiled terrorist plot making yet more erosion of the Constitution self-explanatory, vs “you people only oppose the Iraq invasion because you just don’t understand!!  Look at these crazies!!”.  One assumes  that measures effectively throwing out innocent-until-proven-guilty & requirement of actual reason for suspicion to spy on US citizens are the key to stopping terrorism, the other somehow makes a logical leap of epic proportions — that a bunch of Brits being caught shows why we need to do more killin’ in Iraq.

Which one is dumber?  No, seriously, I can’t tell.