Again, this material writes itself. Why does Juan continually subject himself to this punishment? Juan tries to talk about the Republicans politicizing the war on terror for the upcoming elections, but as usual, Brit reels him in. Bill Kristol even gets in on this one (as he usually does).

KRISTOL: I just want to strongly object to one thing. And I’m willing to be critical of President Bush’s management of the war in all kinds of ways. But it is a totally false charge that he has played the politics of fear.

Compared to previous presidents at wartime, he has been incredibly responsible. He has never said a word about the Clinton administration. He has never tried to blame past failures on them. He’s been scrupulous about that. He has bent over backwards not to make this a war against Islam. He’s said Islam’s a religious of peace. He’s tried to be very careful in not demonizing enemies.

I mean, look at Joe McCarthy. Look at Harry Truman, a man I admire. Look at his rhetoric against Tom Dewey in 1948: “Fascism is coming back.” Look at normal rhetoric used by presidents who were in political trouble. Bush has been, I think, very careful and very responsible.

WILLIAMS: I appreciate what he’s done in terms of not trying to isolate especially Muslims here in the United States. But he is the same person who’s been using recently rhetoric like “Islamic fascism,” which I think goes overboard.

But the second…

HUME: Juan, you concern yourself about this, what you called, fear campaign by Republicans. There is a big difference between Democrats and Republicans on this issue, it seems to me, and between conservatives and liberals. And that is, conservatives believe that we have something very serious, very dangerous to be afraid of.

And the sense one gets, despite what they may say about it, time and time again from the American left is that this whole war on terror was really an overreaction, that it should be a police and intelligence operation, that it should be a matter of justice. That’s the way the Clinton administration chose to fight this. And that the president uses 9/11 as a political — well, 9/11 was a real thing. And what it said about the worldwide terror movement is true.

WILLIAMS: OK, Brit…

HUME: And so, if you believe that…

WILLIAMS: … I agree with you, we are at war. I agree with you and the president; we’re at war.

HUME: Right.

WILLIAMS: But in the last week, what have we seen, Brit? We’ve seen the start of a fall campaign season in which Republicans are in dire trouble, the president’s unpopular, the war in Iraq’s unpopular. What does the president do?

He doesn’t start a conversation about dealing with the key issues of the day. He switches the conversation, switches the agenda to his strong point, which is the war on terror, the one point on which Americans give him some support. And he does it conveniently, tactically and purposely. He politicized 9/11 and the memory of it as we come to this five-year mark.

HUME: I’ll let…

WALLACE: You have 10 seconds.

HUME: Well, the fact of the matter is that this is the issue we ought to be talking about, Juan, unmistakably.

I will never understand why Juan continues to subject himself to this weekly public whipping by the scholars of the FNS Panel. I’m not upset about it because it provides for good blogging material, but DAMN! Juan has GOT to be an intellectual masochist! I really enjoy watching it, though.

And you can watch it here yourself.