"Is Tom Tancredo Too `Tough on Terror'?" blogged the Washington Post. Conclusion to reach: Way too tough.

The Los Angeles Times quoted one Dennis Goldford, a professor of politics at Drake University in Des Moines, who described the Tancredo commercial as "an incredibly fear-based kind of advertisement that some might say is trying to terrorize people into supporting his view." This is rich. Acknowledging terrorism as act of terrorism: Professor, grade yourself an "F."

Meanwhile, the Rocky Mountain News didn't claim even a shred of impartial coverage, sub-heading its report on the Tancredo commercial: "Expert says terrorism images are so blatant commercial won't work." The "expert" here was Bruce Gronbeck, a communications professor at the University of Iowa who teaches a course on politics on the aftermath of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks (heaven help his students). He said: "This is just blatant, raw fear images, and they've never worked in the United States, period."

"Fear-mongering." "Terrorizing people." "Blatant, raw fear images." The way the "experts" talk, they make it sound as if Tancredo is subjecting citizens to sick "Saw" dismemberment fantasies -- not the plain, awful reality of our tragically jihad-diminished day. Yes, our shopping malls are targets. And yes, our borders are porous. Ignoring this makes it easier to live in a world of pretend, but that's not traditionally where our best presidents have come from. Indeed, how does any credible, responsible presidential candidate ignore the potential connection between shopping-mall targets and porous borders?

Answer: At this nation's politically correct peril.