Yet the endorsement of Mr. McCain by a Qaeda-affiliated Web site isn’t a surprise to security specialists. Richard Clarke, the former White House counterterrorism director, and Joseph Nye, the former chairman of the National Intelligence Council, have both suggested that Al Qaeda prefers Mr. McCain and might even try to use terror attacks in the coming days to tip the election to him.
“From their perspective, a continuation of Bush policies is best for recruiting,” said Professor Nye, adding that Mr. McCain is far more likely to continue those policies.

Op-Ed Columnist - The Endorsement From Hell - NYTimes.com

I don’t really see it this way.  My guess is that the Al Qaeda “endorsement” [the article states “Al Qaeda will have to support McCain in the coming election,” read a commentary on a password-protected Islamist Web site that is closely linked to Al Qaeda and often disseminates the group’s propaganda] has about as much validity as the Hamas “endorsement” of Obama.  It’s possible that this “endorsement” is contrived to inspire fear in potential McCain voters, and lead them to Obama, but I doubt it.  What is more likely is that these terrorist groups will do whatever they can to create chaos in our country - and the election process here certainly leaves a lot of low hanging fruit.

(via bellatoris)

I’m hesitant to put any stock in an “endorsement” by terrorists—regardless of the party they “choose”—because it can be equally spun by both sides. When Al Qaeda endorsed McCain, the Obamaniacs claim that McCain would agitate more anti-American resentment and make recruiting easier. If Al Qaeda endorsed Obama, the hawks would argue that they want him because Obama would be weak (ala a reversal of the Carter/Reagan swap) and embolden terrorists, making them less afraid of a severe response by America.

Besides, in terms of how we vote, who the frick cares what Al Qaeda thinks?