Just when the 2006 midterm elections were starting to get really good – deep, deep, deep in the mud – John McCain began to put the pedal to the metal for 2008.

Speaking in Michigan, McCain said, "I would remind Senator Clinton and other Democrats critical of the Bush administration's policies that the framework agreement that her husband's administration negotiated was a failure."

He was speaking, of course, about North Korea and this week's serious smackaround about who is responsible for Kim Jong Il's underground nuclear party.  It was Clinton.  No, Bush.  No, Clinton.  Well, Jimmy Carter h\ad it fixed, didn't he?

Maybe it was Kim Jong Il.  His quest.  His bomb.  His attention-grabbing party.  Just as it was al Qaeda which attacked the U.S. on 9-11 and Hezbollah which attacked Israel only scant months ago.

On the larger scale, China could have done more to curtail North Korea, the entire Muslim world could have done more to curtail al Qaeda and Iran and Syria could have done more to curtail Hezbollah than the U.S. could have done without violating some convention we're supposed to be bound by.

Regardless, incident by international incident, the national security of this country is affected, and this country had better decide what that national security means and what it's going to take to provide it.

Senator McCain used the specific example of North Korea to exploit the broader question.  Are we going to be a nation that walks softly (a little bit louder now) with a big stick or are we going to be a nation that walks babbling across the world stage while handing out carrots to madmen and murderers?

When all is said and done, those are the choices, with minor variations, with detail added to dress up the arguments and make them seem all grown up and intellectual.

We are not among those who believe either John McCain or Hillary Clinton is going to be our next president.  But barring unforeseen circumstances, both are going to go toe to toe in the center ring for some time.

Round One goes decisively to McCain.  He grabbed an issue when Missus Clinton ventured into the open, thinking she was scoring one for her team by attacking President Bush on North Korea, and put her in a box she has desperately tried to avoid.  The box is labeled appeasement, regardless of the euphemisms it marches under.

For citizens still puzzled by Election 2006, trying to think their way through a myriad of issues, national security being the one that counts, we have a simple test that can be applied to all candidates.  Just ask one question.  If he or she had been aboard Flight 93, would he or she have joined those passengers who charged the cockpit or would he or she have attempted to negotiate with the terrorists?  Answer that, and you will know how to vote.