But this persons believes that if we do what he thinks is right, he can prevent attacks like this from happening in America. So it seems like the perfect time to talk about it. It's not like he's trying to push some completely different policy about say wall street regulations with terrorist attacks as the context.
Also, I'm sure if it was brought up randomly, with no linkage to a current terrorist attack, you and others would be saying "There haven't been any terrorist attacks on (countrys) soil in X years, so whatever system we have now is working just fine"
That's the whole problem, he's pushing the same policy that he was pushing last week, the week before that one and two years ago. More surveillance. Because that will work, this time. Only it very much appears that it does not work and more people will likely die if we go down that road and lots of people will have their rights further trampled. The war on terror, the war on drugs, the war on cancer... If anything is declared a 'war' then you have to be very careful that your emotional state isn't used to make you decide things that are not in your own or even societies best interest. This is one of those occasions.
But he hasn't been able to implement his "more surveillance" policies, because he's been consistently blocked. Also, how will more people die under a state with more surveillance?
Also, I'm sure if it was brought up randomly, with no linkage to a current terrorist attack, you and others would be saying "There haven't been any terrorist attacks on (countrys) soil in X years, so whatever system we have now is working just fine"