I don't want Mitt Romney to be president, but he doesn't usually scare me quite as much as Rudy Guiliani or Mike Huckabee.

He made it to the top of the list today with his disgusting attempt to tie Benazir Bhutto's assassination to Iraq.

"We are still learning the details of today's tragic events in Pakistan, but this is a stark reminder that America must not only stay on high alert, but remain actively engaged across the globe. Pakistan has long been a key part in the war against extremism and radical jihadists. For those who think Iraq is the sole front in the War on Terror, one must look no further than what has happened today. America must show its commitment to stand with all moderate forces across the Islamic world and together face the defining challenge of our generation – the struggle against violent, radical jihadists."

Even Rudy Giuliani and President Bush had the class to not actually mention Iraq in their statements.

How is this a "stark reminder" that we should be "on high alert"? Without ever saying so, Mitt ties this to Al Qaeda, but unless he's got information that no one else has right now, they aren't exactly the most likely suspects. The only people blaming this on "extremism and radical jihadists" are Romney, Bush and, by some odd coincidence, the man voted "Most Likely to Have Benazir Bhutto Killed", Pakistani dictator Pervez Musharraf.

Mr. Romney, you might have been too distracted marching with Martin Luther King Jr. or hunting big game to have heard about the reality in Pakistan, so let me fill you in.

Pakistan is a dictatorship. I know we don't like to talk about this, since we're supposed to be counting on Pakistan for help against those "violent, radical jihadists", but that's the truth. General Musharraf took power via a 1999 coup, ousting a democratically elected Prime Minister, and has been the head of the government since.

Until a month ago, he was also the official head of the military as well. He's now given that up - a purely symbolic gesture made to appease the Bush Administration and make sure we keep giving him War On Terror money for no apparent reason.

There were supposed to be actual democratic elections in a couple weeks, where Musharraf was almost certainly going to lose to Bhutto. I don't know how much world history you've studied, Mitt, but dictators very rarely give up power freely. Do you really think Al Qaeda was behind the October attempt on Bhutto's life, or do you think maybe there's a chance that Musharraf blamed them to try to get the international spotlight off himself?

As many of the other presidential candidates from both parties pointed out today, this was certainly a horrible terrorist attack. But not every terrorist is a radical Islamist jihadist. We need a democracy in Pakistan that will help shut down radical Islamist organizations like Al Qaeda and the Taliban, and today's assassination is a blow to that process.

But it was a blow delivered by a man who is far from a radical jihadist - a man who has, for all his bad points, always denounced Islamist extremism. This was a blow delivered by a man who will do anything to stay in power. Today, he removed one of the biggest obstacles in his way.

And now, Mr. Romney, in your blind rush to look tough on terror, you have given credibility to his spurious accusations. By doing so, you have done damage to democracy in Pakistan and, although you might be too campaign-blinded to see this, you have done damage to any real chance we have to dismantle the very groups you rail against.

I guess that's not as important as picking up a couple more votes in Iowa and New Hampshire.