An elucidation.

Not paranoid, rational. "Something bad" is not a code word for a second 9/11 or even a domestic attack on the United States. A domestic attack on any of these dates would have a vast effect on the Congressional and domestic debate on the future of the occupation, but that does not mean it will happen. Far from it. The apparent ease with which such an attack could be carried out is surprising. The willingness to die and automatic weapons would be disastrous in an unprotected area such as a mall (The Mall of America perchance?) or an airport (how secure are the waiting zones to pass through security?), or any number of other densely populated areas. I will not say that such an event is an impossibility, but likely is far from an appropriate description. A large attack in Iraq or Pakistan I do see as a probability, however. The effect of a domestic attack is ambiguous. It might turn the remaining pro-war legislatures toward bringing the troops home as an admitted failure. It might just as easily strengthen their cause with the renewed emphasis on the need to win. Such a strike is risky to say the least. An equivalent event abroad only reinforces the idea that its their war and that the more days that pass with American troops abroad the more will die to no avail.
The fact that nothing has happened since 9/11 must be attributed to either the weakness of AlQaeda compared to the past, local distractions (Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, etc) for both energy and focus, a planned pause by the leadership, or some combination of the above. These factors will not change in the next several weeks. Withdraw the troops in September and they will.