Incorrect. He suggested that nuking Mecca might be an an appropriate response to a terrorist nuclear attack on American soil.
Quite a distinction, but one evidently lost on the author.
Incorrect. He suggested that nuking Mecca might be an an appropriate response to a terrorist nuclear attack on American soil.
Quite a distinction, but one evidently lost on the author.
It's not lost on them, they need to leave that part out because the criticism is ineffective if the audience who the criticism is supposed to influence has the visual of their city destroyed and their family dead. And also because it begs the question of Tancredo's critics: "If Tancredo's response was extreme, what would the appropriate response be?" Democrats and other Tancredo critics will run from that question like they are on fire.