McClintock Campaigns In San Diego

NBC SAn Diego ^ | Oct. 4, 2003 | NBC San Diego

[Jorge]

"terrorists" vs "terrorism" is a distinction, without a difference.

The difference is one of debating ideas vs making personal attacks on those you disagree with.

Comparing political tactics to "terrorism" would be bad enough.
Characterizing politicians who oppose you as "terrorists" represents a ratcheting up of the rhetoric that has no place in any civilized political debate.

Your excuses for looser use of the term "terrorist" leads to the sort of grotesque moral equivalency that allows liberals to compare America to a terrorist state similar to Al Qaeda and President Bush to a "terrorist".

McClintock only hurt himself more with this inflamatory and over the top rhetoric.
He's damaged his own political future more than anybody else ever could, even if they tried.

[Writesider]

Interesting. For someobody with a damaged political future, McClintock enjoys the highest favorability numbers of any politician in California, including Diane Feinstein.

As for debating ideas, perhaps if Arnold had some, there would have been a debate.

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, he does have some ideas:

He says he will do everything for the children, but supports abortion on demand.

He supports gay adoption, but opposes gay marriage.

He supports giving schools more money from the budget, but he also supports a spending cap. (Prop-98 already requires 40% of the budget be spent on K-12).

He opposes raising taxes, but says Indian Tribes should pay "their fair share" (he is apparently oblivious to what the Tribes contribute to their local communities)

He supports industrial sector jobs, but seeks to strengthen environmental regulations (as if CA doesn't have enough green tape strangling industry already).

He favors "local control", but wants to strengthen the Coastal Commission (which removes local control of land-use decisions)

Etc, etc, etc, and on and on...