My Letter to Sen. Aboud

As an educator I was absolutely appalled by your statement that you might be able to support Russell Pearce-Karen Johnson proposed bill that would allow teachers to carry guns in schools.

The actual cases where a gun in the hands of a teacher could have possibly prevented violence are few. Incidents at Columbine, Va Tech, UofA College of Nursing could possibly been mitigated by a teacher had they been armed. But only if the armed person had actually been close by and been able to get off a good, clean shot.

There is far more danger, however, in having teachers in a school carrying a firearm. Just last week at Rincon/University High School (where you used to teach) there was an incident that could have been deadly. Image that the assistant principal was one of those teachers that was carrying a firearm. She was knocked out when she fell and hit her head. Had she been armed, that would have left a gun within easy reach of some of the students who were fighting. What had been a fight between several girls could have quickly turned into a tragedy.

Imagine an over-worked, stressed out teacher with a gun. On a regular basis teachers that are otherwise caring educators 'go off' on a student or students. Teachers are human, and a confrontational situation could easily escalate into a deadly situation.

I have 3 kids in school here in Tucson (oldest is a junior at Rincon) and I sure as hell do not want them attending a school where the teachers might be armed.

Please re-think your support of this proposal.

Aboud owes an explaination.....

Russell Pearce is well known for sponsoring or supporting asinine legislation, so his latest legislative proposal should not come as to much of a shock. What is shocking is that there is a legislator from Southern Arizona that says she could possibly support it.

According to the Arizona Daily Star, the proposed piece of legislation from Rep. Pearce and Senator Karen Johnson would allow teachers, and some students to carry guns on campus. This is completely insane on so many levels. This, however is not the worst of it.



Paula Aboud, State Senator from LD28 seems to agree with Pearce:

But Sen. Paula Aboud, D-Tucson, said she might be able to support such a plan — but only if carrying guns were limited to teachers.

"I can see where she's coming from in light of the tragedies that we've had on the campuses," Aboud said, referring to incidents at Virginia Tech and Columbine High School.

But she said parents rightly would be concerned for their children if other students were carrying guns. Armed teachers present a different situation, Aboud said.

"I think teachers, depending on where they are teaching, experience a tremendous sense of fear," she said. "I think there's a potential for violence almost anywhere."

So Paula, a former educator, thinks that arming teachers would be a good thing. Many site incidents like the Virginia Tech shootings as a good reason to arm teachers. I don't buy it, but don't have the time to go into the problems with this part of their argument for arming teachers. Instead, I am going to use a recent local incident to show how deadly having teachers carrying guns on campus could be.

This past Wednesday there was a fight at Rincon/University High School. The fight started out small, but grew to involve 8 girls. Responding to the incident, one of the Assistant Principals went to break up the fight. She was either shoved, bumped or hit, which caused her to fall and hit her head. She was knocked out. Now imagine if she had been carrying a gun. One of the students could have easily grabbed that gun, quickly turning an simple fight into a tragedy.

I think that Senator Aboud owes us an explanation of why she would even think of backing this stupid and dangerous piece of legislation.

This explanation needs to be a good one, or I will work to get someone to oppose her in the primary.

Good Christian?

These days many politicians, especially Republicans, try and promote themselves as good Christians. Nothing wrong with that. But far too often this is just a facade, and like all things built on poor foundations, the facade comes crumbling down. A state legislator in Colorado is the latest to show his true colors.

A photographer for the Rocky Mountain News took a picture of this lawmaker praying during the opening prayer prior to being sworn in. The legislator, Douglas Bruce, then kicked the photographer, Bible in hand the entire time.

AP Story: Colorado Lawmaker Kicks Photographer

He must be stuck in the Old Testament, with all of that smiting of enemies!......

GET A GREEN CARD!!!

Get one as soon as you can, regardless of your current immigration status! Best of all, they are free! This gringo has one!

Before I get a bunch of hate mail, the 'Green Card' I refer to has to do with good Mexican food and helping the environment and nothing to do with INS.
Let me explain:

Tania's Flour Tortillas has a promotion called the "Green Card" to help the environment, save you some money, and get you hooked on some great food. Here is how it works: You get your green card when you make a purchase. on your next visit, if you do one of several things on the card to help the environment, you get either a 10% discount, free cold plate, free chips and salsa, free valu burrito, or a free drink.

This is not just about promoting a business that is helping the environment. The food there is great.

Go get your "Green Card"

Back to where this all began...

When I first created my blog, over 2-1/2 years ago, my first post wasn't about politics. Heck, I wasn't even living in Tucson at the time. It was a rant about the lack of originality of movies coming out of Hollywood. I was sick of seeing trailers for remakes of movies and movies based on old tv shows.

Well, everyone must return to his/her roots every once in a while.

I heard this morning that they are going to remake one of the greatest guy flicks of all times: The Dirty Dozen. That just goes too damned far. How in the heck can you remake that classic without completely f-ing it up? You can't! That movie is a timeless classic with a great cast, ok storyline, and great action. It is such a classic that it is even referenced in one of the greatest chick-flicks of all time, Sleepless in Seattle.

The Dirty Dozen has some classic lines that just won't sound the same with someone else saying them:

-Killin' generals could get to be a habit with me.

-Shoot any officers you see in there.
-Who? Ours or theirs?

-Doesn't give me anything. But along with these other results, it gives YOU just about the most twisted, anti-social bunch of psychopathic deformities I have ever run into! And the worst, the most dangerous of the bunch, is Maggott. You've got one religious maniac, one malignant dwarf, two near-idiots... and the rest I don't even wanna think about!
-Well, I can't think of a better way to fight a war.
(from IMDB)

Worse than remaking the Dirty Dozen is word that they are making a movie based on Land of the Lost, a campy Saturday morning tv show from the 1970's. You remember, Marshall, Will and Holly, don't you? Surely you remember the Sleetaks!


Didn't these morons in Hollywood ever read a book? How many great, or even mediocre books have never been made into a movie?? I bet there is a library full of them.

I know that remakes of movies is nothing much when one thinks about 4,000 dead soldiers and countless dead Iraqi civilians, but I feel that the issue is a reflection of a serious problems we face in America: laziness, no originality and a lack of creativity, and/or a fear of trying something new.

Maybe instead of remaking an old movie like the Dirty Dozen, we could learn something from them. Let's take a bunch of thugs and ne'er do wells,, give them guns, and send them to Iraq!
Oh, wait, we already did that. They just call it Blackwater instead....

borrowing an idea from the old USSR..

One federal agency was working to create their own news agency, not unlike TASS. Seems FEMA can't be bothered with calling in reporters for a press conference, so they brought in their own employees to ask questions the other day: FEMA under fire for faking news conference. Softball questions, Pollyanna answers, and stress-free time for all involved.

The White House chastized the effort, but said they don't think there was any "mal-intent"
Really, now???

-Press Conference called with only 15 minute notice
-reporters could listen in via phone, but not ask questions.
-employees asked the questions.

No, no attempt at deception attempted here. All that was missing was a 'great job, brownie'.

I guess having fake reporters is better than jailing real ones. Wonder if Sherrif Joe and his buddy Thomas up in Maricopa will try and follow this example for their pressers in the future...

Ok, how much for him to NOT run??

Fred Thompson took his sweet time before finally jumping into the Republican fray, leaving Newt Gingrich as the last remaining candidate who was not a candidate in the GOP. Well, Newt has made a move takes him one step closer to becoming a candidate. He wants money. If he gets enough of it, he will run. Specifically, he wants $30 million over the next three weeks and he will get into the race.

Gingrich: $30 million will get me into presidential race

MARIETTA, Georgia (CNN) -- Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich told supporters on Thursday that if they pledge at least $30 million to his campaign over a three-week period starting Monday, he will compete for the GOP 2008 presidential nomination.

This should make things on the Republican side quite interesting. Will there be enough folks out there that have looked at the current crop of Republican candidates and said to themselves, "eh, don't like a one of 'em"? Will these folks cough up enough dough to entice Newt? I suspect that they will in the far right that doesn't trust a Romney because of his religious beliefs and don't buy Johnny-Mac and his sudden shift to the right. We know they don't trust Guliani because of his abortion stance.

And if it appears that the Republicans won't give him enough money to get in, will some anonymous democrat step in with big bucks to get him in, if just to watch the fireworks?

4th Amendment is ALIVE!!!

Portions of The Patriot Act have been ruled unconstitutional by the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon.

The man behind the suit that challenged the constitutionality of the law was the Oregon man that was wrongly accused in the Madrid bombing. This man found out first hand how intrusive this law is.

FROM CNN http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/law/09/26/patriot.act/index.html
(CNN) -- A federal court on Wednesday struck down two provisions of the Patriot Act dealing with searches and intelligence gathering, saying they violate the Fourth Amendment protection against unreasonable searches and seizures with regard to criminal prosecutions.

"It is critical that we, as a democratic nation, pay close attention to traditional Fourth Amendment principles," wrote Judge Ann Aiken of the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon in her 44-page decision. "The Fourth Amendment has served this nation well for 220 years, through many other perils."

The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court of Review, set up to review wiretap applications in intelligence cases under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, or FISA, "holds that the Constitution need not control the conduct of criminal surveillance in the United States," Aiken wrote.

"In place of the Fourth Amendment, the people are expected to defer to the executive branch and its representation that it will authorize such surveillance only when appropriate."

The government "is asking this court to, in essence, amend the Bill of Rights, by giving it an interpretation that would deprive it of any real meaning. The court declines to do so," Aiken said
.......

Aiken ruled that FISA, as amended by the Patriot Act, permits the government to conduct surveillance and searches targeting Americans without satisfying the probable-cause standard in the Fourth Amendment.

"Prior to the amendments [to FISA], the three branches of government operated with thoughtful and deliberate checks and balances -- a principle upon which our nation was founded," Aiken wrote.

But the Patriot Act, she said, eliminated "the constitutionally required interplay between executive action, judicial decision and Congressional enactment."

"For over 200 years, this nation has adhered to the rule of law -- with unparalleled success. A shift to a nation based on extra-constitutional authority is prohibited, as well as ill-advised," she wrote.

Aiken noted that FISA does not require that the subject of a search be notified, although the Fourth Amendment ordinarily does. In addition, she said, the Fourth Amendment requires particularity -- authorities seeking a search warrant, for example, must list what they are looking for and where they are looking for it.

Break out the champaign, at least for now. This ruling will very likely be appealed. The article mentions that this judge is a Clinton appointee and is very liberal. However, the points raised by this judge seem solid.

No homosexuals in Iran

In his speech today @ Columbia University, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad stated that Iran doesn't have any homosexuals:

Asked about widely documented government abuse of women and homosexuals in his country, Ahmadinejad said, "We don't have homosexuals" in Iran. "I don't know who told you we had it," he said.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/09/24/us.iran/index.html

Could it be because they 're-educate' or execute homosexuals in Iran??

And you thought that the United States Military "Don't ask, Don't tell" policy was harsh!

Scott Adams: 'spot on' with his Dilbert Blog

I am a big fan of Dilbert creator Scott Adams, and regularly read his Dilbert blog. His posts are usually funny, almost always thought provoking, often full of satire, and regularly controversial. In his September 22nd Post, A Feeling I'm Being Had, he is all of that and more.

A Feeling I'm Being Had

I was happy to hear that NYC didn't allow Iranian President Ahmadinejad
to place a wreath at the WTC site. And I was happy that Columbia
University is rescinding the offer to let him speak. If you let a guy like
that express his views, before long the entire world will want freedom
of speech.

I hate Ahmadinejad for all the same reasons you do. For one thing, he
said he wants to "wipe Israel off the map." Scholars tell us the correct
translation is more along the lines of wanting a change in Israel's
government toward something more democratic, with less gerrymandering.
What an ass-muncher!

Ahmadinejad also called the holocaust a "myth." Fuck him! A myth is
something a society uses to frame their understanding of their world, and
act accordingly. It's not as if the world created a whole new country
because of holocaust guilt and gives it a free pass no matter what it
does. That's Iranian crazy talk. Ahmadinejad can blow me.

Most insulting is the fact that "myth" implies the holocaust didn't
happen. Fuck him for saying that! He also says he won't dispute the
historical claims of European scientists. That is obviously the opposite of
saying the holocaust didn't happen, which I assume is his way of
confusing me. God-damned fucker.

Furthermore, why does an Iranian guy give a speech in his own language
except for using the English word "myth"? Aren't there any Iranian
words for saying a set of historical facts has achieved an unhealthy level
of influence on a specific set of decisions in the present? He's just
being an asshole.

Ahmadinejad believes his role is to pave the way for the coming of the
Twelfth Imam. That's a primitive apocalyptic belief! I thank Jesus I do
not live in a country led by a man who believes in that sort of
bullshit. Imagine how dangerous that would be, especially if that man had the
launch codes for nuclear weapons.

The worst of the worst is that Ahmadinejad's country is helping the
Iraqis kill American soldiers. If Iran ever invades Canada, I think we'd
agree the best course of action for the United States is to be
constructive and let things sort themselves out. Otherwise we'd be just as evil
as the Iranians. Those fuckers.

Those Iranians need to learn from the American example. In this
country, if the clear majority of the public opposes the continuation of a war, our
leaders will tell us we're terrorist-humping idiots and do whatever they
damn well please. They might even increase our taxes to do it. That's
called leadership.

If Ahmadinejad thinks he can be our friend by honoring our heroes and
opening a dialog, he underestimates our ability to misinterpret him.
Fucking idiot. I hate him.

This great piece of satire expresses how I feel. I think that Ahmadinejad and Iran in general are not to be trusted. But I think that it was wrong try and exclude him from speaking at Columbia. Our country is supposed to have this little thing that we call freedom of expression. Some feel that this little freedom should not be extended to foreign leaders that disagrees with us. (well, for that matter, they also want to stifle the free speech of Americans that disagree with the current Administration).

I think that America can prove that it is a great nation by allowing Ahmadinejad to speak freely and openly. We need to show him and the world just how democracy is supposed to work. (Hell, it would be nice to show Gee-Dubya how democracy is supposed to work)

Looks like a flake VS Flake inCD-6

Russel Pearce making moves towards running against Jeff Flake:

Pearce takes step toward run for Congress

MESA - State Rep. Russell Pearce has announced the formation of a Congressional campaign exploratory committee, the first formal step toward a run for Congress.

The move allows the Mesa Republican to raise money for a run at Arizona's 6th Congressional District while retaining his office in the state House of Representatives.

If he chooses to go for it, Pearce would face Jeff Flake, a fellow Republican who will be seeking a fifth term in the seat next year. The 6th District includes parts of Mesa and Chandler, plus all of Gilbert, Queen Creek and Apache Junction.

If the flake beats Flake, paint CD-8 blue.

Spinning Wheels got to go 'Round

As I predicted, McCain says that he was just joking around with the NH high schooler when he called him a "little jerk".

McCain: Little jerk Comment Made in Jest
...

Speaking with CNN about the remarks, McCain added that "especially with young people, but with everybody, you got have a sense of humor and exchange."

McCain added, "He's entitled to his views and I respect them and that's why I made sure he was able to respond three or four times. I think that's what young people expect."

Gee, I thought that young people wanted to be respected, especially one that asks a very serious and valid question. McCain is like that old man that knows everything and gets pissed when you point out that he is wrong, often going into a tirade about something completely different to change the subject. You don't dare question his knowledge or his view of the world.

This is why Johnny-Mac can't see that his campaign is all but dead.

A Senator to make AZ proud!

I thought Idaho had a reason to be embarrassed about the actions of one of their Senators, until today's news from our very own Senator McCain.

Seems Johnny-Mac thought it was OK to begin answering a relatively serious question from a New Hampshire high school student with some humor, which would have been fine had he stopped there. But the senior Senator from the great state of Arizona decided that he needed to finish his answer by saying “Thanks for the question, you little jerk … you’re drafted.”

I am sure that the McCain spin doctors will claim that he was joking. Watch the video. McCain starts out with some humor, gets to a serious answer to the question, then calls the kid a little jerk. There was nothing in that exchange that would lead the Senator to insult a student.

Clearly, this man does not have what it takes to be President. Another student at the event had an exchange with McCain about gay rights. McCain reiterated his stance opposing gay marriage. Here is the next bit of the exchange:

"You want to take away someone's rights because you believe it's wrong," Sleaster followed up.

"I don't put that interpretation on my position, but I understand yours," McCain responded, seeming to enjoy the back and forth.

It seems to me that John was trying to imply that the student is gay. The student, however, did not get upset, he got in the last word:

"I came here looking to see a good leader. I don't," Sleaster said before leaving the microphone to some boos and gasps from the audience and an eventual scolding by a school administrator.

I like the fact that these students asked tough questions of a candidate and unwilling to back down. Shame on the administrators for chastising a student for speaking his mind and defending himself against a veiled insult.

Sleaster was right, he didn't see a leader, he saw the true Johm McCain. A man who insults and puts down those that question him, his abilities, or integrity. I have been on the other end of McCain's wrath too. I didn't respond as well as Sleaster.

Arizona, normally considered a red state, today, we are just red-faced. At least Craig has some very credible deniability.

Johhny-Mac's travels take him far and wide

John McCain has gotten around quite a bit these days. He's been to Iraq, Iowa, points east, west, north and south. Now he travels to a place he doesn't seem to get to very often (besides the Senate floor).

John McCain is visiting Arizona.

Novel idea, a senator visiting his home state. It is amazing what a Presidential candidate will do to get elected these days!

Ah, more from the "Family Values" party

You've gotta wonder what is up with Republicans and restrooms these days:

Senator pleaded guilty, reportedly after bathroom stall incident
A Republican senator pleaded guilty earlier this month to a misdemeanor disorderly conduct charge stemming from his arrest at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport, according to state criminal records.
Roll Call newspaper reported Monday that Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho was apprehended June 11 by a plainclothes police officer investigating complaints of lewd behavior in an airport men's room.
http://www.cnn.com/2007/POLITICS/08/27/craig.arrest/index.html

He claims his actions were misconstrued and that he shouldn't have pled guilty.

Maybe he was more like those other stand-up Republicans and was looking for a payoff or bribe, and not sex.

Gonzo Gone!

Three Down*, countless more to go:

A.G. the AG has resigned!

Attorney General Gonzales resigns, officials say

President Bush is expected to make a statement about Gonzales at 11:50 a.m. from his ranch in Crawford, Texas, where he has been vacationing.

Gonzales aides at the highest level and other top-level officials knew nothing about the announcement in advance, Justice Department sources indicated to CNN.

They were not informed until a meeting this morning, sources said, when Gonzales acknowledged he would be reading a statement at 10:30 a.m. ET.

According to the article, Gonzo and his wife had lunch with G-Dub and his wife in Crawford. Bet that was an awkward meal, as word is that the AG phoned in his resignation on Friday. (from a radio report I heard this AM).

As with all good news out of this administration it seems, there is some bad news to follow: Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff is to be Bush's nominee to replace him. Chertoff has the qualifications on paper, but this country does not need another Bush puppet in such a critical position.

Even worse, Bush will then nominate a deputy director from the OMB to replace Chertoff at DHS:

Clay Johnson, deputy director for management at the Office of Management and Budget, would replace Chertoff, the officials said.

Johnson, a longtime friend of Bush, served as the president's chief of staff and appointments secretary when Bush was governor of Texas and was executive director of the Bush-Cheney transition team. (CNN.COM)

This guy seems to have no qualifications for this position at all, other than be a Bush crony. This move seems to be a set up for some type of 'October Surprise' from Homeland Security.

*Rumsfeld, Rove, and now Gonzales.

A plan for withdrawal

Getting out of Iraq is something that needs to happen, but needs to happen under a well thought-out plan, not just a middle of the night move ala the Baltimore Colts in 1984. Now, it has been reported by many, including Sen. Clinton, that the Pentagon has not plan to get out of Iraq. Many pundits, including several of my fellow Liberal Drinkers, feel a full pull out could and should happen promptly. I happen to disagree, and have been chastised on several occasions on Thursday nights at the Shanty. One criticism has been, 'what would you do?'

Well, I have thought about this and here is how I would start.

1. Promptly begin bringing home ALL National Guard troops.
   It was never envisioned that the National Guard would serve oversees in combat missions when the security of US soil isn't threatened. These troops have served far and above the call of duty. They have sacrificed more personally and financially than they ever should have. Their families have had to bear far too much of a burden. The men and women of our National Guard are often called weekend warriors because they serve only part time. they have full-time jobs. Some joined th NG to supplement their incomes. Now they find themselves making less money and away from their homes and families. Many go on welfare/foodstamps just to get by. Replace the NG troops with regular (Army, Navy, Marines, Air Force) to cover critical positions/roles. This can be part of the overall strategy to reduce the number of troops in Iraq.
   
2. Phase out all Reserve forces.
   The Reserves were designed to fill in when US troops are stretched thin. Now, I know that they are stretched thin, but they won't be for long if we can get out of Iraq. Like the NG, these troops have regular civilian jobs. Their families are also forced to pay a heavy price. Again, this can be part of an overall troop reduction.
3. Remove troops from other nations.
   Troops from other nations should no longer be responsible for our fuck-ups.
   
4. Change our role.
   Troops should no longer be providing coverage for commercial ventures (ie convoys). They should provide protection to military installations. They should only respond to attacks on US installations/troops. They should no longer be involved in securing oil fields, providing police/security services.
5. Close installations.
   As we get to step 4, we should begin closing and consolidating bases.
   
6. Get completely out.

It may not be a perfect plan, but hell, at least I have a plan. (Pentagon??)

Making the turn safely

I had an interesting experience in traffic this afternoon, and I think that it illustrates my philosophy on how we should handle (and should have handled) things in Iraq.

Now, I know many of my fellow Democrats feel that the only thing to do now in Iraq is pull all of our troops out and do so quickly. I happen to disagree with an immediate pull-out. I feel that a complete immediate pull-out poses several problems and risks, ones that could result in making things worse in the Middle East.

on to the analogy:
As I was heading west on East Broadway approaching Kolb road in the middle lane I noticed that traffic in my lane ahead, so I moved into the far left lane. As I got closer to the light, I noticed a copper colored PT Cruiser in the middle lane with what I assumed at first to be its hazards flashing. I seemed like the car had stalled, backing up traffic, forcing people to change lanes and thus creating . As I passed the vehicle, I realized that it was the left turn light that was blinking. as I proceeded down Broadway, I watched in my rear-view mirror as the PT Cruiser proceeded to go from the middle lane into the left turn bay. Apparently the driver wanted to turn into the shopping center there.

The driver had found herself (yes, the driver was a woman, but this is not about gender stereotypes and driving) going in the wrong direction and decided to make an immediate correction in her course without regard for the safety and well-being around her. She should have assessed her situation, realized that she couldn't safely or legally make the turn from her current location. She should have proceeded a bit further, made sure she had the right-of-way and then moved into the left lane then the turn lane. A legal U-turn would have then had her heading back towards her destination, all with only a minor delay in reaching her goal but doing so in a manner safer for her and all around her.

This is a clear analogy to our present situation in Iraq. It applies to both how we ended up in this mess and how we should work to make our way out of Iraq. Bush (et al), like the driver, had a specific goal they sought to achieve. Both then proceeded to go after that goal, ignoring the safety of those in the area, the law (international law in Bush's case, traffic laws in my analogy) common sense.

As in our current situation, the driver found herself on the wrong course, and decided to make an immediate correction, ignoring potential dangers and common sense.

As we look to change course in Iraq, we need to carefully assess the best way to change direction, not just make that impetuous left across traffic. It is more than just a handful of drivers at risk, it is potentially the stability of a majority of the middle east at stake.

(as far as a turn to the left for Congress and the White House goes, the sooner the better)

Rovermort Resigns!

Karl Rove resigned this morning! He says he was not forced to resign but feels it is time and wants to spend more time with his family.

From CNN.COM: Rove says he was not forced to quit

Story Highlights

• NEW: Rove says congressional scrutiny did not force him out
  
• Rove, Bush to speak Monday at 11:35 a.m. ET
  
• It's the "right time to be giving more time to his family," spokesman says
  
• Top White House adviser Karl Rove to quit at end of month, CNN confirms

Since he will no longer be an a member of the Administration, he will be subject to Congressional subpoena. Things could get interesting. (Now, if you really believe that Rove will no longer act as an adviser to GeeDub, I've got ocean-front property in Yuma to sell you).

The real question is, can we get Gonzales to follow suit?

Beyond hawkish..

Now I am used to Republicans being hawkish, it is the nature of the beast. But just what would you call Tancredo when he makes statements like this?

“If it is up to me, we are going to explain that an attack on this homeland of that nature would be followed by an attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina,” Tancredo said .
From CNN Political Ticker: Tancredo: Threaten to bomb Muslim holy sites in retaliation

Does this moron even think trough what he is saying? He must want an all-out war with all of Islam. Haven't we done enough in Iraq to make the Muslim world hate us??

This idiot would have most likely bombed Mecca after the Oklahoma City bombing in 1995. What nice little 'whoops, my bad' that would have been.