Posted on 07/02/2007 10:05:31 AM PDT by SittinYonder
AMES - Republican presidential hopeful Tom Tancredo criticized two of his GOP rivals on their commitment to combat illegal immigration.
The Colorado congressman was in Ames on Sunday to open a campaign office and seek support for the Aug. 11 straw poll in Ames.
Tancredo said he is running for president because no other candidate has as strong a commitment to illegal immigration as he does.
He said Rudy Giuliani, a former New York City mayor, has tried to make it a ``sanctuary city'' for illegal immigrants.
``He's now happy as a clam with the idea of securing our borders and going after immigration -- it's great,'' Tancredo said. ``It's wonderful. I don't believe a word of it.''
Tancredo said Sam Brownback has blocked immigration reform efforts in 1996.
``He's been an open-border guy for years,'' Tancredo said. '`During a 1996 debate on the issue, he was the primary opponent to most the reform issues. Now he's trying to, quote, modify his approach and say he's always been with us.''
A telephone message to Brownback's campaign was not immediately returned.
Jarrod Agen, a Giuliani campaign spokesman, said Giuliani has long worked to get illegal immigrants removed from the country and called Tancredo's comments ``inaccurate.''
``Mayor Giuliani has made it clear that he is against amnesty and that one of his full commitments is to end illegal immigration in the United States,'' Agen said.
George W. Bush, on the other hand, was presidential material. So too was Bill Clinton. There's been 41 so far, who were presidential material, but that didn't mean they were all good for the country.
I don't know what litmus test you use, but mine is: Who is the conservative who will seek to limit the size and scope of the federal government, protect the nation from foreign invaders (be they al-Qaeda in airplanes or illegal immigrants or the Canadians), and govern based on the Constitution, not the latest polling data.
When I apply my test to the current list of candidates, I'm left supporting Tom Tancredo and convinced that he is, in fact, presidential material.
Yep.
Fred Thompson, Duncan Hunter, Mitt Romney. All have a grasp of the English language and don't stutter when in front of a camera like Tancredo does.
Me too.
Do you not think Fred Thompson or Duncan Hunter, who are much better communicators than Tancredo, would do the same?
Fred Thompson and Mitt Romney both believe that millions of illegal aliens should be given a path to citizenship.
Unlike you, I won’t consider voting for a candidate that believes millions of illegal alien lawbreakers should be given a path to American citizenship.
Former United States Senator Fred Thompson said in 2006 that “You’re going to have to, in some way, work out a deal where they [illegal aliens] can have some aspirations of citizenship.”
Fred Thompson is wrong. A deal should not be worked out to give twelve or twenty or thirty million illegal aliens aspirations of citizenship.
http://tancredo4prez.blogspot.com/
Duncan Hunter is my second choice. There are issues where I disagree with Hunter - No Child Left Behind and Campaign Finance Reform (both of which Hunter voted for) among others.
I’m not interested in knocking Hunter, though, because I do like him as a candidate. I like Tancredo far better because on the issues where I disagree with Hunter I do agree with Tancredo.
I understand that Tancredo isn’t the communicator that some of them are, but he’ll do just fine.
On November 30, 2005, Mitt Romney, then governor of Massachusetts and presently a Republican presidential candidate described the immigration reform proposal of President Bush and those of Sen. McCain and Sen. Cornyn as “reasonable proposals”. Unlike Gov. Romney, Rep. Tancedo has never considered any of the immigration reform proposals from President Bush or Sen. McCain to be reasonable. All of Sen. McCain’s immigration proposals have been amnesty proposals. In November 2005, while Gov. Romney was sharing with the Boston Globe his belief of the reasonableness of proposals that would give millions of illegal aliens with legal status, Rep. Tancredo was fighting for passage of H.R. 4437, a bill that ultimately passed the United States House of Representatives that would have strengthened enforcement of the immigration laws and enhanced border secuirty, but would not have given legal status to any illegal aliens.
On March 16, 2007, a news article concerning Gov. Romney’s changing words about Senator McCain’s proposals was published in the online edition of The Boston Globe. The article reported the following:
PHOENIX — When Mitt Romney swooped into the heart of John McCain country this week, he brought a pointed message on illegal immigration: McCain’s approach is the wrong one.
. . .
“McCain-Kennedy isn’t the answer,” Romney said in a well-received speech to conservatives in Washington this month, describing it as an amnesty plan that would reward people for breaking the law and cost taxpayers millions to provide them benefits.
But that is markedly different from how Romney once characterized McCain’s bill, elements of which are receiving new attention in Congress and from President Bush. Indeed, Romney’s past comments on illegal immigration suggest his views have hardened as he has ramped up his campaign for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination.
In a November 2005 interview with the Globe, Romney described immigration proposals by McCain and others as “quite different” from amnesty, because they required illegal immigrants to register with the government, work for years, pay taxes, not take public benefits, and pay a fine before applying for citizenship.
“That’s very different than amnesty, where you literally say, ‘OK, everybody here gets to stay,’ “ Romney said in the interview. “It’s saying you could work your way into becoming a legal resident of the country by working here without taking benefits and then applying and then paying a fine.”
Romney did not specifically endorse McCain’s bill, saying he had not yet formulated a full position on immigration. But he did speak approvingly of efforts by McCain and Bush to solve the nation’s immigration crisis, calling them “reasonable proposals.”
Romney also said in the interview that it was not “practical or economic for the country” to deport the estimated 12 million immigrants living in the US illegally. “These people contribute in many cases to our economy and to our society,” he said. “In some cases, they do not. But that’s a whole group we’re going to have to determine how to deal with.”
. . .
http://tancredo4prez.blogspot.com/
On September 19, 2006, WashingtonPost.com published a report from the Associated Press entitled “McCain May Alienate Some Conservatives”. The author of the article, Liz Sidoti, reported that Gov. Mitt Romney had made it known that he supported President Bush’s immigration position and that those who had broken ranks with President Bush had “made a big mistake”. In 2007, Romney says he opposes President Bush’s immigration plan. Below is a portion of the article:
Meantime, one of McCain’s potential rivals for the GOP nomination, Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, has made it known that he supports the president’s immigration position, saying that Republicans who have broken rank with Bush “made a big mistake.”
http://tancredo4prez.blogspot.com/
According to an article published in The Lowell Sun on March 30, 2006, “Gov. Mitt Romney expressed support yesterday for an immigration program that places large numbers of illegal residents on the path toward citizenship”.
Romney doesn’t believe an immigration program that places large numbers of illegal aliens on a path toward citizenship is amnesty. He is wrong. Any program awarding paths to citizenship to millions of illegal aliens that violated prohibitions against improper entry by an alien contained in Title 8, Section 1325 of the U.S. Code is amnesty.
http://tancredo4prez.blogspot.com/
Waste of time blasting those two...unless Tancredo is going for the ‘moral victory’ of slamming two other guys in the same boat as he is...unelectable nationally.
Brownback is more electable nationally than Tancredo?
You might want to watch to video available at the following link:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdyVIZkC57Q .
On June 28, 2007, Brownback voted for cloture for the illegal alien amnesty bill and then voted against cloture for the illegal alien amnesty bill eleven minutes later.
None of the three are electable nationally, which is why this doesn’t make any difference for Tancredo.
As I’ve noted, he’s not the sharpest knife in the GOP drawer, as this demonstrates.
If Tancredo gets enough votes, he'll be elected.
Just because you've "noted" something doesn't make it so.
So does Hillary and Kerry, on the other hand God chose Moses over his brother Aaron, despite his fumblemouth.
I’ve heard Tanc speak in person and found him to be a very good speaker and on top of the facts.
That being said Hunter and Thompson are also two I am considering.
Who are the Republican candidates that are electable nationally?
Hunter is waaaaay better than any candidate on EVERY issue. I contributed to his campaign, and wrote a letter to the editor about him which was published today.
Just curious. Do you have a 2nd and 3rd best candidate?
I feel very strongly for Tancredo as well. I would love to see a Hunter/Tancredo ticket. After that, a 3rd, I’m just not sure yet. And good for you on getting your letter published!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.