Skip to comments.
Tancredo Throws Punches at Bush
Human Events ^
| February 9 2006
| Robert B. Bluey
Posted on 02/09/2006 12:18:44 PM PST by Reagan Man
Rep. Tom Tancredo (R.-Colo.) didnt hold back in his criticism of President Bush this morning at the Conservative Political Action Conferencedelivering what amounted to a presidential stump speech that could have easily been delivered in New Hampshire or Iowa.
Tancredo attacked the administration for its support of a guest-worker program for illegal aliens and its big-spending ways on education and Medicare prescription drugs.
It is the President who is out of step with his party, not Tom Tancredo, the Colorado Republican said to applause at the Omni Shoreham Hotel in Northwest Washington, D.C.
Tancredo called for the repeal of two programs offered by President Bush: the No Child Left Behind Act and the Medicare prescription drug program. Both expanded the cost of government and drew the scorn of conservatives in Congress.
Tancredo said the Big Government policies of the Bush administration need to be halted. He said conservatives must return the GOP to a party of individual rights and shouldnt afraid to say it.
TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 109th; bush; cpac; tancredo
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 461-480, 481-500, 501-520 ... 561-564 next last
To: 68 grunt
Insulting the President is brilliant strategery on the part of the Tancredo supporters because they believe attacking the President will cause him to abandon his own ideas on immigration and adopt Tancredo's. Either that, or it's just gratuitous Bush-bashing.
To: F16Fighter
Disruptor's snapshots don't count ...
482
posted on
02/09/2006 7:11:06 PM PST
by
68 grunt
(3/1 India, 3rd, 68-69, 0311)
To: You Dirty Rats
Tancredo made a unilateral promise to the electorate at large and then junked it for the sake of power because SOME of his constituents wanted him to.The electorate absolved him of it, obviously. So it wasn't as though they were inconvenienced by his decision. The only people who would have been were his political enemies.
483
posted on
02/09/2006 7:11:43 PM PST
by
inquest
(If you favor any legal status for illegal aliens, then do not claim to be in favor of secure borders)
To: 68 grunt
Its called a campaignNot something he could have conducted very effectively if he'd held himself to that "commandment", now is it?
484
posted on
02/09/2006 7:12:44 PM PST
by
inquest
(If you favor any legal status for illegal aliens, then do not claim to be in favor of secure borders)
To: dalereed
485
posted on
02/09/2006 7:13:11 PM PST
by
68 grunt
(3/1 India, 3rd, 68-69, 0311)
To: 68 grunt
Do loopy Lemmings ever tire of repeating themselves?
To: inquest
The electorate absolved him of it, obviously.Some of the votes for him may have been from people who thought he was the best candidate even if he did sell out his promise for continued power. At the very least, he's demonstrated less commitment to his clearly stated campaign promises than, say, President Bush.
To: You Dirty Rats
I voted karter rather than Ford. I'm sorry, I'm sorry, a thousand times over, I'm sorry ...
One of my two mistakes. The other was goobinor moonbeam, once.
488
posted on
02/09/2006 7:16:41 PM PST
by
68 grunt
(3/1 India, 3rd, 68-69, 0311)
To: kerryusama04
I agree. As far as I am concerned, guest worker program is support for illigal immigration PERIOD It is also a slap in the face for all of those who come here by the book. If we are going to keep allowing this to happen then we should work for Mexico to become a US state and start taxing these people. We have a double standard immigration policy. Since when has a Mexican had more rights to this land than an American citizen?
Puerto Rico should also pay taxes and be a state. Hell they get to enjoy all the perks of a US protectorate, but they don't pay taxes and some even hate this country. Think I'm kidding? Just come to the Puerto Rican parade in Chicago and you will see for yourself. Heck they even have a congressman at large.
Tancreto is right about big government. The fact is, government has become a big goon that beats you up and takes your money on the way to and from work.
Government has become a burden to the citizens of this great land. Think about it, government taxes gas, hotel stays, parking on public streets, amusement fees, convenience fees, zone parking fees, city parking fees, cable TV, phones, cars, homes, every damn thing you can think of. Government has also burdened small business and forced business and homes to leave certain areas.
So, why? Why would anybody spend 20 million to get a job that only pays $158,100? Government is big MONEY and a place where you can make some serious money under and above the table at the expense of Joe Citizen. You see, this is the ME generation. It's all about "ME". The "WE" generation is slowly fading into history.
It is unfortunate because there are GREAT people out there who should be in government and are not. There are too many who are in government too long. Are there good people in government today? Yes but not enough.
The people need to take government back and start to give a damn. Government can never police itself. The people must.
I say have a national referendum on illegal immigration and to hell with some of these politicians.
489
posted on
02/09/2006 7:17:50 PM PST
by
SQUID
To: mthom
Well?You are a silly woman. Wait.
490
posted on
02/09/2006 7:18:02 PM PST
by
68 grunt
(3/1 India, 3rd, 68-69, 0311)
To: arasina; 68 grunt
"... perhaps with someone such as Tancredo at its helm."
" You'd like that, huh?"
Lol, it's an INQUISITION!
But ze Party hasn't even picked Herr Tancredo. He iz non persona grata with ze "GOP insiders" for daring to challenge Dubya Bush's "see nothing, hear nothing, know nothing" border policy.
To: DelphiUser
Your self is not really yours is it?
492
posted on
02/09/2006 7:20:10 PM PST
by
SQUID
To: You Dirty Rats
Some of the votes for him may have been from people who thought he was the best candidate even if he did sell out his promise for continued power.So in other words he promised to deny them something they wanted (at least I presume that "the best candidate" is something they would have wanted), and then relented?
Is it really such a bad thing to go back on a promise to someone to do what they wouldn't have wanted you to do? That's more in the category of going back on a threat. Yes, it does somewhat diminish your credibility next time you make a threat, but really, who hasn't gone back on threats at one time or another?
493
posted on
02/09/2006 7:20:41 PM PST
by
inquest
(If you favor any legal status for illegal aliens, then do not claim to be in favor of secure borders)
To: You Dirty Rats
... Either that, or it's just gratuitous Bush-bashing. Or, perhaps, an orchestrated effort by FR fifth columnists to lead the useful idiots in decent.
494
posted on
02/09/2006 7:21:06 PM PST
by
68 grunt
(3/1 India, 3rd, 68-69, 0311)
To: inquest
... now is it? This thread has proven you to be confused. I'd really rather not explain in your dithering terms ...
495
posted on
02/09/2006 7:23:33 PM PST
by
68 grunt
(3/1 India, 3rd, 68-69, 0311)
To: 68 grunt
No need to wait. You have no answer because you cant be bothered to know anything about the issue. "big picture"
496
posted on
02/09/2006 7:24:30 PM PST
by
mthom
To: F16Fighter
Do loopy Lemmings ever tire of repeating themselves?Do disruptors ever tire of the truth?
497
posted on
02/09/2006 7:24:37 PM PST
by
68 grunt
(3/1 India, 3rd, 68-69, 0311)
To: 68 grunt
If you weren't confused, you'd have a very easy time answering such a simple question.
498
posted on
02/09/2006 7:25:08 PM PST
by
inquest
(If you favor any legal status for illegal aliens, then do not claim to be in favor of secure borders)
To: 68 grunt
... perhaps with someone such as Tancredo at its helm.You'd like that, huh?
Not at ALL. I made the mistake of jumping aboard the Perot bandwagon back in 1992. I just want SOMEBODY, some DECENT Republican with GUTS to take this illegal immigration/open borders/terrorist loophole problem SERIOUSLY! People are not happy with the paternalistic attitude of the current administration. ("Be quiet and go to your room. This is an adult conversation and we know what's best for you.")
It's NOT just Republicans who are opposed to it. There are many on the Left who oppose illegal immigration, but they say nothing because they're having too much fun standing back and watching us fight about it. SOMEONE will have to deal with and solve it; if the Republicans continue to be cowards, it could be a Dim or a new Third Party leader, but it's NOT going to simply fade away.
WHY does something REALLY BAD have to happen before the problem is dealt with? We complain about that having happened with the terrorist strike on 9/11/01. We now have an opportunity to prevent the awful consequences of allowing artful dodgers to cause serious economic damage to our country and our way of life. So WHY DOESN'T PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH take THIS bull by its horns like he has with the WOT?
Ahhhh. That felt good. Stay tuned for tomorrow's episode of "Don't Get Her Started", featuring arasina FReeper. :o)
499
posted on
02/09/2006 7:25:43 PM PST
by
arasina
(So there.)
To: onyx; F16Fighter
You should hear him say "Go ahead." It's one word: ga'ad. LOL
500
posted on
02/09/2006 7:27:41 PM PST
by
arasina
(So there.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 461-480, 481-500, 501-520 ... 561-564 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson