Posted on 07/23/2007 2:33:17 PM PDT by SittinYonder
WASHINGTON -- Republican presidential candidate Rep. Tom Tancredo has demanded that fellow GOP White House hopeful Sen. Sam Brownback apologize for questioning Tancredo's commitment to outlawing abortion.
Tancredo, a congressman from Colorado, and Brownback, a Kansas senator, are vying for support from GOP conservatives who influence the Iowa caucuses.
Brownback's campaign has been making phone calls in Iowa that criticize Tancredo for taking campaign money from a Planned Parenthood backer. It has also posted a press release detailing the accusations.
"Say no to Tom Tancredo and his Planned Parenthood friend and help end abortion in America," the caller says, according to a script confirmed by Brownback's campaign.
"Congressman Tom Tancredo has accepted thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from Dr. John Tanton, a founder of a major Planned Parenthood network," said Brownback's Iowa communications chief John Rankin on the candidate's Web site.
"Federal Election Commission records show that Tancredo's presidential campaign, political action committee, and congressional re-election campaign have accepted thousands of dollars personally from Tanton, and thousands more from a political action committee connected to Tanton," Rankin said.
"Given Tanton's obvious ties to Planned Parenthood, Tom Tancredo should publicly denounce his ties to Tanton and should donate all previously accepted funds to an Iowa crisis pregnancy center," Rankin said.
"How can pro-life Iowans believe Tom Tancredo's commitment to life when he has accepted money from such a prominent abortion supporter?"
Tancredo demanded an apology.
"Sam [Brownback] and I have been friends for several years and he is well aware of my lifelong commitment to the unborn. Yet he has approved the use of despicable and deceitful campaign tactics in an effort to deliberately mislead the voters of Iowa concerning my record and my commitment to life," Tancredo said.
"I call on Sen. Brownback to cease with the maliciously misleading push calls intended to harm me and apologize."
Tancredo's campaign also accused the senator of trying to divert attention away from illegal immigration, Tancredo's main issue. Unlike Tancredo, Brownback has supported giving legal status, under certain conditions, to illegal immigrants.
"Americans from all walks of life, from all racial and religious backgrounds, and from all political persuasions support me because they believe as I do that illegal immigration is the greatest domestic threat we face as a nation and they know I will never resolve this issue by giving amnesty to illegal aliens," Tancredo said.
Tancredo's campaign said the Coloradoan has an "A" rating from the National Right To Life Committee, an abortion opponent.
He could direct it to a pro-life charity instead.
Because he's an anti-population growth extremist who supports abortion and opposes immigration in order to lower the population of the US and the world.
Is there a single vote that Tom Tancredo has cast that was pro-abortion? If so, please name it.
http://tancredo4prez.blogspot.com/
Senator Switchback shouldn’t be lobbing verbal grenades at anyone.
Please name a single vote that Rep. Tancredo has cast that was pro-abortion.
Link to video of Sam Brownback on June 28, 2007, voting for cloture on the illegal amnesty bill and then eleven minutes later voting against cloture for the illegal alien amnesty bill after he knew cloture for the bill would not pass: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hdyVIZkC57Q .
http://tancredo4prez.blogspot.com/
http://www.citizensforethics.org/node/24670
Pols profiting from porn
Source:
WILLIAM TRIPLETT // Variety
Watchdog group claims Upton, Brownback on the take
14 Mar 2005 // WASHINGTON — Several of the most vocal congressional critics of indecency have accepted political contributions from businesses that profit substantially from porn, a watchdog group has charged.
In a report released late last week , Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington documented contributions to, among others, Rep. Fred Upton (R-Mich.) and Sen. Sam Brownback (R-Kan.), both of whom have authored key anti-indecency legislation.
No actual makers of pornographic material contributed to the politicians. All money came from businesses that offer porn in addition to more family-oriented content or services. Among the contributors were cablers Comcast, Time Warner, Cox, Charter, Adelphia and Cablevision; satcasters EchoStar and DirecTV; along with Marriott Intl. and Holiday Inn.
According to “Addicted to Porn: Members of Congress Accept Contributions from Porn Purveyors,” Upton received $56,000; Brownback received $17,000.
In an accompanying statement, Crew exec director Melanie Sloan said, “It is one thing to be silent on the issue and accept porn purveyors’ contributions. However, these members of Congress attempt to slap pornographers with fines and legislative restrictions with one hand and turn around and accept porn profits with the other. “
The report details contributions to 15 members of Congress who received an aggregate $433 million during the 2002 and 2004 election cycles.
However, Sloan reserved her sharpest comments for Rep. Heather Wilson (R-N.M.), labeling her “the biggest hypocrite of all for having written a letter to former Vice President Al Gore demanding that he return a contribution from an adult entertainment Web site and for sanctimoniously ranting at Viacom executives that they cared more about profits than morality.”
The report maintains that porn is an increasing source of profits for the media and hotel businesses. Cable and satellite TV’s highest profit margins come from adult programming, and pornographic movies available in rooms provides the hotel industry with one of its highest profit margins, the report said.
“Based on estimates provided by the hotel industry, at least half of all guests at hotels such as Marriott and Holiday Inn pay to view adult movies,” the report stated. “These orders result in approximately $190 million a year in sales.” Viewers spend nearly $1 billion a year for pay channel or on-demand porn, the report added.
Upton declined to comment on the report. Calls to Wilson and Brownback seeking comment were not returned.
By "he" do you mean Tancredo or the Planned Parenthood supporter? If Tancredo, please cite your source(s).
I said about five times that I was referring to Tanton.
"How can Tancredo, who has an excellent record on Life otherwise" -- JohnnyZ
Why don't you try actually reading the thread arnoldpalmerfan?
I’ve read the thread.
Here is some interesting information about lawmakers and campaign donations.
http://www.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20051208/news_lz1ed08top.html
UNION-TRIBUNE EDITORIAL
Legal looting
Cunningham case only hints at extent of rot
December 8, 2005
The recent resignation of Rep. Randy “Duke” Cunningham, R-Rancho Santa Fe, has focused the spotlight once again on the reprehensible ways that defense contractors work with lawmakers to win fat contracts for their services, whether they help the nation’s defense or not.
Cunningham’s bribe-taking was repulsive. But one of the biggest problems in contractors’ and congressmen’s mutual back-scratching isn’t Duke-style corruption. It is what’s perfectly legal.
This was underlined by the Union-Tribune article, “Contractor a master of gaining political access,” by Dean Calbreath and Jerry Kammer. It detailed how Cunningham and House Armed Services Committee Chairman Duncan Hunter, R-El Cajon, worked closely with two local companies – ADCS Inc. of Poway and Audre Inc. of Rancho Bernardo – to make the Pentagon pay for converting printed documents to computer files. They and a few other lawmakers got Congress to allocate $190 million for “automated data conversion” projects from 1993 to 2001.
Did the Pentagon want this “help”? No. As a 1994 General Accounting Office report noted, it already had the tools for such work.
But Cunningham, Hunter and their House allies didn’t care. Audre and ADCS were generous with contributions – and ADCS executive Brent Wilkes allegedly was bribing Cunningham. No matter who griped, lawmakers could always add “earmarks” for pet projects to bills and get their way.
This led to such absurdities as a $9.7 million contract for ADCS to digitize historical documents from the Panama Canal Zone that the Pentagon considered insignificant.
This isn’t governance. This is looting.
Hunter disagrees. In a phone interview, he said there was support within the Pentagon for such projects, citing several official letters praising Audre’s technology or endorsing automated document conversion. He said his fighting for contracts to go to San Diego-area firms is what congressmen do.
But the preponderance of evidence shows defense officials objected to document conversion spending and saw it as ridiculous. That should have carried the day – with Hunter or any lawmaker trying to bring home the bacon.
Instead, the prevailing attitude was that when you have hundreds of billions of dollars to divvy up, everyone should get a piece – and if the Joint Chiefs of Staff think the military’s bucks should go toward protecting soldiers and not the pointless preservation of old documents, well, tough luck.
This is no way to run a government. Forget the fatalistic argument that pork is an inevitable part of the legislative process. Just once it would be nice to hear a lawmaker declare he wouldn’t vote to spend one dime on a military project that the Pentagon didn’t request – or hear a president vow to veto every defense spending bill inflated by the legislative looters.
The status quo is revolting. If only it would inspire a voter revolt. A few more stories like the one about Cunningham, Hunter and the document conversion follies, and it just might.
Interestingly, instead of owning up to the fact that it was your own p*ss-poor communication which caused your problem, you attempt to blame the rest of us because we didn't bother reading all the rest of your posts to try to find out if you really meant what we thought it sounded like you maybe meant.
That's rich.
Yet you continue to ignore John Tanton, the liberal anti-human extremist, and Tancredo's acceptance of his money and support.
I guess you heartily approve?
Maybe if you're lucky Tanton won't consider you part of the "undesirable" population that needs to be eliminated.
But how far do you take this position?
Do you think it's okay if a candidate accepts donations and support from a Communist? A racist? A neo-Nazi? al-Qaeda?
Is there any point at which you think a candidate should say, "Hell no, I don't want that scum on my side; and I'm giving their contribution away to a charity"??
Some consider the National Council of the Race, otherwise known as the National Council of La Raza, to be a racist organization. In 2002, Senator Brownback and Senator Tom Daschle received the National Council of La Raza Capital Award.
Unlike Duncan Hunter, there have never been any questions raised about Rep. Tancredo’s conduct in Congress being influenced by donations to his campaign. If there have been such questions raised, please post a copy of the article or articles that address such questions.
Tom Tancredo is the most conservative candidate in the presidential race. He has an American Conservative Union lifetime rating higher than the candidate you support, Duncan Hunter.
Tom Tancredo, unlike Sam Brownback, has always been pro-life. Tom Tancredo has been pro-life a lot longer than Sam Brownback.
During the last thirty (30) years, Tom Tancredo has never cast a single pro-abortion vote. Tom Tancredo consistently has a rating of zero from NARAL, the pro-abortion lobbying group.
Did Tom Tancredo take money from anyone presently under indictment?
Is Brent Wilkes under indictment?
How about these donations?
http://www.capitaleye.org/mzm.asp
Top Recipients of “MZM Inc” PAC and Individual Donations, 1995-2005*
Recipient
Affiliate
Total
Indiv
PAC
Virgil H. Goode Jr. (R-Va)
$94,426
$78,426
$16,000
Katherine Harris (R-Fla)
$50,000
$40,000
$10,000
National Republican Congressional Cmte
$45,000
$30,000
$15,000
Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif)
$20,000
$8,000
$12,000
National Republican Senatorial Cmte
$15,000
$15,000
$0
American Prosperity PAC
Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif)
$10,000
$0
$10,000
Duncan Hunter (R-Calif)
$7,000
$2,500
$4,500
Elizabeth Dole (R-NC)
$6,050
$4,050
$2,000
Mario Diaz-Balart (R-Fla)
$6,000
$4,000
$2,000
Rick Renzi (R-Ariz)
$6,000
$4,000
$2,000
Top Recipients of “Wilkes Corp/ADCS Inc” PAC and Individual Donations, 1995-2005*
Recipient
Affiliate
Total
Indiv
PAC
National Republican Congressional Cmte†
$96,700
$41,000
$10,000
American Prosperity PAC
Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif)
$55,000
$40,000
$15,000
Americans for a Republican Majority
Tom DeLay (R-Texas)
$40,000
$35,000
$5,000
Superior California Fed Leadership Fund
John T. Doolittle (R-Calif)
$35,000
$25,000
$10,000
Future Leaders PAC
Jerry Lewis (R-Calif)
$33,000
$13,000
$20,000
Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-Calif)
$30,500
$14,500
$16,000
George W. Bush (R)
$30,000
$30,000
$0
Benjamin A. Gilman (R-NY)
$28,646
$20,646
$8,000
Jerry Lewis (R-Calif)
$23,000
$20,000
$3,000
Duncan Hunter (R-Calif)
$22,700
$15,200
$7,500
*Based on data released electronically by the Federal Election Commission on October 31, 2005. Figures include contributions to federal candidates, PACs and party committees.
† Total includes $45,700 in contributions to non-federal committees.
You are fine with accusing all kinds of other politicians
but you continue to hold Tom Tancredo blameless.
That kind of slavish deification of a politician is foolhardy.
Dr. Tanton, as I understand it, is a retired eye surgeon from Petoskey, Michigan. He is not and has never been under indictment for activity related to campaign donations or anything else.
I like, Tom Tancredo, am one hundred percent (100%) pro-life. I, like Tom Tancredo, am totally opposed to the mission of Planned Parenthood.
If John Tanton donates to Tom Tancredo’s campaign, he knows that he is donating to a candidate that has the strongest pro-life record of any presidential candidate and is probably opposed to every policy position held by John Tanton with regard to abortion.
I intend to vote for the most pro-life candidate running for president. That is Tom Tancredo. It is not Sam Brownback who was once pro-choice and has said that he could support a pro-choice nominee to the United States Supreme Court.
It does not matter to me that John Tanton, an abortion supporter donated to Tom Tancredo’s campaign, because I know from his conduct over the past thirty (30) years that Tom Tancredo is one hundred percent (100%) pro-life. None of John Tanton’s donations to Tom Tancredo have influenced a single vote cast by Tom Tancredo on the issue of abortion.
Tom Tancredo has done nothing wrong in this matter.
I wonder if all the members of Congress that took donations from organizations connected to Jack Abramoff or took donations from organizations connected to Brent Wilkes have returned all the money they received.
By the way, Tom Tancredo never lobbied for the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association.
Who gives a rat's *** about stupid campaign finance violations when compared to accepting support from a guy who puts the Nazi in EnviroNazi?
That creature is opposed to everything that conservatives stand for, yet you and Tancredo are perfectly happy to have him as a bedfellow.
Tom Tancredo votes against the position of NARAL one hundred percent (100%) of the time.
Tom Tancredo has consistently received a score of one hundred percent (100%) from the National Right to Life Committee.
Tom Tancredo votes against the postion of Dr. Tanton on abortion issues one hundred percent (100%) of the time.
Tom Tancredo has never been in bed with NARAL or the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association. Tom Tancredo has never been paid to lobby for the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association.
Would you ever vote for a candidate that was paid to lobbby for the National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, a group that is as strongly pro-abortion as Planned Parenthood?
In 2006, I attended a fundraiser at a Catholic church for a local chapter of the National Right to Life Committee. I don’t believe Dr. Tanton was at that meeting. He is not my bedfellow.
Dr. Tanton is pro-abortion and Tom Tancredo is pro-life.
If a candidate for president that claims to be pro-life was paid money to lobby for National Family Planning and Reproductive Health Association, how would you characterize that candidate’s actions?
You also refuse to say anything critical of John Tanton, the Environazi abortionist contributor that Tancredo refuses to reject.
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.