Posted on 06/30/2004 9:38:32 PM PDT by Reagan Man
Colorado Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo is in big trouble with the GOP leadership. And just what, you may be wondering, is his great sin? "Team America," a political action committee originally founded by Tancredo, worked to unseat Representative Chris Cannon, a liberal Republican from Utah, by supporting Matthew Throckmorton, his challenger in the Republican primary.
Chief among those organizations caterwauling about the actions of Tancredo is the liberal "Tuesday Group," a coalition of approximately thirty liberal Republican House members whose goal is to steer the party to the left. Hiding under the cloak of a grossly distorted rendition of Ronald Reagan's "Eleventh Commandment" ("Thou shalt not speak ill of a fellow Republican"), the Tuesday Group is now expressing concern that party conservatives are finally making efforts to strike back.
Apparently, undermining the conservative agenda by abandoning the party at key junctures during the legislative process is perfectly fine with these Republican "centrists." But any discussion of such matters by conservatives, who have tired of seeing their party abandoning its principles, is strictly taboo. By such hypocritical assertions, these liberal "Trojan Horses" hope to continue dominating party politics from within.
Of course Ronald Reagan never intended for his "Eleventh Commandment" to be arbitrarily invoked as a means of allowing liberalism to spread, unchecked, within the ranks of the GOP. Rather, it was supposed to prevent the sort of backbiting and mud slinging within party ranks, which can ultimately undermine the credibility of the entire party.
House Majority leader Tom Delay, a longtime champion of conservatism, has found himself in the middle of this row. Seeking to maintain a cohesive Republican majority, he is promoting themes of "team spirit" and "comity" among party members. Delay even referenced Reagan's "Eleventh Commandment" in a meeting with Tancredo in which the Colorado Congressman was apparently warned to change his ways and endorse a unified party, or face retribution within Republican circles.
Unfortunately, such rhetoric fails to deal with the fact that it is the Republican liberals who regularly undermine party unity by voting with Democrats at critical junctures. With such people constantly placing the philosophies of liberalism ahead of traditional Republican principle, the only manner in which even a facade of "unity" can be maintained is for the entire party to shift to the left. This, of course, is precisely the strategy of the liberal Republicans.
Tancredo's major issue of concern is unchecked illegal immigration and the resulting compromise of America's borders. Hardly a miniscule "pet issue" of a fringe constituency, the immigration problem goes to the very core of maintaining America's national integrity and heritage. Little else of GOP principles or goals can be regarded as significant in any way, as long the party remains indifferent to the invasion of the nation's borders by a flood of illegal immigrants who, as soon as they are able to do so, will vote against such things. Yet, major forces within the GOP are once again actively working to insure that at best, the Republican counterpart to Democrat plans of opening the borders will only amount to a watered-down version of the very same thing.
By supporting truly conservative Republican challengers, Tancredo's PAC hopes to specifically target key players of the open borders advocacy for defeat during their respective state primaries. While it is not entirely clear whether or not Tancredo is still officially participating with the work of the PAC, his political ideology remains consistent with that of its members. Tancredo realizes that threats to the future of the nation are no less virulent when advanced by so-called "Republicans," than when spawned by their traditional advocates, the Democrats.
Tom Delay has, in the past, shown himself to be extremely principled, with the one notable exception being his support, under severe White House pressure, for an education bill that was essentially crafted by Ted Kennedy. He knows that if his party persists in its claims to uphold both high and low standards, only the low standards will prevail. Though presently striving to remain within the boundaries of party loyalty, he is surely aware that, as a principled conservative, his own future is no less threatened by the underhanded actions of the "moderates" than is Tancredo.
For Delay and Tancredo, whose differences are far outweighed by their political common ground, the most pressing matter is to maintain the party according to conservative principle rather than allowing the "centrists" to reinvent it in the image of the Democrats.
Lot's of pro abortion GOPer, and the GOP signs off on all kinds of gun laws too. Taxes? Minor diferences between the two parties as compared to real tax reform.
I don't know about your circle of acquaintances,
but mine see me as the most conservative of conservatives,
and I'm in complete alignment with you politically.
In the REAL WORLD, the left views the entire GOP
about the same as terrorists view all Americans...
as future fertilizer.
Do you consider yourself a liberal Republican? I never thought you were a liberal Republican, Howlin.
>>> ... and I vehemently disagree with you supporting Tom Tancredo ...
As I pointed out more then once on this thread, Tancredo supports all the traditional conservative issues associated with the platform agenda of the GOP. Tancredo supports a strong defense, tax cuts/tax reform, limited govt and fiscal responsibility and he is pro-life. Tancredo supports the Presidents efforts in the WoT and the conflict in Iraq. Tancredo also supports the reelection of Bush-Cheney. Sounds like GWBush and Tom Tancredo have a lot in common and agree on most issues.
Tancredo doesn't support amnesty for illegals and opposed Bush`s immigration reform proposal. He isn't alone. A majority of Americans oppose granting amnesty to illegal aliens.
No, I don't consider myself a liberal Republican, but you've made it clear on this thread and many others that those who don't hold your myopic, tunnel vision beliefs aren't as good a conservative/Republican as you are.
I just wondered if, looking down from your perch on high, you wanted the rest of us not to have a voice in the GOP.
It was a clear question. Instead of answering it, you droned on and on about Tancredo, a man who has thrown his lot in with Pat and Bay.
I'll just put you down as not wanting to back up the statement you made.
Bush isn't in favor of amnesty, no matter how many times you say he is, nor how many ways you frame it.
Secure the land borders and 90% or more of that will be stopped.
Do you know anybody nutty enough to think anywhere near 3 million illegal aliens could cross into the United States each year by boat?
Is Mexico building an armada?
LOL!
They had Cannon dead to rights for soliciting campaign contributions from illegal aliens and minors.
How did he beat that rap with the voters?
First off, those are your words, not mine. People can hold moderate political views and still be a good Republican.
I don't believe in undermining the conservative agenda of the GOP party platform, by giving credence to the liberal agenda. That includes giving a voice to liberal Republicans (aka.RINO`s) in determining GOP policy. I believe in sticking to a core set of principles that advance conservatism, while denouncing and undermining liberalism. There exists a GOP party platform and it is clear on all the major issues, from defense, to taxes, to the RKBA and pro-life/right to life issues. Rewarding illegal aliens with any form of amnesty isn't part of that agenda. It goes against what is fundamentally right and fair, not to mention what is the law of the land.
>>>It was a clear question.
I'll just put you down as not wanting to back up the statement you made.
I answered you. You're not a liberal Republican. If you have something to say, say it and stop whining all the time.
Btw, you're the one who said, " ... I vehemently disagree with you supporting Tom Tancredo.... You furthered the debate on Tancredo and others.
Ever since the recall election, you and some other FReepers who I used to get along with fine, have been attempting to stir up trouble with those of us who oppose Arnold Schwarzenegger and what we see as his liberal policy agenda. Not only that, but everytime someone disagrees with PresBush on any issue, you and others ("The Posse") engage in some of the most juvenile rhetoric ever displayed on FR. Someone can be a strong supporter of PresBush, without being a BushBot. I agree with the President on 75% of the issues, but he has my full support in his reelection efforts.
Well then I guess you're screwed. When you can convince 60% of the voters that what you want should be law then both the Republicans and the 'rats will pass it. Until that time feel free to vote for the 3rd party candidate of your choice. They will not win, but you can feel good about letting other people make the choice between 'rats and Republicans for you. Because in Nov the President will be a 'rat or a Republican, the Congress will be controlled by the 'rats or Republicans, and 9,999 times out of 10,000 the state legislator who represents your town will be a 'rat or a Republican. Deal with it.
That is utterly ridicules and most that are honest, and are not a mere political party hacks, can see this..
Even his subordinate, Asa Hutchinson stopped the recent raids in California, after years of those in DC standing watching, winking and nodding as our borders and sovereignty are being eroded and undermined. Asa Hutchinson said the raids were conducted outside of policy, and they failed to get permission from the Administration. Why would the INS need permission to do it's job?
Why after 25 plus years of millions pouring into our country illegally would this administration stop what finally amounted to a small token enforcement?
Is it not clear to anyone that is coherent that this administration is in favor of open borders and a weakened sovereignty?
Mexican Official Wants Border Eliminated
These illegal aliens are primarily 3rd world, Leftist leeches.
Every time a 3rd world Leftist wins or steals the right to vote in U.S. elections, a Conservative's vote is neutralized.
How can illegal immigration not be considered the LINCH PIN for all other Conservative issues by a Conservative voter?
Anything Conservative done now, by any president, will eventually be undone by an increasingly more Liberal electorate in the future.
We must have a president that will secure our borders and implement new policies and propose new laws against illegal immigration, while enforcing the laws that already exist.
Do this and these illegal immigrants will deport themselves.
A president that refuses to do this doesn't deserve our votes.
Bush sure isn't getting mine.
I'd rather take my chances with 4 more years of gridlock than with 4 more years of the damage he's done to our sovereignty.
How can illegal immigration not be considered the LINCH PIN for all other Conservative issues by a Conservative voter?
Very simple. These are clearly not conservatives, as they are not concerned with our borders or our sovereignty. The truth is, those from both beltway parties have demonstrated this lack of conservatism and lack of respect for the rule of law for the past 25 plus years. Protection of America should come first and should be their first priortiy, but it no longer is.
Reagan campaigned on a platform of balancing the budget and cutting government spending, but he also wanted increased military spending and taxcuts. Reagan comprimised to get what he wanted. This is not a slam on Reagan. It is smart politics. In order to pass legislation you need 60 votes in the Senate just to release a bill from cloture. Reagan never had 60 hard core conservatives in the Senate. He had 35 - 40 solid conservative Republicans and 20-25 RINOs and DINOs that were willing to give something if Reagan would give something.
Politics is by its very nature a tradeoff and those who refuse to trade get nothing, and most often get screwed. I present Patrick J Buchanan as proof. 1992's hero of the far right and harbinger anti-Christ to the beast Clinton.
You claim Bush won't get your vote because of this. Can you please show me where he advocates letting illegals vote?
And it's funny that you are so willing to see Bush lose... Kerry DOES advocate immediate citizenship for any illegal alien that has been here for 5 years. They would get to vote as citizens.
For the first 100-125 years of America we had no INS or border security. Anyone who wanted to come here and get a job was welcome. About 100 years ago, in the middle of a global Great Depression, people like yourself became paranoid about the Chinese over running America and demanded limitations. Since that time the INS has regulated immigration. Not on the bases of need for workers, but which ethnic group we like the least.
You are correct that both parties view immigration as a benefit to America. If a majority of Americans ever decide that immigration is a problem, new laws will be passed to keep out the wretched Mexicans. Fortunately that day is not yet here.
IMO, it's not that cut and dried.
I believe that while these folks do lean in the Conservative direction on some key issues, they haven't figured out that out of control illegal and legal immigration is their 'poison pill'.
It's our Nation's 'Jone's Town' grape Kool Aid.
Bush and Rove are pouring them big tumblers of that grape 'Kool Aid' and they're fighting for refills.
They want to hold the rest of us down and make us drink it, too.
Some of them might be beyond saving, but maybe our efforts will keep someone else from suiciding. ;^)
So the majority of Bush voters are just dumb cult followers, huh? And Dubya is a mass murderer. Interesting world view you have there. May I suggest a forum that will be more accepting of you intellectual abilities? Try DU.
You didn't know that Cannon has a solid conservative voting record?
Cannon is a solid conservative -- Ronald Reagan was a solid conservative. However, Reagan was worse than Cannon when it came to illegal amnesty. Reagan supported citizenship amnesty -- Cannon doesn't
The writer of this article doesn't know his "arse from a whole in the ground", do you?
What's Bush done to keep 3rd-world, Leftist, illegal leeches from entering the United States?
What's Bush done to keep 3rd-world, Leftist, illegal leeches from getting driver's licenses? Ever hear of motor-voter?
What's Bush done to discourage the use of matricular consular cards?
The answer is nada, right?
That's why he won't get my vote.
"...Kerry does advocate immediate citizenship..."
The Republican congress will fight him on that. They roll over for Bush.
That's why I'd rather take my chances with 4 more years of gridlock.
No country is more open to free market economics than America. All other countries will be more socialist. It is a silly argument.
When people come to America their views change and their children are educated in the American way. Maybe not as well as you and I would like but certainly better than in their own countries.
I know some illegal aliens. They love their children. They love God. They love freedom. They just don't look like you. Past that the differences are minimal.
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.