Bush team strikes back against Tancredo

Denver Post ^

[KantianBurke]

Tuesday, April 23, 2002 - WASHINGTON - Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., renewed his fight with President Bush over immigration laws Monday, mixing his pointed criticisms of the president's policies with lavish praise for Bush's leadership. It wasn't enough, however, to win over the president's aides. Tancredo said he got a second call in four days from the White House, this one complaining about the tone of a letter he sent the president offering "some political advice."

"I want to be polite. I really like the president. I really like him a lot," the Colorado lawmaker said shortly after he was berated by Ken Mehlman, White House director of political affairs.

The president's senior political adviser, Karl Rove, upbraided the two-term conservative Friday over statements he made attacking Bush in a Washington Times interview.

"The president is not on our side," Tancredo told the paper, complaining that Bush supports an "open door" border policy that could lead to another terrorist attack. "Then the blood of the people killed will be on this administration and this Congress."

Tancredo didn't dispute any of the quotations. He was just surprised, he said, that the White House took so much offense at them.

Tancredo, who heads the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus, long has been an outspoken critic of Bush's immigration policies. Earlier this year, he came within one vote of blocking House passage of a Bush-supported bill to allow individuals who are in the country illegally to become legal residents.

None of Tancredo's previous comments stirred the White House to action as much as his interview with the Times, a conservative newspaper with a strong following among the president's senior advisers. In a luncheon meeting with the paper's editors and reporters Thursday, Tancredo argued that the president's policies are a threat to national security.

Hoping he could open discussions between the president and members of his caucus over the issues, Tancredo on Monday sent the president a letter restating his "strong opposition" to open borders. It didn't mention the flap over his Times comments.

"I, like most Americans, am immensely thankful that our nation has the great fortune of having you at the helm of the ship of state to guide us through this difficult time in history," Tancredo wrote. "Your courage and determination have been inspirational, and I will do all I can to support your efforts to destroy every vestige of those organizations that pose a threat to our way of life."

That was neither a retreat nor an apology, Tancredo said. "What I hoped was we could have some sort of dialogue on this."

At the very least, Tancredo said, he hoped it would prompt Bush to issue a statement backing the reorganization of the Immigration and Naturalization Service. In the letter, Tancredo also noted that Rove had not met with him or the caucus over the issue despite repeated invitations.

Tancredo said he has never been involved in so public a dispute with someone he admires.

"This is not pleasant for me. If the issue didn't demand it, I wouldn't do it. This one happens to be enormously important."

[Iscool]

(Next the Buchananites will say, "see, we told you that international trade was a bad thing.")

After watching Bush go by the way of Hillary Clinton for the past year, I just don't grasp how you can throw Buchanan criticism into the mix...Trying to blow a smoke screen for George???

[Timesink]

"The president is not on our side," Tancredo told the paper, complaining that Bush supports an "open door" border policy that could lead to another terrorist attack. "Then the blood of the people killed will be on this administration and this Congress."

"The blood of the people killed will be on this administration?" These are the words of a grandstanding jerk, not anyone seriously interested in "establishing a dialogue." By his standards, the blood of everyone at the WTC and Pentagon are already on the hands of everyone in Congress right now, so why isn't HE resigning or turning himself in at the nearest police department?

[#3Fan]

open borders = idiot

I've never seen a congressman named open borders. What state is he from?

So if Bush hadn't proposed that alien workers be legalized, they would all be in their former country by now? Just exactly what changed under that proposal anyway? It seems you people are having tantrums over something which had a net effect of 0.

[davidosborne]

I think Tancredo is right on.. although he could probably use a little more tact... maybe if we ALL supported him on this issue he would not have to be so abrasive, and we can let the President know how WE feel...

Click here for Petition that I wrote on April 3rd

[Lion's Cub]

Actually, I find this incident very revealing.

Some men are "pillars of the community", always friendly and warm and gracious and kind (you know-kind of compassionate)--even to competitors. Then they go home and beat up on their family. Go figure...

[Physicist]

I just don't grasp how you can throw Buchanan criticism into the mix...

Simple. Declaring that terrorism is the result of immigration policy is absurd on its face, like the saying that murder is caused by gun policy. But since terrorism is foremost on everyone's mind, the brigades and their ilk are attempting to use it as a cover to sneak their "America First" retreads out of the dustbin and back onto the table. That's all this immigration talk is. And some people think that by taping a "conservative" sign onto it, they can browbeat conservatives who ought to know better into agreeing with it.

The jibe about anti-capitalist policies was sarcasm on my part, but it will probably be lost on some just the same.

[davidosborne]

Click here to HEAR Rep. Tancredo talk about IMMIGRATION from the house floor......

[healey22]

FYI

'Arab Terrorist' Crossing Border-Middle Eastern Illegals Find Easy Entrance Into U.S. From Mexico

[rmlew]

By his standards, the blood of everyone at the WTC and Pentagon are already on the hands of everyone in Congress right now, so why isn't HE resigning or turning himself in at the nearest police department?

He is a whistle blower opposing the policies.
There are many arguements against Tancredo, but that one doesn't fly.

[Uncle Bill]

Why Democrats should draft George W. Bush in 2004

The surest way to bust this economy is to increase the role and the size of the federal government."
George W. Bush - Source: Presidential debate, Boston MA Oct 3, 2000.

Gore offers an old and tired approach. He offers a new federal spending program to nearly every voting bloc. He expands entitlements, without reforms to sustain them. 285 new or expanded programs, and $2 trillion more in new spending. Spending without discipline, spending without priorities, and spending without an end. Al Gore’s massive spending would mean slower growth and higher taxes. And it could mean an end to this nation’s prosperity."
George W. Bush Source: Speech in Minneapolis, Minnesota Nov 1, 2000.

"People need more money in their pocket, as far as I’m concerned."
George W. Bush - The Tampa (FL) Tribune Oct 26, 2000.

"I think the economy has grown really in spite of government. This is an incredible period of time when productivity has been enhanced, not because of any great initiative of government, but because of the ability for entrepreneurs to stake a new claim."
George W. Bush - Source: Ronald Brownstein, LA Times Aug 13, 2000

I was deeply concerned about the drift toward a more powerful federal government. I was particularly outraged by two pieces of legislation, the Natural Gas Policy Act and the Fuel Use Act. It seemed to me that elite central planners were determining the course of our nation. Allowing the government to dictate the price of natural gas was a move toward European-style socialism. If the federal government was going to take over the natural gas business, what would it set its sights on next?"
George W. Bush - Source: “A Charge to Keep”, p.172-173 Dec 9, 1999

Un El día En El la vida de Jorge W. La arbusto

"Immigration is not a problem to be solved, it is the sign of a successful nation."
George W. Bush - Source: Speech in Washington, D.C. Jun 26, 2000.

"In September of last year, I welcomed my good friend, the President of Mexico, to the White House. Standing together on the South Lawn, President Fox and I spoke of building a hemisphere of freedom and prosperity and progress."

Foolin' them is easy isn't it? Heck yes.

A UNICEF-funded book being passed out at the United Nations Child Summit encourages children to engage in sexual activities with other minors and with homosexuals and animals

Clinton raped Juanita Broaddrick, not once, but twice

"That’s why I’m for instant background checks at gun shows. I’m for trigger locks."
George W. Bush - Source: St. Louis debate Oct 17, 2000

[Jim Scott]

goes to show you Bush is a liberal and is openly anti conservative.

Yeah, even worse than Clinton! Right Bob? C'mon you know you want to say it.

Please. This Tancredo guy is just grandstanding and pushing conservative buttons by yapping about immigration and open borders with the President. He uses wildly inflamatory words and gets the desired response and the Bush-haters pile on with inane remarks like yours. Bush is a liberal. Openly anti-conservative.
Your hysterics and hyperbole sink your own assertions.

[Brownie74]

And then there is this.....

Bush Inks $190 Billion Farm Bill Over Objections

[Jennikins]

Re Tancredo's remarks to Bush: Someone has to tell President Bush just what the story is. Bush seems determined to thwart what the people want. They keep on bringing back 245(i), on and off, but no problemo, it will get passed, quietly, just watch.

[Geezerette]

Michael Savage Bump!!

"Borders ... Language ... Culture!"

g

[Dutchy]

BUMP!!

[Jennikins]

Re: Your post #29. Ditto, and triple ditto's.

Bush obviously does not like criticism. Are we not allowed to disagree with his policies? Oh, I forgot, "Who cares what you think" - Bush, to a man who said he was not too pleased with some of Bush's decisions.

Mr. Bush does not care to know what we think. How about that.

[ClancyJ]

Especially if/when we get hit with a terrorist attack in the USA. Just my 2 cents worth.

We don't have to get hit with a terrorist attack.

Note: Libertarians, Third Party Supporters, No More Votes for Bush supporters:

"Bush White House Angered by Secret Clinton-Abdullah Meeting

The Bush White House was surprised and angered when it discovered two weeks ago that ex-president Bill Clinton held a secret meeting with Saudi Crown Prince Abdullah only hours after members of the royal family met with President Bush and his father in Houston.

"To the dismay of White House planners, [Abdullah] saw an unscheduled and unexpected visitor: Bill Clinton," reported USA Today on Monday - ...... (See: Clinton in 3-Hour Mystery Meeting with Saudi Prince Abdullah)

The paper notes that the surprise meeting had taken place at "a sensitive moment for the Middle East," during a visit where the Bush administration had taken great pains to "plot every detail of [Abdullah's] weekend trip to Texas."

"The former president, in Houston for a fundraiser and staying at the same posh hotel as the Saudi leader, headed upstairs after midnight for a private chat that had been arranged only a few hours earlier. Their 90-minute eeting didn't end until 2 a.m.," USA Today said."

Since I do not trust Bill Clinton in the least - I tend to believe there was a purpose for this meeting. As in all efforts in Clinton's life - it has to do with him.

I feel he could have arranged a deal - the Saudis throw support and influence of Saudi campaign fund recipients behind getting Hillary in office. The Clintons then to payoff the Saudis with power in our government. Call me a tinfoil hatter but I just would believe anything with this creep.

I also today noticed the headline that the "powers" were promoting Hillary for vice-president.

I just request that each of us remember the Clintons as some seek to get the GOP out of power and find the perfect constitutionist that might miraclously win the presidency.

[Jennikins]

What's wrong with putting "America First"? Please tell me, I really would like to know. Is that something to be construed as contemptible? I don't think so.