Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

TARGET: Tom Tancredo (Warned "never to darken the door of the White House again.")
Roll Call ^ | November 18, 2002 | Josh Kurtz

Posted on 11/18/2002 6:23:24 PM PST by Mark Felton

November 18, 2002

Target: Tom Tancredo

Some Say GOPPrimary Challenge Likely

By Josh Kurtz He represents one of the most conservative districts in the nation. He just trounced his Democratic challenger by 37 points. Yet Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.) may be one of the most vulnerable incumbents in the 2004 election cycle.

Tancredo, a controversial, outspoken voice for the Republican right who is entering his third term, has angered leading Republicans back home and in the White House.

The House Member's criticisms of President Bush's immigration policy bought him a 40-minute rebuke earlier this year from Bush adviser Karl Rove, who, in the Congressman's own words, warned him "never to darken the door of the White House again." And his decision to renounce his pledge to serve only three terms has infuriated powerful Colorado Republicans, including his political patron, former Sen. Bill Armstrong (R).

"I'll be surprised if he doesn't have a primary [in 2004]," said Floyd Ciruli, an independent Colorado pollster.

Several Republicans, including popular state Treasurer Mike Coffman, who just won a landslide re-election of his own, are considering taking on Tancredo in the '04 primary.

Other potential candidates include state Sen. Jim Dyer (R) and former Arapahoe County Commissioner Steve Ward. "It's a given" that someone will run against the 56-year-old lawmaker, Coffman said. "There are questions about his term-limit pledge. When you have someone like Senator Armstrong, who was his mentor, backing away from him - I think that resonates."

Armstrong was instrumental in getting Tancredo elected in the first place, endorsing him over four strong opponents in a competitive GOP primary to replace retiring Rep. Dan Schaefer (R) in 1998. By Tancredo's reckoning, Armstrong's blessing was worth 3 points at the polls - which just happened to be his margin of victory in the primary.

Even though he may not seek re-election in 2004 - and would consider running for Senate if Sen. Ben Nighthorse Campbell (R) retires - he has chucked the term-limit promise nevertheless.

"The term-limit pledge in and of itself is not the deciding factor if he will run again," said Tancredo spokeswoman Lara Kennedy.

Like all Members who change their minds on term limits, Tancredo has cast his decision as being in the best interests of his district and pet causes. Tancredo wants to preserve his seniority for his suburban district south of Denver and angle for better committee assignments. Plus, he does not want to lose the momentum he has built fighting the government's open immigration policies, Kennedy said. Tancredo is the founder of the House Immigration Reform Caucus.

While plenty of politicians have broken their term-limit pledges before, including Rep. Scott McInnis (R-Colo.), Tancredo's decision is more noteworthy because he once headed Colorado's term-limit organization.

"All too often you have terrific candidates who come to Washington with the best of intentions, but they get too comfortable, and when the time comes, they don't want to go home," lamented Stacie Rumenap, a spokeswoman for U.S.Term Limits.

Whether Tancredo suffers any political damage remains to be seen. So far, the handful of Members who have broken their pledges, including McInnis, have not suffered any consequences at the polls, Rumenap conceded. And U.S.Term Limits is not in the business of recruiting challengers to incumbents who have broken the pledge.

Tancredo has promised to return campaign contributions to donors who are dismayed at his decision to ignore the term-limits pledge. But Armstrong - who did not respond to several messages left at his Denver law office - called the refund offer "hollow," according to The Rocky Mountain News.

Armstrong, meanwhile, has offered some kind words about Coffman.

"Mike Coffman is someone the Republican Party and the people of Colorado will rally around,"he told the News. "There is no doubt in my mind that he will be on the short list for whatever comes along - it could be governor, it could be Senator, it could be Congress."

Coffman, in fact, began running for Congress last year - in the new 7th district, which adjoins Tancredo's. But when the final district lines were drawn, Coffman found himself in Tancredo's 6th district, just a few blocks from the 7th, and chose not to move or run.

Coffman said that while he has not given much thought to the 2004 election yet, he believes that Tancredo will be vulnerable. The three Republicans most frequently mentioned as challengers are all military veterans, while Tancredo is not, and that could make a difference in a district that values military service, political insiders said.

Coffman, a 47-year-old Marine Corps vet who served in Operation Desert Storm, said Tancredo's military deferments during the Vietnam War would hurt him as America prepares to attack Iraq, and could be linked to his decision to ignore the term-limit pledge.

"Here's a guy ordering young men off to war and he himself didn't serve," he said. "I think in this conservative district, something like that could resonate."

Certainly, Tancredo's record would contrast with Coffman's, or Dyer's, who is an Air Force veteran, or Ward's, who is a lieutenant colonel in the Marine Corps Reserves and is on active duty in Florida.

Dyer called it "highly unlikely" that he would challenge Tancredo, but said somebody else might, and predicted that the term-limit issue would sting the incumbent.

"I think a number of people that support Tom are not going to support him if he breaks the term-limit pledge,"said Dyer, who was a surrogate for Tancredo at a candidate forum this fall. "We can't say that situational ethics is bad for party A but not for party B."

Ward, a former mayor of suburban Glendale, could not be reached for comment, but is expected to return to Colorado next year. In an interview with the News after completing his one term on the Arapahoe County Commission, Ward made his opinion of politicians who stay in office too long perfectly clear.

"Any politician who can't find the bathrooms in the first week doesn't deserve to be in public office," he said.

It is unclear whether the White House would try to get involved in a primary challenge to Tancredo.

But it is fair to say that Tancredo is not one of the president's favorite people. Earlier this year, the Congressman accused Bush of pandering to Hispanic voters and trying to prop up Mexican President Vicente Fox by offering amnesty to certain undocumented immigrants. That declaration brought an angry 40-minute phone call from Rove, and Bush pointedly failed to introduce Tancredo to the crowd during a political rally in Colorado in September.

With his hard-line views on immigration, Tancredo is no stranger to controversy. In 1999, he gained publicity for reaffirming his support for gun owners' rights just days after the massacre at Columbine High School, which is six blocks from his house.

The Southern Poverty Law Center released a report last summer linking Tancredo to extremist groups, which the Congressman dismissed as "McCarthyism."

And he was embarrassed earlier this year when it was revealed that undocumented workers had been hired to do some construction work on his Littleton home.

But pollster Ciruli said Tancredo's views on immigration are in line with his constituents'.

"Nobody who's going to argue the soft side of immigration is going to beat him in the Republican primary, or even in the general," he said.

After seeing two fairly viable opponents get wiped out by Tancredo in 1998 and 2000, Democrats appear to have abandoned the 6th district - leaving Republicans there to decide whether they want him to remain in office.


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Front Page News; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Colorado
KEYWORDS: immigrantlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,001-1,0201,021-1,0401,041-1,060 ... 1,101-1,115 next last
To: Luis Gonzalez
we stopped over 1.2 million illegal aliens at the SW border last year.

Where are those 1.2 million right now? Some were stopped more than a few times but most are here now. The border is very open but it takes an illegal a few tries before they catch on how not to get caught.

1,021 posted on 11/19/2002 10:27:22 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1013 | View Replies]

To: sinkspur
Baloney, #11. Tancredo is speaking out the gospel truth. Truth hurts, doesn't it. Regardless of Bush's good qualities, one that is not good is his attitude toward immigration and protecting our borders. He is very weak in that area, and was pandering to Vincente Fox, although for the moment there seems to be a falling out there, as Bush is unable to pursue his undocumented worker waiver because of the potential hue and cry from the American public since 9/11. Let's face it, Bush is a moderate Republican at best when it comes to domestic matters. You just don't want to see the truth. Well, keep your head in the sand, but Tancredo is right about illegal immigration, porous borders, and a lousy visa program. I hope he continues to be a thorn in Bush's side on this particular issue. Will keep Bush more on the straight and narrow.
1,022 posted on 11/19/2002 10:34:02 PM PST by flaglady47
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
These "do nothings" under the direction of this "do nothing" administration are out there right now, risking their lives on the border, so that you and the rest of your ilk, can demean them, and marginalize them.

The agents are trying and you're right---they are risking their lives out there. They can catch an illegal, send him back, and he's just going to come right back over. Until Mexico begins to offer it's citizens something more, we're going to have this problem. We also need to revamp our immigration laws entirely ---quit allowing the scam that allows people to bring in relatives who they get right onto SSI and Medicaid. Family "reunification" is unfair bacause some of the worthier immigrants who'll work are finding it impossible to come in legally while those who won't/can't work can very easily come in. If we need agricultural workers, then we should let those in legally and bar some of the others instead. Maybe sponsors should be employers and not relatives who at the present only need to be 125% over the federal poverty level.

1,023 posted on 11/19/2002 10:36:18 PM PST by FITZ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 991 | View Replies]

To: DoughtyOne
The corruption of the English language has made many useful words meaningless. By exaggerating the unacceptable influx if illegals by pretending it's an "invasion", makes you look hysterical and unworthy.

I knew what the morons were saying and I was calling attention to their silliness. Looks like I hooked you too.

An unwanted swell of illegals coming over the border, is not the armed invasion mentioned in the Constitution and you know it.

Accusing the President of not fulfilling his oath is stupid and dishonest.

1,024 posted on 11/19/2002 10:50:59 PM PST by Deb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 845 | View Replies]

To: Torie
Right. The border patrol was established to act as hospitality stewardesses.
1,025 posted on 11/20/2002 12:18:01 AM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 983 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
In 1924 Mexico had about 1/4 the population it has now.
1,026 posted on 11/20/2002 12:31:01 AM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1019 | View Replies]

To: Torie
In the 20s Mexico had less that 1/4 the population it has now.
1,027 posted on 11/20/2002 12:33:10 AM PST by RLK
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1005 | View Replies]

To: Mark Felton
Maybe we should all start emailing the white house,"Tancredo for Pres '04"
1,028 posted on 11/20/2002 2:13:50 AM PST by exnavy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Reagan Man; janetgreen; nanny; madfly; Luis Gonzalez
Notice how Luis conveniently omits the INS's own admission that they allow at least 3 illegal aliens through for every 1 they apprehend and Marine Inspector says it's more like they let 9 through.

Luis accuses me of advocating the murder of Mexican children on the Texas border. He can't prove his lie with a link, but he has the nerve to keep calling Tom Tancredo a liar.

I say Luis is the liar here. Janet says Luis is a "bloviator". Reagan Man says Luis is a "bullfighting, shitkicker".

I'd say Luis is a little bit of all four.

How does lying, bloviating, bullshitter sound?

LOL!

1,029 posted on 11/20/2002 4:10:07 AM PST by 4Freedom
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1020 | View Replies]

To: hchutch; madfly; Scholastic; Gunrunner2; IronJack; belmont_mark; DoughtyOne; Commander8
I believe that the President is offering as good an approach as can be expected for fixing those mistakes and securing the borders against future illegal immigration, and I will support him to the greatest extent possible - and if that means working to end Tom Tancredo's political career, I will do that.

You are placing way too much faith in the President in my opinion. After Clinton, it is only natural given the fact that President Bush has a lot more personal character and integrity than his predecessor. However, the President is dead wrong on this issue. The answer to solving our immigration problem is not amnestying millions of illegals which only incites more illegal immigration. Thast's what caused this problem in the first place. The answer is to protect and defend the borders of the United States for as Reagan presciently stated, "a nation that ceases to protect its borders ceases to be a nation at all." The answer lies in enforcing our laws against criminal law-breakers. That is exactly what Tancredo and Malkin advocate and that is why they have my full support and the support of millions of other patriotic Americans who care about the future of their country.
1,030 posted on 11/20/2002 5:15:32 AM PST by rightwing2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 618 | View Replies]

To: Theodore R.; Scholastic; Gunrunner2; IronJack
Apparently Representative Tancredo is being bolstered by the conservatives who have left liberal CA and relocated to CO. His was the most smashing victory of any House Republican in CO, was it not? And maybe even of the whole West? I would imagine that Mr. Rove would want us to forget liberal CA and remember the other Republican victories on Nov. 5 -- from HA to ME, from AK to FL, right?

Exactly. Rove argued that the President abandon California because the Governor's race was "unwinnable." Well, Simon nearly won without Bush's help in the last two and a half months of the campaign proving Rove wrong. I would argue that we won so many races in the preceding election not because of Rove but in spite of him. Rove keeps pushing the President in liberal directions like getting him to support pro-abortion and left-of-center candidates like Riorden for Governor in California and elsewhere throughout the country.

The elections showed that being pro-life actually helped candidates get elected in most races so if Rove had recruited pro-lifers, they would have had a greater chance of winning. Tancredo's smashing victory was a stunning rejection and repudiation of Karl Rove. I attended the Immigration Debate sponsored by Buchanan's American Cause early last month and the panelists were very convincing in stating that unabashedly pro-border security candidates can increase their chances of getting elected by taking strong positions against illegal immigration and reducing legal immigration. That is a winning issue among the WASP majority here in the US which constitutes the Republican base and among even some minority groups. Pro-life and strong positions against immigration are the two winning issues that the GOP needs to focus on to turn out their base and keep control of both branches of government up for re-election in 2004. Now is the time to start recruiting candidates that are strong and committed on these issues.
1,031 posted on 11/20/2002 5:24:56 AM PST by rightwing2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 620 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
Amen! As a conservative independent voter who is happy to have Pres. Bush at the helm, I must say that there are currently two very strong issues with which I disagree with the White House: Tancredo /borders /immigration is the first, the second are the slaps delivered to conservative Christians about Muslims.

While I will always vote for a GW ahead of the current pack of politicos, these TWO issues are a Republican deal breaker, and I urge those of you who are die-hard party members to start cluing other party members in on this. Independent voters really DO have the swing vote, and while I am conservative and not aligned with libertarians or greens....another conservative with character and some comprehension of "borders/language/culture" could cause some upsets at the polls. Don't you agree?
1,032 posted on 11/20/2002 5:31:09 AM PST by snickeroon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1030 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
I would argue that we won so many races in the preceding election not because of Rove but in spite of him.

I firmly agree with your assessment of Rove: he's just happens to be there when Republicans sometimes win elections, and he takes credit accordingly. I did not read of any particular race, other than CA, where he had supposedly taken an "active interest." I imagine Bill Simon could tell us who is the "true" Rove.

1,033 posted on 11/20/2002 5:37:03 AM PST by Theodore R.
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1031 | View Replies]

To: Magnum44
I'm not gonna hold my breathe in the hopes that they finally do somtehing. But if they don't this country will be absorbed.
1,034 posted on 11/20/2002 5:46:48 AM PST by Bikers4Bush
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 850 | View Replies]

To: FITZ
[Mexico wasn't as corrupt and hopeless then. Most Mexicans used to prefer to stay in Mexico, even today most would prefer to stay in their own lands but they've given up for the most part.]

Well, as for corruption, I never ventured too far inland into Mexico and when I lived on the border, tourists were pretty safe as they realized tourism is what kept them going. Of course, we always paid the man standing on that block to watch our cars - but I think that was more customary than necessary - don't know.

As for most Mexican perferring to stay home in the past - yes, I think so - but many lived in poverty and as I said, they came here and worked, but went home. When they were here, they obeyed the laws, and were no problem. I do think many more would have immigrated had there been no 'official' or 'unofficial' limit. I think most Mexicans of today are no different from most people in the world, there are a huge number of Americans who would leave if they could better themselves. People don't have the same loyalty to their country. They have more loyalty to their ancestry or ethnicity than to their country. AT least that has been my experience, mostly with the younger people anyway. They do seem to think America is corrupt and many I talk with think freedom is a funny word. They believe we have freedom and private ownership as long as it doesn't get in the way of the government or some large corporation. Many say that our freedom is just an illusion. Sad.

1,035 posted on 11/20/2002 5:51:57 AM PST by nanny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1019 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2; Poohbah
You underestimate the President. One would think you'd have learned after Bob Smith's little write-in effort got trounced. Will we have to primary out Tancredo, too?
1,036 posted on 11/20/2002 6:02:42 AM PST by hchutch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1030 | View Replies]

To: Luis Gonzalez
[The part that points out that your claim that we have an "open borders" policy is hard to substantiate in light of the fact that we stopped over 1.2 million illegal aliens at the SW border last year.]

Oh, Luis!!

The part that points out my claim of an open border is: schools overcrowded with the children of illegal aliens, hospitals broke from caring for non paying illlegal aliens, ER's so crowded with illegal aliens a sick child cannot be seen for 4 hours (in a very small community), cities are broke from caring for these people, states are broke from caring for these people, parts of Dallas look like Via Acuna, standing in line in the checkout while they get half a basket of food free with WIC, and pay for the other half with food stamps - now I could fill the page with the reasons we do have an open border.

If, in fact, 1.2 were caught - that would mean several million made it across and of that 1.2 million - probably 3/4 of them came back and were successful.

Now you can argue you want them, you can try to argue they are contributing more than they are taking - but don't try to argue we don't have an open border. Now I know you are actually trying to convince some who might believe you as they haven't, as yet, felt the sting - but I live in Texas, remember, - so I know you are not really talking to me. My answer to you is for the benefit of those same people - because you also know the truth.

1,037 posted on 11/20/2002 6:13:48 AM PST by nanny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1013 | View Replies]

Comment #1,038 Removed by Moderator

To: hchutch; madfly; Commander8; Durus; iconoclast; FiestyLittleGirl; Scholastic; Japedo; ...
You underestimate the President. One would think you'd have learned after Bob Smith's little write-in effort got trounced. Will we have to primary out Tancredo, too?

No, I don't underestimate the President. Bob Smith's write-in effort, you say? What the hell are you talking about? Bob Smith didn't hold a write in effort. A few of his supporters started one, but neither he nor I supported it. I certainly understood why those write-in supporters would try to oppose pro-terrorist pro-illegal immigration supporter Sen-Elect Sununu though. If you want to support a primary effort against #1 House conservative Tom Tancredo after you supported a primary effort to defeat #1 Senate conservative Bob Smith, then you will only be proving your credentials as a CINO and worse as an agent of the Democrat Socialist left and the liberal, multiculturalist, politically correct wing of the Republican Party.
1,039 posted on 11/20/2002 6:48:11 AM PST by rightwing2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1036 | View Replies]

To: rightwing2
I don't know about you, but the last I checked, Sununu was just as conservative as Smith in the ACU ratings. And I bet whoever primaries Tancredo out will turn out very close in the ACU ratings as well.

The write-in effort for Smith fizzed. Why should we care about you and your purist conservatives anyhow? You couldn't take out Sununu in New Hampshire. The term paper tiger comes to mind.

You're no longer worth my time - and I'm darn glad to see Bob Smith is now an EX-Senator. We don't need people who take money from animal rights wackos there - particularly when the animal rights wacko he took money from also moved $100,000 in funds to terrorists convicted of firebombing scientific labs in the name of "animal liberation."
1,040 posted on 11/20/2002 6:59:48 AM PST by hchutch
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1039 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 1,001-1,0201,021-1,0401,041-1,060 ... 1,101-1,115 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson