Tancredo Says He'll Consider Amnesty Program

This seems to create a real dilemna for

Mr. Tancredo - on the one hand, he has based his Presidential campaign on the immigration issue; on the other, he has taken this position. This seems to undermine his Presidential campign. Does this mean that we see him back in CD-6? But how does this play with the voters in CD-6 when he does this type of change of direction? Is it possible Mr. Tancredo could be collapsing two potential campaigns at the same time?

Not being in that part of the state I have no idea how this will play, just asking a wonkish question.

---

by: El Paso Rockefeller Republican @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 17:20:44 PM UTC

help him and hurt him

since the idea of a useful guest worker program holds merit with the Dems and the President, Tancredo is helping his national image, showing he can be flexible.

In CD-6, this could be perceived as a flip flop after the many years of hearing him rail against immigrants.

Either way this may be the first sign of Tancredo hitting the glass ceiling.  All in for President and burning his bridges behind him.

---

by: Car 31 @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 17:51:32 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Tancredo cashes in on successes, gets seat at the table

Smart move by Tancredo. He's forced Bush and Congress to increase border security enforcement. Now the agenda is changed. By signaling his willingness to compromise in the great American tradition, he gives himself the right to comment on proposed legislation and, perhaps, influence it a bit.

If he runs for president, he will have credibility when he challenges his opponents to ensure that border security laws are enforced and that no amnesty is granted to illegals.

Only Tancredo haters will bash him, but they have no credibility.

---

by: Another skeptic @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 20:23:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Credibility?

Like that which comes from saying this:

Tancredo called the Senate "amnesty" deal "miserable public policy that will be rejected by the House of Representatives and has already been rejected by the American people."

"It continues the running joke that is our immigration system by treating the same crimes differently," he said. "In a perverse rendition of hide-and-seek, it grants a reward to those who evaded law enforcement for the longest time. And, as we did in 1986, it will encourage more illegal aliens to come into this country in the hope of yet another amnesty."

And then doing something else?  That kind of credibility?  He can keep it.

"Compromise in the great American tradition" is not something that should appear in the same sentence with Tom Tancredo, a politician so retrograde and cantankerous that he is still unwelcome at the White House and among many quarters of his own Party.

Am I Tancredo-bashing?  You betcha.

"But every Republican in the world is a lobbyist…" -- Bill O'Reilly

---

by: OscarTheCouch @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 20:40:48 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

So...

when he rails against "miserable public policy" he's considered "cantankerous?  Mmmmm, lord knows we never hear that from the dems! As for his supposed "retrograde" ideology, it seems he's one of the few politicians with the fortitude to stand against meaningless platitudes and ineffective policy for this ever-onerous problem…if your solution mirrors the feckless Carter Administration's policies of the 70's, you can keep `em!

"All right, they're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." Gen. Chesty Puller

---

by: eddys @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 21:14:22 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No, he's considered cantankerous

because of his past unwillingness to budge, or even to consider honestly, different approaches to immigration from within his own Party.  It's really Karl Rove's assessment more than my own.

Put simply, Tom has not played well with other Republicans, and now that he's agreed to join their sandbox, don't expect them to welcome him.

"But every Republican in the world is a lobbyist…" -- Bill O'Reilly

---

by: OscarTheCouch @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 21:28:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Right on

Isn't the hate amazing. Real nice human beings.

---

by: Another skeptic @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 22:51:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He brings it on himself

With his comments and actions in his past.  He can't change minds here at home with a more flexible position now. 

---

by: Car 31 @ Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 01:46:21 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

I hear you.

It is amazing.  But what can we do?  Tancredo's too old to change his ways now.  He probably is a nice human being at some level.  At least I hope so.

"But every Republican in the world is a lobbyist…" -- Bill O'Reilly

---

by: OscarTheCouch @ Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 20:41:06 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Not a issue at all.

Cutting through the bile and name calling of this post I have heard very few "neo-Nazi, racial purists", etc, weigh in on the issue.  I have heard some reasoned discussion around how to balance respect for and enforcement of the laws of the country and the recognition that we are a nation of immigrants. 

Part of the challenge is how to get a Comprehensive package.  One way of doing it is to throw all of the tough stuff (enforcement) and easy stuff (amnesty) into the same bill, do the easy stuff and then defund the tough stuff. 

The second approach is to say before we do the easy stuff once again lets first do the tough stuff (border enforcement, internal enforcment, employer verification tools) and once we have a the infrasructure in place to support the tough stuff then we can talk about the easy stuff. 

Tancredo's comment seem to be consistent with second approach which is supported by most of the people who the poster demonizes. 

---

by: ck2_nd @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 18:14:28 PM UTC

Read it again

He didn't say they wrote on this blog, but wrote to him personally.

And why can't we do both? Enforce the laws on the books, and protect the border? I think the Department of Homeland Security, with the largest budget, should have been responsible for that after 9/11.


"Suddenly, it may be cool to be American again" - William J. Kole

---

by: Go Blue @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 18:37:29 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I was referring to larger discussion than this blog

I see a lot of people who feel they have been burned in the past becase the government tend to do the easy thing first and then take a powder when it comes to the hard (and expensive) stuff. 

The original post stongly implied that all of Tancredo's supporters were Nativist Neo-Nazi's who's heads will explode becase Tom said that once we do the hard stuff we can look at the easy stuff.

Living in CO-06 and having talked to lots of Tancredo supporters, most people belive that we should look at border enforcement, internal enforcement, employer verification tools and policies, and should take a serious look at the existing visa rules and regs, along with addressing the existing illegal populations and guest wroker programs.  Most of them also realize that unless the hard stuff is done first it will simply not get done.  Once the folks who are only interested in the easy stuff get what they want they will not support the resources needed to to the tough stuff  (why pay for border agents once we have amnesty?).

---

by: ck2_nd @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 18:55:34 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

See my further comments below, ck2_nd

I did not mean to imply that ALL of Tancredo's supporters are neo-Nazis, etc. Not at all. And I apologize if that's how my original post came across.

The fact is, however, that Tancredo draws significant support - including very major financial support - from extremists including neo-Nazis, Southern secessionists, and Tantonites (believers in racial eugenics and selective abortion) who see in him something they really like.

Of course Tancredo's supporters are trying to sugar-coat his revealing slip, but Tancredo's statement actually is just as much a betrayal as his switch from his term limits pledge. Suddenly he's now willing to SUPPORT an amnesty plan as long as it's linked with better enforcement measures? That's a HUGE switch, and the only reason for him making the switch is that he's bending the way the wind blows: political expediency.

In 2001 Tancredo said: "For me, the issue of giving one's word and promising to do something like this is more important than the rest of it... The overriding motivation for me today to adhere to the term limits pledge is that I made a pledge... I took the pledge. I will live up to the pledge. That's it. That's the overriding issue." Then a year later he broke the pledge. His excuse was phrased thus: "I find myself in a position of leadership ... I represent the best hope for change ... I dare not abandon this cause ..."

Of course, now he IS abandoning the cause. If he is willing to consider an amnesty program, then the only difference between him and McCain/Kennedy/Bush is one of degree, of tinkering around the edges. He's no different than dozens if not hundreds of other Congressmen.

As Paul Jacob, Senior Fellow at U.S. Term Limits, the national organization that had worked so closely with Tancredo to pass Colorado's term limits laws, said when Tancredo broke his term limits pledge:

"Voters can count on one thing: They'll never be able to count on Tom Tancredo."

He has proven it once again.

---

by: Tancredo Watch @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 19:21:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Tancredo would betray us if he didn't stay in the game; this keeps him in the game

It's clear that Tancredo is positioning himself to continue the good fight as much as a minority member of Congress and a long-shot presidential candidate can.

His backers know the enviroment he has to work in and how dishonest Bush and the supporters of illegal immigration are, and we want Tancredo to continue to look out for our interests.

---

by: Another skeptic @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 20:27:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Betraying your bedrock (no amnesty) principles = "Staying in the game"

Maybe he should just quit playing games.

---

by: Tancredo Watch @ Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 00:34:41 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Namely...

it hasn't worked in the past, so there is little evidence this comprehensive approach will work now.  Neither party has the political courage or capital to risk pissing off the Latino/Hispanic vote. If there were greater majorities on the right, I could see it happen. The dems, by sheer virtue of ideology, are more in sync with maintaining an influx of immigrants - it is particularly beneficial to their labor union coalition.

"All right, they're on our left, they're on our right, they're in front of us, they're behind us...they can't get away this time." Gen. Chesty Puller

---

by: eddys @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 21:31:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Sorry if I wasn't clear, ck2_nd, I didn't mean THIS blog

There haven't been neo-Nazi posts on THIS blog, ck2_nd, but go to my blog at www.tancredowatch.blogspot.com and just read some of the comments left behind there by fervent Tancredo supporters - it'll curl your hair. AND I have received emails directly to me that are typically along the "f*** the immigrants" vein, including that direct language - and not even attempting to include the fig leaf of "illegal" before the word "immigrants". If you go to www.nationalvanguard.com, a very slick neo-Nazi website that still can't QUITE hide its Nazi roots despite its best efforts to appear modern and hip, you'll see that they support Tancredo.

There are many good, honest people who MISGUIDEDLY support Tancredo because (1) they don't realize the kind of creeps with whom Tancredo associates (even though he professes that he doesn't), and (2) they think Tancredo is a man of his word. He is not. He has left behind many profoundly betrayed former colleagues in the term limits movement, and now, because POLITICAL EXPEDIENCY makes him want to change his tune, he is declaring that he is willing to "cave" on what up to now has been his - and his supporters' - most fervent rallying cry: No Amnesty!

Tancredo's SOLE explanation for violating his term limits pledge was that he was needed as the bulwark against illegal immigration in Congress. Now he's going soft. Heck, what in the world do we need him in Congress for if he's willing to go along with an "amnesty" program provided it's linked with better enforcement of existing laws? I'd say even John McCain and Ted Kennedy wouldn't have a problem with that position!

---

by: Tancredo Watch @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 19:11:43 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

And our "immigration package" just wastes money.

According to today's Post.  It would have been great if Owens' special session had ended with some actual budgeting, but apparently not:

In November, state Attorney General John Suthers' office acknowledged that it has not been enforcing an anti-counterfeiting law due to a lack of funding.

That law orders the attorney general to pursue civil fines of at least $50,000 from people who forge documents to help illegal immigrants get jobs.

And earlier this month, Suthers told lawmakers that a voter- approved referendum on immigration is doomed to fail.

That measure - Referendum K on the November ballot - ordered Suthers to sue the federal government to demand enforcement of existing laws.

On Tuesday, Suthers' office asked for emergency funding of $46,191 to cover the costs of pursuing the lawsuit, even while concluding that such a case is likely to be dismissed prior to trial.

Wonder what Amnesty Tom thinks of this?

"But every Republican in the world is a lobbyist…" -- Bill O'Reilly

---

by: OscarTheCouch @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 18:23:04 PM UTC

While local gov't gets screwed (again)

at least the AG has the option to "not enforce".  Counties and municipalities are stuck with the mandate of verifying everyone coming in for services.  No money there either.

---

by: Car 31 @ Fri Jan 26, 2007 at 01:51:46 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Vintage TT

I think this proved that TT never really believed his hatemongering, not that it makes me like him any better. He's a cynical opportunist who isn't afraid to appeal to hate when it helps him, and deal in the back room when it helps him. 

I can't think of any politician that I like less than TT, and this doesn't raise my opinion of him to find out he's (partially) selling out his only issue.

---

by: Tim @ Thu Jan 25, 2007 at 19:54:30 PM UTC