« IT Workers Told to Fight | Main | Arnold Jones for President »
Debating Tancredo
by Steven Lawrence
I have given this much thought and if I was Congressman Cannon, I would respond to the invitation to debate Mr. Tancredo like this…
Thank you for informing me of Mr. Tancredo’s visit to Utah. If the Bomber of Mecca (BM) really is a Republican he would have told me himself. But of course he didn’t tell Jon Porter (R-NV) that he was visiting his district last week or David Dreier (R-CA) when he did a rally against him in his district before the last election. Then again, he didn’t tell Messrs. Kolbe and Flake (R-AZ.) that he was going to direct hundreds of thousands of dollars from negative population growth groups into the campaigns against them. Yet again, if he really is a Republican he wouldn’t have given substance to the scurrilous Democratic attacks by suggesting that Tom Delay (R-UT) step down pending an investigation that would never end. Nor would he have suggested that the President was endangering American lives with his border policy.
You may be aware that, given his activities in opposition to prominent mainstream republicans, I have invited Mr. Tancredo to leave the Republican Party like his Team America friends Bay and Pat Buchanan have done. I think that people need to know where his ideological roots are before we can have a profitable debate.
Normally I would look to what a person has said to get a fix on his positions, but Mr. T has proposed no program. He says now that he is not for deporting all illegal aliens. That is after a study says it can’t be done and it would cost $250 Billion to try. Duh!
He has also proposed many amendments to our appropriation bills that would penalize cities and states for allowing what he calls “Sanctuary Cities.” If you will allow me a small point, I’m deeply offended by the perversion of such an important Judeo-Christian concept.
I have a long record of voting for and working on border security and internal enforcement. I have also introduced a bill that had almost 2/3ds of the Senate cosponsoring it and twice that number of House Members.
But what does Mr. T want, other than personal attention, even if only as adulation from the disenfranchised? The Kyl-Cornyn bill? You don’t need a debate on that issue. Just watch the lack of co-sponsors to see that is a nonstarter.
And what about employers? America is virtually at full employment again. To grow we need labor. My dairy farmers pay more then $12.00 per hour to start and figure that it costs them $10,000 to train a worker. Eliminating these workers would mean higher cost milk if we can get it.
Those who fund the opposition to immigration are people who want America to have a much smaller population and don’t want other countries to have the access to resources that we have as Americans. These are issues appropriate for debate, but not with a stealth candidate who pretends to party membership but is no more than a minor demagogue.
You and I have talked before. For a long time! As I recall our conversation, you agreed to support me, yet at the convention you supported my opponent. He had been consistently unclear about how to resolve our problems with illegal immigrants while being eminently clear about this perceived threat. I have been consistent in my positions and votes. While not alarmist, I have worked hard and creatively to solve these very difficult problems.
In the meantime I remain open to any productive suggestions you or Mr. Bomb Mecca have to offer…
Mr. Cannon declined rather admirably and with tact. Nonetheless, I think that people need to know where Mr. Tancredo’s ideological roots are before we can have a profitable debate on the issues.
Posted by Editor on August 19, 2005 09:58 AM
