• Your cart is currently empty.
Latina Lista: News from the Latinx perspective > Palabra Final > Politics > Tancredo’s Withdrawal from the Republican Presidential Race Didn’t Come Soon Enough

Tancredo’s Withdrawal from the Republican Presidential Race Didn’t Come Soon Enough

LatinaLista — Rep. Tom Tancredo’s withdrawl today from the Republican race for president was not surprising. What was surprising was that he was so honest in confessing that it really wasn’t the presidency he was interested in, but rather forcing the issue of illegal immigration.

Tancredo speaks before a group of his supporters at a rally.
(Source: newwest.com)

In his announcement, he couldn’t pat himself on the back enough times for what he terms “great progress” in the immigration debate.

In fact, according to Newsweek, the Tancredo campaign has already won. And just this month, The Economist, The New Yorker, The Wall Street Journal, and even The New York Times have grudgingly accredited our campaign with forcing the issue of immigration to the forefront of the national debate and, more importantly, with forcing nearly every Republican presidential candidate to commit themselves to an immigration plan that calls for securing our borders, enforcing our immigration laws.

But it’s one thing to force an issue, it’s another thing entirely to be responsible for orchestrating and perpetuating a hate campaign against a defenseless demographic, especially when no real resolution was sought or given serious consideration.


Tacredo’s admission that he used his candidacy to promote his “pet cause” mocks the serious pursuit of all the other candidates for president.
And it exemplifies how this small Washington group that Tancredo heads, who are against undocumented immigrants, did and can manipulate the system to push their hysteria onto a public that was forced to believe the country was under attack from undocumented migrants.
When in reality, the truth is there is no attack and these migrants have been here all along working and living and raising families without any complaints, until Tancredo decided — for the country — that these people were no good.
To label Tancredo an extremist in the immigration debate is an understatement. If he was so right about his platform, then why didn’t more of the Republican electorate embrace him?
Even with Tancredo’s endorsement, Gov. Romney is cautious about appearing to even be on the same page with him.
In an email to Latina Lista, Governor Romney said:

“Congressman Tancredo ran a spirited campaign focused on issues that are important to many Americans. I thank him for his support. While we don’t agree on every issue, we agree on the need to keep America strong. I look forward to working with him and other Republicans to achieve that end.”

A country’s strength lies in its unity as a nation and the health of its economy. It’s not language or birthplace that determines this strength but the contributions and relationships the people have with one another in supporting communities and businesses.
Until the hate and suspicion set in against the undocumented, it was an ideal that fortified the strength of the United States.
Thanks to Tancredo and his supporters, this country has devolved to a place in time where fear, intimidation and intolerance rule(d).
The three biggest factors in the undoing of any country — and Tancredo wants a pat on the back for bringing us to this point?
The question everyone should be asking themselves is who is going to give him the boot from politics once and for all?

Related posts

Comment(25)

  • Avatar
    Horace
    December 20, 2007 at 7:30 pm

    You haven’t been paying attention, Marisa. The candidates have a strategy; enforce our workplace immigration laws and secure our borders. The form is working, as shown in Oklahoma and Arizona, and the latter has promise of doing so, when the fence is built. They have a solution, but you don’t happen to agree with it.

  • Avatar
    Publius
    December 20, 2007 at 7:40 pm

    May I point out that these illegal aliens are are the cause of our divisiveness. Your accusations are disingenuous, because it was their relatives who were amnestied in 1986 who encouraged them to come here. Fool the gringos once and you think you can fool them again ? In reality, it was the Hispanic community in this country that provoked this crisis, and now when they’re called on it, it’s the rest of America’s fault that their friends and family are to be sent deported. By your actions you’ve soured ethnic relations in this country. I hope that you’re proud of yourselves.

  • Avatar
    Marisa Treviño
    December 20, 2007 at 8:14 pm

    Not at all. It was the government that missed the perfect opportunity to create a long-lasting policy that would effectively answer the needs of businesses and the wants of future immigrants.
    How anybody in a position of authority would think amnesty is/was the answer to halting illegal immigration is beyond common sense and proves that all these reactions are knee-jerk and not geared to finding equitable solutions.
    It’s too easy to blame the undocumented for taking advantage of the door that was continually held open for them.
    No, this debate is distorted by ones who claim they want it fixed. If they did, then they would be busy working at a solution rather than how to divide the country further.

  • Avatar
    Frank
    December 20, 2007 at 8:38 pm

    Not all of these illegal aliens are here just working and are innocent of other crimes, just to clarify that.
    But that is really beside the point. It is about the rule of law. Businesses had no right to invite them here and they had no right to accept their invitation.
    Tancredo did not decide that these people were no good. He based his oppostion on their violation of our immigration laws as do I.
    The reason more Republicans didn’t embrace Tancredo is because they were pandering for the Hispanic vote. For whatever reason a good majority of Hispanic citizens are standing up for illegal foreigners rather than our laws. I think we all know the reason why but it is un-American.
    I don’t see anything quoted by Mitt Romney as to his remarks about Tancredo that would indicate that he doesn’t agree with him on the illegal immigration issue. In fact Romney has a good track record in opposing illegal immigration. He merely said he doesn’t agree with Tancredo on everything. How does one come up with that to mean it is about illegal immigration?
    It never ceases to amaze me the mindset of the pro-illegals that they equate being opposed to illegal immigration as a racist or hate issue. It isn’t! It is about respecting our immigration laws that are in place for very good reasons.
    You may want to give Tancredo the boot but last I heard he plans to run against the ethnocentric Salazar for his Senate seat. Good luck, Tom!

  • Avatar
    Publius
    December 20, 2007 at 9:29 pm

    “How anybody in a position of authority would think amnesty is/was the answer to halting illegal immigration is beyond common sense and proves that all these reactions are knee-jerk and not geared to finding equitable solutions.”
    Well, it was the Hispanic community with the support of Ted Kennedy that assured that the 1986 amnesty was the solution. And Teddy promised that no further amnesties would be needed.
    I don’t understand why you, as an American favor the contrived rights of foreign nationals over the risk that an amnesty could backfire and result in millions of people on the welfare rolls. It stands to reason that adding millions of people living on the margins would ultimately result in their receiving welfare at the end of their path to citizenship. Why should the American people be equitable if it results in a new enormous burden to their treasury? It seems to me that you can’t be generous to illegal aliens without taking something from the taxpayer. Can you promise the American people that this wouldn’t happen? Let me ask you this hypothetical. If it could be shown that illegal aliens would prove a net burden to the taxpayer if given amnesty, would you still support accepting them for citizenship?
    And you seem to always give too much weight to the big business and not to the voter, who feels betrayed by their greedy politicians. However, it’s the voter who will be most affected by the tax burdens, and it is he who votes. I can guarantee that it will do no good to invoke the needs of business, as it is they who are mostly responsible for undermining the people’s law. Those opposing amnesty are as much angered by the role of big business as they are by the aggressiveness of the Hispanic community in their defense of illegal immigration.

  • Avatar
    adriana
    December 21, 2007 at 2:24 am

    How does Mitt Romney have a good record on illegal immigration? Actually, I’m glad that Tancredo endorsed Romney, so we can come full circle and really witness the hypocrisy in this issue. Romney has hired illegal workers and has a colorful family immigration story himself.

  • Avatar
    laura
    December 21, 2007 at 9:09 am

    The reason Republican candidates adopted Tancredo’s rhetoric is that it is so convenient to deflect blame for the problems their party’s behavior has brought down on this country: $10 billion (that is $10,000,000,000 every MONTH) spent every month in Iraq for the past 5 years, no money for anything the people really need, like healthcare and schools and retirement security.
    Deflecting blame onto undocumented immigrants instead can rouse the racist still latent in many – though not most – Americans. We see this on this blog every day.
    The consequence is not only more suffering of the hardworking people who grow our food and take care of our babies and our old people: undocumented immigrants.
    The consequence of the policies generated out of this racist scapegoating will also be increased suffering of the racists themselves. We will see this soon in Arizona and Oklahoma, as economies tank when workers and customers are driven away.
    In fact, all of us are likely to suffer as our national economy tanks, not just because of the many failures of the Republicans at all levels, but also because undocumented immigrants are driven away or are forced to endure intensified exploitation. This is sending shock waves through many industries, and we are losing our food supply as growers leave the US.
    On the level of individuals like “Frank” “Horace” “Publius” “Eyes of Texas” etc., the time and energy they expend on pursuing hatred of undocumented immigrants, is that much time and energy they don’t expend on improving their own lives.
    Most Americans don’t go for that – which is why Tancredo stayed at 1%.

  • Avatar
    Angela
    December 21, 2007 at 12:12 pm

    I have a solution. We should bring back segregation to this country. In a sense, anyway. All monies collected from EVERY taxpayer should be divided into two piles. One pile would be the money from the people that want illegals to be allowed to stay, the other pile from the people that think they shouldn’t.
    Are you with me so far? Do you see where this is going?
    Now, we have 2 piles of money. For every service that is provided to someone that is in this country illegally, the funds should come from the “Pro-illegal” pile.
    If the pile runs out of money, then……………Oh-well.
    It’s a “you scratch my back, I’ll scratch yours” thing. Then we can really see EXACTLY how much of a burdon the illegals have on our economy, and we will also find out how many people “REALLY” support them. Personally, my money would not be used to help an illegal in ANY way. That’s just my opinion though. And we all know what that entails……..

  • Avatar
    Frank
    December 21, 2007 at 12:25 pm

    adriana, Romney didn’t knowlingly hire illegal aliens. He went thru a company that hired illegal aliens. Romney had no right to check their I.D.’s. It doesn’t matter if Romney had a “colorful” (whatever that means) family history of immigration. He is not them. He is himself and not responsible for his ancestors actions.
    laura, you are wrong. Those who oppose illegal immigration are not using it as a reason to deflect from other problems. It is about the rule of law. It has nothing to do with racism either. I haven’t seen any racist statements made in this blog about illegal aliens. Why don’t you point them out? You can’t because there aren’t any.
    Law abiding Americans did not invite these illegals here to pick our food or babysit with our kids. It is the corrupt trying to profit from their cheap labor and passing their social costs unto Americans who did. I don’t care how hard working some of them are either. It is irrelevant because they are working here illegally and they know it.
    Any company that feels the need to stay afloat with illegal labor, doesn’t deserve to be in business. They are un-American, tax evaders.
    What ever downturns there may be in our economy due to the illegals leaving, we will recoup in a matter of time and we will return to a nation of laws.
    I pursue the taking back of my country and returning to a nation of laws. I don’t pursue hate. What makes you think that any of us in here opposing illegal immgigration need to improve our lives? Sounds like you are looking for a scapegoat to defend law breakers. My life it just fine, thank you.
    Tancredo dropped out of the race because he knew he wouldn’t get the Republican nomination. Both parties are too busy hispandering for votes to want to touch the crucial issue of illegal immigraton seriously. It is sad that our politicians feel the need to reach Hispanics by going along with the violation of our immigration laws and then rewarding the ones who break them. Doesn’t say much about them, does it?

  • Avatar
    Evelyn
    December 21, 2007 at 12:41 pm

    Frank
    The last part of your post is what has you confused, or maby it’s the public you are trying to confuse.
    You state, “it never ceases to amaze me, the mindset of the PRO-ILLEGAL”,……. you use the word pro- illegal. I don’t know anyone who is pro-illegal, no one supports the act of crossing the border illegally. I don’t know anyone who supports people from other parts of the world or those of other countries close to our borders that want to come to the U.S. ILLEGALLY.
    If there is a group that you are addressing that does advocate for people to cross our borders illegally, I would like to have the link to support you in your effort of exposing this despicable stance.
    Every one I know supports fixing the current broken immigration system to allow on an as needed bases for immigrants to be admitted legally.
    Could it be….naw…..well maby, could it be that you are pandering to the racists and the use of this word coined by them, to misrepresent the views of people like me who advocate for equality and justice for all immigrants or groups of people who are demonized with lies and propaganda by racists who hate them. Whet do you say Frank, Are you a racist or not?

  • Avatar
    laura
    December 21, 2007 at 12:49 pm

    “Frank,” my friend, racism is like pornography – I know it when I see it.
    And if your life was just fine, you would not be spending so much time at your computer writing invective against undocumented immigrants on this site and on others.

  • Avatar
    Evelyn
    December 21, 2007 at 1:01 pm

    Horace
    Enforcement of our current workplace laws cannot be done. Many people are working with legal documents that belong to someone else. The current system doesnt address these issues. To Implement a system (real ID) that would address these problems without causing more, new laws must be passed.
    The last time lawmakers tried to do this, Groups of racists didnt let it happen. They are not willing to compromise.
    They would rather keep things the way they are , and send this country to HELL.

  • Avatar
    Frank
    December 21, 2007 at 5:15 pm

    Evelyn, no I am not a racist. I just want all immigrants to come here legally. Although you may not advocate illegal immigration per se, you are sticking up for those who did break our immigration laws. Neither position is in the national interests and is un-American IMO.
    Again, our immigration laws are not broken, they just haven’t been enforced properly. I have no qualms about admitting immigrants legally on an as needed basis.
    I don’t know what lies and propaganda you are referring to about illegal aliens but I don’t spread them. I am mainly opposed to illegal aliens in our country simply because it is against the law. What kind of equality and justice do you think they are entitled to?

  • Avatar
    Frank
    December 21, 2007 at 6:30 pm

    The SAVE ACT would make it mandatory for employers to check everyone on their payroll’s SS numbers to make sure they belong to the person using them. Duplicate numbers in the data base would also be suspect. The no match letters need to go out the employers too. We need to make sure that employers do not have illegal aliens on their payroll. It is the law!

  • Avatar
    Frank
    December 21, 2007 at 6:36 pm

    laura, since when it is racist to spend a lot of time fighting for your cause whether it be on the internet or in other ways? I sure see a lot of the pro-illegals doing the same thing but I guess that is ok with you? Does that mean that they have miserable lives? Your remarks are just plain bizarre.
    I am semi-retired so I can pretty much spend as much time as I want to on the internet. I am fighting a very important cause and that is to return this country to a nation of laws and stabilize our population growth.

  • Avatar
    Evelyn
    December 21, 2007 at 9:40 pm

    Pubilus asks,
    If it could be shown that “Illegal aliens”
    would prove a net burden to the taxpayer if given amnesty, would you still support accepting them for citizenship?
    I will take you up on that challenge Publus.
    NO, I wouldn’t support them, but you have to show me which group of Immigrants, that have entered the U.S., have been a burden to taxpayers. Please include the link .

  • Avatar
    Horace
    December 22, 2007 at 4:01 pm

    Evelyn, Flor, Marisa,
    Judge Wake refused to grant a temporary restraining order for the Arizona laws designed to combat illegal immigration. http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2007/12/22/america/Employer-Sanctions.php
    The employment laws will take affect on 1 January, regardless of the desires of corrupt employers and advocates of illegal immigration like yourselves. Does that make Judge Wake a racist, nativist, anti-immigrant, etc.?

  • Avatar
    Publius
    December 22, 2007 at 4:09 pm

    “I will take you up on that challenge Publus.
    NO, I wouldn’t support them, but you have to show me which group of Immigrants, that have entered the U.S., have been a burden to taxpayers. Please include the link.”
    Don’t need a link, as pure reason and understanding of our econmic and welfare systems work will be sufficient. Most illegal aliens earn at or below the poverty level. As such, when they gain citizenship, their families will be eligible for food stamps, total refunds of their income taxes, Earned Income Tax Credits, free medical care, and their retirees will receive more Social Security than they invest in the system when they retire. Refute that.

  • Avatar
    Liquidmicro
    December 22, 2007 at 6:55 pm

    http://www.cbo.gov/ftpdocs/87xx/doc8711/12-6-Immigration.pdf
    The Impact of Unauthorized
    Immigrants on the Budgets of
    State and Local Governments
    DECEMBER 2007
    Quick summary here:
    http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/stories/2007/12/17/daily19.html
    Congressional study shows illegal immigrants sap tax dollars
    Lets see if this is coherent enough for Evelyn, since she couldn’t refute her own remarks of insinuating that “one of their own would have taken the money, she knows” as thieves.
    Is this study “dumbed down enough” for you, Evelyn?? Although I am not Publius in accepting your challenge, I challenge you just the same.

  • Avatar
    Evelyn
    December 22, 2007 at 7:34 pm

    Publius
    Since you have no link, I will toast my win with a glass of wine.
    Can you please provide the non racist link to prove that what you state is true, or is it just an opinion.
    I have several links that are credible that say you are wrong.
    here’s one,
    http://wwwailf.org/ioc/FactChecks/Economics07pdf

  • Avatar
    Evelyn
    December 22, 2007 at 7:36 pm

    Publius
    Since you have no link, I will toast my win with a glass of wine.
    Can you please provide the non racist link to prove that what you state is true, or is it just an opinion.
    I have several links that are credible that say you are wrong.
    here’s one,
    http://www.ailf.org/ioc/FactChecks/Economics07pdf

  • Avatar
    Frank
    December 23, 2007 at 10:38 am

    If a congressional study isn’t credible then I don’t know what is.

  • Avatar
    Evelyn
    December 23, 2007 at 9:23 pm

    liquid
    …your first link produced: NOT FOUND
    Your second produced:
    ALERT: Filtering has occurred which reduced direct exposure to sexually explicit content………. which indicates …….YOU MADE A FOOL OF YOURSELF!!!!!!!
    Frank
    I was going to say something smart, but i’m not, because even though I don’t agree with you, it’s Christmas, and I am leaving everyone in peace. Unless they provoke me, like liquid.

  • Avatar
    Liquidmicro
    December 24, 2007 at 11:28 am

    Evelyn, I caught you in one lie, now I am catching you in 2 more, those links work just fine.
    Your cynicism is now out for the rest to see when all you had to do was defend your position in calling the ‘Illegals’ thieves.
    The only FOOL here, it seems, is YOU.

  • Avatar
    Liquidmicro
    December 24, 2007 at 12:03 pm

    That was witty, hell, it was even funny Evelyn, it was just that last part that hung you out to dry again: YOU MADE A FOOL OF YOURSELF!!!!!!!

Comments are closed.

25 Comments