Tancredo to drop bid for White House.

[24champ]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071220/ap_po/tancredo_5




By GEORGE MERRITT, Associated Press Writer Wed Dec 19, 9:01 PM ET

DENVER - Republican Rep. Tom Tancredo, whose forceful opposition to illegal immigration vaulted him to national prominence, plans to announce he is abandoning his long-shot bid for the presidency, a person close to Tancredo said Wednesday.
ADVERTISEMENT

The five-term Colorado congressman planned to make the announcement at a news conference in Des Moines, Iowa, on Thursday, the person said, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak for Tancredo or his campaign.

Tancredo's campaign would only say he planned a "major announcement" Thursday.

Tancredo has consistently polled at the back of the nine-person GOP field. He has based his campaign on opposition to illegal immigration, a top issue in many areas of the country. He has run television ads that link lax border security to terrorist attacks, rape and other crimes.

Tancredo announced in October that he would not seek a sixth term in Congress, but hinted he would consider running for the Senate after his presidential bid.

Colorado will have an open Senate seat next year when Republican Wayne Allard retires.

Fears about illegal immigration boosted Tancredo's profile, but it didn't translate into support as reflected by his low standing in national and state polls and his limited fundraising. In part, candidates such as Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani usurped Tancredo's hardline stance on the issue, prompting the congressman to quip at one debate that "all I've heard is people trying to out-Tancredo Tancredo."

Tancredo drew criticism for a controversial campaign ad that showed a man in a hooded sweat shirt with a backpack in a crowded mall. The screen goes dark at the sound of an explosion, and then the ad shows clips of the aftermath of terrorist acts in Europe, including a picture of a bloodied child.

"There are consequences to open borders beyond the 20 million aliens who have come to take our jobs," a narrator says. "Islamic terrorists now freely roam U.S. soil, jihadists who froth with hate, here to do as they have in London, Spain, Russia. The price we pay for spineless politicians who refuse to defend our borders against those who come to kill."

"I approve this message because someone needs to say it," Tancredo says at the beginning of the ad.

Tancredo took credit in July for some of the political woes that have befallen Sen. John McCain, once the front-runner in the GOP race. Tancredo has hammered McCain in Iowa and other states for supporting a failed immigration bill in Congress that would have legalized millions of immigrants now in the country.

The grandson of an Italian immigrant, Tancredo says he became angry about illegal immigration because of bilingual education requirements in schools. He says those requirements turned out students who were illiterate in two languages.

Tancredo wants the military to patrol U.S. borders and employers to be required to prove a need for short-term foreign workers.

Never shy about stirring controversy, Tancredo told a radio talk-show host that "you could take out" Islamic holy sites should terrorists ever launch a nuclear attack against the United States.

When asked if he meant bombing holy sites like Mecca, Tancredo answered: "Yeah" and said he was "just throwing out some ideas."

[JCMElway]

Another one-issue pony falls out of the race. Yee-haw.

[Spider]

quitter

[Traveler]

Drops out about 7 months to late. Good riddance!

[Rohirrim]

That's my congressman you're talking about! :rofl: Damn! I wish somebody would run against that turkey. Hell, maybe I'll do it myself.

[spdirty]

He accomplished what he wanted to accomplish, which was to get at least most of these jerkoffs to talk like immigration hawks and call em on their bullshlt when they do.

He needs to make a run for Senate. Maybe against Salazar in 2010.

[spdirty]

That's my congressman you're talking about! :rofl: Damn! I wish somebody would run against that turkey. Hell, maybe I'll do it myself.

He's done in Congress next January.

[spdirty]

The guy is a great guy and a wonderful patriot. And you go to hell if you don't agree. Heres a letter I got from him.

Thursday, December 20, 2007
Dear Ryan, http://www.partnerorganizations.com/images/tancredo3.jpg (http://www.partnerorganizations.com/r.asp?U=2428)

It is with my heart full of gratitude and a touch of sadness that I write today to tell you of my intention to end my campaign for the presidency.

As a loyal friend and supporter it is important to me that you understand why I am doing this, even though you may disagree.

For the past ten years I have dedicated my public life to the critical issue of illegal immigration. I believed then –as I do now—that massive uncontrolled illegal immigration threatens our survival as a nation. I could not stand by and let open border politicians and corporate lobbyists sell our country out to the highest bidder.

Then earlier this year when I feared that the issue would not be championed by any of the top candidates I threw my hat in the ring. It was the only way I could be certain that the candidates would be forced to take a stand.

Thanks to your incredible support look what we have accomplished:

Just last week Newsweek declared that "Anti-immigrant zealot [that would be me] had already won. Now even Dems dance to his no mas salsa tune. " This month alone The Economist, the New Yorker, the Wall Street Journal and a score of other newspapers have written similar assessments, grudgingly crediting our campaign with forcing the issue of immigration to the center of the national stage and -- more importantly -— with forcing every presidential candidate to commit themselves to an immigration plan that calls for securing the borders, opposing amnesty and enforcing the law.

Of course, many of the candidates need to be pinned down on their understanding of the meaning of amnesty, but we have succeeded beyond my most optimistic expectations of a year ago. We even have Hillary jumping through hoops on the issue!

So with so much success why drop out of the race now, you are probably asking. For one reason and one reason alone: I believe the cause demands I do so.

The presidential campaign has come down to less than a handful of viable candidates. Unfortunately several of them have abysmal records on immigration and can’t be trusted to do what is needed to preserve this country if they’re elected. My fear is that if I were to stay in this race my votes could be the factor in handing victory to a pro-amnesty politician. Friends, we have done too much, come too far and the stakes are too high to play that hand. And so I am ending my presidential campaign.

I know there are many more battles in our future and you can count on me to stay in this fight with you. We must continue to build the unquestioned momentum that is fueling our movement today. In the weeks ahead, I will write to you again to share with you my plans for the future, and for the immigration reform movement that is transforming American politics.

But for now, I just wish to again express to you my deepest thanks and appreciation for your partnership with me in this historic effort. I also want to wish you a very blessed and merry Christmas!

We have come so far together, and through our efforts we have made a stunning and, I believe, permanent impact on the debate over securing our borders and preserving our nation.

Not a day has gone by in this campaign that I have not thanked God for the dedication of so many Americans like you. I can promise you that as long as He gives me life and strength, I will work hard for our cause and to honor the trust you have placed in me.


With sincere best wishes,



Tom Tancredo
http://www.partnerorganizations.com/tma/Tancredo/tomsig.gif

[Taco John]

Tancredo sold himself out. For him to spend all this time on the illegal immigration issue, only to bow out before a primary, only to back one of the biggest wafflers in the race on the issue of immigration is nearly unforgivable. I wonder what Romney promised him in return?

What a shill... I had a lot of respect for Tancredo priot to him selling out.

[spdirty]

Tancredo sold himself out. For him to spend all this time on the illegal immigration issue, only to bow out before a primary, only to back one of the biggest wafflers in the race on the issue of immigration is nearly unforgivable. I wonder what Romney promised him in return?

What a shill... I had a lot of respect for Tancredo priot to him selling out.

he's better than Huckabee or Guiliani. Who the f@ck should he have supported? Hunter? Oh yeah...Paul is the ACTUAL frontrunner.Uhh

[24champ]

he's better than Huckabee or Guiliani. Who the f@ck should he have supported? Hunter? Oh yeah...Paul is the ACTUAL frontrunner.Uhh

Seriously...Paul isn't going to win anything. He is a second tier candidate.

[Taco John]

Hey, he's free to support the highest bidder, even if the highest bidder is the Republican John Kerry. More power to him...

I just expected more out of a guy who I previously viewed as principled.

[24champ]

Call him whatever you want Taco, but last I checked he doesn't accept checks from White Supremecist leaders.

[Taco John]

Call him whatever you want Taco, but last I checked he doesn't accept checks from White Supremecist leaders.


I will call him whatever I want. Right now I'm calling him a sellout.

As far as your smear on Ron Paul, you just don't understand libertarianism.

I found a post on a board that explains it very well:

The people for whom this is a controversy just don't understand libertarians.

To a libertarian, a man's moral standing is utterly and absolutely his own. Nothing he has not freely chosen makes up part of his moral being in any way.

To Paul, since he came by the money honestly - by forthrightly stating his platform and asking for donations - the money can't possibly be "tainted". Mr. Black can't soil or sully Mr. Paul or his campaign by contributing to it, because Mr. Black is completely irrelevant and can never be relevant.

Asking a libertarian to send back a donation like this is like asking a libertarian for slavery reparations. They consider even the request to be a moral insult. Dr. Paul was clear in his message. He did not try to appeal to white supremacists. He merely put out his own honest message.

That's why Paul seems to be so pissy about this issue, when he otherwise has been quite mild during the campaign in the face of provocation. [Unlike his more belligerent supporters.] Paul's been happy to stand there and be booed at debates and laughed at by the other candidates and insulted and marginalized by the media and none of it has fazed him. But asking about this donation is the one thing that has pissed him off - because it pushes a libertarian hot button.




The bottom line is that Dr. Paul got the money because of his platform of small government, individual liberty, and peace. It doesn't matter who sent the donation. The attempt to smear him with it falls on deaf ears to me.

[Bronco Bob]

I will call him whatever I want. Right now I'm calling him a sellout.

As far as your smear on Ron Paul, you just don't understand libertarianism.

I found a post on a board that explains it very well:

The people for whom this is a controversy just don't understand libertarians.

To a libertarian, a man's moral standing is utterly and absolutely his own. Nothing he has not freely chosen makes up part of his moral being in any way.

To Paul, since he came by the money honestly - by forthrightly stating his platform and asking for donations - the money can't possibly be "tainted". Mr. Black can't soil or sully Mr. Paul or his campaign by contributing to it, because Mr. Black is completely irrelevant and can never be relevant.

Asking a libertarian to send back a donation like this is like asking a libertarian for slavery reparations. They consider even the request to be a moral insult. Dr. Paul was clear in his message. He did not try to appeal to white supremacists. He merely put out his own honest message.

That's why Paul seems to be so pissy about this issue, when he otherwise has been quite mild during the campaign in the face of provocation. [Unlike his more belligerent supporters.] Paul's been happy to stand there and be booed at debates and laughed at by the other candidates and insulted and marginalized by the media and none of it has fazed him. But asking about this donation is the one thing that has pissed him off - because it pushes a libertarian hot button.




The bottom line is that Dr. Paul got the money because of his platform of small government, individual liberty, and peace. It doesn't matter who sent the donation. The attempt to smear him with it falls on deaf ears to me.


So does that mean Hillary was wrong to return the money given to her
by Norman Tsu when she found out Norman Tsu was a convicted felon?
Because that was a huge chunk of change she gave back.
I find it odd that people accuse Hillary of being corrupt because
she got money from a convicted felon, never mind that she gave
the money back when she found out about it.
And yet Ron Paul is some kind of a saint even though he gets and
keeps money from a hate monger who belonged to an organization
that murdered black people for fun.

[Taco John]

So does that mean Hillary was wrong to return the money given to her
by Norman Tsu when she found out Norman Tsu was a convicted felon?
Because that was a huge chunk of change she gave back.
I find it odd that people accuse Hillary of being corrupt because
she got money from a convicted felon, never mind that she gave
the money back when she found out about it.
And yet Ron Paul is some kind of a saint even though he gets and
keeps money from a hate monger who belonged to an organization
that murdered black people for fun.


You say he was a convicted felon? What was he convicted of?

[Taco John]

As far as I can tell what Mr. Hsu was doing was illegal, and in order to gain his money, he defrauded investors for over $20 million dollars. From what I can tell, the guy was a criminal who raised his money illegally.

I'm having a hard time seeing how the two issues relate.

[Bronco Bob]

You say he was a convicted felon? What was he convicted of?

Authorities say at least one of Hsu's California businesses was an illegal Ponzi scheme. He reportedly raised more $1 million from investors for the purpose of buying and reselling latex gloves. Although some early investors did make money, authorities say there's no evidence any gloves were actually bought or sold.

The latex scheme led to a grand theft charge 15 years ago, to which Hsu pleaded no contest. Before he could be sentenced in 1992, he disappeared.

Since then, Hsu has traveled to Hong Kong and back to the U.S. He kept a relatively low profile until he began making a name for himself earlier this decade as a big political contributor.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=14428731

[Bronco Bob]

As far as I can tell what Mr. Hsu was doing was illegal, and in order to gain his money, he defrauded investors for over $20 million dollars. From what I can tell, the guy was a criminal who raised his money illegally.

I'm having a hard time seeing how the two issues relate.

I guess it just depends on which a person considers worse.
Belonging to a group that advocates murdering black people,
or being a guy who set up a scam to sell rubber gloves.

[24champ]

I'm not going to support Ron Paul because for one he has a isolationist foreign policy and second I find some of his supporters beliefs alarming. Not just the 9.11 truthers that like his pull out of Iraq right now strategy but also the ones that want to unite behind Ron Paul so they can further their own racist agendas.

I just won't be contributing to a campaign if they are going to allow 500 dollar contributions from known Neo Nazis. I've also been told on another political forum that if I don't vote for Ron Paul then I would be considered a traitor, not exactly a way to get votes or at least mine.

Ron Paul is attractive to Racists because he is anti-Israel and also has a questionable civil rights record. Paul was one of only two congressmen to vote against the Emmett Till Unsolved Civil Rights Crime Act. In 2004, Paul was the only member of Congress to vote against commemorating the fortieth anniversary of the 1964 Civil Rights Act.

In fact even Ron Paul Supporters wanted a white supremacist named White Willie who frequented the Ron Paul forums and organized Ron Paul meet-ups back on their forums after being banned.

http://ronpaul.meetup.com/boards/view/viewthread?thread=3801808&pager.offset=0


A article that touches on this subject...

http://www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html



As far as Libertarian goes, if that is who Ron Paul truly is, then he should run on the Libertarian party side, not the Republican Party.

[Taco John]

His money was illegitimate. He scammed his way into it. The money that Hsu donated didn't actually belong to him. He stole it.

Dr. Paul has had to give back money that people have stolen in order to donate. Many criminals have tried using the campaign as a way to test stolen bank cards by donating small sums to the campaign to ensure they work. When the campaign finds them, they refund the money. They don't want stolen money. They only want money that people freely gave because of their support of Dr. Paul's clearly communicated platform of individual liberty, small government, and peace. So long as the money is legit, I don't personally care who donates.

[Taco John]

As far as Libertarian goes, if that is who Ron Paul truly is, then he should run on the Libertarian party side, not the Republican Party.



Libertarianism is a philosophy before it is a political party. Reagan and Barry Goldwater were libertarians. The Republican party has traditionally walked hand in hand with libertarians. This is because the Republican party until just the last two decades were very keen on the vision of our libertarian founding fathers.

You'll never be able to get libertarians out of the Republican party. It's more likely that the neocons in the republican party will switch over to the Democrat side, where they are very open to the neocons Wilsonian philosophy.

[Taco John]

Also, the AmericanThinker is not a very credible publication.

[L.A. BRONCOS FAN]

That's my congressman you're talking about! :rofl: Damn! I wish somebody would run against that turkey. Hell, maybe I'll do it myself.

:thumbsup:

http://www.bartcop.com/red-state-species6.jpg

[Bronco LB 59]

I just won't be contributing to a campaign if they are going to allow 500 dollar contributions from known Neo Nazis.

$500 is chump change. Paul doesn't pander to lobbyists anyway. This bigot's views won't have any impact on his campaign.

It's just one man with an unpopular opinion. One guy in a group of tens of thousands that donated money. Take any group of large people and there's going to be some bigots there. It's just the percentages.

Paul is a man of morals. But he doesn't let his religious convictions or emotions get in the way with running the government. That's the distinction here. The bigot has the Constitutional right to believe what he wants and it's not the government's role to chastise him as long as he is not breaking the law.

[Bronco LB 59]

Reagan and Barry Goldwater were libertarians.

Junior Goldwater is a Ron Paul supporter.

<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/W7r27Az_Mns&rel=1"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/W7r27Az_Mns&rel=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>

[24champ]

$500 is chump change. Paul doesn't pander to lobbyists anyway. This bigot's views won't have any impact on his campaign.

It's just one man with an unpopular opinion. One guy in a group of tens of thousands that donated money. Take any group of large people and there's going to be some bigots there. It's just the percentages.

Paul is a man of morals. But he doesn't let his religious convictions or emotions get in the way with running the government. That's the distinction here. The bigot has the Constitutional right to believe what he wants and it's not the government's role to chastise him as long as he is not breaking the law.

I wish it was just one guy that happens to be a neo nazi that supports Ron Paul. Ron Paul can do what he wants to do, if he is ok with white supremacists supporting and funding his campaign then thats fine. I am not ok with it, just like I am not OK with his isolationist foreign policy. I get that Ron Paul is a strict constitutionalist but I have a question for you, why accept money from somebody that belongs to a group that preaches hatred on Blacks and Jews? If it is "chump change" as you put it, why does Ron Paul need to keep it?

[Bronco LB 59]

I wish it was just one guy that happens to be a neo nazi that supports Ron Paul. Ron Paul can do what he wants to do, if he is ok with white supremacists supporting and funding his campaign then thats fine. I am not ok with it, just like I am not OK with his isolationist foreign policy. I get that Ron Paul is a strict constitutionalist but I have a question for you, why accept money from somebody that belongs to a group that preaches hatred on Blacks and Jews? If it is "chump change" as you put it, why does Ron Paul need to keep it?

You're naive if you really believe Ron Paul is the only candidate who has gotten a donation from a racist.

Ron Paul kept the money because it has everything to do with principle. Our country gives people the right to believe whatever they want. Everybody should have a voice no matter how extreme their positions are. What type of message would that send to disenfranchise citizens from the political process? It should be inclusive.

These neo-nazis are a minute group and their positions of hatred are irrelevant in Paul's campaign. The way I see it, it's $500 they don't have anymore to preach their garbage.

[24champ]

You're naive if you really believe Ron Paul is the only candidate who has gotten a donation from a racist.


In this election, yes he is.


Ron Paul kept the money because it has everything to do with principle. Our country gives people the right to believe whatever they want. Everybody should have a voice no matter how extreme their positions are. What type of message would that send to disenfranchise citizens from the political process? It should be inclusive.

So in other words, Paul values the right to discriminate more than the right not be discriminated against? Got it.


These neo-nazis are a minute group and their positions of hatred are irrelevant in Paul's campaign. The way I see it, it's $500 they don't have anymore to preach their garbage.

The way I see it, the Ron Paul campaign didn't need the 500 dollars and could have told Black to F off like just about all the other candidates would have. Or he could have taken that 500 dollars and given it to the NCAAP or something.

[Bronco LB 59]

In this election, yes he is.

That's so silly. It's wrong and you can't even support that opinion. Neo-nazis are such a diminutive movement these days, they don't even matter. They're harmless.

So in other words, Paul values the right to discriminate more than the right not be discriminated against? Got it.

The way I see it, the Ron Paul campaign didn't need the 500 dollars and could have told Black to F off like just about all the other candidates would have. Or he could have taken that 500 dollars and given it to the NCAAP or something.

If Dr. Paul gave the money back, he would be going against everything he believes in.

Like Paul says, he's the "champion of Constitution". He goes out of his way to defend civil liberties and the right to free speech. The Bill of Rights grants that bigot the right to say his racist garbage.

If Paul returned the money, he would be a hypocrite. That would completely contradict his positions. Dr. Paul doesn't agree with Black's views personally, but the racist has the Constitutional right to participate in the political process.

[snowspot66]

Paul himself answered this question.

He basically stated that this is $500 less that that man has to promote his views of hatred and $500 more than he himself has to promote liberty and freedom. It's the Nazi's problem if he wasted his money on Paul, not Paul's problem.

Paul doesn't support the mans views and never has. If people donate to his campaign he'll use the money. He won't change his views and principles because of money. Whoever gives him money supports HIS (Paul's) views or else they waste their money plain and simple and this whole thing is about Paul's views, not some Nazi's views.

If you're looking for a reason to be offended then be offended by the massive corporations donating to every other major candidate in an effort to hedge their bets and buy a little bit of persuasion. The major candidates have been clamped to the corporate tit for years and the American people are paying the price.

[Taco John]

... just like I am not OK with his isolationist foreign policy...

You've been misinformed... It's no wonder if you're reading propaganda sites like the American Thinker. Ron Paul's foriegn policy is not isolationist. Isolationism is a very specific thing which would actually run very counter to what Dr. Paul advocates. Dr. Paul advocates non-interventionism. Non-interventionism does not equal isolationism - except of course, to propagandists who are loose with the truth.


I get that Ron Paul is a strict constitutionalist but I have a question for you, why accept money from somebody that belongs to a group that preaches hatred on Blacks and Jews? If it is "chump change" as you put it, why does Ron Paul need to keep it?

Because he earned it fair and square. He put out his campaign platform. He put out his message. He was honest and let people know what he supports and what he doesn't support. And people sent money. It makes no sense for Dr. Paul to stand there with a message of freedom, including free speech and individualism, and start checking people for their beliefs in order to allow them to donate. The reality is, their beliefs don't matter. They are donating to support Dr. Paul's message, which has nothing to do with racism. Dr. Paul has made it more than clear that he finds racism to be a form of collectivism that is particularly ugly and something that he would never support. If a white supremacist knows this, and still chooses to donate, then so be it.

[Taco John]

So in other words, Paul values the right to discriminate more than the right not be discriminated against? Got it.


There's no sense in having a discussion with you. You're reading propaganda sites like American Thinker who want to maintain a warfare state. There's no way you're ever going to agree with Dr. Paul's principled position whether it's his stand for the constitution, or allowing everyone to participate in the process regardless of their background or beliefs.

Dr. Paul is attempting to bring the whole of America together for one purpose: to restore the republic. He's not going to discriminate against those who want to show support for his message.

[broncocalijohn]

and back to the subject: Tancredo was one guy i supported. His view on illegal immigration goes beyond just if they should be here or not. It is about our sovernity, 14th amendment, government supporting with our tax dollars, better schools, etc. His candidacy put one of the most important subjects on the front page of every paper and tv debate. Does anyone know that the spending bill just gutted the fence part for the border? Well, hopefully Duncan Hunter can keep the topic alive.

[baja]

I wish it was just one guy that happens to be a neo nazi that supports Ron Paul. Ron Paul can do what he wants to do, if he is ok with white supremacists supporting and funding his campaign then thats fine. I am not ok with it, just like I am not OK with his isolationist foreign policy. I get that Ron Paul is a strict constitutionalist but I have a question for you, why accept money from somebody that belongs to a group that preaches hatred on Blacks and Jews? If it is "chump change" as you put it, why does Ron Paul need to keep it?

It's the principal dummy.

Don't you think Ron Paul knows that if he made a big deal about returning the 500 dollars he would pick up lots of votes just like yours. He will forego your vote because the he will not compromise his principals to win your vote. This is what sets apart Ron Paul from most politicians.

He clearly states his beliefs and promises to deliver as much of his platform as he can when he is elected so he is not beholden to anyone regardless the amount of the donation or the source of it.

[Dudeskey]

and back to the subject: Tancredo was one guy i supported. His view on illegal immigration goes beyond just if they should be here or not. It is about our sovernity, 14th amendment, government supporting with our tax dollars, better schools, etc. His candidacy put one of the most important subjects on the front page of every paper and tv debate. Does anyone know that the spending bill just gutted the fence part for the border? Well, hopefully Duncan Hunter can keep the topic alive.

Well, w/ you being in Cali it may not be relevant, but don't be surprised if he takes this time to prepare himself for a run @ Wayne Allard's soon-to-be-vacated senate seat... so on the state level, he may be more effective bringing those issues to the forefront