March 31, 2006


Tuning In to Anger on Immigration: Rep. Tancredo's Profile Grows With Push to Secure U.S. Borders (Shailagh Murray and T.R. Reid, March 31, 2006, Washington Post)

The first time Rep. Tom Tancredo got really angry about immigration, the year was 1975, and he was a junior high school social studies teacher in Denver. [....]

A year later, Tancredo launched a political career animated by his obsession to stem the tide of immigration from Mexico and Central America that he feared would change the character and security of the country. [...]

Tancredo is particularly riled at the business community, which he says has become "addicted to cheap labor." Employers are a driving force behind the guest-worker program and other Senate provisions that amount to "nearly universal amnesty" for the 12 million people currently living in the United States illegally, Tancredo says.

Posted by Orrin Judd at March 31, 2006 7:16 AM

What is he saying that is wrong?

Posted by: GER at March 31, 2006 10:23 AM

You know, 11 million illegals?

Of course we can escort them out.

Just open up immigration to the world, no one is indespensible.

Here's a thought. It's precisely we have cheap labor that they're coming here.

We do buy most of our grapes from Chile now, don't we? Thank you, Cesar Chavez.

Posted by: Sandy P at March 31, 2006 11:27 AM

Rantburg has an article about a HS in Apache Junction.

3 mexicans raised the mex flag over ours, 3 Americans took it down and burned it.

Posted by: Sandy P at March 31, 2006 11:31 AM

Once again: bloggers should look behind the stories instead of just parroting them.

For instance, why does the WaPo put this in such, well, psychological terms? People are "angry", Tancredo is "obsessed", etc. What are they trying to say?

Has the WaPo continually offered pro-illegal immigration propaganda, or has their coverage of the issue been fair? (Hint: the former)

Why would the WaPo do that?

Why would a company like First Data (owners of Western Union) oppose Tancredo?

Why would First Data support Tancredo's opponent?

Posted by: TLB at March 31, 2006 12:42 PM

Gee, I don't know, TLB. Probably because First Data (in my backyard, thankyouverymuch!) is making a fair amount of coin off Western Union's remittance business. Which they're (stupidly) trying to spin off.

This applys to you too, TLB: Where are the protestors against illegal immigration? Would you support and promote "non-illegal immigrant picked" produce?

Posted by: Brad S at March 31, 2006 1:17 PM

Because Western Union doesn't send telegrams anymore. They make most of their money from wire transfers of cash - like Jose sending money back to Mexico.

Posted by: Michael Herdegen [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 31, 2006 1:17 PM

We don't burn flags and we don't protest.

But we do make calls and write letters. And vote.

To protest, we really have to be pushed.

We're not there yet. But we're watching.

Posted by: Sandy P at March 31, 2006 1:29 PM

"...Where are the protestors against illegal immigration?"

Er, working? Whatever protests were in the past, now they're pretty much the domain of the paid off, the lazy, or the true-believers (like Aztlan and the other Mexican "nativists" in the latest one).

Posted by: Just John at March 31, 2006 2:13 PM

The sycophants on this blog are selling their souls in an effort to shore up the miserable campaign of that sick, old man, John McCain. If McCain is for something, they are too no matter how it conflicts with morality, common sense, or what is right and wrong.

They prove it again here by kneeling at the altar of the Leftist rag WaPo and their hit piece on Tancredo. If they would only get off this obsessive behavior, they'd be making some good points elsewhere. I used to come here so often that I put them on my blogroll. I am rethinking that decision now.

All I hear is the banging of the drums for a doomed campaign of a 72 year old man whose two best friends seem to be Russell Feingold and Ted "the swimmer" Kennedy. Sad.

Posted by: Michael at March 31, 2006 2:40 PM


Please stop thinking and just remove us. You aren't welcome here.

Posted by: oj at March 31, 2006 2:44 PM


Because obsessing over brown people is psychologically disordered.

Posted by: oj at March 31, 2006 2:46 PM

Knowing I am not welcome here says a lot about you and is all I need to know not to come back. Adios, OJ and the McCain mantra - enjoy oblivion.

Posted by: Michael at March 31, 2006 3:28 PM


We're all McCain sycophants? You sure you spend a lot of time around here?

Posted by: Matt Murphy at March 31, 2006 3:31 PM

There's only one McCain supporter on this blog. The rest of us just roll our eyes heavenward.

Posted by: erp at March 31, 2006 6:08 PM

I am sure that many commenters here are against illegal immigration, but favor legal immigration. I am one of those.

It is dishonest of the Wapo, AND OJ, to DROP the adjective "illegal" and argue and pretend that we oppose ALL immigration and ALL immigrants.

Dropping the adjective reflects either viciousness, laziness or general lack of brainpower capable of granting that others have graduated positions. It's a disappointment when people who know demonization when they see it, and oppose it when they see it, INDULGE IN IT THEMSELVES.

Posted by: Ptah at March 31, 2006 10:23 PM