« Feet First | Main | Read This, Reid »

October 21, 2010




This is an other interesting "interest" of Soros & Co. Watch the space.


Outstanding column. When NPR dismisses someone like Juan Williams (who seems a good guy personally, although too liberal for my taste) you get an indication of how far left they stand. Another outrageous misuse of taxpayer dollars.


/////"Look, Bill, I'm not a bigot. You know the kind of books I've written about the civil rights movement in this country. But when I get on the plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they are identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous."/////

Monica here, deliberately or not, gives evidence of Juan Williams' guilt. His guilt is blatant and irrefutable. The fact that he, a media personage, doesn't seem to understand it is troubling. He's clearly guilty in the first degree. Of what? Naivete. Arguably un=premeditated, yet raw, prima facie. Unmitigated naivete. The guy seems to think he has a right to express himself freely and honestly. How did this happen? How did he even last so long on Pravda-like NPR?

In today's Politically Correct Republic, what educated person does not understand the legal sanctions against honest expression of feelings? This guy is an author who's written about the American scene, and he doesn't understand that much about the scene he writes about? He's that ignorant or dense? But even ignorance of the law is no defense.

Does Juan Williams really think he can express his honest feelings in public today, on air, about such matters as (1)seeing six bearded men seated strategically on his passenger flight (2)two black men walking behind him anywhere (3)liberal attraction, especially Jewish liberal attraction, to Karl Marx-think? (4) Barney Frank's Washington whorehouse (5)showering in Army barracks with new recruits who gave up their speedos in the Gay Day parade etc etc?

Your colleagues are not bigots either, Juan, but do you see them flagrantly breaking The Law?


MARK LEVIN Repeal it,Republicans, or we repeal you.

GRINGOBRO Should be loud and clear
Mr Levin means Obamanationcare


Truther - got it.

I could not follow your original post because my personal experience has been along the lines you describe. Offshoring, but only as a matter of survival. People felt sick about it, but it was done with a faint hope of reversing it later. If it wasn't done, MORE. Americans would be hurt. I personally never observed a corporate leader who felt good about offshoring, and most times the alternative was worse.

Your question is right on target: How could our national leaders let this happen?

POSTED BY: ROB | OCTOBER 20, 2010 AT 09:42 PM


The most simple answer: they got PAID.




Reading Gringoman's comment above gave me the idea to call them National PRAVDA Radio.

Good to see the topic of npr finally taken up by others than merely myself.




Never mind the Tea Party. Greedy RINOS continue to present a clear and present danger:


Obviously these CONVICTED, but never jailed, moslem fraudsters expect something in return for their campaign contribution.

And you think this isn't going on inside the Beltway on a much grander scale?



It's absolutely DISGUSTING that this politically correct "don't offend the Muslims or they might get mad" bull-crap is holding the First Amendment hostage. How in God's name did these spineless, gutless, cowardly p--sies get in control of Free Speech?



If I had a way of contacting the Koch Brothers, I'd urge them to start a "National AMERICAN Radio" station.

Seeing that the Nipper has been co-opted by George Satan and a variety of ultra-liberal "foundations".

Once established, NAR should sue to get the same funding as Pravda Radio, since at least the same number of TAXPAYERS hold views differing vastly from those pushed on the Nipper.




Soon as you mention SAtAN's name, guess who shows up on the radar yet again:



I don't want MY MONEY being used to shove LIEberal opinions own my throat!!

They're also running anti-FOX campaigns!!




Reading Gringoman's comment above gave me the idea to call them National PRAVDA Radio.

Good to see the topic of npr finally taken up by others than merely myself.


Posted by: Ummahgummah | October 21, 2010 at 11:39 AM

The Gringo Advisory Board endorses the Uhmahnnic re-naming of NPR. However, GAB realizes that most Obamazombies would not get 'Pravda' and its Stalinist history. Ergo, for the needy, GAB also proposes 'National Politicallycorrect Radio'.


MARK LEVIN Repeal it, Republicans, or we repeal you.

GRINGOBRO Mr Levin means Obamanationcare.
Get it out of America's hair.
Got it, Goopers?


BULLETIN (h/t Limbaugh)

Senator Jim (Tea Party) DeMint: "If the G.O.P. doesn't change, I'm getting out of it."

(Said after the latest Republican chortlings of 'doing business' with Obama after November 02.)


MARK LEVIN Repeal it, G.O.P. or we repeal you.

GRINGOBRO That's right.



Wow. How cool. Fox gets it's first kinda black kinda Hispanic Nazi convert.



DemocRATic candidates keep pointing to their "extreme" Republican opponents.
Since when is believing in the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution, lower taxes, Constitutionally limited government, secure borders and a free market extreme?
Extreme is: Fringe left Marxist radicals in the White House pushing to fundamentally transform America into a Communist country.


@ MJFell: Since their extreme GOP/Tea Party opponents are nothing more than whores for Big Fascist business and backed by billionaires like the Koch Brothers and Murdoch. And all their "small government" BS accomplishes is cheaper more easily bought castrated government that can't regulate anyone or anything worth a da*mn and the American Middle Class and poor continue being poisoned, polluted, and outsourced out of existence while the rich get richer than any human has a right to be.

Since they're all whores for the rich. Since then.


Welcome Back Monica.....NPR was high on George Soros funding. There is a learning curve the Left just can't seem to get in front of....lay down with dogs, and you get up with fleas. Sure you can take funding from George Soros, and you tie yourself to his fortunes when they rise, and when they FALL.

The Lamestream Media is heading for a BIG FALL, no one is pulling them back from the cliff. George Soros is just whipping them to go faster.


@ MJFell: And most importantly of all: Since each and every last one of them say one thing and continue to incessantly do exactly the opposite.


Not their lies.


Oh and Monica, George Soros wishes he was me - A Real Evil Genius, isn't the topic of every blog, magazine/newspaper article, and 24/7 news cycle and radio talk show, spelling out your every evil move :)

Maybe Soros needs a copy of, World Domination For Dummies?


He's really embarrassing his peers.


Lori Ziganto "I can see refudiation from my house."

Elections Have Consequences - You Betcha They Do ;)



A new study of the atmosphere funded by NASA (Science Oct 15th, 2010, p. 356), concludes that, SURPRISE, CO2, although a minor greenhouse gas, is the most important. They neglect to mention their error budget, and model assumptions, but I can say that it seems to me that they have neglected heat tranfer by water vapor advection, and the negation o the CO2 greenhouse effect obscured by clouds. When are they ever going to quit hitting us over the head with these ingenuities? Probably never. But I am moved to self-expression, and so let me recount what started all this - including the 1990 Kyoto Protocol.

Grain failures in places like the Ukraine and Belarus, are what caused the failure of the inefficient, Soviet Committee system, according to Ronald Reagan. The Soviets suspected Reagan had something to do with their grain failures, occurring in several successive seasons, something they thought was unlikely. They believed Reagan had purposefully launched CFC's through the smoke stacks of the industrial belt in Germany, to prevent rain.

Soviet agents in US Science programs acted to prevent the use of all CFC's in the US, and then claimed to have discovered the ozone hole over Antarctica, and based on this had CFCs banned internationally by treaty(Montreal, Sep 87). The Soviets knew CFCs were openly used to eliminate moisture in mosquito laden regions in Africa, hence the US knew how to employ CFCs for the purpose of retarding rain.

Reagan's response was that was that there was nothing coming out of those smokestacks except CO2. He whimsically rendered, "If only aliens really existed imperiling the earth, then the US and USSR could work together."

The scientific response to this was placed into a letter in 1988 by Carl Sagan printed in several places, including Ogonyok, Parade magazine, and the Congressional Record :

An alien invasion is, of course, unlikely.
But there is a common enemy in fact, a
range of common enemies, some of
unprecedented menace, each unique to our
time. They derive from our growing
technological powers and from our
reluctance to forgo perceived short-term
advantages for the longer-term
well-being of our species. The innocent
act of burning coal and other fossil
fuels increases the carbon dioxide
greenhouse effect and raises the
temperature of the Earth, so that in
less than a century, according to some
projections, the American Midwest and
the Soviet Ukraine current breadbaskets
of the world may be converted into
something approaching scrub deserts.

New York University gave Sagan an award they called "The Olive Branch" for the letter in 1989.

Thus global warming was born. Its purpose : Under the guise of a peace effort, to derange US science as a response to the intentional destruction of Soviet crops, and because he, Sagan, was exposed to lethal radiation at Chernobyl as a result. Ronald Reagan called Sagan arrogant, but this stupid Communist movement spread through networks to many science departments (1985-86) across the nation, as they began to make up scientific results favorable to the Soviets, or deliberately made up results for their own personal political benefit instead.

So Ronald Reagan is responsible for global warming.


xb: How rich do you believe a human has a right to be? I thought God gives the power to get wealth (Deut 8:17-18) or is there someone above that?


@ MJFell: And most importantly of all: Since each and every last one of them say one thing and continue to incessantly do exactly the opposite.


Not their lies.

Posted by: xbjllb | October 21, 2010 at 02:55 PM


Congratulations, I couldn't have described the current Marxist White House and their co-conspirator Tsars, Congressmen or Senators any better!! Thank you!!


@ MJFell: Since their extreme GOP/Tea Party opponents are nothing more than whores for Big Fascist business and backed by billionaires like the Koch Brothers and Murdoch. And all their "small government" BS accomplishes is cheaper more easily bought castrated government that can't regulate anyone or anything worth a da*mn and the American Middle Class and poor continue being poisoned, polluted, and outsourced out of existence while the rich get richer than any human has a right to be.

Since they're all whores for the rich. Since then.

Posted by: xbjllb | October 21, 2010 at 02:52 PM


It appears my earlier congratulations to x-ray were out of order. It appeared he was having a moment of clarity. My mistake.


Hmm, NPR fires Juan Williams on the very day that the Federal Housing Finance Agency announced Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac will need as much as $215 billion more from taxpayers in the next three years to meet their financial obligations. Coincidence?


George Soros is giving NPR $1 millionto hire new reporters.



Fired NPR news analyst Juan Williams should have kept his feeling about Muslims between himself and "his psychiatrist or his publicist," the network's CEO told an audience at the Atlanta Press Club earlier today.

Interesting how conscience didn't come to mind.


Regardless of their cause, all regressive socialists (formerly known as liberals, until that name became to toxic even for them, currently self described as "progressives") are cut from the same mold. For regressive socialists, the ends always justify the means. In this spirit, they're ready, willing and able to lie, cheat and steal provided the results for them are a "win".

May God have mercy on their pitiful souls.



"I thought God gives the power to get wealth (Deut 8:17-18) or is there someone above that?" - LongRifle

Who took Jesus Christ up onto a mountaintop and offered Him all the riches, wealth, and power of the entire planet?

And what was His response?

Know then my response.


Wow. Homeboy Juan Fox just signed a 2 MILLION dollar deal with Fox, rewarding him for his Islamic fear. Wonder if the deal was made before and he just wanted out of the NPR contract.

Now that's SOME WHORE.

Now all we need is a spider to write it above his pen.


"My mistake." MJFell

One out of millions in a lifetime.


Sorry for the typo.... I meant Juan de Fox.

aka Juan Williams


"My mistake." MJFell

One out of millions in a lifetime.

Posted by: xbjllb | October 21, 2010 at 09:20 PM


As is typical and 100% predictable of regressive socialists, who sit in their Mom's basement blogging in their underwear and eating cheetos, madame xray is reduced to taking someone's statements out of context in an embarrasingly ineffective attempt to smear them.

Go back to NPR or MoveOn or Media Matters madame xray, where someone might accidentially mistake your remarks for wit.


Worth noting: NPR affiliate employee Sarah Spitz at public radio station KCRW wishes death on Rush Limbaugh…not a firing offense.


The Obamas appeal to many for help, while simultaneously remaining appealing to few...



Next time some moron blames the national debt on others, tell them this:

It took from 1776, when the United States became an independent country, until 1990, the year after the Berlin Wall fell, for the federal government to accumulate a total of $3 trillion in debt, according to the Treasury Department. It only took from Jan. 20, 2009, the day Barack Obama was inaugurated, until Oct. 15, 2010, for the Obama administration to add $3 trillion to the federal debt.




About the rights of "Free Speech" The rights that one has, is stopped at where it infringes on the rights of others. About the morons, MJFELL. That applies to BOTH parties.


Jay--There are some crummy Republicans. There are no good DemocRATS.


"who sit in their Mom's basement blogging" - MJFell

Sounds like your assumptions reflect your own miserable reality. My Mom's been dead for years and I own my own house.

AND there's no basement.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. As usual.

And truth is never a smear.

Wrong yet again.


Mjfell, Have never seen any party that is better than the other. That Supreme court ruling where it's okay for politicians to receive large sums of secret money. The Dems were against it. They knew that it would put far more power in the hands of the rich. The Republicans loved it. One, stated that it was the right decision by the court. Then, they showed how that guy was getting large sums of money from overseas. And, from someone who was being investigated on criminal charges!



Worth noting: Jim DeMint is calling for "N"PR to be defunded.

Looks like SATAN has enough cash to make up the difference.

Why stick us taxpayers with the bill for this claptrap?



About the rights of "Free Speech" The rights that one has, is stopped at where it infringes on the rights of others. About the morons, MJFELL. That applies to BOTH parties.
POSTED BY: JAY | OCTOBER 21, 2010 AT 11:26 PM



Saying that moslems on a plane is scary {given their involvement with hijackings and bombing that is a logical feeling} causes a with hunt and instant job loss without ACLU or other namby-pamby groups protesting.

But yelling alla akbar while murdering and rampaging across the land, even inside our army barracks seems to be just fine for the libs!

Calling for sharia to replace our laws and the Constitution is something that seems to give little libs tingles up their legs.

So let's cut the BS, GAY.

There's only so much BS I can take in one day and "N"PR has given us all the BS we can handle.




Libs are also very strident when it come to curtailing Freedom of religion for Christians and Jews.

But when it comes to the freedom to say "kill the unbelievers" they get all warm and fuzzy!

Mosks have to be built in record time just because they know that Americans will hate it.

Oh and of course the MoFoes need prayer breaks at work to annoy the rest of the work force.

And Footbaths at colleges and airports.

MoFoe cabbies now have the right to refuse a ride to anyone with a dog or carrying alcoholic beverages.

This Freedom of Religion thing is great when you're a foreign invader moslem!!



"So let's cut the BS, GAY."
UGGA BUNGA. I learned from day 1, that you are incapable of having a discussion at an adult level without the name calling. You think you are trying to be funny. When, infact you are anything but!
My statement is understandable for anyone who tries to believe in the Constitution. And, doesn't try to nitpick it for their own personal agenda. And, that is simply that the rights that one has stops when it interferes with the rights of another. I'm sure others can understand it.



I'm sure they can, GAY.


Bert Burgess

As was requested by Monica, I contacted the Ombudsman at NPR today and said:

I thought I had seen all the bond movies and their villans; Dr. No, Goldfinger, Scaramanga, Blofeld, Drax. Which one was "Dr. Soros" aka Numb Nuts in? How did that theme song go? (similar to the Goldfinger theme) 'Doc Soros,...the man with the numb nuts..."


madame x-ray, you're not worth the effort. Really.


Mjfell, Have never seen any party that is better than the other. That Supreme court ruling where it's okay for politicians to receive large sums of secret money. The Dems were against it. They knew that it would put far more power in the hands of the rich. The Republicans loved it. One, stated that it was the right decision by the court. Then, they showed how that guy was getting large sums of money from overseas. And, from someone who was being investigated on criminal charges!

Posted by: jay | October 22, 2010 at 12:34 AM



Learn the facts before you shoot your mouth off:

The New York Times
Topic of Foreign Money in U.S. Races Hits Hustings
Published: October 8, 2010

WASHINGTON — Ever since he raised the issue in his State of the Union speech nearly nine months ago — prompting head-shaking by Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. of the Supreme Court — President Obama has been warning about the danger of foreign money creeping into elections as a result of the court’s landmark campaign finance ruling.

In two campaign stops Thursday, Mr. Obama invoked what he portrayed as a specific new example, citing a blog posting from a liberal advocacy group as he teed off on a longtime adversary, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, over its political spending.

“Just this week, we learned that one of the largest groups paying for these ads regularly takes in money from foreign corporations,” Mr. Obama said. “So groups that receive foreign money are spending huge sums to influence American elections.”

But a closer examination shows that there is little evidence that what the chamber does in collecting overseas dues is improper or even unusual, according to both liberal and conservative election-law lawyers and campaign finance documents.

In fact, the controversy over the Chamber of Commerce financing may say more about the Washington spin cycle — where an Internet blog posting can be quickly picked up by like-minded groups and become political fodder for the president himself — than it does about the vagaries of campaign finance.

Organizations from both ends of the political spectrum, from liberal ones like the A.F.L.-C.I.O. and the Sierra Club to conservative groups like the National Rifle Association, have international affiliations and get money from foreign entities while at the same time pushing political causes in the United States.

In addition, more than 160 political action committees active in campaigning have been set up by corporations that are based overseas, including military contractors like B.A.E. Systems and pharmaceutical giants like GlaxoSmithKline, according to data from the Center for Responsive Politics, a nonpartisan research service.

Such groups, which collectively have spent hundreds of millions dollars on political causes to advance their agenda, are required by law to ensure that any foreign money they receive is isolated and not used to finance political activities, which would violate a longstanding federal ban. The Chamber of Commerce says it has a vigorous process for ensuring that does not happen, and no evidence has emerged to suggest that is untrue.

Richard L. Hasen, an election-law specialist at Loyola Law School in Los Angeles, said there were legitimate questions about whether foreign money could be making its way into campaigns, particularly because many groups are not required to disclose their donors. But he added, “I’ve seen no proof of the chamber funneling a penny of foreign money into U.S. elections.”

The specter of foreign money entering American campaigns has been a potent political issue over the years. President Bill Clinton’s 1996 re-election campaign gave rise to evidence of illegal contributions from overseas.

Mr. Obama himself faced accusations by conservative opponents in his 2008 campaign that his large online fund-raising efforts may have generated contributions from foreign nationals barred from contributing. No allegations were substantiated.

“People who live in glass houses shouldn’t throw stones,” said Bruce Josten, chief lobbyist for the chamber, as he recalled the 2008 allegations.

He accused Mr. Obama of using “smear tactics” in bringing up the issue at two separate campaign stops this week in order to deflect attention from his own record as the midterm elections approach. “This is a White House that seems to like to pick an enemy and use it as a foil to advance an agenda,” he said.

Mr. Josten said the Chamber of Commerce had 115 foreign member affiliates in 108 countries, who pay a total of less than $100,000 in membership dues that go into its general fund.

The group’s total budget is more than $200 million, and Mr. Josten said the group had safeguards to segregate the small fraction generated overseas from other accounts to comply with federal law and avoid bleeding into political spending.

The group has already spent more than $25 million on an aggressive political ad campaign in attacking policies it considers anti-business and the candidates, overwhelmingly Democrats, who have supported those policies. The chamber expects to spend at least $50 million by the November elections.

“We don’t raise money from foreign corporation for our public affairs activities,” Mr. Josten said. “I am absolutely certain we are in full compliance with all federal campaign laws.”

The issue of the chamber’s funding first gained notice this week when ThinkProgress, a blog affiliated with the Center for American Progress, an influential liberal advocacy group, posted a lengthy piece with the headline “Exclusive: Foreign-Funded ‘U.S.’ Chamber of Commerce Running Partisan Attack Ads.”

The piece detailed the chamber’s overseas memberships, but it provided no evidence that the money generated overseas had been used in United States campaigns. Still, liberal groups like MoveOn.org pounced on the allegations, resulting in protests at the chamber’s offices, a demand for a federal investigation by Senator Al Franken, Democrat of Minnesota, and ultimately the remarks by Mr. Obama himself.

White House officials acknowledged Friday that they had no specific evidence to indicate that the chamber had used money from foreign entities to finance political attack ads.

“The president was not suggesting any illegality,” Bob Bauer, the White House counsel, said. Instead, he said Mr. Obama’s reference to the chamber was meant to draw attention to the inadequacies of campaign disclosure laws in allowing groups to spend large amounts of money on politics without disclosing their donors.

White House officials called on the chamber to go beyond current disclosure laws and establish that no foreign money has been used in its political campaigns. “They can put this to rest,” said Joshua Earnest, a White House spokesman. “They have the keys to the file cabinet.”

But a number of Republicans said Friday that they thought Mr. Obama’s attack was unfair.

“It’s really just unfortunate and irresponsible rhetoric from the White House,” said Benjamin L. Ginsberg, a Republican campaign finance lawyer. “These charges are just not real.”



Thanks for the link to NPR, Monica.

I personally was shocked and angered into taking the following actions immediately on hearing the news about Juan Williams:

1.Emailed our local public radio station that carries NPR news. Notified them that we are suspending future donations to the station until they cease broadcasting NPR news.

2.In a Breitbart TV report of your story and its connection to Soros, urged others via posted comment to similarly email their local public radio stations that carry NPR. Urged readers to similarly will withhold future donations until their station drops NPR News.

3. Emailed my Congressional Representative and Senators urging them to support defunding of NPR given their failure to program in the interest of the general public without bias, and, to support investigations into your unfair firing and its connection to George Soros and his shadow propaganda organizations.

A little research into the historical background of the lady who weilded the NPR axe reveals her soviet tendancies and connections. Such details would make excellent discussion on your show.

For Runner

Get our $$$ back in the USA, stop the elitists from doing deals with China-Japan-Asia-EU-Britain-Germany-France-Dutch-Saudi-Iraq-Iran-OPEC-India-Venezuela-Brazil-Mexico

Conservative Tom Tancredo Needs our Help To Win In the Colorado Governor Race !!!

Tell the Maes supporters to vote for Tancredo and he will be able to win.

Hickenlooper-D is polling at 45%, Tancredo-American-Constitution-Party at 40%, and Maes-R has 10-12%.

The people of Colorado mistreated Tancredo in the primary, He has 10 years as a US Congressman from Colorados 6th district. He grew up and lived in Colorado since 1945.

Dan Maes moved to Colorado sometime after 1985, and has never ran for or held a public office before.

Wew must try to appeal to the 10-12% hold out; Tea Party, Republican, and Independent Maes supporters-voters, to stop the Democrat from winning and to vote in a strong opponent of the Clintonistas-Obamanation regime.

Tancredo on Barack Obama

In a speech given at a campaign event for Colorado Senate candidate Ken Buck on July 8, 2010, Tancredo said of President Barack Obama, "...the greatest threat to the United States today, the greatest threat to our liberty, the greatest threat to the Constitution of the United States, the greatest threat to our way of life; everything we believe in. The greatest threat to the country that our founding fathers put together is the man that's sitting in the White House today."

On July 22, 2010, in an editorial in the Washington Times, Tancredo said that Congress should bring impeachment charges against President Obama.

I just saw Tancredo on Fox news he seemed like a very stable normal person.

He's not a major proponent of pot legalization as some of his opponents are trying to label him with. He just said that decriminalizing it for adults so that they can obtain/use it in the privacy of their own home, and heavily-crimnalizing it for adults who sell or give it to minors, might help to lower the staggering costs-SSS of the massive amounts of crime related to its,

illegal smuggling, distribution, the resulting law enforcement involvement, routines, programs, investigators, special task forces, State and Federal, Attorney Generals, prosecutors, legal-aid lawyers, Judges, courts, prisons, against adults who use it.

In other words his position is sort of like alot of people in the Tea Partys, position. That the war on drugs like most massive government programs is a miserable self-perpetuating bureaucratic-failure, designed to or serving the purpose of keeping the 100's of billions of S's costing behemoth going, for the purpose of keeping the money flowing in all directions.

As crime increases and the jails are filling up because it's illegal for adults to legally purchase and use the stuff. Tancredo said that if the war on drugs for adults was dropped and re-designed to protect the minors and everyone else for that matter, that their should be heavy penalties, fines, to anyone who sells or gives any kind of drugs to a minor.

He basicly said that those who use drugs had to be held responsible to keep any kind of detrimental effects, behavior, etc., within their own homes, to themselves, not while; driving, on the job, using machinery, in public, etc.

And he wasn't even sounding at all like he was pushing this, he was asked about it and just explained it fully, effectively, but in a very mild manner.

He gave his reason for voting for TARP, he felt that something had to done to save the US bankingf and economic system from crashing. Almost everyone else voted for it too, and most of the money has been paid back, so he shouldn't lose anyones vote over it, especially when confronted with the alternaive, the Democrat opponent in the race.

He wasn't pushy at all in any of his answers. He wasn't asked about illegal-aliens, it was a short interview.

He came off as very; calm, amiable, reasonable, easy to talk to, get answers out of, or work with.

During a 2005 radio interview on Orlando talk-radio station WFLA AM 540, Tancredo responded to a questioner asking about the hypothetical U.S. response to a nuclear attack on U.S. cities by al-Qaeda, by saying that one possible response would be to retaliate by "taking out" Muslim holy sites (specifically, Mecca) if it were clearly proven that Islamic terrorists were behind such an attack. Several days later, in an interview on CNN together with James Zogby, Tancredo said that the attack was mentioned merely as a hypothetical response and insisted that there was nothing for which he should apologize.

During the Republican Presidential Debate broadcast on Fox on May 15, 2007, Tancredo made a statement in passing that the root cause of Islamic terrorism is “a dictate of their religion.” In September 2007 Tancredo defended his remarks: "I still believe it is something we must consider as a possible deterrent because at the present time there are no negative consequences that would accrue to the people who commit a crime such as a nuclear, chemical or biological attack."

During a July 31, 2007 townhall meeting in Iowa, Tancredo said that a threat to bomb Mecca and Medina was "the only thing I can think of" that could deter a nuclear terrorist attack. This statement drew substantial criticism from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, as well as State Department spokesman, George-Bush-RINO-Saudi-Iraqi-Iran-OPEC-man Tom Casey, who stated that "To somehow suggest that an appropriate response to terrorism would be to attack sites that are holy and sacred to more than a billion people throughout the world is just not inline with the; George-Bush-RINO-Saudi-Iraqi-Iran-OPEC-man, way to go/"

Gay Marriage

Said Tancredo in September 2007, "You have to remember that we are always just one kooky judge away from actually having homosexual marriage forced on all the rest of us, because of the [full faith and credit] clause in the U.S. Constitution. Therefore, we need, we absolutely have to have, a constitutional amendment that defines marriage." He is in full support of the Federal Marriage Amendment. Due to his numerous anti-gay stances, he has received ratings of 7% from the ACLU, 0% from the HRC, and 19% from the NAACP.

Sonia Sotomayor Nomination

Tancredo became one of the outspoken conservative opponents to the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor to the Supreme Court. On May 28, 2009, he made an appearance on CNN to voice his opposition and claimed that Sotomayor was a racist. When CNN’s Rick Sanchez asked him if Sotomayor was a racist, Tancredo replied “certainly her words would indicate that that is the truth”. He then compared the Hispanic-American advocacy group La Raza to the KKK by saying "it’s a Latino KKK without the hoods or the nooses".

On February 4, 2010, Tancredo spoke at the National Convention for the Tea Party movement where he told attendees that Barack Obama won because of "people who could not even spell the word ’vote’ or say it in English". He then proposed "a civics literacy test" as a prerequisite to voting. These remarks were criticized by the Democratic Colorado House Speaker Terrance Carroll and the Southern Poverty Law Center's research director Heidi Beirich. Tancredo has denied the charge that his remarks were aimed at African Americans.

Tom Tancredo is perhaps best known for his opposition to illegal immigration. Tancredo founded the Congressional Immigration Reform Caucus in May 1999. He served as its Chairman until January 2007, when he turned the chairmanship over to Brian Bilbray.

Tancredo has called for halting illegal immigration, and a three-year moratorium on all legal immigration to allow those immigrants already in the country to be assimilated.

Tancredo's has staunchly supported tightening immigration requirements from Islamic countries. On September 18, 2008, Tancredo introduced H. R. 6975, the Jihad Prevention Act, which would require aliens to attest that they will not advocate installing a Sharia law system in the United States as a condition for admission, and for other purposes. Aliens failing to make such an attestation would be ineligible for admission. Further, the visa of any alien advocating the installation of a Sharia law system in the United States would be subject to revocation.

Tancredo criticized the Denver Public Library system for purchasing reading materials written in Spanish and for offering space for classes to be held for these library users, on the grounds that putting Spanish-speakers in a 'linguistic ghetto' would delay their integration into American society.

Tancredo sponsored legislation to eliminate H-1B visas for temporary workers in 2005.

Tancredo was the sponsor of a successful, bi-partisan amendment to a Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill that would withhold federal emergency services funds from 'sanctuary cities'.

On July 30, 2007, Tancredo "criticized Congressional Democrats for eliminating a requirement that anyone applying for Medicaid and State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP) services provide proof of U.S. citizenship". According to Tancredo, "the new Democrat plan would raise taxes and make it easier for illegal aliens to obtain taxpayer-funded medical benefits".

Tancredo has made it a point in all of his public speeches to differentiate between those who enter the United States legally and those who come illegally. He frequently attends naturalization ceremonies to support new citizens for "doing it the right way".

In 2006, Tancredo published In Mortal Danger: The Battle for America's Border and Security through Joseph Farah's WND Books in Nashville, Tennessee. The volume focuses on American cultural identity and his proposals to remedy what he conteds to be major flaws in the immigration system.

Conflict With RINO Party Leadership

Tancredo's outspoken advocacy for immigration reform, and particularly his criticism of President George W. Bush's border security controls, reportedly made him persona non grata in the Bush White House.[89] According to Tancredo, he and Bush's political adviser, Karl Rove, got into a "screaming match" after Tancredo claimed that "if the nation suffered another attack at the hands of terrorists able to skirt immigration laws, the blood of the people killed" would be on Bush's and Congress’ hands.

In an interview, Tancredo said his falling out with the White House has lasted. "One reason I am persona non grata at the White House is not just because of immigration... but because I refuse to support him on his trade policy, his education policy, Medicare and prescription drugs initiatives.... Here was a Republican Congress increasing government to an extent larger than it had been increased since Medicare had come into existence."

Tancredo reported that his career in Congress was threatened by the leadership because of his stances. "I was called into Tom Delay’s office because I was supporting Republican challengers to Republican incumbents. I had a group called Team America that went out and did that. He called me and said to me, 'You’re jeopardizing your career in this place by doing these things.' And I said, 'Tom, out of all the things you can threaten with me that is the least effective because I do not look at this place as a career.'"


Tancredo had a 90% + Conservative record for 2008, 100% + for 2007, and a 97.2 + average for his 10 years in the US Congress:

2008 U.S. House Bills, Descriptions, Vote Counts:

Colorado U.S. House Votes 1-25

Name, 1-25 votes for 2008: - - - - - XXXXX - - - - - +++++ - - - - -, #-(2008-Conservative + votes %), #-(2007-Conservative + votes), #-(# of years in US Congress) #-(all years in US Congress Conservative + votes average)

1. DeGette - - - - - - X X - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 0 12 3.64
2. Udall Mark - - - - - - - - - (-) - - - - - - - - + - - - + + - 13 4 10 8.46
3. Salazar J - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - + - - - + + - 12 8 4 27.00
4. MUSGRAVE - + + + + X + + + X - + + + + + + + + + + - + + + 87 100 6 97.17
5. LAMBORN + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + 100 100 2 100.00
6. TANCREDO + + X + + X + + + + + + + X + + + + + + + + - - X 90 100 10 97.20
7. Perlmutter - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 0 4 2 2.00

In fairness I will start to do a search to see if there's any reason not to vote for Tom Tancredo. I suspect that I'll be reporting back that he has an all-Conservative type record, and that these; leftist-liberal-Democrat, liberal-moderate-Republican-RINO attacks against him, are at best, inaccurate-exaggerated representations of the related stories that they are taken from.

Vote for Conservative Tom Tancredo To Win In the Colorado Governor Race !!!

The comments to this entry are closed.