Illegal Immigrants Say They Remodeled Basement for Congressman Known as Immigration Critic

Associated Press ^ | September 19, 2002 | Jon Sarche

[gunshy]

Myself, I rarely pay attention to Mr. Tancredo, and since he is not my representative and I prefer a more diplomatic approach to solving the problem of illegal immigration, I offer my comments with the caveat that I am perhaps slightly unsympathetic to him.

How does one be diplomatic while enforcing the law? Illegal mexicans are law breakers, they should be deported. Should I call a diplomat first every time I find an illegal?

[WRhine]

A Denver businessman accused of using illegal workers to remodel U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo's basement said Thursday he would welcome a visit from immigration officials.

Guilty people don't do this.

[gunshy]

Lose whose votes? Those of the pro-illegal immigration Latino Republican voters?

No, you silly. We're talking about the illegal voters. Those are the one's that GWB and the dims are worried about losing. They are a far larger block of voters than the legal immigrants.

[WRhine]

Payback is not a lady.

You are right. You and your fellow back slapping Country Club RINOs will find this out soon enough. You can't hide the truth and play games with the rule of law and expect that this won't come back and haunt the GOP at some later date. It will. It's the way this universe works.

[gunshy]

You must be a libertarian. You are aware that the libertarian party supports open borders. Just like GWB.

[Consort]

Glad to see that your morals rank right up there with the democrats.

Care to explain that accusation or is moralizing just your hobby?

[gunshy]

This guy is following the law and upholding the oath of office that he took. You apparantly, based on your comments, don't think he should do that. Might have some impact on the republican party. Must not do anything that may impact re-election, it's politics, so morals and principles are not needed, just like the democrats.

[Consort]

This guy is following the law and upholding the oath of office that he took.

The same can be said about politicians from any party and any ideology. In politics, how something is being done can be just as, or more important than what is being done. If he upholds the highest principles and morals and fails to gain public support, then he is nothing more than a principled and moral loser. And, if he hurts the party in the process, he becomes a principled and moral liability.

[gunshy]

That is exactly why I said your morals rank right up there with the democrats. Party over principles, party over country. The big (R), the big (D), there is no difference. What good is an oath if it needs to be set aside when it gets in the way of your politics.

[FITZ]

two "anonymous sources?"

It's easy to lie if you don't have to prove anything. If they don't identify themselves, how can we know they didn't present fake papers to their employer or aren't actually citizens claiming to be illegals?

[Consort]

That is exactly why I said your morals rank right up there with the democrats.

---

Quit the moralizing — your not good at it.

---

Party over principles, party over country.

---

Your blind spot is growing. One more time: If the best of the best can't get elected or can't remain elected or they hurt their own cause, then the bad guys benefit.

---

The big (R), the big (D), there is no difference.

---

Do you really think that the big (D) will ever support pro life, support the military better than the big (R), support gun rights, support lower taxes, eliminate some taxes, support some immigration controls, remove the liberal strangle hold on our schools, support school freedom of choice, support seating Conservative judges, etc., etc., etc....?

---

What good is an oath if it needs to be set aside when it gets in the way of your politics.

---

That comment has nothing to do with this subject.

[gunshy]

That comment has nothing to do with this subject..

You are the one who suggested that Trancredo "look the other way" because his actions may hurt the party. I'll ask the question again, why take an oath if you just break it when it serves the party. People like you don't even understand the meaning of morals.

[usadave]

Hey, do we keep on FReeping or do we stop at 80%?

So, supposedly only members of Free Republic are voting in this poll? And just how did you come to that conclusion? Or do you simply just not like the results of the poll?

[Consort]

You are the one who suggested that Trancredo "look the other way" because his actions may hurt the party.

---

Wrong again. I said he can do or say whatever he wants as long as he doesn't lose more votes than he gains in the process. I'm talking political strategy and your keep hiding behind your interpretation of "morals".

---

I'll ask the question again, why take an oath if you just break it when it serves the party.

---

That's your misinterpretation; not mine. It's not what I said and not what I advocate.

---

People like you don't even understand the meaning of morals.

---

When you mature, you'll see how asinine, inane, judgemental, and juvenile that comment is.

[hchutch]

If you knife hte RINOs in the back, the Republicans won;t come crawlingback to you begging for your vote any more. They'll say, "Screw you and the horse you rode in on" and find the votes elsewhere.

You'd better be sure you can beat them over this. Because ifthey can win without you, you are going to be screwed.

[PRND21]

So, supposedly only members of Free Republic are voting in this poll?

Ok

And just how did you come to that conclusion?

I didn't.

Or do you simply just not like the results of the poll?

I just hosted an internet poll that claims your logic is faulty.
Case closed.

[hchutch]

The Libertarians wouldn't have me.

I oppose abortion unless the life of the mother is in danger (I'd let the states decide if rape or incest should also be exceptions to a general prohibition on abortion).

I'm also 100% against the legalization of drugs, including marijuana.

I support a very active take-no-crap-from-any-tinpot foreign policy and would strongly back allies like Taiwan and Israel. I also was in support of taking out Milosevic in 1999.

I track with conservatives on many of the issues, save for an opposition to term limits (keep folks like Hyde, DeLay, Santorum, Watts, and some of these others in there as long as they want. If they're good, why toss them out?) and a VERY strong disagreement with the Tancredo-Buchanan-Malkin position on some parts of the immigration issue.

I support additional Border Patrol agents on the border, but I am of the opinion that the good people (which Tancredo himself has acknowledged exist) ought to be allowed to remain under a very strict protocol (a lot tougher than what GWB would propose).

[kilohertz]

I would tend to believe the contractor, some have their doubts. The DP should come forward with either the evidence to back up their story, or they should retract their story.

Yes. One may doubt the contractor; in fact, he may not be telling the truth. But his direct denial puts the ball in the Denver Post's court to prove their charge.

If the DP won't name its "anonymous sources", and have them say when they claim to have worked for the contractor, if he knew about their status, if Tancredo knew -- then we can probably guess the DP has not been fully honest with this story. The next few editions of the Denver Post will tell.

[Joe Hadenuf]

"It is the government's responsibility to enforce our immigration laws, and if the INS were doing its job, no illegal immigrant would be available to violate our labor laws," Tancredo said in the Post.

[gunshy]

I'm talking political strategy and your keep hiding behind your interpretation of "morals".

To me, morals are far more important than political strategy. Your god is the republican party and you will do whatever is necessary to maintain their position of power. Our country was built on morals, not political strategy. I know that is not important to you but it is to me. Cheating is not okay just because you don't get caught, and the ends don't justify the means, and breaking your word is not acceptable even if it means more votes for the party. This country is going to hell in a handbasket because people like you who don't and won't stand on principle. Your sole objective is to win. Winning for the sake of winning is not the way I want to live. You keep your party, I'll keep my principles.