Apologia pro Tancredo

Irv P. writes:

Response to readers who responded to my call for Tancredo donations:

Yes, I know that he is not the PERFECT candidate. He could use “work” here and there. I would love to see him deliver his message in a smoother manner. Not relevant. He is the best candidate! He is the only one who has been bold enough not to pander on ANY issue. He dares to take on liberalism at its core. He has done it consistently throughout his tenure in Congress.

When I used the phrase “the state of our nation” when he is at around one percent, I was lamenting the fact that an honest man, telling it like it is, can’t get any traction. I thought that his was a message that was waiting to be welcomed with open arms by large numbers of Americans. It hasn’t happened. Please don’t explain why! Of course it can be explained.

Do you want him to gain? Is his the only voice in the arena speaking for you? Would you want to see him as President as opposed to the others, not some fictional ideal?

If you answer yes, get behind him financially. We are about to start the primary season. If he can start to gain any momentum, maybe that can grow into a real candidacy. He’s in it for real. He wants to be our President.

VFR folks, right now he is your only voice. We can intellectualize forever. This is an opportunity that exists. It’s real. Send a donation and feel the exhilaration!

RG writes from Dearborn:

I’ve given to Tancredo three times, most recently about two weeks ago and I still like him a lot. I’ve followed him for several years now and it’s funny, in the debates his speech is fragmented, he stutters and stammers but when I’ve watched numerous stump speeches of him in Iowa or New Hampshire, etc.,when he has an hour or so to speak, he speeches are quite good. He zeroes in on the core issues—sovereignty, rule of law, assimilation, English language, Islam, etc.

Vincent Chiarello writes:

Allow me to add a thought or two to Irv P.’s passionate plea for financial assistance to Tom “Terrific” Tancredo.

While his critics in the media and congress dismiss Tom Tancredo as a “one-issue” candidate, I believe that there is no candidate running in the GOP primaries who has a better, and more consistent record as a fiscal and social conservative, than Signor Tancredo. While candidate Ron Paul may have chosen not to fund Planned Parenthood because of his belief that it is not the government’s role to so, Tancredo, who is not Catholic, has stated categorically that abortions are morally wrong, and therein lies a major difference between these two honorable men. In the Libertarian context, the distinction between immoral and moral social behavior is subordinated under the rubric of “choice.” In this, and other ways, LA’s description of Libertarianism as “infantile,” is right on the money.

Further, the willful hostility by the MSM, including “conservative” outlets, to cover his presidential bid was a major impediment to Tancredo’s message getting out to the public. Yet, as Irv P. and I know, there is no finer gentleman, and one with sense of humor to boot, than the Representative from Colorado’s Sixth Congressional District. Earlier this year, when asked if he could be elected president, he demurred, saying that he “didn’t have the right hair.” He also didn’t attract the big GOP donors; they were too busy falling over themselves in promoting candidates who would make Dwight Eisenhower blush. Yet, to have seen Tom Terrific perform as the primary season lengthened was to see a man confident in the righteousness of his cause. By not appearing at the Univision panderfest, Tom Tancredo stood alone amongst the GOP’s presidential candidates as a man of principle. This may sound corny to some, but Tom Tancredo is, genuinely, a man of the people of this country.

Earlier in the year, I, as a member of the American Council for Immigration Reform, made phone calls for Tancredo’s Iowa Caucus bid. It was an enlightening experience to hear how often folks in “the Hawkeye State” were uninformed about the dangers posed by illegal immigration. But those who knew of Tancredo or had met him personally were, overwhelmingly, in his corner.

Irrespective of what happens in the GOP and Democratic nominating conventions, Rep. Tancredo’s persistence in calling attention to the dangers of “open borders,” and the admission of millions of unassimilable hordes will not be forgotten. His candidacy must be kept alive, for I fear that serious harm will come to this country if politicos such as Huckabee, who is nothing but another GWB II, are nominated. I, too, urge VFR readers to donate to Tancredo’s campaign; it is in our, and the nation’s, interest to do so.

LA to Vincent Chiarello:

Caro Vincenzo,

Excellent statement, I’m posting it.

One small disagreement:

You wrote:

“inassimilable hordes.”

I don’t know where this change of the prefix “un” to “in” has come from, but I protest mightily. Yes, some words have changed over the centuries, such as “unalienable” (as in the Declaration of Independence) to “inalienable.” But “inassimilable”? Never!

Lorenzo

Mr. Chiarello replies:

Caro,

My spelling check used that form of the spelling. Scout’s honor: I’d written “unassimilable hordes,” but thought myself wrong. I guess I’m infallible only in matters of faith and morals, not spelling.

a presto
Vincenzo

LA:

Which program’s spellcheck?

VC replies:

Outlook Express.

Vincenzo il Magnifico aka Vincenzo il Infallible (a real word)

LA:

My OE leaves “unassimilable hordes” intact. Now maybe OE’s spellcheck interacts with Word’s, and maybe I changed Word’s to make unassimilable the correct one, but that’s just a guess.

I’ve run into this issue before, someone telling me that his spellcheck changed unassimilable to inassimilable.

Posted by Lawrence Auster at December 13, 2007 12:13 PM | Send