Xenophobe Tancredo is at it Again

4:12 pm By Maegan La Mala · Immigration|Politics

12 Dec 2005

Racist congressman Tom Tancredo of Colorado wants to change the U.S. Birthright Citizenship policy so that the children born of immigrants will not attain U.S. citizenship.

A group of 92 lawmakers in the House will attempt next week to force a vote on legislation that would revoke the principle of “birthright citizenship,” part of a broader effort to discourage illegal immigration.

Because of the length of time involved, some immigration experts say that birthright citizenship is not a major incentive for the vast majority of illegal entrants.

Not sure why Tancredo is such a xenophobe, especially when he is the son of Italian immigrants. I always wonder how crazy hypocrites like Tancredo get elected to public office.

“There is no support for the concept in the Senate,” said Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.). “There are certain things that we have done as a nation for a long time that I don’t think we’re going to change. Rolling back the clock is not going to solve the problem of immigration.”

Via / Los Angeles Times

Tags: Colorado, Immigration, xenophobia

6 Responses to Xenophobe Tancredo is at it Again

Delliano

December 13th, 2005 at 12:11 am

What is a racist? What makes Tancredo a racist? Because he is against illegal immigration such charges betray an empty arsenal of serious arguments. Have some sense. That word has been thrown around so loosely, it has lacklusk. I am a legal immigrant. As long as you are legal his rhetoric should not affect you.

Gustavo

December 13th, 2005 at 12:41 am

Do you know of Tancredo’s political track record? Do you know of his attacks on Latinos? Tancredo goes beyond being against “illegal immigration.” Tancredo is a xenophobe that detests immigrant cultures. He should really just come out and say that the U.S. is only for those that are anglo and speak english.
Sounds hypocritcal to me that just because you’re “legal” his rhetoric of hate should not affect you.

cindylu

December 13th, 2005 at 3:20 am

Classic drawbridge mentality.

I did a lot of reading on in-state tuition bills for undocumented students this past week (on top of all the legal and education-related arguments). I was disgusted to learn that a student who had spoken out about the need for an in-state tuition bill Colorado was then targeted by Tancredo for deportation. Ugh.

HispanicPundit

December 14th, 2005 at 2:11 am

I did a google search on this guy, as a I have never heard of him before. Apparently, this guy has a reputation of having crazy beliefs, for example:

A Colorado congressman told a radio show host that the U.S. could “take out” Islamic holy sites if Muslim fundamentalist terrorists attacked the country with nuclear weapons….

Talk show host Pat Campbell (search) asked the Littleton Republican how the country should respond if terrorists struck several U.S. cities with nuclear weapons.

“Well, what if you said something like — if this happens in the United States, and we determine that it is the result of extremist, fundamentalist Muslims, you know, you could take out their holy sites,” Tancredo answered.

“You’re talking about bombing Mecca,” Campbell said.

“Yeah,” Tancredo responded.

The congressman later said he was “just throwing out some ideas” and that an “ultimate threat” might have to be met with an “ultimate response.”

Spokesman Will Adams said Sunday the four-term congressman doesn’t support threatening holy Islamic sites but that Tancredo was grappling with the hypothetical situation of a terrorist strike deadlier than the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Or how about this:

He has received press attention for highlighting individual illegal immigrant families for deportation, such as that of an honor student trying to gain admission to the University of Colorado at Boulder, who had publicly complained about having to pay out-of-state tuition rates because he was illegally in the country.

WTF?!?!?

However, it does seem that the right people already know this guy is a nut. Check out what I also dug up:

Outside Madison Square Garden, Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), who chairs the House Immigration Reform Caucus and vigorously opposes Bush’s plan, did have something to say about the issue. At a sparsely attended news conference, Tancredo renounced the party for failing to revamp the platform’s position on immigration.

“The immigration plank in the party platform is full of platitudes, promises and pandering,” he said. Tancredo said he and Karl Rove, Bush’s top political adviser, got into a screaming match over the issue two years ago after the congressman was quoted saying 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 the president’s and Congress’s hands.

“Rove, of course, was quite upset about it and I asked him, I said, ‘Karl, let me ask you something: If it happens the way I just said it, who do you think people should blame? The Elks Club,’ ” Tancredo said. Rove called the congressman “a traitor to the party,” “a traitor to the president” and warned him to never “darken the doorstep of the White House,” he said.

Thatta boy Rove, you tell him.

domingo arong

December 14th, 2005 at 3:20 am

GOP officials, Rep. Tom Tancredo and John C. Eastman should reread the Citizenship Clause.

The phrase “and subject to the jurisdiction thereof,” is enclosed within a PAIR OF COMMAS, with the first comma placed before the coordinating conjunction “and.”

An element enclosed within a PAIR OF COMMAS is “non-restrictive,” meaning the phrase does not modify or qualify the element preceding it; a comma-plus-coordinating-conjunction is regarded as a “single punctuation mark.”

Is this another case of being “hanged by a pair of commas” Lynn Truss popularized?

Grammatically, the Clause is intended to read:

“All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and [all persons] subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and [citizens] of the State wherein they reside.”

The Clause thus confers a SECOND, still unrecognized, category of citizens of the United States–”All persons subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

Senator James Doolittle mentions this category during the debate (at p. 2897, 1st col., Congressional Globe, 39th Congress, 1st Session, May 30, 1866) with the phrase “all persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States” printed in quotation marks:

“But, sir, the Senator has drawn me off from the immediate question before the Senate. The immediate question is whether the language he [Senator Jacob Howard, the author] uses, ‘all persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States,’ includes these Indians…”

Senator Doolittle was fearful of the consequences and implications of the “very language” Senator Howard (the author) employed — “subject to the jurisdiction thereof” — as distinguished from the words “subject to” used two months earlier by the same 39th Congress in a similar provision in the 1866 Civil Rights Act, which read:

“All persons born in the United States and not subject to any foreign power, excluding Indians not taxed, are hereby declared to be citizens of the United States.”

Note that NO comma is placed before the conjunction “and,” which makes the phrase “and not subject to any foreign power” “restrictive,” a modifier or qualifier of the preceding phrase, “All persons born in the United States.”

Note also that, by this SECOND category, the territorial extent of the Fourteenth is consistent with the extent in the companion Thirteenth.

Thus, under the Thirteenth, it is abolition of slavery [1] “within the United States”, or [2] “any place subject to their jurisdiction”; while, under the Fourteenth, it is citizenship to {1] “All persons born in the United States” and [2] “[all persons] subject to the jurisdiction thereof.”

Based on the remarks by Judiciary Committee Chairman Senator Lyman Trumbull and Senator Howard (the author) during the debate, this SECOND category conveys the meaning:

“All persons owing allegiance within the extent or territory over which the constitutional power of the United States extends”–or birth within the realm and within the allegiance.

At that time in 1866, this SECOND CATEGORY embraced “persons” NOT “in the United States” but within the following places “subject to the jurisdiction thereof”:

–the 12 ceded territories pending statehood
–the 11 Confederate States awaiting readmission to the Union
–the District of Columbia.

cindylu

December 15th, 2005 at 3:09 am

HP,
I can’t believe you didn’t know about Tancredo. Dude, you’re slipping.

VivirLatino

Xenophobe Tancredo is at it Again

6 Responses to Xenophobe Tancredo is at it Again

Hola!

Get our RSS Feed!