Well, this is pretty surprising:
In fact, it’s not clear Tancredo is in line with the mainstream, social conservative wing of the GOP he seeks to align himself with. According to campaign finance reports, one of Tancredo’s biggest financial backers has been the family of Dr. John Tanton, the founder of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR). Wall Street Journal editorial-page features writer Jason Riley wrote a devastating piece about the organization back in 2004, in which the group’s pro-abortion and pro-eugenics roots were revealed.
Tanton is also one of the most prominent conservative financiers of Planned Parenthood in the United States, having helped found in the mid-1960s the first Planned Parenthood chapter in northern Michigan.
Tancredo appears to have embraced FAIR’s extreme and repugnant policy positions, having accepted more than $20,000 from the FAIR PAC and personal donations from Tanton between 1996 and 2006. Over the past ten years, according to Federal Election Commission reports, FAIR has provided more than $15,000 to Tancredo campaigns and PACs. Tanton has given Tancredo $7,000, while donating $28,000 to FAIR’s political action arm.
“There are others out there who are prepared to be tough on immigration policy,” says a consultant for Republican House member from a western state. “Republicans and social conservatives need to be asking Tancredo some tough questions. I don’t believe he’s a pro-life candidate, not by a long shot, and the people he’s associated with, who back him, are not part of the mainstream. To disavow these people now is just too late.”
I’m not really sure what to make of this. The lack of a single source willing to go on record for the article is telling and the “pro-eugenics roots” quote makes it seem like a hit piece. If this is true though, is there any 2008 Republican that doesn’t have a potentially fatal flaw?
January 16th, 2007 at 10:41 pm
Tancreado has just announced yesterday and now this. Sheesh.. Should any of us be surprised?
January 16th, 2007 at 10:48 pm
I think Tancredo had several fatal flaws before this. What’s Huckabee’s, or Thompson’s fatal flaw?
January 16th, 2007 at 11:05 pm
Huckabee will have Club for Growth and CATO attempting to torpedo him from the moment he enters the race. No idea about Thompson though.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:19 pm
See, this is kind of like Pat Robertson saying that Sam Brownback is the best Senator. Not exactly the kind of person you want endorsing your run for President.
January 16th, 2007 at 11:32 pm
Pro-eugenics?! LOL.
Seriously though, it’s not so surprising. Tancredo strikes me as more of a paleocon than a so-con, and depending on the breed, many paleocons are more isolationst-libertarian than anything.
January 17th, 2007 at 12:04 am
These are desperate, warmed-over smears from 2004.
For instance, the eugenics smear is analogous to trying to smear recipients of Ford Foundation money as anti-semites because of Henry Ford.
More on the smear at my link.
January 17th, 2007 at 1:33 am
Tancredo’s rhetoric and actions have always been on the side of pro-life as far as I know. But I suppose guys in his position have to scrape for their money where they can get it.
I agree with Nathan…this was not by any means Tancredo’s “fatal flaw”. I’d say his real flaw was borderline lunacy and verbal grenades.
Huckabee’s flaw is the heartburn he gives fiscal conservatives. To all the Nusrats out there who bemoan the so-cons trampling them for the last 8 years, the Huckster is more of the same. I don’t know much about Thompson yet. But that’s life, nobody’s perfect.
January 17th, 2007 at 1:52 am
Dave,
Interesting. I thought most paleoconservatism shares the same so-con cultural positions but are extremely isolationist, whereas so-cons aren’t necessarily. Which is why I was confused about Tancredo’s not so solid Pro-Life credentials.
January 17th, 2007 at 3:40 am
I am not too concerned by where any politician gets his money. Politics makes strange bedfellows. It always has. It always will.
January 17th, 2007 at 9:45 am
I’m sorry, I don’t see the problem here. Tancredo is accepting money on behalf of the FAIR PAC, that has nothing to do with being pro-choice. If the founder of FAIR is also involved in Planned Parenthood, what does that have to do with Tancredo. Tancredo is Pro-Life, end of story.
Michael
January 17th, 2007 at 9:55 am
I am by no means a fan of Tancredo, and he’s definately on my “no way in hell” list among Republican contenders. But to take donations from FAIR, and spin it as pro-choice is a blatant misrepresentation of the truth. FAIR’s support of Tancredo indicates that they support his well-established position on immigration, which anyone who cares already knows.
January 17th, 2007 at 10:14 am
This is nothing more then a hit piece, the VOTES by Tancredo speak for themselves:
Abortion Issues
(Back to top)
2006 Representative Tancredo supported the interests of the Planned Parenthood 0 percent in 2006.
2005-2006 Representative Tancredo supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 100 percent in 2005-2006.
2005 Representative Tancredo supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 0 percent in 2005.
2004 Representative Tancredo supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 0 percent in 2004.
2003-2004 Representative Tancredo supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 91 percent in 2003-2004.
2003 Representative Tancredo supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 0 percent in 2003.
2001-2002 Representative Tancredo supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 100 percent in 2001-2002.
2001 Representative Tancredo supported the interests of the Planned Parenthood 0 percent in 2001.
2001 Representative Tancredo supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 0 percent in 2001.
2000 Representative Tancredo supported the interests of the NARAL Pro-Choice America 0 percent in 2000.
1999-2000 Representative Tancredo supported the interests of the National Right to Life Committee 100 percent in 1999-2000.
Tancredo received a 100% rating for his PRO-LIFE votes on the following issues:
1 – Terri Schiavo: Federal court review (S. 686)
2 – Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act: (CIANA): hostile Scott Amendment
3 – Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA): hostile Lee Amendment
4 – Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act (CIANA): passage
5 – Funding of embryo-killing stem cell research (H.R. 810)
6 – Abortion in military medical facilities
7 – Coercive abortion / United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA)
8 – Abortion in military medical facilities
9 – Funding of embryo-killing stem cell research (H.R. 810): veto override
10 – Child Interstate Abortion Notification Act: (CIANA): passage of revised bill
11 – Unborn Child Pain Awareness Act: passage
January 17th, 2007 at 1:37 pm
This is a great example of opposition research finding out some isolated fact about a politician, and then trumpeting it out-of-context.
All people make mistakes. All politicians make compromises. We have to determine what the body of evidence says about the candidate, not just one or two isolated instances.
January 17th, 2007 at 2:31 pm
This doesn’t make any for someone who votes pro-life at every possible opportunity.
January 26th, 2007 at 8:48 pm
It is pretty obvious this site has it’s own agenda- Sorry, you’ve
lost your credibility.
January 26th, 2007 at 8:51 pm
For the record, you’ve convinced me to vote for Tancredo; and if any of the
neo-cons get the nomination, I’m voting third party.