Tancredo's Stupid Pandering

While no big fan of McCain, if Obama gets the two more SCOTUS appointments he might, don't tell me we're better off because McCain lost. We'll be living with the result of that for decades. And for Tancredo to be correct, one has to assume he thinks conservatives are just a bunch of sheep who wouldn't be protesting big government under McCain, just as they began doing under Bush.

McCain may be wrong on many things, but he was more right on many than Obama will ever be. But the SCOTUS is where Obama is most likely to make his mark on history. And it won't be a history any intelligent conservative should want to see. We'd have been better off with McCain, as unpleasant as that reality may be to entertain.

“Thank God John McCain lost the election,” the former GOP congressman from Colorado and 2008 presidential candidate said to cheers and applause from the 600 grassroots activists in attendance.

In Tancredo’s view, the Tea Party movement would never have been sparked under a McCain administration because Republican Party leaders and activists would have been muffled from criticizing their president. Meanwhile, McCain would be cutting deals with House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Comments

[Jeremy]

Dan:

I understand your logic, but I am not sure I agree. No doubt, that with the Supreme Court appointments (and many other things) a McCain Presidency would be far preferable to an Obama one-- but I could easily see McCain pulling a GWB and trying to nominate poor nominees with questionable conservative credentials (as GWB tried to do before we were lucky enough to get Roberts and Alito). And frankly, I do not think the Tea Party movement or any of the conservative resurgence would be anywhere near as big as it has been had McCain been President. I think the conservative movement was really hampered under GWB because of a reluctance to criticize a Republican President forcefully.

The election of Obama and his subsequent actions really opened up a window for a lot of folks about how radical the Dem agenda was. Meanwhile, McCain would have moved the political positions of America's "conservative" party dangerously to the left, causing long-term damage to the conservative cause.

So I really can see going either way on this. I'm all for necessary comrpmises, but there are also times for a strong stand on your principles that gives you a short-term loss, but the potential for a much bigger long-term gain. Given the generally baleful record of GWB (IMHO) and the prospects of worse from McCain, I think that 4 years of Obama is an acceptable, if painful price to pay for a long-term resurgence of conservative, Constitutional government in America.

[Sara]

I have a sneaking suspicion you dislike Tancredo's statement even more because Glenn Beck was the first to say it.

[Al in St. Lou]

With McCain, we would've moved more slowly toward socialism, and therefore, Tancredo is right: The Tea Party movement would be a shadow of what it is now.

Of course, for the near future, we would've been much better off with McCain and McCain's appointments to the SCOTUS.

[Dan Riehl]

This is not the way to win, folks:

http://rawstory.com/2010/02/tea-party-opening-speaker-suggests-blacks-voting/

[SallyVee]

The Tea is thoroughly poisoned, as I originally concluded (at the same time hoping I'd be proven wrong). This is beyond bad judgment, and way beyond a little "stupid pandering." This tells the whole story, and it doesn't have a happy ending.

Since Tommy Two-Cents left congress and got fleeced by Bernie Madoff I guess he's been looking for a way to exhume himself and glom onto something - anything. What a pathetic moron. It is extremely distressing that he was chosen (and presumable paid) to lead off this event. It's a total deal killer.

The tea is starting to look about as toxic as Obama Kool-Aid.

Friends don't let friends drink the tea.

[Dave in Alaska]

Well Dan, Looks like you got your 15 minutes of fame on this subject, all the Tea Party movement can say now is ...Et tu Brute...

[Dan Riehl]

Screw off, Dave - it isnt about fame for me. It's about winning elections. Deal with it, or go stick your head in the Alaska snow where it may belong.

[Evil Red Scandi]

I agree wholeheartedly with Jeremy and Al. The majority of conservatives and libertarians have been focusing so hard on the short-term battles that they've largely lost the long-term war. Something either needs to push the Republican party further and, most importantly, permanently towards a small-government mentality, or another party or parties need to rise up challenge them.

[Jeff]

Oh, yes ... thank God O-6bama got elected. Becasue without the Tea Parties I wouldn't get asked to speak in front of anybody ... thats it T-man, more Red on Red fragging ...

the Tea Party movement is simply the tip of the iceberg in American politics today ...

When African Americans start voting for their long term self interests the party of Jim Crow will be finished ...

[Thomas]

I agree with Tancredo.

[SallyVee]

The more I think about this and the more I look at the completely lame & dysfunctional website of Tea Party Nation - plus the list of participants and sponsors - the angrier I get. This Know Nothing disease must be like Herpes... it never really goes away, just lies dormant for periods of time. It is starting to feel like the Summer of 2007 all over again, with all the same losers, demagogues and hysterics resurfacing. This is highly, highly distressing.

There is still time for Palin to extract and evade, isn't there? Where is Seal Team #8 this weekend? Sarah has a perfect reason and a perfect way to do something very intelligent and effective to help lead sincere people away from dangerous and self destructive activity.

But I fear no one will heed the warning. I think Fox has a whole weekend of prime time programming set up to follow this convention... figures.

[Jack Okie]

I'm with Tancredo, also. With McCain things wouldn't have come to a head. The frog would still be at a slow boil.

With more and more folks realizing the 10th Amendment means what it says, I look for some civil disobedience from states like Oklahoma, Texas and others. There is a confrontation coming; states invoking Nullification won't care as much about the composition of the Supreme Court.

Nominees to the supreme court would be quite different were the 17th Amendment to be repealed.

[astonerii]

Um, yeah. SCOTUS appointments from the ever accommodating John McCain would be so much better than those of Obama. If that is your argument for why America would have been better off having McCain as president today and putting off the revolution until later, it is not a very good one.

First, John McCain is not conservative on anything other than defense, and Lieberman is just as conservative as he is on that issue. McCain would be able to always get a few republicans to vote for legislation that the democrats propose and republicans would oppose normally, for instance, $850B slush fund called TARP. If it were a democrat president, or the election had already been completed with Obama as the victor, do you really think that TARP would have passed? What kinds of legislation would a McCain want to have on the agenda? Health care, Cap and Trade, Immigration Reform, we all know he would not support tax cuts to get the economy going, as he already voted against and criticized the ones Bush got passed. The only thing I see different between a heavy democrat majority in the house and senate and a McCain instead of Obama president for legislation would have been a slightly less absurd $787B 'stimulus' package and no Card Check on the table.

As far as court appointees, it has happened over and over again that a supposed 'conservative' nominee that can get passed in a senate as democratic as it is today has a 75% likely hood to veer far left as soon as they get the permanent life position of arbiter. McCain would go out of his way to appoint tokens to the court, and in the zeal to appear diversified would err on the side of liberal in every instance.

At the end of the day, a McCain presidency would leave Tea Party activists no target, would not net us any significant benefit on court appointees, but would still have worked just as hard to destroy the fabric of the American Nation. I will never, under any circumstance be convinced that the America of 2020 would have been better off with a McCain presidency at the expense of an Obama presidency. This is the once in a generation required educational moment that America needs to have happen in order to remind it why conservatism is the right path for our country.

[Ragspierre]

I have written for years that a Fabian McAnus posed a MUCH greater danger to the US than the radical Obama.

I still hold that view. More today, now that what I call OPERATION OVER-REACH seems to be going better than I could have hoped.

McAnus would have been multiples worse, and our response (as a people) much less exercised.

[Al in St. Lou]

Just because some left-wingers take Tancredo out of context (and mispunctuate his remarks) doesn't make him wrong. Trancredo said that we need a "civics literacy test," and he's right. Frankly, I'd prefer the more radical solution of only letting freeholders (people who own real estate that isn't mortgaged) vote. The problem is having too many voters who don't really understand the consequences of bad policies. Of course, I would never suggest that now is a good time for a candidate to run on such voter restrictions. I don't know how we get to where we should be from where we are.

[astonerii]

"Trancredo said that we need a "civics literacy test," and he's right. Frankly, I'd prefer the more radical solution of only letting freeholders (people who own real estate that isn't mortgaged) vote."

I have always thought that the best way to fix the problem with the decline of democracy due to the ability of 51% to vote money for themselves from the 49% was that people should be given a number of votes based on the amount of taxes they pay. So for federal elections, your taxes would be 1 for SS taxes, 1 for Medicare and Medicaid Taxes, 1 for the 10% bracket, 1 for the 15% bracket, 1 for the 20% bracket, 1 for the 25% bracket, 1 for the 30% bracket and 1 for the 36% bracket and if there are any other federal specific taxes, they would each add one for each bracket. So a person who pays no taxes at the end of the year and paid no SS or Medicare/medicaid taxes would get to vote and would be counted once. A person who pays all the taxes would be counted once for being a citizen and up to 10 more times for all the taxes he/she pays. Business owners may end up with even higher counts. Considering the fact that 50% of the population pays a net 0% of the federal budget, shows that our current system is broken. When people are not expected to be responsible, in this case, by paying for government expenditures, then they will not act in a responsible way.

On the other hand, the reason I make this argument is because no one believes that some people deserve more or less votes than others, but there is a break between people who think that some people should or should not be responsible to pay for the benefits of having a government. My idea is the following. Constitutional amendment that bans the federal government from imposing any kind of tax at all. The amendment would grant the federal government the license to print a sum of money that is based on a strict % of gross domestic product. I am not an economist, so I am not sure what the overall ramification of this would be, but I doubt it would be much more than a small bump in inflation.

[Al in St. Lou]

Fixing the value of money is as simple (sarcasm alert!) as going back to a gold standard. Having a gold standard means the government must sell gold to anyone hold U.S. dollars at one fixed price. Severing money from the gold standard has been the root of many of our problems, IMHO.

[Anon]

It's too early to say....Obama has so far been spectacularly bad, but he might learn and improve...even get re elected, we don't know. Eight years of Obama as president would have to be much worse than a McCain presidency, though I do agree that w/McCain as president there would have been no Tea Party movement.

I happen to agree w/Tancredo that a citizen should have to demonstrate some kind of basic proficiency and understanding in order to vote, hold office, serve on a jury, etc...but that will never happen, so its kind of pointless to bring it up.

In terms of the Supreme Court, again,no one knows, Stevens AND Kennedy could retire and if that happens then the balance of the court shifts from 5/4 conservative to 5/4 liberal and I suspect that break out on the court would make the Warren Court look centrist, and that would be SPECTACULARLY bad for the country.

[Thomas]

I love how whenever someone disagrees with Dan, he immediately resorts to juvenile name calling.

[Dave in Alaska]

Dear Dan,
I Made the above observation due to the fact that your name is being used in conjunction with the ABC story, the way it is being used is harmful to the movement. Left wing bloggers love you right now, you have either unintentionally or intentionally given a stick to the left to beat the Tea Party movement with.
Oh and thank you for the insult, let's me know I hit a nerve.

PS...you have been blogging too long to be so thin skinned...

[PCP Smoker]

Dont be so hard on him. Be honest, were you not wishing for a series of events to shock common people out of their fascination with socialism? It might not be good for the republic, but I can guarantee you there is a lot less support and patience for left wing causes now than 5 years ago.

[archer52]

The two things wrong with McCain would have been the cover the left would have had moving the healthcare debacle through the system. And the fact that idiot would have signed it so he could stand alongside Teddy R. FDR and LBJ. Don't fool yourself for a minute, a leopard doesn't change his stripes and McCain was the one who put together a law that guaranteed incumbents an advantage while damaging the first amendment.

No thanks. I'll take the crazy progressive right now because in one year his actions have awoken millions to the threat McCain, Graham, Snowe, Reid, Clinton and the rest have posed to this nation for decades.

I hope he is run out in the next election. We need more Mike Pence types to clear the deck and start all over.

[archer52]

The two things wrong with McCain would have been the cover the left would have had moving the healthcare debacle through the system. And the fact that idiot would have signed it so he could stand alongside Teddy R. FDR and LBJ. Don't fool yourself for a minute, a leopard doesn't change his stripes and McCain was the one who put together a law that guaranteed incumbents an advantage while damaging the first amendment.

No thanks. I'll take the crazy progressive right now because in one year his actions have awoken millions to the threat McCain, Graham, Snowe, Reid, Clinton and the rest have posed to this nation for decades.

I hope he is run out in the next election. We need more Mike Pence types to clear the deck and start all over.

[ddub]

With McCain, the status quo would have remained and that's unacceptable. Mr. Riehl , you seem to prefer the slow drip to socialism rather than an open faucet, I prefer neither.

Glenn Beck and Trancedo are both right, I'm glad McCain lost.