April 02, 2007

Ron Brynaert/Raw Story posts Tancredo smear

Congressman Tom Tancredo (R-CO), a "dark horse" candidate for the 2008 Republican presidential nomination admitted in an interview that he is a "controversial figure" who is sometimes prone to saying "outrageous things."

Last November, Esquire Magazine wrote, "Tancredo is Tancrazy. Made his name calling for mass deportations of illegal immigrants. Recently was the featured speaker at a meeting of the League of the South, described by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a 'neo-Confederate hate group.' In a rare moment of clarity, he called his own suggestion that he run for president 'idiotic.'"

Brynaert was last noticed by me downplaying the North American Union, something which every FOIA-obtained document makes clear is a distinct plan by Bush, Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez, Chertoff, and their counterparts in Canada and Mexico.

As for Esquire, do they have a cite of Tancredo "calling for mass deportations of illegal immigrants"? That's a key claim from Brynaert's second paragraph, so perhaps he should verify it instead of just repeating an Esquire smear. Can Brynaert identify Tancredo's actual policy vis-a-vis deportations, and then provide a correction?

As for the SPLC, they seem to define "hate group" as "anyone who disagrees with us". They also have an indirect link to the Mexican government; perhaps Brynaert could look into that.

And, whether the meeting he appeared at was that of the LOS is an open question. The LOS denies it was their meeting, and Tancredo's spokesman says it was organized by "Americans Have Had Enough! and the Sons of Confederate Veterans".

So, why is Brynaert posting unverified and very possibly false information? Cui bono?

Related:
Sleazy Think Progress, Anderson Cooper lie about Tom Tancredo
Tancredo may run for president; Chris Cannon begins smears?
Violent MSU lefties disrupt Tancredo speech
Jeb Bush writes letter re: Tancredo's Miami remark
Tim Dickinson/Rolling Stone's misleading, pro-illegal immigration propaganda

UPDATE: To make this clear, there's a huge difference between supporting mass deportations and supporting eventual deportation (or self-deportation) of a large number of current illegal aliens. Namely, the first would take place over a fairly short period of time. It would not only be a logistic nightmare if it went well, if it went poorly it could result in a great deal of civil disturbance due to the fact that illegal aliens are clustered in urban centers. I refer readers to the July 26, 2005 Darryl Fears article "$41 Billion Cost Projected To Remove Illegal Entrants" (link):

Will Adams, a spokesman for Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), an outspoken advocate of stronger immigration laws, called the study an "an interesting intellectual exercise" by liberals that is "useless . . . because no one's talking about" employing mass deportation as a tactic.

"No one's talking about buying planes, trains and automobiles to get them out of the country," Adams said. "The vast number of illegal immigrants are coming for jobs. Congressman Tancredo wants to go after the employers."

Posted to Politics at April 2, 2007 12:10 PM