Tom Tancredo is best known for being a rattlesnake on immigration issues, but he’s hard right on social issues too (e.g., he supports an abortion ban.).

In this conversation with KNUS’ Peter Boyles last week, Tancredo says it’s not what gay people do that bothers him. He says he doesn’t care. But he does have a problem with gay people forcing hetero people, like him, to break their religious convictions in order to respect, include, or accommodate gays.

TANCREDO: Now, on the one hand, you know, Peter, our whole thing in this campaign and in my life is, essentially, “Look, I want to control just my own life. I don’t want to control yours.” Okay? That’s really and truly the bottom line for me. So, I don’t want to control the lives of people who have a different opinion about their sexuality and that sort of thing.
BOYLES: Pshhh! Who cares!
TANCREDO: I just don’t want them to try to control the lives of people –
BOYLES: Of others.
TANCREDO: –who have deeply held religious beliefs and are trying to, you know, adhere to them. And, so, that’s the only sticking point, here. And if it weren’t for that, I mean, I got no problems with this.

Listen to Boyles and Tancredo discuss why they want gays on an island 6.5.14

So Tancredo is saying, in a circular fashion, that he really doesn’t tolerate gays at all, unless they could be on a planet-within-our-planet by themselves, where they wouldn’t ruffle anyone’s bogus religious convictions.

Would Tancredo say we should defend the right of a bully to punch someone in the nose?  That’s not an exact analogy, but discrimination and bigotry are actually pretty close to violence, especially in the big picture. Just ask a gay person who’s been denied same-sex benefits, a lease, a job, opportunities for advancement, or a cake for their wedding, dear God.

Religion is Tancredo’s recycled strategy to justify discrimination, with Boyles lap dogging it up and throwing fuel on Tancredo’s fire.

Someone in the KNUS studio needs to dump ice water on Boyles.

“We love this guy,” said KNUS radio host Peter Boyles, as he introduced gubernatorial candidate Tom Tancredo and asked him about the demise of House Majority Leader Eric Cantor.

“If I were a drinking man, I’d have been drunk last night,” Tancredo told Boyles. “I’d have been celebrating like crazy. I still went to bed about 10. It was a wonderful evening. The next domino is when Boehner resigns. And that may come.”

“Who knows how it will play out?” Tancredo told Boyles, amplifying on a statement distributed to reporters. “Who would have guessed that this would have happened? Who would have guessed that the recalls would have gone the way they did? Who would have guessed that Amendment 66 would have gone down in absolute flames? Oh man! I’m telling you, there are so many things happening. And who knows? Maybe after the vote on June 24, people will say, ‘Who would have thought Tancredo could win the Republican primary and then maybe the general election!’ And they’ll say, ‘Can you imagine this guy beat an incumbent Democrat.’ Who knows what’s in the cards?”

“We are extremely excited that this is the silver stake through the heart of amnesty,” said Tancredo on KNUS. “… The battleground for this issue will now devolve, if you will, to the states. We’ve got to do things that will make it uncomfortable for people who are here illegally to be here. You gotta be able to pass things like e-verify…. States can do this, if they have the guts.”

Tancredo agreed with Boyles’ lie that Obama himself could not pass e-verify and get a job due to his phony Social Security number.

Birther talk-radio host fails to test depth of CO State Senator’s birther-related views

As news spread last night that Tea-Party Republicans in Virginia ejected House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Arapahoe Country Tea Party activists–here in Colorado–at their monthly meeting were hearing from gubernatorial candidate Tom Tancredo. And Bob Beuprtez was a no-show.

Celebrating Cantor’s victory with theme music (“We Are the Champions“) and bravado on the air this morning, KLZ radio-host Randy Corporon talked about last night’s Arapahoe County Tea Party meeting:

“Bob Beauprez didn’t show up. But Tom Tancredo did. He was an unannounced visitor. He’s been hitting a lot of Tea-Party and Liberty groups as the meetings pop up. And so…with Bob Beauprez not showing up at the Arapahoe Tea Party meeting, Tom Tancredo had some extra time to get his message out there.”

Corporon, who’s Chairman of the Arapahoe County Tea Party group, said on air that people at the meeting discussed “how to take advantage of the monumental event” of the Cantor defeat, and they decided that they need to get the message out to Republican candidates that “what happened to Eric Cantor can happen to you.”

Bob Beauprez wasn’t there to hear the message, but Tancredo was.

Listen to Randy Corporon celebrates Cantor defeat on KLZ 6.11.14

Republican gubernatorial candidate Scott Gessler launched an ad yesterday attacking his rival Tom Tancredo as a loser because Tanc lost his 2010 campaign for governor.

The conservative radio world isn’t buying Gessler’s attack.

In a conversation with Tancredo a couple weeks ago, here’s what KNUS’ Dan Caplis had to say on the topic:

CAPLIS: I like Scott, but I thought his shot on you was very unfair…And here’s why. I agree with you. I think it was the best race you ever ran—-that race for governor. I think you did something very noble in trying to bail out, you know, a terrible situation, created by the Scott McGinnis / Dan Maes mess.

TANCREDO: Yeah. Yeah.

CAPLIS: And it’s so interesting. People forget. I mean, you ran a very good race, and, full disclosure, I think I contributed to your campaign. If I didn’t, I meant to. But I know that I publicly supported you.

TANCREDO: There’s going to be another chance. You’ve got another chance.

CAPLIS: [laughs] That’s good! I like that! But here’s my point. You jumped into this mess. And I remember, there were national political experts on Election Day predicting you were going to win that race! …And honestly, Tom, I think in that race, if it had been under normal circumstances, and you had just been the nominee of the GOP, and you’d have had the infrastructure in tact from day one, etc., I think there’s a real good chance you win that race.

TANCREDO: I do too.

In his 2010 gubernatorial run, Tancredo lost by 14 points in three-way race. If he’d gotten Maes’ 10 points, he’d have been within about 4 points of Hick. Still a loser, but still.

For a variety of reasons, I don’t think Tancredo would have beaten Hick, even if Maes dropped out, but Caplis has his historical facts correct here, for a change.

And if you’re going to get into a spitting match about who’s the bigger loser, Tancredo or Beauprez, Beauprez wins for once. (The Gessler ad also calls Beauprez a loser.)

In 2006, Beauprez lost by 17 points in a head-to-head race against Bill Ritter, with no Dan-Maes distraction.

Don’t get me wrong. Anybody who calls Obama a “radical,” as Tancredo does in his own political ad below, is an intellectual loser in my book, so I personally agree with Gessler, who’s a radical himself.

But Caplis had it mostly right in his analysis of Gessler’s attack of Tanc, if you look at the numbers and the historical facts.

Here’s more of the conversation on KNUS May 16:

TANCREDO: So, [the 2010 gubernatorial race] was a lot of fun, and I enjoyed it. And I do not regret a single minute of it. So, I’ll tell you, this is what happens. This is what we’ve tried to avoid. It’s why I tell them all the time, “Let’s not debate.” And I’ll tell you another thing. Scott, listen to me carefully, here, because I told this to [CO State Senator Greg] Brophy, too. And this is the truest thing I can tell you about politics. In a multi-candidate race, when one person attacks another, goes negative on another, both those candidates go down in polls. Because the votes go to another one of the people that are out there.

CAPLIS: Hmm. Hmm. Interesting. Because there’s that other option.

TANCREDO: That’s right, another option. You get mad at the people who are attacking, and then you think–. But you also get mad at the guy that is being attacked, and so it goes to number three or four.

CAPLIS: [laughs] You know, you –.

TANCREDO: You’ve got to remember, this will not help you, Scott! I guarantee you!

PETER BOYLES: In our lives, we’ve all seen this, where there is a husband or a wife who is cheating in a relationship. The third person goes to one or the other and tells, “Joe, Mary’s cheating,” [or] “Mary, Joe’s cheating.” At the end of the day, both of them hate the guy [inaudible]. And that’s what this is about.

TANCREDO: Yes.

CAPLIS: And what is so interesting to me, is Scott has so many positives things to talk about.

The primary season has illuminated some big flipping and flopping by Republican candidates, leaving lingering questions in the minds of the three people following this stuff.

One of the strangest unanswered questions is: Why did gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez first support and then oppose the “individual mandate,” which is, of course, the key provision of Romneycare and Obamacare? It requires everyone to get health insurance.

The issue came up in April on KVOR’s Jeff Crank show. Crank is an anti-Obamacare freak, so even if he knew about Beauprez’s flip, you wouldn’t expect Crank to tell his listeners that Beauprez was once a fan of the foundation of Obamacare:

BEAUPREZ: To Obamacare, specifically, Jeff, count me in the camp that says we still need to repeal it and replace it. But I’m also realistic enough to know that that’s not likely to happen, even if we do take over control of the United States Senate, we’ll still have Barack Obama there and I doubt he’s inclined to repeal the whole bill – to sign off on that. So, we’re probably a couple years away with a new president before we can get it done. What we can do, and what I look forward to doing, is everything within a governor’s power and the state’s power to push back, especially on this Medicaid bomb that is coming our way. We are going to have to stand firm on that because it is going to break the states. We’ll be going down the path of the Californias and the city of Detroit if we’re not careful and get our arms around this. I think the real push can come from a collaboration of governors. And I look forward to working with many of them that I already know out here: Butch Otter, I served with—he’s in Idaho; Gary Herbert in Utah; Matt Meade, a great guy in Wyoming; Susana Martinez; Mary Fallon, and on and on. Bobby Jindal’s been an absolute champion, just out with his own new healthcare plan that talks about a real healthcare reform—what it would look like. And not surprisingly, he expands on free-market principles: HSAs, more consumer choice, putting decisions in the hands of consumers, not just pushing tens of millions of people on to traditional Medicaid, as he puts it.

Even if the GOP fire against Obamacare is dying, you’d think reporters would do Republican voters a favor and seek an explanation from Beauprez on how he went from point a) praising Romneycare and saying a mandate buy health insurance is like a law requiring you to buy auto insurance to point b) denouncing Obamacare, saying we need “more consumer choice,” and essentially leaving the poor to scrap for healthcare. What’s the evolution of Beauprez’s thinking here?

If this isn’t information that a Republican primary voter would want to hear in 2014, what is?

Heard on the latest “Devil’s Advocate” show, hosted by libertarian/conservative Jon Caldara:

Caldara: Now, let’s assume for some reason, you couldn’t run for this primary. You got struck by lightning. Who would you throw your support behind? Who would you like to see win that primary? …

Tom Tancredo: I would like to see Bob Beauprez, Scott McInnis, or Mike Kopp win it.

Caldara: Oh, what a politician’s answer. And you were just telling me what an un-politician you are.

It’s an innocent mistake for Tanc to confuse Scott McInnis with Scott Gessler. We all err. But it points to a problem for Caldara, not to mention the pack of Republicans running for governor.

Caldara is seated directly in front of Tancredo’s nose and the name “McInnis” comes out of Tanc’s lips and over Caldara’s head. He probably wouldn’t have noticed if Tancredo had confused Bob Schaffer with Bob Beauprez or Frank McNulty with Mike Kopp. They blend together, don’t they?

You have to think Caldara would have raised an eyebrow if McPlagiarist had walked into the TV studio and tried to present himself as Tom Tancredo, but who knows. But if McInnis tried to pass himself off as Beauprez, it’s almost a certainty Caldara wouldn’t have noticed any difference. Is there one, besides the mustache or lack thereof?

Unbiased observers, like ColoradoPols and Mike Littwin of the Colorado Independent, have concluded that Tom Tancredo has been winning the GOP gubernatorial debates by not showing up.

But Tancredo is apparently willing to put his winning streak on the line by debating Hick, if Tanc wins the GOP primary.

That is, if the topics are okay with him and if journalists asking questions are screened and kept on a short leash.

Tancredo: I saw the other day that [national GOP Party Chair] Reince Priebus is saying, “You know what? We’re not going to do that anymore. We’re going to change—either we’re going to have fewer, change the format.” And I intend to do exactly the same thing if I am the nominee. We will establish what we believe to be the most effective way of, quote, “debating”, even with Hickenlooper. And it will be on a single topic. We will have, what—two or three debates on individual topics. We will help determine who are the people going to be that are asking questions. Or else, we won’t do those debates either. Because, when you give the media the free rein in this sort of thing, it does not work good—it does not work well for Republicans.

Another way of saying what Tancredo said: When Republicans have to answer questions from reporters, it doesn’t work out well for them. But it works out well for Democrats?

Obviously, it can work out either way for either party, as you know if you follow political debates. It depends mostly on the abilities of the candidates, and showcasing those abilities (or lack thereof) is the point of a debate.

Republicans like Tancredo like to think professional journalists are out to get them, but a guy like Sengenberger–or any reporter who happens to see Tancredo–should correct him.

The Colorado Springs Gazette tried to make an argument this week that gubernatorial candidate Tom Tancredo stands further out of the mainstream than his rivals, Bob Beauprez, Mike Kopp, and Scott Gessler.

Even if you missed last night’s 1950’s revival at Colorado Christian University and you haven’t read the clown-car series on ColoradoPols, you know that’s a tough case to make when you start looking at specific issues. Women, immigration, environment, energy, etc. There ain’t that much difference among them on the craziness meter.

Just spin the radio dial, for example, and up pops Beauprez, saying something wild, like agreeing with a talk-show host that Obama is a Muslim. John McCain had the guts, you recall, to eloquently reject the suggestion that Obama was an Arab. But not Beauprez, as of Sept. 30, 2013, on the Charles Butler Show, Genesis Communications Network.

Butler: I conclude that Mr. Obama has never lost his Muslim beliefs or his Muslim leanings. At the end of the day here’s a principle in Islam called Taqyyia. And I believe that is what Obama has been practicing for the last thirty-some years, is Taqyyia. And it’s an Islamic principle where you can deceive a non-Muslim into thinking that you are non-Muslim, in the interest of pushing, putting forth Muslim interests. And I’m looking at Mr. Obama and everything he’s done, and the media doesn’t cover it this way but when you look at the facts, everything he has done thus far has been to support and destabilize stable regimes for Muslim rule, whether it’s Muslim Brotherhood, whether it’s Hezbollah, he’s supported those things.

Beauprez: That’s why so many of our allies, Israel for the primary among them, but that’s why so much of our status around the world, our respect among our friends around the world–

Butler: Am I telling the truth, Bob? Or am I off on this? Help me out, here

Beauprez: Absolutely.

That’s a Gazette “standard bearer of fiscal and social conservatism” talking?

Last week, ColordoPols reported that gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez agreed, in no uncertain terms, that the federal government has the right to require you, dear citizen of the United States, to have health insurance. It’s called the “individual mandate” and, of course, it’s the foundation of Romneycare and, later, Obamacare.

But once Mitt Romney became irrelevant, Beauprez changed his mind, with no explanation. And reporters, who’ve pretty much ignored the Pols story, have yet to ask him for one, even though there was ample coverage of Mitt Romney’s endorsement of Beauprez.

Someone should ask Beauprez about it, because this is supposed to be the election when Republicans are so hot mad about Obamacare (and guns) that they’re going to submit mail-in ballots it droves.

As to how the Romney flip is playing out within the GOP base, OGREeXposed.com, which frequently critiques the GOP establishment, had this to say last week:

Perhaps the most concerning and disturbing revelation concerns Beauprez’s position on the individual healthcare mandate, the lynchpin to Obamacare and Amycare (Colorado’s version of the Obamacare exchange.)

In a 2007 op-ed discovered by the far-left blog ColoradoPols, Beauprez clearly and unequivocally supported the imposition of an individual healthcare mandate. Beauprez equated the mandated purchase of health insurance with car insurance. This, of course, was closely related to his endorsement of Mitt Romney for President in the 2008 election. Beauprez would later distance himself from supporting the individual mandate—yet another “both ways Bob” moment.

Beauprez is no stranger to controversy over fundamental policy questions. During his 2006 primary run for governor, Beauprez was accused by his primary opponent Marc Holtzman of joining far-left Democrats and big-government Republicans in supporting referendum C. Referendum C permitted the state legislature to spend above the limits imposed by the Tax Payer Bill of Rights, and ended the tax payer refunds which became so popular. Beauprez was accused of supporting and then opposing Referendum C, which is how he was tagged with the nick-name “both ways Bob” in the first place.

It looks like Beauprez’ previous support of the individual health-care mandate resulted from his you-endorse-me-I’ll-endorese-you, relationship with Romney. But you wonder what good Romney does for Beauprez anyway.

OGREeXposed bluntly tweeted last week:

A @MittRomney endorsement for @bobbeauprez just turned away as many Rs as it attracted. Bob is living in 2006. #copolitics

Ken Clark, co-host of KLZ’s Grassroots Radio Colorado, emailed me:

Romney’s endorsement of Bob Beauprez simply means that Beauprez has aligned himself with the establishment arm the the GOP which is really not a surprise.  Beauprez was one of the first in Colorado to not only endorse, but to speak on the behalf of Romney’s failed presidential run.  It further illustrates the divide between candidates whom act upon principle as opposed to what ever seems to be expedient in the moment.  Beauprez endorsed the Romney campaigns  rule changes at the 2012 convention which was nothing more than an attempt to remove the voice of the Grass Roots and the Ron Paul supporters from the political process and control who would be the nominee.  They would like nothing more that to shut the liberty groups down and have us follow them blindly into oblivion, I’m sorry but that simply will not happen.

Rob Douglas, columnist for the Steamboat Pilot, pointed out via email that Romney could become a valuable fundraiser for Beauprez. In similar vein, Eli Bremer, former chairman of El Paso county Republican Party, wrote me that this could help Beauprez, because the “Republican primary electorate around the country in 2014 seems like they are much more serious about evaluating the traits that traditionally make for good general election candidates.”

Douglas added:

On the surface, Mitt Romney’s endorsement of Bob Beauprez might be expected by the casual observer. After all, Beauprez was an early and unwavering supporter of Romney during the 2012 presidential campaign and Beauprez worked hard for the campaign here in Colorado.

But I think Romney’s endorsement goes deeper than political payback. Given the fairly small number of endorsements by Romney so far this cycle, I believe he is exercising discretion in picking candidates to support. That tells me Romney is a true believer when it comes to Beauprez. And, if you look at the personal and professional similarities between the two men, you can see why there’d be a natural affinity. Both have succeeded in business and politics. And while both also experienced the sting of defeat, they continued to find ways to advocate for their beliefs.

Asked if the Romney endorsement would help Beauprez, former state Sen. Norma Anderson said, “It depends. For those that supported Romney in the presidential election it will help. For those who didn’t, it won’t. That’s usually how it works.”

CORRECTION: I missed a May 7 Denver Post article, by Lynn Bartels, reporting that Tancredo “has been told conservative outside groups will spend money to make sure he doesn’t win the primary for governor, rather than helping him afterward.”

———————

Reacting to Lynn  Bartels’ Denver Post article today reporting that Republicans are trying to push him out of the GOP gubernatorial primary, Tom Tancredo told KNUS talk-radio host Peter Boyles that he’s heard the Republican Governors’ Association (RGA) is “trying to raise money for a 527 to attack me during the primary.”

In response to Boyles’ assertion that the “Coors brothers and Bruce Benson and the power elite and the Chamber of Commerce” don’t want the “kinds of things” that he does, Tancredo said, “I actually think that there are some of these guys that would rather have a Democrat elected here.”

Prompted by Boyles, Tancredo also said that before his primary opponent Bob Beauprez entered the race, Beauprez told Tancredo the Chamber of Commerce and Republican governors encouraged Beauprez to run.

“You know, and I told [Beauprez] at the time, ‘Look,’ – because he was saying, ‘You get out of the race. I’ll get in.’ And I said, ‘Bob, I have 7,000 contributors.’ You know what, Peter? It’s now over 10,000 individual contributors to my campaign. [Do] you know what the average is? Sixty-seven dollars. God love these people. I’ll take their endorsement any day over Mitt Romney’s. I’ll tell you that right now.”

“And I said, ‘I’m not going to – you can’t expect me to get out of this race, because – just because — why? We had coffee? Just get in!’ I told him. ‘Get in! Run! You might be the guy that knocks us all off of the block and you make it, and God bless you, and if you can beat Hickenlooper, hey, I’m with you, buddy! But I don’t think you can. I don’t think any of these other guys can either. I’m closer to Hickenlooper in the polls than any of them.”

“And, I have more independent supporters than they do,” Tancredo told Boyles. “Now, Peter, if you want to run – win a race in Colorado, are you going to do it with a traditional Republican campaign, traditional Republican candidates? Or are you going to do it with somebody that’s going to try to bring independents and unaffiliateds on board. I think I can.”

“I am running as a Republican,” said Tancredo on air. “I either win or lose! You know, this idea that this is somehow this is , what–subversive—for me to run? Give me a break! I have as much, I think, opportunity and chance of winning this race as anybody else. Why shouldn’t I give it a shot? Maybe they’re all right. Maybe I can’t. Maybe it’s all – all the stuff they say is true. Well, then, if they believe that, there’s a way to handle that. You can just vote for someone else.”