U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) George Stern

(R) Sheri Davis

50%↑

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
April 19, 2007 02:39 AM UTC

Tancredo Belittles Virginia Tech Tragedy

  • 26 Comments
  • by: Tancredo Watch

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)


Never one to keep his mouth shut when potential headlines beckon, Tom Tancredo is jumping on the Virginia Tech mass killing to issue a public “correction” belittling the scale of the recent carnage. The murderous episode wasn’t quite as bad as the press says it is, according to Tancredo.

While many press reports are calling the Virginia tragedy the worst school massacre ever, Tancredo’s office has declared that the Virginia Tech rampage is actually not THE deadliest school rampage in U.S. history. That distinction actually belongs to a 1927 school bombing in which approximately 48 people, mainly children, were killed. (It’s unknown whether the 1927 total still outranks the Virginia Tech rampage if wounded are also tallied.)

This appalling, tone-deaf attempt at one-upmanship is an example of why Tancredo is widely viewed as not ready for prime time. One can only imagine what the Congressman’s response would have been if some Virginia counterpart had issued a similar press release within days after the Columbine massacre.

Tancredo’s office maintains that it’s necessary to go public with this “correction” at this time of profound grief and sorrow – over a matter that his own spokesperson admits is nothing mooe than “splitting hairs” – to deflate any attempts to use the Virginia Tech shootings as an excuse to promote gun-control legislation.

That reasoning is odd, to say the least, and the timing is atrocious, hapless and cruel. While there are predictably a few liberal Democrats raising the issue of gun control again, most Democrats are aligned with Republicans in not wanting to re-visit that issue – and almost all other politicians are putting aside issues of partisanship to extend their deepest sympathies to the reeling Virginia Tech community.

Surely Congressman Tancredo realizes that this Congress is not about to move any gun control legislation forward in the near future. Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid has said: “I think we ought to be thinking about the families and the victims and not speculate about future legislative battles that might lie ahead.”

If only Tancredo were so compassionate. But his most recent pronouncement is actually par for the course for Colorado’s controversial Congressman: the victims aren’t even buried yet, and Tancredo is busy at work trying to capitalize on the situation.

One can legitimately speculate about Tancredo’s true motive: is it truly about thwarting gun control legislation, or merely about keeping his own name in the headlines? Since he’s not been able to raise much money, “He can get free media by being on radio and TV shows and remaining controversial,” a political analyst recently noted in the Denver Post.

That may sound like a harsh judgment, but this is not first time that Tancredo has used personal tragedy in a shameless attempt to promote his own visibility. As Rocky Mountain News columnist Mike Littwin wrote about Tancredo in 2005, after Tancredo tried to make hay out of the killing of policeman Donnie Young: For Tancredo “no tragedy is too horrible to exploit.”

Sources:
http://tancredowatch…
http://www.politico….
http://www.cbsnews.c…
http://www.denverpos…

Tweet
Share

Comments

26 thoughts on “Tancredo Belittles Virginia Tech Tragedy”

  1. …I figured Tancredo would make some stupid remark about immigration. I just didn’t know he had it in him to not just turn it into a political issue, but to also belittle it.

    1. In response to all the talk about the worst massacre in U.S. history, Tancredo put out a correction. Like everything else Tancredo says, this “offended” his harsh opponents who look for every chance to bash him. Poor babies.

      Typical nonsense from the Tancredo bashers.

      They hate it that he’s getting some good press outside of Colorado, where thinking appears to be a little clearer than at these altitudes.

      Hey, guys, you’re making a mountain out of a molehill.

      I thought the notice was pretty interesting, and it tended to puncture the pro gun control advocates’ little balloon.

        1. So when do you want the correction? Gimme a break. You should see the pro- gun control nuts and their opponents. They were going at it while the bodies were warm.

          And this discussion wasn’t needed to encourage copy cats. That’s a stretch, too.

          Tancredo just saw a chance to poke at the hype in the media. Got his name on the blogs. I think Obama’s call for gun control was more offensive, frankly.

      2. Splitting hairs over things like this might inspire some future idiot to just do something more atrocious to outdo what’s already been done.  Why do we even need to debate which shooting was the worst?  They’re all bad.  This doesn’t help the discussion at all.  On another note, how is Tancredo getting good press outside of Colorado?  Tell me. 

        1. by someone, at some moment, to avoid some of the pathologies of how we report and remember dramatic events. As I wrote not long ago in another thread, before this incident, there is a glitch in the human psyche which grabs hold of dramatic events and exaggerates them out of proportion. In fact, I believe there is an evolutionary explantion for this phenomenon, which I won’t repeat here. The point is, that there are real consequences to this tendency, sometimes dramatic and destructive in themselves. (Consider the domestic political developments in the wake of 9/11).

          But, as for this tragedy, the time is not now, the person is not Tancredo, and the justification is not to avoid a discussion of gun control (which is a very appropriate discussion to have in the wake of these shootings). To whichever pollster above complained about bashing Tancredo for stating the truth, I have this to say: Does it matter, in terms of the relevance of this event, whether it was “the worst in U.S. history” or not? 32 innocent people were shot to death. That is the truth. It’s ranking among other similar shootings does not alter the size and seriousness of this event. For Tancredo to state a factual truth in order to engage in a conceptual misdirection (i.e., the significance of this event is diminished by the fact that there was a larger massacre 80 years ago) is, in essence, to be deceptive for political ends.

          Not only that, but, obviously, it is not always admirable, or even defensible, to state a particular factual truth at a particular moment in time for a particular reason. Would it be appropriate, do you think, to point out that one of the victims was caught masterbating in the shower the morning of the shooting, because that person had offended you recently and you wanted to get revenge by marring their  name? Or that one had just embarrassed himself by making a public scene over some small matter? Or that one was known by his friends as a petty and disagreeable person? Such things may be truths, but stating them publicly at this moment would be reprehensible. As was Tancredo’s statement at this moment, for this reason.

      3. He did well.

        Some interesting comments:

        Mentioned that his limited fundraising is ok since he doesn’t have to buy his constituency. There are people concerned about illegal immigration in all 50 states.

        When asked about his candidacy hurting other Republicans running, he mentioned that when he takes his oath of office each year there is no mention of ‘party’ or ‘Republican’, just ‘Constitution’ and ‘the United States’.

        I’m not a fan of Tancredo, but I like that he is willing to stand up to the party for what he believes.

        1. Any press is good press. That is why he said this. That is why he says much of the inflammatory stuff he says. He can’t even get into the dance if no one has heard of him.

      5. the mainstream news media didn’t do their homework, and Tancredo is right.  As someone you may call a “leftie”, I have no problem with the truth and I don’t think other’s you brand as lefties do either.

        However, I don’t think anyone thinks the fact that it is not historically the worst school violence, massacre, whatever dosen’t really “puncture the pro gun control advocates’ little balloon”. 

        Disturbed and violent people have easy access to deadly weapons in this country.  That makes everyone less safe. This is so basic a concept it’s like saying vitamins are good for you, but for god knows what reason people like you just don’t want to understand that.

          How many students killed would be satisfactory for people like you to take a new look at gun control?  Damn, I guess 31 wasn’t enough. 

        1. After JFK was killed, I thought some kind of gun control would be appropriate. But I’ve been around pro-gun people long enough to hear their arguments as well, and it’s clear that the 2nd Amendment is on their side.

          I don’t trust government enough to disarm everyone. Too many kooks gain power and become dictators. Never know when we’ll elect a Ceasar Chavez.

          At the same time, I don’t think people should own military weapons such as the pistol used in the VT massacre.

          Have I made everyone mad?

          2. dosen’t make me mad at all.  I just think gun control is the only solution to this kind of problem, and I see comparatively in other countries where gun control laws are very strict, and you have very few homicides or mass killings vis-a-vis the USA (gun related or not).

      6. How do nuts like you and TT think that you have cognitive processes?  It’s obvious to most of the world, including most “righties” that something seriously wrong is there in your synapses.

  2. Is it any wonder that many Republicans are ashamed of our Congressional representation and fear the day when all of our delegation will be Dems?

    (Well except for CD-5 – Goofy could win as the Republican nominee here.  Oh wait a minute, he already did.)

  3. but is he right about a 1927 bombing.  I hadn’t heard of this bombing.  Where was it?

    Also, as far as worst gun violence in American history, wouldn’t Wounded Knee qualify?

    1. . . . the Sand Creek Massacre, in Colorado in the 1860’s:  Only 9 or 10 soldiers were killed and three dozen wounded. Between 150 and 184 Cheyennes were reported dead, and some were reportedly mutilated, and most were women, children, and elderly men.

    1. “To regard or portray as less impressive or important than appearances indicate.” (Source: Dictionary.com.)

      Isn’t that precisely what Tancredo was doing? He was saying that the 32 killed at Virginia Tech earlier this week (never mention how many wounded, I guess they don’t count in his bizarre calculation) wasn’t actually as “impressive or important” as some media were saying, because the slaying was only the SECOND-largest school slaying in U.S. history, not the first as those media seemed to be indicating.

      It just seems utterly bizarre, but typical of Tancredo, to be issuing such a declaration when most of the victims haven’t even been buried yet.

      Again: Can you imagine how – rightfully – outraged Tancredo would have been had some Virginia legislator issued a similar bloviation within a few days after Columbine?

      Since there is really no serious chance of additional gun control legislation being enacted, one is left with the distasteful impression – but again, characteristic of Tancredo – that he is simply trying to get his name in the press through this strange and heartless mechanism.

      1. Too bad that some of Tanc’s defenders are so enamored of him that they are incapable of recognizing when he’s putting his foot in his mouth.

        1. Thank you! Even a broken clock…

          I know I’m obsessive about Tom Tancredo. But he’s my Congressman and he drives me crazy with his constant shenanigans. Especially when they’re mean-spirited or bullying in nature.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

141 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!