Colorado Congressman Tom Tancredo -- a potential 2008 Republican presidential candidate -- has emerged as a staunch foe of illegal immigration. But have he -- and Bob -- met their match? Find out in this latest edition of "Running Gags"!

P.S.: Hat tip to my dad on this one.

With the recent immigration rallies across the country, the topic of illegal immigration has reclaimed the spotlight. This may give more of an opportunity for 2008 presidential candidate Tom Tancredo to present his views. "Tancredo believes in eliminating incentives for immigrants to come to the U.S. and building a fence along the border with Mexico," the Denver Post reported. "Tancredo also backs deportation of illegal immigrants and legally taking to task any companies that hire them." Sending away people from another country ... hmm ... where have we heard that before? Oh, yeah, Hugo Chavez's government was proposing this for ConocoPhillips.

In a previous cartoon, I compared Tancredo with Chavez. Seems great minds really do think alike, as this week's cartoon demonstrates:

I once wrote a post on this blog two months ago calling Tom Tancredo a one-issue candidate. I heard from the Tancredo supporters and they weren't too happy.

Well, today I am a Tancredo fan as he pushed through an amendment that has "stunned" Washington D.C. From the Rocky Mountain News:

The U.S. House of Representatives this morning voted to withhold federal emergency services funding for "sanctuary cities" that protect illegal immigrants.

Anti-illegal immigration champion Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Colo., sponsored the measure, which he says would apply to cities such as Denver and Boulder. He was elated by its passage, which stunned critics and supporters alike.

Not only did it pass, it passed with 50 Democrats crossing over in support. This is a victory for conservatives as a whole and Tancredo in particular. The passage of this amendment could well spell the end of this bill that many on the right have worked extremely hard to kill. If 50 donks crossed, what happens when it comes to voting on the entire bill?

I think the Senate and House are surely feeling the ire of the their constituents and are ducking for cover. They know full-well that they cannot vote for this and get reelected in certain parts of the country. The Blue Dog Dems from the South who were just elected will get voted out in 2008 and they are fully cognizant of that fact.

Tancredo has something to crow about and it may just help him gain some much-needed momentum. More here.

To twist a Howard Dean phrase, the Republican wing of the Republican party has scored a victory over the dissidents on illegal immigration. Will immigration continue to be a hot topic as 2008 beckons?

If you're John McCain, you better hope not. If you're Tom Tancredo, the issue could earn you more attention and primary votes if it stays current.

Illegal immigration could be to 2008 what gay marriage was in 2004: A topic that galvanized conservative voters to provide support for the Republican presidential candidate. How much this will help the GOP remains to be seen, however.

Amazing. During last night's Republican debate, three candidates signaled that they did not believe in the theory of evolution. Mike Huckabee, Tom Tancredo, and Sam Brownback. John McCain himself, who was initially asked the question, seemed almost hestitant to endorse what is perhaps the most robust scientific theory of our age. You might as well say you don't believe that planes can fly. Watch.

Of course, evolution itself is not incompatible with a belief in God, as some would have you think. But it certainly doesn't square with a literalist interpretation of the Bible. One wonders how each candidate would respond in full to this question, and whether it's the last we'll hear of it.

Could a hot topic catapult a GOP second-tier candidate into the 2008 presidential nomination?

Earlier this year, it looked like illegal immigration could be that topic. It brought headlines to Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo, and headaches for President Bush and Arizona Sen. John McCain.

Now Republicans seem united in opposing illegal immigration. In last week's presidential debate, McCain, after making an insensitive reference to "the Guatemalans" on Mitt Romney's lawn, said, "No one, by the way, is for amnesty. I and the president of the United States, both of us from border states, came forward with a plan that we thought was comprehensive and workable with the priority being border security, which remains my position."
What remaining issue could spark an insurgency? Iraq. Anti-war Rep. Ron Paul of Texas articulated his anti-war argument in New Hampshire.

Mitt Romney romped in the Iowa Straw Poll, though it doesn't mean much since Rudy Giuliani and John McCain didn't participate:

Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, got 31.6 percent of the more than 14,000 ballots cast, compared with 18.1 percent for second-place finisher Mike Huckabee, the former governor of Arkansas; 15.3 percent for Kansas Sen. Sam Brownback; 13.7 percent for Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo; and 9.1 percent for Texas Rep. Ron Paul, who rounded out the top five in the 11-man field.

This means nothing for Romney as he expected to win. For Mike Huckabee, it gives him a much-needed boost but essentially means he'll be around until the Iowa caucuses and then drop out.

The big losers were Sam Brownback, Tom Tancredo, who failed to get any real traction during the immigration bill debacle and Rep. Ron Paul. Paul, in particular, needed a good showing to give clout to his alleged groundswell. That groundswell didn't materialize and if Paul can't win -- or even make the top three -- in a watered-down field, he has no business being in the race other than to act as spoiler -- which may be the plan.

The Iowa Straw Poll was once considered to be of great import but that time is passed. The candidates made a showing of busing people in and treating them all nicely in exchange for a vote that means nothing. I suspect that we'll see Brownback, Tancredo, Tommy Thompson and Duncan Hunter pack it in as they had dismal showings and their campaigns have not lit any sparks anywhere (in Hunters case, that's a shame). Paul will keep going as he has, in his words, "large Internet support," but real voting is not the same as spamming a blog's poll and hitting the Ron Paul button fifty times in three minutes.

First, let's remind ourselves how FUBAR it all is. A Washington Post article details how 190,000 AK-47 rifles and pistols have just somehow gone missing after the U.S. gave them to the Iraqi security forces they were training. It is estimated that 30% of the weapons we have shipped to Iraq are in the wrong hands and yet the Republicans scream bloody murder when 6 Iranian weapons are found. John McCain says "bomb bomb Iran." The entire Republican field (Ron Paul is as much a Republican as Joe Lieberman is a Democrat) continues to support President Bush's war. They are very vocal and don't say the war is wrong just that we haven't done enough. Now comes the topper:

Colorado Rep. Tom Tancredo's campaign stood by his assertion that bombing holy Muslim sites would serve as a good "deterrent" to prevent Islamic fundamentalists from attacking the United States, his spokeswoman said Friday. "This shows that we mean business," said Bay Buchanan, a senior Tancredo adviser.

How insane is that? Let's start WW3 off with a bang, shall we? Let's just go nuclear on them, that will show them. I mentioned this item to a few people at the office and the reaction was uniform along the lines of rolling eyes and 'You've got to be kidding.' Most Americans realize we live in a real world, not some imaginary place where we can bomb away and solve problems. A bit more on the flip.

The GOP candidates are getting ready for tonight's MSNBC debate in California. Apparently no less than ten Republicans are fighting for the party's presidential nomination, and they will all show up.

Rudy Giuliani: Has the problem of high expectations as he is widely perceived as the best and quickest speaker. on his feet He needs to explain his awkward stance on guns, abortion and his third marriage. May succeed by steering the conversation toward crime, experience and solving tough problems.

John McCain: Needs a home run, badly, used to be viewed as a front runner and is clinging on to about 25% of the GOP voters despite great name recognition. Will he go on the offense against Giuliani or play it safe? Vulnerable to attacks on the judges and campaign finance front.

Mitt Romney: Just needs to get noticed and get a few sound bites in. He is also hoping for a Giuliani-McCain mudfest so he can look presidential in comparison. He should also explain why Battlefield Earth is a really good book.

As for the rest, Duncan Hunter, Sam Brownback, Thompson(Tommy), Tom Tancredo, Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, and Jim Gilmore. The best they can hope for is a few soundbites so that someone will remember that they too are running for president. Of these I have the highest hopes for Hunter. He has no chance, but he is well liked by movement conservatives.

I expect lots of references to Reagan, picking good judges and a rush to see who will be toughest on terrorists and the best friend of the military. The excitement will come from those who have little to lose; the second- and third-tier candidates.

Previously on 'The Stump':
· Republicans Will Wrangle at Reagan Library
· Latest GOP Presidential Straw Poll

A week after the Democrats "debated" in South Carolina, their GOP counterparts do the same. The MSNBC/Politico-sponsored event took place in the impressive space at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California. And Nancy Reagan and Arnold Schwarzenegger were both on hand to lend further star power.

Chris Matthews took over moderator duties, though on several occasions the candidates didn't exactly answer the question he asked. Iraq was, not surprisingly, the first subject of the day, but conservative touchstones like abortion and stem-cell research were on the docket. Of course, there were a few softballs: which tax would you repeal? And should Bill Clinton be back in the White House (Give you one guess on the answers to that one.)

As for the contenders, the roll call included all 10 current candidates. For those of you keeping score at home they are (in reverse alphabetical order, just to change things up a bit): former Gov. Tommy Thompson of Wisconsin; Rep. Tom Tancredo of Colorado; former Gov. Mitt Romney of Massachusetts; Rep. Ron Paul of Texas; Sen. John McCain of Arizona; Rep. Duncan Hunter of California; former Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas; former Mayor Rudy Giuliani of New York City; former Gov. Jim Gilmore of Virginia; and Sen. Sam Brownback of Kansas

So were there any clear winners or losers? Memorable moments? Did it help you decide who to vote for? Leave your comments below.

Previously on 'The Stump':
· Latest GOP Presidential Straw Poll
· It's April 2007 and They're Already Debating
· Coalition Wants Access to Debate Video

I'll update this as the debate goes along. Add your thoughts in comments.

Update (7:20): On the question of whether the invasion of Iraq was right or wrong, Mitt Romney dodged, Rudy Giuliani was straight forward and said he supported it; Duncan Hunter said he would use tactical nukes against Iran to prevent them from developing a nuke themselves. Rudy agreed.

Ron Paul went right to his cut and run rhetoric.

Update (7:41): John McCain failed to explain himself with the immigration bill. McCain said it wasn't the bill he'd have written. Huh?

Hunter called the bill the Bush/McCain/Kennedy bill. That'll leave a mark.

Giuliani harped on the lack of a database and Romney suggested making the Z-Visa temporary.

Update (8:06): On pardoning Scooter Libby, Giuliani, Tommy Thompson, Romney and Tom Tancredo said they would comsider it as did huckabee. Others dodged.

Hunter said he would pardon Border Patrol agents Compion and Ramos who were jailed for shooting a drug dealer. That will go over well with conservatives.

Update (8:29): Giuliani hit the prescription drug question out of the park. He also dealt well with the Iraq question.

Sam Brownback said twice he'd introduce legislation tomorrow to break Iraq into three "states." An interesting concept I'll cover tomorrow.

Update (8:37): Ron Paul actually just said that Iran is not a threat in response to Duncan Hunter's earlier assertion that he would preemptively nuke Iran to keep them from obtaining nukes. He also said (and I paraphrase) that they've never done anything to us. I'm sure there are people who were hostages for 444 days who would beg to differ, congressman.

Paul is not a libertarian or Republican, he is an anti-war liberal.

The alliance of talk radio, blogs and grassroots efforts was a winner when it came to defeating the "shamnesty" bill. Conservatives were enraged and showed just how much power we possess:

A Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey of 15,000 adults in June found that just 32.0% now say they're Republicans. That's up more than a full percentage point from a month ago and is within a tenth-of-a-point of the GOP's best showing in ten months.

This is purely because of the efforts put forth to defeat a bill that would've rewarded those who broke our laws. The Bush administration suffered its worst legislative defeat because of the actions of fellow Republicans.

This is interesting as it shows that immigration is an important issue and it shows that President Bush, Ted Kennedy and John McCain were on the absolute wrong side of it. The Democrats actually stayed out of the fray for the most part and the media portrayed it for what it was; a major disagreement between conservatives and the president. The president lost, conservatives won and the public went against the president. That should be telling to the Bush administration.

Note also that the people who identified themselves as Democrats decreased. That is telling as well since the Dems were associated with this bill largely by the presence of Teddy Kennedy.

I've said it before and I'll say it again: McCain lost the election on this issue and candidates such as Fred Thompson and Tom Tancredo stuck to their guns and ended up on the side of the American people. Others such as Lindsey Graham and Sam Brownback came out looking like fools and severely misjudged the public reaction to illegal immigration.

ABSENT: Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, John McCain, Mitt Romney

PRESENT: Sam Brownback, Mike Huckabee, Duncan Hunter, Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, Alan Keyes

What were they thinking? They say a picture is worth a thousand words and the four empty chairs on the podium of the Republicans' recent debate on Thursday, September 27th at Morgan State University spoke volumes. Regardless of the spin or the rationale (reported "scheduling conflicts" for each of them), those candidates obviously did not think it was worth their while to show up and there is no way to interpret that except that they didn't think it was important to reach out to these blocs of voters -- which is interesting, since the over 60, white male, southern voter is probably going to vote for one of them anyway and is a shrinking population. I'm not sure a candidate can win the national election anymore with over 60, while male, southern voters.

Mike Huckabee said he was "embarrassed for our party and I'm embarrassed for those who didn't come."

Sam Brownback said, "I think this is a disgrace that they are not here...a disgrace to our country...bad for our party...I don't think it's good for our future."

The general consensus is that after the primary, whoever the Republicans select will start moving towards the center and reaching out to these other voters. Good luck with that strategy. There are a lot of us around who will remind people of who was important, or not, to the candidate in September 2007.

Today is May Day, historically when immigration supporters rally and march in support of lessening restrictions on immigration. It appears as though those numbers are dwindling:

LOS ANGELES (AP) - Demonstrators demanding a path to citizenship for an estimated 12 million illegal immigrants rallied around the nation Tuesday, hoping to spur Congress to act before the looming presidential primaries take over the political landscape.

From Phoenix to Detroit, hundreds of people carried American flags in the streets.

...Hours before the march was set to begin in Chicago, dozens of demonstrators began arriving carrying American flags, signs and placards, including one that read "We may not have it all together, but together we can have it all."

Hundreds? Dozens? Those numbers are really small. The AP piece is typical open borders, give them citizenship fluff, but those numbers speak volumes (note this Reuters headline that can't deny the truth). The climate in America has changed and this is one issue the Republican's own. Everyone in America comes from immigrants, that's true. But most came here legally and not only waited for their citizenship, but assimilated into the fabric of our nation.

With the exception of Tom Tancredo and Duncan Hunter, the GOP field has been wary of entering into this very important debate. President Bush himself has hedged and has lost support of a lot Republican's because of it.

We need real immigration reform and we need it now. Real reform does not offer amnesty nor reward those who've broken the law. It does provide funding for real border security and it provides for consequences if you cross illegally. Reform also requires the U.S. to take a firmer stance with Mexico and calling for economic sanctions if they don't stem the flow.

I know they are just seeking a better life and money to support their families. I feel for them and wish their own leaders would provide them more opportunity. I believe in immigration if it's legal imigration where taxes are paid for services provided. I'm 100% against illegal immigration.

Previously on 'The Stump':
· Will Farm Bill Increase Illegal Immigration?
· Bush Pushes Immigration Again
· Bush Finally Getting Serious About Illegal Immigration?

The latest USA Today poll has Rudy Giuliani, Fred Thompson, John McCain and Mike Huckabee all gaining while Mitt Romney falls 4%. Fred Thompson only gained 3% in this poll taken over the weekend, the first since he announced he's a candidate. Pretty modest numbers for a new candidate. The numbers also suggest as I noted earlier that McCain is indeed back in the race and must now be repositioned back into the top tier.

However, the latest Rasmussen poll shows Thompson leading Giuliani 26% to 22% meaning Fred took some votes from America's Mayor. The Rasmussen poll has historically had Giuliani closer to the field than others so no great change. That's a four point jump for Thompson, not a significant leap but something he may be able to build on.

With regard to Fred Thompson, I expected to see at least an 8-10 point surge after his announcement, but his long, drawn out pre-campaign nullified any great bump. The numbers I find intriguiging for Thompson is the high percentage who don't know him:

Thompson is significantly less well known than Giuliani or McCain - 28% of Republicans say they've never heard of Thompson, compared with 8% for Giuliani and 9% for McCain.

Among those Republicans who know all four leading contenders, Giuliani and Thompson are essentially tied. In a head-to-head race among all GOP voters, Giuliani bests Thompson by 13 points, 53%-40%.

How can 28% not know who Fred is? That says to me that he was not very effective in getting his name out over the summer, a major campaign flaw and unforgiveable for a candidate who has been on a top-rated show for a couple of years. Apparently, those who do know of Thompson like him as he is tied with Rudy in that category.

Ron Paul, Sam Brownback, Duncan Hunter and Tom Tancredo all posted the usual horrid numbers. It's surprising that Ron Paul hasn't broken 4% in any USA Today poll given his supposed clout in the race and his landslide victories in text and internet polls. I guess it doesn't translate to the real world.