Iowa Cheers Tom Tancredo in Republican Debate

Paul Krugman wrote in his August 6th column ”Two presidential elections ago, the conventional wisdom said that George W. Bush was a likable, honest fellow. But those of us who actually analyzed what he was saying about policy came to a different conclusion — namely, that he was irresponsible and deeply dishonest. His numbers didn’t add up, and in his speeches he simply lied about the content of his own proposals.”
Krugman essentially is challenging the voters to evaluate the candidates based on policy proposals and not their nuanced, cliché-riddled pep rallies and negative advertising.
No “Compassionate Conservative” jive-talking this time.

If Krugman watched Sunday’s Republican Presidential Candidates debate in Iowa, he would have noticed the crowd reacted with wild applause and approval for Tom Trancredo.
This man was not pulling punches … his words range out as fervent beliefs … there is no doubt that if elected, his Administration would use Executive Power and Vetoes to fulfill His vision for America.

The debate did not even need to hit Tancredo’s strong issues on illegal aliens or to address his foreign policy stance that includes threatening to “attack on the holy sites in Mecca and Medina.
No, it was his position on Health Care that excited the crowd.
Trancredo said ”It's not the responsibility of the federal government to provide womb-to-tomb health care for America."

Forget the premise that our country was founded upon that we would commit to the general welfare of all persons, as opposed to protecting the interests of a narrow section or class of the population.
That silly Constitution aside with its Preamble :
``We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common Defense, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.''
And again in the section that defines Congressional responsibilities.
“The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Exciese, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States.”
It should be noted that the Founding Fathers inserted this clause in the powers of Congress, and not among the limitations on those powers. It wanted a federal government that was driven by the people. Government powers are granted by the people, and are to be exercised directly on them, and for their benefit.

Now, the term “Welfare” is not meant to mean public assistance for the poor, but instead as “health, happiness, or prosperity; or essentially, our well-being.” Examples include roads, schools, lighthouses, piers, and even to promote industry. And the Supreme Court has concurred most notably in Helvering v. Davis that Congress was responsible for the General Welfare since the “States and local governments are often lacking in the resources.”

So the question comes to Tancredo, if the Federal Government should not be responsible for health care, should it be responsible for roads, schools and commerce ?
Without roads, there will be no commerce.
Without schools there will be no commerce.
Without commerce there will be no taxes to pay for the Common Defense (or even border security.)

The cheering crowds that embraced Tancredo’s words make me want Tancredo to be the the Republican Party nominee. I want to see him in a general election for the country to decide if His vision is Our vision.

Somehow his words do not mirror the words of Abraham Lincoln who during a time of war stated “our fathers brought forth on this continent, a new nation, conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal” and reminded the audience in that same speech that our government is “of the people, by the people, for the people”.

Maybe if Tancredo has time he should read Lewis Gould’s book Grand Old Party: A History of the Republicans which claims the Republican Party was founded on the beliefs of civic virtue, and opposition to aristocracy and corruption.

There's an old expression, "a drunken person says, what a sober person thinks." I don't believe that Tancredo was drunk, but actually quite somber in his thoughts ... the question is "Why were so many Iowans cheering?"

Health care is the #1 domestic policy concern. Ask any business that currently provides health care coverage ... or ask any citizen that provides his own. We know where Tancredo stands ... the rest of the Republican nominees have failed to offer any policy proposals ... just sound bites.