Little-known Republican McCotter opens White House bid

WASHINGTON Sun Jul 3, 2011 7:12am EDT

Rep Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich) plays his guitar with a band after formally announcing his bid for the 2012 U.S presidential race at a ''Freedom Festival'' in Whitmore Lake, Michigan July 2, 2011. REUTERS/Rebecca Cook

Rep Thaddeus McCotter (R-Mich) plays his guitar with a band after formally announcing his bid for the 2012 U.S presidential race at a ''Freedom Festival'' in Whitmore Lake, Michigan July 2, 2011.

Credit: Reuters/Rebecca Cook

Related Topics

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Thaddeus McCotter, a guitar-playing Michigan congressman with an independent streak, formally launched a longshot bid for the 2012 Republican presidential nomination on Saturday.

The conservative McCotter made his formal announcement at an Independence Day rock festival outside Detroit. He filed the paperwork on Friday to enter the Republican race for the right to challenge Democratic President Barack Obama.

"Through your hard work and through your principled determination to bequeath to your children a better America, we will restructure the government," McCotter told the crowd at the rock festival, where he played guitar with a band. "... What we need in Washington is someone who knows the future is not big government -- it is self government."

McCotter, 45, is a rock 'n' roll fan known to quote song lyrics and at times challenge his own party leaders. He enters the campaign as a heavy underdog with little name recognition or money.

The five-term congressman from the Detroit suburbs is a strong supporter of the car industry and backed the industry bailout but he has appealed to Tea Party conservatives with calls for a fundamental restructuring of government.

McCotter said on Friday there was room for more candidates in the Republican race, which is now led by former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney and U.S. Representative Michele Bachmann of Minnesota.

"I want to take my message out and ... see if people respond to it," he said in an interview with a Detroit radio station.

(Writing by John Whitesides; Editing by Bill Trott)

We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see
Comments (4)
txgadfly wrote:
Questions for self-described “conservatives” and “libertarians”:

1. if the Government should not be in the retirement business, why not abolish the “special” retirement taxes that only apply to the working poor? (Social Security, etc.) Stop charging for what you do not intend to provide. Should the Government be in the systemic fraud business?

2. if the Government has any obligation to the people of the country, why should it not charge taxes proportional to what it provides to the people who receive the benefit? Why should the rich and powerful run the country like a medieval fiefdom and not pay proportionately? Why tax the poor at 45% and the rich at 6%? Why fight the wars of the rich on the backs of the poor?

3. if conservatives are not the simple lackies of the rich and powerful, why is that not clear? Why do conservatives not propose any single thing that is disapproved by the wealthy?

Jul 03, 2011 1:19pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
dammad wrote:
First, SS is availble to everyone who participates in it and has enough fiscal quarters. It is not means tested.

Second, the govt is in the “systematic fraud business” if I understand you. SS is a Ponzi scheme (look it up) that has been allowed to continue becuase it is a Ponzi scheme created by those who control the money.

Third, the obligation this republican govt has to the people is to protect them from “all enemies foreign and domestic.”

Fourth, America is not “a medieval fiefdom.” It is ruled by laws and not blood lineage. Look it up.

Fifth, the poor – the really poor – pay nothing in taxes. Look it up. You glibly toss out your “facts” but offer no evidence.

Sixth, the poor do not create jobs. By definition, they do not have the financial resources to creatre jobs. They get jobs that the “rich” create when they wish to work.

Seventh, you do not define the “wars of the rich.” I would suggest that the Libya War is not a war of the rich but of the stupid.

Eighth, you have given no evidence for your calumnous comments. So, what does this make you? A fool? Or an idiot? For those who avoid the evidence and common sense there are no other choices.

Jul 03, 2011 6:22pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
Cairns wrote:
I sympathise with your side, txgadfly, but dammad has got a valid response to your statements. You have both defined the essence of the difference between the two sides. Now, being intelligent people, can you come up with something in between that can have benefits for all? We need ideas here.

Jul 03, 2011 8:22pm EDT  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.