Colorado Conservative Project

Brophy: State Reptile Bill "Taxasaurus" Ritter

2008-01-30T10:30:00.000-07:00

McCain wins FL, good bye Rudy

2008-01-30T10:27:00.000-07:00

John "I'm a conservative, really" McCain won last night's Florida Republican Primary.

Rudolph Giuliani is expected to drop out of the Presidential race and endorse McCain today.

John Galt Signing Off

2007-12-05T10:33:00.000-07:00

I have been a pretty lazy blogger the last three months, that's what work will do to you. So this will be my last post on the Colorado Conservative Project. Hopefully one day I can resume my blogging, it sure is a fun hobby.
I appreciate Mr. Lyman allowing me to occasionaly write on his blog, he is a good friend and an even better political operative.
So Merry Christmas and Happy Holidays to all of the CCP readers out there. Get behind a conservative candidate in 08, you'll be glad you did!

With that I will leave you with this breaking news story about Mitt Romney.

Gov. Huckabee loves taxes

2007-11-12T09:35:00.000-07:00

As former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee begins to challenge former Mass. Governor Mitt Romney for the lead in the Iowa Republican caucuses, his big-government past continues to haunt him.

Huckabee, a hundred pounds ago, practically begs the Arkansas legislature for a tax increase:

Ken Salazar = partisan hack

2007-11-09T15:15:00.000-07:00

US Senator Ken Salazar (MoveOn - CO) has intentionally ignored Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave's leadership in the fight for private property rights in Pinion Canyon.

From the Fort Collins Coloradoan:

Salazar gives credit to brother for Musgrave work?
Rep. Marilyn Musgrave is taking a page from the late comedian Rodney Dangerfield’s playbook today saying “I don’t get no respect!”

Although Musgrave most certainly uses better grammar, her office said this afternoon they are unclear as to why Sen. Ken Salazar, failed to give her the political props – a.k.a the credit – she deserves on brokering Pinon Canyon legislation.

In a press release sent by Salazar’s office, the first-term Colorado senator passes praise onto his little brother, Rep. John Salazar, a Democrat from the Western Slope of Colorado, for his efforts to stop an army expansion of Pinon Canyon in El Paso County. The senator failed to mention Musgrave at all, even though the Fort Morgan Republican authored the legislation he was praising.

Musgrave authored a House amendment that blocked the Army from moving forward for one year on any plans to expand the Pinon Canyon site. She enlisted John Salazar as a House co-sponsor.

Colorado's two senators, Democrat Ken Salazar and Republican Wayne Allard. initially balked at supporting the amendment but later came on board when the Senate considered the issue.

On Goldwater and the legacy of the conservative movement's enigmatic father

2007-11-09T14:57:00.000-07:00

The American Conservative's Daniel McCarthy has a superb essay about Barry Goldwater's legacy, and the current strain of liberal revisionist history of the man Pat Buchanan called "the father of us all."

I highly recommend this weekend reading.

Highlight:

...But if the Republican Party is full of pretenders, where does one look for Goldwater’s true heirs?

To answer that question, one has to look to the sharpest division that split the Goldwater movement of the ’60s. It wasn’t the division between libertarians and traditionalists, it was the division that separated idealistic libertarians and traditionalists alike, the campaign amateurs, from the campaign professionals. The conservative movement still pays lip service to economic liberty, social order, and military strength—but on all three points, Republicans have become hollow men who have preserved the rites of Goldwaterism but who long ago lost its spirit. That was an amateur spirit—in both the best and worst senses of the word—and it drew together in common cause traditionalists and libertarians as different as Brent Bozell and Goldwater speechwriter Karl Hess.

...The conventional wisdom overvalues politics and undervalues the philosophy of the movement: it overlooks the ways in which Goldwater succeeded far beyond the electoral success of a Johnson or a Nixon—or a Bush. The Conscience of a Conservative continues to be read today because it isn’t a political tract, a soulless campaign book of the sort generated by every other modern presidential effort.

The idealism and amateurism of the Goldwater people inspired a movement in a way that political professionals never could: indeed, the cynical professionalism and win-at-all-costs mentality of today’s conservatives, best represented by Karl Rove, has had the opposite effect. Goldwater galvanized America’s youth—Young Americans for Freedom grew directly out of Youth for Goldwater. Under the professional Republicans of the past decade, on the other hand, conservatives have lost whatever momentum they had with the next generation...

Harvey announces campaign for CO-6

2007-11-07T14:15:00.001-07:00

Today, on the steps of the state capitol State Senator Ted Harvey announced his intention to run for congress in Colorado's 6th Congressional district.

Harvey was surrounded by supporters, including:

State Senator Greg Brophy
State Senator Mike Kopp
State Senator Josh Penry
State Senator Scott Renfroe
State Senator Dave Schultheis

State Rep. Cory Gardner
State Rep. Kent Lambert
State Rep. Kevin Lundberg
State Rep. Mike May (House Minority Leader)
State Rep. Frank McNulty
State Rep. Ken Summers

UPDATE: Here is Harvey's announcement press release:

Conservative Republican State Senator Ted Harvey Announces Candidacy for 6^th Congressional District

Denver , CO: Conservative Republican State Senator Ted Harvey announced his candidacy for the 6^th Congressional District today on the steps of the State Capitol.

In announcing his candidacy, Senator Harvey touted his conservative experience on issues important to the district. “As an elected legislator for the past 6 years, I’ve worked hard to reduce taxes, shrink government, as well as pass legislation to protect life and crack down on illegal immigration,” said Harvey. “As a Member of Congress, voters know they can count on me to continue my proven record of conservative leadership on the issues most important to them.”

Senator Harvey was joined by several Republican State Representatives and Senators at the event. Already, the Ted Harvey for Congress campaign has earned support from half the Republican delegation in both the State House and State Senate as well as numerous county officials from across the district.

Initial support for Harvey among Colorado legislators includes:

Rep. Rob Witwer (R) Sen. Mike Kopp (R)

Rep. Ken Summers (R) Sen. Scott Renfroe (R)

Rep. Steve King (R) Sen. Josh Penry (R)

Rep. Jim Kerr (R) Sen. Greg Brophy (R)

Rep. Mike May (R) Sen. Shawn Mitchell (R)

Rep. Ray Rose (R) Sen. Dave Schultheis (R)

Rep. Cory Gardner (R) Sen. Ken Kester (R)

Rep. Kent Lambert (R) Rep. Frank McNulty (R)

Rep. Kevin Lundberg (R) Rep. Jerry Sonnenberg (R)

Rep. Amy Stephens (R)

“I’m proud to have the support of so many of my colleagues and grassroots leaders because they know I will work hard to champion conservative values in Congress like Tom Tancredo has,” Concluded Senator Harvey.

-30-

Wiens out of CO-6

2007-11-07T10:22:00.000-07:00

State Senator Tom Wiens won't run for CO-6.

From his press release:

Colorado state Sen. Tom Wiens, R-Castle Rock, announced today that he will seek re-election to a second term in the Colorado State Senate and will not be a candidate for the sixth congressional seat being vacated by retiring Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo.

"I believe I can have a more positive impact on the future of Colorado by continuing to serve in the State Senate than by being a member of Congress," Wiens said. "This has become even more clear to me given the events of the last several days in which we have seen our Democrat governor practicing government by fiat, ignoring the best interests of the people and bypassing the entire legislative process. Governor Ritter is clearly placing the interests of his political benefactors above the interests of the people."

Wiens said Gov. Bill Ritter's controversial executive order last Friday, granting labor unions bargaining power over state employees, will increase the costs of government in Colorado and reduce its efficiency and our competitiveness as a state. He went on to say, tax payers expect real and tangible results from their state government "Instead, we are now are in an environment where special interests are the only ones getting results."

Greeley Trib endorses militant lesbian

2007-11-06T11:51:00.000-07:00

From TheGreeleyReport.com :

The Greeley Tribune announced their endorsements for Greeley City Council spots. Of course we all know that our community has waited with bated breath to know the unsearchable mind of the all-wise Tribunal staff, because after all, this is the election season and we need them to think for us.

In Ward 1, their adulation goes to candidate Denise Hall. In their words, she is an impressive candidate...one who is “smart, articulate, and thoughtful. She brings diversity to the council personally and professionally.” In short, the Tribune think tank believes that Hall is best qualified to grasp the issues and articulate change, which is needed on city council.

However, as reported on www.greeleyreport.com, what they fail to detail is Hall’s history and alternative lifestyle…one which undoubtedly serves as a foundation for her political agenda waiting to be imposed on Greeley if elected. You see, Hall is a proud and radical lesbian with a history of activism in the gay pride movement. In 1994, while assisting with the organization of an interfaith service for the annual gay pride parade in Oklahoma City, she apparently sought out input from the queer pagans group but was not able to find their organization. In her own words, “I was unable to locate the queer pagans group. Unfortunately, I had to plan the service without their input”.

Yet despite her adherence to moral views that many find to be perverse rather than diverse, according to the Tribune, this is the missing ingredient needed on our city council, and Denise Hall is the answer we’ve all been looking for. But it makes many stop and wonder this: If Denise Hall IS the answer, are we even asking intelligent questions? Perhaps the missing ingredient in our annual 4^th of July parade is an appearance by the queer pagans group along with our veterans and Christian organizations which do so much to build family values rather than attack them.

Or perhaps, maybe what’s missing is a news source in Greeley that is fair and balanced…one which won’t omit relevant facts in order to promote its own agenda.

The only city we will have is the one we build, and if we find that we’re riding a dead horse, logic dictates that at some point we should dismount.If we want Greeley to be a 1^st rate city, it’s incumbent upon the voters to choose their candidates wisely. Prosperous cities don’t just “happen” by chance, they’re built by good decisions and principled leaders…something we desperately need in Greeley.

Ron Paul raises $4.2 million in 24 hours

2007-11-06T11:45:00.000-07:00

Congressman Ron Paul (R - TX) raised $4.2 million dollars in last 24 hours for his Presidential campaign. This represents the single largest fundraising day by any Republican this cycle.

From AP:

Republican presidential candidate Ron Paul, aided by an extraordinary outpouring of Internet support Monday, hauled in more than $4.2 million in nearly 24 hours.

Paul, the Texas congressman with a libertarian tilt and an out-of-Iraq pitch, entered heady fundraising territory with a surge of Web-based giving tied to the commemoration of Guy Fawkes Day.

Fawkes was a British mercenary who failed in his attempt to kill King James I on Nov. 5, 1605. He also was the model for the protagonist in the movie "V for Vendetta." Paul backers motivated donors on the Internet with mashed-up clips of the film on the online video site YouTube as well as the Guy Fawkes Day refrain: "Remember, remember the 5th of November."

Paul's total deposed Mitt Romney as the single-day fundraising record holder in the Republican presidential field. When it comes to sums amassed in one day, Paul now ranks only behind Democrats Hillary Rodham Clinton, who raised nearly $6.2 million on June 30, and Barack Obama.

Paul spokesman Jesse Benton said the effort began independently about two months ago at the hands of Paul's backers. He said Paul picked up on the movement, mentioning in it speeches and interviews.

"It's been kind of building up virally," Benton said.

The $4.2 million represented online contributions from more than 37,000 donors, fundraising director Jonathan Bydlak said Monday night.

Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul

RINO's run together

2007-11-05T11:50:00.001-07:00

Liberal Loveland Republican Don Marostica, famous for spending $100,000's to beat conservative Kevan McNaught by a few hundred votes in 2006, is supporting fellow RINO Rudy Giuliani.

From the Loveland Reporter-Herald:

Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani will stump in Loveland and Windsor next week. He’ll spend the night in a Loveland hotel room on Friday night, then sip his Saturday morning coffee in a Loveland cafe shortly before meeting with local supporters at a Windsor country club.

State Rep. Don Marostica — a staunch supporter of the presidential bid of the former New York City mayor — said he had to make the commitment to host Giuliani’s campaign here on short notice. “They called me last Friday (and) said you have 11 minutes to make a decision, or else we’re going to take him to Lincoln, Neb.,” Marostica said. ...

The big spenders are mostly business people who will want to discuss business issues, Marostica said.

The Colorado representative expects to far exceed the $60,000 minimum required by the fundraising committee. “I don’t want to say it was easy,” he said, “but it was pretty easy.”

Ritter is a "Hoffa" style union "toady"

2007-11-05T11:36:00.001-07:00

The Denver Post pulls no punches in it's Sunday editorial lambasting Ritter for signing an executive order to allow unionization of state employees.

Despite the bitter wailing and gnashing of teeth from of axe-grinding liberals like Jim Spencer and Jason Bane (who attempt to masquerade as journalists for ColoradoPols.com and Colorado Confidential.com) the Post's editorial is spot on.

The piece attacks both the means and the ends of Ritter plan.

A Colorado promise broken

By The Denver Post Editorial Board

When Coloradans elected Bill Ritter as governor, they thought they were getting a modern-day version of Roy Romer, a pro-business Democrat. Instead, they got Jimmy Hoffa.

Ritter campaigned under the guise of a moderate "new Democrat" but now we know he's simply a toady to labor bosses and the old vestiges of his party — a bag man for unions and special interests.

The governor on Friday unveiled his plan to drive up the cost of doing business in Colorado by forcing collective bargaining on thousands of state employees.

We're concerned this may be the beginning of the end of Ritter as governor.

By pandering to unions, and the ever-shrinking 7.7 percent of the electorate that belong to unions, he's broken his "Colorado Promise" to voters. His promise to usher in a new era of collaborative government — where business and labor, Democrats and Republicans, would all be at the table — was nothing more than a sham.

It's unconscionable for the governor of a state that's limped through lean budget years to knowingly drive up the cost of government. And for what? Political payback to unions?

He's even doing an end-run on the legislature, controlled by his own party. Instead of introducing a bill in the legislature that could be debated and fine-tuned — the collaborative process he promised — Ritter junked what has worked for Colorado for decades with the flick of a pen. He didn't even have the guts to stand before the public and announce his plan. Instead, he sent out a press release late Friday afternoon when he hoped no one was looking.

It's government by fiat.

Ritter sailed into office with an unusual but strong coalition of business and labor backing his bid. But he has now corrupted that relationship with business, and the bulk of his agenda is at risk. He also has damaged his party, which enjoys power in Colorado partly because of that moderate face they painted for themselves in recent years.

Without business in his corner, we fear Ritter won't be able to effectively shepherd a comprehensive health care solution through the statehouse. And any plans he may have for a new revenue stream for higher education are dangling by a thread, too.

Perhaps more importantly, we're concerned he's lost whatever business support he had to reform Colorado's budget process. And that could very well doom his governorship. Gov. Bill Owens was able to pass Referendum C, which freed up money for five years from the state's tight revenue caps, because he had a strong coalition of business leaders helping to win support from GOP voters, who happen to be the largest block of Colorado voters.

Ritter will be rudderless if he tries to convince voters to approve an extension of Referendum C.

Experts say collective bargaining can add as much as 30 percent to the cost of doing business. Tell us, how does that make sense for a state that can hardly pay its bills and plans to come to voters as soon as 2009 with its hand out?

Ritter's two Democratic predecessors, Dick Lamm and Romer, were able to govern for 24 years, collectively, without introducing collective bargaining.

State employees are paid well, and treated well. In fact, by one estimate, they already earn 25 percent more than workers in surrounding states and their pay is 9 percent higher than the national average. We're ninth best in the country in paying our state employees, but not long ago we were 49th in the nation in K-12 spending as a percentage of personal income. Strange priorities, indeed.

Had Ritter thought employees were somehow getting a raw deal, he could have waved his magic wand and changed all that. He is the governor, after all. Instead, he's decided to prop up unions.

Now, he runs the risk of becoming Colorado's first one-term governor since Walter Johnson in 1950.

Coloradans bought the Colorado Promise, but may end up with a trail of broken promises.

A governor with such early promise has squandered his future in order to keep his backroom promises to a few union bosses.

And Colorado is the loser.

The Denver Post's editorial board operates independently of the paper's news coverage.

Greeley Mayor attacked

2007-11-05T11:30:00.000-07:00

The Alliance for a Better Greeley has been flogging RINO Mayor Tom Selders for his tacit support of the drug and gang problems that result from illegal immigration.

TheGreeleyReport.com has the story:

Alliance for a Better Greeley spokesman John Hagen earlier today expressed outrage regarding Greeley’s gang-related percentage of homicides and methamphetamine distribution, declaring that the city’s policies - and its current mayor – “have put out the welcome mat” regarding gangs and crime, which hurts economic prosperity.
“Tom Selders went to D.C. and put Greeley on the map in front of the nation as a city that’s lax on law and order. Greeley’s citizens must now spring into action to save the city from continued crime, deteriorating quality of life, and economic decline,” said Hagen. “Gangs victimize cities perceived as weak on crime and law enforcement.”
“The housing revenue boom is over, and criminal gangs are consolidating in cities like Greeley. It’s vital every opponent of gangs & crime turn up the heat on elected officials in Greeley.”
The group stands behind the charges it made in a previous mailing, and on Saturday, a large wave of the same postcards were received by residents across Greeley.

Badda Boom, Badda Bing; Democrats Front Felon To Challenge Maristoca

2007-11-02T10:05:00.000-06:00

As reported at ToTheRight

We know the seat is hopeless for Democrats, but couldn’t they find someone without a criminal record to run in this race?

From the Fort Collins Coloradoan:

Democratic state House challenger Crusificio “Cross” Gambino pleaded guilty to class 5 felony theft charges last year stemming from check fraud and was sentenced to three years probation, according to court records.

Gambino, 30, who Tuesday announced his intention to run for House District 51 - which covers north Loveland and the southern edge of Fort Collins - could not be reached for comment Wednesday. Phone numbers for Gambino obtained by Coloradoan public records searches were not active, and knocks on the door of his Fort Collins-based marketing firm, Gambino and Associates, were not answered.

Gambino would face Republican incumbent Rep. Don Marostica in 2008 if he runs for the seat.

According to court records, Gambino pleaded guilty to class 5 felony theft charges Jan. 12, 2006, and was sentenced to three years probation March 3 the same year.

Gambino can still run for the office with a felony conviction, a spokesman for the state Secretary of State’s Office said Wednesday.

“If you are a felon serving a prison sentence or on parole, you cannot vote,” spokesman Richard Coolidge said. “As it relates to a candidate for an office, if you’re on probation, there is nothing that would (preclude) you from running.”

Gambino said Tuesday he has been a longtime supporter of the Democratic Party. A check of voter registration records showed Gambino as a registered unaffiliated voter in Weld County.

Calls to Larimer County Democratic Chairman Adam Bowen and a late afternoon call to Marostica were not answered.

Dick Wadhams needs to stop insulting conservatives

2007-11-02T09:15:00.000-06:00

The Colorado GOP has a long history of making poor choices when it comes to Republican primaries (Think Randy Graff) and they've done it again.

So-called "political genius," and state party Chair Dick Wadhams publicly insulted a sitting member of Congress from his own party.

From The Politico.com:

“The most lethal charge against Doug [Lamborn] is that he just doesn’t have the personal and intellectual strength to be the congressman for the 5th District.”

If Wadhams truly wanted to stay out of the CO-5 primary, he would have sat on his hands and said nothing. Given Wadhams willingness to push around Wayne Wolf, Bob Schaffer's primary opponent, he has shown he IS willing to support primary candidates.

Wadhams is wrong to publicly attack a conservative member of congress.

Shame on Dick Wadhams, shame on the state party.

Rudy: I'm not a Republican

2007-10-30T11:44:00.000-06:00

Rudy on running for NYC Mayor:

"Well, I'm a Republican mayor, but I"m really not. I'm the mayor of New York City. I ran as a Republican, I ran as a Liberal — which really confuses all kinds of people — and I ran as an Independent, as part of the Independent Party, which actually is now the party that's supporting Ross Perot. So I ran a fusion candidacy, like my predecessor Fiorello LaGuardia. So I'm not the most partisan of Republicans."

The video:

Huckabee is liberal

2007-10-30T11:37:00.000-06:00

The Wall Street Journal's John Fund attack's Huckabee's liberal record on MSNBC's Tucker Carlson show:

You can read the full WSJ article here.

Money quote from Phyllis Schlafly:

Phyllis Schlafly, president of the national Eagle Forum, is even more blunt. "He destroyed the conservative movement in Arkansas, and left the Republican Party a shambles," she says. "Yet some of the same evangelicals who sold us on George W. Bush as a 'compassionate conservative' are now trying to sell us on Mike Huckabee."

RINO Bill Owens piles on:

Governors who served with him praise Mr. Huckabee for his ability to work with others, but say he was clearly a moderate. "He fought my efforts to reform the National Governors Association and always took fiscal positions to my left," former Colorado Gov. Bill Owens, a supporter of Mitt Romney, told me.

A Colorado Rockies Win Could Spell A Loss For Conservative Politics

2007-10-25T12:07:00.000-06:00

Ok, the title of this post is abit dramatic. Needed to make a point though.

Representative Tom Tancredo has announced that he will announce his decision on whether to run for Colorado's Sixth Congressional District the day after the World Series ends. While Tancredo could go either way with his decision, many fear that he will decide not to seek another term in Congress. That being the case, is there a way we can convince Rockies skipper Clint Hurdle to not win the final series clinching game until after the November 2008 election?

Yes, it would be the longest game in World Series history. A game that lasted over a year and if my math is correct would be somewhere around 26,208 innings long. We're talking about the Rockies though, they can get an RBI whenever they want and defensively speaking Troy Tulowitzki could probably handle the fielding by himself.

It is possible.

It also would also be well worth it to keep a conservative hero like Tom Tancredo in office. Tom has single handedly brought the issue of immigration to the forefront of politics. With the exception of perhaps Ron Paul no other representative sparks enthusiasm among hard line conservatives the way Tom Tancredo does. You name the issue and I guarantee you Tancredo is on the right side of it.

While those in line to fill the 6th would make great members of Congress, it will be abit disheartening to see someone like Tancredo leave us(at least for the time being).

Congressman Tancredo we salute you and while we are eager for the Rockies to bring home that World Series trophy, I for one would be willing to wait just abit longer to get it.

From Roll Call (only those with subscriptions can view the article online)

Tancredo's Decision
He’ll Reveal Re-election Plans at the Conclusion of the World Series
By David M. Drucker
Roll Call Staff

Play Ball! While most of Colorado surely is preoccupied with the Colorado Rockies’ first World Series appearance, a subset of fans located in the Centennial State’s 6th district probably is anticipating Major League Baseball’s main event for another reason.

Rep. Tom Tancredo (R), who is in the midst of a long-shot presidential bid, will announce the day after the Series ends whether he will run for re-election to his House seat. His retirement could ignite a heated GOP primary in the solidly Republican 6th district between state Sens. Ted Harvey and Tom Wiens and small-business man Wil Armstrong, the son of former Sen. Bill Armstrong (R-Colo.).

Tancredo spokesman T.Q. Houlton confirmed this week that his boss would reveal his 2008 plans the day after the last Rockies game. That could come as soon as Monday, should either the Rockies or the Boston Red Sox sweep the best-of-seven series, which was scheduled to begin Wednesday night after Roll Call went to press.

The first two games were scheduled to be played in Boston, with games three and four scheduled for Saturday and Sunday in Denver.

“People very close to him don’t think he’s going to run,” said one knowledgeable Colorado Republican. “But I still have a hard time thinking he’s going to walk away from everything.”

While stoking his White House ambitions for the past several months, Tancredo has long eyed the 2010 Senate race and a potential matchup against Sen. Ken Salazar (D). Many Colorado insiders have speculated that Tancredo will run for Senate in 2010, retaining his House seat until then.

The younger Armstrong said Wednesday that he is giving serious consideration to running for the 6th district GOP nomination in 2008 — but only if Tancredo retires at the end of his current term, his fifth in the House.

“I care what’s going on in our district and our state and our country, and if he chooses not to run again I will think very hard about it. I’m leaning that way,” Armstrong said. “But frankly, if he stays as my Congressman, I’d be thrilled. He’s done a great job and I have lot of admiration for him.”

Armstrong, Harvey and Wiens each would make a strong candidate, according to Republican strategists, although each has a potential downside. Colorado Secretary of State Mike Coffman (R) also is seen as a formidable candidate, but GOP activists would prefer he hold off running until 2010, as Gov. Bill Ritter (D) presumably would appoint a Democrat to replace him if he ran for Congress next year and won.

Tancredo mostly is known for his ardent opposition to illegal immigration and his work in Congress to overhaul federal immigration law. Tancredo’s outspokenness on the matter has helped him build a national public profile, and his supporters credit him for the fact that addressing illegal immigration has become a major campaign issue in the presidential race and in many Congressional contests.

Strident remarks Tancredo has made on other subjects — including that dropping a nuclear bomb on Mecca in Saudi Arabia should be a military option in the war on terror — have added to his run of national publicity.

However, Colorado Republicans note that he remains beloved in his district, and they contend that he is known for more than illegal immigration back home. Republicans there say his support for education reform and his opposition to wasteful government spending has earned him a reputation for being a reliable conservative on issues important to Republican voters.

Like Armstrong, Harvey is interested in running for Congress if Tancredo retires. Harvey said most political activists in the district place the odds of Tancredo running again at 50-50, although they are beginning to believe more and more that he will seek a sixth term.

If Tancredo does retire, Harvey predicted a crowded and competitive GOP primary to replace him, as the district leans heavily Republican and the winner of the intraparty contest likely would cruise to victory in the general election. Tancredo’s worst performance since ascending to the House in 1998 occurred in 2000, when he won re-election with 54 percent of the vote.

President Bush won the suburban Denver 6th district with 60 percent of the vote in 2000 and 2004.

“I think the primary will be a highly contested race,” Harvey said.

Harvey said he would wait for Tancredo’s decision before figuring out his own plans. The state Senator has two young children, ages 7 and 10, and he said that definitely would factor into his decision.

Wiens could not be reached for comment on Wednesday.

The state Senate districts held by Harvey and Wiens include separate though significant chunks of the 6th Congressional district. That could give each of them an advantage over other potential primary candidates, although their support does not extend outside of their legislative seats.

Armstrong’s father, the former Senator, is still revered by Colorado Republicans, and that could help the small-business man should he run for Congress. However, he would have to overcome the notion that he is trying to win a political office on his father’s coattails.

“Ted [Harvey] and Tom [Wiens] both are very serious, legitimate candidates,” the knowledgeable Colorado Republican said. “But I think Wil [Armstrong] is the intriguing wild card that could surprise a lot of people. I don’t think there’s a frontrunner in it.”

John McCain On Woodstock And Clinton

2007-10-23T15:10:00.000-06:00

In case you missed it McCain had by far the most memorable line of the night at the recent GOP debate.

Right or Left brained?

2007-10-22T12:24:00.000-06:00

Check out the link below to see if you're right brain or left brain oriented.
Right Brain or Left Brain?
When I looked at it this morning I swear it was moving counterclockwise now it is definately moving clockwise and I am having a hard time forcing myself to see it otherwise.
(Hat tip to former Colorado political operative, turned VA GOP spokesman, Shaun Kenney for the link)

Learning To Say You're Sorry

2007-10-22T10:33:00.000-06:00

Intersting article from Roll Call that points to some of the underlying motivations that push both Republicans and Democrats to do what they do.

From Roll Call (Unfortunately the only way you can only access the actual article is if you have a subscription to Roll Call)

By Stuart Rothenberg

October 22, 2007

If there is anything that points out the difference between most Republicans and most Democrats, it is Congress’ effort to pass a resolution that labels Turkey’s slaughter of Armenians almost a century ago as “genocide.”

The White House has opposed the action, which has been pushed by House Democrats. While some Republicans have been supporting the measure (and supported previous attempts to please Armenian-Americans by embarrassing Turkey), the current resolution is primarily a Democratic initiative on Capitol Hill.

But if you cut through all of the politicking and even put aside the specifics of the current controversy, you see that fundamentally, the issue is this: For Republicans, politics is never having to say you’re sorry. For Democrats, politics primarily is about an endless number of apologies and condolences, and a feeling of unquenchable guilt, though it tends to be institutional, not personal.

Republicans apparently figure that what’s past is past, so you might as well forget about it. You got a problem? Deal with it. As a party, the GOP isn’t big on apologies, reparations or public assertions of sympathy.

It’s not that Republicans never experience guilt. Actually, they are drowning in it. But it’s personal guilt, some of it apparently coming from original sin (except for Rep. Eric Cantor [Va.] and Sens. Arlen Specter [Pa.] and Norm Coleman [Minn.], no doubt).

As former President Bill Clinton proved, Democrats are much better at publicly feeling people’s pain, even if it occurred more than 100 years ago and all of the people actually involved in the incident are long gone. It doesn’t even matter whether the United States was involved. Democrats pretty much are ready to apologize or commiserate for anything, anyplace and anytime.

Luckily for Democrats, we’ve had centuries of people oppressing people around the world, so there is almost an endless supply of brutalities and injustices deserving of attention, classification, condemnation and apology.

In fact, so many unfortunate things have happened over the past few centuries that the next Democratic Congress can spend pretty much all of its time, if it wants to, apologizing to groups and demanding that other people apologize, too. Democrats have only begun to scratch the surface on groups they want to apologize to.

The problem for the Democrats is that the controversy over Congress’ steps to assert that Turkey was guilty of a policy of genocide isn’t a laughing matter — at least it isn’t to the Turks. Instead, it is the first truly dumb thing that Democrats may have done since the party won both chambers of Congress last year.

It now looks as if House Democrats may put the Armenian genocide measure in the deep freeze, hoping that everyone forgets about it. But while that may limit the damage that the party could cause itself, burying the measure wouldn’t inoculate Democrats completely from the fallout caused by their initial efforts to pass the resolution.

I recently asked a couple of Democrats — an incumbent Member of Congress from a Democratic-leaning district who is on record supporting the measure and a long-shot Congressional challenger in a Republican district — whether they now favored the genocide resolution, and both acted as if the measure were infected with botulism.

The resolution has strained U.S.-Turkish relations at exactly the worst time, when a Turkish incursion into Iraq could complicate the already complicated American military and political mission in Iraq.

“Democrats are harming the future of the United States and are encouraging anti-American sentiments,” Turkish Premier Recep Tayyip Erdogan asserted about 10 days ago.

Democrats, of course, have been criticizing President Bush for years for allegedly contributing to an increase in anti-Americanism around the world, so Erdogan’s comment gives Republicans ammunition to use against Democrats.

If Turkey’s military forces cross into Iraq to attack Kurdish guerillas, Republicans could well try to change the subject of Iraq by blaming Democrats for antagonizing the government of Turkey and undermining the U.S. effort in Iraq.

Democrats have been successful for the past few years by keeping the focus on GOP failures and by criticizing Bush administration policies. But the House leadership’s miscalculations on the “genocide” resolution points out both that making policy is more difficult than criticizing and that House Democrats are likely to make their share of problems when they become more ambitious.

CASA requests liberal mayor's records

2007-10-18T10:33:00.000-06:00

I just got this press release from the Colorado Alliance for a Secure America:

October 18th, 2007
Greeley City Clerk

Attn: Betsy Holder
Greeley City Clerk’s Office
100 10th Street
Greeley, CO 80631

Re: Open Records Act Request

Dear Ms Holder:

Please consider this letter to be a request for records pursuant to the Colorado Open Records Act, C.R.S. § 24-72-201 et seq. (the “Act”).

Our organization is seeking records pertaining to the “contingency plan” concerning revised departmental budgets as presented or discussed by City Manager Roy Otto in the spring of 2007. Of course, we will pay reasonable costs for such information. This would include any paper or electronic communication that the Greeley Tribune recently referred to as involving “Greeley City Council proposing to cut…the police budget. Police Chief Jerry Garner and City Manager Roy Otto said…that all city departments had to have a contingency plan -- which included some cuts -- if city revenue dropped much more.”

Again, any communication pertaining to the “contingency plan”. We have also served this request upon the City of Greeley IT department to prevent any electronic communication from being deleted, as that would violate the intent and letter of the Colorado Open Records Act, C.R.S. § 24-72-201.

A copy of this request has been forwarded to all parties named herein, the State Attorney General, the local and state media, and likewise forwarded to our counsel. As the nature of this request goes to the heart of certain issues that Greeley residents may consider important in the short term, time is of the essence.

Please forward the information or contact me for any questions/clarification via the number(s) below as soon as possible.

Thanks very much.

Sincerely,

Chrisann Reese
Executive Director

CASA has been attacking liberal Greeley mayor Tom Selders over his weak stance on illegal immigration.

You can keep up to date on all the goings on in Greeley at the new blog the Greeley Report.

GOP Lawyer gives money to Dems

2007-10-18T10:29:00.001-06:00

Prominent RINO lawyer -- and State GOP counsel -- John Zakhem has been giving money to Democrats.

The Grand Junction Sentinel reports the Zakhem gave $400 to Rep. Bernie Buescher. Additionally, former GOP state representative Gayle Berry also gave money to Buescher.

From the report:

In his campaign finance filings, Buescher reported receiving $400 from John Zakhem, a Denver-based, Republican lawyer and former attorney for the Trailhead Group, a political campaign committee that targeted Buescher last year.

“(Zakhem) is perhaps as prominent a Republican as there is out there, and I was very pleased,” Buescher said. “I think that is demonstrative of the fact that I’ve been able to reach across the aisle and work with members of both parties.”

More than 30 percent of Buescher’s contributions, $1,150, came from lobbyists, including $100 from former Grand Junction Republican Rep. Gayle Berry, the documents show.

GOP musical chairs

2007-10-17T16:29:00.000-06:00

In the era of term limits, jockeying for electoral advantage has taken on a mythic level.

Senator Ron May is expect to announce his retirement, paving the way for Rep. Bill Cadman to take over his senate seat, via vacancy committee.

It is widely believed that Doug Bruce, author of TABOR, will full Cadman's house seat.

Rumors to this affect have been swirling around the golden dome since early this year, and it seems like now we're just waiting for May's announcement to put these balls in motion.

Muhammad Ali Hasan files in SD-8

2007-10-16T14:14:00.000-06:00

From ToTheRight.

October 11, 2007 (Eagle County) — Eagle County resident and political news commentator Muhammad Ali Hasan has filed as a candidate for Colorado State Senate District 8 with the Secretary of State. While a final decision on a run for the seat is not expected until January, Hasan has decided to move forward in the process to adhere to state campaign laws and to allow for more liberty in exploring his options.

“I have a deep respect for campaign laws,” Hasan said. “Since there is no provision for exploratory committees is Colorado, filing shows everyone I am serious about thoroughly evaluating a possible run. I plan to use the next few months to have conversations with residents and local party leadership before making my final decision.”

Hasan has an extensive background in political commentating for national news networks and as a political activist. Locally, Hasan was a founding member of the Eagle County Young Republicans, served as their first president, and currently serves on the Eagle County Republicans Finance Committee. Hasan holds a Masters degree and is a former public school teacher to extremely low-income, urban students.

Senate District 8, currently represented by term limited Republican Jack Taylor, includes all of Eagle, Jackson, Moffat, Rio Blanco and Routt counties, as well as parts of Garfield county. Hasan said he believes he could bring new energy, ideas and a commitment to be an advocate for the issues that matter most in Senate District 8.

Hasan’s high energy and interest in local issues is appealing, said business owner Rick Spencer of Routt County. The two met on several occasions as Hasan traveled the district, and Spencer said Hasan “leaves an impression.”

“He is highly energetic and he seems very curious,” Spencer said. “He gets very involved in things and is really working hard to get in step with what is going on here and what matters to our counties.”

Jeannie Ford Artez of Glenwood Springs said she is also impressed by Hasan’s energy and eagerness.

“Though I haven’t decided who to endorse yet, personally I think he is a terrific young man who is very bright,” Artez said. “I have very much enjoyed meeting with him and I look forward to seeing what he is going to do.”

Should Conservatives Support Rudy Giuliani?

2007-10-14T20:02:00.000-06:00

(Hat tip to a veteran CO Republican operative for the story)

From Scripps Howard News

"The most important 'traditional value' in this election is keeping the Clintons out of the White House," says Greg Alterton, an evangelical Christian who writes for SoConsForRudy.com and counts himself among Rudolph Giuliani's social-conservative supporters.

People like Alterton are important, if overlooked, in the Republican presidential sweepstakes. Anti-Giuliani Religious Rightists are far more visible. Also conspicuous are pundits whose cartoon version of social conservatism regards abortion and gay rights as "the social issues," excluding other traditionalist concerns.

New York's former mayor "has abandoned social conservatism," commentator Maggie Gallagher complains. He "is anathema to social conservatives," veteran columnist Robert Novak recently wrote. Focus on the Family founder Dr. James Dobson has said: "I cannot, and will not, vote for Rudy Giuliani in 2008." Dobson and a cadre of Religious Right leaders threaten to deploy a pro-life, third-party candidate should Giuliani be nominated.

This "Rudyphobia" ignores Giuliani's pro-family/anti-abortion ideas, his socially conservative mayoral record, and his popularity among churchgoing Republicans.

While Giuliani accepts a woman's right to an abortion, he told Iowa voters in August: "By working together to promote personal responsibility and a culture of life, Americans can limit abortions and increase adoptions." Among Giuliani's relevant proposals:

--"My administration will streamline the adoption process by removing the heartbreaking bureaucratic delays that burden the current process." Giuliani notes that sclerotic court schedules, exhausted social workers, and tangled red tape prevent moms and dads from adopting some 115,000 boys and girls in foster care.

-- Giuliani wants the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives to promote organizations that help women choose adoption over abortion.

-- He would like to make permanent the $10,000 adoption tax credit.

-- Giuliani also would encourage states and cities to report timely and complete statistics to measure progress in abortion reduction.

This is no sudden conversion on the road to Washington. As mayor, Giuliani did nothing to advance abortion. On his watch, total abortions fell 13 percent across America, but slid 17 percent in New York. Between 1993 and 2001, Gotham's tax-funded Medicaid abortions plunged 23 percent.

Giuliani's campaign for personal responsibility created a climate that seemingly discouraged abortion. Moving 58 percent of recipients from welfare to work may have encouraged women and men to avoid unwanted pregnancies. New York's 57 percent overall-crime reduction and 67 percent homicide drop probably reinforced such self-control.

Compared to the eight Democratic years before he arrived, adoptions under Giuliani soared 133 percent.

-- Giuliani also proposed eliminating the city's $2,000 marriage penalty. He chopped it to $400.

-- Giuliani opposed gay marriage in 1989. "My definition of family is what it is," Giuliani told Newsday 18 years ago. "It does not include gay marriage as part of that definition."

-- He jettisoned New York's minority and women-owned business set-aside program. Giuliani explained: "The whole idea of quotas to me perpetuates discrimination."

-- Giuliani sliced or scrapped 23 taxes totaling $9.8 billion and shrank New York's tax burden 17 percent. This left parents more money for children's healthcare, private-school tuition, etc.

Giuliani could have governed comfortably as a pro-abortion, pro-welfare, pro-quota, soft-on-crime, tax-and-spend, liberal Republican. Instead, Giuliani relentlessly pushed Reaganesque socio-economic reforms through a City Council populated by seven Republicans and 44 Democrats.

These accomplishments may explain why he leads his competitors and impresses churchgoers. Among Republicans in an Oct. 3 ABC/Washington Post poll, Giuliani outran former Sen. Fred Thompson, 34 percent to 17, versus Sen. John McCain's 12 percent, and Mitt Romney's 11. As "most electable," Giuliani scored 50 percent, versus McCain's 15, Thompson's 13, and Romney's 6.

An Oct. 3 Gallup survey found Giuliani enjoying a 38 percent net-favorable rating among churchgoing Catholics, compared to McCain's 29, and Thompson's 25. Among Protestant churchgoers, Thompson edges Giuliani 26 percent to 23, with McCain at 16, and Romney at 7.

Religious Right leaders should study Giuliani's entire, socially conservative record, not just the "socially liberal" caricature of it that hostile commentators and lazy journalists keep sketching. Social conservatives should not make the perfect enemy of the outstanding. Ultimately, they should recognize that a pro-life, third-party candidate would subtract votes from Giuliani in November 2008.

This would raise the curtain on a 3-D horror movie for social conservatives: "The Clintons Reconquer Washington" -- bigger, badder, and more vindictive than ever.

The Truth about S-CHIP

2007-10-11T13:59:00.000-06:00

Congrats are due to Marilyn Musgrave, Doug Lamborn and Tom Tancredo for their opposition to the ridiculous S-CHIP legislation.

The Liberal Left has so distorted the facts, that I thought a brief reminder of what S-CHIP really is, would be in order.

Here is some of the analysis done by Republican Study Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling:

H.R. 976 reauthorizes and significantly expands the State Children’s Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), while increasing cigarette taxes to supposedly offset the bill’s costs. The legislation follows closely the Senate-passed version of SCHIP reauthorization, expanding the program but discarding much of the Medicare-related provisions included in the House-passed legislation. Highlights of the bill are as follows:

Cost: H.R. 976 provides $34.9 billion over five years and $71.5 billion over ten years in new mandatory spending—this spending is on top of the $25 billion over five years that would result from a straight extension of the program. The House-passed version provided $47.4 billion over five years and $128.7 billion in new SCHIP spending (as well as billions of non-SCHIP spending).

The new spending is partially offset by increasing taxes on tobacco products (see below). However, this CBO score overlooks a major gimmick which the bill employs to lower its costs. The bill dramatically lowers the SCHIP funding in the fifth year by 80%, from $14.25 billion in the first six months to $1.75 billion. In all likelihood, such a reduction would not actually take effect, which would make this an effort to generate unrealistic savings in order to comply with PAYGO rules. To that end, H.R. 976 is technically compliant with PAYGO.

Some of the worst parts of S-CHIP include:

Encourages Spending: H.R. 976 shortens from three to two years the amount of time a state has to spend its annual SCHIP allotment. Under current law, states are given three years to spend each year’s original allotment, and at the end of the three-year period, any unused funds are redistributed to states that have exhausted their allotment or created a “shortfall,” i.e. making commitments beyond the funding it has available. In addition, the bill establishes a process through which any unspent funds would be redistributed to any states with a shortfall. Some conservatives may be concerned that this process provides incentives both for states to spend their allotment quickly and to extend their programs beyond their regular allotments into shortfall, so as to be relieved by the unspent funds of other states or the new Contingency Fund (see above).

Expansion to Higher Incomes: Under current law, states can cover families earning up to 200% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) or $41,300 for a family of four in 2007 or those at 50% above Medicaid eligibility. However, states have been able to “disregard” income with regard to eligibility for the program, meaning they can purposefully ignore various types of income in an effort to expand eligibility. For instance, New Jersey covers up to 350% of FPL by disregarding any income from 200-350%, allowing them to cover beyond 200% with the enhanced federal matching funds that SCHIP provides.

As of 2010, H.R. 976 increases the eligibility limit to 300% of FPL or $61,950 for a family of four but also continues the current authority for states to define and disregard income. States which extend coverage beyond 300% of FPL would receive the lower Medicaid match rate. The bill also grandfathers states with an approved state plan amendment (or a state about to submit such an amendment in compliance with state law) that already covers those above 300% of poverty. This provision is for New Jersey and New York (seeking to cover 400% of FPL or $82,600 for a family of four). In addition, Section 116 of the bill overturns CMS’ current policy of requiring states to ensure that 95% of the eligible children in their state below 250% of FPL are enrolled before expanding coverage to higher incomes.

Adult Coverage: Under current law, some states cover nonpregnant, childless adults—these states have received waivers in the past in an effort to expand health insurance to uninsured populations, even though the program was intended for children. H.R. 976 would prohibit any further waivers but would provide continued funding for existing coverage of such adults through FY 2008. Beginning in FY 2009, funding for nonpregnant childless adults will be capped at FY 2008 levels, but states would receive the lower Medicaid match and be limited to only covering those already enrolled.

Additionally, the bill also weakens current law regarding illegal aliens recieving S-CHIP monies, increases taxes and penalizes those with private insurance.

The bottom line is simple: the bill would expand the SCHIP program by $35 billion over five years and loosen the program’s eligibility requirements while astronomically expanding the big-government welfare state.

Huckabee: unions are the future

2007-10-11T12:10:00.000-06:00

Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee's populist campaign continues to stray from conservative, and even Republican ideology with his support of labor unions. This sort of apostasy doesn't go over will with the base.

From Change to Win (a union political website) Huckabee says:

"The real fact is, unions are going to take a more prominent role in the future for one simple reason: A lot of American workers are finding that their wages continue to get strapped lower and lower while CEO salaries are higher and higher.

And the reality is that when you have the average CEO salary 500 times the average worker, and you have the hedge fund manager making 2,200 times that of the average worker, you're going to create a level of discontent that's going to create a huge appetite for unions.

So unions are the natural result of workers finally saying, "Look, I can't go from a $70,000 year job to a $15,000 a year job and feed my family of four." That's when unions are going to come back in roaring form."

This is the hallmark of unionism: violence against workers.

NARAL wants Rudy

2007-10-11T12:04:00.000-06:00

The national pro-abortion lobby, NARAL, is saying that a Giuliani Presidency would be good for the pro-abortion "movement."

From Huffington Post:

NARAL's political director Elizabeth Shipp acknowledged it "would help" the pro-choice movement if a Republican proved it was possible to win the presidency while still supporting abortion rights...

As mayor of New York City, Giuliani had a pro-choice record, which has come under intense scrutiny since he entered the presidential race. In the GOP debates this past May, Giuliani said "it would be okay" to repeal Roe v. Wade, before adding, "But ultimately, since it is an issue of conscience, I would respect a woman's right to make a different choice." In recent weeks, a coalition of prominent Christian conservative figures has threatened to support a third-party candidate should Giuliani win the Republican nomination.

NARAL has yet to announce an endorsement in the 2008 race. But Shipp acknowledged that Giuliani is the lone Republican in the field who could potentially win the organization's support. [Emphasis added]

Musgrave's image improving; while maintaining principle

2007-10-11T11:08:00.000-06:00

Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave gets a decent write up from today's Fort Collins Coloradoan on her re-branding and the "Musgrave 2.0" phenomenon.

"I've worked hand-in-hand with numerous Democrats to address bread-and-butter issues that are relevant to my district," Musgrave said in a statement. "My bipartisan efforts to pass (emergency) agricultural disaster assistance are far more important than a procedural vote."...

"Where she has reached out to the Democratic side, it has been on issues of direct concern to Colorado," Wadhams said. "I don't think there's any suggestion that she was changing her overall mainstream philosophy as a member of Congress."

There goes the electability arguement

2007-10-11T10:08:00.000-06:00

A recently release Quinnipiac poll has Rudy Giuliani struggling head to head with Hillary Clinton in many battle ground states.

This certainly hurts his elect-ability argument.

The bottom ine:

Matchups by the independent Quinnipiac (KWIN-uh-pe-ack) University poll finds:

Florida: Clinton tops Giuliani 46 - 43 percent, breaking a 44 - 44 percent tie September 12;
Ohio: Clinton tops Giuliani 46 - 40 percent, compared to 47 - 40 percent September 6;
Pennsylvania: Clinton beats Giuliani 48 - 42 percent, up from 46 - 44 percent August 23.

"The news just keeps getting better for Sen. Clinton. She has a Democratic primary lead over Sen. Obama ranging from 27 to 34 points in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania and is widening her margin over the Republican hopefuls in each of those three critical states," said Peter A. Brown, assistant director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.

(H/T: NRO's The Campaign Spot)

There's more to Life than just judges

2007-10-11T09:21:00.000-06:00

From today's National Review Online:

Douglas Sylva on "We need a president to do more than just appoint the right justices." The Money Quote:

The “Pro-life, Pro-family” voting contingent require a candidate who sees threats as they do — as the pervasive efforts of cultural and social elites— and who is vigilant, and active, and courageous in response to these threats...

President George W. Bush has been that champion, and his administration has proven just how much more there is for a conservative president to do to than to select judges, even Supreme Court justices.

For years now an effort has been underway at the United Nation, for instance, to reinterpret international law in the hope of creating a universal right to abortion on demand. Various forces at the U.N. also seek to redefine the family, to establish complete sexual autonomy for adolescents, to create a worldwide right to homosexual marriage, to depress world fertility rates, and to legalize cloning in order to create human embryos for medical research...

More specifically, on his very first day in office, Bush reinstated the Reagan-era “Mexico City Policy,” which restricts federal funding from non-governmental organizations that perform or promote abortions in foreign countries. His enemies erupted in anger, naming the Mexico City Policy the “Global Gag Rule,” and claiming that Bush would be responsible for killing women who would not have recourse to legal abortions....

Would Giuliani have taken any one of these important actions? Not caring much about these issues, would Giuliani have even known about the threats? It is time for Rudy to acknowledge what pro-lifers already know only too well: that they need a president to do more than just appoint the right justices. Executive-branch neutrality is not acceptable. Rudy has to tell “Pro-life, Pro-family” voters whether or not he can be this sort of president, and he can start by promising to continue George W. Bush’s fight — his entire fight for life and family — at the United Nations.

The unnecessary Bush cheering aside, I think this is spot on. And for the record, I don't believe Rudy knows about pro-life issues and frankly I don't think he cares either.

Giuliani, abortion and Christians

2007-10-10T19:27:00.000-06:00

I feel a couple of comments need to be made about John Galt's posting of The Hill's article on the third party controversy that has arisen in the last severals day, as well as the incoherent blabbering over at the re-activated RockyMountainPolitics.

It isn't news that the leaders of the major Christian groups didn't agree on a potential pro-life third party candidates. That was reported in the original article.

The larger point is they were all in unanimous agreement that they would not support Rudy Giuliani for President.

Additionally 27% of Republican voters say they would support a pro-life, third party candidate over Giuliani. Regardless of what Gary Bauer and Tony Perkins do or say, the natives are restless.

I will not vote, under any circumstance vote for a pro-abortion Republican for President. Enough of my fellow Christians feel the same way, that it will be next to impossible for Giuliani to win.

I highly recommend this post from RedState.com. It is a passionate response to the knuckle-heads in the Giuliani personality cult.

Money quote from Red Sox Republican:

...what my pro-Rudy friends don't seem to understand is that for guys like me, support for Rudy is a non-negotiable proposition. And it's not just (or even primarily) because he's a dirty, stinking Yankees fan. It is, of course, the abortion thing.

Now, a lot of people say that abortion is just an "issue" and that it's wrong to let a single issue dictate your whole politics. Generally, that's a sound proposition. I guess there are a wide variety of reasons that people might oppose abortion - but I oppose it because I think it's killing. And the way it's practiced in this country, it's a *lot* of killing. It's killing in numbers per annum that roughly equal the holocaust. And so I'm sorry to say that it's simply not an option for me in my conscience to pull the lever for a guy who supports the continuation of current abortion policy in the United States.

This is the point in the conversation where my pro-Rudy friends generally interject, "Yes, but, *HILLARY!!!*" And then I have to wonder whether I'm speaking clearly or something, or whether my pro-Rudy friends have somehow gotten the idea that the concept of supporting a candidate who would stand by and allow what I consider to be mass infanticide is a negotiable one. So let me just say it: it isn't. Sorry if you got the wrong impression, here, but I'm not really interested in being persuaded on this point.

I think that part of what makes this so insulting is that there's so little else about Rudy which might even make me think about at least standing aside for him, if not actively working for him. At this point, the only arguments I have ever heard for why Rudy would allegedly be good for this country are these:

1. He's not Hillary Clinton
2. He'd aggressively continue the war in Iraq

Well, put me on the growing list for whom #2 isn't such a high priority any more, and as for #1, well, the country survived Andrew Johnson, Jimmy Carter, LBJ, and Bill Clinton; it will survive Hillary Clinton. And the parade of horrors that would supposedly attend a Hillary Presidency are simply not enough for me to vote for a guy who is pro-legal-abortion. Not even close. So, I mean, thanks for the effort, Rudy fans, but perhaps you'd better move on to someone else in that 27% group, because the issue is not up for negotiation here.

Lamborn Gets Seat On House Armed Services Committee

2007-10-10T17:26:00.000-06:00

Press Release Below

LAMBORN BECOMES ACTIVE MEMBER OF
HOUSE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE

WASHINGTON – Today, Congressman Doug Lamborn (CO-5) became an active member of the House Armed Services Committee.

"It is an honor to have the privilege of serving as an active member of the House Armed Services Committee. Colorado’s Fifth District is the proud home of five military installations and is one of our nation’s most military-intensive congressional districts. Our strong military presence is a great source of pride for my constituency, and I am proud to represent them as a member of the Armed Services Committee.

It is critical for Congress to enact strong defense policies that ensure our servicemen and women are provided with the training, the tools, and the resources necessary to keep America safe. Serving on the House Armed Services Committee will afford me the opportunity to ensure our military interests are advanced in order to meet our national security requirements.

The loss of Congresswoman Jo Anne Davis (VA-1) is something the Davis family, friends, and Congressional community will mourn, but her life and dedication to public service will serve as an inspiration to all of us. She will be missed. I intend serve on the House Armed Services Committee with the high honor and integrity she exhibited during her tenure." – Congressman Doug Lamborn (CO-5)

###

The Ram Republic Debuts At CSU

2007-10-10T10:49:00.000-06:00

The aftermath of CSU newspaper the Collegians infamous headline, has lead conservatives on campus to start their own newspaper The Ram Republic. To view the newspaper or to donate to their cause click here.

Social conservative leaders back off third-party threat but still fear Giuliani

2007-10-10T10:39:00.000-06:00

From The Hill

Evangelical leaders Gary Bauer and Tony Perkins said Wednesday it is still possible for social conservative Republican voters to find a candidate to rally behind, and painted another Clinton administration as the worst outcome of the 2008 election.

Speaking to reporters at a breakfast sponsored by The Christian Science Monitor in advance of next week’s Values Voter Summit, Bauer and Perkins backed away from earlier threats that Christian conservatives would consider a third-party bid if a pro-abortion rights candidate wins the GOP nomination. They both agreed that supporting such a bid next year would virtually “guarantee” Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton’s (D-N.Y.) victory.

“Politics by nature is a messy business,” Bauer said. “And you rarely find somebody who agrees with you all the time.”

Perkins agreed with that assessment, but he said social conservatives have not found a candidate who stands out on their issues.

Bauer said former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani is the most “problematic from the standpoint of values voters.” Both men said they thought that former Sen. Fred Thompson (Tenn.) did well in his debate debut, that former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney can overcome questions about his religion and — perhaps most surprisingly — that former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee is perceived to be good on their issues but soft on terrorism.

Perkins and Bauer said social conservatives’ fears of a Clinton win will not be enough to motivate evangelical voters, pointing to Giuliani as a candidate who might not be able to stir evangelical support.

“He gives social conservatives very little to be motivated about,” Perkins said.

But the conservative leaders acknowledged that there is a divide currently among social conservatives as to what is more important to their base, social issues or projected national security strength.

Bauer said the divide is “puzzling” to Washington-based evangelical leaders, but Perkins maintained that once social conservatives know more about Giuliani’s position on abortion, his support would weaken.

“I think it’s a stretch for Mayor Giuliani to get a majority of the social conservative vote once it’s all said and done,” Perkins said.

Perkins said Giuliani would need to experience a “road-to-Des Moines conversion,” and Bauer said Giuliani’s early stumble on federally funded abortions was akin to “sticking your fingers in both eyes” of social conservatives.

Perkins and Bauer said Giuliani has not gone far enough to assuage their concerns by saying that he would appoint “strict constructionist” judges.

“He’s trying to send all sorts of signals,” Bauer said. “But he [has] got a hard sell, and it’s going to take a lot more.”

Perkins cited the influence that the conservative movement has had over the Bush administration, particularly after it was able to pressure the White House to fix what they considered a huge mistake in the form of Bush’s attempt to appoint former White House counsel Harriet Miers to the Supreme Court.

“Saying you’re going to appoint conservative judges is not enough,” Perkins said. “I’m under no illusion that social conservatives would have any influence in the Giuliani administration.”

When asked what Giuliani would have to do to allay their fears, Perkins and Bauer said a legitimate conversion on the abortion issue or some sort of behind-closed-doors pledge to be strong on their issues would be required.

Perkins and Bauer said they are both convinced that Romney’s evolution on the abortion issue is a legitimate conversion, “even if the movement tends to coincide with a primary schedule,” as Bauer said.

“I don’t think he’s flip-flopping,” Perkins said.

The two conservative leaders said they remain optimistic that a Republican candidate who is strong on their issues can win next year, but they think Giuliani against Clinton in the general election would be a “frustrating option.”

What does not appear to be an option next year is a break with the GOP in support of a third-party candidate.

While conservative religious leaders said last week the move is something they would consider, Bauer and Perkins said doing so would ensure a Democratic president. Perkins, however, said it is something they would consider in the long run.

“Everybody realizes that a third-party candidate would not work in this election,” Bauer said.

Dobson keeps pressure on pro-abort Giuliani

2007-10-10T09:03:00.000-06:00

Dr. James Dobson continues to flay abortion supporter Rudy Giuliani, this time attacking the idea that Giuliani would be elect "constructionist" judges.

From Hannity & Colmes:

But you're taking Rudy's word on his intention to appoint strict constructionists to the Supreme Court, and I would like to remind you that he has a terrible record in New York of appointing judges. He appointed some of the worst possible judges.

I've already reported on Rudy and judges: what Rudy means by "constructionist" isn't what the pro-life community means.

Tancredo Takes On Rogue Mayors

2007-10-08T14:30:00.000-06:00

From The Hill

Rep. Tom Tancredo (R-Colo.), a GOP presidential hopeful and leading critic of immigration policies, blasted Texas mayors Monday for not letting the federal government build a border fence on their land.

Tancredo is reacting to reports that mayors of some Texas cities oppose the construction of the fence, which Congress approved to improve border security.

“These mayors are jeopardizing national security with their not-in-my-backyard attitude,” Tancredo said. “Congress approved the border fence with the overwhelming support of the American people to protect our nation from terrorists and illegal aliens and it will not be thwarted by a handful of rogue mayors.”

The outspoken Tancredo, who is polling in the low single digits in national polls, also offered his solution to the problem, which is to “build the border fence north of these communities.”

“These mayors have already demonstrated that their hearts and loyalties lie with Mexico — perhaps they’d feel more comfortable if their cities were geographically located there as well,” Tancredo said.

Carpetbagger

2007-10-05T14:42:00.000-06:00

Here's a little humor for your Friday afternoon, Steamboat Pilot style:

I've said it before and I'll say it again. Al White is the single most liberal Republican in the Colorado General Assembly.

Pro-life community flexes muscles

2007-10-05T12:14:00.000-06:00

Rassmussen has just release a poll that shows 27% of Republicans would vote for a third-party pro-life candidate over Rudy Giuliani.

If Rudy Giuliani wins the Republican nomination and a third party campaign is backed by Christian conservative leaders, 27% of Republican voters say they’d vote for the third party option rather than Giuliani.

That's the ball game, folks. Thanks for coming to Yankee Stadium.

If 27% of Republicans don't vote for him in a general election, that is enough to sink any hope he has of beating Hillary Clinton.

Good. I don't want a pro-choice Republican killing babies under the GOP banner.

Additionally, Dr. James Dobson reiterates his opposition to pro-abort Giuliani in a New York Times Op-Ed:

REPORTS have surfaced in the press about a meeting that occurred last Saturday in Salt Lake City involving more than 50 pro-family leaders. The purpose of the gathering was to discuss our response if both the Democratic and Republican Parties nominate standard-bearers who are supportive of abortion. Although I was neither the convener nor the moderator of the meeting, I’d like to offer several brief clarifications about its outcome and implications.

After two hours of deliberation, we voted on a resolution that can be summarized as follows: If neither of the two major political parties nominates an individual who pledges himself or herself to the sanctity of human life, we will join others in voting for a minor-party candidate. Those agreeing with the proposition were invited to stand. The result was almost unanimous...

I firmly believe that the selection of a president should begin with a recommitment to traditional moral values and beliefs. Those include the sanctity of human life, the institution of marriage, and other inviolable pro-family principles. Only after that determination is made can the acceptability of a nominee be assessed.

The other approach, which I find problematic, is to choose a candidate according to the likelihood of electoral success or failure. Polls don’t measure right and wrong; voting according to the possibility of winning or losing can lead directly to the compromise of one’s principles. In the present political climate, it could result in the abandonment of cherished beliefs that conservative Christians have promoted and defended for decades. Winning the presidential election is vitally important, but not at the expense of what we hold most dear.

One other clarification is germane, even though unrelated to the meeting in Salt Lake City. The secular news media has been reporting in recent months that the conservative Christian movement is hopelessly fractured and internally antagonistic. The Los Angeles Times reported on Monday, for example, that supporters of traditional family values are rapidly “splintering.” That is not true. The near unanimity in Salt Lake City is evidence of much greater harmony than supposed. Admittedly, differences of opinion exist among us about our choices for president.

That divergence is entirely reasonable, now just over a year before the national election. It is hardly indicative of a “splintering” of old alliances. If the major political parties decide to abandon conservative principles, the cohesion of pro-family advocates will be all too apparent in 2008.

Dobson hit a home run.

Rudy Giuliani Courting Mike Huckabee

2007-10-04T16:39:00.000-06:00

CCP EXCLUSIVE BREAKING NEWS: POTUS candidate Rudy Giuliani is said to be courting social conservative Mike Huckabee as his running mate for the 08 Presidential election. In the category of 'duh', Giuliani is hoping to win back some of the conservatives upset over his stances on abortion, gun rights, and gay marriage.

Will it work?

Who knows, Huckabee has been by far the most enjoyable to watch out of any of the candidates Republican or Democrat and Rudy is looking to be the top contender out of the GOP lineup.

It could very well be a formidable line up if the James Dobson crowd is satisfied by this concession to the point where they would vote Republican instead of third party this election.

Catholics join attacks on pro-abort Rudy

2007-10-04T10:40:00.000-06:00

St. Louis Archbishop Raymond Burke announced that he will deny Presidential Candidate, and self-proclaimed Catholic, Rudy Giuliani communion if he tries to celebrate mass in St. Louis.

From the STLtoday:

Of the six Catholics running for president, only Republican Sen. Sam Brownback has a legislative record on abortion that meets the church's approval. Along with Republican Rudy Giuliani, Democrats Sen. Joseph Biden, Sen. Christopher Dodd, Rep. Dennis Kucinich and Gov. Bill Richardson all have public records that are inconsistent with church teaching on abortion rights.

"It is a cause of concern for me and for all bishops to find ourselves in this situation," Burke said in an interview last week.

Asked if he would deny Communion to Giuliani if the former New York mayor approached him for the sacrament at the Cathedral Basilica, Burke said: "If the question is about a Catholic who is publicly espousing positions contrary to the moral law and I know that person knows it, yes I would."

In an interview earlier this year, Burke said of Giuliani: "I can't imagine that as a Catholic he doesn't know that his stance on the protection of human life is wrong. If someone is publicly sinning, they should not approach to receive Holy Communion."

(H/T: Andrew Sullivan)

Presidential Quiz

2007-10-04T09:55:00.000-06:00

Whose Your Candidate? After you're done with the quiz come back and comment to let us know which candidate you are most aligned with(according to the parameters they set in this poll).


	John McCain Score: 28	Agree Iraq Immigration Taxes Health Care Social Security Line-Item Veto Energy Death Penalty	Disagree Marriage
-- Take the Quiz! --

Burma

2007-10-03T16:24:00.000-06:00

From the talented Scott Bieser.

GOP Downballot Considerations

2007-10-03T11:37:00.000-06:00

Interesting article from RollCall about the impact the GOP nominee for POTUS will have on downballot races. Regardless of whom our nominee may be, having Clinton on the ballot only helps Bob Schaffer.

From RollCall

Amid much discussion of the impact Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) could have on downballot Congressional races next year if she is the Democratic presidential nominee, a much quieter debate has begun among Republicans about the potential pros and cons of their presidential frontrunners when it comes to picking up House and Senate seats.

The belief among many Republican Members and strategists is that if Clinton is on the ballot in 2008, it will matter little who her opponent is because the GOP’s base and conservative independents will turn out in droves to cast an “anti-Hillary” vote. Still others in the party argue that mobilizing the base won’t be the party’s primary problem next year. Instead, it will be appealing to the moderate and independent voters who are credited with handing control of Congress to Democrats in the 2006 elections.

Already, the battle for the House is shaping up to be waged largely in suburban districts in the Northeast and Midwest. Additionally, the top targets in the Senate are Republicans representing Democratic-leaning states like Maine, Minnesota, New Hampshire and Oregon.

Backers of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani (R), who continues to lead the GOP field in most national polls, say he is the best-positioned candidate to appeal to the more moderate electorate in those areas.

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), a leading Giuliani booster in the House, argued it is paramount to have a candidate at the top of the ticket who can appeal to former Reagan Democrats and independent voters in places like New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania and Florida.

King said he has discussed Giuliani’s downballot impact with high-ranking Republicans, whom he declined to name.

“They agree that we have the best chance of picking up seats, if not taking back the House, with Rudy on top,” King said. “He would run stronger [in swing areas] than any of the other Republicans.”

King said Giuliani could especially aid vulnerable Republicans in New York. Reps. Jim Walsh (R-N.Y.) and Randy Kuhl (R-N.Y.) face competitive races again in 2008, and the GOP also has hopes of winning back the seats currently held by freshman Reps. Kristen Gillibrand (D-N.Y.) and John Hall (D-N.Y.).

Recent Democratic polling appeared to back up the notion that Giuliani would run best in swing territory.

An August survey done by Democratic pollster Celinda Lake, who is working for Sen. Joseph Biden (D-Del.) in the 2008 presidential race, showed the former New York mayor ahead of both Clinton and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) in 31 Democratic-held House districts that are considered to be the most competitive.

The poll, reported on last month by The Washington Post, also showed that the two leading Democratic contenders could even be a drag on the incumbent lawmakers’ re- elections.

Meanwhile, supporters of former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney (R) and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) are more apt to argue that the top of the Republican ticket will have little impact downballot, and some say it shouldn’t be among the top criteria when choosing a nominee.

“Whoever is on the ballot opposite Hillary Clinton is going to ride a huge wave of popular support as the anti-Hillary,” said Rep. Mike Rogers (R-Ala.), who is backing Romney.

He added that either Romney or Giuliani “is going to do very well in the South” as the party’s nominee.

Rep. Bill Shuster (R-Pa.), another Romney supporter, noted the former chief executive’s business background will help him appeal to conservatives, moderates and independents alike. He said above all else, the public is looking for change and a competent leader and that Romney’s “sunny disposition and positive outlook” will win voters over if they don’t agree with him on all issues.

Other Republicans contend that it won’t matter which name is at the top of the party’s ballot come next year, just as long as it isn’t Bush.

When the Republican nominee emerges in February or March he will become the national face of the party, and lawmakers contend there will be much less talk about President Bush’s low poll numbers.

“I think that gives us the opportunity to restore some of the Republican brand that we’ve lost,” McCain backer Rep. Steven LaTourette (R-Ohio) said.

While Republican House Members are more likely to be directly affected by the success or failure of their party’s presidential pick, Senate incumbents also are mindful of the impact the top of the ticket may have on their reelection hopes, especially given the difficult landscape the party faces.

With 22 Republican Senate seats in play, fundraising faltering and recruitments stalled, the party’s presidential nominee could prove critical to incumbents’ successful re-elections.

Too conservative a nominee could easily damage the chances of a vulnerable Senator running in a swing state, while a more moderate White House hopeful — such as Giuliani — could actually boost those incumbents’ odds at re-election.

Sen. Norm Coleman (Minn.), who is among the GOP’s most threatened Senators in 2008, said Giuliani would clearly be an asset to his campaign and that “there’s no question [Giuliani] has a chance to win Minnesota.”

Coleman, who has not endorsed a 2008 contender, said he is not concerned that the more socially conservative White House hopefuls would hurt his chances, either.

“There are no negatives in this, and potentially there’s a strong upside,” Coleman argued.

Giuliani supporters have long avowed that he is the only candidate who can change the electoral college math, putting traditionally blue states in play and forcing Democrats to spend money in states like California, New Jersey, Connecticut, Michigan and New York.

There are eight House Republicans whose districts were carried by Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) in the 2004 presidential race. Giuliani has been endorsed by four of them, including Rep. Charlie Dent (R-Pa.).

Dent said one of his reasons for endorsing Giuliani was that he believed he would be the best person to run with in his Democratic-leaning district.

“Rudy Giuliani will give the greatest assistance to candidates running in the mid-Atlantic and Northeast regions and help bring more independents back into the Republican column,” he said.

Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), a McCain backer also up for re-election in 2008, agreed Giuliani could make things easier for moderate Republicans in cycle. But he also argued that McCain — who has broken ranks with conservatives at times — could help his party’s candidates in swing states.

“We need to play in the blue states and we need a nominee who can put the blue states in play,” Graham said.

Rep. Tom Davis (R-Va.), a former top party strategist and potential 2008 Senate candidate, said it would be impossible to predict now which candidate might be a drag or boost downballot. But he agreed that the nominee can make a huge difference, citing the 1964 and 1972 presidential elections as evidence of one-sided landslides that impacted Congressional races. Voters traditionally are less prone to ticket splitting in presidential years, he said.

Other party operatives argue that President Bush had little to no coattails in the 2000 and 2004 elections and that similarly, the down-ballot impact for both parties will be minimal next year.

Sen. John Sununu (R-N.H.), who faces a difficult re-election next year, narrowly won an open House seat in 1996 — as then- President Bill Clinton carried the district with 48 percent, compared to former Sen. Bob Dole’s (R-Kan.) 40 percent. Independent candidate Ross Perot got 10 percent.

“In that case, it didn’t have too significant an impact,” he said. “But I can’t predict the future.”

The liberal wailing and gnashing of teeth continues

2007-10-02T17:31:00.000-06:00

With Eric Eidsness withdrawal, anger at Sen. Ken Salazar seems to be building among liberal circles over his role in the Dem's CO-4 primary.

Colorado Confidential expressed it last week:

Anyone who questions U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar's role in Colorado politics should take a look at the state's Fourth Congressional District...
Maybe Salazar is not a Godfather in the traditional sense, but he makes offers you can't refuse.

No matter how subtly Salazar wields power, that's the Godfather's way.

Weld County's Wide Street's is predicting another Musgrave victory today:

[Sen. Ken] Salazar’s working hard behind the scenes (though Betsy will try to minimize this), and has now cleared the field for another CD-4 Democratic loss.

Eric Eidsness Ends Campaign For Congress

2007-10-02T16:48:00.000-06:00

Eric "His Eidsness" has ended his campaign for Dem nomination in CD-4. Speculation abounds that Congress is much too small for someone with Eric's ego and that he is in fact running for President of the United States as a (insert party here) candidate. We will keep you updated on the wonder that is Eric Eidsness. In other news, the sun will still rise tomorrow morning.

From the Coloradoan

Eidsness ends congressional campaign
By Coloradoan staff

Eric Eidsness abandoned his bid for Northern Colorado's Democratic congressional nomination, apparently clearing the way for Betsy Markey to challenge Republican incumbent Marilyn Musgrave next November.

"The hand writing is on the wall and I see it is not my time to be elected to national office to represent (Colorado's 4th Congressional District)," Eidsness said in a prepared statement. "While my populist message appeals to a broad range of voters, particularly in the more rural areas, I do not have the support I will need here in Larimer County to win the Democratic nomination."

Eidsness is the second Democratic candidate to drop from the race in the past week. Angie Paccione, the party's 2006 nominee, withdrew last week.

That leaves Markey, a former Larimer County Democratic chair and aide to Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., as the sole announced Democratic candidate.

Musgrave, who's served three terms in Congress, narrowly defeated Paccione in 2006, when Eidsness ran as a Reform Party candidate.

Hillary Clinton Has Her Own Psalm

2007-10-02T15:36:00.001-06:00

Got this in a fax today, not sure as to why, but it is amusing.

The HIllary Rodham Psalm

Hillary is my shepherd, I shall not want.

She makes me to bow down to big government.

She leads me beside the abortion clinic.

She restores gun control.

She leads me in the paths of socialism, for her name's sake.

Yea, though I walk through the valley of the shadow of liberalism, I will fear no evil; for Hillary is with me.

Her benefits and handouts, they comfort me.

Hillary prepares a health care system before me, in the presence of my better judgment.

She fills my head with promises.

My welfare cup runs over.

Surely, higher taxes and illegal immigration will follow me all the days of my life; and I will dwell in the house of the Clinton's forever!

Political Pale Horse Hacked!

2007-10-02T14:36:00.001-06:00

Our friends over at the Political Pale Horse have been hacked, at least I assume they have been hacked. That or they have just started posting really unusual political dialogue in a language I am not familiar with. I would encourage you to go over and see for yourself, but being a tech moron I am unsure the great powers that hackers possess and if they could somehow hack you by just visiting the site.

Maybe you are being hacked by even reading this post, I don't know.

Obvious suspects include but are not limited to John Cox, Sam Brownback, Al White, various members of the NRA, and Mark Udall's campaign team.

Rudy, babies, and Christian leadership

2007-10-02T09:37:00.000-06:00

Cheers to Dr. James Dobson, Tony Perkins et. all for their public announcement that they will not support a pro-abortion Republican nominee for President. Often these figures serve only as GOP cheer leaders, which marginalizes the pro-life, pro-family agenda.

Tony Perkins on Hardball last nigh t (via NRO's The Campaign Spot):

...the vast majority of social conservatives came to the Republican Party because of the life issue and the other social issues. If the party leaves those issues, I think it's unreasonable for them to demand that they stay in the party. And I don't think they will.

...We are not going to sit down at a table and negotiate away the protection of human life and shake hands and get up and go forward. That's not going to happen on my watch.

...We're simply saying that there is a line which we won't cross. That is, we will not be supportive of a candidate who supports abortion.

Amen to that Tony.

Additionally Marc Ambinder calls into question Giuliani's definition of "strict constructionist" judges:

By the way: as Giuliani as has said, his "strict constructionists" might well preserve Roe v. Wade, which means that Giuliani employs the phrase to describe judicial orientation, rather than outcomes, which is how the phrase plays in politics.

Quote This Picture: Hugo Chavez & Mahmoud Ahmadinejad

2007-09-28T10:47:00.000-06:00

Iran's President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad with Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez

Actual quote: "No one can defeat us"

Possible Quotes:

Mahmoud-"So with the whole time change thing you did, can you catch both Grey's Anatomy and The Office on the same night now?''

Hugo-"Let's get you, me, maybe Kim Jon-Il together and cruise South Beach in Sean Penn's new Escalade"

Mahmoud-"Oh, this is what homosexual means? Yeah we have loads of those in our country"

Mark Udall's Back Yard

2007-09-27T15:15:00.000-06:00

First reported at Political Pale Horse.
The "religious oppression" quote is priceless!
Why isn't Mark Udall condemning these idiots????
Read on for for more of PPH's dissection of the land of Boulder and the future leaders it is breeding.

Liberal morons in the Peoples Republic of Boulder are protesting the pledge of allegiance. Not too surprising, right? But listen to their rationale in the Boulder Daily Camera.

Members of the activist Student Worker club are inviting their peers to leave class every Thursday at 8:30 a.m. — when the pledge is recited over the intercom — and meet in the courtyard to say a revised version of the pledge that doesn't reference God.

Their club must be comprised of suburban white kids who have only visited Denver a handful of times and don’t understand what real problems are.

Club President Emma Martens, a Boulder High senior who's leading the protest, wrote this new version: "I pledge allegiance to the flag and my constitutional rights with which it comes. And to the diversity, in which our nation stands, one nation, part of one planet, with liberty, freedom, choice and justice for all."

Their club president is most likely a trust-fund baby who has ample time to spend creating problems that don’t exist. This idiot goes on to show how incredibly stupid she is with this statement.

"Boulder High has a highly diverse population, not all of whom believe in God, or one God," Martens said. "We didn't think it was fair for the whole school to have to listen to it. "It's almost religious oppression," she said.

Religious oppression? Are you exaggerating or are you so incredibly stupid that you don’t understand what that term means? We’re willing to bet on the latter. If you want to see religious oppression look no further than Sudan, China and other places that participate in true religious oppression.

Is there nothing else news worthy going on in Boulder that the Camera could cover? We all know you guys can’t solve murders there, but we’re sure there is something else you can focus on.

Angie Paccione Drops Out Of CD-4 Race

2007-09-26T14:40:00.000-06:00

First reported at ColoradoPols

Press release from Paccione campaign below

There are no words adequate enough to describe the privilege I?ve had representing the people of Fort Collins as their State Representative and as the Democratic candidate for the people of the 4th Congressional District. In 2000, when there was no democratic candidate on the ballot for the 4th CD, I was motivated to enter politics to fill the void in leadership. At that time I offered my service as the voice of the people in representative government. I am forever changed, forever grateful, and forever indebted to the people for the opportunity they gave me to serve them.

I have a passion to serve people by doing whatever I can to unleash their greatness. This is what has always compelled me. I used my skills as an athlete to serve our country in international competition, I used my academic talent to serve our youth as an educator, and I used my political position to serve the people I represented by giving them hope, making the system work for them, and empowering them to participate in politics as well.

Since September of 2005 I have been on a mission to win the 4th Congressional district because I believe and many others do as well, that I would be a better, more effective representative for the people of this district. As an elected official I have always focused on what?s right, not on who?s right. That has allowed me to reach across political divides and partisan politics to get things done for the people of our great state. I am proud of the work I was able to do?as a lead sponsor of legislation and as a co-sponsor. I have always been accessible to my constituents, I have always been responsive to their concerns, and I have always worked with members of both political parties.

Last night I had the privilege of speaking to hundreds of high school students and their parents. I told them what I have been telling young people for nearly three decades? to have the courage to say "yes" to opportunity. Today I am here to do the very thing I encourage others to do?to say yes to an amazing opportunity that has presented itself to me. Since January, I have been working with Pathways to Leadership Inc., a company that gives businesses a competitive advantage over others by helping them unleash the greatness in their employees, teams, and organization. This is a company that changes the results people and organizations deliver - because it changes the lives of the people in the organization.

I thought that I might be able to work with Pathways to Leadership and campaign for Congress at the same time. However, the opportunities with Pathways have grown and I must say "yes" to those opportunities. In addition to locations in the US, my work with Pathways will be taking me to Australia, Switzerland, Mexico, and Italy in the very near future. In those travels, I will be working with businessmen and women who are motivated to improve their leadership skills and the wellness culture in their workplace.

This is a tremendous opportunity for me and I have wrestled with my decision for a number of weeks now. The campaign is very strong, the support is broad-based, and I still believe I am the best candidate to win the seat. However, I am motivated by a passion to serve and my opportunity with Pathways gives me the ability to serve immediately. I could spend the next 14 months campaigning for the opportunity to make a difference or I could spend the next 14 months actually making a difference in the lives of others.

So, today I am announcing that I am ending my campaign for congress in the 4th district.

From the bottom of my heart, I want to thank my staff, my volunteers, and all those who invested time, energy, and hope in our campaign. I am thrilled that I have been a vehicle for their involvement in the political process. Those that have been empowered by my campaign will continue to use their voice to impact the politics of their communities? I am certain of it. And although I won?t be their candidate I will continue to be their friend and will fight side by side with them to change our country and the world.

Doug Lamborn: Defending those that condemn him

2007-09-25T19:45:00.000-06:00

Great commentary from Backbone America about the current state of Colorado's 5th Congressional District. Do people even know why they don't like Doug Lamborn anymore besides the fact a couple of Jeff Crank bloggers go around and tell them not to? Can someone point to two votes that they would have made differently then Doug has if they were in Congress? Two votes out of hundreds, please point to them!

From Backbone America

Lamborn among the Lilliputians
by Dave Crater

Congressman Doug Lamborn (R-CO5) couldn’t have known when he first waded into Colorado politics over a decade ago that he would wash ashore on Lilliput. Such seems to be the case, however. As you remember, Jonathan Swift created two fictional islands in his 1726 classic, Gulliver’s Travels, Lilliput and Blefuscu. No disproof having been established, one assumes that both islands are, still today, located in the South Indian Ocean, separated by a channel 800 yards in width,
and inhabited by people “not six inches high.”

More to the point for the purpose of current politics: When a shipwrecked and still asleep Lemuel Gulliver washed up on the shores of Lilliput and was captured by little people who tied him down before he awoke, he discovered that the two islands were permanently at war over the correct way to eat a boiled egg. Still today, the inhabitants of Blefuscu are firmly convinced the correct way to eat a boiled egg is to start at the rounded end. The Lilliputians are equally convicted that, still today, no civilized person eats a boiled egg any way except sharp end first.

Though Gulliver is a giant compared to the Lilliputians, he does not return their hostility in kind, but rather helps to aid them in various ways before, for no other reason than his refusal to take part in their selfish perfidies, he again earns their fickle and shallow scorn.

Naïve people here in Colorado sometimes refer to Lilliput as the El Paso County Republican Party, but we really should get into the habit of calling places and people by their proper names. The little people in Lilliput are particularly active these days, doing their best to tie up Congressman Gulliver — er, Lamborn — before he permanently awakes and takes to himself for many years to come the title of Congressman, a title which the Lilliputians believe rightfully belongs only to a Lilliputian.

The chief Lilliputians in Lilliput these days are one Mr. Jeff Crank and one retired General Bentley Rayburn. To be sure, both are accomplished men by Lilliputian standards; indeed, they appear to know it. Gulliver is equally accomplished and, refreshingly, doesn’t appear to know it. More to the point, by the standards that Gulliver considers genuinely meaningful and which are in truth the only things that can turn a Lilliputian into a Giant — old-fashioned notions that include courageous loyalty to true principles and good men above one’s personal ambitions, and doing the right thing and telling the truth even when it’s not popular, and doing it for a long time — it appears Gulliver is, still today, as lonely as he was in 1726.

The Leading Lilliputians are currently squabbling over who is justified in taking on Gulliver in a primary next year. One says it is properly he because — well, that’s never been entirely clear. Part of it must be a result of his having come so close to beating Gulliver two years ago. As for the rest of it — well, perhaps he eats the round end of the egg first.

The other Leading Lilliputian and his Supporting Lilliputians say he’s a general, and thus a true leader. The question as to why a true leader would challenge an incumbent Giant like Gulliver — remember, a Giant is not necessarily someone who is popular, but someone who does what is right and tells the truth, and has for a long time — does not appear to have yet been posed in Lilliput.

To cap things off, if a newspaper article on Sept 19 was any indication, it appears the Leading Lilliputians are so hostile to Gulliver that they may have overcome their own mutual antipathies long enough to make something of a Gentle-Lilliputian’s agreement: if either is behind in the polls close to election day, that one will drop out of the race. “There is no formal agreement,” mind you – personal interests are not to be sacrificed until it’s clear there is really nothing to be sacrificed and fulfillment of spite toward Gulliver becomes the only remaining objective. “It’s not going to be my ego that causes [Gulliver] to get re-elected,” one Lilliputian said.

The next day, the other Lilliputian’s supporters were again assaulting both his rival and Gulliver for only the vaguest of reasons: “[Gulliver] was not a leader in the (state) legislature, and he won’t be in Washington,” one said. “And [the opposing Lilliputian] has nothing to set him aside, nothing of stature.” Translation: we don’t like Gulliver and the other Lilliputian eats his boiled eggs pointed end

So what does our modern-day congressional Gulliver do amidst these Lilliputians? What Gulliver has always done. “[Gulliver’s] campaign said they had no comment,” the latter story reports. He faithfully continues his accustomed course in the world and in the halls of national government, praying for the welfare of the Lilliputians even in their spite toward him. It’s safe to assume Gulliver realizes life and politics in Lilliput are, still today, fickle, and not likely to change any time soon.

As has been pointed out, Congressman Lamborn definitely is the giant in this story defending the Lillputians to his own peril. I caution those, that continually throw bombs thinking they will not be rebuked, that the giant is presumably getting tired of it and that the same campaign team that smacked you around in 2006 will grow tired of it as well and will have to deal with the Lilliputians.

Cindy Sheehan Shows That War Is A Problem For Both Parties

2007-09-25T10:01:00.000-06:00

I think we need to be in Iraq, I think we need to listen to our soldiers on the front lines before we pay attention to those who tune into CNN, I think we are making Iraq a better country then it was before and I do think that if we do not fight them over there that we will be fighting them over here.

I also know that for Republicans to lose as little seats next year as possible, that a new tune must be sung in regards to the war in Iraq.

The good news is that the Iraq war is no longer a Republican problem. Democrat incumbents will take as much, if not more, heat on the Iraq war as incumbent Republicans. The key difference between the two parties is that the Democrats said they would get the troops home immediately, a promise they have failed to keep to the American people.

By failing to get the U.S. out of the war Democrat incumbents are at risk from those in their own party unhappy with their commitment to the withdrawal efforts.

A good example is Cindy Sheehan taking on Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi. I have and never will be a Pelosi apologist, but I would take her in a heartbeat over a crackpot like Sheehan.

Read The Hill article below on the celebrities endorsing Sheehan and the affect it will play in the 08 elections.

Anti-war activist Cindy Sheehan is making celebrity endorsements a key facet of her long-shot bid to defeat House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) next year.

In a recent interview with The Hill, Sheehan said she has been endorsed by actress Roseanne Barr, country crooner Willie Nelson and Rage Against the Machine guitarist Tom Morello.

Sheehan added that White House hopeful Rep. Dennis Kucinich (D-Ohio) and former Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-Ga.) are also backing her.

“Celebrities bring a certain kind of — good or bad, it seems like our lives are centered around TV and movies — I think it does bring credibility,” Sheehan said.

Nelson is a friend of Sheehan’s and has offered to help her raise money for her campaign. “[Nelson and his wife] just have the exact correct politics and the exact compassion for the earth and humanity that I think attracts us as friends,” she said.

“I support Cindy Sheehan in everything she does,” Nelson wrote in an e-mail, “whether it’s running for Congress, or the president of the U.S. She’s a great American, not afraid to stand up for what she believes in.”

Sheehan, who is running as an independent, unaffiliated candidate, is counting on comedians such as Barr to lend some star power to the campaign. Several San Francisco-based comediennes are planning a campaign fundraiser for Sheehan, she said.

Spokesmen for Barr and Morello did not return phone calls seeking comment.

Kucinich praised Sheehan, but declined to confirm that he is formally backing her.

“I like Cindy,” Kucinich said. “She has been a very important spokesperson in challenging the war. She and I marched together against the war.”

He said he doesn’t comment on races waged against incumbents as a “matter of policy.”

Sheehan is backing Kucinich for the presidency.

Hip Hop Caucus President Rev. Lennox Yearwood Jr. said he will lend his support. “Cindy Sheehan is the Rosa Parks of the anti-war movement and the race in San Francisco is fundamentally about organized people versus organized money,” he said.

Pelosi won her 2006 congressional campaign handily, taking 80 percent of the vote. She’s also had her share of celebrity support. Celebrities ranging from movie producer Francis Ford Coppola to comedian Robin Williams have given money to her campaigns.

Bruce Cain, a political science professor at the University of California Berkeley and the director of the D.C.-based Institute of Governmental Studies, said Sheehan’s chances of beating Pelosi are “slim to none.”

Sheehan is unlikely to get 10 to 15 percent of the vote because there aren’t enough “progressive, green, anarchist types” in the district to elect her, Cain said. Californians do not blame Pelosi for not getting troops out of Iraq, he added.

“The motivation to elect a Democrat is going to be stronger than the motivation to make a point,” Cain said.

Pelosi has already accumulated close to $1.3 million in her campaign coffers. A Pelosi spokesman refused to comment on Sheehan’s campaign.

In a recent e-mail on Iraq that was sent by the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee to potential donors, Pelosi pointed out that she has been a longtime activist: “Long before I was Speaker of the House, I was a political activist like you …”

Sheehan said hers will be a grassroots campaign. She doesn’t expect to come close to out-raising Pelosi.

“I’m not going to be competing with her on money or on the establishment,” she said, noting she won’t accept any corporate donations.
McKinney, an outspoken opponent of the war, expressed her support for Sheehan at a rally in August near one of the president’s vacation homes in Maine.

“Our children deserve a better country and the world deserves a better partner. That’s why I’m happy to see Cindy Sheehan run for Congress. I want Cindy to win,” McKinney said.

Sheehan said she expects more celebrity endorsements to roll in as her campaign kicks into high gear, but she does not anticipate many of Pelosi’s colleagues will back her.

“If they support me it’s going to be difficult for them to get chairmanships or to get on a committee,” she said. “I totally understand if nobody comes out and supports me.”

She wasn’t shy about criticizing Democrats for funding the war.

“If I tell my children, ‘Don’t do drugs’ … and then one of my children asks, ‘Mom, can I have money for drugs?’ and I give them money for drugs, that’s showing them my approval,” she said. “[Congress is] giving [its] approval to President Bush to wage this occupation of Iraq.”

Part of Sheehan’s campaign will aim to enfranchise minorities and young people “who have felt disenfranchised by the power elite.”

She’s also getting educated on local issues important to California’s 8th district and house-hunting in the area. Sheehan lives in northern California, but plans to move into the district soon. She’s organizing her campaign team and hopes to begin campaign fundraisers and events in October.

Sheehan’s battle against the war began after her son Casey, a 24-year-old Army specialist, was killed in Baghdad. She began demonstrating outside of President Bush’s Texas ranch and founded Gold Star Families for Peace in August of 2005. In May, Sheehan announced that she was retiring from anti-war activism, only to return with a challenge to Pelosi: If Pelosi didn’t move to impeach Bush and Vice President Cheney, Sheehan would mount a congressional campaign against her. Sheehan subsequently announced her candidacy in August.

Sheehan called the first female Speaker of the House a “consummate politician” and emphasized that she and Pelosi agree on most issues, with the notable exceptions of Iraq and impeachment.

“In her heart she probably does care about the people of Iraq — but when they sit down to talk about Iraq they talk politics, not about the human cost of war,” she said, referring to Democrats.

Pelosi is vulnerable in liberal San Francisco, a district where the majority of people don’t support the Iraq war, Sheehan said. “People over there are dismayed,” she said. “Nancy is not holding Bush and Cheney accountable. She’s not ending the war in Iraq.”

Many Democrats, however, have defended Pelosi’s action. They say that Pelosi has worked feverishly to end the war, but does not have the votes to override the president’s veto pen.

Sheehan promised that she would not be known as a one-issue candidate, a label that hurt Ned Lamont in his general election bid to defeat Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.).

Sheehan, who doesn’t have health insurance, said that making healthcare available to all Americans would be a priority.

“[The Iraq war] is an overriding issue. We can talk about universal healthcare, we can talk about the costs of a college education, we can talk about a lot of issues that affect every American. When we are spending money on Iraq, we cannot rebuild our infrastructure — we cannot do that in America when we are devoted to the war machine.”

She added, “I really think we’ve done the marches, we’ve done the disobedience and the next natural step is to challenge the establishment. This really isn’t me against Nancy Pelosi. This is me against the war machine.”

Must read for conservatives...

2007-09-24T09:55:00.000-06:00

In case you don't read the Sunday edition of the Denver Pravda (Post), I highly encourage everyone to read this excerpt from David Harsanyi's new book "Nanny State."

In fact you should send this excerpt to your favorite Republican state Representative and Senator as a reminder that "good government" is small government.

Choice quote:

In his 1996 State of the Union address, President Bill Clinton felt the need to let Americans know the era of big government had ended. This curious assertion was meant to allay the growing concerns of Americans, who had begun to see government as stepping over the bounds of its charge.

Clinton’s words rang hollow. In many respects, the big government was simply refocusing, consolidating, and beginning to cast its eye toward regulating private matters that had previously been out of bounds. “Big” intrusive government was now also in the hand of local city councils, which could often put the big boys to shame.

Though Republican Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich started getting crabby about the nanny state in the mid-1990s, by the time George W. Bush, a Republican—purportedly the party of less intrusive government—was elected to his second term in 2004, the new and improved nanny state was only expanding its authority. “We have the responsibility that, when somebody hurts, government has got to move,” explained President Bush on Labor Day 2003. Twenty years ago, this kind of brazen promotion of the state would have been unheard of coming from the lips of any respectable Republican—and barely any Democrats would have dared to give voice to it.

In 1997, vice president and future presidential candidate Al Gore explained that government was “like grandparents in the sense that grandparents perform a nurturing role.” The word “nurturing” was perhaps too delicate for conservative Andrew Card, George Bush’s chief of staff during the 2004 presidential election, who framed the idea in a more red-state, family-friendly lingo, explaining that the president “sees America as we think about a ten-year-old child.” This was an evolution of sorts from Bush’s fairly restrained proclamation in the 2000 race that “government must be carefully limited, but strong and active.”

Today, politicians of both parties brazenly endorse nanny policies in response to the slightest anxiety or unsettling development. Many Americans have felt the government’s evolution from strong and active to smothering grandparent.

CSU CR Press Release Calls For Resignation Of Editor

2007-09-22T18:26:00.000-06:00

For Immediate Release:

The CSU College Republicans Call for Resignation of University Newspaper Editor

Fort Collins - The Colorado State University College Republicans are calling for The Collegian editor in chief, David McSwane, to resign. On Friday, September 21, 2007, The Rocky Mountain Collegian, Volume 116, No. 36, published an editorial using explicit language directed toward President Bush. The editorial has created an uproar among students and community members.

The College Republicans acknowledge the Collegian’s right to free speech, and are utilizing their right to criticize. This is not a free speech issue; it is an issue of journalist integrity. It is believed that this was a politically charged statement. Chelsey Penoyer, Chair of the CSU CRs, noted, “It is one thing to challenge us, the College Republicans as your peers, but it is another to attack the Executive Office of the United States. This is a display of blatant disrespect for the Office of the President of the United States.”

Nor is this an issue of constitutionality. The CSU CRs are not trying to censor them or take away their right. However, this is a public paper with a large readership. McSwane had no consideration for the community of Fort Collins. It is a family-oriented city, and must be noted that the paper goes out to businesses and restaurants around the city where everyone has the availability to read it. The Fort Collins community has continually embraced and supported CSU.

There are numerous media outlets in the community; however on the CSU campus there is only one that blatantly leans to the left. This is exactly why the CSU CRs have established a second voice on campus that portrays the views of conservative students. They are looking for advertisers and writers. Anyone who is interested can email them at csurepublicans@gmail.com.

This not only discredits CSU and college students in general. It also has caused a loss of all credibility for The Collegian. Monday, September 24th, the CRs were scheduled for a CSU College Republican recruitment event. Therefore, they will continue by holding this event on the Student Center plaza. The CSU CRs will now be having an informal, official petition for people to sign asking for McSwane’s resignation.

"Taser This...F**K Bush" and other enligthening banter from American universities

2007-09-22T17:32:00.000-06:00

Recently a Colorado State University student newspaper released a very short and crude editorial statement saying "Taser this...F**K Bush" that has and will cause continued controversy on the campus and community. The incident has already been featured on some prominent national news publications.

(Click here for the actual headline. Verbiage is not sensored)

While we at CCP respect free speech, even blatant disrespect for our President such as this, what we do not respect is college newspapers with the vocabulary of the local dive bar.

"Taser this...F**K Bush"

Is this really the best that liberal colleges can give us anymore?

They could have done a witty editorial about why they don't like Bush, Republicans, or the war. They could have stolen some material from The Colbert Report who probably stole it from Air America. The could have actually taken the initiative to write a sensible editorial that might have endeared part of the student body to their views.

They could have.

Instead we are left with nebulous drivel cobbled together that offended many, irritated a few, and left the rest of us laughing at the current state of a young liberals vocabulary. Not that we ever would accuse The Collegian for its probity, I guess we just expected better.

On the bright side, they have done a heck of a job of pissing off moderate students who might have volunteered for Dem campaigns in 08. Although it is doubtful those students will volunteer for any Republican campaign, there is something to be said for people not hating a cause as much. They lose alacrity as well as their power to draw others in.

On the brighter side, as this is all good news today, they have also sparked the CSU CR's to do something on campus. Not that the usual diet of going to weekly meetings and complaining about Hillary care sprinkled with occasional boozefests is a bad thing for CR chapters, it is just nice to see any CR chapter in Colroado making some noise and poking the opposition in the eye every once in awhile. This CSU CR chapter is taking the initiative to start is own publication to refute the liberal bias of the current paper.

While we here at CCP sincerely hope for the best for the CR newspaper we do make the simple request that its first editorial be longer then five words.

Dick, I am your father...

2007-09-20T12:06:00.000-06:00

Politico.com's Ben Smith blogs about the more humorus ramifications of Hillary Clinton calling VP Dick Cheney "Darth Vader":

I've gotten a bunch of e-mail this morning from the, er, small subset of political junkies who are also Star Wars geeks, and a couple of things are clear:

George Bush is Emperor Palpatine.

Before he became evil, Dick Cheney was a great and good Jedi. (Possibly during the Gerald Ford administration. Was this reported at the time?) And in his final act, he redeems himself by taking down the Emperor. (Still time?)

Dobson wacks Fred

2007-09-20T11:04:00.000-06:00

ABC News/AP are reporting that Focus on the Family founder James Dobson took a wack at Presidential hopeful Fred Thompson yesterday.

A private e-mail Dobson said this about Thompson:

"Isn't Thompson the candidate who is opposed to a Constitutional amendment to protect marriage, believes there should be 50 different definitions of marriage in the U.S., favors McCain-Feingold, won't talk at all about what he believes, and can't speak his way out of a paper bag on the campaign trail?"

Dobson continues:

"He has no passion, no zeal, and no apparent 'want to.' And yet he is apparently the Great Hope that burns in the breasts of many conservative Christians? Well, not for me, my brothers. Not for me!"

You may recall several months ago that Dobson also said he didn't think Thompson was a Christian.

(H/T: Jonathan Martin's Blog on Politico.com )

Giuliani: I'm a liberal

2007-09-19T15:53:00.000-06:00

From 1993: "They can send me a signal and vote for me on the liberal line."

(H/T: Andrew Sullivan & Marc Ambinder)

Al White staffs up

2007-09-17T11:49:00.000-06:00

UPDATE:
RINO State Rep. Al White (Winter Park) is staffing up.

According to his campaign press release, Matt Johnston of Beauprez' failed campaign has signed up for White.

Al White is the single most liberal Republican currently in the Colorado General Assembly.

NRA Board member calls for assault weapons ban

2007-09-17T11:19:00.000-06:00

NRA Board member Joaquin Jackson calls for a ban on so called "assault weapons.":

For the man who has everything

2007-09-14T16:22:00.000-06:00

What do you get a man who has won a Heisman trophy, appeared in the cinematic masterpiece The Naked Gun and killed two people in cold blood?

According to Breitbart, ABSOLUTELY NOTHING cause he is just going to steal it for himself anyways.
Click hear to read more.

The Reality Of Wayne Wolf Taking On Bob Schaffer

2007-09-12T19:23:00.000-06:00

The big buzz in Colorado politics this week is that a gentleman named Wayne Wolf has announced his candidacy for the Senate seat being vacated by Wayne Allard.

Though some are saying that he is taking on Bob Schaffer in the primary, people forget that he first has to make the ballot to be in the primary.

He won't.

Just as Holtzman was not able to make the ballot, and just as some of your conspiracy theorists would say that Coors never really made the ballot, you can soon say the same thing about Mr. Wolf. The big difference is that Holtzman and Coors both had great campaign teams, both had money, and both had abit of name ID in Republican circles before they announced.

Wayne Wolf has none of those attributes.

On a political blog someone questioned if Mr. Wolf would be pushed out of the primary because he lacked the horns, implying he might be a RINO or Republican In Name Only for all you political sarcasm virgins. I will say that where Mr. Wolf is at on the conservative spectrum is of no concern to anyone, in fact Mr. Wolf even announcing he is running is really of no concern to anyone. No one will try and push him out, because no one will care.

If the Schaffer camp is concerned at all they could spend a couple thousand dollars on a delegate campaign to make sure he does not make the ballot, but even that IMHO is unneeded. When a political operative from the western slope called me last week to see if I knew who Wayne Wolf was(I had no clue), I knew the Schaffer camp would be fine.

I am sure that Mr. Wolf is a fine upstanding gentleman that has devoted many years of his life to the conservative movement, but that does not make him a contender in the Republican primary. Some feel that a few of the western slope's needs have been ignored by our current Senators, water being their main concern. But trying to take out Schaffer is not going to meet those needs anytime sooner. And to put things into perspective Schaffer is not the culprit to the western slope water woes and if anything he, as was done during his time in Congress, will be a champion for their cause.

Mr. Wolf I am sure you are a fine upstanding Republican. But for your self respect, bow out of this thing now. No one else is going to take the time to spare you.

CFAC attack on Ritter get's national attention

2007-09-12T11:31:00.000-06:00

Christian Family Alliance of Colorado has gotten national attention for their petition drive to force Governor Bill Ritter to respect Article V Section 50 of the Colorado Constitution which prohibits "direct" and "indirect" use of state funds to provide abortions.

Ritter has announced he intends to restore state funding to abortion groups like Planned Parenthood, in direct violation of the Colorado Constitution. Colorado State Senator Scott Renfroe (R - Eaton) has joined with CFAC in this important fight. Last legislative session, Renfroe's SB07-143 was the first legislation ever introduce in the Colorado Assembly to ban abortions in Colorado.

From WorldNetDaily:

"The reality is that Bill Ritter has never backed down from his promise to put money into Planned Parenthood," Mark Hotaling, the director of the Christian Family Alliance, told WND.

He explained that the budget the state currently is operating on was established mostly by the former governor before he left office.

Especially, he noted the state's "family planning" money was committed to other organizations that are operating under contracts already in existence. Ritter, when he made the statements about having taxpayers support Planned Parenthood's operations financially, meant it, and he still means it, Hotaling said.

"The governor had to appease the radical left of his party, and made certain promises. One of them he made repeatedly was to restore money to Planned Parenthood," Hotaling said."The reason he couldn't to do last legislative session was the timing of grants and the lack of funds in the state family planning fund," he said.

"But there's nothing to prohibit him from doing it in the next session, when more money can be put into the fund."He said the public needs to rise up and let the governor know of its opposition to taxpayer funding for the abortion industry.

Joining in the Colorado Family Alliance campaign is state Sen. Scott Renfroe, who told WND that he's "gravely concerned" about Ritter's announced plans.

He said he's asked the governor, "How are you going to do this, and uphold the constitution and the will of the people?" "I guess time will tell if he does do something," he said.

Renfroe told WND that a campaign letter has been sent to constituents seeking support. "I am saddened and appalled that Gov. Ritter assumes that part of our tax money already belongs to Colorado's largest abortionist," he wrote. "And with pro-abortion liberals in control of the State Legislature, our only hope is to turn to the good sense and actions of citizens … to help stop this injustice."

More on Huckabee

2007-09-12T11:23:00.000-06:00

Not to appear to be flogging a dead horse, but Club for Growth has put up a new site, attacking Mike Huckabee. It's very well done.

Visit www.TaxHikeMike.org for all the details.

From the site, here is Huckabee trying to defend why he was endorsed by a labor union:

Jeff Crank is a liberal

2007-09-07T10:56:00.000-06:00

According to our buddies over at PoliticalPaleHorse, Jeff Crank has announced his finance committee.

A brief glance at the membership of this committee, proves once again, that Jeff Crank is a liberal, establishment hack and not a true conservative.

Finance committee members include notable RINO's*, Bruce Benson, Steve Schuck and Bill Miller.

[Eds. Note: For those of you that live under a rock, RINO means Republican In Name Only. It is the definition of liberals within the Republican Party.]

More on Huckabee and a national smoking ban

2007-09-06T12:30:00.000-06:00

From National Review's The Campaign Spot:

Huckabee Clarifies a Bit on Smoking
Campaign Spot reader Alex writes in with an update from a Mike Huckabee conference call this morning.

Blogger: There’s some concern about your statements regarding tobacco regulation from the Lance Armstrong forum. As a Public Health Professional, I fully support any and all tobacco regulation, but others felt your comments meant you would be building big government and forcing behavior on individuals. Could you clarify your views on tobacco regulation?

Huckabee: Certainly, I don’t believe that we as a government have a right to tell people what to do or not do. The issue is one of workplace safety. The same reason that the government regulates the exposure of radon and other toxic gases in the workplace. In Arkansas I signed a bill that banned smoking in certain public areas and businesses, but not in bars/restaurants, because those were places consumers could more easily choose to go to or not to go. So, in the workplace, if we regulate smoking, it is an issue of worker safety. The responsibility initially lies with the states, of course. The only way this would be a federal responsibility is for it taking on that role as part of OSHA as it regulates other work place safety.

I'm both reassured and unnerved by this. Yes, at the presidential cancer forum, he did mention the restaurant and bar exception, but when asked by Chris Matthews if he would sign a bill banning smoking "in public places," he said, "I certainly would."

I sympathize, I don't like cigarette smoke in my workplace,
but I don't think it's an issue for Congress and the President to resolve.

Secondly, if he really thinks it is an issue of workplace safety, why would Huckabee subject waiters and waitresses, busboys, bartenders, and hosts to cigarette smoke?

The Real Rudy

2007-09-04T16:00:00.000-06:00

TheRealRudy.Org:

Vote for Rudy's biggest mistake here.

Interesting perspective on "pro-life" and Huckabee

2007-09-04T10:01:00.000-06:00

K-Street Mole for Huck has an interesting take on what it means to be "pro-life" as opposed to "anti-abortion" and how that plays out with Mike Huckabee.

While I don't necessarily agree with this take, its certainly worth reading.

The highlights:

Anti-abortion means you believe that abortion is killing a human person with a right to life, and therefore abortion should never or very rarely be legal.

Pro-life means you believe the same thing as someone who is anti-abortion. But it can mean so much more:

- Pro-life means you support the local crisis pregnancy centers and maternity homes that help women in desperate situations give life to their babies. It's more than a bumper sticker - it is time or money shared to give life to individual persons in need.

- Pro-life means you don't support the death penalty whenever there is any reasonable doubt that the person is guilty of pre-meditated murder. (Yes, I know a jury already decided the person was guilty beyond reasonable doubt. But can you really expect a dozen people with no knowledge of legal standards or scientific/evidentially methods of proof to decide to acquit an accused when loved ones of the victim are clearly grieved before them, on the basis of "reasonable doubt"?)

- Pro-life means society gives people the means to be healthy and stay alive. Stay-at-home parents and people too sick to work need access to healing professionals just as much as employees, children and seniors. (The best way to do this is highly debatable by people of goodwill, but a pro-life person agrees this should be the goal.)

- Pro-life means you don't believe you are entitled to carry on activities that endanger the lives of others. You are not entitled to blow carcinogenic smoke into other people's lungs, you are not entitled to sell food or products that carry health risks without at least informing customers about the hazardous contents, and you are not entitled to drunk or reckless driving.

Some Republicans may bristle at some of these aspects of being pro-life. Particularly the last one -- according to some, this is supporting a "nanny state." No. A nanny state tells you that you can't eat Doritos or smoke in your own house. A pro-life state says that Frito Lay has to tell you what is in those Doritos and says you can't smoke in public places where other people have to breathe your exhaust fumes. A nanny state pays for your condoms and Cialis. A pro-life state tells insurance companies they can't refuse to give ongoing necessary treatment to people with chronic conditions like multiple sclerosis or Lyme Disease.

Huckabee is not just anti-abortion. He is pro-LIFE. That's why I think he deserves the votes of all pro-life citizens, regardless of party affiliation. Let libertarians sulk about smoking bans - if you are a pro-family traditionalist, a social-justice Christian, or anyone else who believes that the number one duty of government is protecting our right to life, Huckabee is your man.

I can't say that I support "social-justice," it sounds a lot like socialism with a populist/religious veneer.

Liberal Iowa judge over turns state's marraige law

2007-08-31T09:26:00.000-06:00

A liberal Iowa judge has struck down that state's marraige law and is requiring that gay couples be issued marriage certificates.

From AP/USAToday:

A county judge struck down Iowa's decade-old gay marriage ban as unconstitutional Thursday and ordered local officials to process marriage licenses for six gay couples.
Gay couples from anywhere in Iowa could apply for a marriage license from Polk County under Judge Robert Hanson's ruling.

Less than two hours after word of the ruling was publicized, two Des Moines men applied for a license, the first time the county had accepted a same-sex application. The approval process takes three days.

This will impact the Iowa caucus, but in whose favor I'm not sure.

Mark Udall and Hillary Clinton Take Donations From Known Felon

2007-08-31T09:25:00.000-06:00

First reported at ToTheRight.

This morning’s New York Times has reported Hillary Clinton will take nearly $25,000 of the felon-fugitive/Democratic-uberfundraiser Norman Hsu’s various campaign contributions and unload them on unnamed charities.

Unfortunately for the Democrats, Hsugate doesn’t end with Clinton, because she isn’t the only candidate who benifted from his corrupt cash: Our very own U.S. Senate wannabe, Mark “Screwball” Udall, D-People’s Republic of Boulder, had no problem accepting $1,000 of it on June 25 of this year. And just like with the Abramoff scandal, the dirty-money flow doesn’t stop there.

Udall has received $5,000 from the PAC For A Change, the Barbara Boxer-led liberal leadership PAC, which itself took $2,000 from Hsu. Udall got $10,000 from the Searchlight Leadership Fund, the Harry Reid-steered PAC, which Hsu and his front donors gave a total of $3,000. Worst of all, Udall accepted about $40,000 from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee and Democratic Congressional Campaign Committees, which received a whopping total of $82,333 from Hsu and his cohorts.

So, will Udall and his supporters continue to attack Republican U.S. Senate canididate Bob Schaffer for accepting legal donations, or will they clean up their own homes before they worry about someone else’s? We suspect Udall won’t be calling Merry Maids anytime soon.

Breaking: Udall will donate the $1000 donation to the Colorado National Guard Fund.

Rove Humor

2007-08-31T09:19:00.000-06:00

For a little Friday humor play Politico.com's Game of Rove.

Huckabee recieves union endorsement

2007-08-30T14:49:00.001-06:00

Just how far has Governor Mike Huckabee strayed from the conservative fold?

Today, Huckabee and Hillary Clinton recieved dual endorsements of The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM).

The IAM have decided to endorse both a Democrat and a Republican this election cycle.

"The dual endorsement is intended to involve all IAM members in the upcoming election," said
Buffenbarger. "It is fitting for the union whose early members gave birth to Labor Day to reach beyond traditional partisan boundaries to establish new relationships for the benefit of all working Americans.

On why they chose Huckabee:

"Mike Huckabee was the only Republican candidate with the guts to meet with our members and the only one willing to figure out where and how we might work together,"said Buffenbarger. "He is entitled to serious consideration from our members voting in the upcoming Republican primaries."

Mike Huckabee is willing to work with union thugs?

A round of applause is goes to ALL the other Republicans running for President who ignored the sirens song of these union thugs.

My past concerns about Huckabee, combined with his new union endorsement make it safe to say that Huckabee should NOT be the choice of conservatives.

Al White to run for state senate

2007-08-29T11:09:00.000-06:00

In completely unsurprising news, liberal Republican Representative Al White is "98%" sure he will run for term-limited State Senator Jack Taylor's 8th District seat. It has long bee speculated that White would run for this seat.

White is the single most liberal member of the Republican delegation now serving under the gold dome in Denver.

Rumors about possible primary opponents include Gregg Rippy (another of Colorado's most liberal former state legislators) and an as yet unconfirmed report that a local county commissioner might throw his hat in the ring.

As yet there is no indication that a real conservative might run against White.

Problems with Huckabee

2007-08-29T10:02:00.000-06:00

Tomes have been written about how conservatives are struggling to find their candidate in the 2008 Presidential race. Rudy, Mitt, John --all the front runners -- have dubious to down-right liberal records.

While many are turning to some of the second tier candidates, especially Mike Huckabee after his surprise "victory" at the Ames Iowa Straw poll, conservatives should take a closer look at these candidates before they jump of their respective band wagons.

Mike Huckabee, of all the second tier candidates, seems the mostly likely to challenge the unholy trinity (McCain, Romney, Giuliani). But Huckabee is far from the "authentic conservative" he claimed to be when he entered the Presidential race.

I can't lie, part of me likes Huckabee.

There is not doubt that he will be 100% pro-life and 100% pro-gun. However, Huckabee's populist rhetoric and big-government solutions have me running scared.

Yesterday, Huckabee called for a national smoking ban. (You can watch the video here.)

While I'm not a smoker, the issue of federally mandated behavior control is at the heart of nanny-government. While I enjoy going to Colorado restaurants and bars and not smelling like John Boehner's ash tray, but there is a larger, small-government issue at stake.

This sort of populism is a branch of the tree of George W. Bush's so-called "Compassionate Conservatism" that he has used to grow the size, scope and authority of federal government. Bush's brand of nanny-big government "conservatism" has expanded government to levels that the Clinton's only dreamed about. To all appearances, it looks like Huckabee is part of this big-government crowd.

Adding this idea to Huckabee's comments about main street vs. wall street, his opposition to school choice vouchers, as well as his references to the "club for greed" should give all conservatives pause.

It is also informative that long time Arkansas political writer John Brummett believes that Huckabee is cut from the same political tactics mold as Bill Clinton:

Mike Huckabee has always had a more liberal side than the left thinks and Hillary Clinton a more conservative one than the right thinks. ...

First, the liberal side of Huckabee:

Fresh from his Iowa straw vote impetus, which came courtesy of his conservative side, Our Boy Mike appeared at the monthly newsmaker breakfast of the Christian Science Monitor. What he pronounced prompted an official with the Club for Growth, the extreme economic conservative group that's been trying without success to bedevil him, to say disapprovingly that Huckabee sounded like he was doing "John Edwards' poverty tour."

At this breakfast, Huckabee declared that:

-People aren't doing as well economically as broad indicators suggest. Costs of health care, gasoline and college tuition have them struggling to break even. The next president must be sensitive to that.

-It's ridiculous to say God belongs to any school of political thought. One's religious values must influence more issues than abortion. Those values should make one an environmentalist who cares about poor people. (He didn't say anything about "environmental wackos," which he uttered last century in one of his right-sided moments.)

-Governors without much foreign policy experience can succeed in foreign affairs, as evidenced by the performances of Franklin Roosevelt, Harry Truman and, get this, Bill Clinton. Huckabee didn't mention the similarly situated George W. Bush, coming back later under questioning only to say he meant no disrespect to the current president and that history will judge Bush more favorably than contemporary views.

Part of this is tactical by Huckabee. But part of it is genuine. He is a political quilt with patches of pettiness, meanness, hyperbole, hypersensitivity, ethical impairment, generosity and open-minded compassion.

(H/T: Politico.com's Jonathan Martin blog.)

Bottom line: a Huckabee presidency would be a Pyrrhic victory for the Conservative Movement.

Hillman on private property

2007-08-29T09:41:00.000-06:00

Property: Rights or privileges
By Mark Hillman

Anyone who has grown up on a farm or ranch hears this maxim, "Take care of the land, and the land will take care of you." A farmer or rancher who doesn't take care of the soil will soon find that the soil won't produce enough to make ends meet.

But you don't need to be a farmer or rancher to understand the importance of private property rights. What's more, property isn't simply a piece of land or a home. Property is anything you own - your clothes, your car, your business.

For most, our possessions come from how we choose to utilize our own unique time, skills and labor and are selected to meet our specific needs. Moreover, because our possessions are our own, we take care to maximize their use.

Public and private lands illustrate well the stewardship incentives of genuine ownership. Theoretically, we all own parks, open space, forests and such. Yet without paid employees to keep them clean and safe, our public lands would be overgrown, littered with garbage, and overrun by "owners" who enjoy them too much.

By contrast, most private property owners regularly tend to their property. Even owners who never plan to produce anything from their land often invest time and money to improve its appearance.

Once you've made a piece of property your own, for someone to take it from you by force is nothing less than theft - not just theft of your property, but of the time and hard work that you exchanged to purchase it.

Who would do such a thing? Too often, the answer is our government. But let's not forget that government isn't organic. Government responds to the public. When government seizes your property or changes the rules to make your purpose for it illegal or unprofitable, it's often your fellow citizens using government to do their dirty work.

Back in 2003, I sponsored a bill with then-Rep. Shawn Mitchell, R-Broomfield, to restrict the use of eminent domain by local governments.
In several cases around the Denver metro area, city councils or urban renewal authorities wanted to condemn undeveloped lands or existing businesses in order to give those properties to developers who would replace the status quo with something that would generate more tax dollars.

At the same time, the town of Telluride - in a case now before the state Supreme Court - condemned a prime parcel just beyond its city limits for precisely the opposite reason: to prevent its development.

Although the owners in these cases were offered compensation, the point remains that, for financial or sentimental reasons, they did not want to sell their property - in some cases, at any price.

Colorado's popular new statewide smoking ban is another example of blatant disregard for property rights. If every bar or restaurant owner in the state chose to go smoke-free tomorrow, that would suit me just fine. But for the state legislature - increasingly comprised of people with no business experience - to pass a law that puts some mom-and-pop establishments out of business is simply unconscionable.

Viewed from a property rights framework, if I am a guest on your property, it's your choice to allow smoking or not. If you are a guest on my property, the choice is mine. If we are both guests of a third party, the choice is neither yours nor mine but the property owner's.

Simply because we outnumber the property owner, we have no right to impose our will on someone else's property. Yet the legislature put the will of the majority ahead of the rights of property owners.

When a mere majority, which has no investment of time or labor nor any legitimate stake in your property, can seize it for their own purposes or regulate it into financial ruin, property ownership has become a privilege, not a right.

Visit Mark Hillman's website.

Gonzales resigns

2007-08-27T10:59:00.000-06:00

Embattled Attorney General Alberto Gonzales resigned this morning. The resignation is a day late and a dollar short.

Applause to Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave for calling for Gonzales resignation months ago.

Romney back peddles on abortion

2007-08-27T10:44:00.000-06:00

Former Mass. Governor Mitt Romney is already softening his luke-warm position on the sanctity of life.

Last week Romney in an interview with a local ABC-TV affiliate said he believes that state should have the right to legalize abortion.

Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney said Tuesday in a Nevada television interview that he supports letting states "make their own decision" about whether to keep abortion legal.

"My view is that the Supreme Court has made an error in saying at the national level one size fits all for the whole nation," Romney told Nevada political columnist Jon Ralston in a televised interview. "Instead, I would let states make their choices."

Asked by Ralston if it was "OK" with him that Nevada is a "pro-choice state," Romney said, "I'd let states make their own decision in this regard. My view, of course, is I'm a pro-life individual. That's the position I support. But, I'd let states have this choice rather than let the federal government have it." [Emphasis added]

Romney hasn't even won the nomination yet, and is already trying to appeal to moderates. Statements like this, void his supposed pro-life conversion.

Either you are opposed to the murder of innocent children or you are not, there is no middle ground.

Read the full story her e.

Government is not the answer

2007-08-24T09:32:00.000-06:00

The Economist has an interesting piece on the state of liberalism in America. The piece included the results of a poll, released by the Democracy Corps showing that liberalism is far from flourishing.

83% of Americans believe that if the government had more money, it would waste it.

Additionally, 57% of Americans actually believe that government makes it harder for people to get ahead in life.

H/T to NRO's The Campaign Spot.

Hastert to screw conservatives, again

2007-08-22T16:35:00.000-06:00

As I discussed earlier, former Speaker of the House, Congressman Denny Hastert is no friend of the conservative movement.

It's too early to pop the champagne to celebrate his retirement, because Hastert may be lining up to screw conservatives again. It is being rumored that Hastert may resign in November to ensure succession by his hand-picked (and liberal) associate.

From Evans-Novak Political Report (via Politico.com):

According to the Evans-Novak Political Report, former House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) will be resigning from Congress in November, instead of retiring at the end of his term. If true, this could have significant ramifications in determining his successor.

A shortened special election campaign would likely benefit the candidates with the highest name recognition and the deepest pockets. Among Republicans, that status belongs to dairy owner Jim Oberweis, who has run unsuccessfully in three previous statewide bids for governor and for the Senate.
Conservative state Sen. Chris Lauzen is Oberweis’ main challenger, but he has feuded with Hastert in the past. Several Illinois Republicans speculate that Hastert’s decision to resign stems from wanting to help Oberweis win the nomination. [emphasis added]

Romeny's Unfavorables surpass Hillary

2007-08-22T11:16:00.000-06:00

Rasmussen Reports released a poll that has Mitt Romney's unfavorable ratings higher than Hillary Clinton's.

The salient details:

The Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey found that 44% of Likely Voters would definitely vote against Romney if he’s on the ballot in 2008. That’s a point higher than the 43% who would definitely vote against Clinton.

In terms of partisan reaction, it’s interesting to note that 25% of Republicans say they would definitely vote against Romney while 22% of Democrats would vote against Edwards.

Among unaffiliated voters, 44% say they will definitely vote against Clinton and 41% say the same about Romney.

Clinton does a better job of uniting Republicans than any other candidate. Seventy-six percent (76%) of the GOP faithful say they’ll definitely vote against the former First Lady. Only 61% of Republicans say the same about Obama and Edwards.

Sixty-three percent (63%) of Democrats say they’ll definitely vote against Romney.

Couldn't resist

2007-08-22T09:56:00.000-06:00

The First Daughters, Jenna and Barbara have been the fantasy of every College Republican and RNC intern since Bush became president.

Classic line from George W. Bush's son-in-law to-be on his engagement to Jenna Bush:

'At that moment I knew. I knew the way you know about a good melon'

From Politico.com's Shenanigans blog.

Marsha Looper has lost her mind

2007-08-22T09:35:00.000-06:00

"Republican" State Rep. Marsha Looper (R -Calhan) has joined liberal Democrat State Senator Abel Tapia (D - Pueblo) in calling for a guest worker program, with U.S. employment offices in Mexico.

Yes that's right, Marsha Looper wants employment offices in Mexico.

Read the full Rocky Mountain News article here.

"If we don't find a way to address the labor shortage, we're going to be in trouble," Looper said. "As it stands now, 40 percent of the state's produce is rotting on the vine."

Looper said farmers in her district aren't hiring migrant workers because they are afraid of getting raided or fined if they can't verify the workers' legal status.

"We need help, and we need to get help here legally," Looper said. "Ag is a big part of the economy in this state."

Imagine that, people are afraid of breaking the law because of its consequences!!

Immigration Warrior State Senator Ted Harvey (R - Highlands Ranch) schools Tapia and Looper on Federalism, the role of state government, and the truth about illegal immigration.

But Rep. Ted Harvey, R-Highlands Ranch, a vocal critic of illegal immigration, said that any guest worker program should be created by the federal government and not individual states.

"I believe we need to ensure we have enough workers to help farmers, but perhaps they need to look for U.S. citizens and pay an appropriate wage for them to go out and work," Harvey said.

Quick Praise From the RINO Galt

2007-08-17T12:55:00.000-06:00

A huge surprise to all I am sure, but I do not share my buddy If Josh Lyman Were Conservative's contempt for the good speaker from Chicago.

Quite the opposite I have always been impressed with Congressman Hastert's resolve to do what is right for the people. His heart for serving is almost unmatched in current times in regards to our representatives. This can be seen time and time again going back to when he served as a teacher and famed wrestling coach.

Here is wishing Congressman Hastert best wishes as he proceeds to the next chapter of his life.

With Goodwill From Fellow Republicans, Hastert Leaving on His Own Terms

By Susan Davis
Roll Call Staff

Rep. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) defied expectations when he opted to remain in the House after Republicans lost a majority — and he lost his Speakership — in November.

Plagued by health problems, a number of high-profile GOP scandals and a rank and file that was ready for a change in management, he easily could have chosen to end his run as the longest-serving Republican Speaker by resigning from office.

Yet Hastert has long been mindful that Speakerships in modern times do not end well. In his 2004 memoir, “Speaker,” he recalled reading an anthology on his predecessors in the post shortly after he was tapped for the top job in 1998.

“Most were Democrats who had labored in the fields for years. They kept climbing up the ladder, making it all the way to Majority Leader and then, finally, winning election as Speaker,” he wrote. “Then, after a year or two, they died. It happened over and over again. Not much future to this job, I thought.”

But instead of bowing out when the road forked for the GOP in November, Hastert has opted to stick around — at least until next year. With his retirement announcement Friday, he is seeking a graceful exit before the curtains close on a Congressional career that spans more than two decades.

“I think under most circumstances, the moment a Speaker faced what he faced a year ago he would have resigned, as [ex-Speaker Newt] Gingrich [R-Ga.] and others did in the past,” said Rep. David Dreier (R-Calif.), a longtime Hastert friend and ally. Dreier said Hastert reminded him of Winston Churchill, who returned to the House of Commons after being defeated as prime minister to “fulfill the role of elder statesman.”

While recent Speakers such as Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Gingrich hold significantly brighter national spotlights, the media-averse, avuncular and verbally clunky Hastert easily transitioned back onto the bench with the rank and file when he lost the Speakership.

That was in large part because of a generous reserve of goodwill built over the years from his GOP colleagues, who overwhelmingly credit Hastert as the force that held a fractious and narrow majority together during eight of the 12 years of Republican control.

“During two decades of service in the House, Speaker Hastert has earned a reputation of being a steady, loyal and gracious colleague and leader whose personal integrity and respect for our institution is unparalleled,” Minority Leader John Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a statement. “He ascended to the Speaker’s chair with the unanimous support of his Republican colleagues and will leave Congress as one of our most respected Members.”

Hastert largely was able to avoid the kind of partisan fights and verbal attacks lodged from and against his second in command, then-Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-Texas), but it took Hastert years to shake the perception that the more assertive DeLay was the one in control and he was the one who followed marching orders.

In hindsight, there is little to indicate that Hastert and DeLay’s relationship was built on more than the business of politics. Hastert told Roll Call in March that he still speaks to DeLay “occasionally” but said they no longer communicate “on a regular basis” since DeLay resigned from the House.

Regardless, Hastert and DeLay were an effective team that often used heavy-handed tactics to move their agenda. The most cited example of that is the 2003 House vote on the Medicare prescription drug bill during which Hastert held the vote open for nearly three hours — the longest roll call in House history — to get the votes to pass the bill. Democrats decried the move as blatantly unfair, and it prompted an ethics investigation into DeLay on his vote-getting tactics that resulted in an ethics admonishment for the Majority Leader.

Hastert made no apologies, recalling in his book that he told reporters after the vote, “I’ve been working this issue for 20 years and seniors have been waiting through three Congresses for a prescription drug benefit, so I don’t think that waiting an additional three hours to get it done is too much.”

The Medicare bill was only one example of how Hastert worked to enact an agenda outlined by President Bush, which at times put him at odds with his own Conference. “I think Bush would have been a one-termer without Hastert, I truly believe that,” said John Feehery, a former top Hastert aide who is now a lobbyist. “There’s no doubt about it, [Hastert] was the most important person in the House moving the president’s agenda. He’s the most underestimated and undervalued member of the Bush team in that sense.”

Feehery cited Hastert stewarding the passage of the 2001 tax cuts, Medicare, and in particular a series of defense and intelligence measures such as the USA PATRIOT Act after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.

“I think his greatest accomplishments are twofold, in both bringing the country together after 9/11 and moving all of the important legislation that happened as a result of that,” Feehery said. “I think that’s what he is most proud of.”

Members overwhelming credited Hastert’s leadership in the wake of Sept. 11 as what will secure his place in history. Dreier noted that there have been no terrorist actions on U.S. soil since. “That’s not an accident and due in part to Hastert’s leadership,” Dreier said, noting that Hastert often was willing to push legislation that was not politically popular to do what he believed was necessary to protect the country.

“His leadership after the 9/11 attacks helped strengthen our national security and prevent future attacks on the homeland,” added House Republican Conference Chairman Adam Putnam (Fla.), who credits Hastert as a mentor.

Hastert’s tenure was not without folly. It was on his advice that the Conference changed internal rules in 2005 to protect DeLay’s leadership post as he faced a criminal indictment in Texas. The move later was reversed, but Members grumbled that Hastert was losing touch with the Conference in an effort to protect DeLay.

His office also was in the center of the controversy surrounding former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.), who resigned just weeks before the midterm elections when it was revealed that he had sent sexually explicit electronic messages to teenage males he had met through the House page program.

There is no evidence that Hastert or anyone else knew of those messages before they were revealed in the press, but leadership offices and senior aides in Hastert’s shop were aware of a series of more innocuous e-mails sent to pages in the past.

The House Committee on Standards of Official Conduct immediately launched an investigation. While the panel concluded that no one was guilty of wrongdoing, it chastised the Speaker’s office for showing an “inexplicable lack of interest” in a matter involving underage teens.

The panel further concluded that Boehner and Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-N.Y.) had informed Hastert about the e-mails despite the fact that Hastert testified that he did not recall such conversations.

His critics also have accused Hastert of contributing to a more partisan, divided atmosphere on Capitol Hill; the Illinois lawmaker had little to no relationship with Pelosi and then-Minority Leader Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.) before her. However, neither party’s leaders in recent years have made bipartisan outreach a priority in a chamber that divides them by a thin margin.

In a statement, Pelosi lauded Hastert’s tenure. “Speaker Hastert has always placed a high value on public service, a calling he dedicated much of his life to as a teacher, coach, and member of the House,” she said. “He can take great pride in his record as the longest serving Republican Speaker, an accomplishment that is a testament to his leadership in the Republican Conference.”

While Hastert, 65, has not yet said what his future career goals are, sources close to him say they expect him to retreat back to Illinois. While his health always has been a concern — he is diabetic — he has dropped more than 50 pounds and counting since November.

Neither he nor his wife, Jean, has ever embraced Washington, D.C., life, and they own considerable farmland in the Midwest. Sources said they could see Hastert returning to his first profession of teaching, or earning a cushy salary as a corporate consultant. He has expressed no interest in becoming a lobbyist, and he has all but ruled out an ambassadorship — an avenue former leaders of both parties have pursued in the past after leaving Congress.

While Hastert likely will hold on to the distinction of longest -serving Republican Speaker for the foreseeable future, the jury is out on whether history will judge his Speakership as one of the greats. His allies would like to think so.

“The funny thing about Speakerships is they usually end badly, and usually in personal controversy,” Feehery observed. “But in the annals of the modern Speakership, I think Hastert’s will rank right up there with Sam Rayburn’s.”

The truth about Denny

2007-08-16T15:52:00.000-06:00

American Spectator editor R. Emmett Tyrrell has an excellent piece unmasking former Speaker of the House Denny Hastert's real legacy.

The highlights:

His period as Speaker marked the Republican congressional delegation's final decay from Reagan splendor to the provincial Republicanism of an earlier era...

He also opened the floodgates to Congressional spending. He also turned a blind eye to the petty corruption that beset the House during his term. He encouraged mediocrity and held back young principled Republicans of the Reaganite variety. He allowed the Republican Party to return to the era of pork barrel deal making...

The result was the Reagan Administration, an amalgam of the best of the rising right and the old liberal consensus developed at the beginning of the Cold War. It was a politics of ideas. Irving Kristol had pronounced modern politics the domain of ideas and he was right. Hastert, the retired high school wrestling coach, had no appetite for ideas. Until Republicans return to a politics of Reaganite ideas, they will be as antiquated as the Democrats and infinitely less interesting.

More hot air in CO-5

2007-08-16T10:40:00.000-06:00

El Paso County GOP Chair Greg Garcia is full of more hot gas than a hot air balloon.

In today's Gazette, Garcia is threatening to "punish" any candidate in CO-5's unnecessary primary who doesn't meet with his standard of campaign "ethics."

That process would include some sort of investigation of claims alleged to be false and a requirement that candidates disavow any statements that are made by their campaigns or supporters and are found to be untrue, Garcia said. Not following the rules could lead to punishment, he said, adding that he is still trying to determine what that could be.

I'm not sure that Garcia has any real comprehension of what his job as county party chair actually entails. Garicia has no authority to "punish" campaigns he thinks have gotten too rough, in fact Garcia should be staying out of the whole primary mess in the first place.

However, Garcia is a bought and paid supporter of sore-loser Jeff Crank.

Even liberal Republicans like former El Paso Chair, State Rep. Bob Gardner don't think Generalissimo Garcia's "rules" are enforceable.

“The fact is the chairman has no real power other than the position of the chairman to express disapproval or dissatisfaction with the tactics. You can’t make a candidate or campaigns change their campaign if they don’t wish to.”

The bottom line is that Generalissimo Garcia's statements were made to give him cover when he uses the county party machine to actively campaign against his sitting, conservative Congressman.

Pro-Life Movement gets boost

2007-08-15T16:01:00.000-06:00

From the Fort Collins Coloradoan:

Ritter trying to 'sneak in' abortion view
Erik Rush
Although I'm not a one-topic crusader columnist, every now and then a political issue gets my hackles up so badly I feel I would be grossly remiss if I didn't address it.

The phenomenon of the "pro-life" vs. "pro-choice" issue is one in which I think many conscientious (non-ideologue fringe dwellers) folks are a little too lukewarm on. Leaving religious convictions aside for the moment, I know it was consoling to think that our legislators had everything in hand as far as medical ethics go, having been lulled into an erroneous belief that the subjects in question were simply blobs of undifferentiated cells.

It's become apparent to more and more Americans over the years that abortion is about the lucrative industry of killing babies in nauseatingly brutal and inhuman fashion; hence the "partial-birth" (in reality, full-term) abortion debates within the last few years.

Colorado Constitution Article 5, Section 50, was passed via ballot measure by the people of the State of Colorado to ensure that our tax dollars would never be used for the "direct or indirect" support of abortion mills.

It recently came to my attention (and to that of Colorado pro-life organizations) that Gov. Bill Ritter, in an effort to pay back some of the far-left supporters who helped get him elected, intends to circumvent this law and "indirectly" funnel Colorado taxpayer dollars to Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers.

It should be no surprise: "I will restore the funding to Planned Parenthood and other agencies," Ritter stated on his campaign Web site.

How, one wonders — without doing it illegally?

Depending on how familiar one is with the machinations of politics, this process can be likened to the laundering of money by organized crime. When dollars change hands enough times and no one is paying attention to the paper trail, when the government cuts a check, all looks to be above board.

The Christian Family Alliance of Colorado (www.ChristianFamilyAlliance.com), which has the support of Greeley Sen. Scott Renfroe, one of our state’s pro-life champions, is mounting a grassroots effort to stop this abomination in its tracks.

If you’ve been paying attention to the media of late, you’re aware it was a bipartisan grassroots effort that killed the U.S. Senate’s abysmal and dangerous immigration bill. Nationally, it was a major wake-up call that the voters, not special interests, still hold the lion’s share of political power in America.

There’s no reason to assume that this won’t hold true concerning Ritter’s designs, in spite of pro-abortion liberals controlling the state Legislature.

Timing is important, as well, according to CFAC literature: “… we think Ritter believes he will be able to sneak his pro-abortion scheme into action this summer when he hopes others will not be paying attention.” It’s a tactic we’ve seen played out at the federal level many times.”

This time, let’s show Ritter that the citizens of conscience in Colorado are indeed paying attention.

For more information on how you can help in this effort, contact: Mark Hotaling, director, Christian Family Alliance of Colorado, P.O. Box 13528, Denver, CO 80201; telephone (970) 556-0097.

Erik Rush is an author and columnist who works in advertising. Send e-mail to opinion@coloradoan.com

Senator Scott Renfroe introduced the first legislation banning abortion (SB07-143) in the history of the Colorado General Assembly last session. Renfroe is a pro-life champion and I'm glad to see he is supporting the Christian Family Alliance of Colorado.

I hope the Christian Family Alliance of Colorado can make some positive steps for the pro-life movement here in Colorado.

Romney speaks out of both sides of his mouth

2007-08-15T15:07:00.001-06:00

From National Journal's Hotline and the Boston Herald:

Boston Herald's Ross reports Mitt Romney owns stock in 2 companies involved in embryonic stem cell research, biomedical firms Novo Nordisk and Millipore corp, "both of which use human embryos to research cures for chronic diseases." In his "public actions," Romney has "occupied a middle ground on stem cell research," supporting "using excess embryos created at fertility clinics, but he has opposed cloning or creating new embryos solely for experimentation."

Romney's "assets are held in a blind trust created after he was elected" Gov in '02. The manager of his trust, Brad Malt of the firm Ropes & Gray, "said Romney had no way of knowing how his funds were invested." While many candidates sell stocks held in blind trust, Romney didn't do so before WH '08. "Candidates can also set restrictions on their investments when a blind trust is created, but Malt said Romney did not take that step in 2002."

Romney's financial statement shows he owns between $100K and $250K in Novo Nordisk, "a Denmark-based company engaged in research projects involving embryonic stem cells" (8/15).

Romney has claimed that his election year conversion to the pro-life cause is a result of studying embryonic stem cells, and how his opposition to embryonic stems cell research was the catalyst for his pro-life conversion.

Romney opposes embryonic stem cell research, but has no problem making money off the destruction of human life.

NRO: Brownback should pull out of POTUS race

2007-08-15T10:44:00.000-06:00

National Review's Rich Lowr y writes on why Sam Brownback should pull out of the 2008 Presidential race.

Coffman, Tonner and CO-6

2007-08-15T10:21:00.000-06:00

Several well placed Republican sources have confirmed that Secretary of State Mike Coffman has been meeting with Flat-Line's (Phaseline) Sean Tonner about running for Tom Tancredo's CO-6 House seat. At least two meetings have taken place in the last three weeks.

Does this indicate that Coffman has inside information into Tancredo's plans for 2008?

Does Tanc's strong finish in the Iowa Straw Poll breath new life into his Presidential run?

What isn't clear is whether or not Coffman will primary Tancredo. A Coffman run for CO-6 is sure to anger both the Republican party establishment, as well as conservatives.

Republicans want to keep the Secretary of State seat, which if Coffman won CO-6, would be appointed by Governor Ritter.

Conservatives believe that Senator Ted Harvey or Wil Armstrong would be far better conservative ambassadors in Congress.

Humor, POTUS style

2007-08-15T10:17:00.000-06:00

Yes, that is Rudy in drag. Yes this is Romney dressed like a mariachi singer at a Massachusetts Mexican restaurant.

Iowa Straw Poll

2007-08-13T10:35:00.000-06:00

The clear victor of Saturday's Iowa Republican Straw Poll is Governor Mike Huckabee.

Mitt "RINO" Romney may have actually won the poll, but Huckabee made the strongest showing and elevated himself to the top tier of candidates.

I'm in the process of tracking down some Colorado guys who went to the straw poll to get there first hand reactions. I'll post their reactions, once I get them.

In the mean time, read National Reviews analysis of Huckabee here.

Full Straw Poll results:

Iowa state auditor David Vaudt has unofficially certified the Iowa Straw Poll results. With 14,203 ballots having been reportedly cast, here are the results as per (http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/) …

1. ROMNEY: Gov Mitt Romney won the 2007 Ames straw poll, receiving 4516 votes, or 31%.
2. HUCKABEE: In a surprise, Gov. Mike Huckabee finished second with 2587 votes at 18.1%
3. BROWNBACK: Sen. Sam Brownback with 2192 votes and 15.3%
4. TANCREDO: Tom Tancredo with 1961 votes, 13.7%.
5. PAUL: Ron Paul with 1305 votes, and 9.1%
6. THOMPSON: Tommy Thompson, 1,039 votes, 7.3%
7. THOMPSON: Fred Thomson with 203 votes.
8. GIULIANI: Rudy Giuliani with 183 votes.
9. HUNTER: Duncan Hunter with 174 votes.
10. MCCAIN: John McCain with 101 votes.
11. COX: John Cox with 41 votes.

Do The Bart Man

2007-08-09T10:29:00.001-06:00

If you frequent PPH, you have probably already seen this.

POTUS candidates likened to Simpsons characters according to The Krusty Konservative

John McCain – Maude Flanders – she’s died on the show and no one really misses her.

John Cox – Dr. Nick Riviera – he’s a charlatan who only fools a small minority of people into believing he’s a legitimate practitioner of his trade.

Mike Huckabee - Ned Flanders – he’s a good guy. He’s nice, friendly and everyone likes him… but he’s completely non-threatening.

Mitt Romney – Dredrick Tatum – the reigning heavyweight champion of the world with a MAJOR problem.

Tommy Thompson – C. Montgomery Burns – he’s dying and everyone knows it, but he’s just not quite dead yet. And yes, that means Steve Grubbs is Waylon Smithers.

Rudy Giuliani – Homer Simpson – He screws up all the time but for some reason everyone still loves him.

Tom Tancredo – Ralph Wiggum – he’s a minor character who’s wildly popular with die-hard fans.

Sam Brownback – Principal Skinner – he’s kind of a dork and no one respects him.

Fred Thompson – Dr. Julius Hibbert – he’s big and jovial and he’s trying to figure out what’s wrong with the body (politic).

Newt Gingrich – “Sideshow” Bob Terwilliger – he’s a smart guy with TONS of baggage.

Quote of the Week

2007-08-09T10:21:00.000-06:00

Seen on a bloggers signature over at CoPols

"For those of you who do not know what a blogger is, it is someone with a laptop, an axe to grind, and their virginity." - Steven Colbert

Ron Paul is up... on TV

2007-08-08T12:01:00.000-06:00

Today, Congressman Ron Paul went up on the airwaves with his first set of 30 second TV ads in Iowa.

The ads are running in Cedar Rapids and Des Moines markets.

Iowa Straw Poll Predictions

2007-08-07T17:20:00.000-06:00

In the spirit of the moment, I am going to add to the white-noise, by releasing my own predictions for this Saturday's Iowa Straw Poll.

1. Mitt Romney
2. Fred Thompson
3. Rudy Giuliani (tie)
3 Tom Tancredo (tie)
4. Ron Paul
5. John McCain
6. Mike Huckabee
7. Sam Brownback
8. Duncan Hunter
10. Tommy Thompson
11. John Cox

Sour grapes in CO-5

2007-08-06T10:55:00.000-06:00

The Denver Post has a puff piece on the continued sour gapes of Jeff Crank and his supporters, over Doug Lamborn's victory in last years primary.

Crank and his supporters are sore losers. Lamborn has done a good job so far, in his first months as a minority Congressman. He has represented his constituents and their conservative values well.

Party insiders agree:

Lamborn has support from his constituents, said Greg Garcia, chairman of the El Paso County Republican Party. That county's voters represent about 80 percent of Lamborn's district.
"When I talk to people and ask them, 'How do you think we're doing?' Doug Lamborn is talked about very positively," Garcia said.

Even liberal business groups, a natural "constituency" for former Chamber of Commerce hack Crank, are happy with Lamborn.

Lamborn, he said, has used public appearances and mailings to let voters know his congressional efforts, which many have praised.
"He has supported business issues and Realtor issues," said Terry Storm, chief executive of the Pikes Peak Association of Realtors, which so far is happy with Lamborn.

In fact the piece even goes so far as to claim that Crank is already a primary candidate, in a photo caption.

Jeff Crank candidate for Colorado's 5th congressional district at a meeting sponsored by NFIB at Broadmoor in Colorado Springs on Monday. (Post / Hyoung Chang)

Crank is very clearly only in this to appease his Mount Rushmore sized ego, and not represent the people of Colorado's 5th Congressional District.

If Crank was actually interested in doing the right thing, and not feeding his ego, he'd run for a state house of state senate seat. But he's not interested in that. He's going to take his principles compromising agenda (endorsed gay candidates and tax hikes, while claiming to be conservative) and run a sore-loser primary campaign.

Musgrave getting some Greeley love

2007-08-06T10:20:00.000-06:00

The Greeley Tribune has a great piece on the re-branding of Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave.

From the piece:

"I would say that I think Congresswoman Musgrave is a lot more visible than what she was given credit for even previous to 2007," said Dick Wadhams, chairman of the Colorado Republican Party. "I think she worked hard before this, but I also would concede that she does seem to be at least having more visible events in the district."

Both sides believe it's good for more constituents to hear Musgrave's beliefs, so more people will know where Musgrave stands -- a good thing to her staff, who believe most people in the region agree with her, and a good thing from the perspective of Democrats, who believe most people don't.

While her beliefs have stayed consistent, her work with Democrats has been mostly friendly this year. She's appeared on more than one occasion with Udall, the U.S. representative and Democratic Senate candidate from a town outside that liberal bastion, Boulder. She has bucked other members of her party and joined with U.S. Rep. John Salazar, another Democrat, to oppose the U.S. Army's stalled plan to expand its training site in southern Colorado, inside Musgrave's district.

Musgrave said at a meeting last month that she's always worked well with Democrats; the media just never focused on it, so she took matters into her own hands. To that end, her staff started a newsletter in February called "Bi-Partisanship Works."

The e-newsletter, sent by Musgrave's communications director Aaron Johnson, highlights work she is doing with the other side. The first e-mail went out Feb. 9, and similar newsletters have followed about once a week.

One could argue, however, that many of her bipartisan actions are things that can hardly be called controversial. For instance, Musgrave recently joined the Congressional Bike Caucus.

Other bi-partisan actions have been more controversial, however. Musgrave caused a stir in the delegation with her opposition to the Army's plans to expand its training site at Piñon Canyon in southern Colorado, which led to nasty comments by U.S. Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colorado Springs, a friend of Musgrave's.

Even more obvious than the newsletter has been Musgrave's renewed focus on her constituents, which includes photo-ops like pumping gas and pouring coffee, but also attempts at substantive events like "listening sessions" on the local economy and the farm bill, among other topics.

Good for Musgrave for working hard to re-brand herself, while still sticking up for conservative values. These sort of news stories will go a long way toward Musgrave's upcoming re-election campaign.