'76 Blog

(Denver Post, Oct. 10) “Not so fast,” warns the movie hero.  He’ll make sure the cad or the con man doesn’t get away with it.  One side in American politics has always been the party of “not so fast,” putting the brakes on expansive government power.  Today that’s the Republican Party, and they serve the common good in doing it, even when unsuccessful. But I’m concerned that in the governor’s race this year, Colorado Republicans may be so unsuccessful that their restraining influence on political overreach is lost for a long time.  Even the most fervent Democrats, if they remember the corruption of power, shouldn’t relish that prospect – though one can see why they’re keeping gleefully silent as Tom Tancredo and Dan Maes rip each other. Voting begins this week.  The worry du jour last week was demotion of the GOP to minor-party status if Maes finishes under 10 percent.  I don’t think he will, but he obviously won’t win either.  In the likely outcome of Democrat John Hickenlooper winning, or the unlikely outcome of the freelancer Tancredo prevailing, the one certainty on Nov. 3 is a defeated, divided, and demoralized Republican establishment – which doesn’t augur well for constitutionalism. What’s constitutionalism, and who cares?  We all should.  Our written constitution of self-government, in this state or the United States, is only as strong as the unwritten traditions of fair competition and civic virtue – habits of the heart, as they have been called – that sustain America as a caring community of free people.  A jungle ethos of winning at any cost endangers all that.  Let's not go there.  Too many on the right in Colorado, I’m sorry to say, already have.  To be clear: While this party stalwart is firmly on record as supporting neither Maes nor Tancredo nor Hickenlooper, I have GOP friends in each man’s camp – and our friendship will survive the disagreement.  The purpose here is to analyze attitudes, not to slam personalities.  The slamming is what has to stop. Reversing early assurances that he wouldn’t run an anti-Maes campaign, Tom has.  On Dan’s side, a frothing anti-Tancredo screed is now online, slinging slurs like “chicken hawk.”  It’s more bitter than a primary because there’s no intra-party comity to damp the invective.  Tom says he’ll govern as a Republican if elected -- but it wasn’t long ago he emphatically disavowed the party label, and mocked Lincoln for good measure.  Political memories aren’t short.  Even if Ken Buck wins, some congressional seats flip, and Democrats suffer legislative losses, a self-wounded GOP will be disadvantaged under the gold dome after this cannibalistic governor’s race.  As tax pressures intensify and Obama girds for reelection, Colorado is going to need a party of “not so fast.”  Who will it be? The American Constitution Party can’t mount a defense when liberals go on offense. Whether Tancredo’s ambition succeeds this time, or fizzles as it did in the presidential primaries, many in my party will need to think long and hard about whether the end justifies the means.  Maes’s undeniable weaknesses were but a relative excuse, not an absolute justification, for mass desertion of the Republican nominee.  Somehow the McInnis disease, scorning party standard-bearers in 2006 and 2008, went epidemic in 2010. Abandoning long-established institutions for “light and transient causes” violates conservative prudence, the Declaration of Independence warns.  Many of the GOP’s finest, including three of Tom’s congressional colleagues, have gambled unconservatively this fall.  They used to say the Episcopal Church was the Republican regulars at prayer.  The Tancredo movement seems like the regulars on a fling.  Might all this, in hindsight, prove an overreaction?  Have we destroyed the village to save it? “She’s come undone,” sang the Guess Who.  I hope I’m wrong in applying that to our state’s Grand Old Party.       

(Denver Post, May 30) An Alaska mayor shocks the governor in a primary, then humbles an ex-governor in the general election, then electrifies the nation as John McCain’s running mate.  A legislator from the laughing-stock Massachusetts Republicans upsets the attorney general to capture a perennially Democratic Senate seat. A lowly Pennsylvania congressman ignores the president’s support for a party-switching senator and retires him in a primary, Obama endorsement and all.You know their names.  In ousting Arlen Specter, Joe Sestak (corrupt job offer notwithstanding) followed a pattern set by Scott Brown and Sarah Palin.  Voters in both parties are turning to conviction candidates and giving resume’ candidates the boot.  Palin’s rollicking speech at DU last weekend, hours after the state Republican convention, got me wondering whether the same pattern fits Colorado.Laughing that it was fun to do politics at an ice rink, the Wasilla hockey mom skated in to forecheck the Messiah himself.  Her deft indictment of Mr. Obama’s policies delighted the crowd of several thousand, about half of them Tea Partiers by a show of hands.  With her peroration on Reagan as a model of the “lifeguard leadership” America needs, you could hear Sarah asking herself: “Should I run in 2012?”Time will tell.  Right now there is 2010 to deal with, and on a Saturday that had seen conventional wisdom toppled among both Democrats and Republicans, something else you could hear was our state’s previously favored hopefuls for senator and governor frantically recalculating their chances.Jane Norton and Ken Buck, Senate rivals in the August GOP primary, both attended the Palin event.  Once the underdog, he was riding a 77% delegate majority and positive media buzz.  She was coming off several days of rough press and party grumbling over her decision to bypass the convention and file petitions.  Listening in on their thoughts that night would have been fascinating.  Though still formidable in likability, endorsements, and funding, the former lieutenant governor now clearly has a race on her hands.  For all that Norton was recently lauded by Gov. Palin as a “pink elephant,” a conservative woman to watch, the pit bull of the hour seems to be Buck.The same dramatic reversal of fortune, like something out of the movies, has befallen Michael Bennet and Andrew Romanoff, Senate rivals on the Democratic side.  Romanoff, feisty and buoyant, radiates conviction. Bennet has the resume’, but he plods. The incumbent’s war chest and White House backing may prove no more decisive for him than they were for poor Arlen Specter.It was in the race for governor, though, that May 22 invited the craziest speculation on who might become Colorado’s Sarah Palin.  Evergreen businessman Dan Maes, authentic and fearless but politically unknown, announced in early 2009 against Gov. Bill Ritter. Fat chance.  Like most Republicans, I shrugged and awaited the serious contenders. First came former congressman Scott McInnis, then state Sen. Josh Penry, then (very briefly) former presidential candidate Tom Tancredo.  But suddenly last November, Penry and Tancredo were out. This January, Ritter too was out.  And now as June begins, McInnis sits SECOND on the ballot behind, of all people, Dan Maes.Is it another case of conviction trumping resume’?  If latecomer Joe Gschwendtner gains traction, does a three-way primary (like Palin’s in 2006) help Maes? Could Dauntless Dan, if nominated by the GOP, beat the media’s darling, John Hickenlooper?  There is precedent.  Back in 1962, the untried John Love took out Democrat Gov. Steve McNichols. Things are at a boil, and as Samuel Adams of Boston Tea Party fame observed, “It does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.”  Americans and Coloradans, fired up about over-government, have made this a year of surprises already.  My hunch is we haven’t seen anything yet.  

(Denver Post, Mar. 21) Political inexperience was the gold standard among 30 of my neighbors at a precinct caucus in Centennial last week.  Fellow Republicans viewed the 2010 contenders for senator and governor with the hard eyes of swindle victims or jilted lovers.  The less involved a candidate had been with our party’s time in state and national office over the past dozen years, the more acceptable he or she seemed for nomination this year. Caucus night in March was only the first step on a long road to election night in November, 225 days from now.  But it dramatized the “once burned, twice shy” distrust of government that will shape the choices made by Colorado voters in GOP, Democratic, and independent ranks.  Trust when broken is hard to restore.  That’s the penalty box our whole political system is in right now.  Unpredictable new forces are in play as this campaign unfolds. The Tuesday meeting at a school library near our house was older, white, and mostly men.  Rainbow America we were not, but we gathered with a love for this land of liberty and a desire to make a difference.  Before things started, there was laughter and applause when someone pointed to a presidential book display featuring Barack Obama and George Washington and quipped, “The goal is a government with less of him and more of HIM.  In the precinct straw poll for a nominee to regain the US Senate seat from Democrats Michael Bennet or Andrew Romanoff, Sedalia businessman and former state Sen. Tom Wiens took 40%, followed by former Lt. Gov. Jane Norton with 37% and district attorney Ken Buck with 23%.  In the trial heat for governor, Evergreen businessman and rookie candidate Dan Maes got a notable 44%, trailing former congressman Scott McInnis, the prohibitive favorite, who had 56%. Our tiny sample largely tracked the statewide Republican tallies, though it was Ken Buck who ran close with Jane Norton in the overall count.  More striking to me than the percentages was the mood in the room.  A burly guy named Larry spoke for many with his warnings of the tax-and-spend taint attaching to an ex-congressman and an ex- lieutenant governor. Countering him with the case for McInnis and Norton was the more youthful and smooth-spoken Cole, but you could see many skeptical frowns.  I’m uncommitted in both races, and cast a secret ballot that night.  Any of the GOP contenders, whatever their shortcomings or the party’s past lapses, would obviously work harder for limited government – the imperative right now, before our country goes bankrupt – than would a Sen. Bennet, a Sen. Romanoff, or a Gov. John Hickenlooper as liberal Democrats.  That’s why my party must not self-immolate in the 2010 primary as we did in the 2006 gubernatorial bloodbath.  The prize is November. Dems actually face a tougher task with this year’s fed-up electorate than my side does.  Their Colorado ticket will be a pair of entitlement-peddling, union-bought insiders by whatever names.  Our nominees can definitely take outside position against that.  Whether Republicans are ready to use power more responsibly this time, if trusted with it again, is another question.  Bluntly acknowledging that question would be a good start; frontrunners take note. Nothing can be taken for granted.  Lent is a far piece from Halloween.  What if an autumn house of horrors found America at war with Iran?  The incumbent party might benefit decisively from a rally to the flag.  Half a year is an eternity in politics, we’ve learned again and again. “I’m giving the Republicans one more chance,” Doug told our caucus.  Bitterly disillusioned by McCain after 2008, he’s back as a delegate this spring.  As buyers’ remorse with Obama deepens, will voters similarly gamble and grant the GOP a do-over?  

('76 Editor) Tune in tonight, Thursday, Dec. 17 at 7pm on 710 KNUS in Denver and streaming at 710knus.com, when Centennial Institute presents the Republican finalists for Governor of Colorado, Scott McInnis vs Dan Maes. Recorded at Centennial's candidate forum on Nov. 3 and edited to reflect Josh Penry's exit from the race. McInnis leads incumbent Bill Ritter by 48-40 in the latest poll. What does the potential next governor have to say for himself? What makes Maes, the dark horse, run? Video highlights of both the Governor and Senator forums.

(Denver Post, Dec. 6) All that is covered shall be revealed, promises the Good Book.  It’s the perfect motto for America’s open society.  Secrets are fools’ gold.  Leaks will out.  Thanks to a leaker at East Anglia University, we now know climate change isn’t cooking the planet after all.  Climate alarmists are cooking the data. Meanwhile in Colorado, leakers are heating up the governor’s race.  A week after the election, someone scooped Josh Penry’s plan to end his candidacy against Gov. Bill Ritter. A week later, someone else scooped Scott McInnis’s plan to unify Republicans around an issue contract.  I’ve got this week’s leak. A confidential memo from inside the McInnis campaign showed up under my doormat. The authors call themselves the Skunk Works.  The address line says, “Eyes Only: Mighty Mac,” and the subject reads: “The Carter Question and the Treaty of Fifth Avenue.”  This is pure journalistic catnip, Pulitzer-quality stuff.  Let me quote: “Boss, to say you had a good November would be like saying Elway could pass a little.  Last month was terrific.  Overnight you’re the consensus nominee, endorsed by past and present GOP icons from Owens to Tancredo to Penry, and your Platform for Prosperity puts Republicans on offense with all three big issues – jobs, jobs, and jobs.  Plus the platform’s tough stance on taxes, spending, illegal aliens, and crime erases your Washington taint as an ex-congressman.  “Ritter is now the one weighed down with Beltway baggage and on the defensive for his linkage to an Obama stimulus that didn’t stimulate.  With total jobs in Colorado actually below 2006 levels, you can score big next fall with the old Jimmy Carter question on whether voters are better off than four years ago.  Obviously not, so it’s time for Mac at quarterback. “But since our job as Skunkers is to pipe in reality, not spin flattery, here’s the other side.  With this new platform appearing to be written for you by powerful rivals, you’re in the awkward position of Nixon in 1960 when his issues were dictated by Rockefeller.  Divisions over the so-called ‘Treaty of Fifth Avenue’ helped defeat the ticket.  We need to change the 2010 story line, and fast. “The potential winning message of the Platform for Prosperity is threatened by party grumbling and PR vulnerability.  Pundits, both left and right, scoff that our agenda is too vague to attract swing voters. Many of the GOP faithful are saying we prefer insider manipulation instead of inclusiveness.  Some worry that you won’t run hard on the platform, or fight for it if elected.  What’s the McInnis response? “To quiet the complaints on process, do three things.  Hold grassroots platform hearings with Republicans across the state.  Let assembly delegates choose your Lieutenant Governor, possibly Dan Maes.  And gain endorsements from Bob Schaffer and Bob Beauprez at whatever cost, finally healing the breach from your ’06 and ’08 jabs at them. “As for issues, Skunkers say go full throttle. Dramatize your platform with specifics.  For job creation, pledge to zero out the corporate income tax.  Colorado would boom!  Roll out ballot issues to fortify TABOR and to let health insurers from any state write coverage here. Dare the legislature next spring to pass a top-10 list of prosperity bills.  Call for voting down at least one member of our constitution-shredding Supreme Court, perhaps labor hack Michael Bender. “Remember, Boss – McCain lost the presidency partly because millions of people feared his moderate mushiness would doom American conservatism if he won.  If we don’t catch the wave of tea parties and townhalls, that could be your political obituary as well.  But channel your inner Palin the next 300 days, and Ritter’s job is yours!”