Fmr. Gov. Bill Owens' Frosty Encounter With Ex-Professor Ward Churchill

"In retirement, he's starting to look a lot like Michael Moore . . . Ward Churchill is a plagiarist and a fraud and, regrettably, we continue to pay for his deception"--Former Gov. Bill Owens on ex-CU professor Ward Churchill

Owens commented on being deposed (audio courtesy of Complete Colorado) for Churchill's lawsuit on the Caplis and Silverman show--including a funny encounter with the man himself (h/t Drunkablog):

The deposition took place in the office of Churchill's attorney, David Lane. Owens, who left office in January 2007 and now is a businessman, was represented by the attorney general's office.

For his part Friday, Churchill refused to shake Owens' hand.

So Owens took a verbal jab: "I said, 'Come on, you're a big guy.'"

Lane said later: "I hope the governor's feelings weren't too hurt."

And apparently, by "big guy" Owens meant Michael Moore.

Churchill's response?

*crickets chirping*

Owens concluded:

Churchill and Lane claimed the firing was in retaliation for exercising his constitutional right to free speech.

"I very directly told David Lane that I also had a First Amendment right to speak on the subject, and I reflected what a vast majority of Coloradans were saying," Owens said.

"Unfortunately for David Lane, his client had a clear pattern of lying for virtually his entire academic career. That's why he was fired.

"I believe the jury will reject Churchill's (claims.)"

Drunkablog, Pirate Ballerina and SP will have extensive coverage of the Churchill lawsuit come next month.

In the meantime, prepare for William Ayers' defense of Churchill next month at CU.

Colorado GOP Reacts To Election Of New RNC Chair Michael Steele

Ben DeGrow has an extensive post detailing the voting for RNC Chair that occurred yesterday, including insight from Colorado GOP Chair Dick Wadhams and Colorado RNC Committeeman Mark Hillman, and the reactions from Republican activists who hope that Michael Steele understands what social media and user generated content can offer, and also what Web 2.0 does, and more importantly doesn't do:

This isn’t just about Facebook or Twitter. This isn’t just about how many friends one has on a social network. This is about bottom up collaborative political action. And this collaborative action functions using the tools of social media and the internet as messaging and communication vessels.
. . .
So, in essence, the RNC needs to view the web as a thriving community of activists who want to be involved. We want to be a part of something. We want to take part in projects that we feel ownership of. We want to collaborate and help build things that we believe will further the movement for free-markets and sound government.

In other words, less old-school hierarchy and top-down approaches to messaging, and more interactive and responsive political activism.

And not just on the national level, but in every state. A new playing field derived from an evolution in technology and the successful implementation of new strategies and tactics by Democrats necessitates a rethinking at all levels of the party--from fundraising and recruitment to messaging and campaigning. This isn't an old guard vs. "Young Turks" issue. But expecting different results from the same unsuccessful methods for the last 2 or 3 cycles would be textbook insanity and self-delusion.

Congratulations to Michael Steele. The long road to 2010, which officially began once Sen. John McCain conceded the election to now President Barack Obama, can begin in earnest with a new face for the party at a national level. Local party elections are also coming up soon. Now is the time to get involved--we can't wait until the summer of 2010 to show up.

William Ayers To Defend Ward Churchill At CU In March Ahead Of Ex-Professor's Lawsuit

Thankfully, Drunkablog was on top of this over a week ago:

Come and hear the shocking truths behind the right-wing attacks on Churchill. Hear what they don’t want you to know!

Date: Thursday, March 5, 2009
Time: 6:00pm - 9:00pm
Location: Glenn Miller Ballroom, at CU Boulder inside the UMC

DMYR Presents CU Regent Tom Lucero

Tom Lucero, CU Regent and Republican candidate for CD-4 in 2010, spoke to the Denver Metro Young Republicans at the January meeting.

Highlights from Lucero's talk:

Global Warming: Policy Change, Not Climate Change, Is the Real Danger

By Julian Dunraven, J. D., M.P.A.

Honorable friends:

Global warming does indeed seem to be a pervasive problem. Yesterday it plagued me in my morning paper, harangued me from radio and television broadcasts, and even managed to insinuate itself into the conversation of irksome social acquaintances. Although I have become accustomed to bad policy masquerading as good science, and even look forward to reading my Global-Warming-Article-of-the-Day in the paper, yesterday’s news was particularly insufferable.

Todd Hartman of The Rocky Mountain News started it off, trumpeting Dr. Susan Solomon’s new pronouncement that CO2 emissions “will irreversibly change the planet,” for centuries to come no matter what we do. I suppose someone should suggest to Dr. Solomon that, if she has noticed human behavior has little to no impact on climate change, it might be because the whole things is part of the earth’s natural and periodic cycles. However, I was rather hoping her pronouncement might end the climate change squawking; after all, she does not seem to have much hope that there is anything more to be done. Alas, fortune is not so kind.

True believers never lose hope, and so NPR did its best to keep the faith alive by broadcasting proposed solutions. It seems a few members of the scientific community were watching “The Simpsons” and drew a bit too much inspiration from Mr. Burn’s attempt to block the sun by raising a giant metal disk over Springfield. Of course, the earth is a lot bigger than the town of Springfield, and thus there would have to be quite a few of these disks launched into orbit before we could block enough sunlight to begin cooling the earth. The disks would also have to be replaced occasionally as they fell out of orbit. The real sticking point is the cost, which is currently several trillion dollars. It is always unfortunate when mere economics gets in the way of good Simpsons . . . or science rather.

Another absurd proposal NPR and others have deigned to promulgate, involves launching sulfur particles into the atmosphere. This, would be far cheaper than the Mr. Burns plan, and would sufficiently darken the sky to promote global cooling. Unfortunately, it may also severely change weather patterns, increase acid rain, and—oh yes—darken the sky. No one quite knows how many species of animal and plant life would be devastated from a decrease in light sufficient to cool the earth. It might eventually leave the world a barren wasteland, but everyone agrees it would be a cooling barren wasteland.

Fortunately, it is only bureaucrats like those running the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) who seem to use middle school science fair projects as the standard for publishable research. The IPCC’s report, which was authored by a mere 52 scientists, was widely touted as representing the final and absolute conviction among the scientific community that Global Warming is the result of human produced CO2 emissions. Instead, the Republican minority of the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, led by Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), has soundly refuted this in its Minority Report, which cites over 650 scientists, all contesting the IPCC’s claims.

One of the more interesting dissenters is Dr. Don Easterbrook, whose study of the climate indicates normal and alternating periods of warming and cooling stretching back for millennia. Not only does Dr. Easterbrook contest the idea that Global Warming is caused by humans, after looking at the sun’s recent activity and the Pacific Ocean’s decadal oscillation, he has staked his reputation on his theory that we are now entering a period of Global Cooling, and the Warming advocates will soon see their arguments collapse.

Whether or not he turns out to be correct will be largely irrelevant for the next four years. President Barack Obama’s cabinet selections clearly indicate the he accepts the idea of human caused Global Warming absolutely, and intends to write policy with that in mind. In his January 2009 Monthly Review, Richard Loomis of World Energy gives a thorough analysis of “President. Obama’s Energy Picks.”

As. Mr. Loomis explains, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton sees Global Warming as a national security threat and, during her campaign, advocated for strong carbon cutting measures. Steven Chu, as Secretary of Energy, has expressed great distaste for oil, dislikes nuclear power for the waste it generates, and refers to coal as, “my worst nightmare.” Solar, wind, and natural gas power and natural gas fuel seem to be his preferences. Carol Browner, the “Energy Czar,” comes to us from the EPA, where she argued that California should be granted a waiver from the Clean Air Act to allow it to more strictly regulate carbon emissions. Lisa Jackson, the EPA Administrator, pushed a moratorium on new coal plants as the EPA head for New Jersey. Then there is Ken Salazar as Secretary of the Interior who, while not joining the rest in his hatred of coal, is strongly opposed to expanding oil drilling whether on land or off shore.

From this list, Mr. Loomis is correct to fear some sort of cap and trade mechanism being forced on the U.S. by executive order. And herein lies the real danger of Global Warming. In his January 24th broadcast of “the Big Picture,” Jim Puplava warns that the U.S. will have a difficult time convincing the rest of the world to join in such an initiative during this economic crisis. Europe especially will be disinclined to rely more on natural gas when Putin has consistently demonstrated his willingnes to use the gas supply as political leverage. Thus, the U.S. will be forced to pursue carbon reduction policy alone. The high energy costs of such a policy would put the U.S. at a competitive disadvantage to Europe, China, and our other major trading partners. This is especially worrisome at a time when tax revenues are declining and government spending is increasing, and Mr. Puplava is right to wonder how much more of our debt the world will continue to finance when other nations are beset with their own economic problems.

Then there is peak oil. The recent IEA World Energy Outlook reports a 9.1% annual depletion rate in the world’s oil reserves. All major oil fields are in decline, virtually no new discoveries are being made, and oil demand continues to rise across the world—despite the economic crisis—especially in China, India, and oil producing nations developing their own economies. We are set for an oil supply crisis to hit between 2012-2015. Our own oil reserves are not sufficient to avert this problem, but they can help buy more time for us. However, as developing an oil field takes anywhere from 4-6 years, we would need to start investing today. Instead, low oil prices, and the refusal of the Obama administration to expand drilling while it considers actually raising taxes on oil produces has all but killed capital investment in this vital field.
Natural gas fuel is also a viable stop gap measure while we search for something to more permanently replace oil. However, it is not unlimited, and if we insist on squandering it to supply our electricity, it will not be of much help to us when we face the coming oil supply crisis.

As I have said before, Global Warming is something science is still vigorously debating as it attempts to fully understand the causes of climate change. However, to the Obama administration, the debate is over. In the midst of an economic crisis, it is willing to tax coal and nuclear power into extinction—despite an already overburdened grid. It is willing to put our nation’s entire economy in peril of the worst oil supply crisis ever seen and squander the natural gas resources that could help protect us. And it is willing to do all of this solely on the basis of its faith in human caused Global Warming. Whether climate change is a real problem caused by humans is still up for debate. However, the dangers of policy change based on that premise are very real and imminent.

"Chicago-Style" Politics Becomes Entrenched In Colorado; Shady Deals Exposed

Republicans: Remove a ballot initiative in exchange for compensation = bribery.

Democrats: Hey, it's just free speech!

From Face The State:

Jon Caldara, president of the Independence Institute, testified in favor of the bill. He was a primary backer of Amendment 49 and told the committee that on the eve of the deadline to remove initiatives from the ballot, he was offered $800,000 to pull the initiative. “What an idiot I was not to take that $800,000,” Caldara said, sarcastically adding he now has incentive to put bad measures on the ballot in order to gain financial benefit. Committee member Rep. Beth McCann, D-Denver, was notably disturbed by Caldara's story and suggested further investigation into his allegations.

But the bill also had its share of detractors. Democrat go-to attorney Mark Grueskin, who served as legal counsel for the unions during the 2008 election, testified in opposition. He argued the bill would violate free speech by banning a monetary exchange for removing a ballot measure. “Like it or not money is speech under both [the Colorado and U.S.] Constitutions,” he said.

Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck, who also spoke before the committee, fired back at Grueskin. “The act of paying someone money might be an act of free speech, but it might also be an act of bribery," he testified.

The bill was ultimately killed on a 6 to 5 vote, with McCann being the only Democrat to vote in favor. Stephens was disappointed, but said she would continue to pursue the issue. "Now that we know those are the terms, we have a new Chicago-style politics," she said.

Sen. Mike Kopp, R-Littleton, was the bill's Senate sponsor and called its defeat the "Blagojevich-ization" of Colorado.

Props to McCann for opposing what Ben describes--quite accurately, in my estimation--as "political blackmail."

But then again, think of the unions!

Speaking of corruption, here is a somewhat-related story that should be drawing more attention and is not:

The Lakewood Housing Authority bought its new headquarters for $3.1 million - $300,000 more than the seller paid for the property the same day as the sale.

The July 23 transactions have raised a few eyebrows, including those of one Lakewood City Council member.

But Bill Lunsford, the housing authority's development manager, points to an appraisal that valued the office building at $3.2 million - $100,000 more than the quasi-public agency paid.

Lunsford said he had no way of knowing that the firm selling the property was closing on it the same day for $2.8 million.

"If we obviously had this opportunity to buy it from the previous guy at what I hear now is $300,000 cheaper, we would have done it," Lunsford said Monday.

Oops, our bad.

Yeah, right.

Thanks to the Independence Institute for providing first-hand testimony on behalf of the anti-corruption bill defeated by union-enslaved Democrats, and for shedding light on the type shenanigans exposed in the housing authority's operations.

I have a feeling that not only will a similar bill come up again (especially if this type of activity occurs again) under a Republican-controlled legislature, but that many more exposés of sketchy deals involving government or quasi-governmental/public assistance organizations. The questionable circumstances of the Lakewood Housing Authority's purchase are probably only the tip of the iceberg.

RMA 2.0: Rocky Mtn Blogs Radio Show #11

**NOTE: New time and extended format--Every Tuesday--next show January 27, 8:30 pm.



The Blog Talk Radio version of the Rocky Mountain Alliance. A weekly discussion about politics--national, state, and local--featuring RMA members bloggers led by featured host and producer Joshua Sharf, with rotating co-host duties from Ben DeGrow of Mount Virtus, Randy Ketner of Night Twister, and Michael Alcorn of Best Destiny.

**January 27 lineup--elections expert Jan Tyler and State Sen. Greg Brophy.

Last week (all shows archived): Guests included Todd Shepherd, Independence Institute and Mark Hillman, Colorado Republican National Committeeman.

Next week--TBD.

January 13--State Rep. Ellen Roberts, R-Durango (HD 59) and State Senator Mike Kopp, SD 21, R-Littleton.

January 6--CU Regent Tom Lucero, chairman of the successful Amendment 54 campaign and a candidate for CD 4 in 2010.

December 30--RMA took a look back at a dismal year in their 2008 year-in-review.

December 23--Joshua and fellow commentators (including yours truly) hosted Jim Pfaff of Americans for Prosperity Foundation and Opinion Times. Pfaff discussed the AFP Colorado report "Keeping Colorado Competitive" and bridging the Christian/libertarian gap.

On December 16 we hosted State Rep. Kevin Lundberg (District 49), and discussed the Salazar appointment as the Secretary of the Interior in the Obama cabinet.

The December 12 edition featured Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier.

**Bookmark the new RMA Radio home page, with embedded player and calendar of upcoming shows and featured guests.

Stream the show live, or play/download the podcast at your convenience.



I'll update co-host and guest info for each episode as it becomes available. Stay tuned . . .

RMA's shows are archived--if you missed any of them, be sure to check out the archive page to stream or download, or scroll down this page a bit, for the embedded archive player.

The Rise of Gold and Fall of The Dollar

By Julian Dunraven, J.D., M.P.A.

Honorable friends:

Last month I wrote that the bailout total, which has now reached more than $8.5 trillion, with another $850 billion stimulus to come this year, will eventually force us into dangerous levels of inflation. I thank the Bangor Daily News and Bridget Johnson at The Rocky Mountain News for picking up on that post. Since then, although the Fed printing presses have been running at a frantic pace, nearly doubling the money base, much of it has not yet reached the money supply. That is about to change.

As the credit crisis hit and companies began to deleverage in earnest, selling anything they could to obtain dollars and pay down debt, U.S. treasury bonds sold very well. Our people, seeing the credit crunch and falling prices, began to fear a deflationary trend and flocked to treasury bonds as well. Truly markets are psychologically driven—and often insane. More rational heads have reminded us that real deflation requires a contraction in the money supply—which the Fed’s printing has made all but impossible. It seems, however, that reason is beginning to reassert itself.

U.S. treasuries are now selling at almost zero percent interest rates. As a result, $1 million invested into a one month treasury bill, rolled over each month, will earn you only a meager $100 annual interest. A one year treasury bill for $1 million will earn you only $4,300. No one can live off such pathetic returns, certainly not our retirees. As for other governments, such returns offer little incentive to continue financing our debt, which increasingly looks to be utterly unmanageable. As a result U.S. Treasury sales are beginning to decline.

As the Ludwig von Mises Institute points out, our biggest creditor nations are unlikely to increase their investment. Japan has been a net seller of U.S. Treasuries and it has its own problems to deal with from demand destruction affecting its exports. OPEC nations are suffering from falling oil prices and their own resulting economic woes render them unable to finance more of our debt. The Caribbean banks are suffering from the credit crunch forcing liquidity and in no position to offer help. That leaves China, which is passing its own $585 billion stimulus, of which the government is providing only $170 billion, leaving the rest to be financed out of its foreign exchange reserves—such as U.S. treasuries.

To further complicate the matter, Chuck Butler’s Daily Pfenning yesterday picked up on news that Chinese officials are now contemplating selling U.S. Treasuries in part out of retaliation that the U.S. government has cast blame on China for the global financial crisis. Yu Yongding, a former member of the People's Bank of China's policy board, also warned that “supply of Treasuries may far exceed demand in the future.”

Thus, as the Fed finds itself unable to sell sufficient treasury bonds to finance all the government spending, it will have no choice but to begin quantitative easing, a polite term for printing money and injecting it directly into the money supply. In other words: massive inflation.

As part of their efforts to accomplish this enormous monetary expansion and devaluation in a vain effort to stimulate the economy, the Ludwig von Mises Institute points out that the central banks have finally abandoned their attempts to artificially suppress the price of gold through naked short selling and dumping. Slapstick Politics discussed this inevitability back in October.

As I predicted last month, the result of all of this has been a drop in the value of the dollar and a precipitous rise in the price of gold as people try to find a way to preserve their wealth. The other major fiat currencies of the world are no better, as James Turk of Gold Money illustrates. The central banks of the world have all embarked on this strategy of bailouts and spending together, and they are all devaluing their currencies together. That trend is likely to continue for some time, and gold remains the best protection against it.

For those of you who still have yet to purchase gold and are cringing at its current price surge to around $900 per ounce, there are some hopeful signs to watch for. Although I do not think the bailouts and stimulus packages will be at all effective at solving the financial crisis in the long run (a topic Slapstick Politics will continue to address), I do expect them to produce a short term boost in confidence in the near future. The strange aura of hope that the Obama administration has coming into office will assist this as well. There may also be another period of deleveraging in the near future. In either scenario, several investment specialists speculate that the price of gold could plummet back down to $650-700 per ounce. If that happens, it would be a wonderful time to purchase. Before the central banks have completed their efforts at quantitative easing, most gold investment experts are estimating the price of gold could rise to anywhere from $1,500-5,000 per ounce. The Ludwig von Mises Institute goes quite a bit further, speculating that gold could climb to almost $10,000 per ounce. While I tend to lean toward the more conservative estimates, gold continues to provide the best possible protection against the inflation and devaluation the central banks of the world are now foisting upon us in what is perhaps the greatest theft of wealth in history.

Senator Who? Michael Bennet And Russ Feingold's Planned Constitutional Amendment

As Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Who?) continues his whirlwind "Getting To Know You" tour of Colorado, state Dems are busy propping up the still-puzzling choice of appointee:

"He's doing everything he needs to do," said Colorado Democratic Party chair Pat Waak.

"He is really treating this like it is a campaign." she said. "He is spending every single available moment he has meeting and talking to people. He understands he needs to appeal to everyone in this state, not just Denver. He is making personal connections with people and that's how you get elected in Colorado, so I think it's great."

He'll need those connections if he is to buck the rather daunting historical odds of winning election on his own in 2010.

So what does this have to do with Russ Feingold (D-Campaign Finance Reform)?

Looks like he plans to introduce an amendment to the Constitution barring gubernatorial appointees and mandating elections for all future Senate replacements:

Washington, D.C. – U.S. Senator Russ Feingold, Chairman of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on the Constitution, issued the following statement today on plans to introduce an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to end appointments to the Senate by state governors and require special elections in the event of a Senate seat vacancy.

“The controversies surrounding some of the recent gubernatorial appointments to vacant Senate seats make it painfully clear that such appointments are an anachronism that must end. In 1913, the Seventeenth Amendment to the Constitution gave the citizens of this country the power to finally elect their senators. They should have the same power in the case of unexpected mid term vacancies, so that the Senate is as responsive as possible to the will of the people. I plan to introduce a constitutional amendment this week to require special elections when a Senate seat is vacant, as the Constitution mandates for the House, and as my own state of Wisconsin already requires by statute. As the Chairman of the Constitution Subcommittee, I will hold a hearing on this important topic soon.”

Just last week, Colorado State Sen. Mike Kopp announced plans to introduce a bill that would achieve the same objective for the state (and which would have a much lower threshold of passing) in calling for special elections to fill a vacant Senate seat. The lefties at ColoradoPols called it a "gaming" move of "political expediency" that is ultimately "self-serving."

So, what will they think of Feingold's proposed Constitutional amendment?

The widely discussed appointments in Colorado, Illinois, and New York--all three in which Democrat governors appointed Democrat replacements--have elicited reactions from puzzled bewilderment (Senator Who? in Colorado) to scandal (Gov. Rod Blagojevich, D-Highest Bidder) to entitlement (you know, New York, you know). After these well-publicized fiascos, why not require special elections for open Senate vacancies?

Colorado's newest Senator was appointed by an indecisive governor predisposed to calling for "blue ribbon" panels for just about everything, and even soliciting the public's input on who should replace the outgoing Sen. Ken Salazar, who had been tapped for President Barack Obama's cabinet. Apparently that input went largely ignored.

Exit question: Will the fact that the party responsible for bringing so much attention to this generally infrequent procedure diminish or augment public support for such a measure?

Night Twister: "Getting Connected In Colorado"

There are blog posts, and then, there are blog posts.

Fellow RMA blogger from Fort Collins, RMA radio co-host, and friend Randy Ketner of Night Twister has produced the THE blog post on the center-right in Colorado--including the GOP, libertarians (big and small L), free marketers, think tanks, etc., as well as city and county government links, local GOP party sites, online political activism, blogger alliances and much, much more.

The explanation:

Political activism is more than waxing philosophical and eviscerating politicians on blog sites and broadcast email messages. Real political activism is hard, time-consuming, and often boring, repetitive work. It means going to city council, county supervisor, and school board meetings. It’s walking precincts, making phone calls, and attending local political meetings. It also means being informed, and joining with others in keeping your representatives accountable. All of these things are the impetus behind this blog.

Knowing where to get timely information about what’s going on in your State is a huge part of the battle, especially in these days of information overload. We all have day jobs, family responsibilities and/or friends, and hopefully other interests. It’s actually alright to not know everything that’s going on everywhere all the time. Having access to the most important information means getting connected. Networking is vital to success in political activism.
. . .
What this means is, with my active involvement I can affect change in my community where it makes the biggest difference. This is not to say that national issues are not important; they most certainly are. The thing is, we can only make real changes there every 2 to 6 years. I can make a difference in my community every single day.

What will you find there? Links to the following:

Government
Political Organizations
Online Colorado Conservative Organizations
Colorado Bloggers & Alliances
Web 2.0
Online National Groups

So check out all this and more at Night Twister.

GOP 2010: News From The Grapevine And Why Republicans Should Borrow A Page From The Democrats' Playbook

Face The State has a new report on the "rumor mill" making the rounds within the GOP for the upcoming 2010 midterm election.

The speculation is not unsubstantiated beyond FTS, as SP has heard good things about Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier beyond insider comments, with Frazer responding to FTS that "It’s fair to say that right now I’m considering where I can have the greatest impact going forward"--and SP is looking to candidates in the Frazier mold to step up and begin to refill the tattered GOP bench.

Why is this important? The GOP can't win in 2010 (just as the GOP didn't win in 2006 or 2008) by using the same candidates, political operatives, and electoral strategies that worked from 1980 to 2004 any more than the Denver Broncos were able to use the same coaches, players, and playbook from their back-to-back Super Bowl victories in the late 1990s. Just ask Mike Shanahan or Pat Bowlen.

The idea that the normal cursus honorum or "paying your dues" processes that produced the "Contract with America" class of GOP politicians is still viable will only doom a newer generation of conservatives and GOP-leaning libertarians (roughly those 25-45) to wait through potentially more disastrous election cycles in the near future, and forsaking long-term goals to rebuild the party locally and nationally by wanting to avoid stepping on the toes of those who believe that this is "their time." Incumbents of any age and viable candidates of all backgrounds should be given the opportunity to throw their hat into the ring, especially if the GOP wishes to mount anything approaching Howard Dean's 50 state strategy and fellow blogger Joshua Sharf's call to run in every district in Colorado.

Quick-fix celebrity recruits aside (the often-rumored John Elway, for example), every race should have a viable candidate, even in difficult areas where incumbency or voter registrations numbers are a disadvantage. GOP primaries should not necessarily be avoided, and multiple competing candidates at the bench level should see a wide variety of opportunities given the Democrat Party advantage in governorships, state legislatures, and Congress. There is no reason why the GOP shouldn't be anything but a national party and not simply a regional party of "get-out-the-base" voters, volunteers, and fundraisers. We haven't conceded anything on the core principles of the "big tent"--free markets, smaller government, and individual rights/liberty--so why concede districts just because they are held by Democrats?

The 2010 election in Colorado will feature several state-wide races--Governor, a US Senate seat, Attorney General, Secretary of State, and State Treasurer. Voting in the aggregate matters, especially at the state level in midterm elections, and turning out GOP and GOP-leaning center-right and independent voters will be the key to victory. Renewed interest in local races in typically uncompetitive districts currently held by Democrats will play a huge role in reengaging those voters set adrift by strategies that look to maximize votes in supportive areas while ignoring others in the hopes that the GOP brand will be enough to get folks to vote. President Barack Obama's campaign presciently and effectively--obviously, he is the President--eschewed such a course. Even without him on the ballot in 2010, much of the party infrastructure and institutional knowledge will still be in place, and the Democrats are no doubt hoping that this built-in advantage will discourage any GOP efforts at revamping campaigns off-line or on-line. To do so would be to ignore (forgive the gratuitous Star Wars reference) Admiral Ackbar's admonition--"It's a trap!"

It is still too early in 2009 to endorse those candidates who have formally filed, those who have been mentioned or have shown an interest, and those whose candidacy is merely speculation. But it is not too early to begin reengaging the dispirited GOP rank-and-file, to propose bold new visions for the party, to toss out discredited strategies, to effectively communicate our principles, to avoid becoming a party of "NO!" by offering alternative solutions instead of whining about the other side of the aisle, or to turn into debased imitators of the most vitriolic smear-merchants in the Democrat Party.

Opportunities to perform a true house-cleaning and not simply rearrange deck chairs on the Titanic don't come very often. GOP elites, fundraisers, powerbrokers, political operatives and especially the bench itself is going to be put on notice (as if it hasn't already been in the two most recent electoral abbatoirs)--lead, follow, or get out of the way.

Abortion And Barack Obama

Via Hot Air:

Barack Obama’s Fashion Faux Pas: Whatever It Was, It Was Not White Tie

By Julian Dunraven, J.D., M.P.A.

Honorable friends:

The magical aura of change and hope that seemed to bewitch the nation today was not quite strong enough to ensorcell Wall Street, which continued its consistent, if volatile, fear driven trend downward. But today, I am told, is not about policy or economics; rather it is about fun and fashion. Fair enough. It is rare that I get to talk about etiquette in politics, so I will take advantage of the opportunity. Besides, while I am sure that virtually all fashion editors will be critiquing Michelle Obama’s evening gown, however lovely the rest of us may think it, and ignoring her husband entirely, someone needs to say something about that ghastly conglomeration Barack Obama tried to pass off as white tie attire.

I suppose I need to give him credit for at least attempting white tie, which is the strictest type of formal evening wear, and something few of our overly casual citizenry, including presidents, even try anymore. Because of that unfamiliarity though, few will ever realize how badly he botched his effort and wound up looking more like an inexperienced prom king than a president, an appearance only reinforced by his pathetic attempts at dancing. One would think America’s first couple could be bothered to learn at least a simple waltz before the inaugural balls. Nonetheless, for those gentlemen who perhaps aspire to wear white tie correctly one day, allow me to point out our new President’s faux pas.

White tie, properly speaking, involves a plain fronted, stiff white shirt with French cuffs and a wing-tip collar. Mr. Obama’s collar was full, quite improper for the occasion. The coat for white tie must be black, have tails, and satin peak or shawl lapels. Mr. Obama’s jacket lacked tails entirely, and notched lapels, while barely passable for black tie, are far too similar to the daily business suit to ever be appropriate for the ultra formal white tie style. The pants for white tie must be black with a braid down the sides. Mr. Obama’s trousers had only a satin stripe. Naturally, white tie also requires a white piqué waistcoat and bow tie, and gold and or mother of pearl cuff links and button studs. The President got that much right at least.

In contrast, the less formal black tie tuxedo, used for private entertaining such as weddings rather than public occasions and balls, consists of a white shirt with a pleated front, French cuffs and full fold-down collar. The jacket should not have tails and may have shawl, peak, or notch satin lapels. In the summer, the jacket—and only the jacket—may be white. That is as exciting as is permissible. The black pants must have a satin stripe down the sides. As the name suggests, it requires a black bow tie with a black waistcoat or cummerbund with black and silver cuff links and button studs. Colors are never permitted, no matter what a gentleman’s date is wearing, unless he wishes to look like an organ grinder.

Both white and black tie have daytime equivalents as well. However, I won’t complicate things further with those. It suffices to say that the president managed only a bizarre and awkward amalgamation of the two styles, though I am glad he did not go so far as to include colors or the tacky variation of ties cheap haberdashers so carelessly foist upon us these days. I have only one further suggestion for the well groomed man: visit a barber or stylist before putting on formal evening wear. Sideburns should either be present on both sides of the head or not at all.

If today really was about fun and fashion, and if Wall Street was paying attention, perhaps it explains the decline. How can a gentleman be expected to manage the nation’s economy if he cannot even manage to properly dress himself?

RMA 2.0: Rocky Mtn Blogs Radio Show #10

**NOTE: New time and extended format--Every Tuesday--next show January 20, 8:30 pm.



The Blog Talk Radio version of the Rocky Mountain Alliance. A weekly discussion about politics--national, state, and local--featuring RMA members bloggers led by featured host and producer Joshua Sharf, with rotating co-host duties from Ben DeGrow of Mount Virtus, Randy Ketner of Night Twister, and Michael Alcorn of Best Destiny.

**January 20 lineup--Guests include Todd Shepherd, Independence Institute and Mark Hillman, Colorado Republican National Committeeman.

Next week--TBD.

Last week (all shows archived): January 13--State Rep. Ellen Roberts, R-Durango (HD 59) and State Senator Mike Kopp, SD 21, R-Littleton.

January 6--CU Regent Tom Lucero, chairman of the successful Amendment 54 campaign and a candidate for CD 4 in 2010.

December 30--RMA took a look back at a dismal year in their 2008 year-in-review.

December 23--Joshua and fellow commentators (including yours truly) hosted Jim Pfaff of Americans for Prosperity Foundation and Opinion Times. Pfaff discussed the AFP Colorado report "Keeping Colorado Competitive" and bridging the Christian/libertarian gap.

On December 16 we hosted State Rep. Kevin Lundberg (District 49), and discussed the Salazar appointment as the Secretary of the Interior in the Obama cabinet.

The December 12 edition featured Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier.

**Bookmark the new RMA Radio home page, with embedded player and calendar of upcoming shows and featured guests.

Stream the show live, or play/download the podcast at your convenience.



I'll update co-host and guest info for each episode as it becomes available. Stay tuned . . .

RMA's shows are archived--if you missed any of them, be sure to check out the archive page to stream or download, or scroll down this page a bit, for the embedded archive player.

Sen. Inhofe Asks the People to Help Fight Second TARP Bailout

By Julian Dunraven, J.D., M.P.A.

Honorable friends:

From what I have been reading, I doubt there are many people left in this nation, outside the District of Columbia, who still believe that the TARP bailout was a good idea. Despite this, only a few members of the Senate have shown courage in representing the people against this horrendous and immoral plundering of our country’s wealth. Sen. James Inhofe (R-OK), along with Senators Barasso (R-Wyo.), Wicker (R-Miss.), DeMint (R-S.C.), Lincoln (D-Ark.) and Enzi (R-Wyo.), have cosponsored legislation that would halt the second installment of the $350 billion bailout.

They face tough opposition, however. Obama, backed by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Leader Harry Reid, has demanded that Congress release the money to the incoming administration. Obama has threatened to veto any attempt Congress makes to withhold the money.

The U.S. Senate is due to vote on the issue this afternoon. Many people have told me that they feel helpless to prevent what seems to them to be inevitable. It is not. Sen. Inhofe and his allies are committed to fight it, but Inhofe has asked for the help of the people. All it takes is a few moments to find your senator’s web page, type a quick objection to the bailout, and e-mail the message. The Senate needs our help to stand up against this pressure, but it can be done.

Already, CNN reports that Republican senators, anticipating that Obama will get the money, are asking his administration to promise that he will only use it on the financial industry, and not alter the purpose—for the auto industry for instance—as the Bush administration did. There was a time when such a request would have been silly. The Constitution, after all, prevents a president from altering legislation to his whim—he is charged merely with enforcing it. Yet, today, Congress must beg the president to even follow the laws they pass. As Sen. Inhofe has stated before, and I have echoed, our Republic is in dire straits.

If we are unhappy with this state of affairs, then it is up to us, the people, to correct the government which should be answerable to us. It is our responsibility to defend the Constitution and to make our will known to the spineless and feckless fools currently sitting in Congress that we do not want more money to go to these bailouts. It is not hard, and requires only a few moments, and a few clicks of the mouse. I hope you will all join me in answering Sen. Inhofe’s call to contact our senators, and to send them all but one powerful word: “NO!”

Just War: Why Christians Should Not Falter in Support of Israel

By Julian Dunraven, J.D., M.P.A.

Honorable friends:

The Holy See permanent observer to the United Nations has quoted Pope Benedict XVI as saying of the conflict in Gaza “that the military options are no solution and that violence, wherever it comes from and whatever form it takes, must be firmly condemned.” Naturally, I would expect the pontiff to be praying for peace. However, I am surprised that the former head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith would make such a careless comment so wildly out of line with the Church’s teachings. Such slips only encourage the type of behavior I saw this weekend from a few guests at a wedding who, though totally uneducated on the subject, pronounced their condemnation of both Israel and Palestine while piously declaring that war is always wrong. Such statements are as contemptible as they are intellectually lazy, and I grow weary of listening to them.

While Christianity has perhaps lamented that war is always tragic and unfortunate, it has never declared that war is always wrong. To the best of my knowledge there is not a single mainstream Christian Church so foolish as to make such a declaration. Certainly, Israel’s actions in Gaza cannot be called wrong by any rational observer. To fully understand how incredibly imbalanced the ethics of this conflict are in favor of Israel, there is no better teacher than Charles Krauthammer in his last two columns, “Excruciating Moral Clarity,” and, “Ending Hamas Rule.”

However, for those of you who, like me, have an assortment of Christian friends who refuse to sanction any war no matter how powerful the justification or how clear the moral reasoning, I suggest you refer them to the Christian Just War Doctrine. Going all the way back to Saint Augustine of Hippo, it predates all the schisms and is a part of every mainstream form of Christianity.

The Just War Doctrine, codified in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, states in §2308 that, “as long as the danger of war persists and there is no international authority with the necessary competence and power, governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense, once all peace efforts have failed.” Section 2309 goes on to list the conditions under which a just war may be prosecuted:
· the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain;
· all other means of putting an end to it must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective;
· there must be serious prospects of success;
· the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated. The power of modem means of destruction weighs very heavily in evaluating this condition.

Considering what we know of Gaza, despite all international effort over the past several decades, no authority has been successful at persuading the Palestinian militants to desist from launching rockets into Israel. As Mr. Krauthammer points out, rocket fire on the Israeli population has continued unabated even after Israel withdrew all settlers and military, and ceded governmental control to the Palestinian Authority in 2005—effectively doing everything the Palestinians had demanded for an end to hostilities. Negotiations have gone on for decades, yet only Israel attempts to abide by any of the agreements reached. There is nothing more Israel can offer save its own annihilation. Thus, I would say negotiation has proved most ineffective.

Israel does have a good chance of permanently ending this conflict, though, if its assault can topple Hamas’ control and demonstrate that Islamic militants will succeed only in bringing greater hardship down on Palestinian people. The hardship endured by the Palestinian people is indeed unfortunate, but Hamas has deliberately orchestrated that hardship by using its own civilian population and humanitarian centers as shields against Israeli counterstrikes. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) acknowledges that the problem of proportionality is “aggravated if one side deliberately positions military targets in the midst of a civilian population.” Though Israel is doing all it can to minimize civilian casualties, they are inevitable. Nonetheless, after so many decades of failed negotiations, if Israel can succeed in destroying Hamas utterly, the permanent peace to follow will be worth the terrible price.

As the Catechism states in §2304, the peace Israel fights for is “not merely the absence of war, and it is not limited to maintaining a balance of powers between adversaries. Peace cannot be attained on earth without safeguarding the goods of persons, free communication among men, respect for the dignity of persons and peoples, and the assiduous practice of fraternity. Peace is ‘the tranquility of order.’ Peace is the work of justice and the effect of charity.” According to Pope John Paul II in his World Day of Peace Message of 1982, “Unconditional and effective respect for each one's unprescriptable and inalienable rights is the necessary condition in order that peace may reign in a society.” Currently, only Israel offers such respect—going so far as to offer warnings and aid to enemy noncombatants in its quest for peace. Hamas, on the other hand, is dedicated to the complete destruction of Israel. Unless it is clearly defeated, that ideology of hate will remain as an impenetrable barrier to peace for yet more decades to come.

As the USCCB states, “This is why Christians, even as they strive to resist and prevent every form of warfare, have no hesitation in recalling that, in the name of an elementary requirement of justice, peoples have a right and even a duty to protect their existence and freedom by proportionate means against an unjust aggressor.”

Rather than making foolish statements about how all war is evil, if Christendom truly wants to see an end to conflict in the Middle East, they would do well to bring real pressure to bear on Hamas, Palestine, and their Arab allies to prevent the continual flow of weapons and armaments into Gaza, and to enforce real consequences for mortar attacks beyond occasional dispatching another diplomat for talks while the militants rearm. The USCCB reminds us that a true “Christian has no choice but to defend peace, properly understood, against aggression. This is an inalienable obligation.”

Latino Angst Over Democrats' Political Appointments In Colorado

Guest post by Meg.

A statement jumped off the front page of the Sunday Denver Post at me: "This will have legs down the road, I swear to God it will." Upon further examination, this hot-headed and mildly blasphemous statement was not made by a grade-school student, but by a man who was once duly elected by the people of Colorado, former Democratic state senator Paul Sandoval.

The issue? Colorado's Latino political and business leaders believe that they have been left out of the recent slew of political appointments and turnovers at the state level. Former U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar has moved on to Interior, but the man that Gov. Ritter chose to be his replacement? Michael Bennet, the Denver Public School superintendent, a white man. Then the man Ritter tapped to take Bennet's place at DPS? Tom Boasberg, DPS's chief financial officer, also a white man. The Colorado secretary of state position, vacated by Republican Mike Coffman, was also Ritter's to fill. His choice was Bernie Buescher, recently rejected by Grand Junction voters in his state House re-election bid. You guessed it… Buescher is a white man.

All of this has caused much angst among the Latinos in the state. Former Denver Councilwoman Ramona Martinez joined the chorus. She reminded "those who feel we are not good enough to fill positions of power" that "no more will we be taken for granted. No more will our numbers be only counted on Election Day. No more. No más."

The Latino leaders' main issue is said to be that they were not consulted before the appointments were announced. In the case of DPS, they specifically asked the president of the Denver school board, Theresa Peña, if she would meet with them beforehand. The request was ignored. They sent Peña a subsequent letter chastising her for her inattention, and seeking a discussion of "the creation of an open and transparent process for this and future appointments within the Denver Public Schools." The Latinos also disagreed with the "secret" process to appoint the secretary of state of the Senate seats.

Ritter asked a blue-ribbon panel, as is his wont, to give him three names for the secretary of state finalists. The three names were white men. The Post jumped on the critical bandwagon today by blasting Ritter in an editorial, saying that it was "unfathomable" that Ritter did not "ensure" that Rosemary Rodriguez was one of the finalists. The Post's rationale was that Rodriguez has more election experience than those who were recommended, and suggested that Buescher's appointment "seemed to be a nod to the Western Slope." They were similarly critical of the Boasberg appointment. The Post editorial board made a token concession that the selecting officials "can and should hire the candidate who best fits their needs" and that they shouldn't be "intimidated by any person or group." They even declared that they "like Boasberg… [he is] well-versed in district operations." But then they return to the complaint that the Latinos were not involved in the process.

The Latinos' response is wildly out of proportion. It is entirely Ritter's prerogative to decide who is nominated to empty state positions (Article IV, Section 6, Colorado state constitution). He does not have to involve anyone else whatsoever in the process. The Post editorial called the shutout and the "secret" process "bad politics and even worse policy." My guess is that if a Latino had indeed been named using the same secrecy, there would be no outcry. As a Latina myself, I am well acquainted with this notorious double standard.

It is not the "secret" process that the Latinos don't like. It's their perception of losing ground, of being disrespected, of being left out. Latino culture is very heavy on demands of respect. When this respect is not forthcoming, they become vocal and agitated, even when, as in this case, the process was completely correct. Both the Post and the Latino leaders seem to be arguing for a quota in state appointments. They seem to be suggesting that although a Latino did not originally hold two out of three of those positions, they should have been top contenders for the appointments—solely on the basis of race.

The Post plays into this by not criticizing Ritter for appointing Buescher, a Democrat, to fill Republican Mike Coffman's shoes. All is fair in politics, but when it comes to race? Then the Latino community is a "growing constituency" who must not be ignored. We're not supposed to remember the majority who elected a Republican secretary of state.

The Latino leaders are unseemly in their endless demands for "respect," even to the point of vague "No más" threats in Spanish. Many of them fought hard to be elected to office. Why are they clamoring for jobs to be handed to them for free? They should look inward and work to put forth quality candidates for public office in the future. If their growing constituency is as outraged as they say, such candidates should be quite competitive in future political races.

Berg v. Obama Denied Certiorari

By Julian Dunraven, J.D., M.P.A..

(For earlier posts on this case click here.)

Honorable Friends:

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to hear Berg v. Obama. Despite this denial, there is still a chance it may be heard by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, where it is still pending. Berg reports that his brief is due by 20 January 2009. Ironically, that is inauguration day. Though it saddens me to say so, as this case will not even be heard, much less resolved, by the time Obama is sworn into office, I cannot imagine any court would presume to review the qualifications of a sitting president. Thus, I do not expect that there will be any further developments in this case. As such, the question of Obama’s constitutional qualifications falls to the U.S. Senate. The Senate has accepted Obama as fully qualified for office, and he will thus become the next President of the United States on January 20th.

RMA 2.0: Rocky Mtn Blogs Radio Show #9

**NOTE: New time and extended format--Every Tuesday--next show January 13, 8:30 pm.



The Blog Talk Radio version of the Rocky Mountain Alliance. A weekly discussion about politics--national, state, and local--featuring RMA members bloggers led by featured host and producer Joshua Sharf, with rotating co-host duties from Ben DeGrow of Mount Virtus, Randy Ketner of Night Twister, and Michael Alcorn of Best Destiny.

**January 13 lineup--State Senator Mike Kopp, SD 21, R-Littleton.

Next week--TBD.

Last week: January 6--CU Regent Tom Lucero, chairman of the successful Amendment 54 campaign and a candidate for CD 4 in 2010.

December 30--RMA took a look back at a dismal year in their 2008 year-in-review.

December 23--Joshua and fellow commentators (including yours truly) hosted Jim Pfaff of Americans for Prosperity Foundation and Opinion Times. Pfaff discussed the AFP Colorado report "Keeping Colorado Competitive" and bridging the Christian/libertarian gap.

On December 16 we hosted State Rep. Kevin Lundberg (District 49), and discussed the Salazar appointment as the Secretary of the Interior in the Obama cabinet.

The December 12 edition featured Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier.

**Bookmark the new RMA Radio home page, with embedded player and calendar of upcoming shows and featured guests.

Stream the show live, or play/download the podcast at your convenience.



I'll update co-host and guest info for each episode as it becomes available. Stay tuned . . .

RMA's shows are archived--if you missed any of them, be sure to check out the archive page to stream or download, or scroll down this page a bit, for the embedded archive player.

Online "Bill" Pay: Colorado Media Matters And The Colorado Model

I come to praise Bill Menezes, not bury him.

This really isn't about him in particular anyway. Back in November I squared off against Menezes on CBS4's election night webcast. We started off by discussing "how we got started" (first 5 minutes of the webcast)--and I made it clear to distinguish what for me is essentially a serious hobby from Menezes' professional and well-paid outfit at Colorado Media Matters.

He described the function of the "non-profit" "research organization" as a tool to "correct conservative misinformation" in the MSM by employing a "staff of researchers" using a "proprietary archive system" that enabled the organization to track, document, and expose what they perceived as a conservative bias. Agree with them or not, they have a clearly defined role, and have been aggressive in pursuing their objectives.

CMM, formally or informally, formed a large part of the online arm of the vaunted "Colorado Model"--now partially reduced due to the incredible success seen over the past three election cycles.

It is no secret that the GOP and conservatives and libertarians in general have been forced, at the very least, to play catch-up with their liberal/Democrat opponents. But what about benchmarks? In order to know where you want to concentrate your precious time, energy, and resources in any attempt to bring about parity with the other side (let alone any thought of leapfrogging them), it would be helpful to know what greased the wheels of the rather large and multi-faceted left-leaning apparatus employed here in Colorado.

And in politics the golden rule applies--he who has the gold, rules.

Or in this instance, he who has the gold and employs it wisely in a concerted, coordinated effort to spread a particular political message--wins elections.

Which brings me back to Menezes.

Here is a jpeg of the 2007 filing for Media Matters for America (click to enlarge):



Menezes' actual pay is almost beside the point. We already know that the director of CMM receives compensation, and that CMM was the first state-level division of the overall Media Matters operation.

As I said, Menezes is to be praised (and that is not a backhanded compliment either)--he has earned his keep, and the successes on the left in this state provides the clearest evidence that the "Colorado Model" and the implementation of organizations like CMM can produce immediate results.

So here's a note to the powers that be on the center-right, both here in Colorado and across the country--in case you were wondering how we got our a&$#*! kicked these past few election cycles, here is at least one reason. It's because there were some 100%-dedicated, full-time positions like this made available by the deepest of pockets on the left.

Just a thought.

Anti-Israel Rally In Denver

**Update--Pro-Israel rally draws hundreds; Palestinians wave Nazi flags



Full post at Peoples Press Collective--and don't forget about the pro-Israel rally tomorrow January 11in front of the state capitol at 2pm.

Senator Who? Weekend Edition

Word on the streets--can Bennet woo Hispanics?

Bennet faces the anti-war, anti-Israel crowd on his introductory tour of Colorado.

Bennet "political"--inflating his own record?

Bennet a "blue dog?" EPIC FAIL.

Or is he already "saying all the right things" in his first policy speeches?

Rebuilding The GOP Bench In Denver

Begins locally, or in this case, within the party structure. If the GOP has any chance at looking to rebuild its competitiveness statewide, it had better focus first on local elections and to putting into place the personnel infrastructure that won't cede any district election or continue to allow Democrats go unchallenged in making use of the vaunted social networking apparatus of the Internet. There is no simple fix, and this is hardly a laundry list of the action items necessary to reestablish a functioning party with viable candidates, a clear and consistent message on policy borne of principles, and a system engaging the grassroots and eshewing the traditional party operative structure that may have worked in decades past, but that has been thoroughly exposed in recent elections.

The GOP isn't bereft of such individuals, and a candidate for Vice Chairmanship of the Denver County Republican Party--my friend and fellow RMA blogger Joshua Sharf--is just the type of experienced and energized person the GOP needs to put in place now, and look to recruit more of going into the future. This won't be a plan that looks at 2010 exclusively, but a vision that sees politics for the cyclical nature that it has both here in Colorado and across the country and realizes that elections aren't won within the next cycle, but over time. The Democrats realized that and, well, they have realized the results as well.

I therefore offer my full endorsement of Joshua, and encourage other Denver Republicans to do the support him as well.

More On Senator Who?

Last night's RMA 2.0 Blog Talk Radio featured a discussion of the appointment of DPS Superintendent Michael Bennet by Gov. "Blue Ribbon" Bill Ritter, including theories on the appointment and analysis of his chances in 2010.

Ben DeGrow questions Bill Ritter's judgement on the Michael Bennet pick--self-delusion or subtlety?

Rocky Mountain Right reminds us that Bennet has a very poor chance of winning election on his own in 2010 based on historical examples, and notes the similarities in experience (none) between Bennet's selection and the Harriet Miers nomination.

Folks around the state are still scratching their heads over who Bennet is and what he might represent in the Senate--he has been called an "ardent" supporter of President-elect Barack Obama, and Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-NY) thinks he's "got the goods"--but Bennet faces political reality when he sets out on his first tour of the state to introduce himself and try to get a handle on the "economy and other challenges."

Good luck with that Senator.

RMA 2.0: Rocky Mtn Blogs Radio Show #8

Every Tuesday--next show January 6, 9pm.



The Blog Talk Radio version of the Rocky Mountain Alliance. A weekly discussion about politics--national, state, and local.

**Tuesday January 6: CU Regent Tom Lucero, chairman of the successful Amendment 54 campaign and a candidate for CD 4 in 2010.

Next week: State Senator Mike Kopp, SD 21, R-Littleton.

Last Tuesday, RMA took a look back at a dismal year in their 2008 year-in-review.

December 23--Joshua and fellow commentators (including yours truly) hosted Jim Pfaff of Americans for Prosperity Foundation and Opinion Times. Pfaff discussed the AFP Colorado report "Keeping Colorado Competitive" and bridging the Christian/libertarian gap.

On December 16 we hosted State Rep. Kevin Lundberg (District 49), and discussed the Salazar appointment as the Secretary of the Interior in the Obama cabinet.

The December 12 edition featured Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier.

**Bookmark the new RMA Radio home page, with embedded player and calendar of upcoming shows and featured guests.

Stream the show live, or play/download the podcast at your convenience.



I'll update co-host and guest info for each episode as it becomes available. Stay tuned . . .

RMA's shows are archived--if you missed any of them, be sure to check out the archive page to stream or download, or scroll down this page a bit, for the embedded archive player.

FYI: Support Israel Rally 1/11/09

Event: Pro-Israel Rally at State Capitol

"Support Israel's Right To Self-Defense"

What: Rally
Host: Americans Against Terrorism
Start Time: Sunday, January 11 at 2:00pm
End Time: Sunday, January 11 at 4:00pm
Where: West Steps of the State Capitol

Begin the New Year with a Laugh: We Can All Cry Soon Enough

By Julian Dunraven, J.D., M.P.A.

Honorable Friends:

Happy Twelfth Night! This is the last day of Christmas. Tomorrow is the Epiphany and, as the Magi commence their visit, the holidays will sadly draw to a close. Before I get back to commenting on the New Year, though, which is quickly filling up with many mad events (El Presidente has already pounced on the insane appointment of Sen. Who), I thought I would share a few light hearted reflections on 2008.

This first video comes from Jib Jab. Their annual, “Year in Review” series of videos never fails to entertain, and the “2008 Year in Review,” is no exception.

The second video recap of 2008 comes from “Uncle Jay Explains the News.” Uncle Jay seems to be quite an entertaining and sensible fellow, and his other news briefings are worth a glance or two as well.

I hope you enjoy the levity. Tomorrow the Dunraven will be back to his usual raucous squawking.

Senator Who? Makes His Debut

“Michael Bennet is exactly what we need in Colorado. Michael will bring a fresh, new approach to the economic crisis. He knows we can’t fix our 21st-century problems with 20th-century solutions”--Gov. Bill Ritter, after tapping DPS Superintendent Michael Bennet to replace Sen. Ken Salazar

As more confused reaction on Gov. "Blue Ribbon" Bill Ritter's appointment of DPS Superintendent Michael Bennet pours in--everything from a startled "seriously?" to "perplexing" to Bennet being a "risky" choice--Dem royalty come out swinging for the newly minted Senate appointee, including President-elect Barack Obama, outgoing Sen. Ken Salazar, and friend and possible benefactor Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper:

"I congratulate Michael Bennet on his appointment as Colorado's next United States Senator, and Governor Bill Ritter for making a splendid choice. Michael Bennet perfectly reflects the qualities of the ruggedly independent state he has been chosen to serve. An innovator in the public and private sectors, he has shown himself willing to challenge old thinking and stale policies. His breakthrough work at the helm of Denver's schools has reflected that commitment, and established Michael as one of the nation's leading education reformers. He will be a breath of fresh air in Washington."

President-elect Barack Obama

"If I am confirmed to serve as Secretary of the Interior, Michael will bring to the United States Senate an impressive background and a wealth of experience - both as an accomplished public servant and a successful businessman - that will help us tackle the many challenges we face as a state and a nation. If I am confirmed, I am confident Michael will serve the people of Colorado well as our next United States Senator."

Ken Salazar

United States Senator

"Michael Bennet brings intense personal commitment, intellectual rigor and innovation to any challenge. In addition to his diverse experience in law, the private sector, government and public education, Michael's strong character and dedication to public service will serve Colorado well in the U.S. Senate."

John Hickenlooper

Mayor, Denver

Like many in the blogosphere and the public in general, Bennet's DPS bio and recent profile have become go-to sources for information on the "darkhorse" appointee.

Senator Who? Gov. Ritter Appoints DPS Superintendent Michael Bennet To Replace Salazar

"Bennet for Senate."

Has a nice ring to it.

Wait a minute.

As I heard again and again today--who!?!?!?

RMR posits a variety of plausible theories on the nature of the Bennet appointment by Gov. "Blue Ribbon" Bill Ritter. The reaction from both sides is complete bafflement--both GOP State Chair Dick Wadhams and the folks at ColoradoPols are in the WTF? boat. Other reactions include everything from Bennet as "dark horse superstar" to the harbinger of a new age of political aristocracy in America.

The only constant: that the appointment is risky, especially given the failure rate of appointees to be elected on their own in subsequent elections.

Todd Shepherd of CompleteColorado.com argues that the appointment of Bennet could not have transpired without the blessing of Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, widely perceived in recent days to be emerging as the frontrunner among a trio of well-qualified and well-positioned Democrats that included Hickenlooper, former State Rep. and House Speaker Andrew Romanoff and Rep. Ed Perlmutter-CD7.

Whether or not that is the case, following Ritter's official announcement and confirmation of his appointment, Bennet will face the formidable task of raising his own personal ID and building the apparatus for the statewide election in 2010, or providing a capable caretaking role should this be an unlikely placeholding appointment.

Either way, the state GOP can only be licking their chops at the opportunity provided by the Bennet appointment. Not only will the seat Bennet occupies be a top target simply because of the appointment itself, a mediocre performance by Bennet not only puts the seat more clearly into toss-up territory, but disheartens the Dem base (see the aristocracy and WTF? argument linked earlier) and calls into question Ritter's own executive judgement. By appointing Bennet and not a more qualified/quantifiable Democrat from the deep bench on the left, Ritter has drawn an even bigger target on his own reelection and the Dems in general in the locally focused 2010 elections.

Top 10 Political Stories Of 2008

CompleteColorado.com's Todd Shepherd discussed the most interesting and impactful political stories of 2008 in Colorado on 740 KVOR with Jeff Crank.

John Elway: Senate, Governor Or Broncos' Front Office?

An AP story on speculation about John Elway's potential next move, now that Mike Shanahan has been fired by Denver Broncos owner Pat Bowlen.

And until Elway makes a front office move or declares himself out of the running, his name will always be floated--seriously or not--as a potential GOP candidate for Senate or Governor in 2010 (and subsequent elections after that as well).

In related news--who is more recognizable: Governor Bill Ritter, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, or Mike Shanahan?

Face The State Interview On Colorado Internet Political Commentary

Recorded a few months back, Peoples Press Collective members Ross Kaminsky of Rossputin.com and yours truly were interviewed by Kate Melvin of Face The State on the state of political commentary on the Internet in Colorado, and you can listen to these comments on FTS' Weekend Edition (first segment).

BDS Dies Hard--Aspen Bomber Kills Self, Shuts Down Town

It may be 2009, with the ascension of Barack Obama upon us, but Bush Derangement Syndrome dies hard, especially in elitist liberal enclaves like Aspen.


BDS hits Aspen

Mentally unstable, BDS-ridden, the aspiring Aspen bomber commits suicide:

A man who left bomb threats and homemade bombs around Aspen on New Year's Eve shot and killed himself in his car a few hours after his threats cleared much of the resort town, Aspen Police said.

Assistant Aspen Police Chief Bill Linn said James Chester Blanning, 72, walked into two Aspen banks Wednesday afternoon and left packages wrapped in holiday paper along with notes saying the boxes contained bombs. The notes threatened "mass death" and demanded $60,000 cash, along with criticisms of President George Bush, Linn said.

The Rocky has a scan of the full note excerpted above, as well as more anti-Bush/Cheney rhetoric in a handwritten note to the editor of the Aspen Times. Judging from reactions to the long-time resident, Blanning had been an eccentric/unstable individual for some time.

Good thing he also happened to be an incompetent bomb maker and managed to kill only himself.