Republicans

Why I'm picking Walker Stapleton for Governor

Running for Governor of Colorado is hard, and I have the scars to prove it.

Twenty-eight years ago, I won the Republican nomination, but lost badly to the Democratic incumbent, Roy Romer. Back to the drawing board. 

Then twenty years ago, with an open seat, Coloradans elevated Bill Owens, a two-term state treasurer and proven conservative change agent to the governorship. He did us proud.

Now after a dozen years of liberal Democrats as ineffective CEO's for the state, opportunity beckons again. Ballots for the June 26 primary go out soon.

Once more it's an open seat, and against the Dems' leftist field, any of our Republican contenders are far better suited to lead Colorado.

I'd gladly see GOP contenders Doug Robinson or Vic Mitchell or Greg Lopez elected in November. They've all run well.

But my vote in the June primary goes to Walker Stapleton.

Like the 1998 winner, he's a two-term state treasurer and proven conservative change agent.  

I wasn't for Walker in his first race, 2010. He has won me over as a strong campaigner and a good steward of his executive duties.

He's ready to be our next governor. And I like it that he likes President Trump, don't you?

When you vote this month, please join me in supporting Walker Stapleton for Colorado Governor.

 

pix walker stapleton 2018.png

Why won't GOP call jihad by name?

David Petteys of Act for America, Denver chapter, and Michael Del Rosso of the Claremont Institute recently compared notes on the strange reluctance of Republicans running for office to identify our jihadist enemy in plain language. Here is their exchange: PETTEYS: Our friend Michael Del Rosso recommended that the following question be asked of every candidate: “In your opinion, what is the greatest threat to our country and what would you do about it?”

Recently I had the opportunity to actually ask this question of Jane Norton, the front running GOP Senatorial candidate here in Colorado. I am happy to say her response was this:

“Islamic Terrorism, and we need to get over this idea that the rights of terrorists have priority over the lives of American citizens.”

Although I would prefer the term “Islamic Jihad” as opposed to Terrorism, it is a step forward. Certainly preferable to the answer you’d get from most Democrats who would talking needing to "save the planet from climate catastrophe by cracking down on the evil oil companies”.

I’m also happy to report my Congressman Mike Coffman’s office notified me today that he was joining Sue Myrick of North Carolina’s “Counter Terrorism Caucus” as a result of my suggestion.

DEL ROSSO: Dave, I would NOT accept Terrorism as an answer from this candidate.

A couple of weeks ago I put the following query to three of the seven Republican candidates attempting to reclaim Virginia's 5th District US House of Representatives seat for the GOP: "America has been in a shooting war for over 8 years with over 5,000 KIA, tens of thousands wounded, and a trillion dollars spent, with no end in sight. Who is our Enemy, what is their Doctrine, and what is their Objective?" Each time the exchange went generally this way:

Candidate: “We’re fighting Terrorists.”

Me: That makes as much sense as saying “Our Enemy is Tanks.” Terrorism is a tactic, not an enemy.

Candidate: “We’re fighting Muslim Extremists.”

Me: “How do you know their Extremists? How do you know they are not actual Mainstream Muslims?”

Encountering a bewildered look and no response I further asked “Have you ever read the Quran? Any book on Islamic jurisprudence and doctrines? Have you read the 9-11 Report?”

Every time, the candidate's answers to all three were “No.”

So I informed each of them: “You just admitted that you have no basis in fact, you have no knowledge, in making any claim about who are enemies are. How can you presume to ask me to vote for you to be my Representative when you have not even taken the trouble to identify our enemy 8 years into a war?”