McCain & Hillman carry assembly

Colorado Republican conventioneers gave presumptive presidential nominee John McCain a strong vote of confidence at the state assembly in Broomfield on May 31, despite a loud and proud showing by Ron Paul supporters. Separately, Mark Hillman rolled to victory for national committeeman on his rousing speech, smoothly organized campaign, and statewide alliances from a near-miss for State Treasurer in 2006. Hillman scored 55% against 26% for impressive newcomer Leondray Gholston and 19% for Dave Schultheis, the Reaganite state senator from Colorado Springs.

The 44 slots for national convention delegates and alternates (see results listed below) were contested among a record 380 aspirants who included 70-plus Pauliacs with their mustard-colored T-shirts and defiant slogans. Winning tallies went mostly to the names (some familiar, others not) on a McCain Unity Slate flyer that papered the hall.

Republicans hoping for victory in November have to be concerned, though, with the tepid McCain feelings evident at Broomfield in contrast with the fire of Ron Paul's "real right" devotees.

Also ominous to me were the apathy manifest in some 4200 no-shows on Saturday for 6800 state assembly delegate and alternate positions, and the near-invisibility of President Bush in the day's proceedings. His name drew only the weakest applause when mentioned by National Committeewoman Lilly Nunez in her reelection speech.

Encouraging, in contrast, was the energy and determination mobilized among Republican legislators by their leaders, Sen. Andy McElhany and Rep. Mike May and their lieutenants. This bodes well for the fall, especially in light of Gov. Bill Ritter's repeated stumbles, most recently his court defeat on TABOR as colorfully related to the assembly by Jon Caldara.

The delegates' blood was also stirred by excellent speeches from Bob Schaffer (as detailed in Crater's post above this one) and Tom Tancredo. Tancredo grinned as he hinted about the future. Is he taking aim on Ritter for 2010?

Backbone America congratulates our office manager, Kathleen LeCrone, on her election for RNC alternate in an earlier round of voting two weeks ago.

Yours truly, after being an RNC delegate at New York in 2004, a Nixon staffer at the Miami convention in 1972, and a page at RNC Chicago when Nixon bested Goldwater in 1960, passed on the delegate race this year. I hope to cover both RNC St. Paul and DNC Denver on a media credential for 710 KNUS.

Colorado Republican Party Delegation to the 2008 Republican National Convention Official Results as published by state GOP, May 31

At-Large State Delegates:

Marti Allbright Wayne Williams Kerith Brehm Alan Duff Charcie Russell John Carson Kristy Burton Crista Huff Albert Bollwerk Monica Owens Merilou Athens-Barnekow Conrad Ladd Beverly Henry Kent Lambert Thomas Kirk Mojie Adler Shari Williams Clif Sams Celeste Huber Douglas Robinson Gary Bartel Tom Wiens

At-Large State Alternates:

Mary Smith Ryan Call Candy Figa Art Onweller Patrick Johnson William Leone William Jeffers Jack Gloriod Roger Houdek Athena Dalton Patrick Kelly Michael Eddy Frieda Wallison Kevin Holst Lia Moran Jace Ratzlaff June Robinson Joe Smith Cynthia Hamlyn Haley Brooke-Hitching Clark Bolser Hugo Chavez-Rey

Congressional District 1:

Delegates: Gabriel Schwartz Michele Austin Sharon Johnson

Alternates: Joy Wood David Sprecace Harry Arkin

Congressional District 2:

Delegates: Marty Neilson Guy Short Kimberly Peticoles

Alternates: LeMoine Dowd Patrick Johnson Timothy Gilmore

Congressional District 3:

Delegates: Jack Taylor Geneva Taylor Carol Brown

Alternates: Mark Young Ralph Walchle Wendell Coats

Congressional District 4:

Delegates: Abe Villarreal Perry Buck Sue Sharkey

Alternates: Kevin Lundberg Anita Cornwell Travis Witsitt

Congressional District 5:

Delegates: John Suthers Robert Balink Ken Chlouber

Alternates: Robert McCombs Summer Vanderbilt Merilee O'Neal

Congressional District 6:

Delegates: Joe Nunez Kendall Unruh Nathan Chambers

Alternates: Kim Ransom Kathleen LeCrone Richard Murray

Congressional District 7:

Delegates: Matt Knoedler Shirley Sietz Lynn Cottrell

Alternates: Katherine Isenberger Jack Ott Jobadiah Weeks

Listen to Right to Work special

Here's the podcast of my May 29 special on KNUS about the Right to Work ballot issue.  My guests were State Sens. Ted Harvey and Shawn Mitchell, proponents of Amendment 47. Opponents, including these so-called "muscle-flexing" union leaders, refused to participate despite repeated invitations from our producer.

Click below for full audio of the show, and watch for future editions of "Under the Dome" each month in this crucial election year of 2008.

Andrews and Harvey

Andrews and Mitchell

Why I'm Voting No in Centennial

Take a minute and consider this with me, even if you don't live in the affluent, tree-lined Denver suburb of Centennial where neighbors are duking it out over the June 10 vote on a new city charter. As one more symptom of how Republicans across the country have lost their way, it's relevant no matter where you reside. Centennial was established in 2000 as a whole new kind of municipality with low taxes, minimal government, and "virtual" administration. But since then, taxes have gone up, mission creep has occurred, and the virtual stuff is largely forgotten. We've become just another status-conscious little city keeping up with the Joneses.

With a huge margin of registered Republicans, you'd think Centennial could have either (a) kept to its vision for a few short years, or failing that, which it has, you'd think Centennial could have (b) written a home rule charter to recover the forsaken vision. Sadly, it has done neither.

Charter proponents are strangely silent about the noble vision of eight years ago. Their case is phrased in glowing generalities about self-determination and soothing assurances that the charter is just like most other cities. But that's just the problem: lots of us want to be different from other cities. We thought that's what we were signing up for when approving incorporation in 2000. Bait and switch isn't nice.

When and if our well-meaning charter commission (with its notable over-representation of Democrats) can bring forth a charter that takes us back to the low-tax and minimal-government "city different" of yesteryear, I will eagerly lead the campaign for its approval. But for now, since the document we've been presented is more likely to lock in all the disappointing trends of recent times, I'm voting No.

My Denver Post column on this issue, along with a number of related articles, is in the Local Government category of our site. Scroll down to menu in right column.

My radio interview with Cathy Noon, who supports the charter, and Betty Ann Habig along with Chris Raab, who oppose the charter, is in the Backbone Radio section of our section. See nav bar or radio box at top of home page. The time frame in our 5/18 podcast was 550pm to 7pm.

Under the Dome: Liberty & Labor

Want more information on the Right to Work ballot issue, Amendment 47, as featured on John Andrews' radio special May 29? Proponents asked us to tell you about this website, also about this one.

Opponents refused to participate in the discussion at all, but we are still telling you about this site with their counter-arguments, this one with more arguments, and this one with more still.

Don't know much about history

I'm sure that Barack Obama's recent comments defending his pledge to meet "without precondition" with rogue leaders like Iran's Mahmoud Ahmadinejad were comforting to the MoveOn.org and Huffington Post crowd. It reaffirms the commonly held belief on the left that there are few issues that can't be solved through diplomacy and dialogue -- even with those who profess to seek your annihilation. In such idealism one finds such enduring myths of the "Middle East Peace Process", the on-going negotiations over Darfur and the persistent efforts of the IAEA and the UN to rein in the Iranian nuclear program. But fear not: Like many intellectuals who believe in the power of their ideas, Obama is convinced that he can bring terrorists like Ahmadinejad over from the dark side. Unfortunately, for those of us who understand the nature of this kind of evil, such misplaced confidence is yet another example of the risks inherent in an Obama presidency. It is also a depressing sign of his misreading of history, which is replete with examples of the false expectations of diplomacy with dictators and despots. It reminds me a bit of how Lyndon Johnson was convinced that if he could just sit down with Ho Chi Minh and offer him a huge public works program on the order of a "WPA for Vietnam", he could get the North to stop the generational struggle for independence and unification. LBJ was convinced that there wasn't anyone he couldn't cajole into a deal, believing that every man has his price. Little did he understand what motivated Ho and his fellow nationalists. It wasn't negotiable.

Of course, what Ahmadinejad seeks is also non-negotiable: the destruction of Israel, the pursuit of nuclear weapons, a destabilized Iraq, an exporting of terrorism to do damage against American interests. And, of course, like most Islamic fundamentalists, he wishes to do so from a nation that abuses its women, gays and other apostates with brutal repression. Much like Hitler, Ahmadinejad has a vision of the world that doesn't allow for diversity, and is based on a belief system that the ends -- however evil -- are always justified by the means. And for those idealists out there, that includes the use of nuclear, biological and chemical weapons.

It is difficult to understand what a President Obama would have to say to an Ahmadinejad that might possibly make a difference in these beliefs, or in the path down which he has chosen to take Iran. Does he think that the Iranian leadership doesn't really want to destroy Israel? Or they aren't really interested in killing American soldiers in Iraq? Or that they are only using the threat of nuclear weapons so that the world will listen to their myriad grievances against the West? Perhaps he believes, like LBJ, that everyone has their price. If we dangle more carrots, perhaps they will play nice. It has to be that simple, right?

Obama seems to think so, and he has been consistent in saying so. He has taken a tremendous beating by John McCain (and Hillary Clinton) for his "naive" willingness to meet openly with Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Assad, Kim and other despots around the world. And yet he persists in his claim that it is both a good and necessary thing to do. He often trots out the example of Kennedy meeting Khruschev in Vienna in 1961 as validation of his strategy. And yet, this again is a poor reading of history: Kennedy's meeting with Khruschev was an abject failure, putting the young president on his heels and leading indirectly to the Cuban Missile Crisis -- where Khruschev sought to press a perceived advantage. This perception was fueled by Kennedy's poor preparation in the meetings and the ability for Khruschev to bombastically dominate the discussions -- convincing Kruschev that Kennedy could be bullied. Kennedy was thus upstaged in Vienna and put on the defensive; he responded by showing that he wasn't to be underestimated by upping the ante in Vietnam. Historians now roundly agree that the Vienna meeting with Khruschev was among the more ill-advised decisions of the Kennedy presidency.

Barack Obama is, of course, no Jack Kennedy -- which only serves to make these examples even more alarming. Kennedy was a right-wing conservative by the standards of today's Democrat party, and together with his brother Bobby, had no compunction against using force in defense of American interests and ideals. Obama, on the other hand, proudly waves the banner of non-aggression that so animates the left-wing today. While JFK was willing to stand firm in the face of Soviet aggression in Cuba and a perceived communist threat in Vietnam, it is difficult to imagine Obama having the courage to defy the base of his party that is so central to his support. Obama sees the world in shades of gray, the way most of the Democrat party does. Such a view isn't well suited to the struggle between good and evil.

The response by Obama to criticism over his willingness to meet with the heads of terrorist states tracks closely to his anger over President Bush's statements on appeasement on his recent trip to Israel. Though Bush didn't name him specifically, Obama was enraged that the president would dare trot out the "politics of fear" to brand him as weak on the fight against terrorism.