In Memoriam: Jesse Helms

"In a life full of accomplishments, probably the most significant single political act was his role in persuading a disappointed Ronald Reagan in 1976 to continue his primary campaign for the presidential nomination." That's Richard Greenfield paying tribute to the late Jesse Helms this week in the Connecticut Jewish Ledger. Welcome words of truth, if you were as disgusted as I was at the MSM slurs on Helms's memory after his death in the predawn hours of July 4.

Greenfield continues: "Fresh from defeats in Iowa and New Hampshire, Reagan was ready to abandon his effort. But Helms got him to stay in the race resulting in stunning victories first in North Carolina and then Texas. Arthur Finkelstein, a Helms adviser at the time said 'without Helms and Team Reagan there would have been no Reagan presidency and the cause of freedom in the world would have suffered greatly.'" Read the whole piece here; click to editorials in left column.

Another eloquent and fitting eulogy for Helms came from Newsmax.com columnist Phil Brennan, who said in part:

"Unlike Gulliver, he would not allow himself to be tied down by the mass of pygmies who surrounded him and shot their darts at him.

"Like St. Thomas More, when the winds of change blew against him, he seemed to say, 'Here I stand -- I will not be moved. You can slander me, you can kill me, but you cannot kill the truth.'

"Like another great Southerner, Stonewall Jackson, he lived the motto, 'Duty is mine, consequences are God’s.' And he did his duty as his Creator gave him the light to see it. And like Old Jack when he struck at his foes, he used everything he had."

Read the rest of Brennan's tribute here. America and the conservative movement greatly need not only more men and women of backbone like Reagan, but also more like Helms.

Who does Bob Tiernan like for President?

What's a poor atheist to do, with both Obama and McCain flaunting their church attendance yesterday, and an ordained minister, Leah Daughtry, chairing this year's DNC, a brazen invasion of the faith territory long owned by the GOP and James Dobson? Robert Tiernan's Colorado chapter of the Freedom from Religion Foundation is aglow with pride about its "Imagine No Religion" billboard downtown, but his God-deniers movement seems adrift with no clear political home in 2008. The John Lennon-inspired advertising sign is halfway through its two-month run on 14th Avenue west of the Civic Center. I missed the breaking news about it in early June; we were in Europe, touring empty churches and learning about the birth dearth among world-weary couples in that increasing religionless (except for Islam) continent.

[photopress:religion_billboard_061908.JPG,thumb,pp_image]

As illustrated in my snapshot above, the billboard sits right next to Denver's new, half-constructed Justice Center, and blocks away from the main congregating area for local homeless people. You wonder how Tiernan and company would make the case that crime would be less and generosity to the unfortunate would be greater, in their imagined world where nothing is either morally forbidden or commanded by a higher power.

You wonder how the FfRF crowd, as they call themselves, intend to vote this November. I'm betting they feel considerably more welcome in the Democratic Party, Daughtry's symbolism and Obama's faith-based mimicry of Bush notwithstanding.

You try to "imagine" the billboard staying up an extra month so that a poll of DNC delegates could be taken in late August. Would most of them be less disgusted by Bob Tiernan's atheist fantasy than I and my fellow Republicans are? I'm betting, again, the answer is yes.

Hick's weakness shows again

"Thank you, Miss Marie, that was beautiful. And now, since it's important to honor our country and our flag on such an occasion as this, I invite all of you to stand and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance." That's what Mayor John Hickenlooper could have said, but didn't, when the self-aggrandizing singer "switcheroo'd" her political message song for the national anthem on July 1. When I was Senate President in 2003-2005, presiding daily over formal ceremonies much like the Mayor's State of the State, I wouldn't have hesitated a heartbeat before reclaiming control of the proceedings with some such polite but firm words as those, had someone tried to hijack the occasion as Rene Marie did.

But not only did Hick assert no such leadership in the moment, it clearly never even occurred to him that he should have, judging from his clueless, shrugging comments to the media later on Tuesday. (Dave Logan on KOA was one recipient of those that I know of; there may have been others.)

Not until the anthem affair became a local and national storm did the Mayor finally muster up some "anger" a day later. Even then it seemed to be more about the embarrassment of finding himself out of step with an aroused public, than about the "disrespect" (Gov. Ritter's word on KOA Wednesday morning, and a good one) shown by Marie to America itself.

This blunder by Hickenlooper is much like the mess he made of Christmas a couple of years ago -- initially announcing that Yule greetings would no longer appear on the lighted City and County Building, then hastily reversing himself after an outcry arose.

Hick has shown us once again that under the boyish exterior he's a doctrinaire liberal, and in cultural matters a rather leftish one. Likable and capable as he is, the man is instinctively captive to PC globalism and secularism, tone-deaf to the deeply held patriotic and religious beliefs of most Americans.

As for Rene Marie, the only time I ever heard, or heard of, her until this week was when she performed at the Colorado Prayer Luncheon last May. She talked the Christian talk quitely glibly on that occasion, but we now know her beliefs have the same anti-American slant as those of Jeremiah Wright.

At the luncheon she sang (and, significantly, modified on the fly) Reinhold Niebuhr's famous Serenity Prayer. You know the one: "God grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change; courage to change the things I can; and wisdom to know the difference."

In this instance neither the weak-kneed mayor nor his headstrong guest lived up to those sentiments (which are as much a personal code of behavior as they are a petition for divine help). After Marie rudely arrogated to herself the role of change agent, Hickenlooper was timid and passive when he could have courageously taken command. Nor did either have the wisdom to even realize how badly they both had disgraced themselves.

Ritter strikes out on energy

(Denver Post, July 6) Where is “Far Side” cartoonist Gary Larson when we need him? Two prehistoric inventors stand before the tribal elders, beaming proudly. Og has discovered fire, and Zor has invented the wheel. But the ruling Democrats turn thumbs down. “Begone,” they order. “No good will come of those things.” I exaggerate, of course. The elders would decree taxes and regulation, not a ban. Dems aren’t cavemen, after all. Yet if you follow the logic of liberals like Bill Ritter, we’re headed for a future with less fire and fewer wheels. Their distaste for the obvious energy sources that keep America rolling and the lights on is that intense.

Following a sweaty commute on Gov. Ritter’s bike-to-work plan, you can spend the day in one of Mayor Hickenlooper’s minimally air-conditioned office buildings. After dining at ethanol-inflated food prices that evening, you can join our green leaders in one of their voluntary switchoffs, a darken-the-city display of pity for the planet.

That’s the sacrificial approach, the future as guilt trip. Barack Obama has warned: “We can't drive our SUVs and eat as much as we want and keep our homes on 72 degrees at all times, and then just expect that other countries are going to say OK.” As the loyal convention host for Obama, Ritter is in a sweat himself over those bad ol’ fossil fuels. Let’s count the ways:

With gas prices at $4 and climbing, the governor wants a huge tax increase on Colorado oil and gas production. That’s one. His Oil and Gas Conservation Commission is set to impose new rules that will make it even harder to get energy out of the ground. That’s two. And he’s saying no, in concert with Democratic Sen. Ken Salazar and Senate candidate Mark Udall, to developing our oil shale. That’s three, an energy policy strikeout.

Everyone knows the alternative-energy litany. “Wind, solar, biomass, hydro,” we chant. “Fuel cells, perpetual motion, Kryptonite,” we add in hope of an extra indulgence from the Gaia priests. I have nothing against all that stuff (though I’ve sometimes rooted for Lex Luthor against Superman). It’s simply a matter of cost-benefit and timelines. That stuff is tomorrow, whereas oil and gas – and nuclear, which Ritter sidestepped on "Meet the Press" last week – are today, if Colorado keeps its backbone.

Two short summers ago, Bill Ritter took the state by storm as a pro-business Democrat. Taxpayers and consumers soon learned otherwise. Part of his soul is owned by the unions and the rest by Earth First. How else explain his ballot proposal to more than double the severance tax on petroleum, a mainstay of our state’s economy both in employment and at the pump?

The tax hike takes a divide-and-conquer angle by targeting a single industry which many currently scapegoat, and proponents say it would boost business in general by boosting higher education.

But chambers of commerce have seen through the ruse and refused their support, while university presidents are lukewarm. Their need is operating funds, not the scholarships that Ritter is vaguely promising. Nor can state bureaucrats dispel his vagueness without violating campaign finance laws.

Bottom line: the severance tax petition looks doomed with a month to go; don’t waste your time signing. Take time instead to attend one of the commission hearings on those draft regs to impede oil and gas drilling with more red tape. Big turnouts so far indicate significant citizen pushback.

Perhaps Democratic tribal elders won’t get their way after all. The dread of environmental guru Amory Lovins that it would be “disastrous for us to discover the source of clean, cheap, abundant energy, because of what we might do with it,” may not prevail. Most of us, you see, really want to keep the fires burning and the wheels turning.

Are tax dollars pushing tax hike?

If Douglas Bruce authored a ballot initiative that simply said, "Taxes shall be reduced by $300 million a year" but couldn't explain which programs should be eliminated or scaled back, pundits would ridicule his half-baked scheme and scold him for wasting the public's time. That's the treatment Gov. Bill Ritter should be receiving for his hastily proposed $300 million oil and gas tax increase - money to be showered on various programs with few specific instructions.

Perhaps because he's the Governor, some editorialists have suggested that state bureaucrats should flesh out the details of his proposal, specifically his vainglorious "Colorado Promise" college scholarships.

There's just one problem: state law frowns on commandeering government workers at taxpayer expense to do homework for a ballot campaign that hasn't even qualified for the ballot, much less been approved by voters.

After the Governor changed his tune about how the scholarships would work and whom they would benefit, higher ed chief David Skaggs, the former Boulder congressman, rode to the rescue:

"[T]he Colorado Commission on Higher Education instructed staff . . . to prepare recommended policies to implement the provisions of the scholarship ballot measure and to have them ready for the commission to consider at its next meeting, July 10," Skaggs wrote in a letter to the editor.

Didn't these state staffers have any work to do before the Governor decided to play Santa Claus to college students by raising taxes on oil and gas? If not, then perhaps he could create a few scholarships simply by eliminating unnecessary bureaucrats in higher ed.

Both Denver dailies have correctly noted that Ritter's ballot initiative is in trouble without more specific detail, but it is not proper for state employees to develop those details for the campaign.

Colorado Revised Statues (1-45-117) allow government employees to "respond to questions" but they may not spend "more than fifty dollars of public moneys in the form of letters, telephone calls, or other activities incidental to expressing his or her opinion on any such issue."

No doubt, Gov. Ritter and Mr. Skaggs will contend they are simply asking state staffers to answer questions - not using them to garner support for the initiative. But these are not technical questions, like "Will the scholarships come in the form of a reimbursement or as a credit against tuition?" These are essential policy decisions, such as "How much will the scholarships be worth?" and "Who will be eligible?"

Without these specific details - which the Governor and other proponents failed to provide - the tax increase and the Governor's vanity scholarship program are dead in the water.

Still, the courts have ruled that the purpose of the aforementioned law "is to prohibit the state government and its officials from spending public funds to influence the outcome of campaigns for political office or ballot issues."

Another court case said that even an informational "brochure mailed by (a government entity) explaining proposed improvements violated the law because it did not present arguments for and against."

On June 18, I filed an open records request to find out exactly how much homework higher ed officials and the Governor's staff are providing for the ballot initiative. Mr. Skaggs responded that his staff could not produce this material within three working days "without substantially interfering with the staff's obligation to perform other public service responsibilities."

While I await his final response, I will contemplate how it is that his staff can develop, almost from scratch, a $130 million scholarship program without compromising "the staff's obligation to perform other public service responsibilities."