Mount Virtus

Poll numbers for Colorado Republicans have been less favorable than any would like to see, but in the crucial weeks leading up to the 2006 election the Party is putting another weapon into play: volunteers. I was pleased to see several dozen volunteers show up at GOP Victory Headquarters in Wheat Ridge this morning to see Rick O’Donnell and the legendary Hugh Hewitt.

After a brief rally, volunteers split up to work their separate state house districts – dropping literature, making phone calls, stuffing mailers. I was told many more volunteers who never showed up at Victory HQ went to work hitting the streets this morning.

Jeffco’s big “Super Saturday” volunteer push is part of a statewide GOP effort. So if you’re a registered Colorado Republican or independent voter, there’s a good chance you received some sort of contact today with information about the Republican candidates in your area – be it a phone call or pieces of literature left at your doorstep.

I enjoyed the fresh air and exercise of walking a couple Arvada neighborhoods, passing out literature touting O’Donnell, Bob Beauprez, and my state representative Bill Crane. I got to talk to a few residents and to spread the good word. And there were hundreds more like me working across the state, talking to friends and neighbors and delivering the message: the Republican Party is representing families, taxpayers, small business owners, with the values of individual liberty, personal responsibility, and a strong national defense.

O’Donnell is in a heated battle with Democrat Ed Perlmutter in Colorado’s 7th CD, in one of the sure-to-be hottest races of the political season with coffers of cash pouring in to the district on behalf of both candidates. I’m looking for a photo finish in that race. Beauprez’s campaign for governor got a late start but is picking up some momentum and looks to close strong against Bill Ritter. Republicans are the favorites to hold the statewide offices of Treasurer (Mark Hillman), Secretary of State (Mike Coffman), and Attorney General (John Suthers). Recovering the state senate may not be in the cards for 2006, but Republican chances are improving to regain the majority in the state house. Then there are too many county and local offices to mention, races that are often more important than attention they receive.

For each of these races (and more), every extra ounce of effort from Colorado Republican volunteers pushes the team that much closer to victory on November 7. See you at the next “Super Saturday” event!

Finally, Colorado Republican gubernatorial candidate Bob Beauprez has something to be cheered about: a Wall Street Journal/Zogby poll released shows Beauprez trailing Democrat rival Bill Ritter by 3 points (margin of error +/- 4 points).

In light of two recent polls that showed a much more distinct advantage for Mr. Ritter, I wouldn’t stake my credibility on this survey signifying a huge momentum swing in the Republican’s favor. More polling data over the coming weeks will have to corroborate some sort of trend. At the same time, it has to be sobering news for the Ritter bandwagon and perhaps can energize the GOP base here in Colorado.

Yes, the Beauprez campaign got a late start. My druthers would have been to see a more aggressive and articulate campaign start, say, about Labor Day. But some have prematurely written off this race. An uphill battle for Beauprez? No doubt. Will he win? Not if the election were held today. Can he still do a lot of good for other GOP candidates in the state, if not give himself a chance to finish ahead of Ritter at the November 7 finish line? Yes.

One way or the other, my fellow Republicans, let’s not complain, but let’s get to work.

I usually leave the details of the bigger issues of the GWOT in the hands of experts more capable than I. If you want to pick a fight on this issue, take it up with one of them. Let me start by answering a few common questions about Iraq that get tossed about.

1. Have we made mistakes in prosecuting the war in Iraq? Yes (but isn’t that every war?)
2. Is the violence in Iraq between Shi’ites and Sunnis troubling? Yes (but civil war can still be averted)
3. Are American forces viewed as friendly liberators by most of the Iraqi population? No (but many more are eager to make the democratic experiment work on a permanent basis)
4. Therefore, it was a mistake to go to war in Iraq, right? Wrong!
5. Were there other justifications for going to war in Iraq besides WMDs? Yes (but I don’t have time to rehash them all today)

This statement released from the White House today – remarks delivered by President Bush in Alabama on Iraq – are well worth reading and considering to get some badly needed perspective:

“Some Democrats in Congress say that we should not be fighting the terrorists in Iraq; it was a mistake to go into Iraq in the first place. I believe these Democrats need to answer a simple question: Do they really believe that we would be better off if Saddam Hussein were still in power? In a recent interview, the top Democrat on the Intelligence Committee was asked this very question. And his answer was, yes, yes, and, yes.

“If this is what the Democrats think, they need to make this case to the American people: They need to make the case that the world would be better off it Saddam Hussein were still in power. If Saddam Hussein were still in power, he would still be sponsoring terror and paying families of suicide bombers. If he were still in power, he would still be pursuing weapons of mass destruction. He would still be killing his own people. He would still be firing at our pilots. He would still be defying the United Nations. He would still be bilking the oil for food program and using one of the largest oil reserves in the world to threaten Western economies and to fuel his ambitions.

“After the attacks of September the 11th, it became clear that the United States of America must confront threats before they come and hurt us. Saddam Hussein’s regime was a serious threat, a risk the world could not afford to take. America, Iraqis, and the world are safer because Saddam Hussein is not in power.

“In a recent series of speeches, I made it clear that we’re in the early hours of a long struggle for civilization. I have made it clear that we’re in the ideological struggle of the 21st century. I’ve also made it clear that the safety of the American people depends on the outcome of the battle in the streets of Baghdad.

“I strongly believe that Iraq is a central front in the War on Terror. The Democrats may not think so, but Osama bin Laden does. Here are the words of bin Laden, ‘I now address… the whole… Islamic nation: Listen and understand… The most… serious issue today for the whole world is this Third World War… [that] is raging in [Iraq].’ He calls it ‘a war of destiny between infidelity and Islam.’ He says, ‘The whole world is watching this war,’ and that it will end in ‘victory and glory or misery and humiliation.’

“For al Qaeda, Iraq is not a distraction from their war on America, it is a central battlefield where there’s –outcome of the struggle will be decided.

“The NIE I quoted earlier says this about Iraq. It said, ‘Perceived jihadist success there,’ in Iraq, ‘would inspire more fighters to continue the struggle elsewhere.’ It also says that ‘Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.’

“Democrats in Washington have been quoting the NIE a lot in recent days, but you don’t hear them quoting that part of the document. The Democrats can’t have it both ways. Either they believe that Iraq is a distraction from the War on Terror or they agree with the intelligence community and the terrorists themselves that the outcome of Iraq is important in the War on Terror. Truth is, the Democrats are using the NIE to mislead the American people and justify their policy of withdrawal from Iraq.

“The American people need to know what withdrawal from Iraq would mean. By withdrawing from Iraq before the job is done, we would be doing exactly what the extremists and terrorists want.

“The terrorists’ entire strategy is based on the belief that America is weak and does not have the stomach for the long fight. Bin Laden has called American withdrawals from places like Beirut and Somalia as proof that if the terrorists are patient America will lose her nerve and withdraw in disgrace.

“The greatest danger is not that America’s presence in Iraq is drawing new recruits to the terrorist cause. The greatest danger is that an American withdrawal from Iraq would embolden the terrorists and help them find new recruits to carry out even more destructive attacks on the American homeland. And that is why the United States of America will stand with the brave Iraqis and defeat the terrorists in Iraq.”

If there’s one case I’m going to be following in the U.S. Supreme Court’s new docket, it’s this one:

The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to decide whether public employee unions must get special permission before spending some workers’ dues on political causes.

Justices accepted an appeal from the state of Washington that involves fees paid to the Washington Education Association by teachers who decline to join the union.

Those workers still can be charged dues by the union to help pay for labor negotiations that affect them. But they can’t be forced to pay for the union’s political activism, under a string of Supreme Court rulings that reach back nearly 30 years.

At issue is whether the union needs teachers to say “yes” before the fees can be used for political causes or whether teachers must specifically object to having a portion of their fees spent for that purpose.

The court will hear arguments in the case, as well as a related lawsuit by five teachers to recover their fees, early next year.

One of the organizations that signed on to an amicus brief in support of this case was the Independence Institute.

Here’s hoping that the nine justices on the nation’s highest court provide a victory for individual rights of free political speech.

And about time, I should say. Why not take a minute to point out a couple of interesting stories highlighted in today’s Rocky Mountain News?

First, the latest in the controversy about Nayyera Haq, the staffer for Democratic Congressman John Salazar who verbally lashed back at Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo for defending the Pope’s right to free speech. The Rocky reports that Haq has taken a temporary leave from Salazar’s campaign.

Meanwhile, the Rocky took a miss on Haq’s unfair distortions of Tancredo’s comments as anti-Islamic and her role in inviting Islamic extremists to Capitol Hill, which have been documented by the local blog To the Right and the national blog Red State. And a Google News search for the name Nayyera Haq or Tom Tancredo turned up nothing from the Denver Post in the past five days since the controversy started brewing.

Speaking of Tancredo, his upstart Democrat challenger Bill Winter was busy removing the proverbial foot from his mouth this week for an apparent e-mail threat sent to fellow Democrat and Rocky media critic Dave Kopel in 2004 (Full disclosure: I work with Dave at the Independence Institute). (HT: To the Right)

Winter e-mailed Kopel denouncing the “Swift Boat hysteria” surrounding Kerry. Winter said that while President Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney supported the Vietnam War, they did not serve in combat.

Kopel defended his writing about Kerry’s war record, which drew an angry response from Winter, who called Kopel a “rabid attack dog for Bush and Cheney” and ended with the line: “When the revolution comes, I’ll be looking for you, brother!”

You won’t find a more honest, straighter shooter than Kopel, who on more than one occasion has challenged my own work. At least apologies have been made and accepted, though Winter’s memory fails in trying to recall what he meant by the “revolution” line. Better to distract and mislead – that’s what people are looking for in a representative:

Winter has recently criticized Tancredo for his fiery rhetoric, including Tancredo’s suggestion last year that the U.S. could threaten to bomb the Muslim holy site of Mecca in retaliation for terrorist attacks.

About his own e-mail, Winter said, “We ask if it’s the sort of thing that a serious political candidate would say, but nobody seems to question the things Tom Tancredo says.”

Nobody? Oh, the media coverage of that remark was quite extensive. Even a local conservative blogger or two called it into question. (No, seriously, go do a Google search. See what else you find.) I can’t wait for the Dead Governors to call out Winter for his threatening e-mail. At least I have some expectations from the Guvs – I only anticipate a bizarre twisting of stories from the SoapBlox crew (such as this).

And when will that “watchdog” Colorado Media Matters start complaining about the Post‘s lack of coverage? Sorry … I can’t stop chuckling … Hee, hee, I forgot – in their little world, the media is universally biased to the Right (to the Right of the site’s purveyors, that is, which in many cases is also known as the mainstream).

This morning Rocky Mountain News editorial page editor Vince Carroll is indeed on point in his defense of embattled Secretary of State Gigi Dennis. After careful hearings and public deliberation, Dennis issued a series of rules on August 2 to clarify Colorado’s election laws, including a provision that membership organizations must ask their members’ individual written permission before using part of their dues in political campaigns.

Seems fair enough, right? While the principle behind the rule stands clear and strong, some have called the timing of its delivery into question. Some union bosses are used to automatically taking members’ money for political purposes and claim that having to ask permission of all their members would be an undue burden that would cause them “immediate and irreparable harm” in their ability to influence the election process. (more…)

As highlighted by El Presidente, the Beauprez campaign needs to get its act together – more like it needed to get its act together yesterday. I have refrained from writing about this race in recent weeks because in the very limited time available to blog, I didn’t want to spend it highlighting all the gaffes (and alleged lies) from Colorado’s Republican would-be governor and his campaign staff.

The gurus at Real Clear Politics have captured the losing trend in this race and pointed out the current average poll gap of 12 points! With 50 days until Election Day (and much sooner until absentee ballots start getting distributed), is it too late for Bob Beauprez to turn the corner and upset Democrat Bill Ritter? No one knows for sure. But it should be too late in the game to make excuses or to complain about the poor hand that’s been dealt.

Beauprez is still looking for an issue or issues to give him traction and an edge. What about his Accountability Pledge? Or maybe the issue of gun control? Don’t count me as optimistic yet.

Memo to GOP bigwigs: Now is the time to do what it takes to right the Beauprez campaign ship, rather than to make plans about who you’re going to point fingers at come November 8.

I’m a partisan, yes, but I’m also an honest partisan. Only a blind observer would tell you that things are going well for Beauprez. I’m too old for make-believe. We know what it takes to win. Let’s fix what’s wrong, feed what’s right, and make our best shot at keeping the statehouse in Republican hands.

Today marks the five-year anniversary of a horrific day forever etched in our individual and collective memories. May God continue to give peace and comfort and strength to the families of victims, wisdom and moral clarity and fortitude to our nation’s leaders, and faith and patience and resolve to each and every citizen of the United States of America.

Five years later, America has not forgotten. May we never be overcome by grief or fear or apathy or moral confusion. But for the sake of liberty and humanity and all we hold dear, may we go on to wage the fight against the fanatical evildoers of Islamofascism. The road well may be long and arduous, but the outcome is certain: On to Victory!

As many pundits have pointed out, the Congressional race in Colorado’s 7th District (in which I happen to live) figures to be one of the competitive campaigns of the 2006 season. Republican Rick O’Donnell and Democrat Ed Perlmutter are squaring off to replace the open seat left by Congressman Bob Beauprez, who is running for governor

While I have often been too busy of late to comment on this race, I have enjoyed the email press releases coming from the O’Donnell campaign. The most recent release is clever, generating a nickname for the opponent that deserves to catch on – “Empty Eddie.” Why? The message of the release is spot on, bringing up a point that ought not to be ignored: O’Donnell’s Web site contains a series of detailed proposals to address a range of issues, while Perlmutter’s Web site is filled with platitudes and vagaries.

Now, of course, the O’Donnell people are too polite to point out any of the things that came to my mind so clearly as I read the release:

1. Liberal Democrats (like “Empty Eddie”) are much more prone to emote than to think, obviating the need for serious detailed policy proposals.

2. Liberal Democrats (like “Empty Eddie”) can’t win elections running on a liberal agenda, so it’s much easier just to speak in nebulous terms.

3. Liberal Democrats (like “Empty Eddie”) know they are much more likely to get a free pass from the mainstream media, and thus largely can avoid serious policy discussions.

4. Liberal Democrats (like “Empty Eddie”) have primarily become defenders of the status quo and thus have tended to stagnate in any attempts at new policy ideas.

5. Liberal Democrats (like “Empty Eddie”) are banking their electoral success this year on a knee-jerk, vitriolic hatred of the President and the majority party in Washington. Who then really needs serious policy ideas?

You can read the press release from O’Donnell campaign manager K.C. Jones (not of Boston Celtics fame) below (also included were a detailed, side-by-side comparison of the candidates on the issues, which due to formatting issues could not be reproduced)… (more…)

The Left’s organized propaganda machine is out in force to protest ABC’s new 9/11 documentary. Mr. Bob has urged us to go use their comment space to write something more appropriate, such as a letter of support, to ABC. I think it’s a fine idea. Below is the letter I wrote compliments of http://thinkprogress.org/tellabc (all you have to do is go in and change the subject line and message text to express what you want to say):

Robert A. Iger
President and CEO, The Walt Disney Company

Dear Mr. Iger:

Thank you for not caving in to political pressure from organized interest groups in your efforts to depict the events leading up to 9/11. Americans deserve the chance to see an honest, balanced historical account of what led up to that disastrous day so we can make sure not to let it happen again.

I am glad ABC has made sure this 5-year anniversary will not pass without some careful attention to the looming issue that shrouds all others: the Global War on Terror. As a nation we need to focus on working together to combat the radical Islamic threat rather than looking for opportunities to deliver political cheapshots against the President or members of Congress.

Please know that my family and I intend to view ABC’s important documentary special. Again, thank you.

Many on the Left would just as soon have Americans forget about 9/11, or at least would like to rewrite this vital piece of history. Shouldn’t the piece at least have a chance to air? Make your voice heard.