( - promoted by Hestons Ghost - )

So when the "Colorado Promise" fails to assuage voters' angst regarding (fill in the blank - the disaster in the Gulf, $13 trillion budget deficit, mandated health care, increased taxes, etc.), generalization is the 'go to' tactic.

In his latest fundraising missive and blog entry, Andrew Romanoff suggests that those on the far right speak for the GOP as a whole. While nothing could be further from the truth, it's an interesting move on his part, and I think we can all rest assured that the media will begin lapping this stuff up and regurgitating it to the unwitting public.

The question is, will the public buy it this time around?

First off, using former Congressman Tancredo's speech given at a "Ken Buck for U.S. Senate" rally or the "tweets" of State Senator Dave Schultheis as legitimate representation of what this election is about, much less what the GOP is all about, is just poor form.

(Honestly, Mr. Speaker, where was your indignation when Madam Speaker Pelosi called then-President Bush a "total failure?" Where was the public outrage when House Democrats booed and heckled the president during his 2005 State of the Union Address?)

Second, the public is tired of spending. Period. They're tired of government taking and taking and doing nothing - taking more money, taking away freedom, taking more taxes. They're scared for the future and the future of thier kids. And they ought to be.

At this point, Democrats have controlled Congress and the U.S. Senate for four years. They've controlled the presidency and the majority of governors' mansions for almost two. How long will Democrats point their fingers at Republicans and think the public won't notice the smoke and mirrors?

Can Tancredo and Schultheis get a little nutsy? Sure, but so can Sen. Reid and Rahm Emanuel.

This election is about jobs and the economy. It's about restoring freedom, getting government out of our way and letting Americans do what we do best - finding a way out of this mess. It's about creating opportunity for businesses and employees, not creating new taxes and burdensome regulation. It's going to take a stiff upper lip and a strong stomach to reach in and make cuts - among other departments, it will likely mean cuts to Medicaid (which eats up 30 percent of the state's budget) and cuts to education (which eats up 43 percent of the state's budget).

Does it stink? Yes. But, can we afford to continue down this path of infinite spending looking always to tomorrow to bail us out? No. Is the answer to our problems a tax increase? Probably not during a recession.

We've got real problems Mr. Romanoff. And while you and your friends in the media try and obfuscate and spin, make excuses and point fingers, voters are smarter than you give them credit.  That's a Colorado promise you can take to the bank.

We can sort this all out after Nov. 2, but in the meantime, if Romanoff would be kind enough to tell us what his solutions are and limit his name calling and broad (not to mention, disingenuous) generalizations to beating up his Primary opponent, that would be fantastic.

Perhaps feeling nervous about hinging his own political career on Senator Who and the soured deal with Andrew Romanoff,  Bill Ritter has decided to drag Mark Udall and Bernie Buescher into his suicide pact with Michael Bennet on the eve of Andrew Romanoff's entry into the Democratic primary. The Ritter for Governor campaign blasted out a fundraising email on behalf of Bennet (is it even legal for a state committee to plug a federal candidate?) that reads in part:

Michael has only served for a short time, but he has already earned a reputation in Colorado and in Washington as a serious, thoughtful and straightforward public servant.

This is not surprising because no matter what the context -- business, government, or public education -- Michael has built a long record of success, of doing big things, of not shrinking from hard choices or entrenched interests. We don't need to tell you that we need more of that in Washington.

Please stand with us as we stand with Michael. We fully support Michael's campaign for election in 2010, and are asking you to join us in this effort.

The email was signed by Ritter, Udall, and Buescher.

The Washington Post has taken note of Obama's unusually low approval rating in the state and the Romanoff/Ritter civil war:

Bennet is preparing for a difficult general-election campaign, but his most immediate problem is a likely primary challenge from Andrew Romanoff, a former speaker of the Colorado House.

Romanoff was a leading candidate for the Salazar vacancy before Ritter tapped Bennet, and other Democrats see his challenge to Bennet as motivated more by personal pique than by principled differences with him. Whatever his motivation, Romanoff creates one more obstacle in Bennet's path as he tries to win his Senate seat outright.

Ritter also has problems. Foremost is the challenge facing every governor this year and next: how to run a state in the middle of a recession that has created a sizable budget deficit.

The Denver Post reports that Andrew Romanoff will challenge Sen. Michael Bennet in the Democratic primary:

Wally Stealey, a longtime lobbyist and political mover in Pueblo, said Romanoff called him Friday morning to tell him he had decided to run.

"If I'd have had my choice, I'd have him running against Ritter," Stealey said. "But I didn't get my choice. That doesn't matter. You don't always get your choice in politics."

Democratic strategists say the 43-year-old Romanoff faces significant hurdles in mounting a run against a sitting U.S. senator, even one appointed less than eight months ago and who still has relatively limited name recognition.

As we observed shortly after Bennet's appointment, you would be hard pressed to find anyone in either party willing to claim that Michael Bennet would make a better Senator than Romanoff. Why Romanoff decided to wait until September, giving Bennet a nearly three quarter head-start, is anyone's guess.

Roll Call is reporting that Andrew Romanoff is fairly likely to challenge Sen. Michael Bennet in the 2010 Democratic primary.

This isn't all that surprising. Frankly, you would have a hard time finding in anyone in either party (aside from Bill Ritter) who would tell you that Michael Bennet would be a better U.S. Senator than Andrew Romanoff. A telling sign has been the fact that Andrew Romanoff's political allies have been the most openly skeptical among Democrats of Michael Bennet's appointment over the last few months.

ED PERLMUTTER: The CD-7 Rep. has emerged as a favorite of the liberal blogosphere and is making more noise about the appointment than anyone else.

ANDREW ROMANOFF: The GJ Sentinel endorses Romanoff as Salazar's replacement.

JOHN HICKENLOOPER: The Denver Post casts their lot in with "Hick."

FEDERICO PEñA: The former Denver mayor pulls his name from consideration.

Bernie Buescher has gotten his wish and been appointed Sec. of State. The Rocky Mountain News offers this insight into Ritter's selection:

Some political observers say it was Buescher's close ties to Ritter that sealed his fate. Buescher and Ritter both advocated for Amendment 58, which would have closed tax loopholes for oil and gas developers, especially on the Western Slope. The amendment was defeated.

In the meantime, Andrew Romanoff will probably end up running for Senate even if he doesn't get the appointment. As for Ken Gordon? Well, he'll have to go back to spamming online polls.

Bill Ritter has announced the Secretary of State finalists. They are Ken Gordon, Andrew Romanoff, and Bernie Buescher.

As I wrote several weeks ago, Ritter had a real opportunity here to appoint someone with real experience who would put the job before politics. By opening up the process to applicants, he offered a little hope that he was actually looking for someone based on qualifications and not cronyism. Several excellent (and yes, Democratic) candidates applied including Denver County Clerk Rosemary Rodriguez and former Denver County Clerk Sherry Jackson.

Instead, Gov. Ritter has opted to use the position to reward his political allies and has given us a list of candidates who are only going to use the office to advance their own careers.

This all begs the question: if Ritter was just going to give the appointment to one of his allies and ignore the qualified candidates, then why did he put on the charade of taking applications in the first place?

Gov. Bill Ritter has an important choice looming on the horizon.

Mike Coffman unfortunately came under fire largely as a result of seeking higher office. By running for congress only two years after becoming Secretary of State he caused his attention to be divided between campaigning and focusing on his office's duties. Even more disruptive was the fact that by running for congress he had painted a giant partisan bulls-eye on his back, every Democratic group in the state was taking shots at him and making it even harder for him to get his job done. Do we really want to repeat this when Andrew Romanoff or Bernie Buescher decide to run for congress or when Ken Gordon gets an itch to run a primary against Ken Salazar?

Rosemary Rodriguez, Sherry Jackson, and Jessica Lovingier all have served as county clerks. While Lovingier, a Republican, is a long-shot; Ritter ought to give priority to Rodriguez and Jackson if he is serious about making sure the office is in competent hands.

If Ritter would rather engage in transparent political pay-back and naked partisanship then Romanoff, Bueshcer, or Gordon would be excellent choices.

By opening the process up to applicants as opposed to simply appointing someone, Gov. Ritter is at least offering a ray of hope that he is honestly looking for the most qualified candidate. Let's hope he follows through.

Face the State is breaking news that a memo distributed among top ranking Colorado Democrats outlined a plan to "educate the idiots" and specifically targetted minorities among other "idiot" groups:

In a confidential internal memorandum obtained by Face The State (PDF), the Colorado Democracy Alliance outlines a roster of "operatives" who worked for Democratic victory in the 2006 general election. The document outlines specific tasks for various members of the state's liberal infrastructure, including a campaign to "educate the idiots," assigned to the state's AFL-CIO union. Among the operation's intended targets: "minorities, GED's, drop-outs."

The full memo can be found at the above link. The text in the memo lays out the following task for a Democratic operative:

Minimum Wage - wedge issue management - increasing CO union power: "Educate the Idiots" campaign, Target: minorities, GED's, drop-outs.....

The Colorado Republican Party has already responded with a statement:

“It is incredible that the state’s top-level Democrats hold everyday Coloradans in such a low regard that they feel it appropriate to refer to them as idiots in their internal documents,” Wadhams said. “These are the people who work hard everyday to put food on the table; they do not deserve to be referred to as “idiots” by those who wish to exploit them for their votes.”

“One has to wonder why the people on the list thought this was ok,” Wadhams said. “This type of behavior is acceptable from no one, let alone so many who now hold leadership positions in our state government. The right thing for them to do is apologize at once, and return all tainted campaign donations they may have received.”

Andrew Romanoff's parting shot at TABOR is starting to wither on the vine. Even Bill Ritter is getting ready to abandon Romanoff as the Denver Post reports:

The rough political road for a proposed state-budget fix got even rougher Monday as Gov. Bill Ritter stopped short of endorsing it and the group expected to propel it to November's ballot expressed concern about funding, timing and other issues.

"I don't know ultimately . . . if we're going to have the coalition together to put that on the ballot," Ritter said Monday of House Speaker Andrew Romanoff's plan in his monthly appearance on the Mike Rosen Show on KOA 850.

The proposal, which would alter the Taxpayer's Bill of Rights and end mandated increases in education funding, started as a referendum, but Romanoff could not muster the support of two-thirds of state lawmakers — the requirement for it to go on the ballot. On Sunday, Romanoff said he would take the case straight to voters. The effort to proceed as a ballot initiative requires approval of the ballot language and then 76,000 signatures by Aug. 4.

And that concerns Ritter, who last month was among the lawmakers on hand when the House speaker said he would ask lawmakers to place the plan on the ballot.

"Since that has taken a different track now, it would appear I would have to go back and have a conversation with (Romanoff) and really ask the question, 'What is its winnability, who is the coalition, how do you fund the campaign, who are the opponents and how does it fit with other things on the ballot?' And that's a real big problem for all of us," Ritter said.

(- promoted by Rocky Mountain Right -)

House Speaker Andrew Romanoff's scheme to lift all state spending limits and turn Colorado taxpayers TABOR refunds into wasteful education spending is falling apart faster than Jason Bane can eat a pie. And the good news for Republicans just keeps coming. 

With the announcement of Sen. Josh Penry's brilliant Colorado-Plus 1 plan yesterday, Romanoff is beside himself. The RMN reports:

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news/2008/apr/23/gop-readies-defense-pl...

Romanoff's once powerful grip on the House Dems is no more. They have forsaken their leadership and his silly plan that would have pitted them against Amendment 23. In reality, Penry's plan is a hell of a lot better. Anyone who got a property tax bill this year should notice that Bill Ritter's unconstitutional tax increase is soaking them, supposedly for education spending. So why do we need more money for education? Penry's plan addresses a critical need that Colorado Dems have left hanging, transportation.

The best part is that Romanoff is so fried he has been reduced to petty attacks, accusations, and name calling befitting of a 4th grader. Only now in his last weeks do we finally get to know the real Andrew Romanoff.

(- promoted by Rocky Mountain Right -)

Andrew Romanoff's scheme to screw taxpayers out of their TABOR refunds and handing them over to the education bureaucrats has fallen apart at the seams. The Denver Post Reports:

http://www.denverpost.com/breakingnews/ci_9019725

The bottom line is that Teacher Union Democrats, unhappy with Romanoff, have amended Amendment 23 Plus into the School Finance Act, undermining Romanoff's so called deal. Any Republican who was even on the fence in supporting this terrible idea should now see the trap that Romanoff was laying for them. This was a bad deal from the start but luckily we can now see just how bad it really was.

Romanoff is the one who loses the most here. He loses his deal, he loses his control over the House Dems, and he looks like a conniving liar to the many newspapers who not only wrote on his plan sight unseen, but even editorialized in favor of it. Apparently Republicans only have the Teachers Unions to thank for all this. Their willingness to go behind Romanoff's back has split their party and under minded his leadership. All while giving republicans a nice talking point. Way to go team.

Andrew Romanoff has repealed a plan in the guise of fixing the state budget to repeal Amendment 23 and portions of TABOR. The Rocky Mountain News summarizes the plan:

Tax surplus refunds under the Taxpayers Bill of Rights would permanently disappear and instead go to fund education under a proposal by Democrat House Speaker Andrew Romanoff.

Romanoff said the measure would get rid of automatic spending increases for education, as required by Amendment 23, and take the state budget off of "autopilot."

Gov. Bill Ritter was quoted elsewhere as calling the plan "bold and elegant."

What Andrew Romanoff doesn't bother to mention is that the provisions of Amendment 23 are set to expire. From the Colorado State Constitution:

Section 17. Education – Funding. (1) Purpose. In state fiscal year 2001-2002 through state fiscal year 2010-2011, the statewide base per pupil funding, as defined by the Public School Finance Act of 1994, article 54 of title 22, Colorado Revised Statutes on the effective date of this section, for public education from preschool through the twelfth grade and total state funding for all categorical programs shall grow annually at least by the rate of inflation plus an additional one percentage point. In state fiscal year 2011-2012, and each fiscal year thereafter, the statewide base per pupil funding for public education from preschool through the twelfth grade and total state funding for all categorical programs shall grow annually at a rate set by the general assembly that is at least equal to the rate of inflation.

Andrew Romanoff is trying to deceive everyone into believing that his plan to neuter TABOR and Amendment 23 is simply in the interest of fixing the state budget. While Amendment 23 has been a great burden on the budget, it is set to expire right after the 2010 election. The budget problem will go away on it's own very shortly and TABOR will remain intact if no action is taken. Instead, Romanoff is using the specter of the soon-to-be-expired Amendment 23 as an excuse to try and slay TABOR in one last hurrah before being term-limited out of office and fading out of the public eye forever.

The real answer to the problem of Amendment 23 is to cut wasteful spending, not to pass massive budget increases as we enter a recession, and to wait one more budget cycle until it is gone once and for all.

At the end of the day, this is just another Referendum C--style hoodwink by the Democrats to try and worm out of the fiscal constraints put forth in TABOR.