Breaking: Tancredo statement on gov race; if McInnis/Maes don’t promise to get out, Tancredo will get in

by Rossputin | 4:04 pm, July 22, 2010

[Update: Dick Wadhams has responded to Tancredo’s announcement.  See end of this note for more…]

Former Congressman Tom Tancredo has just released a statement on the Colorado Republican gubernatorial primary.  In short, it says that neither Scott McInnis nor Dan Maes can win the general election.  Therefore, Tancredo calls on whichever man wins the primary to drop out and be replaced by a viable candidate chosen by a committee of the GOP.

Furthermore, Tancredo says that if Maes and McInnis do not BOTH announce by noon on Monday that they will drop out if they win the primary, Tom Tancredo will “seek the nomination of the American Constitution Party for Governor of Colorado.”  He adds “If I run, I will do so to the best of my ability and will do so through the November election.”

[More commentary soon, to be added below Tancredo’s statement.]

See the entire statement below:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=47913432

Tom Tancredo’s statement regarding CO governor’s race

My gut reaction to Tancredo’s announcement, keeping in mind that I had some inkling for the past few days that this was coming:

While there’s some small possibility that either Maes or McInnis will drop out of the race, I put the chances at maybe 5% each, especially by Monday.  That might be high.  That means (at least if you were to view their decisions as independent which is certainly not correct but the math is too complicated otherwise) that the chance of both of them getting out is 1/4 of 1%.

The other way to say this is that in my view there’s a 99% chance that next Monday Tom Tancredo will officially announce that he will be running for governor as the nominee of the American Constitution Party.

So, then what?

The establishment will probably not support Tom or the winner of the primary, though McInnis has a slightly better chance of getting support because as damaged as he is, he’s still probably more likely to have a chance against Hickenlooper than Maes would.  Tom could probably raise a fair bit of money, given his name recognition (and not just in Colorado), but nobody is going to raise as much, maybe not half as much, as Hickenlooper.  The Arizona law and the issue of immigration more broadly play right into the wheelhouse of Tancredo.  In other words, even if people peg him as a one-issue guy (which isn’t right but I understand the perception), that one issue is very high on people’s list of what’s important right now.  Not as high as jobs and the economy, but Tom will be every bit as strong on those issues as McInnis or Maes would.  Nevertheless, the portrayal of Tancredo by the media and by Democrats will consistently be as a racist and a fringe candidate.  You can just hear them now: “Tancredo is right where he belongs, with a fringe third party.”

In the end, I think that having Tancredo in the race as well as either Republican means a certain victory for John Hickenlooper.  But not having in the race probably means the same thing.

Even if Tancredo were the only candidate, I fear he is too controversial to win, and he’ll have some ’splainin’ to do regarding his vote, widely discussed by conservative activists, for TARP.  I think Tom Tancredo is smart and quite principled, despite that vote which quite a few Republicans made – and regret.  He has a much deeper understanding of and respect for the Constitution than most of our politicians.  But he’s been so type-cast that there’s probably not enough time (or money) for him to change the perception of him out there.

I think Tom, if he’s in the race, could get the second-most votes after John Hickenlooper.  And you  know that that means, right?  It means 4, and probably 8 years of Governor Hickenlooper.  That said, I don’t think having him in the race substantially raises the chance of Hickenlooper winning either because Hick is already so likely to beat either McInnis or Maes…unless there is some bombshell news, particularly news with serious negative implications for Hickenlooper’s character (analogous to McInnis’ “Musings About Water” problems).  If there is an anti-Hickenlooper bombshell, then having Tom in the race could turn out to be a major negative for the chances of keeping Hick out of the governor’s mansion because of the vote splitting.  That said, Tom will have a decent argument to make that having the Republican in the race is really the problem…

In the end, I don’t think Tancredo has a much better chance of beating Hickenlooper than McInnis does, and obviously not if they’re both in.

Thus the best possible outcome would be if Tancredo stays out because both McInnis and Maes give in to his threat…and you already know what I think the chance of that is.

While I completely understand Tom’s disgust with the current situation, I’m not convinced that his decision that he can’t just sit by and watch this happen without trying to do something – which is what he’s thinking, based on our on-air radio conversation on Sunday – is the best thing for the state, and maybe, in the long run, not even for Tom Tancredo.

At the end of the day, Tancredo’s entry will probably just be another interesting footnote in a sad tale of Republicans handing the governorship of Colorado to an enviro-wacko leftist wolf in sheep’s clothing in the best year for Republicans since 1994.

——

UPDATE: Dick Wadhams responds.

In his reaction to Tancredo’s announcement, Colorado GOP Chairman Dick Wadhams says he is “terribly disappointed in Tom Tancredo’s announcement that he has made a backroom deal with a minor political party to run for governor.”

Wadhams also mentions a Tancredo op-ed: “This past December, Tom Tancredo wrote a compelling op-ed calling on Tea Party and 9-12 activists to not form a third party because previous conservative third parties ’succeeded in electing the more liberal candidate after many conservatives waste their votes on a third party candidate.’ Tom Tancredo should remember his own words.”

In other words, if Tancredo thought he had even the smallest chance of being selected by a vacancy committee should his threat have worked, even that chance has just vanished like a little piece of flash paper in the flame of Dick Wadhams’ anger…

Wadhams entire statement here:

http://www.docstoc.com/docs/document-preview.aspx?doc_id=47924804

Dick Wadhams’ statement on Tom Tancredo’s threatened entry into CO Governor’s race

My Intro at the 8th Annual ATF Party

by Jon Caldara | 3:42 pm, July 22, 2010

If you missed our 8th Annual Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms Party this past Saturday, my condolences. In my opinion, it was our best yet. But the good news is, they keep getting better each year. Well, either that, or I get more and more drunk each year.

Colorado Takes On Tenure and Evaluation Reform… Are “Master’s Bumps” Next?

by Eddie | 11:45 am, July 22, 2010

Writing over at Education Next, experts Emily Cohen and Kate Walsh explain how reformers should be focused on changing the levers of state policy to improve the quality of teaching, rather than grousing about what locally-negotiated collective bargaining contracts won’t allow them to do. In their piece “Invisible Ink in Teacher Contracts”, Cohen and Walsh [...]

The Buck/Norton sexiness competition

by Rossputin | 10:57 am, July 22, 2010

Over at Peoples Press Collective, El Presidente has a note about the mini-uproar regarding gender entering into the Colorado Republican Senate primary.

I thought I’d put my two cents in…and these comments are not written while wearing my “he endorsed Jane” hat, but rather just thinking about the politics.

Bringing sex, or rather gender, into the race is tactically smart for Jane. It’s tactically stupid for Ken to try to fight on that turf. He should just ignore those discussions.

Even if Jane’s points relating to her gender win her a small fractional gain among women voters, Ken’s responding is rather like responding to “have you stopped beating your wife?” in the sense that there’s almost no answer Ken can give that 1) gets him more points than it gets Jane, and 2) moves the issue, even though it’s already small, to the background (which is where he should want it.)

I disagree with commenter Val’s assertion that women shouldn’t use sex, or more precisely femininity because we’re not actually talking about sex here, to get what they want. Everybody should use every asset they have. Should good-looking guys not shower and dress badly to level the playing field with others (whether in politics, dating, or whatever)?

Asking a woman to ignore the fact that she’s a woman when running for office is like asking Barack Obama not to notice that he’s black.  And it’s like asking voters not to notice either.  It’s just silly, unrealistic, and politically stupid.  I don’t say this as a Norton supporter.  I’d say it about someone running for city council or whatever.  Use what you have and don’t apologize for it.

There is a deep psychological connection in people’s minds between appearances and other non-superficial traits about people. A person might, for example, equate looking good with having a higher chance of success in a given field or having a nice personality.  Take a look at some of what comes up in this Google search for the term “Attractiveness Halo”:
http://www.google.com/search?q=attractiveness+halo

Here’s an interesting line from a University of Michigan study which showed up in that search: “three attributions, sexiness, femininity/masculinity, and liking showed a strong relationship to physical
attractiveness, especially for female targets.”  If true, Jane’s mentioning of gender, bringing attention to her appearance, is a smart tactic.  And it’s something that does not insult Ken Buck.  But Buck reacted as if it did – and that’s a problem for him.

Now, if Buck could make some statements that would embellish his “real man” studliness without making it sound like he’s sniping at Jane, that would be worthwhile.  But given that Jane is perceived (rightly, I think) to have started the topic, it’s very hard to say anything about manhood or high heels without just sounding defensive.

To the extent that Ken Buck keeps talking about gender, even in response to Jane’s starting the topic, it’s as if Jane is Br’er Rabbit and Ken is throwing her into the briar patch.  It plays right into her hands, just when ballots are arriving in the hands of hundreds of thousands of Colorado voters…including hundreds of thousands of women, most of whom are likely to be more turned off by Buck’s response than Jane’s relatively tame bringing the issue of gender into the race.

This is not a big deal, but in this environment everyone is yelling about everything. I suppose if the election is extremely close, this could turn into a pivotal issue, but in that case anything could be the pivotal issue.  This one is certainly smaller than most but I find it interesting anyway. My intent here is not to boost Jane but simply to look at the plain ol’ politics of this. The analysis would be the same with other names involved.  Ken needs to get back to the issues.  To the extent that he responds to Jane’s gambit, it needs to be only on the issue of electability, which was really Jane’s suggestion, not high heels or other items of attire.

I would also like to respond to Val’s question about how the “sex card” is different from the “race card”.  The reason I see is that the race card is intended as a negative, intended to divide people or play on their negative prejudices whereas the gender card is, in my view, intended as an appealing message (not that it would appeal to everyone, or even to most people).  Furthermore, the race card brings up deep-seeded historical issues of slavery and repression next to which discrimination against women pales.  It’s especially true now, in these says of women at the highest levels of everything from industry to politics.

Dan Maes college – final update

by Rossputin | 8:24 am, July 22, 2010

I just spoke with the same man at the University of Wisconsin-Madison who yesterday found no record of Dan Maes in the school’s database.  Today he found the record.

He said to me “I checked this twice yesterday and found nothing.  Now today it’s there.  I put in the same name we did yesterday; we put it in twice.  One possibility is that there was some other field filled in on the screen that I didn’t notice.  But there have been some data integrity issues with the system since they did an upgrade, and this could easily have been one of those hiccups.  I have to apologize to you and Mr. Maes for our screw-up.”

I write this not to absolve myself of an error here. Clearly there was another step I could have taken, i.e. checking the online database.  However the man at UW did tell me today that the two databases, at least as far as the old records go, are identical.  That was why I assumed that searching the second place would have given me the same result as calling, much less two people calling.  In 99% of cases or more, it would have.

Whether it was bad luck of a technical glitch yesterday or “operator error” at UW, I was given wrong information.  Even though my reasoning for not checking in the other place was sound, in hindsight I still should have done so, especially for such an important story. It’s a lesson well-learned by me.

Again, I offer my sincere apologies to my readers and to Mr. Maes and his supporters and will end this rather embarrassing saga here and move on to other topics of discussion.

I do hope that Dan Maes will still meet with me next week for an in-depth interview to discuss matters of policy and politics.  If anything, I feel like I owe him particularly kind treatment…

It’s Not Health Care ‘Reform’; It’s Exploitation

by Brian Schwartz | 7:54 am, July 22, 2010

Scratch a health care “reformer” and you’re likely to find a health care exploiter. To stop health care exploitation we must address the root issue: the nature of rights and the purpose of government.

Medicare head Donald Berwick: You’re a pawn

by Brian Schwartz | 6:00 am, July 22, 2010

In the American Spectator David Catron points out a disturbing quote from Medicare & Medicaid Services head Donald Berwick is.
Berwick’s view of rationing is, in fact, the opposite of [Paul]  Ryan’s. The latter believes it should be driven by the informed decisions of consumers in a free market, while [...]

The Breitbart/Sherrod fiasco

by Rossputin | 5:49 am, July 22, 2010

[Somehow the end of this note got clipped the first time I posted it.  If you’ve read this once already, may I ask that you check the last several paragraphs to see if you missed that part…]

Conservative blogger, activist, and gadfly Andrew Breitbart, has done a lot of good work bring attention to the corrupt and reprehensible behavior of far-left organizations.

But his apparently intentional smear of USDA employee Shirley Sherrod was a travesty of justice, fairness, and a huge black mark on Breitbart’s reputation and credibility.

Breitbart cut THIS full video of Mrs. Sherrod speaking at an NAACP event in March in such a way as to make it sound like Sherrod refused to help a white farmer as much as she could have helped him because he was white.

Breitbart started at about 17 minutes into the video and ended just at the point where it made it look like Sherrod refused to help a white farmer simply because he was white.  But in the rest of the video, Sherrod talks about how she came to realize that while race is still an issue, the problems the white farmer was facing were more representative of problems facing the poor than of inter-racial strife.  Sherrod then describes he she went out of her way to find a good lawyer to help the poor farmer who was being absolutely ignored by the white farmer who she had originally suggested he work with.

What’s so reprehensible about what Breitbart did is that how he misconstrued Sherrod’s words did not create just a slightly erroneous impression of the woman and her words, but rather the precise opposite of them.

He made a woman who describes how initial anti-white instincts were soon trumped by other things, and how she went out of her way to help a white man even after having an inappropriate (although perhaps understandable, given Sherrod’s personal history) inclination to ignore him because of his color.  The entire rest of Sherrod’s speech is about rich versus poor, the powerful versus the powerless.  She said, for example, “we have to work together. It’s sad we don’t have the room for whites and blacks here tonight.  Because we have to overcome the divisions that we have.  We have to get to the point where…’race exists but it doesn’t matter’. We have to work just as hard… White people, black people, Hispanic people, we all have to do our part…”

I don’t support Sherrod’s leftist views or her bashing of Bush or Republicans.  But Breitbart made the story about race in an attempt to damage the NAACP for that group’s ongoing accusations of the Tea Party being a racist movement.

But given Sherrod’s background growing up in the deep south, with a father who was murdered by a white guy who wasn’t prosecuted for the crime despite there having been witnesses, I found her speech to be remarkably generous to whites and to show a personal epiphany on her part which I imagine many others in a similar situation to her would not have, and the rest would not disclose publicly.

Sherrod’s politics and mine probably differ in almost every area.  But not only did she not deserve to be forced to resign; she deserves congratulations from whites and blacks alike for being – so unlike our president – a coherent and believable voice for racial reconciliation in our country.  I thank her for her words that evening.

Let me make this plain: Breitbart’s attack on Sherrod was fraudulent and reprehensible.  He owes Sherrod and his own fans an apology.

Certain conservative columnists who piled on, like Sean Hannity, perhaps owe Sherrod an apology and are themselves owed one from Breitbart.

Now, let’s talk about the Obama Administration for a minute.

USDA Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack appears to have pressured Sherrod for her resignation within a few blinks of an eye after seeing the Breitbart version of the Sherrod video.

This is the same administration which waited nearly a month to fire Communicatons Director Anita Dunn after she said that one of her two favorite “political philosophers” was Mao Tse Tung, the worst mass murderer in the history of the planet.

They waited two or three weeks to fire Van Jones, 9/11-”truther”, self-proclaimed communist and “rowdy (Black) nationalist.”

But they can smash Sherrod within minutes or hours, presumably without even asking her for the whole story?

This administration is unreactive when it needs to react and responsive when it should be patient.  It’s a function of essentially electing a college SDS club to run the country.

Yesterday, I was eating lunch and watching Press Secretary Robert Gibbs give a press conference. (I can hear several of you applauding me for being able to eat and watch Gibbs at the same time, and I thank you for your appreciation.)

Gibbs said, in answer to a question from a reporter about whether this event would hurt Democrats or conservatives more, that the administration doesn’t look at a scorecard at the end of each day to see how they did, politically speaking.  That’s the biggest load of garbage I’ve heard in a while.  There has never been an administration in recent history (well, maybe Nixon) so obsessed with pure politics, power, and electoral gain.

That said, anybody who thinks this event will hurt Democrats even slightly as much as it hurts the conservative blogosphere and the Tea Party movement are being naive.  Breitbart’s actions have set back the credibility of conservative blogging, and particularly with the use of video, a long way.  He owes not just Shirley Sherrod, but also people on his side of the political spectrum, an apology.

DMYR July GENERAL MEETING, feat. JJ Ament and Walker Stapleton

by Brett Moore | 1:45 am, July 22, 2010

[ July 27, 2010; 6:00 pm to 9:00 pm. ]

Join DMYR Tuesday, July 27th for our July General Meeting. This month we are pleased to welcome Republican candidates for Colorado State Treasurer, JJ Ament and Walker Stapleton. As Young Republicans themselves, they are shining expamples of how YR’s can lead NOW! Come hear JJ and Walker lay out their plans to restore fiscal conservatism [...]

Norton/Buck Footwear Flap hits National News

by elpresidente | 11:40 pm, July 21, 2010

“I think it’s pretty obvious the single biggest difference between me and frankly all of the guys up here”–Jane Norton, at The Constitutionalist Today’s March Candidate Forum Of course the video pirating and Democrat-friendly ColoradoPols posted an incomplete copy of the exchange, trying to make political hay out of Ken Buck’s comment that has drawn [...]

Dan Maes says he called on former employer’s customers; he didn’t take customer list

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 11:34 pm, July 21, 2010

Dan Maes has told the Colorado Independent that he called on his former employer’s customers but didn’t take his customer list. He apparently had his own list of contacts. 

Sanctuary Cities – The Real Reason the Feds Aren’t Suing – The Tenth Amendment

by Elliot | 10:57 pm, July 21, 2010

Recently, much ink has been spilt on the question of why the federal government has targeted Arizona for seeking “to enforce the laws that the federal government won’t” while refusing to target “Sanctuary Cities” – i.e. cities that refuse to expend their resources on looking into immigration violations.  Even the potential Republican nominee for the Senate, [...]

Online Schools and Union Opposition

by PerlStalker | 10:48 pm, July 21, 2010

Anita MonCrief posted a link to a fascinating story from Reason Magazine about the rise of online education and the resistance and outright opposition from the NEA.

As we’ve moved into the 21st century, people in general and kids in particular have …

Clear The Bench Colorado wins judgement against “frivolous, groundless, vexatious” complaint by “Colorado Ethics Watch” (CEW, pronounced “sue” – it’s what they do), awarded “tens of thousands” in legal fees

by CTBC Director | 9:12 pm, July 21, 2010

Clear The Bench Colorado wins!
Yes, it’s still more than three months until the judicial retention elections in November, when Colorado citizens will be able to exercise their right to vote “NO” on the three remaining ‘unjust justices’ of the Colorado Supreme Court’s incumbent ‘Mullarkey Majority’ who have declared their intent to allow themselves to be [...]

A Lesson in Federalism from Rural Colorado

by PerlStalker | 8:48 pm, July 21, 2010

I received my Colorado Primary ballot in the mail yesterday and on it is an interesting additional item from the City of Alamosa.

Question 2A:

Shall City of Alamosa Ordinance Number 4-2010, which authorized the execution and delivery of a lease pu…

Kudos to the ACLU of Florida

by Mike Krause | 8:47 pm, July 21, 2010

For defending the Second Amendment rights of a Florida man. According to the Sun Sentinel (Broward County/Palm Beach area), the American Civil Liberties Union is petitioning a court to “help an 85-year-old man get his guns back from the Broward Sheriff’s Office.”
Says the ACLU’s cooperating lawyer:
Under the Second Amendment, he has a right to [...]

Dan Maes to answer tough questions on Regis University Radio Thursday Night

by Jimmy Sengenberger | 7:21 pm, July 21, 2010

As voters decide, Republican Gov. contendor joins college radio host Jimmy Sengenberger at 6pm Thursday Night at KRCX.org ————————— Today he was on the front page of the Denver Post – Thursday night, he returns to Seng Center for a college radio EXCLUSIVE! Tomorrow at 6pm online at krcx.org, host Jimmy Sengenberger of the Regis University Seng Center [...]

Cato on TABOR

by PerlStalker | 6:23 pm, July 21, 2010

In today’s Cato Daily Podcast, Michael J. New discusses Colorado’s Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR).

I remember when Referendum C was on the ballot. I voted for it because 1) I didn’t understand exactly what it was doing and 2) I believed the p…

Reader finds Maes college record

by Rossputin | 6:14 pm, July 21, 2010

A reader of these pages has just posted a comment saying that he found a record of Dan Maes’ graduation just as Mr. Maes claimed.  Since that would appear to be the final word on the subject, I’d say this case is closed. Perhaps I should have checked that same source; I was dissuaded because I assumed (going to show the risks of assumption) that those records would be the same as the school’s direct records.  I made a mistake there.

Airbus who made the first call to UW and got the same answer I did then also went to the online site and found the result, and I have seen it myself.

I feel bad for breaking a story that turns out to have been erroneous.  However, two separate calls were made to the university by two different people, each getting the same result, namely a statement that they had no record of Mr. Maes.  My apologies to Mr. Maes for causing him an unnecessary headache, though I absolutely stand by the fact that the registrar told me what he told me.

Tomorrow I will call the registrar again and ask them how and why they would have said they have no record when other electronic repositories of such data do have a record.

Although everything I wrote was in good faith and was written, including my note to Mr. Maes himself as you can judge for yourself, to give him the benefit of the doubt, I do sincerely apologize to Dan Maes for causing a mini-firestorm unnecessarily.

My aim is not to tear down Republicans, and it’s not as if someone who has been as brutal (rhetorically speaking) as I have to Scott McInnis has any interest in going after Dan Maes just to help McInnis.  Perhaps the other issues surround Mr. Maes caused me to be more willing to accept that there might be a problem, but nevertheless I should have taken that one next step which would have prevented me from running the story to begin with.  It’s an error I’ll learn from.

Again, to Dan Maes, I hope you will accept my sincere apology for this.

(I have sent Mr. Maes a separate private e-mail of apology.)

Michael Bennet-Backed Obama Official, Former SEIU Lawyer to Rule in Client’s Defense Against Aggrieved Nurse

by Ben DeGrow | 5:01 pm, July 21, 2010

From National Review Online today: Carole Jean Badertscher was a California nurse who just wanted to go to work and take care of her patients — but the SEIU was determined not to let that happen. The union’s contract with Badertscher’s employer, the Pomona Valley Hospital Medical Center, had expired, and the union had called [...]

What about Ken Buck’s budget? Is Jane Norton exaggerating?

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 4:41 pm, July 21, 2010

Those following the Jane Norton ads that charge that Ken Buck’s budget soared 40% in only a few years may want to review my interview with him. He answered a lot of questions about his budget. I concluded and believe that his budget increased with Weld County’s population and his office’s workload. I think he has been a fiscally conservative district attorney. 
I’m neutral in this contest.
LINKs:
Interview, Part II: Ken Buck has run his DA office like a fiscal conservative. The Business Word, 4.18.2010. 
Interview: Jane Norton says Ken Buck is Washington insider, not fiscally conservative. The Business Word, 5.3.2010
Weld County commissioners: Buck is fiscally responsible. Allison Sherry.
Truth Test: Norton responds to attack ad. By Adam Schrager, 7.21.2010.

What about Ken Buck’s budget? Is Jane Norton exaggerating? Review my interviews with them

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 4:41 pm, July 21, 2010

Those following the Jane Norton ads that charge that Ken Buck’s budget soared 40% in only a few years may want to review my April 18 interview with him. He answered a lot of questions about his budget. I concluded and believe that his budget increased with Weld County’s population and his office’s workload. I think he has been a fiscally conservative district attorney. See the link to our interview below.

Harry Potter’s Constructive Journalism

by Ari Armstrong | 4:10 pm, July 21, 2010

A 2008 paper from the American Communication Journal argues that the “extremely negative depiction of journalism” in the Harry Potter novels “could have an adverse effect on child readers.”Nonsense, I reply. The Potter series actually offers critical l…

Dan Maes’ former boss accuses him of taking customer lists, trying to poach clients

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 3:39 pm, July 21, 2010

There is no one a small business owner despises more than a former employee who quits, takes a list of customers, starts a competing business and tries to win the former employer’s customers. There is nothing more dishonest an employee or former employee can do, because like, plagiarism, it is theft.
That, the left-wing web site, The Colorado Independent, reports is what Don Unger, Dan Maes’ former boss has accused the Republican gubernatorial candidate of doing. Maes left Unger’s firm, Advantage Credit, Evergreen, to start his own firm, which he shut in 2008. On his web site, the Independent reports, Maes claims he merged his firm into Advantage Credit Bureau of Fargo where he became a vice president. The Independent’s enterprising reporter, Scot Kersgaard, called Advantage Credit, and was told by a woman who answered the phone that she’d “never heard of Dan Maes.”
Unger said he’d never hire Maes back, and he wouldn’t vote for him.
If this is true, it is a very sad story about Dan Maes. It shows that in addition to exaggerating his resume, he acted unethically even before he got into politics.
He should lose the vote of every small business owner who is a member of or supporter of the Tea Party. Too many politicians have worked their way into power, misused that power and left office in disgrace. That could happen if Dan Maes became governor of Colorado. 
Dan Maes doesn’t have the experience, talents or ethics that we want in a Colorado governor.
Nice, important scoop, Scot Kersgaard.
LINK:
Non-politician Maes has worked mostly as salesman and mid-level manager; “I wouldn’t hire him back. That’s for sure.” By Scot Kersgaard.

Dan Maes’ former boss accuses him of taking customer list, trying to poach clients

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 3:39 pm, July 21, 2010

There is no one a small business owner despises more than a former employee who quits, takes a list of customers, starts a competing business and tries to win the former employer’s customers. I can’t think of many things besides outright fraud that an employee or former employee can do that are more dishonest. Like plagiarism, taking a customer list and using it to try to steal customers is considered theft by most small business owners.

What Would Milton Do? (WWMD?)

by Jon Caldara | 1:45 pm, July 21, 2010

There is no economist on earth, past or present, who did more for popularizing free market ideas than Milton Friedman. In a lot of ways, Milton was ahead of his time. When the world was turning towards the disastrous ideas of John Maynard Keynes, Friedman pushed back and helped the ideas of freedom gain [...]

Seeing Hickenlooper’s credibility gap

by Kelly Maher | 1:43 pm, July 21, 2010

If Democratic gubernatorial candidate John Hickenlooper wants his campaign to be a “statewide conversation,” why is he limiting access? You can see for yourself in this video what happened at campaign events in Steamboat Springs, Pueblo, and Fort Garland, (including a cameo from his camera-wielding cousin, Hollywood director George Hickenlooper).

Western Conservative Summit Video

by elpresidente | 8:54 am, July 21, 2010

Will roll out steadily over the next several days, and will be posted in chronological order. Here’s the opening ceremony to whet your appetite: Please be patient as we add video. Just for perspective, the Bachmann speech alone is comprised of 7 videos, broken up for YouTube . . . so it might take a [...]

How is this "compassionate?"

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 7:33 am, July 21, 2010

In today’s Denver Post:Social workers across the state say that attempts to fix the long-troubled Colorado Benefits Management System — a database that processes applications for public assistance like Medicaid, food stamps and Temporary Assistance f…

Today’s newspeak

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 7:12 am, July 21, 2010

Republican governor candidate Dan Maes was quoted in today’s Denver Post as saying, “The next governor has to be able to generate income for the state, and I have proven I can do that.” (See “Maes claims, income at odds.”Governments do not “generate in…

« go back — keep looking »

Featured Posts

• Judge Rules Americans Can Be Forced to Testify Against Themselves

  In order to protect our rights, our security must be protected. In order to protect our security, our rights must be invaded. Nothing wrong with that, is there?

• World Economic Forum in Switzerland: Global Elites Celebrating Hypocrisy
• SCOTUS decision on warrantless GPS surveillance produces an expected friend of privacy
• You didn’t want your Fifth Amendment rights, anyway, did you?
• Keynesian Economists Finally Catch Up and Agree: China to Have Hard Landing
• The Beauty of Private Property—from China?
• Regime Uncertainty, Regulatory Surge, and Unemployment Numbers