McInnis "Concerned," Looking to Undermine Suthers

"Our" view

Whatever-McInnis thinks it's his "unquestionable birth right", huh?  So more than just McInnis wants to run for the senate, big deal.  Why doesn't Coloradopols care that Udall has likewise tried (and at this point succeeded) to clear the field. 

Oh, that's right, everything Republicans do is underhanded and Democrats never do anything wrong.

---

by: Haners @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 15:01:36 PM UTC

The negative spin on McInnis is so perplexing...not

Get used to it.  Stories on Udall will predominately read as straight news with no commentary, while stories on McInnis will be followed by "Our view".

---

by: Lauren Bacall @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 15:14:55 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Have there been stories on Udall? I must have missed his McInnis-like press offensive.

My impression has been that Udall has been pretty quiet while McInnis has been relatively chatty (usually about potential primary opponents).  I'm sure such chattiness would have nothing to do with people's "view" of McInnnis's thinking.

---

by: Cuervo71 @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 15:22:38 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's still pretty stupid

If you're going to bash, at least bash both sides.  There's plenty of ammo out there.

Coloradopols doesn't deny being biased, does it?  Should we do an "our view" in the diaries?

---

by: Haners @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 15:28:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Wanna provide some?

I haven't seen much in the "Dems challenge Udall for Senate seat" news lately.

"We're below sharks and contract killers." -- Rep. Trey Gowdy (R-S.C.), speaking on Congress's 9% approval rating

---

by: Phoenix Rising @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 15:59:07 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What PR said

It's pretty well known that Pols is "left leaning." Still, if you're going to complain about them not taking the Dems to task as hard as they do with the GOP it'll help if you can point out negative news about the Dems that Pols is ignoring then charges of bias will seem more like the truth than complaining.

"Thank you for putting your rank political motives on display." - ArapaGOP

---

by: Aristotle @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 16:07:44 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

It's not "the news"

that is biased.  It's the spin attached to "the news" contained in the headlines and commentary after the story.  I have no interest in trolling right wing blogs for negative spin on Udall's every move and alleged thoughts and motivations.  It's fine if CoPols wants to support Udall, just be up-front about it and do an endorsement.

---

by: Lauren Bacall @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 17:35:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

"spin" or pointed commentary?

Maybe Pols has it in for McInnis. Or maybe they really believe what they're writing. Which is it? Probably depends on your perspective.

"Thank you for putting your rank political motives on display." - ArapaGOP

---

by: Aristotle @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 19:38:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh, OK, "pointed commentary"

Works for me. I totally agree they believe what they are writing.  They have captured the inner workings of McInnis' mind and have revealed it for the rest of us, and we thank them. 

Here's my pointed commentary:  The Dead Guvs don't like McInnis and don't want him to win, therefore, they will put a negative spin, I mean pointed commentary on anything he says or does.  Nothing wrong with that.  It's their blog and they have the right to say anything they want about any candidate. Even you admit they are "left leaning" (leaning in the way one pancake leans into another on a plate) No problem with that either, I've been known to lean in that direction myself. They should just be honest about it and not get so defensive when the issue is raised.

---

by: Lauren Bacall @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 22:11:37 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well

McInnis is the only person in the race that has formally announced. As the only person that has formally announced he is putting himself out there. The problem is that when you are the only person out there everybody, and by everybody I mean the press and bloggers and political junkies, is going to be scrutinizing everything that one person does. It doesnt matter that it is a republican, if it was a dem I would be willing to bet that pols would be posting their comments.

Not only is McInnis the only person to announce, but he also doesnt have a job, as far as I know. His job right now is to get elected. Udall, on the other hand, has a job. He is a congressman, and I believe that he needs to focus on being a congressman representing his consituents. Udall has the added advantage of being the only probable candidate for the dems in the race. There is no reason for him to announce now. Suthers also has a job. He also needs to serve his constituents to the best of his ability. His people can float the idea of him running to test the waters, but he doesnt need to run. He may find that this is not the best time to run, and he may wait until 2010 or later, who knows.

Conversely, Schaffer hasnt announced and he doesnt have a job. He has the elder statesman role and can garner support and money at the drop of a hat. He got screwed last time around, and I bet promises were made. Promises that McInnis may know about or assume, and so he has to get out early and cast aspersions on Schaffer, and now with Suthers mulling it over, Suthers too.

As far as Pols' sarcastic commentary is concerned I am not going to condone or decry their words. To me, its funny at times, and its over the line at times. I find that when I take offense it has to do with a dem, and when its funny its a repub. Stepping outside of myself, I take the honest view that they do it to both sides, and if I am really honest with myself, its funny all the time.

Lets be honest with each other here. When they post something that is considered negative against a republican candidate they are called "left leaning." When they post something negative about a dem they are...posting something negative about a dem. It is impossible to be 100% neutral 100% of the time. The battle cry of left leaning media has so permeated our culture that one negative against a repub or one positive for a dem, we hear it, on any stage. If pols had started this site calling themselves a left leaning blog would you have started posting comments here, Lauren? Would Gecko? How about you, Haners? I know I wouldnt. I dont read Free Republic, because they are Bush apologists. I dont read DailyKos, because they are predominately dem. I read pols because there are differing views, and they allow anyone to start their own diary, to post their own comments (regardless of flavor), and they only delete comments that are totally inflammatory (which, lets admit, they allow a pretty wide latitude in that department).

Whether they like McInnis is a moot point. He has put himself out there and as such he should expect backlash. All pols has done is reprint his comments, and then added their own opinion. An opinion that you and Haners, and others, can disagree with, and spell out why you do. I know I disagree with them at times. The difference between pols and MSM is that when you or I disagree we can respond and be heard by anyone who chooses to read why. Blogging, at least on this site, is reader driven. There may be more dems than repubs, but everybody's voice can be heard, and as such pols could post that Ritter is the second coming, and you can annunciate why that is absurd.

I come to pols defense not because they cant fight their own fight, but because I dont want to lose your voice or Haners, or, Christ, even Gecko's, because you all may see this site as left leaning. Regardless of where they may or may not stand, all I know is that whatever they post there will be solid debate about the issues. If we have solid debate about issues then there will be no need to call them left leaning, because the war of ideas is not won by who posts what first, but by who offers the best reasoning as to why or why not.

By the way, I am now craving pancakes soaked in butter and syrup. Thanks.

---

by: Mr. Toodles @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 00:21:27 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

McInnis=Lawyer-Lobbyist

He is employed as a Lawyer-Lobbyist, representing--among others--foreign-owned energy companies drilling in our roadless and backcountry lands.

---

by: Oliver @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 00:34:37 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Well said, Toodles.

The meta-debates about who has what biases are sort of irrelevant, aren't they? As long as all voices are heard, and no biases silenced, it doesn't matter to me if the wizards-behind-the-curtain are baby-eating neo-fascist cross-dressing tap dancers, or genetically engineered advocates of inter-species marriage (I'm assuming, of course, that everyone falls into one of those categories or the other). Who cares?

I certainly enjoy the diversity of voices on this blog, especially when mutual civility prevails. I continue to learn a lot from all of you. The result would be the same, I think, regardless of Colorado Pols' political stripes.

When I first came on this blog, Gecko's diary was being affectionately promoted. Clearly, whatever bias exists, does not get in the way of a commitment to open dialogue.

"(People) will do the rational thing, but only after exploring all other alternatives" -John Maynard Keynes.

---

by: yevrahnevets @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 03:54:00 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Mmmm pancakes, that does sound good!

To answer your question, no I would not have been interested in blogging here if they had called themselves left leaning in the beginning, nor did I perceive the lean in the beginning.  It didn't start looking like a liberal blog until around late spring or summer if my memory serves me.  Like I said, I don't even care so much that they lean, but if you are going to dish it out, you should be able to take a little back.  Does anyone in here perceive that this is a right leaning blog?  I doubt it. 

But not to worry, I don't scare off that easily, and although I think this blog has lost some conservative posters over this perception, some of us will hang in to fight the good fight. What would I do without a good business/labor dispute with you Toodles?  Besides, now I'm looking forward to Udall declaring his candidacy, so I can see all the negative commentary, mind reading, and photo shopped pics from CoPols.  I'm on the edge my basement sofa!

---

by: Lauren Bacall @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 14:36:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Mmmm pancakes, that does sound good!

To answer your question, no I would not have been interested in blogging here if they had called themselves left leaning in the beginning, nor did I perceive the lean in the beginning.  It didn't start looking like a liberal blog until around late spring or summer if my memory serves me.  Like I said, I don't even care so much that they lean, but if you are going to dish it out, you should be able to take a little back.  Does anyone in here perceive that this is a right leaning blog?  I doubt it. 

But not to worry, I don't scare off that easily, and although I think this blog has lost some conservative posters over this perception, some of us will hang in to fight the good fight. What would I do without a good business/labor dispute with you Toodles?  Besides, now I'm looking forward to Udall declaring his candidacy, so I can see all the negative commentary, mind reading, and photo shopped pics from CoPols.  I'm on the edge my basement sofa!

---

by: Lauren Bacall @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 14:39:42 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I dont know what I would do without our business/labor debates

I wouldnt call them right leaning but they do there are a lot of posts about Amendment 41 lately, and that is a black eye for the dems.

I know you dont scare easily (you never back down when I start posting, not that I would want you to), and I assume that there is a natural ebb and flow with the political cycle as blah and Aristotle check in every now and again. My guess, once Udall and now Schaffer declare there will be a large upswing. Throw in the presidential, and man oh man, the battles will be huge.

---

by: Mr. Toodles @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 19:11:58 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nicely said

I appreciate your words, it was very nicely said.

I also appreciate your concern for those who have decried any sort of left leaning.  I can't speak for everyone but whatever biased that is or isn't present may make me complain but I'm not going to stop posting because of it.  And like you, I would hope that no one would.

Where's the fun in that?  :-)

---

by: Haners @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 14:42:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

No fun at all

My concern is losing solid debate. The sites that openly pander to one side or the other are no fun, because the only people that post agree, or its the one brave sould who dares to defy convention, and then gets shouted down. Here we have a very diverse contingent of people, ideas, ages, backgrounds, everything that makes me want to post.

---

by: Mr. Toodles @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 19:22:15 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

What Toodles said

There isn't anything about the "is pols neutral or not" debate  I could add that would be more insightful or eloquent than what Mr. Toodles just said. But to clarify my point in this particular instance, there is nothing going on with Udall or any other Colorado Dem that could invite this kind of commentary, so what's the point of complaining? I'll buy the notion that Pols is a bonafide liberal blog (as opposed to left leaning - hey, they gotta lean one way or the other, don't they) when someone can produce an example of their passing up an opportunity to criticize a Dem for something like this.

"Thank you for putting your rank political motives on display." - ArapaGOP

---

by: Aristotle @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 01:55:49 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

One thing I just thought of

Amendment 41. That whole debacle is making the dems look like infighting fools. Unless they pull out the immaculate reception of PR moves, whoever wins, Dems lose.

---

by: Mr. Toodles @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 03:39:32 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

It occurs to me...

that maybe you're already a die-hard McInnis supporter - after all, we know you're a west slope Republican. I sure don't recall you caring so much about the slams Both Ways Bob took here - slams he brought on himself. So, am I right?

"Thank you for putting your rank political motives on display." - ArapaGOP

---

by: Aristotle @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 04:01:56 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

You got me there Ari

Of the candidates declared so far, I'm supporting Scott:) 

Not right about Both Ways, I decried the constant drip drip drip of negative commentary on Bob too.

 

---

by: Lauren Bacall @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 13:37:35 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

That's why I fell on the old politician's excuse

that I couldn't recall. :) However, it's true, I don't remember you speaking up about that... maybe Bob screwed himself so bad that it blinded me to anything written in his defense that was not posted by Moonraker.

"Thank you for putting your rank political motives on display." - ArapaGOP

---

by: Aristotle @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 14:28:01 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

In all honesty

This subject is where it shows the most.  Udall positioned himself in a way to avoid a primary, but that isn't a problem.  McInnis tries to do the same, and he's self serving and elbowing everybody else out of the way.  Why does Udall get a pass for clearing his field and McInnis gets hammered for trying to do the same thing?

---

by: Haners @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 17:58:16 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Inane carping

Do you suppose you're on to something? Let's find out.

Udall has at least officially filed as a candidate, right?

Oh. Well, Udall's certainly been going to the press repeatedly with "concern" about so-and-so running and "avoiding a divisive primary," right?

Oh. Well, another Democrat has uttered public word one about running for the Senate, right?

Oh.

Next, please.

---

by: Colorado Pols @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 18:23:52 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Mmmmm....

So you're saying that if Hick jumped in and Udall came out and tried to pressure him out for the sake of avoiding a nasty primary, you would hammer Udall.  Is that what you're saying? 

Which would you support, Udall or Hickenlooper?

---

by: Haners @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 18:44:13 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Is your resort to the wild hypothetical your concession that there is nothing real to report about Udall?

...and thus your complaint about the lack of commentary on Udall was meritless?

---

by: Cuervo71 @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 18:48:41 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Nope

I'm attempting to illustrate a point.  Why is McInnis getting hammered for something that both sides have done and will do.  I want to know what Coloradopols would do if this was the Dems situation instead of the Reps.

If you think that's "meritless" I can't to see what people say when there's a nasty Dem primary over something.

---

by: Haners @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 19:04:40 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

He's right

Our coverage of the CD-2 emerging primary, like our coverage of CD-7 last year where we were even accused of helping keep Herb "The Robot" Rubenstein alive, or agonizing with Hickenlooper while he slowly talked himself out of running for Governor--all just exceptions that prove the rule.

On second thought, maybe you should just quit while you're ahead.

---

by: Colorado Pols @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 19:14:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Ha!

Nice touch of sarcasm there buddy.

But in all seriousness, I have never gotten the negative vibe from any of the other instances listed above as I do from the reporting of McInnis.  I'm not saying that it needs to be roses and chocolates or anything, but if McInnis was so rotten, I think we could figure that out on our own.

Plus, I would really appreciate an answer to my question.

Thanks.

---

by: Haners @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 19:24:12 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

The message is clear Haners....

There is no bias at CoPols and please shut up about it. 

The responses remind me of an old expression, "The hit dog howls".

---

by: Lauren Bacall @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 20:42:10 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yeah

I kind of got that message pretty clear.

Thanks Lauren!

---

by: Haners @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 22:49:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Whatever happened to Herb Rubenstein?

Did he move back to Virginia after the primary?

---

by: One Queer Dude @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 20:59:46 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Colorado Autism Society Development Director

Anybody makes a joke about that and we're calling bullshit.

---

by: Colorado Pols @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 21:14:57 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Run, Suthers, run!

The Dems want the AG's office back!  Suthers, just make sure to resign while you're running, so that when Udall wins for Senate, you'll be out of a job and you can go back to private practice.

Let's have a nice, brutal & ugly Republican primary.

---

by: MiddleRoadDem @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 15:17:28 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Why on earth would he resign his AG office?

I assume you are joking......I've not had enough coffee yet this morning.

---

by: Cuervo71 @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 15:24:18 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Yes, kiddin'...

Suthers would be a bumbling idiot to resign, but that doesn't stop me from calling on him to do so!  He should be protecting Coloradans from enemies, foreign and domestic, rather than out there campaigning, so he should resign when he announces his run for Senate so that we have a full-time A.G.!  (oh, and by the way, the Dems would get the job back!  Minor detail)

---

by: MiddleRoadDem @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 15:28:53 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

You should do a diary

I would be interested to read about Udall's machinations to keep people out of the primary.  I bet it would be front paged, too.  You say below there is plenty of evidence, so let's see it.

---

by: Emma Anne @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 18:16:50 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

I agree--lay out the evidence Haners

---

by: Oliver @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 00:35:42 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh, cool

Why doesn't Coloradopols care that Udall has likewise tried (and at this point succeeded) to clear the field.

Wow. What good news do you have? and where did you get your facts from? Fox and pravda news are no acceptable.

I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.

---

by: windbourne @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 03:08:31 AM UTC

[ Parent ]

now where know where Ken Gordon will be headed when he finishes his last term in the state Senate next year

From Majority Leader to A.G........it's a logical promotion and much better than returning to his old House seat.

---

by: One Queer Dude @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 16:11:01 PM UTC

now we know where.........sorry, typo

---

by: One Queer Dude @ Tue Mar 20, 2007 at 16:14:21 PM UTC

[ Parent ]

Oh please, get Tancredo to run for ...

either senate and/or president. After all, we all know that the republicans will own all of the seats up for grabs, so they will get elected to 110 senate seats (amazing how diebold helps out).

I prefer the "u" in honour as it seems to be missing these days.

---

by: windbourne @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 03:05:38 AM UTC

With a name like "Struthers", he has to be good.

No one is courting Struthers for the US Senate at any level. It'll either be Schaffer going to the Senate or Udall. My money is on Schaffer.

---

by: Paper Bullets @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 03:31:02 AM UTC

Is the AG Sally's new meathead?

---

by: Cuervo71 @ Wed Mar 21, 2007 at 03:40:04 AM UTC

[ Parent ]