CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese



President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*


CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks




CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg




CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen



CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi




State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
May 16, 2006 08:00 AM UTC

Holtzman First on Television

  • by: Colorado Pols

UPDATE:?Channel 4 has the Holtzman campaign video HERE.?

A few weeks ago we saw the first television ad buy of the 2006 campaign season, but that was for an issue campaign. Now Republican Marc Holtzman, one of three candidates for governor, will be the first candidate on television. Here’s the press release:

Republican Gubernatorial candidate Marc Holtzman tomorrow will become the first statewide candidate in this election cycle to air a statewide media spot. The spot features Holtzman touting his plan for a $1.2 Billion dollar tax cut—his signature economic policy and largest tax cut in Colorado history. Holtzman also echoes his intention to end taxpayer-funded benefits to illegal aliens in Colorado.


54 thoughts on “Holtzman First on Television

  1. Because as we all know… tax cuts solve every single problem!  Just look how tax cuts have worked so well at the National Level.

    How much is Marc’s dad spending on these ads, I want to know.

  2. Tell ya what P, how about the state gives tax cuts to those that want them and those that don’t want a cut can pay the difference? It would then equal out and ya’ll will be happy………..

  3. Because as we all know… tax cuts solve every single problem! Just look how tax cuts have worked so well at the National Level.

    I’ll assume you’re being sarcastic with that remark.

    The fact is, after the last round of tax cuts, tax revenues to the Fed this past April 15 were the 2nd highest in the history of our country.

    This explains how this is possible:

    which concludes:
    After the cuts, total tax payments and the share of total taxes paid by the top income earners soared. President Bush’s current proposal to make phased-in rate cuts effective immediately also
    promises to expand the tax base. Indeed, Congress should consider further rate cuts to stimulate even larger gains in incomes and economic growth.

  4. Sounds good, Gecko.  As long as you don’t:

    a) drive on any roads
    b) go to the hospitals
    c) use the library
    d) store prisoners in your house
    e) stop drinking water
    f) expect the police to respond to your 911 calls

  5. And more on tax cuts:

    Our late editor Bob Bartley used to say that critics might forgive you for being wrong, but they’ll never forgive you for being right. That psychological insight may be the only way to explain the fierce and bitter opposition this week to extending the tax cuts of 2003 for another two years through 2010.

    If ever there was a market test of economic policy, the last three years have been it. The stock market has recovered from its implosion in Bill Clinton’s last year in office, unemployment is down to 4.7%, and growth has averaged 3.9% in the three years since those tax cuts passed–well above the post-World War II average and more than twice the growth rate in Euroland.

    Yes, gas prices are high and interest rates are rising, which helps to explain the anxiety felt by some of the public. But these headwinds are all the more reason to be impressed by the economy’s ability to push ahead nonetheless. We’d have thought that the Democrats who are now voting to let taxes increase would be thrilled to know that things turned out better than they had feared. Americans are better off despite Democratic predictions that, as Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi put it back in 2003, tax cuts would “damage long-term economic growth.”

    Alas, admitting error is not a natural political act, so the tax cut critics are now suggesting all of this growth would have happened anyway. Thus the Washington Post last week quoted Robert Rubin–the Clinton economic guru–as dismissing the importance of tax cuts because “we had very good markets in the ’90s before all these tax cuts went into effect.” And it quoted chief Lehman Brothers economist Ethan Harris as saying that the expansion “has nothing to do with tax policy, and more to do with the corporate sector starting to spend some of their record profits.”
    Well, what does Mr. Harris think inspired that revival of business spending? Spontaneous combustion? A Nascar green flag? As for Mr. Rubin, when does he think the stock market imploded and the economy headed downhill? Bill Clinton was still in office when the dot-com boom went bust and U.S. manufacturing was shedding jobs faster than France.

    What these gentlemen want everyone to forget is the unique nature of the 2001-03 recession and sluggish revival. After the stock-market collapse, 9/11 and Sarbanes-Oxley, American business was shell-shocked. Hiring at the Fortune 500 was nil and corporations were hoarding cash. The 2001 one-time tax “rebate”–pushed as the economic cure by Mr. Rubin’s former partner Jon Corzine in the Senate–and phased-in income tax cuts had provided only a short-term lift. Only consumer spending, buoyed by easy Federal Reserve policy and a housing boom, prevented a deeper recession.


  6. Over the past 40 years, the U.S. has had three great experiments in tax-cutting, and each one has worked even better than advertised: The Kennedy tax cuts of the 1960s, the Reagan cuts of 1981, and now the Bush tax cuts of 2003. The political tragedy is that the first of those two were bipartisan, while the Bush tax cuts have had little Democratic support. Only 15 House Democrats supported their extension this week; there were only three in the Senate.

    Perhaps they should recall the words of a famous Democrat from another era: “The tax on capital gains directly affects investment decisions, the mobility and flow of risk capital . . . the ease or difficulty experienced by new ventures in obtaining capital, and thereby the strength and potential for growth in the economy.” That was John F. Kennedy, and he’s still right today.

  7. Notice Remarkable forgets the almost $2 Trillion these great tax cuts have caused us to borrow from China and Saudi Arabia, as well as the $450 Billion more each year the Rubberstamp Republicans and Big Spender Bush keep running up.

  8. I pay quite enough in taxes, thanks. Every damn thing we do, see, drive, eat, breathe, save, spend, etc it f*&$ing taxed.
    If you want to pay more, fuckinay, go for it. But don’t drag everyone else in it just because you think it is a marvy idea.

  9. 4.63% Watch to be exact.  Plus the state just passed a ballot measure saying “sure, take some of our taxes…we need to invest”.  Doesn’t that just seem silly to try to win a statewide race by running on a tax cut?

  10. No P. I’ll be driving on the roads because I pay a huge tax on gas, plus income tax, plus sales tax, plus real estate tax, plus……
    So cute talk. But it don’t cut it.

  11. You are all missing the point.  This shows the desperation in the Holtzman camp to dump any and all available campaign funds in hopes of getting 30.01% of the vote on Saturday.  I have received no less than 15 pieces of mail and 3 phone calls in the past week from MH’s campaign.  They realize that you can’t perjure yourself on the stand, support a criminal campaign manager, and still win the nomination.  So what better way than to propose an unrealistic tax cut to butter up the base.  Activist Republicans attending the convention will see right through this and support Beauprez.  MH just wanted some face time before he is eliminated from further consideration on Saturday.

  12. So does that mean you won’t be driving on roads anymore Gecko?

    That appears to be the depth of your argument.  Obviously you feel that we should be taxed more than we currently are.  Since that’s the case, why don’t you take up Gecko’s offer and pay some of his (or my) taxes.  You know – put your money where your mouth is.

    As for the deficit, yes, it is large, and it’s now being paid down, thanks to the INcreased revenues that the tax CUTS have made possible.

    By your definition, anyone with a mortgage is running a deficit, so homeowners should be taxed EVEN MORE because they owe money.

    Meanwhile, back at topic ranch:  HRRepub does have a point.  It’s pretty early to be expending campaign funds on TV ads…

  13. Remarkable and Gecko,
    You WILL pay your taxes. You WILL smile and feel GOOD when you pay your taxes. You both USE the fruits of paying your taxes so YOU WILL FEEL THE PEACE AND HAPPINESS OF PAYING YOUR TAXES.  Geck my man, you ride your “scoot” on taxpayer paid for roads. Keep riding and keep paying. 
    HRREPUB, you win the prize for writing the “backstory” on what this is really about. It IS NOT about taxes, it’s about MH making the last ditch attemp, a TRY AND FAIL, to get his 30%. Bravo to you HR.

    That is all.

  14. Yeah.  That and all the potholes. 

    Oh – and let’s not forget the children.  After all, I’ve been paying CO taxes for a lo-o-ong time now, the lion’s share which goes to the wonderful education system, and yet I’ve not had a child in the schools. 

    (Cue the harps … and cue the folks who say I’ve ‘gained’ from the education system…  like CU, for example, with that beacon of higher education, Ward Churchill….)

  15. Remarkable
    That’s two or three times now you’ve bashed Churchill, without  Phoenix Rising and the rest of the ultra liberals pummeling ya.
    Like I said before, listen for the crickets now………..

  16. I can’t believe that Holtzman would dare to go up on television while me…a fiscal, proven, conservative, who write books without using pens only has used hired surrogates to do stuff.

  17. Colorado needs a tax cut right now. Ref C has become the blank check that all of the RINOS and DEMS promised us it would not. Voters were sold snake oil and if Marc has a plan to make it right without going too far, I want to hear it.

    At least Marc is thinking about this rather than signing the first thing the Independence Institute puts in frot of his face. That idiotic plan will do nothing but raid severance taxes that should go to the western slope. I guess it does not matter anyway because it is no more than a cheap political stunt designed to make Both Ways look like a conservative.

    I want a Guv with ideas, not a Guv who listens to Jon Caldara.

  18. Right on DNA.

    One of you said invest, didn’t you mean spend. When have you ever seen a politician not spend money?

    That’s one of the reasons that I support Holtzman, I know we dont’t stand a chance with Beauprez because he is no different than what we have in there now.

    One of you said that Marc perjured himself. Has a judge said that?
    Aren’t you supposed to be innocent until proven guilty? The attorneys haven’t even made their final closing remarks yet. My understanding is that the reporter never stayed long enough to hear the Holtzman sides of the story.

  19. Hey want a laugh? Doug Bruce is endorsing Bob Beauprez. I bet Holtzman is relieved on that. Let’s see if Bob distances himself from that endorsement.

  20. Hey pacified…wasn’t it Maynard keynes (the liberla economist) that advocated tax cuts at the personal income levels because in his mind American’s would undoubtedly spend the money.  If they consumed, then it would result in more tax revenues for the government.  Now wait a dog gone minute you say!? 

    maybe that is why JFK knew that a tax cut at the personal income level was such a good idea in the 1960’s.  What has happened to the Democrat Party?  Nothing like JFK.

    Yes, you can also solve a macroeconomic diseqaulibirum by government spending.  Problem is that the government has to borrow from the Fed, who then sells the debt to foreign nations.  If Americans have more money they can 1) spend more and then raise revenues via the money multiplier (i.e. the number of transactions that take place in the economy), or 2) they could choose to save and/or invest (which would increase bank deposits and make borrowing less costly).  So which do you think is the best option again?

    There is in economic theory the reality that you can actually tax too much.  As you increase the tax rates, the wealthy look for shelters, the middle class look for ways to not report, and the poor do not pay.  As such, you end up with a diminishing middle class, and an even larger lower class.

    Fact is, even under todays living standards, American’s enjoy a lower standard of living than they did in 1975.  Fact is your dollar in 1975 would buy much more than today even adjusting for inflation!!!

    When government borrows they cause a crowding out effect in the banking industry.  Making the availability of loans for small business almost impossible.  After all, your competing with Uncle Sam.  Likewise, when the government competes with small business by taking on more and more roles generally left for the private sector, small businesses are forced out of business in the marketplace.

    And this benefits who? How?  Small business accounts for 80% of all jobs in the United States.  As more and more small businesses are put out of business, we all lose.  Unemployment rises, demands for entitlements increases, and thus government raises taxes.  However, the overall tax base continues to diminish are more and more “free riders” join the ranks.

    Holtzman has thwe right idea.  If government doesn’t need the additional funds, give it back!!!  Government doesn’t create jobs.  They re-distribute income.  Pure and simple.  As less and less becomes available, the less likely they are to re-distribute.

    I would much rather have a man being accused of perjuring himself for protecting my pocketbook, than a person such as BB who says that he’s a man of his word (signed the taxpayers pledge not to declare bogus emergencies to justify overspending) then voted himself a payraise at each opportunity, and has voted left of Diana DeGette and Mark Udall.

    Whom do you trust?  I’ll take my chances with Holtzman anyday.

    Incidentally, just how many companies and new jobs did Bob Bweauprez ever bring to Colorado again?  Of 16 bills introduced in the 108th Congress, only one dealt with Colorado.  It was a $500,000.00 expenditure to have private companies receive assistance from the federal government for EPA cleanup related issues.

    Can you say NONE!!! 

    This campaign isn’t only about taxes, government spending, and illegal immigration.  In a nut shell, it is about JOBS, JOBS, JOBS.  BB hasn’t created any and Holtzman has.  Bb didn’t work to bring new jobs to Colorado, Holtzman did.  Again, I’ll take my chances with Holtzman.  Holtzman is interested in selling Colorado as a place for new business and investment opportunities.  BB is merely interested in selling one thing – HIMSELF.

  21. I like you mere everyday MrHandy2001. Most people are overlooking that Holtman brought in 50 HiTech  and 38 BioTech companies like Intel and created 1’000’s of jobs to Colorado.

    For a salary of $1.00 a year.

    That’s the kind of guy that I want as Governor for my kids and future grandkids. One that can attract the kind of companies so they can make a decent living even here in Pueblo.

  22. One way to raise name ID in time for a primary is to go on the air four months out and it seems that’s exactly what Marc is doing. Will Bob rise to this challange?

  23. Please provide the list of “50 HiTech and 38 BioTech companies’ that Marc brought to Colorado.  Be specific, and recall that Intel was here long before Marc was.

  24. Hey Bruce Doug.  I highly doubt that Doug Bruce would be endorsing Bob Beauprez.  That makes literally no sense at all.  Especially since no-one has received any literature to that effect. 

    Also, if Doug Bruce were endorsing Bob Beauprez, why then didn’t he and his supporters attempt to keep the Holtzman supporters from going forward at the caucuses and division leader meetings?

    Also, it would make more sense (using your analogy) to have Doug Bruce supporting Jeff Crank and not Doug Lamborn.  Same situation.  Do you actually think that a guy who has been attacked at all levels by the establishment (i.e. Bruce Benson) would be actively supporting Bob Beauprez. 

    Bruce knows who opposed C & D and who didn’t.  That is just one for the books as I see it.  Nice try, I believe it when I see it.  Many, many big “C” conservatives would abandon Doug if he did this.

    Don’t think he is that politically nieve.

  25. FYI, the $2 trillion in borrowing isn’t directly related to borrowing from China and Japan to subsidize the loss in revenues.  To achieve $450.00 billion in new revenue, assuming a multiplier of 5, the government would only need to cut taxes by $90 billion.  Not $450.00 billion.  That is how it works.

    The $2 trillion is more directly related to government over-spending  (i.e. Congress) and the need to borrow for that purpose.  Granted there would bea a leakage to the system (i.e. savings or imports).  Since interest rates were so low, most people began buying chinese and Japanese goods.

    That is a trade issue.  If their goods weren’t so cheap, people wouldn’t be buying them.  Now that the dollar is weaker, against foreign currencies, the trade deficit (imbalance) is narrowing.  It is cheaper to buy AmericaN goods.  However, the real problem from a micr and macroeconomic perspective is the issue of the Chinese yuan.  The Chinese government keeps their currency weaker to the U.S. dollar artifically.

    Again, that is a trade related issue.

  26. Hey someone explain this one to me, the roads where I live have sucked for years, now that I am paying more in taxes, there is still no plan to fix them.

    Where is my benefit from that stupid Ref C thing?

    I got screwed….

  27. Marc has stated time and time again that he will work very hard as the face of Colorado in bringing jobs here.  This is very important for every region of the State.

  28. “I like you mere everyday MrHandy2001. Most people are overlooking that Holtman brought in 50 HiTech and 38 BioTech companies like Intel and created 1?000’s of jobs to Colorado.”

    Pike, most people are overlooking this because it never happened.  Prove in any way that Marc Holtzman did this.  Go ahead, we are all waiting.

  29. W. is a failure as a conservative. Holtzman, should he follow through on his promises, would be a success. Let’s take a look at what is going on here.

    The reason Bush is in the position he is? Because on spending, immigration, and overall leadership on the hard issues (which are all winners for conservs and losers for libs), he has taken his base for granted. Pure and simple. I am a fire-breathing conservative, and am sorry for Bush. Hapless, tactically and as far as leadership.

    Almost anything he does now is going to be seen as maneuvering, even to many of his tradtitional supporters. The only thing that will save him is that the Democrats are just plain amoral communists, and will run people so unpalatable that we will again grit our teeth and vote Republican.

    Bush should have attacked the Louisiana Dems who were primarily responsible for Katrina. Bush should have attacked the Dems on tax cuts.

    Bush’s “uniter, not a divider” is just plain dumb. Human nature and political reality does not change – “Divide and conquer” is more like it.

    As for Colorado, the first thing we need to do is throw out the spineless Republicans, even if we end up in the minority for another term. Most voters, when it comes down to it, agree with conservative, traditional principles, and we can win on those: marriage, 2nd amend, taxes, immigration reform.

    To run from every fight, like State Party and the rest of the cancerous GOP establishment moderates, is to end up in the minority PERMANENTLY.

    Anyone who thinks the GOP is acting conservative, and blames that for its ills, can obvoiusly NOT speak from a position of knowledge or belief. I point to Ref C as THE example – a pack of lies and a tax increase, and the now bane of all Republicans.

    NOW, AS TO HOLTZMAN, at least he sounds like a conservative. He is philosophicall consistent, and doesn’t see everything, as Kerry does, as “nuanced.” Beat him up all you wish, libs, but people wants leaders, not poll-driven wimps.

  30. I am confused what happened to Team Holtzman? For the last year all we hear is what a machine they are and now that it’s time to dance he has two left feet. Don’t get me wrong I love it and I think Ritter will win, but I think it is pretty clear this guy is all hat and no cattle as Sen. Salazar would say.

  31. Great idea Marc – tell everyone that if they vote for you you’ll give them some money in the form of tax break and then fear monger a little with some thinly veiled racism against “Illegals.”  Tired tactics likes these will continue to turn Colorado blue.

  32. Just because someone is against illegal immigration does nto mean they are “racist”

    That is the lamest line that I have seen posted over and over.

  33. Mr. DNA – How is it a blank check when you can go to the GA website, look up the budget bill(s) for this recently completed session and see where every dollar goes?  Americans are so lazy, they bitch and bitch about “the government” and never bother to do the actual research or read any bills that the people WE elected come up with.  The state and federal govs. never have blank checks if you have the smarts and wherewithal to look in the public record to see where your tax dollars are spent.  It’s called being an engaged citizen, but I suppose it’s just easier to listen to what op/ed pundits and partisan think tanks have to say and to swallow whatever fear tactic we’re sold by the administration than to actually be a thinking citizen.

    Oh yeah, and the Repub’s tax cuts are really helping me out – I can barely make ends meet on my salary and I still owe the Feds $50 for last year.  I guess I won’t see the supposed tax cuts for the “working stiff” at all, I need to be a millionaire to get favors and pork from the Republican controlled Congress.

  34. If you wanted money to go to roads you should have voted for Ref D. The legislature is doing exactly what they said they would with Ref C money. 33% to healthcare, 33% to K12 educaiton, 33% to community & state colleges.

  35. MrHandy2001, believe it. I didn’t either at first. I got it from someone that talked to Doug himself. What a sell out to the establishment. You are right, Doug will lose his support of a lot of people, including me. Marc Holtzman was the only one that fought to keep TABOR! Beauprez despises TABOR.

  36. Kareoke, that wasn’t the bill of goods voters were sold.  Besides my argument is that I can still drive on roads without paying more taxes, since none of the new taxes go to roads.

  37. Can anyone point me to reputable statistics on how much Colorado spends on services for undocumented immigrants?  How much will the state actually save by cutting services, keeping in mind that federal law would prevent the state from denying public education to undocumented children.

  38. So, I have now seen an anti-beauprez piece on tv in GJ.  They are hammering him for being both ways bob, but it is not paid for by the  Holtzman campaign.  What’s the deal?

  39. last post.  the characters look like the guys from south park. do you think they are supporting Holtzman?  I mean, they don’t like scientologists, so maybe they dont like both ways bob.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

39 readers online now


Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!