CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%↑

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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

50%↑

15%

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Dave Williams

60%↑

40%↓

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

40%↑

20%↓

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
September 15, 2010 06:58 PM UTC

"Thinly Veiled Racism" and Hasan's "Tea Party" Complaint

  • 11 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

The always-interesting Hasan family adds even more intrigue to this year’s election, if that’s even possible–as the Pueblo Chieftain’s Patrick Malone reports:

Dr. Malik Hasan has filed a campaign-finance complaint with the Colorado Secretary of State’s Office against the Southern Colorado Tea Party based in Pueblo.

The complaint accuses the Tea Party of failing to register with the secretary of state as a political committee, accepting anonymous donations and failing to report its contributions to candidates and causes…

Among the candidates the party has made donations of $200 or more to are Republican gubernatorial nominee Dan Maes and Republican treasurer candidate J.J. Ament.

Although the contributions appear on the candidates’ campaign-finance reports to the secretary of state, the Southern Colorado Tea Party has not reported those donations to the secretary of state, according to the complaint…

Hasan’s son, Ali Hasan, was a Republican candidate for state treasurer, but lacked the support at the state assembly in May to reach the ballot. At the assembly, held in Loveland, Hasan said members of the Southern Colorado Tea Party campaigned against his son by employing thinly veiled racism.

To be fair, the Chieftain goes on to quote Malik Hasan that the complaint is not the result of the Southern Colorado Tea Party whisper-campaigning against Ali Hasan at the assembly. And on the surface, the violations this group is accused of here seem pretty clear cut: the Hasans certainly aren’t the first to note the laissez-faire way that the “Tea Party” gets behind chosen candidates, seemingly without the slightest concern for applicable law.

But come on, folks. The Hasans aren’t neophytes. They would be funneling money through these groups right beside everybody else, just as they have done for the famously unaccountable “Dr. Evil initiatives,” or as they delivered Scott McInnis’ checks for his water essays to whatever account he wanted no-questions-asked, were it not for one overarching problem.

That would be the “thinly veiled racism.”

But Hasan is absolutely right about one thing:

“The irony of it all is that if these guys are so concerned about the Constitution – enforcing it and following it – then they should start with themselves. You can’t go around yelling and screaming that you want the Constitution respected when you don’t respect it yourself.”

Comments

11 thoughts on ““Thinly Veiled Racism” and Hasan’s “Tea Party” Complaint

  1. Do Teabaggers “go around yelling and screaming” about the state constitution?  I thought they cared only about the US Constitution (to the extent they can read, which ain’t much).

    1. tea baggers only voice agreement with one document. Most of them have yet to read it. Even more can not comprehend what it says or means. They count on Beck, Palin, Armey et al to tell them what it says.

  2. Make that transparently veiled. I just can’t see myself, as a Jew, supporting a group with the same level of “thinly” veiled anti-Semitism (there’s that among many of them too with the whole Jewish conspiracy running the world thing) while telling myself I’ll tolerate it because they have some other good ideas.  Like getting the trains to run on time?  

      1. These days it’s not easy being a conservative Republican Muslim American. Or non-Cuban Hispanic American.  Or African American. Or Gay American. Or Teddy Roosevelt Conservationist American. Or Pro-choice American (yes, pro-choice Republican wasn’t an oxymoron so long ago). The list of those for whom being a conservative Republican gets more personally challenging all the time keeps growing. But according to LB it’s all good because they’re managing to purge so many “soft RINOs”. I guess government isn’t the only thing they want to shrink to bathtub drowning size.  

    1. to the constitution banning any inequality based on religious choice including religious tests as a basis for any elected office. Surely the whisper campaign had to do with the Hasan’s religion and ethnicity or nobody would be mentioning veiled racism?

      We non-Christian Americans do get tired of the fact that candidates so often have to swear they are good Christians, as if that’s a requirement for being a good American.

      Take President Obama, for instance. The technically correct answer to the question “Is he a Christian?” is an  unambiguous “yes”. The constitution lovers’ response to the question ought to be “not relevant, next question, please”.

    2. As Ralphie says elsewhere in this thread, the Hasan complaint is that state campaign finance laws were violated. Those are in Article XXVIII–of the Colorado Constitution.

      But with your question

      Was that an Amendment that did not make it in my copy?

      perhaps you were looking at the Colorado Constitution–the one on the Independence Institute site. A few years back (but several years after the passage of the Fair Campaign Practices Act that established Article XXVIII), the version of the Colorado Constitution on the II web site did not include Article XXVIII–Campaign and Political Finance.

      Checking the Independence Institute’s web site today and searching for “Colorado Constitution” gives several links, including to the state site with the actual up-to-date constitution. However, II also has this link:

      Colorado Constitution – Ballotpedia

      Jun 17, 2010 … Summary. The Colorado Constitution is divided into 27 articles as well as a schedule. Article I establishes the boundaries of the state. …

      ballotpedia.org

      (emphasis added)

      Despite apparently being posted Jun 17, 2010, again no Article XXVIII. And no Article XXIX Ethics in Government. Not surprisingly, Independence Institute is still in the last millennium and two Articles behind. If one were to rely on II, it could indeed be “an Amendment that did not make it into [your] copy.”

      I guess for II, if you don’t like a couple of the Articles, just leave them out?

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

87 readers online now

Newsletter

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