President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta



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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson



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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd



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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese



CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore



CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk



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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans



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
February 20, 2007 10:44 PM UTC

GOP: Doug Lamborn Is Coming To Save You...?

  • by: Colorado Pols

Yesterday’s Cañon City Daily Record:

Colorado’s freshman Congressman, Doug Lamborn of the 5th District, said Saturday the United States already is heading the wrong direction with the change of leadership following last November’s elections.

Speaking at the Fremont County Lincoln Day Dinner, Lamborn blasted the Democratic Party and said Republicans already are working on a plan to restore their leadership during the next election cycle.

“Republicans have in many cases dropped the ball,” Lamborn said, pointing specifically to overspending and individual cases of corruption by GOP leaders. “We’re not resting or sitting back at all. We’re planning on taking back the House.”

Lamborn told the packed house at the Holy Cross Abbey the GOP will rise again…

“…I want to be a conservative leader. Our country needs to return to conservative values.”

Lamborn touted his ultra conservative views and said he will appear today in the cover story titled “Slaying the Democrats” in one of the oldest weekly conservative magazines, founded in 1944, “Human Events.”

We found a short article written by Lamborn on the Human Events website, titled “New House Majority Is Abusing Its Power” and dated today, but didn’t see any Democrat-slaying “cover story” starring Doug Lamborn. In fact, the lead piece on the site pertains to Rudy Giuliani slaying Hildebeasts.

While there’s almost certainly a good explanation for this little discrepancy, we’ll just keep our mouths shut.


80 thoughts on “GOP: Doug Lamborn Is Coming To Save You…?

  1. Lamborn is out of control. This man needs to be stopped before he hurts himself. If he keeps ranting and raving like this he’s going to either have a stroke, or shave his head like Britney Spears (unless Haggard gets to him first).

    Why would anyone want a nut like this representing them?

    1. Meanwhile, today Bob Ewegen wrote a column in which he happened to mention one of Lamborn’s many harebrained schemes: a plan to switch the names of Colorado’s Mt. Democrat and Republican Mountain, so that the GOP peak would be higher… Needless to say, the U.S. Geological Survey was cool on the idea.

      What a dork.

      1. Saw that on  Johnson is the “Democrat” eastbound and Eisenhower is the “Republican” westbound lane on I-70.

        Now that he’s a “federal” legislator instead of a state legislator, he’s not only after our mountains but our tunnels. 

        It’s within Lamebrain’s harebrain of a brain to try to do something as idiotic as this, whether it’s a farce or not. I’ll say this, if the Republicans were in the House majority, it would be the kind of high priority legislation Lamebrain the hairbrain would conjure up. 

      1. Jeff Crank would be in office.  But politics is a messy, imperfect business and we’re going to have to accept Lamborn.  He has actually done a fine job thus far–hasn’t said or done anything stupid–and has been strong on defending the war and helping Republicans set themselves up for victory next year.  Jeff Crank should be looking at running for the state legislature so he can position himself for higher office.

        1. I’m sorry for screaming in my headline, but Lamborn hasn’t done anything.  And do we measure his success because he “hasn’t said or done anything stupid”?  Hell, my dog meets that qualification.

          1. He went to some of the votes on his first day in office…and by some I mean the ones he didnt miss because of the “faulty buzzer system” in his office.

  2. Ok, maybe not Doug himself, but Doug’s kind.  The more ultra-conservative they are and out of touch with moderate voters, the more they’re going to screw themselves over.  They *still* haven’t figured this out.  The GOP has been hijacked by people like Lamborn and they’re not doing anything about it.

    1. In spite of what logic says, DDGLQ made a good point to me the other day. That is that moderate GOPers do NOT do a good job at the polls here in Colorado. In fact, IIRC, at the last election, the great majority of the GOPers that were elected are hard right wingers.

      I have been mulling that over for the last few days, and he is absolutely correct. It would appear that hard GOPers can win in this state as well as in pres. And how many liberals have been elected? Moderate Dems won, but liberals? Only in well known liberal areas. Until you dems get your act together and quite fighting each other, The USA will continue to see our nation head downhill (deficits, corruption, invasion, erosion of rights, etc). 3rd parties canidates (i.e. Libertarians and greenies) are blocked because everything is weighted to a 2 party system. It is in the hands of the dems to start learning some good lessons from the black hats (save the nasty stuff). And based on an earlier story, I would not bet on that.

      1. I’m a very partisan Republican who lives and breathes within the party, but our political system is ill as are both parties..  The Mark Foley and Jack Abaramoff affairs, as well as the today’s news that the NRCC is going to keep a terrorist’s donations, demonstrates that in Washington there is some sort of a warp that absolutely corrupts people–their consicences and their common sense that most of us in the middle of America come to intrinsically.

        On the other hand, here in Colorado the system seems to be working swimmingly.  The Democrats woke up to the electoral reality of Colorado’s center-right (but avidly independent) ideological streak and adjusted by throwing up solid Democrats like Bill Ritter and the Salazar Brothers.  So nobody, neither Republican nor Democrat, should be surprised at where we are at now.  Colorado is not a terribly partisan state, as opposed to, say, Massachusetts or Utah, and as such although Republicans have registration advantages, voters can smilingly support a Democratic majority as long as it doesn’t stray from the sensible pragmatism it has promised.

        Most people in Colorado distrust government and only want their legislative input when individuals and communities can’t take care of things themselves.  People quite simply want to be left alone to raise their families, educate their kids, and give them the opportunity to grow into decent, successful young adults.  When it comes to government, no news is almost always good news.  That idea should be the foundation for electoral success of either party. 

        1. “The Democrats woke up to the electoral reality of Colorado’s center-right (but avidly independent) ideological streak and adjusted by throwing up solid Democrats like Bill Ritter and the Salazar Brothers.  So nobody, neither Republican nor Democrat, should be surprised at where we are at now.”

          Careful, next you’ll be saying you vote for the individual, not the party. 

          The Dems will get around to self-destructing.  It’s early; wait. 

        2. Oddly enough, I think long and hard about what you and other righties say. I don’t agree with most of your philosophy, But I do think about it (which is the reason why I am now willing to accept the restriction on abortion).

            It is easy to say that things are working good at the state level. As I have pointed out before, I know a bit about the republican party esp. at the state level (and back in the days of Romer, I had friends that worked at the top level there). The GOP at the state level has numerous problems. Just a little bit is showing up in Jeffco recently. There is a GREAT deal more corruption that is known by at least 2 of the top ppl and being allowed. It is why I voted dems, hoping to God that they would get past their normal pettiness. But now, I am disgusted by the likes of Fitz-Gerald that attacks Polis and 41, almost certainly as a posturing for the future election. Likewise, the idea that the state should debate about the war? Give me a  break. IMHO, W. belongs in Leavenworth for a number of reason, but that belongs in D.C., not at a state level.

          American politics (and I would argue the republicans deficits, corruption and immoralities) is killing America. It is time to change it. BTW, your last paragraph is why I do not accept the republican policies. Currently, they routinely interfere with citizen’s lifes. 

      2. You are putting the impetus on dems to stop infighting, because the only way the country will get better is if the dems are in control? I agree that the country does better with dems in control.

        Its not really a spite of logic when you consider who votes in the primaries. If there is a primary between a moderate and a hardcore right winger, the winger will get more money, support from the party, volunteers, and a greater percentage of the vote. Who will moderates vote for?

  3. the election of Lamborn proves that you indeed can fool some of the people all of the time.  The more conservative the better appears to be the motto down here. To get more conservative than Lamborn, the Republicans will have to recruit a fascist.

  4. This is a story of a man who was just arrested who gave huge amounts of money to both terrorist groups and the GOP:


    See, I told you–the terrorists and insurgents WANT the U.S. to stay (and therefore want the GOP to win) because then the terrorists/insurgents have a “Western Crusader” to fight, and they get more money, support, notoriety, fame, and have a place in their history books as “heroes”.  If our troops leave, as the Democrats and a few Republicans want, then the terrorists lose big time.

    1. The simple fact is that W. and his invasion has done more for Al Qaeda in 4 years than OBL, et. al. has done in 20 years. Many of these ppl do not want to give up their life fighting an intractable enemy (us). But, when you continually kill their family, invade their lands, etc. then we are the common enemy. BTW, invading Iraq by itself was not the killer. It was how stupid we have been after.

  5. And I can’t believe this hokey Canon City paper actually called him ‘ultra-conservative.’  What, exactly, makes Lamborn ULTRA-conservative as opposed to the good ol’ regular conservativism of his district?  Lamborn’s perfectly right, conservative values and the candidates who espouse them will win the day both in Colorado and nationally.  The problem is that there’s only a few good men with the talent and will to articulate exactly what it means to be a conservative.  Lamborn won with an unflinching conservatism in a year when Republicans simply stunk up the house.  I suspect that will be the case in 2008. 

    1. sadly, next to Lamborn, Bush is actually articulate.

      But aside from the personal issues I have with having inarticulate people representing me in anyway, the “conservative values” these men espouse are frightening.

      They are liars who rave about the importance of “supporting the troops” while voting to cut the budget to veterans.  When it has been shown that many of our veterans are being treated in a rat infested hospital ward, where is their outrage? I am sure Bush is too busy with his Halliburton friends and Lamborn is too busy cozying up to those who would destroy public school for the sake of his friends who would love to have schools for profit!

      But it does not surprise me. The conservative view fits….care about the soldiers enough to send them to war with cheerleading squads while ignoring them and their families when they return injured and in deep emotional and financial need.  While the conservatives LOVE government when they can use it to kill, maim and destroy to keep the oil men and their families rich, they HATE government when it is used to help the poor and injured.  Fits in the pro-life who are mostly pro birth.  They lament over the sanctity of life in utero and could care less after the baby is born and resent any government programs to either help these poor children and their families, and resent programs to help avoid unwanted pregnacy.  How dare government help those poor lazy, mentaly ill and their families.  They are not pro-life..they are pro birth.  Once the child is born it can rot in a hell on earth as long as no money is taken from the conservatives’ bank accounts.
      And if God is anything like God at all, I suspect many of us would become atheists.

      What kind of God supports the greed and pomposity spewed by some leaders of the conservatives anyway?

        1. and it is not just today… the abject hypocrisy of the conservative movement.  It sours a lot of things for a lot of people.  Just ask the men and women at Walter Reed, or the retirees from Exxon who are and will be working forever; or the “collateral damage” folks who watch their babies die so a few rich oil men can have even more money.

          That kind of lying and hypocrisy makes a lot of things feel pissed in…

              1. One of my favorites of all time.  Picasso’s response to Germans testing their new war machines on civilians with the blessing of Franco.

                Covered up in the UN when Colin Powell went to make his pro-war pitch.  How do “they” do that with a straight face?

            1. comes from my experiences.  Living in Colorado Springs and CD-5 limits lots and lots of things…..for lots and lots of people, all because of the dominant closed minded conservatives, who either vote their greed or their sanctimony.

  6. that talked about the 2008 Presidential race.  It commented that the Democrats were running to the left and the Republicans were running to the right.  Who’s left to represent the vast majority of us who are somewhere in the middle?

      1. That by the time of the general election it’s too late.  The righties and the lefties have already secured their respective party nominations.

        1. and that’s why the Rs make a run to the middle while the eyes of the nation are on them during convention, leaving the national viewers with the impression that the GOP is just right of center. When convention is over and they’re campaigning on a more local level, they run to the far right because the party loyalists turn out for the local campaign events as opposed to the more moderate national audience of the national convention.

    1. the MIDDLE again, there will be a problem.  Since 1980 the middle has moved steadily to the right, and now, under this fascist fundie, the middle is somewhere to the right of Attila the Hun and the Crusaders.

      Independents who are REALLY independent need to pay close attention to what is happening.  We are losing our democracy to the rich and powerful.  And it is scary.  Until the far left can pull hard enough to make the middle a REAL middle again, we are all losers.

  7. Whatever points Lamborn wants to make about Democrats is lost for want of his having the moral authority with which to lecture us.

    As Doug perhaps wrote in the Human Events article (but probably not as it’s not written in “Porky Pig” language), ” . . . and when the Constitution is ignored for the sake of partisan gain, it becomes clear that we are in for a long two years,” it rather makes me think instead that he should have kept in mind that when he was employing the likes of the Sleeze Brothers and Pat Tumor to do his dirty work, it is he who ignored common decency for personal gain of the seat he so indecently occupies.  To Lamborn, I reply that what is clear is that it is the citizens of the 5th CD that are in for a very long two years putting up with you.  I trust their grievous error will be rectified in ’08. 

  8. for 08?  I just got a full color full page fold open brochure from Lamborn touting his constituent services.  With one picture of him listening intently to a man in a military uniform.

    He is a pathetic little man.  i shudder to think of the legislation that he would be sponsoring if the Republicans had the majority right now.

  9. The 2006 election showed that the Republican Party was out of touch with the voter, not because the conservative principles of smaller government, lower taxes, and individual freedoms were no longer those of the average American, but because they were no longer those of the average Republican elected official.  They are however the principles of Doug Lamborn.  A refreshingly solid conservative who will do much good for the Republican Party, Lamborn is raising an alarm about the abuses of Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats of the 110th Congress because he knows that should the Democrats be permitted to stifle debate and unconstitutionally force their extreme agenda through the House over the next two years, the country will suffer the grave consequences. 

    When attempting to criticize another for failing to get his facts straight, it is generally a good idea to get your own facts straight.  Human Events is a printed publication.  And, the edition I received in the mail this week had, on the cover, a 750+ word piece written by Rep. Doug Lamborn which flays (not slays) the Democrats for their abuses.  But I’m sure there is certainly a good explanation for this little discrepancy.

    1. Talk about the pot calling the kettle black!

      And you guys do this with a straight face?  If the Dems are abusing their power, it is because they learned well over the last 12 years. 

      BTW, we can never be as good as you.

      1. As I said, the Republicans lost touch with the smaller government values of the party.  Thus, the GOP needed someone like Lamborn who appreciates the Reagan philosophy that “government has an inborn tendnecy to grow.  And, left to itself, it will grow beyond the control of people.  Only constant complaint by the people will inhibit its growth.”  He is a Republican who will not allow government to grow and overspend just to secure political favors and reelection.

      2. Don’t worry, Lauren.  When anyoone tries to defend the “principles” of Doug Lamborn, they’re also defending those of the Sleeze Brothers and Pat Tumor, whose “principles” combined in that pot with Lamborn are a pestilential kool-aid of “principles” like Jim Jones served up to his followers.  Let those who want to drink from Lamborn’s little potty do so but most people don’t like what they’ve seen from Lamborn, the Sleeze Brothers and Pat Tumor, and in 2008 they’re going to clean house–and throw the pot out with Lamborn in it.

        1. I don’t know anything about Lamborn other than what I read in here, so I assume he is either Hitler, Beavis, or Butthead, or a combination of the three. 

          1. But, if you want to roll all three of them into one, then that’s someone with whom Lamebrain would compare with favorably.  See there.  I’ve finally said something nice about Lamebrain.  I thought it impossible.

          2. who sat in a forum in Woodland Park and explained that I should vote for him because “I was chosen by God to do his work in Washington”. Quite bluntly, any person who will make a statement like that will never get my vote.

    2. dealing with K Street over my career. I must sadly say in was the mid 80’s Republicans that partsianized (I know but I still think it should be a word) the DC lobbying machine. In the 70s and early 80s, the standard practice for every lobbying firm was to hire one senior Democrat and one senior Republican and they would each cover their side of the aisle. The infamous quote on K Street was Newt’s “I don’t want to talk to you unless everybody – and I mean the woman answering the phone – is a Republican”.

      Lamborn is complaining because the Democrats haven’t reversed the rules of debate instituted over the last six years. Don’t tell me – after the “nuclear option” discussed over filibusters, the the Republican majority was receptive to debate. Let’s call fair fair – I would prefer the rules to shift back but this is also some “what goes around, comes around”. On a schoolyard baseball game, when you change the rules when you’re at bat and then try to change them back when the other team comes up the response isn’t pretty. I don’t think this helps Doug appear anything but a whiner out of touch with reality.

      1. When the Republicans took over the House in 1994 they allowed more participation by the Dems than the Republicans are being allowed here.  The Democrats contributed over 40 amendments to the “Contract with America.”  Furthermore, it’s not a bunch of kids playing on the schoolyard, the impact of laws made by this congress will have serious implications for the future of the United States.  Democrats need to allow the voice of the minority to be heard, compromise, as demonstrated throughout our history, makes for better legislation.

        As for the partisanship among lobbying firms and interest groups it has been on the rise, but responsibility for this is shared by both sides–and it isn’t necessarily detrimental to the process.  I am surprised that an insider who knows the workings of the system would identify himself as a “Rockefeller Republican” and expect a conservative to give credance to his theories.

        1. I would say that coming from a Republican, those observations are of even greater credibility than others might have.

          I can’t speak for your 40 Dems offering amendments to the Contract On America, but here’s why I doubt it:  The COA wasn’t law.  It was a policy stunt, albeit a good one, by the R’s.  So why would the D’s join in? 

          Further, by the end of The Reign of Terror by the R’s, it was widely known that they had a “take no prisoners” strategies.  As Dems would offer amendments or alternative legislation, it was always killed in committee.  You wonder why the Dems never had an Iraq plan, a healthcare plan?  They have, but they were shouted down.

          I do not approve of highly partisan tactics by either side.  But now “you” aren’t holding our heads underwater anymore, and guess who’s gonna be bobbing for apples.  Congressional Karma, dude.

          1. A Rockefeller Republican isn’t a Republican it is worse than a liberal. 

            It wasn’t 40 Dems offering amendments to the Contract with America, it was 45 amendments offered by Dems.  The Contract with America wasn’t a policy stunt, it consisted of 28 bills, and the Congressional Democrats “joined in” because they cared about the legislation passed by the House and took seriously their vital role as the minority party, just as the Reps would like to do now. 

            As for Iraq, the House as a whole didn’t have an “Iraq Plan,” the majority, including many Democrats, voted to go to war with Iraq.  Nobody is claiming that the war has gone well, or as expected.  The Democrats are criticizing the war and new strategy without offering any substantive alternatives to the plan.  A tactic they used in the past 2 elections.

            The ball is in the Dems’ court now, so we’ll see if they are more than just talk…but I think you will end up being very disappointed at the end of these two years.  Of course in 2008 you won’t hold the Dems’ responsible for their failures, you will attempt to pin the blame on the Republicans…not any easy task if you don’t allow them to have any involvement in the legislative process.

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

54 readers online now


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