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*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%

30%

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
August 28, 2007 05:21 PM UTC

America's Most Conservative Newspaper Teaches Dems A Lesson

  • 3 Comments
  • by: davidsirota

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

The Colorado Springs Gazette is one of the two most conservative papers in America (the other being the Waterbury Republican-American). This is no secret to anyone who has either read the paper, or who is in the journalism industry. But the political continuum is a circle, not a line, meaning that on some issues, ultraconservatives and progressives can make common cause. Today’s Gazette editorial on the bipartisan support for warrantless domestic wiretapping and spying is a good example – and a good lesson for Democratic “strategists” cloistered in Washington with their weak-kneed and self-defeating pathologies.

Here’s an excerpt:

“What do you do when critics call the legality of your secret spying program into question? If you’re the Bush administration, you defend it, by becoming ever more secretive and by claiming to be above the law. The legal basis for the Terrorist Surveillance Program, which was launched soon after 9/11 to capture conversations of potential terrorists, has always been shaky. The Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 outlawed warrantless eavesdropping on Americans, and in 2005 it was revealed that the Terrorist Surveillance Program did just that. Though supposedly altered so as to operate within the law, the surveillance program continues to be defended on alarming and seemingly contradictory grounds — that its legality depends on operational details too secret to be revealed, and that legality isn’t an issue, anyway, since President Bush’s powers as commander in chief cannot be so bound by law…We see the justifications of executive privilege as little more than weak excuses. Earlier this month, this same logic of secrecy, which plays on people’s fears, helped excuse a further weakening of the law as Congress, in the Protect America Act, effectively gutted FISA protections against warrantless surveillance…Now that Congress has promised to revise this temporary measure, Bush and Cheney’s continued excuses are all the more intolerable, obstructing Congress’ ability to examine the genesis of the Terrorist Surveillance Program.”

Pundits and Democratic “strategists” in Washington, D.C. clearly have absolutely no concept that issues of privacy, civil liberties and government intrusion do not fit conveniently on their preconceived – and childishly ignorant – notions of “red” and “blue.” They dismiss the vast American heartland as just a Republican Party monolith that supposedly supports all efforts to strip citizens of their freedom, and they believe that in order to start winning in this heartland, they just have to out-Republican the Republicans on these issues.

We know this not just because they capitulated last month by rubber-stamping Bush’s warrantless domestic spying program, but because they all but run out and tell reporters just how totally out of touch they really are when it comes to these issues. Remember how Sen. Chuck Schumer (D) claimed that his efforts to preserve the most odious parts of the Patriot Act were designed to protect “our Democrats in red states?” Remember how the insulated Washington media fawned all over him when he said this, billing him as an amazing political guru? And remember how, at the very same time, Montana’s Jon Tester was campaigning against the Patriot Act as a way to attract support from libertarian-leaning voters? Yeah – in a race that was decided by a tiny margin, had Schumer’s drumbeat been any louder, it may have lost Tester the Montana senate seat and Democrats might not be in the majority today.

I learned the political lesson inherent in the Gazette’s spot-on editorial when I watched my friend Bernie Sanders in the House. As Rolling Stone’s terrific profile showed, he worked closely with people like Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX) and then-Rep. Butch Otter (R-ID) to forge left-right coalitions that passed legislation reforming the Patriot Act over the objections of Republican congressional leaders. Paul and Otter, you may recall, are among the most conservative elected officials in America. They know – sadly, more than many Democratic “strategists” in Washington – that there is nothing “weak” or “politically dangerous” about standing up for privacy and personal freedom and against government power grabs.

In fact, it’s the other way around: Democrats are exuding weakness and are walking into political peril by subscribing to the cartoonish “red” vs. “blue” outlook of those Washington insiders who claim expertise in a national political topography they clearly do not or do not want to understand. As the Gazette editorial shows, the panoply of privacy and civil liberties issues poses great opportunity for Democrats – but only if they show a shred of foresight and reject the absurd Washington conventional wisdom that says helping the most unpopular president in modern history trample Americans’ freedoms is somehow “good politics.”

Cross-posted from Working Assets

Comments

3 thoughts on “America’s Most Conservative Newspaper Teaches Dems A Lesson

  1. Please don’t bold the entire quoted text – it’s a bit harder to read when there’s so much. The blockquote does the job just fine.

    This post has been one of your best to date, BTW.

  2. that is holding up a few of the washington insiders, and most disturbingly one of Colorado’s editorial board, on of how to solve our countries problems. They are more concered with their talking points than with the needs of the community.

    As Paul Krugman made clear, Democrats need to side with the American people rather than with hollow hyperbole from the right wing who puts our children, their health and our future at risk.

    “And conservative opposition to giving every child in this country access to health care is, in a fundamental sense, un-American.”
    http://www.alternet….

    The Colorado Springs Editorial Board has a sick problem if they believe that having almost a million Coloradoans without insurance is merely a cold.

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

40 readers online now

Newsletter

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