President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(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
October 11, 2007 06:20 PM UTC

Ladies and Gentlemen, Your Republican Party Secretary!

  • 47 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols


Check out this embarrassingly-bad letter to the editor that appeared in the online version of the Rocky Mountain News:

Lieutenant Steve Schultz, USNR (Ret), also Secretary of the Colorado Republican Party writes:

Morons who support Move.on.org aren’t happy with the America of our fathers and grandfathers. They want a socialist state, period. Kathy Madden(RMN Letters Oct 2nd) rants about chickenhawks but I wonder how much military experience she has?, especially at the classified level where I worked as a naval intelligence officer for sixteen years. Move.on puppets like Steve Shelton and Kathy Madden have no clue about the big picture, they just hate Bush. Their shallow diatribes don’t include any solutions, just emotional liberal talking points. The U.S. Senate voted 77 to 23 (bipartisan votes) to remove Saddam Hussein. That’s why we’re there.
And no, Bush did not lie, the intelligence services of many countries agreed Saddam was a threat. So did John Kerry, Hillary, Ted and other Democrats. Look it up. Has it been perfect? Of course not. What the Move.on folks don’t want to admit is Islamic fundamentalists are more of a threat to us than President Bush. Unfortunatelyour enemy reads this liberal drivel and is energized to kill more U.S. soldiers. By the way, every time you hear thelinethatthe President has failedto find Bin Laden it isn’t the President who has been puttinghis boots on the ground around the world. He sent us,the soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen of the U.S. Armed Forces. Soyou’re really saying we have failed. Thanks for reminding us, you’ve been a big help. Especially with your cries of we support the troops, but Bush is a failure.

This letter has not been edited.

The letter is so poorly written that its fortunate the News always notes that “this letter has not been edited.” Hey, Lieutenant? You might want to run your next letter by the old spell check. And this is the Party Secretary? Wonder what his meeting notes look like?

Comments

47 thoughts on “Ladies and Gentlemen, Your Republican Party Secretary!

          1. Any chance you could be convinced not to make intolerant remarks about how people educate their kids?  I think a lot of homeschoolers would very much appreciate it, especially since they generally have to defend their decision against enough intolerant people already.

            I have no idea whether Steve Shulz was homeschooled; I doubt you do either.  In either case, there’s still no reason to refer to home-schooled students as “victims”.

            1.   I don’t have a problem with alternatives to public schools.  There are charter schools.  There are private schools, both secular and religious.  (I myself attended public schools K-8 and then private high school, and I think I derived benefits from both.)
                Educators are professionals, whether they work in public or private schools. Most parents are not trained educators.  And those who are probably wouldn’t be foolish enough to try to home school their children.
                IMHO, for an unqualified parent to attempt to home school a kid is a form of child abuse.

              1. ..by sheer luck they might have better odds of creating a competent kid when you view DPS as the alternative – especially if they’re a minority.

                1. Not surprisingly, you’ve got this completely wrong — to fit your name, laughably wrong.  If you want to compare the performance of home-schooling families and public schools, you need to take into account a couple indisputable facts:

                  1. By definition, practically every home-schooling family has at least one parent whose primary activity in life is caring for the children.  These families are financially very secure, and can support themselves on only one income.  All serious research shows that children from these families do better, regardless of their educational choices.  It’s ridiculous, though, to assume that a family would become more financially well-off by choosing to homeschool.  If anything, it’s quite the opposite!

                  2. Minorities don’t do poorly in DPS because they are minorities — nor, by and large, because of overt racial discrimination.  They do poorly because on average, they come from families with lower levels of education among the parents, fewer educational opportunities for the children, a lower probability that parents read with their children at home, a lower chance that parents value homework and encourage their children to learn, and so on.  These are not problems that go away when parents choose to homeschool.

                  Now I would be the last person to tell you that families that choose to homeschool their children should not do so.  In general, my experience is that well-educated parents who have time to homeschool can provide a better quality of education that way.  The benefit of having a student-teacher ratio of somewhere around 1:1 up to 1:4 is just that great.  (It depends, though, on the child and their style of learning, and other factors.)  That said, it is irresponsible to try to push that choice into families where it does not fit, or to present homeschooling as the solution to systematic disparities in education.

                  1. Nowhere did I say that homeschooling was the panacea or a responsible alternative for a large number of students. 

                    I merely pointed out that with a 70% dropout rate among minority students in DPS, playing Xbox all day and smoking pot isn’t going to prepare anyone for life much worse than DPS as it stands. That a homeschooler of any ability will be right some of the time.

                    Do you work in education? 

                    I actually work with low-income, 95% minority kids from DPS.  A whole lot of them.

                    The fact that all of us, across party lines aren’t screaming like mashed cats every day about this poverty/crime bomb that we’ve created with our schools is beyond me.

              2. I just lost a huge amount of respect for you.  I simply don’t understand how you can throw accusations of child abuse at people you don’t know, and have never met.  I realize it’s an exaggeration. Of course, if you really believed what you were saying – that millions of Americans are child abusers and it’s all legal – your life would be dedicated to stopping it.

                You think people are making bad decisions.  Fine.  You choose to use outrageously offensive language to get attention.  That’s not fine.  Learn some compassion and understanding.

                I’ve spent the last six years of my life building programs to educate home-schooled children in math and science.  I do personally know these people; at least forty or fifty families.  It may not matter to you whom you’ve called a child abuser, but it matters very much to me.

                You are a sorry excuse for a human being, and I’m ashamed that you agree with most of my politics.

            2. More often they’re the shooters, apparently.

              I’m sure there are some decent home-school situations out there.  The only two I know apparently involve playing lots of Halo 3 because Mom’s really tired today.

  1. This is who is being paid by the Colorado republicans? I thought Dick Wadhams was bad enough. Wadman really needs to work on checking resumes and writing skills before hiring staff, and allowing them to go public with attacks like this.

    And thanks for reminding the entire state that BUSH HAS FAILED to capture Bin Laden… dead or alive remeber? It’s not the troops fault Bush outsourced the Marines task to mercenaries who were consequently sympathetic to Bin Laden and Al Qaeda.

    1. When we had bin Laden cornered at Tora Bora, someone at the command level decided to go in with minimal troops, relied on local forces who we didn’t know well and who were apparently sympathetic to bin Laden or his money, and left one side of the box open.

      Since then, we’ve made a political decision to leave Pakistan untouched despite their support of nuclear proliferation, known connections to bin Laden, and high probability that bin Laden is in the country.

      It’s not the troops’ fault; look to the upper-level command.

      1. The Marine Corps is pressing to remove its forces from Iraq and to send marines instead to Afghanistan, to take over the leading role in combat there, according to senior military and Pentagon officials.

        http://www.nytimes.c

        Even our Marine Corp. gets it. Bush failed them.

    2. The State Party Secretary probably isn’t a paid position.  No, it is much worse than Dick Wadhams not checking resumes — this is the entire Republican Party Central Committee who is at fault for an embarrassment like this. They elect all of the officers, including the Secretary.

        1. No, both party structures are loosely set out in statutes (and more specifically controlled by party bylaws).  The State Dem Secretary is elected, as well. Carolyn Boller is serving her second elected term in that position.

  2. The U.S. Senate voted to encourage Bush to use all diplomatic means to ensure that Iraq had no WMDs and to verify to the Congress that diplomatic efforts had failed, that use of military force was the only method of enforcing our national security and the UN Security Council resolutions (regarding WMD), and that the action was consistent with other actions (ours and other nations’) to combat terrorism.

    The President did not await the completion of the UN inspection, did not wait for the completion of ongoing diplomatic actions, proceeded with the use of military force when another means of obtaining compliance with UN resolutions was still underway, and took action in spite of a documented lack of any connection between Iraq and 9/11 (and only a limited connection to terrorism in general…).

    So, Lt. Schultz – I looked it up.

    1. This is “right on”?

      Morons who support Move.on.org aren’t happy with the America of our fathers and grandfathers. They want a socialist state, period.

      No, it’s illiterate name-calling.  Neither assertion is supportable.  I’m sure Lt. Schultz of the Coors Brewing Company is getting an earful today from his colleagues in the Colorado GOP.

  3. and retire as a Lieutenant ? 

    that’s 2 promotions –
    Ensign to LTJG, and
    LTJG to Looey –
    in 16 years ? 

    I know a guy who was a failure as a military officer,
    getting the boot after 13 years,
    and he did better than that. 

    Maybe this is all just a complicated inside joke,
    illustrating the term “naval intelligence” in its oxymoronism-ish-ness. 

    Though I confess I knew another guy, USNR, Naval Intel, first name Orel,
    who really did understand the world and how it worked.
    Very sharp. 

    There can’t be all that many Reserve Naval Intelligence units in Colorado,
    so Orel must have supervised this guy at some point. 

    My guess – it took 2 years to figure out Steve’s limited capabilities (they only drill once a month,) and 14 years to kick him out.
    /

  4. anyone else, but I was terribly underwhelmed by Lt. Schultz and his conservative talking point ramblings. Are we sure that Ret. stands for retired rather than for someone who is intellectually challenged?

    1. If Bush is willing to send our troops to Iraq, and hold them hostage in some sick political game he’s playing, is it too much to ask him (and his ilk) why his (and their) daughters are not over in Iraq?

      Jenna Bush says

      “if people really thought about it, they would know it’s not even a practical question.

      http://www.time.com/

      Why is that a stupid question Jenna? Because your elitists neo-conned party and daddy is willing to sacrifice someone else’s sons and daughters in vein, while all you have to worry about is what not to watch on TV because it might hurt your feelings?

      1. that the royal family in England is all to willing to have their children serve in the military (even in war time). 

        Although, c’mon, would you want anyone remotely related to this administration holding a gun—remember what happened the last time Cheney had one?

      2. this one child , who has AIDS, and others like her should use condoms. Honey, there are alot of people out there who should be using condoms.  Only your Daddy wants them to just use abstinence.  No brains, no headaches.
          Wasn’t it the conservatives who said AIDS can be spread by holding hands and sharing food.

      3. At the beginning Jenna responds:

        “I understand that point, but there are many ways to serve our country, and I think my skills are better suited for teaching and representing the U.S. in Latin America through UNICEF.”

        In other words, her skills are better suited for representing her country through a United Nations Organization! Not to mention, like they don’t need teachers and UNICEF reps in Iraq or Afghanistan…especially now?

        1. …are “serving their country” working on his campaign.

          It’s the Republican way; send a poor kid in place of yours, be a hypocrite by supporting the war but not making sacrifices.

          I want to puke just thinking of the audacity of these people. I think they are people, not sure.

  5.   What an oxymoron!  (By the way, for the benefit of Sgt. Schultz, “oxymoron” is a contradiction in terms.  Like jumbo shrimp. Or an honest Republican.)

  6. Let’s take the Lifelong Lieutenant’s logic a little farther. Correcting his misspellings, he wrote:

    “Every time you hear the line that the President has failed to find Bin Laden, it isn’t the President who has been putting his boots on the ground around the world. He sent us, the soldiers, sailors, marines and airmen of the U.S. Armed Forces. So you’re really saying we have failed.”

    By that interesting logic…

    – The Coast Guard and the other first responders to Hurricane Katrina failed… not Bush, Chertoff and Brownie.

    – The soldiers who died or were grievously wounded in Iraq due to lack of proper body and Humvee armor failed… not Bush and Rumsfeld.

    – The firefighters and police who lost their lives on 9/11 failed… not Bush, Clinton, Rice, etc.

    The buck stops anywhere but with Bush, apparently.

    1. Stubborn

      Its one thing to make a wrong decision, but it’s immoral to be stubborn about it.

      Being a partisan, I know we can all be stubborn about politics. However, there is a point when you have to be practical about things, especially when it is devastating our country on every conceivable level. Bush is just one stubborn man, the Republican party is a group of like-minded (backward, stubborn, and selfish) people that are willing to walk the line, even if that means that its not in our nations best interest.

      Feels good to be a Democrat!

  7. Dick doesn’t have control of his people. Surely by now he’s offered Media Training 101 to the executive committee. And, in Media Training 101, the first and last lesson should be nobody communicates with the press unless they clear it through Dick first.

    Also, I’m so terribly distracted by the extra period Mr. Schultz placed between Move and On (Move.On.org)when referring to MoveOn.org.

    So far, I’m not very impressed with Dick and that surprises me.

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

54 readers online now

Newsletter

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