CD-5 Republicans charging admission for Democracy

from the Hal Bidlack campaign.

Colorado Springs – An admission charge will be required to see the debate between Republican Congressional candidates Bentley Rayburn and Jeff Crank this evening.  Lt Col Bidlack (Ret.) believes that all Americans should have the opportunity to participate in democracy, not just those who can afford to pay for it.

“There shouldn’t be an admission charge,” said Bidlack.  “There is no required donation to hear my positions on issues.  It’s unfortunate that that isn’t true of the Republican candidates.”  

This is bizare – rather than begging people to come listen (the normal situation) they’re charging them? Are they that short of money?

36 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Barron X says:

    .

    The GOP did not conduct a debate tonight.  It was run by the Lincoln Club of Colorado, which is a private club for Republicans, but not a party entity.  

    The cosponsor was a law firm.  

    I don’t believe anyone was turned away for not paying.  Some people had to leave because the hall was stiflingly hot.  

    Besides Hal, me, the TV crews and about 5 others,

    everyone else there in the crowd of over 200 acted like a rabid partisan.  

    It was a fun time.

    .

    • DavidThi808 says:

      So who won in terms of more cheering?

      • Who won the debate:

        * on crowd support?

        * on rational responses?

        * on “gotcha” moments?

        Were the debate questions decent?  Anything particularly outstanding, or was it a testimony to the sad state of GOP affairs?

        • Barron X says:

          .

          who’s more perceptive than me.  

          Jim said that Jeff came across as a typical politician,

          and guessed that he had been knee-deep in politics since he was a teenager.  He has.  

          But his observation on Bentley was a surprise.

          Jim thought that he was in the race as a matter of pride,

          and speculated that he would not be able to stoop down and partake in the give-and-take that Congress requires.  

          ZINGERS ?

          Have you followed the story about the deal the two had, whoever was ahead by a certain date would continue, and the other would drop out ?

          Well, that was the hottest exchange.

          Now, Jim pointed out that they were given the questions in advance,

          and had notes for each question that they referred to.

          At one point, I thought Bentley was reading one answer.  

          Well, Jeff didn’t need notes for this exchange.  

          He was livid; his hands were visibly shaking.  

          I thought he was questioning Bentley’s integrity at one point, drawing catcalls from the Rayburn crowd.  

          Jeff denied that he did.  

          Both showed real toughness.  

          The most touching moment was when Jeff told about his son Joel being diagnosed with diabetes.  

          He made me tear up.  I know something about making crowds cry (5th CD Assembly, 2006.)  

          He’s a much better speaker than me, and I’m pretty good.  

          Who’s you hero ?

          Both said Jesus.  Sounded to this not exemplary Christian like a pander.  

          But Bentley went on to describe his father’s courage.  Extremely moving.  He choked up; very authentic.  Even Jeff commented what a great guy Bentley Sr. was.  

          Jeff also said Reagan was a hero of his.  Sounded like another pander.  

          .

      • Barron X says:

        .

        close to 100 each,

        but the Rayburn crowd was twice as loud.

        There was a Rayburn contingent from around Cripple Creek

        (his family has had property there for many years, despite the “carpetbagger” harping)

        and they were the loudest.  

        There was some heckling

        (I’m one to talk)

        and I thought it might have been them,

        though I’m often wrong.

        .  

  2. ColoradoPolitical says:

    Who cares what Bivouac or Bidlack or whatever his name is has to say.  That guy will do anything to try to get some attention.

    In the mean time Lamborn wins the primary with 50% of the vote and the general election with 70%. Doug will be in Congress for as long as he wants to be.  

    • Barron X says:

      .

      Maybe they too would like to stay a long time.  

      Both opposed tax breaks for alternative energy, and plan to drill our way – offshore and that Alaskan reserve – to lower gas prices.  

      Both support having the states decide if kids should be able to carry guns to high school.  

      .

      When the moderator, John Zakem, allowed each candidate to ask the other candidate one question,

      Rayburn directed his one question to Doug Lamborn.

      Alas, Doug was too busy to attend, what with the votes scheduled for today.  He declined to send a representative/ stand-in.  

      Both emphasized that there’s more to being a Congressman than just votes.  They said that all 3 would probably vote the same way, pretty much.  What differentiated them, they said, is the other stuff – leadership on local issues; being accessible to the entire District; hiring better staff than Lamborn did.  

      Both, but especially Jeff, said that the GOP had gotten off track and was not really a conservative party anymore.  He said that he wouldn’t just stand up to Pelosi,

      but he would stand up to GOP leadership in the House.  

      Hmmmmmm.

      .

      • jericho says:

        I personally like the point about Lamborn voting today. While his oppenents were talking about what they would do if ever elected to any office, Lamborn was in DC doing his job. Too bad his responsibilities as an elected Congressman kept him away from this little event.

        • H.Res. 1312, commemorating the 25th anniversary of the Space Foundation.  (The resolution was part of a theme, with similar resolutions on the 50th anniversary of NASA and the 25th anniversary of Sally Ride’s first trip into space, making her the first woman in space.)

        • Barron X says:

          .

          wasn’t it fun ?

          Anyone else attend ?

          I sat in the first row, stage left, right behind the third TV camera.

          .  

        • gopstudent says:

          Lamborn had ample opportunity to attend.  The Lincoln Club, Rayburn and Crank all said they would schedule the debate around Lamborn’s schedule.  He still refused.  He did not miss the dabate because he was voting, he missed it because he knows he will get his clock cleaned.

          • Mr. Accountability says:

            It sounds like it was a great forum for new ideas and differences of opinion….Debates are only good when you have candidates who actually have different views on the issues.  The only thing Doug missed last night was Crank’s Oscar worthy performance on integrity.  

      • One Queer Dude says:

           And did anyone bring up the question of abuse of the Congressional franking privilege?

        • Barron X says:

          .

          but it was mentioned in the opening remarks, in the closing remarks, Rayburn used his one question for his opponent to ask Lamborn a question, and it was referenced several more times.

          .  

  3. Barron X says:

    .

    Middle of the Road says I’m just retarded,

    but others have observed an unhealthy fixation on one issue.  

    I truly believe that it is by far the most important matter our country is involved in.

    Our course on this matter tells the world who we really are, despite what our Constitution and Declaration say.  

    I was surprised that there wasn’t even one question on that issue.  

    There was, however, a question on the “Global War on Terror,” which is more popular with Republicans.  

    In his answer, Jeff said that we need to “stay the course” on that other issue that should not be named.  

    He hinted that “victory” of some sort would eventually be achieved in that unnamed topic, if we just don’t lose our will.  

    Bentley answered the GWOT question by estimating that 7% of all Muslims are terrorists, and with 1.48 billion Muslims worldwide,

    that meant we have about 100 million of them rascals to kill.  Not an exact quote.  

    .

  4. Barron X says:

    .

    It’s going to be harder to mock them here in the future.  

    It will take a little encouragement from the community.

    .  

  5. rwrgop says:

    But has anyone told the Lt. Col. that Crank and Rayburn didnt host the event and weren’t the ones charging admission?  Furthermore, regarding the fact that there “is no required donation to hear (Bidlack’s) position on issues,” has anyone told him yet that voters in the Republican primary dont care what the Democratic side show has to say.  Save it for the general.  (By the way, I thank the Lt. Col. for his service to our country, I just think it is important that someone knows what they are talking about before sending out press releases criticizing the candidates for doing things they arent doing, like charging admission to debates.)

  6. seeshore says:

    Yesterday and the day before Crank had sent out robo-calls.  These calls, some of you may have received them, are negative, rely on out of context anecdotes and in some cases are complete lies! This shows that Jeff Crank is a mud-slinging dirty campaigner who will stoop to ANY LEVEL to get elected. What about the pledge to not go negative? This guy is all pledges for show with no substance. Just look at his record on earmarks (see diary).

    • Big Red says:

      If your going to accuse someone of something, let’s hear the facts.

      • seeshore says:

        Well for starters, Crank is campaigning now to make Lamborn look bad, which is negative campaigning.  Concerning the dog fighting bill, voting against is DOES NOT mean that Lamborn supports criminals, which is what the ad states.  Rather it means that Lamborn supports smaller government and will hold the line against redundant federal regulation. Crank’s ad states that Lamborn voted for a tax increase, which is a LIE, Lamborn had never NEVER voted for a tax increase. To say so is a LIE and dirty politics! Crank can not win on his own record, so he has to make his opponents look bad.  

        • Mr. Accountability says:

          Big suprise from a desperate campaign.  Things will only get better as we get closer to the election.

        • See, the government is actually supposed to pass laws regarding criminal behavior.  Even “small” governments.

        • rwrgop says:

          Of course he has gone dirty.  It will get worse and worse until the primary.  I am predicting that we will witness some of the most depraved desperate campaigning we have every seen.

        • snow says:

          Founding Father John Adams said, “Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence.”

          The facts are that Doug Lamborn said repeatedly in writing and in television ads and on his web site, “I have never supported a tax increase.”

          The facts are that when Doug was a candidate for the Legislature in Kansas in 1982 he supported increases in alcohol, cigarette and motor vehicle taxes and a severance tax.

          It is also interesting to note that in the Doug Lamborn newspaper advertising from 1982 he did not advertise himself as a “conservative”.  

          On the dog fighting bill…The Lamborn campaign can spin this vote however they want but the facts are this:   WHEN DOUG LAMBORN WAS GIVEN THE CHANCE TO JOIN SENATOR WAYNE ALLARD, A VETERINARIAN BY TRADE, IN PROTECTING DOGS AND OTHER ANIMALS, DOUG LAMBORN SAID NO AND VOTED TO PROTECT CRIMINALS LIKE MICHAEL VICK WHO ABUSE ANIMALS.  

          Shame on you Doug Lamborn, one of the most Dog friendly cities in America deserves better from its representative.  Doug needs to find another issue on which to stand on principle.  His judgement is just plain wrong on this issue.  

          • Discernment in CD5 says:

            Snow, you need not YELL by using CAPS. It makes you sound like a bitter, sore loser.

            Dog fighting – state laws already deal with dog fighting. We need less federal redundent law making, not more. True conservatives know this. Lamborn was right to resist this unnecessary federal law.

            Supporting tax increases – your Crank generated talking points are grasping at straws on this one.

            Let’s really compare Crank and Lamborn on taxes.

            Lamborn – The truth is that in his 14 years in public office, Lamborn has never supported a tax increase. In fact, he was the sponsor of successfully passed legislation resulting in the biggest tax cut in Colorado history.

            Crank – In April 2001, Crank supported SCIP01 to vastly expand government spending in Colorado Springs, even though voters rejected it.  In September 2001, Crank led the chambers efforts to raise taxes and increase government debt.  In June of 2002, Crank organized support to oppose city ballot measures that would have cut taxes and government spending.  Also in 2002, Crank organized a group formed to support passage of ballot measures 1A and 1B to increase taxes on El Paso county voters.  Voters rejected the ballot measure.  In 2003, Crank supported amendment 32 to increase property taxes by $4.4 billion and claimed it wasn’t enough debt and taxes, the government needed more.  In 2004, Crank helped fund the “Go with 1A” campaign, a sales tax increase.

            It is clear that Lamborn has credibility on tax cuts and Crank does not.

  7. Barron X says:

    .

    http://www.gazette.com/video/i

    This was broadcast live on Colorado Springs Channel 9,

    by the Channel 5/30 news team.

    .  

  8. ColoradoPolitical says:

    Lamborn wins the primary with 51%.  Bidlack may do as well as Fawcett but that is not saying much. What did Fawcett spend $1 million and got 38%.  

  9. Win Ah says:

    I just received a recorded call from the Crank campaign.  Upon stating that I was voting for Gen. Bentley Rayburn, the questions asked me were of the utmost character slandering, mud slinging, unethical type- having nothing to do with qualifications of leadership and experience of my chosen candidate.

       I was at the debate last night when Crank touted that he would hold a clean campaign Ha  talk about integrity!  Is this the way he would fight in congress – this represents desparation in my opinion.

       It does not say in our Constitution that a person seeking political office must “own real estate in the district, or pay taxes.”  

       Intimidation is the last bastian you have when you have found no cause to degrade your opponent.  

        My vote is going to a man of the highest character, education, leadership, and integrity – Gen. Bentley Rayburn.    

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.