Greeley Tribune: Musgrave “At It Again”

Yesterday’s lead editorial blasts her “cynical ploy”:

Like one of Pavlov’s dogs reacting to the sound of a bell, the 4th Congressional District incumbent has responded to a competitive election by reverting to form and signing on as a co-sponsor of a bill that would ban gay marriage.

The Tribune has taken her to task previously for using this issue to fuel her candidacy and stint in Congress. She backed off for a while — after narrowly winning her re-election bid in 2006 — but now that it’s election time, she’s co-sponsoring a Constitutional amendment that would define marriage as between a man and a woman. Musgrave became a co-sponsor of House Joint Resolution 22 on June 11. The measure was introduced by Rep. Daniel Lungren, R-Calif., on Feb. 6.

Simply put, this amendment is a bad idea. Gay marriage is a social issue that should not be legislated. If states decided to make gay marriage legal, that is a great example of state’s rights, and it should not be overturned by federal legislation.

Musgrave, R-Colo., built much of her reputation supporting similar legislation. Regardless of your opinion about gay marriage, it’s difficult to view this move as anything less than a cynical ploy to capitalize on voters’ fear on the eve of a competitive election. National Democrats targeted Musgrave’s seat as one a Democrat — Betsy Markey of Fort Collins — has a good chance to win this fall.

Musgrave’s move, of course, may be the result of pure principle. If this is true, we hope she will apply that kind of principled stand when it comes to issues that will help northern Colorado residents build better lives during difficult times…

6 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Arvadonian says:

    I’ve never heard a cow sing, but I think this one may just be sining a swan song….

  2. Middle of the Road says:

    I really loved the last two paragraphs:

    Musgrave certainly has the right to speak her mind and to sponsor bills she believes are in the best interest of northern Colorado. With gas prices rising ever higher, the condition of the economy sinking ever lower, and the country engaged in a war on two fronts, we think Musgrave will have plenty of work to do without engaging in the politics of fear.

    We hope that she remembers her obligation to represent the entire 4th District. We hope Musgrave will be more than a one-issue representative.

    Ouch. Even the Greeley Tribune has got her number.  

  3. rocco says:

    In January 2006, Musgrave and Penn. Senator Santorum announced that the top conservative domestic agenda for the year would be ridding hotels of pornographic movies and protecting traditional marriage. What a difference 2 plus years makes. The most “traditional” voters are paying 4 bucks a gallon, 2.75 for a loaf of bread, and just hoping to hold on to the house. And as the neocon war drums continue, gas will still rise, the market will continue to teter, and Musgrave has to accept responsibility. If Betsy is going to grab this seat, this is the year. The Life at Conception proposal will help Musgrave with the basest of the base, but the middle is falling away.  

    • Mr. Toodles says:

      Will really only secure the most far right of the base. The potential impacts of the amendment extend much further than just abortion, it impacts all in vitro fetilization, stem cell research, birth control, life saving treatments for pregnant women, inheritance rights, the list goes on.

      For the libertarian-esque republicans in CD-4 this will fail. Like you say, she will lose the middle, but she will also probably lose the people who are to the right, but are anti-government intervention/health and life exception pro-lifers.  

  4. rocco says:

    Concur, Mr. Toodles

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.