Debate Faux Pas in Boulder

(I’ve gotten independent cooraboration on much of this – promoted by DavidThi808)

Last night the debate between Rollie and Cindy got heated.  There were a number of accusations that were not true and this morning there have been a number of emails sent to the press and decision makers in Senate District 18.

These emails are not private and were sent to numerous people, including all press in the district.

The first began with an email from Rollie Heath to the press and Sierra Club and number of other individuals correcting statements he made last night.


From: RollieHeath@

Sent: Thu 7/17/2008 11:28 PM

To:

Subject: Correction

At the Sierra Club debate this evening I erroneously referenced Kerr-McGee when I should have said Pennzoil.  I am contacting the press, Claire Levy and the Sierra Club through this email to note this correction.  I regret this error.  

Rollie Heath

The next email was from Baine Kerr, Cindy’s husband and was sent to the same group of people that Heath campaign copied on the original email.



From: Baine P. Kerr

Sent: Fri 7/18/2008 10:12 AM

To: rollieheath@

Subject: Correcting your correction about Kerr-McGee

I am responding to your correction since it involves me, my family, and my late father.

Last night you told the debate audience that Cindy’s financial disclosure identifies Kerr Interests as a source of income, which you said was Kerr-McGee, an oil company.  That was a untrue, as Cindy explained.  Now your e-mail compounds the falsehood by saying you meant Pennzoil.  Kerr Interests has nothing to do with Pennzoil.  Neither Cindy nor I receive any income from Pennzoil, and we have no ownership interests in the company–not a share.  So you need to correct your e-mail, but that’s not all that needs correcting.

Last night you also said your financial disclosure was true and complete.  But it omits as “sources of income” all your compensation and stock awards from Allied Motion Technologies, IMA Financial, and other corporate boards.  (It notes later your memberships on boards but nowhere discloses that you receive significant income from them.)  Also, you told the debate audience you have had no contact with anyone at CACI for ten years.  But you served on CACI’s board during 1998-2002–four of the last ten years.  

For several weeks we’ve been hearing about your whispering campaign against Cindy through false statements about my father, as though he had anything to do with this race.  My father died seven weeks ago at age 88.  Cindy responded via e-mail on this issue on June 2, yet you continue to tell falsehoods about him.  (I am providing Cindy’s e-mail separately.) Please do not say another word about my father or his career, which, for your information, included the following:

My father was a lawyer whose amazing legal career included working as lead counsel with Thurgood Marshall to void the racially discriminatory provisions of Rice University’s founder’s will as unconstitutional, applying Brown v. the Board for the first time to private universities.  He was a WWII hero who landed on Tarawa, the Marine Corps’ bloodiest battle, and in amphibious assaults on three other Pacific islands.  The photograph of him being carried out on a stretcher after being shot at Guadalcanal was on the cover of Life Magazine. He was a key partner and department head at one of America’s most respected law firms, eventually joining Pennzoil United as general counsel.  He retired from Pennzoil in the early 1990s.  He was an early and longtime advocate of clean energy and energy conservation.  He worked many years for wildlife and forest conservation on the board of the National Forest Foundation.  He was a member of the Board of Governors of Rice University and recipient of the highest honor bestowed by the College of Liberal Arts of the University of Texas.

As hundreds and hundreds of wellwishers at his recent memorial attested, my father was a man of the greatest integrity.  He was buried on May 26 with a  Marine Corps Honor Guard.  The last thing I could have imagined at that moment was that you would soon be attacking Cindy through him and his legacy.  

You describe yourself as a principled person of integrity.  If so, you will correct all false statements about Pennzoil, Kerr-McGee, your financial disclosure, CACI contacts, and what you have been saying about my father behind our backs.  

Boulder has many decisions to make on August 12, 2008.  I have been a colleague and friend of Cindy Carlisle since I first moved to Boulder.  

In 2005, Cindy was the only Regent that sat with a group of angry and frightened Black students for hours and listened to their experiences about the recent racial attacks and emails that were plaguing the University.  Every other CU official from Hank Brown down could not get out of the room fast enough after they delivered their, “We are sorry you are under attack” speech.  But not Cindy.  

I had not met her at the time of this meeting, I had just watched to see who on the CU leadership was going to dedicate themselves to protecting these students and upholding the level of principle and honor that CU should be known for.  Cindy Carlisle was the ONLY ONE!

I introduced myself to her after this meeting and have had nothing but respect for Cindy and her husband Baine.  In my opinion, they have stood up to make CU a better place.

I have been involved with my beloved alma mater for over 20 years.  I am a lifetime member of the alumni and I just retired from the Alumni Board.  I can fairly say that I have been disappointed in the leadership at CU, at times, for not challenging many of the issues that have continually plagued the women and the minority students for decades.  Cindy, by far, has always had her heart and head in the right place for the students.  And for that she has my respect as a colleague and friend.

About Whiskey Lima Juliet

Pot and Politics. Pretty much sums it up.

18 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. DavidThi808 says:

    There are a number of comments from people who were there at Daily Camera article including from a reporter this tidbit:

    Richard Valenty with the Colorado Daily here, with a quick clarification to DarkCloud’s post.

    I did talk to both Cindy Carlisle and Rollie Heath last night after the forum, to get a little clarification on the Kerr-McGee issue. Carlisle said during the debate that the “Kerr” in Kerr-McGee was a different family than that of her husband Baine Kerr, and she reiterated the statement after the debate.

    I told Heath about Carlisle’s post-debate statement, and he reacted by telling me “then there isn’t” a family tie between Baine Kerr and Kerr-McGee. He went on to say his broader debate point was that, in his opinion, neither his past business associations NOR a connection to an oil company should have been relevant points in the race.

    I didn’t have reason to believe that he knew the Kerr-McGee statement was false at the time of the debate or that he knowingly lied. But I did find out later that the late Baine Kerr Sr. was the president of Pennzoil, and I received an e-mail this morning from Heath saying he erroneously mentioned Kerr-McGee when he should have said Pennzoil.

    The Camera has probably also received the Heath e-mail by now, and I anticipate that there will be more to come on this topic. Thanks for now, Richard

    Also more at Shawn Coleman’s blog.

  2. Dabee47 says:

    Why in the world is this on the front page?  Do you really need to remind us all how much you love Cindy for a THIRD TIME?!?!

    You did it back in June.  Fine…wonderful…whatever.  Then you did it again yesterday under the guise of trying to start a debate about not voting for clans or some crap like that.  Now you’re doing it again through Wanda’s diary.  Cut the crap.

    It’s a fine diary and while I have a different view of the series of events that went on regarding my fellow African-American students in 2005, Wanda’s glowing praise for Regent Carlisle is lovely.  But it doesn’t belong on the front page b/c Dave feels the need to remind us how great Cindy is for a third time.

    Now, as for the actual content, why the hell is Baine writing emails about this crap?! If he just wants to correct Rollie’s “correction” then fine.  Seems to me that would be a job for Cindy, ya know, the person actually running for office.  But noooo…Baine wants to complain about Rollie’s “whispering campaign” against the late Mr. Kerr.  Give me a break.  This is a campaign for the state freakin’ senate, not a church picnic.  Whining about gossip just makes Cindy’s campaign look lame…which is sad b/c the whining isn’t even coming directly from her in this case…

    And finally, what the hell is “cooraboration?!”  🙂

    • Danny the Red (hair) says:

      I think it qualifies as news

    • DavidThi808 says:

      First off sorry, I meant collaboration

      Why is it front page? Because you had a candidate lying in a debate. And the evidence points to him knowingly doing so.

      When Bob Schaffer does it we front page it and all of us Dems are thrilled to pile on. Are the rules different when its one of our own?

      As to Baine responding – Rollie attacked his dad. I totally understand why he would be the one to respond.

      How about some answers to these points rather than just complaining that you don’t want them brought up?

      • Dabee47 says:

        it’s really not worth arguing…this is just a blog after all.

        Baine’s response concerning his father is one thing.  His response regarding Cindy’s and his financial disclosure is another.  She’s the one running for office and Rollie’s incorrect statement should have been “corrected” by her, not just used as a platform for Baine to defend his father IMO.  

        I’m all in favor of attacking fellow Dems when they lie, but you can’t prove Rollie did this knowingly.  Is it possible?  Of course.  But you can’t prove it.  It’s entirely plausible that he assumed Kerr and Carlisle received income from Pennzoil b/c the late Baine Kerr was the president of the company.  Further, Rollie’s “correction” came just a few hours after the debate…not a day later or after someone in the press called him on it.  He corrected his Kerr-McGee statement, albeit incorrectly, and moved on to what he assumed was true, and now you’re acting like there’s some trail of corruption within the Heath campaign.  That’s a big jump to make on the word of only Baine Kerr.

        This isn’t some sort of ground shaking controversy.  The only people who are trying to make hay of this are you and Shawn Coleman, Cindy supporters.  Does it deserve to be discussed?  Of course.  But this is a minor point in a campaign much bigger than details about how much money Cindy, Baine, of Rollie make.  

        So, hopefully that answers your questions.

        And, didn’t you mean corroboration, not “collaboration?”  😛

         

        • DavidThi808 says:

          I wasn’t there – this was written by Wanda and Shawn also wrote about it. But as Wanda laid it out above it did strike me as Rollie was making it up as he went.

          What’s interesting to me is there has been no statement from Rollie’s campaign speaking to the issues Wanda raises above. If there were clear answers to this, we would have heard them by now I think.

    • Middle of the Road says:

      Why is Baine writing emails? Because it’s Baine’s father being smeared by Rollie Heath. If somebody talked smack about my dad seven weeks after his death, I’d probably beat the snot out of him.  

      • Dabee47 says:

        When I was a kid my grandparents had a maid  who was Portuguese and had something of a speech impediment.  Every time she said my name (David) it would come out “DAH-bee.”  She never seemed to get the “D” on the end of words…  Anyway, it thus became my nickname and a most appropriate handle on blogs and free email accounts.  😛

        Oh, and 47 was my favorite number when I was like 8.  Giants’ closer Rod Beck wore it, I was a pitcher, the Giants were my home team, there ya go…

  3. waltzeswithdog says:

    Talk to everyone who has ever worked with Cindy, both on the City Council and on the board of regents, and no one wants her elected and they don’t want to work with her.  That is scary.  But Rollie’s ties to big business, and to the Colorado Association of Commerce and Industry, an organization that has been dragged kicking and screaming into the 21st century – a decidedly anti-worker, anti-environment, organization is also scary.  

    • DavidThi808 says:

      All the other Regents view their job as being cheerleaders for the University. A Regent doing their job is going to piss off the drones holding the other seats.

      As to the City Council members – again anyone who does not follow the powers that be has a rough ride from both sides.

      So a necessary but not sufficient condition (math term) for Cindy having performed a good job is that she does not get those endorsements.

      With that said, I can see voting for either. Or at least until yesterday I could. The trash talking her father in law just after he died, for no real reason, that bothers me a lot. And he sounds like he was an amazing person – Tarawa was a bloodbath.

      • Fidel's dirt nap says:

        The recommendation alone is no problem, however, her story later that she was under the impression there would be other finalists, and that somehow she was duped by the forces of evil, was very weak.  

        Was she “pissing off the drones holding the other seats” then ?  More like not paying attention.

        I am with Waltzes on this one.

      • Jambalaya says:

        Now, as an alum of CU, I’ve seen me some cheerleaders and the CU Regents don’t rate as such.  They have no moves or megaphones.  But what they do have is experience working with Ms. Cindy, and they are NOT impressed.  As somebody who doesn’t know her from Eve, that means a lot to me.  Playing well with others gets things done and if she can’t do that on the picayune board of regents, her chances in the senate aint grand.

  4. DavidThi808 says:

    We have had attacks on WLJ, me, Cindy, etc. We have statements that it’s no big deal and not worth discussing.

    What we haven’t had is any actual defense of what Rollie did.

  5. waltzeswithdog says:

    and poorly researched.  it should give voters an idea of the kind of senator we can expect if he is elected.  Additionally, Cindy’s lack of awareness about Benson, the damage that Trailhead caused and his role in Trailhead shows a lack of political understanding that gives one pause.  I repeat, glad I don’t have to hold my nose and vote for one of them.

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.