CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese



President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


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

(D) Joe Neguse*


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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks




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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg




CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Dave Williams



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen



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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi




State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
August 02, 2008 04:32 PM UTC

Daily Camera: Rollie Heath for SD-18

  • by: JeffcoBlue

(This is the most important endorsement in this race – promoted by DavidThi808)

Very well written endorsement in a hot primary.

Heath has a long history of serving this area’s social and business needs. The 2002 Democratic candidate for governor was the founding chair of what is now Progress Now, the founding chair of the Democratic Business Coalition, and the founder of Denver’s World Trade Center. He serves on many business and institutional boards, and was chairman of the Mile High United Way 2006 Annual Campaign.

He cares about children and early education, and has direct experience with the K-12 system, including the establishment of a ’90s-era mentoring program for inner city kids in Denver. He supports pre-school education for all of Colorado’s four-year-olds.

He said he wants to start working (on Aug. 13, to be specific) on fiscal reform at the state level, and supports Speaker Andrew Romanoff’s proposal to lift spending limits and provide a savings account for education. The plan retains the public’s right to vote on tax increases. In an interview with the Camera’s editorial board this week, State Treasurer Cary Kennedy called the speaker’s plan a “very workable solution” to TABOR and for education funding in Colorado.

Heath wants to work toward ensuring health care for every Colorado child. He supports incentives to expand the use of wind and solar power in Colorado homes. He is dedicated to working with both sides of the aisle to come up with a comprehensive transportation plan…

This year’s primary was a race marred with mudslinging and some flared tempers on both sides. The Camera’s editorial board agreed that Heath showed some grace under pressure, and his tendency to put past grievances behind him will serve the district well, as he works with legislators across the state.

Heath is the best candidate for Senate District 18. We support his legislative goals for children, the state’s finances and transportation, and he has a proven track record of working with diverse interests to get the job done.


14 thoughts on “Daily Camera: Rollie Heath for SD-18

  1. They had almost nothing to say about Rollie himself, because there isn’t much there except generalities. Take this part for example:

    In an interview with the Camera’s editorial board this week, State Treasurer Cary Kennedy called the speaker’s plan a “very workable solution” to TABOR and for education funding in Colorado.

    That has noting to do with Rollie – to find something with specifics they had to bring up something that has nothing to do with Rollie.

    Rollie has support of 99% of the Boulder Political Elite and the Camera responds to that pressure. And that’s to be expected – local papers do tend to toe the line.

    But don’t call it well written or compelling – they should have done a better job writing this. I support Cindy and I could write a much better pro-Rollie editorial.

    1. I happen to agree with you on the State Senate race, but, to be honest, disagree with you about the CD2 race. But either way do you think you could try to be a little less hysterical and partisan in the things you say? Honestly, in undermines everything you say.

      1. My point was that what they wrote was pretty lame. It’s almost like they were told they had to endorse Rollie so they did as bad a job possible writing it as they could get away with.

        My complaint was that they should spell out strong compelling reasons for supporting him. He’s a good candidate and those reasons exist. Why didn’t they do so?

      2. He is not working for a campaign and for the most part he is a constituent with an opinion.  My political pet peeve is people not saying who they support because someone or group of some ones will be upset.

        While I like Rollie and Josie just fine, they are outstanding people; I think politically Cindy is the better choice for the district.  I have taken some heat for that opinion, and quite frankly, I find it refreshing that David is passionate about his choices.

        This is America; we should talk about our choices.  Who knows it may even change a mind or two to your way of thinking.  I have been considering supporting McCain since so many of you have great things to say about him and his race.


    2. I support Rollie, but the Boulder “elite” is very much split. Look at Cindy’s website for a list of her endorsers. It’s impressive.

      1. Cindy Carlisle was on Boulder city council  and she’s a CU regent.  It’s hard to say she’s not part of the Boulder elite.

        She has made some very embarrassing votes as CU regent as well.

  2. Go to the Daily Camera Website and read the blog posting on the article.  Cindy’s supporters (or more likely the candidate herself) have been trying to spin this key endorsement into a positive for her.  

    To them I ask, didn’t she seek that endorsement too?  Telling she didn’t get it after all the mudslinging.

  3. It’s less than impressive that neither the  MSM nor the bathrobed-and-typing find a candidate’s inaccurate/deceptively false financial statement damning. Heath receives significant income he does not acknowledge, and from corporations he wouldn’t want to wave in front of (supposed) progressives or environmentalists.

    When queried, he said he’d had nothing to do with CACI for a decade.  But he’d sat on their Board of Directors for four of the last ten years. Huh. Deceptive, dingy, or Cheney Level Secretive, it doesn’t speak to someone claiming the ethical stature he does.

    He lost his cool when this was brought up and jumped all over Carlisle’s late father in law with one inaccurate accusation, had that sorrowfully drawn to his attention, replaced it with another inaccuracy, and neither apologizes for his claims nor presents a coherent explanation of why an inlaw of his opponent is relevant.

    Boulder OWES him, we gather. As the nation owes McCain, apparently.

    “Yesterday’s Solutions Tomorrow!” is not the theme to carry into the capital, as Heath proposes, and which his schlerotic supporters advocate. Carlisle has never lost an election but this was in spite of transient approval from the hyphenated names and now elderly Boulder Social Forces in years past, and who now compose the Rollie Rictus. She didn’t ever owe them.  

    The avoidance of anything to be remotely confused with detail in the accusations against Carlisle amount to method, but then, that’s the fun of right wing misogynists and their multiple User ID’s.

    Under the gaze of an antagonistic state administration; fellow Regents of the GOP for whom ‘rubber stamp’ would characterize too much pro-active thinking; two Democratic Regents who vote to move all CU administration to their own districts (and know Carlisle will fight them in the Senate as well to keep stuff in Boulder); and a bitter, bitter bunch of college football fluffers who found nothing in their mental makeup regarding women at odds with a former CU AD’s concern about “plausible deniability” offered to those who – somehow, as if by magic and including himself – felt the need to spend time with their families soon enough, Carlisle as Regent managed to get much of what she campaigned on, but not in the manner anyone could have predicted or she would have chosen.

    The charge of conflict of interest is blatently bogus, since anything like it would have required the participation of the State officers, the highly paid if dubiously competent CU legal team, and all the other Regents to be true. Owens’ ethics guru said Carlisle had done everything correctly.  ANY of those entities would have loved to have found evidence of minimal violations. Nobody could.  She’s clean. So, let’s shut up about that absent Iota One of evidence.

    Her votes on Churchill and Benson were based on the fact her votes didn’t matter, and were designed to keep issues before us.  In any case, there was no beneficial political upside to her for either of them. None. Rather, guaranteed political blowback. An internal imp of the perverse is the worse than can be said.

    Carlisle is being burdened with the embarrassments of CU’s sleazoid handling of a misogynistic athletic environment, although she fought it from the beginning. What pisses some folks off is she had the temerity to be on the winning side.

    Credit who you will, but a near criminally inept series of financial horrors in the Athletic Department, the football camps, the CU Foundation, and various support entities were uncovered and are supposedly fixed.  A set of amazing yet high paid incompetents – University President, various subordinates, Head Coach, CU Foundation chief, etc. – were rooted out and are gone.

    Clear achievement without a lot of help.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

43 readers online now


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