Colorado Senate Passes Anti-Iraq War Resolution

The Colorado Senate passed a “statement” against troop escalation, in an entirely pointed display of political grandstanding that accomplishes little except putting the state’s Democratic delegation on record as opposing the war. As if that was ever in doubt.

It passed along party lines–no surprise there:

The resolution, which now goes to the House, passed on a straight party-line vote, with 20 Democrats in favor and 14 Republicans opposed.
. . .
“The war in Iraq has dragged on for five years,” said Sen. Ron Tupa, D-Boulder, co-sponsor of the measure. “Certainly, when we have Colorado lives on the line, it’s appropriate for us to weigh in on the issue.”
. . .
Littleton Republican Sen. Mike Kopp, an Army veteran who served in the first Gulf War, said he has received letters from soldiers in Iraq who complain that the resolution diminishes their sacrifices.

“We can chose the politics of abandonment or loyalty to our troops,” he said.

More quotes (video):

“If you have an opinion in a democracy, you have to say it,” said Senate Majority Leader Ken Gordon (D-Denver), one of the sponsors of the memorial. “Silence is consent and I don’t consent.”
. . .
“We are not qualified to opine on force levels,” said Sen. Steve Ward (R-Arapahoe County). “We have no particular expertise regarding the need for or against escalation. We are not experts on national security or the tools needed to achieve it.”

Jason Bane believes that despite the resolution having absolutely no legal effect, it is important to put into the record that the Colorado legislature opposes the administration’s policies.

That would matter if the resolution received unanimous or even broadly bipartisan support. The fact that the resolution was passed entirely on party lines makes it clear that the resolution represents the view of Colorado’s Democrats, not the state legislature. A fine but important point of difference.

Education Kerfuffle

“A special place in hell”–Ben DeGrow chronicles the education battles in the legislature.

Tom Tancredo To Make Official White House Bid

Tancredo will formalize his announcement Monday in Iowa on talk radio:

Tancredo’s “For A Secure America” exploratory committee surpassed the $1 million mark in fundraising last week, and he said that made it “certainly more likely” he would go forward with a full-fledged candidacy.

The official word is expected to come at 8 a.m. MST Monday, when Tancredo appears on the “Mickelson in the Morning” talk show on AM radio station 1040 WHO in DesMoines. Tancredo already is in Iowa in anticipation of that appearance.

However, Tancredo leaves potential GOP candidates for his CD-6 in the lurch, as he has not made any decision (he doesn’t have to, either) on whether or not he will run for his seat in 2008 should he fail in his Presidential aspirations.

Should he wait until later this year, or even after the Super Tuesday primary in early February ‘08 to make some announcement on reelection, Tancredo ensures a GOP scramble for the primary (if he does not run). Though the seat is considered safe, a late showing by the eventual candidate (except, once again, Tancredo) might make the otherwise large margins a little more expensive and certainly too close for comfort in an election when the GOP is looking to take back seats lost last year.

Churchill Recommendation To President Hank Brown Within Week

Bringing the Ward Churchill debacle one step further, but still potentially months from completion (via PirateBallerina):

According to the policy, if the president and the P&T panel concur that dismissal is warranted, the president would forward the case to the regents for a final decision. If the president does not believe dismissal is warranted — regardless of the P&T recommendation — the case would be closed. If the president believes dismissal is warranted but the P&T panel disagrees, the president must return the case to the panel, which has up to 15 days to reconsider its decision and issue a second report to the president. If the president still believes dismissal is warranted, he can then send the matter to the regents, but there is no timeline in the old policy for doing so. Churchill would then have 20 business days — a full month — to respond to the president’s recommendation in writing and decide whether he wants a hearing with the board. Any action the regents take on the recommendation must be done in public, the policy states.

The description of even one section of the old, arcane removal procedure no doubt spurred calls for the revamped system (100 days) just recently approved.

Thursday Link Sweep

Blogs:
Colorado Conservative Project–has the GOP hit bottom yet?

No money for security at the Dems convention? Drunkablog says pay for it yourselves.

Best Destiny explains the excuses offered by Sen. Ken Salazar and Rep. Mark Udall for their votes on “phased redeployment” and “timetables”.

Mount Virtus–Colorado Republicans begin Presidential endorsements–Colorado Confidential has the Dems’ picks

Musgrave (CD-4) top target of Dems in ‘08

News:
Democrats propose free college for all low-income students–a “golden ticket.”

Sen. Ken Salazar takes on Bush over Iraq War

Iraqi Immigrant Sues Tom Tancredo For $5 Million, Claims Defamation

Red meat indeed:

A jailed Iraqi immigrant has sued Rep. Tom Tancredo for $5 million, saying that the congressman defamed him during a controversy over so-called catch- and-release immigration enforcement last year.

The immigrant, Gavan Alkadi, 46, reportedly emigrated to the U.S. at age 15, but has been in legal limbo for the past several years. He faces deportation proceedings prompted by his various brushes with the law.

Colorado Bureau of Investigation records show he has been arrested more than 30 times in Colorado since 1981 on suspicion of offenses that include DUI and assault. Many of those charges were dismissed.
. . .
“U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo had caused Me Mental Stress and No Sleep Because I am always Thinking Why and How I Became his Poaster child,” Alkadi wrote in the filing, which includes many spelling and punctuation errors.

So I guess Tancredo can kiss the illegal legal (legal resident–but uncertain status) Iraqi immigrant vote goodbye.

Tancredo an Alkadi last year:

“What prevents our government from doing this – simply repatriating the undesirable alien to his own country of origin, regardless of whether or not the receiving government agrees to accept him?” Trancredo asked in a letter this week to Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff.
. . .
Between his 2005 deportation order and his release in May, he was also sentenced to two years’ probation in Boulder County for drug possession.

“I was shocked to learn recently that Immigration and Customs Enforcement officials in Colorado released a dangerous Iraqi into the community despite his extensive court record,” Tancredo wrote.

Rusnok said ICE abided by procedures and court precedents.

Alkadi was detained Tuesday because he failed to report to ICE as required by the conditions of his earlier release, Rusnok said. Tancredo told the News he thinks his letter precipitated the arrest.

Alkadi’s case is not unique, according to the federal report. In many cases, countries such as China and Iran impose such onerous documentation and travel requirements that they block the deportees’ return, the report said.

Tancredo said it is time for the U.S. to deport them anyway.

“We cannot be a haven for all of these crooks,” he told the News.

A criminal who has an uncertain legal status–”legal limbo”–as a resident of the United States is also unwanted back home in Iraq. That sucks.

But what is up with getting arrested 31 times? Even if the charges are dropped–due to lack of evidence or an unwillingness to press charges, it is clear that Alkadi is prone to becoming unhinged. If he is still an Iraqi citizen, he should get a one-way ticket back.

We have enough criminals who are American citizens, and don’t need legal immigrants/residents or illegal immigrants doing jobs Americans already do in too large a number. This is one type of diversity America could do without.

Freedom Folks has more daily on crimes that don’t happen committed by criminals who aren’t here. Legally, that is.

Blog Maintenance: New Trackbacks And Comments

Slapstick Politics now has trackbacks–and a new comments section from Haloscan.

All of the old posts will display previous comments, and links.

The Start Of A Meme–McInnis The Wonder Moderate

Democrats seem eager to paint any forthcoming GOP candidate for Senate–especially Bob Schaffer–as the dreaded “social”, “traditionalist” or “ultra” convservative candidate (=evil, of course), while painting Scott McInnis as the friendly “moderate” who was the GOP’s only hope for retaining a seat held by the conservative Sen. Wayne Allard.

Why?

To make Rep. Mark Udall seem less liberal.

A head-to-head match-up between Schaffer and Udall would be a true test over the political divide in Colorado. Neither candidate can easily be branded with the meaningless “moderate” label–meaningless in the sense that it usually only indicates the ideological position of the person using the term, and is not a helpful characterization of the candidate. For McInnis, this has turn into code for “less socially conservative”, which is now being used as the attack on a potential Schaffer run.

It is no surprise that Democrats wish to capitalize on what they perceive as a sudden lurch to the left in American politics, and hope to establish some of their more liberal members as “mainstream” (another word for moderate), and not really “liberal” or the even “progressive”. If the American voters truly moved that far to the left, their would be no need to abandon the labels or avoid accepting one’s identity as a solid liberal on the issues.

By portraying Udall as a successor to the “moderate” Ken Salazar or Bill Ritter, Dems are appealing to Colorado’s independent spirit, unaffiliated voters, and a general disdain for extreme West or East Coast liberalism, outside of the Boulder-Denver-Aspen areas. Demonizing Schaffer with the social conservative label–and therefore the only extremist in the race is both logical and also indicative of the extent to which they believe Udall is weak on his record as a “latte-sipping” Boulder liberal.

**Update:
Note–the source for the statement that McInnis was the only GOP candidate with a chance to succeed comes from the NY Sun–from a blogger/editor of gopprogress.com, a place for a “moderate or a small ‘l’ libertarian Republican”. Perhaps this writer overlooked the Hogan & Hartson lobbying connection that weighed heavily, perhaps more so, on McInnis. The money and the attacks that that job created for McInnis created heavy incentives for him to avoid a costly Senate run. No one doubts that an election would be a tough call, but losing a lucrative position to run for an office that paid less, carried no guarantee of actually being his, and would result in endless bashing through the many variations of the “McLobbyist” theme undoubtedly steered McInnis into the “also-ran” category.

Hotline has some thoughts on Colorado’s Senate race.

"Festival Of Democracy", Massive Protests Planned For 2008 Denver DNC

Moonbat protestors have dubbed their planned actions a “festival of democracy”–more like carnival of lunacy–and have already called for street theater and riots, turning Denver into Chicago (1968 Democratic Convention):

Plans were unveiled Monday for four days of “massive protests” during the 2008 Democratic National Convention, including a four-day “festival of democracy” that may be held in Civic Center.

But even as plans were laid for protests, concerns were raised about police spying on lawful dissent.

The Recreate 68 Alliance, which includes several groups involved in the annual Columbus Day protests in Denver, said it would work to bring thousands of activists here during the August 2008 gathering.

“You’ll see large mass actions similar to the immigration rallies” last spring, predicted Glenn Spagnuolo, of the All Nations Alliance.

Spagnuolo said activists had just begun meeting to plan their actions.

The group wants to sponsor a festival to run during the convention and bring speakers, entertainment and free food to a local park.

“We hope to work with the city to create a festival that will be fun and exciting and peaceful,” said Mark Cohen, of the All Nations Alliance.

If recent protests are any indication, the “festival” will be anything but fun, exciting or peaceful. The top concern for the moonbats? Police spying.

Spagnuolo should be familiar to everyone as one of Ward Churchill’s lackeys.

Blogs For Borders Video Blogburst 03/27/07

Freedom Folks has this week’s edition of the Blogs For Borders Video Blogburst.