Josh Penry Sends Email That is Contemptible

(Wow. That IS low and I say this as a Democrat.   – promoted by Middle of the Road)



Josh Penry and Jane Norton have sunk to a new low. Today Josh Penry sent out an email claiming “Americans for Job Security” is not only supporting Ken Buck but supporting Blanche Lincoln as well.

But here is the kicker: the same Good Ol’ Boys group supporting Ken Buck here in Colorado is simultaneously spending even more to reelect incumbent Arkansas Democrat Blanche Lincoln-the liberal who provided the deciding vote to make Obamacare the law of the land.

Penry is correct that Americans for Job Security are running ads attacking Bill Halter, but the ads make no mention of Blanche Lincoln.  Obviously AJS feels that Halter is the more difficult candidate for the Republican candidate to defeat in the general.  Penry has the audacity to twist this into AJS supporting Lincoln.  

Politico has the ad here: http://www.politico.com/news/s…

His argument which shows his belief that people are ignorant, is tantamount to saying Jane Norton is seeking to get Romanoff elected as her ads attack Bennet.  

The Penry/Norton team are beginning to show desperation. That is never a good sign for a campaign.

55 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. cologeek says:

    on this race, wanting to listen to any debate between the two. And then make my decision based on any differences in their respective stances on the issues.

    I was going to do a diary on this after getting the email referenced above, but this one said it for me.

    The Norton campaign, and it’s supporters have pretty much made me sick to my stomach at their actions.  I guess I just became a Ken Buck supporter.

    • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

      Ken Buck has sat down with me twice for interviews and gave me very clear and specific answers to every question I asked. I may not agree with him much, but his answers were always thoughtful and well reasoned.

      Jane Norton has consistently run away from every request for an interview.

      You say you want to base your decision on what each has to say. I’d say that Jane’s unwillingness to sit down for an interview says volumes.

      As to an Norton supporters here, I would be happy to interview her anytime that is convenient. And you know my interviews are very fair.

      • H-man says:

        Laughing Boy:

        Give us your defense of Norton on this one.  The world is waiting?

        • Laughing Boy says:

          A: Go fuck yourself, you fool. Why don’t we just meet at Dem party HQ and have coffee and discuss strategy?

          B: This troubles me, but I’m going to discuss it in the appropriate forum.  

          • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

            Ask if she’ll do an interview. I don’t think it serves her well to run away from free press.

            • marilou says:

              I’ve gone to repeated debates and forums, trying to see Norton and Buck, side-by-side.  He shows up but she is mostly MIA.  

              She doesn’t show well against Buck.  She has sound bites; he’s straight with his answers.

          • JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

            And you look more nervous and defensive each time you try to stifle the dissent of your fellow Republicans.

            Jane Norton is your personal friend, you’ve said so. The Republicans commenting on this disingenuous email from Penry know this. For Christ’s sake, respond on the merits or STFU! You have no credibility with which to bully them into silence.

            Sometimes you have to go to war with the forum you have, LB. Sometimes you have no choice.

            • Laughing Boy says:

              It’s troubling.  I’ll deal with it internally, not on the enemy’s blog.  

              You can understand that, can’t you?

              My point all along has nothing to do with stifling dissent on my side of the aisle.  At all.  It has to do with airing internal party laundry on a site populated overwhelmingly by folks who are connected with the opposition.  What possible good can come out of having this discussion in the wolves’ den?

              Again, it would be like having this totally awesome AR/MB slap fight on RedState.

              • ajb says:

                I get it. The nominee is to be decided behind closed doors in a smoke-filled room. No need for a primary.

                I think the Freepers would get bored with the AR/MB slap fight. There’s no there there.  

              • Fidel's dirt nap says:

                This is a lefty site of course, but come around election or primary time all sorts of new bloggers come around, shills or not, from the “other side”.

                I have to give it to H-Man, he was asked to say something good about Ken Buck and he put it up, and it was impressive.

                You going to let them take a piss in your tea lke that ?

                • Laughing Boy says:

                  Oh, AJB.  That’s not what I’m saying at all.

                  This is stupid now.  Look, I’m going to support, volunteer, campaign for, and give money to the final R candidate, whomever it is.  I like Ken Buck.  I love what he did with that BS mortgage office and the identity theft thing.  

                  I know Jane and have worked with her and I like her.  I’m supporting her, but this Penry email (I got it, too) bugs me.  That’s all I’m going to say about it – here.

                  Last time I’m going to say this – it does no good to have an internal party battle on the enemy’s website.

                  • RedGreenRedGreen says:

                    Can you at least reveal where you’ll be discussing this further? Or is it on a secret forum that isn’t accessible to the great unwashed?

                    • Laughing Boy says:

                      Among Republicans, not liberal Dems who would like nothing better than to defeat both Buck and Norton.

                      Please get real.

                  • marilou says:

                    If Penry’s email of yesterday, and another of today bother you, why don’t you go tell the Norton/Penry/McCain campaign to man up and tell the truth?  This innuendo stuff isn’t suiting them well.  

                    People are not dumb; we see right through it.  

              • ardy39 says:

                I’ll deal with it internally, not on the enemy’s blog.

                FOAD, LB.

                • ajb says:

                  It’s all allegorical.

                  Besides, LB has gotten a little short since the good ship Norton started to list.

                  • Laughing Boy says:

                    It’s not that, really.  I’m not married to any one candidate.  Party trumps person.  I support Jane and I’ll be disappointed if Buck wins the primary, but excited to support him in the general and I’m not going to go on a far-left blog and disparage him just so I can feel happy I picked the right horse.

                    And I agree – the Norton campaign looks like a mess right now.  We’ll see what happens.

                    • ajb says:

                      At the end of the day, you want your party to win. So you don’t want the candidate that wins the primary to come out too bloodied. Unfortunately for both parties, there’s not a lot of difference between their respective candidates with regard to positions or policy, so they’re left fighting over mostly “character”. It’s hard to escape that fight completely clean, eh?

                • Laughing Boy says:

                  Metaphorically.  Political enemy.  No umbrage intended.  

                  • ardy39 says:

                    I find it really hard to even contemplate associating anyone who wants the best for Colorado and Coloradans as an “enemy.” Even those with whom I disagree.

                    Words have meaning.

                    Full-on umbrage intended.

  2. Ralphie says:

    …to support whoever is paying him, or to denigrate whoever isn’t.  He’s a whore.  Why does this surprise anyone?

    • cdsmith says:

      He’s definitely a partisan, and he has a considerable past with many of the established people in the state party that worked to get Norton to run in the first place.  This isn’t a matter of who is paying him, whether or not you agree with the side he’s on.

      I won’t say much good for Josh Penry, but I’ll give him that.  He’s a lousy leader with poor judgement, but he believes in what he’s doing.

  3. marilou says:

    Norton is desperate, and Josh Penry is young and stupid enough to do stupid things and tell stupid lies to try to pull her out of the hole she and John McCain dug her into.

  4. bjwilson83 says:

    Every day there’s something new that comes out of that campaign to astound me. Maybe Penry is trying to sabotage Jane “McCain”? As a Buck supporter, I’m thrilled. As a human being, I want to vomit. It’s like watching a train wreck in slow motion.

  5. redeye says:

    that McJane Norton has been caught lying.

    First, she pulls a quote out of an NYT article that doesn’t exist.

    Not more than two days later, she’s trying to say that Americans for Job Security is a liberal group.  Yeah right.  Next thing you know, she and Penry will be saying Club for Growth is a marixst organization….

    This lie is so bad, it’s laughable. This kind of sophmoric response from Penry and McJane Norton does not surprise me in the least.

  6. redeye says:

    Look at what her supporters on her fb page are saying:

    “I prefere my republican candidates not to smear and throw mud until they have a democrate for an opponent.”

    “Penry is correct that Americans for Job Security are running ads attacking Bill Halter, but the ads make no mention of Blanche Lincoln. Obviously AJS feels that Halter is the more difficult candidate for the Republican candidate to defeat in the general. Penry has the audacity to twist this into AJS supporting Lincoln.”

    “Losing respect for Penry and Norton. Early smear tactics will lose this voter.”

    ” Stop it. I have no idea what’s going on in Arkansas, nor do I care. Address the issues, not the personalities. As the first poster said, save the mud for the Dems.”

    “You’re turning off more people by Smearing Buck than you did when you quit the assembly. Get back on the issues!”

    http://www.facebook.com/?sk=me

  7. milehighpolitico says:

    I’m sorry, but no one who posts on blogs like Coloradopols just made up their mind. We’re not fools, so there is no need to put on such a fake act.  

    When you attack Halter in a primary against Lincoln OF COURSE it’s to help Lincoln.  Obviously these people funding these ads have specific reasons to target each race. Ken Buck is a personal friend of one of the largest donors, and Blanche Lincoln voted for the bailout that Ken Buck’s friend’s company got money from. So you could say Americans for Job Security helped Lincoln because she gave them government money to help fund these ads (through executive salary’s paid from these companies) and took that bailout money and funded ads for “conservative” Ken Buck

  8. BlueCat says:

    I’m still trying to process Penry’s characterization of Blanche Lincoln as a liberal. I guess if Lincoln is a liberal on the planet where Penry lives then Obama being a socialist makes more sense. No telling what color the sky there might be.  

      • BlueCat says:

        Why has the GOP adopted Commie red?  Is there some kind of triple double cross conspiracy going on here? Has the GOP purposely been screwing up everything they can get their hands on for the past couple of decades so that we will have a revolution and TURN COMMIE?!?  Were the fall of the wall and the disintegration of the USSR engineered just to prepare for a new world order with the US as the Commie super-power?!? Paging Glen Beck!!!

  9. H-man says:

    The background of Americans for Job Security in the late 90′s corportate America perceived that they were getting picked on by soft money spending by the AFL-CIO.  The US Chamber of Commerce set up a group called The Coalition: Americans working for real change which morphed into Americans for Job Security.

    Corporate American has figured out that Jane Norton’s promises of going back to Washington DC to act like a fiscal conservative are belied by her record including Ref C.

    In my view the problem now is there is no grown up in the room on the Republican side of things to have a heart to heart with Norton and Penry.  Wadhams should play that role but he is getting married in a couple weeks to a Norton senior staffer and I think it unlikely that he can play that role, which is too bad because that should be part of his job.  

    The other people that might bring sanity to the Norton self-destructive death spiral are probably the ex-pols who have endorsed her but I think they have probably written Norton off as an embarrassment and just want this to be over. Perhaps, McInnis can sit Penry down and tell him going negative on the front runner in a primary is not a good career choice if it does not work.  Then again, running in a primary against your old boss was not a very good career move either.

    In the mean time, we get lie after lie by Norton about Norton and by Norton about Buck. None of this stuff sticks and even her supporters want it to stop.  Norton’s favorability ratings continue to go down and Buck ignores her staying above the fray to run against the Democrat in the fall.

    The difference between the gaffes committed by Gardner as to his web site and Romanoff as to the photo shopped picture and Norton is that the former circumstances were unintended consequences which reflect poorly on the candidate’s competence, but are not fatal. A campaign making a conscious decision to lie about the candidate and their competition months before the primary reflects on the candidate’s truthfulness.   There is plenty of time for the truth to come out, and as it does Norton continues to lose her base.

  10. marilou says:

    He’s still lying on Facebook this morning.  Does he think we really don’t understand what they’re doing?  

    Where are Penry’s ethics?

    If the manager has no ethics, does  Jane “McCain” Norton have any?  If she does, why is she associating with him?

  11. Laughing Boy says:

    Another “Republican” on Pols.  Are you just free-associating now?

  12. sxp151 says:

    We had lots of people sign up to support Romanoff for example. And lots of Republicans left once Penry dropped out of the governor’s race.

  13. H-man says:

    GoldenEye:

    When you look at her interviews and what she is quoted saying directly it is clear this in not “Josh being Josh”.  Here is a transcript of an interview she gave that is posted on her campaign website:

    “I am not the Washington insider in this race. That would be Ken Buck. Ken has a Washington insider 527 running over $1 million of ads on his behalf. And he received over a third of all his donations from employees of one company that relies on stimulus money and millions of dollars of special interests contracts,” Norton said.

    (Her campaign provided me with a list of employees of Greeley-based Hensel Phelps Construction Co. who have contributed $141,800 to Buck’s Senate campaign.)

    I have never been a lobbyist. I am not the Washington insider in this race. That would be Ken Buck. Ken has a Washington insider 527 running over $1 million of ads on his behalf. And he received over a third of all his donations from employees of one company that relies on stimulus money and millions of dollars of special interests contracts.

    As we all know, Buck’s Washington DC insider lives in Greeley and Jane has over 350K from PACs, parties hosted in DC by lobbyists and senators etc. etc.  If she was not a lobbyist you have to wonder what she did in charge of “state governmental relationships”?

    10. As head of the Office of State Government Relations and the Office of Strategic Relationships at the Englewood-based Medical Group Management Assn. (MGMA), did you help hire and fire lobbyists?

    I was director of state government relations from 1994 to 1999. There were two government relations offices, state and federal. My shop monitored health care reform legislation in the 50 states. We provided information to our members on how they could comply with regulatory and legislative changes. There was a federal lobbyist in DC who had a separate role and was a registered lobbyist.

    11. Did you give instructions to those lobbyists?

    Absolutely not

    The ethical lapses of the Norton campaign come from Norton, nobody else.

  14. Ralphie says:

    Just the madam in a lobbyist whorehouse.

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.