Last night’s debate between incumbent John Suthers and his Democratic opponent Stan Garnett received good coverage around the state today. Here’s the story from the Durango Herald’s Joe Hanel, who reports both candidates fared reasonably well–nonetheless making starkly opposing ideological (or perhaps anti-ideological) cases to be the next Colorado Attorney General:
Garnett got into the race shortly after Suthers joined a lawsuit by Republican attorneys general against the health-care reform law that Congress passed this year.
“It’s a waste of the prestige of the office,” Garnett said. “One of the first things I will do when I’m elected Colorado Attorney General is to dismiss Colorado from this case if it hasn’t already been thrown out of court.”
Suthers, though, said the lawsuit is a necessary defense against federal intrusion into people’s lives. If the government can tax people for not buying health insurance, it could tax them for not buying a hybrid car or a health-club membership, he said…
Garnett said that Suthers too often intervenes in out-of-state, partisan lawsuits, and he isn’t active enough in consumer protection. Suthers is engaged at the Legislature on matters such as criminal law and medical marijuana, but not enough on identity theft or schemes to defraud the elderly, Garnett said.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: Genghis
IN: Educating All Kids Is Still The Right Thing To Do
BY: MichaelBowman
IN: At Least She’s Not Your Puppy Murdering Governor
BY: Genghis
IN: At Least She’s Not Your Puppy Murdering Governor
BY: Thorntonite
IN: At Least She’s Not Your Puppy Murdering Governor
BY: ParkHill
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: ParkHill
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: Lauren Boebert is a Worthless POS
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: harrydoby
IN: Friday Open Thread
BY: NOV GOP meltdown
IN: At Least She’s Not Your Puppy Murdering Governor
BY: Meiner49er
IN: Educating All Kids Is Still The Right Thing To Do
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
Doesn’t the Federal government already effectively tax automobile sales through the enforcement of safety and efficiency standards? Is Suthers really trying to say the government can force something on the entire population, but when it tries to do voluntary compliance via support fees (or whatever they’re calling them), it steps out of bounds?
That seems like a stupid argument to make.
suffer from “selective rationalism”… government is bad when it helps others or regulates their Industry.
Yet Government is good when it helps themselves or regulates their competition.
one word… Selfishness.
the proof will be in the pudding. It will prove to have been a partisan waste of resources.
In which case it will have been a productive use of partisan resources 😉
I wouldn’t expect Garnett himself to bring it up, but what about the questioners?
it wasn’t mentioned at all.