President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) J. Sonnenberg

(R) Ted Harvey

20%↑

15%↑

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Doug Bruce

20%

20%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

40%↑

20%↑

State Senate Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

80%

20%

State House Majority See Full Big Line

DEMOCRATS

REPUBLICANS

95%

5%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
November 26, 2013 07:32 AM UTC

Coffman touts stem-cell lab tour despite opposing stem-cell research

  • 14 Comments
  • by: Jason Salzman

(New Coffman®​ strikes again – promoted by Colorado Pols)

From a post of mine on rhrealitycheck.org yesterday:

Rep. Mike Coffman is on record opposing embryonic stem-cell research, but that didn’t stop the Colorado Republican from touring a stem-cell laboratory at the University of Colorado School of Medicine and tweeting, “Happy to get the chance to tour the Stem Cell Research facility.”

A spokesman for the school, which is located in Coffman’s district, confirmed that the stem-cell facility visited by Coffman November 8 uses stem cells obtained from human embryos.

In 2008 and 2010, Coffman supported Colorado’s failed “personhood” initiatives, which aimed to define life as beginning at conception, when embryos form, and would have banned not only embryonic stem-cell research but also all abortions and some common forms of birth control.

Coffman is one of the most vulnerable incumbents in the U.S. Congress, and reporters should be watching for him to make statements and stage events, like this stem-cell tour, that may appeal to moderate voters but run counter to Coffman forever-held beliefs and policy positions.

Other examples include Coffman's shifting position on the government shutdown, his attempt to label himself a no-labels politician, his once hard stance against allowing abortion after rape and incest, and his evolving position toward undocumented immigrants and their children.

Reporters should remind readers of Coffman's major and mini-makeovers as more emerge. The pattern is now part of the story.

Comments

14 thoughts on “Coffman touts stem-cell lab tour despite opposing stem-cell research

  1. Given that Romanoff also has "evolving" views on immigration (cough…sb90…cough) isn't it a bit disingenuous to go after Coffman for having views that shift?

    1. you may have not been in CO at the time to remember. SB90 forestalled efforts to place a constitutional amendment on the CO ballot to prohibit brown people from entering or remaining in CO. Some legislators were talking about having police cars interdict brown skinned folks at the state boder and either turn them back or incarcerate immediately. So, though I did not like SB90 I did have to admit that it was far better than what was likely without it

      1. pshaw – political reality has no place in a plitical debate.  The perception that Elliott wants to create is that Romanoff and Coffman are both the same when it comes to shifting political views.

        The even harsher reality is that Coffman's views have not shifted at all. He oopsed stem cell research before, he opposes it now.  COffman supported personhood before, he supports it now.  COffman opposes a path to citizenship now, as he always has.  ANd on and on.  The only diffrence between so called"new" Coffman and the actual Coffman is that newcoffman will say things that will allow the less observant to believe maybe he has changed.  At the same time, Coffman will get "surprised" on camera saying things that prove he has not changed at all.  (Seriously- does anyone believe Coffman is dumb enough to not know he was being recoded when he said in his heart he knows Obama is not American. Or any other thing he has said as an elected official.  I do not agree with him on many issues- I don't believe he is stupid)

        1. There is a big difference between changing a position or two over time and under changing circumstances or with new knowledge, experience or simply as the tenor of the times change and constantly shifting positions on a dime, from one year to the next, in a fairly blatant attempt to just find what the hell it is that will work.  Remember the I meant it, I didn't mean it, I apologize, I don't really apologize dance on Obama not being a real American? Those changes were sometimes on a daily basis, forget merely year to year.  Another false Fladen the Apologist equivalence: Look over there. Johnny does it, too.  Except, in this case, Johnny never came close.

      2. You are correct that I was not here at time, but I have heard significant of grumbling from my dem contacts and other immigrants' rights folk that Romanoff was a bit over-eager in passing that law. 

        1. I've brought that very thing up several times ever since the silliness of Romanoff and his supporters attempting to create a lefty progressive champion out of  DLC centrist Romanoff so that he could primary Bennet from the left when, in reality, his record, including on immigration reform, clearly showed him to be not an iota to Bennet's left. You weren't here during that primary but I've mentioned it several times since you've joined us.

            1. No, but your intellectual laziness is showing if you want to take "he said she said" as good enough for you.  You know damn well why hearsay isn't admissable, yet it's good enough for you to support the position you already hold.  Weak sauce, counsellor.

    2. Thing is, there's no indication that Coffman's views have shifted on stem cell research. He said he was happy to tour the facility; not happy with what they're doing with embryonic stem cells. It sounds like he's playing a p.r. game with less-than-informed constituents.

      1. good point. Coffman's pattern is a combination of actual shifts, changed rhetoric, and photo ops. This is in the photo op category, as Karen Middleton pointed out in my post. In theory, journalists live to call out public officials on this type of inconsistency.

  2. The difference is that the immigration positions of Coffman change daily or weekly, depending upon his audience. Coffman's always been hard right, border security first, enforce the laws, no path to citizenship, screw the DREAMers. That's if you look at his real, factual voting record. But, depending on the audience, he has tried to softpedal that stance, substituting buzzwords like "compassionate" and "thoughtful" for real policy positions.

    Romanoff's "evolution" on immigration has been a pretty consistent movement from a hard line vote in 2006, denying social services to immigrants,  (which was a disaster), to his present stance supporting Senate bill HR 15, which does include a path to citizenship. Coffman just dances around the issue.

    As Duke Cox said on here in May, 2013, "Everyone HAS a weakness…Coffman IS a weakness."

     

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

185 readers online now

Newsletter

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