U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(D) Joe Neguse

(D) Phil Weiser

(D) Jena Griswold

60%

60%

40%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Alexis King

(D) Brian Mason

40%

40%

30%

Sec. of State See Full Big Line

(D) George Stern

(D) A. Gonzalez

(R) Sheri Davis

40%

40%

30%

State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(R) Kevin Grantham

(D) Jerry DiTullio

60%

30%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

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

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

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

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(D) Joe Salazar

50%

40%

40%

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
June 10, 2010 02:00 AM UTC

Norton Doubles Down on "Repeal Obamacare"

  • 43 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

That’s GOP Senate candidate Jane Norton’s latest ad, reportedly aimed with modest penetration at the Junction and Colorado Springs markets. Where they hope it won’t be subject to as much scrutiny, we guess–you remember what Norton said a few weeks ago, when asked why Republicans across the nation are backing off their knee-jerk “Repeal Obamacare” pledges?

“Well, realistically, I don’t think you can repeal it, [Pols emphasis] with the makeup we’re seeing right now, and even if we were able to put in place conservatives in all the seats, you wouldn’t be able to repeal it…”

Now normally, it would be the case that you’d want to be, we suppose the word is consistent, from one day to the next–since occasionally, not as often as we’d like these days but sometimes to spite themselves, journalists check these things. But apparently, in the media markets where red meat is needed most this primary season…scratch that? Promise in a TV spot the exact thing you admitted a few weeks before you couldn’t possibly deliver–even if “conservatives” held “all the seats?” Only one of these statements can be truthful, right?

On second thought, give her the benefit of the doubt. Maybe you’ll get a pony of your very own!

FRIDAY UPDATE: The Colorado Independent adds:

Norton is running a new TV ad that is extra-heavy on talking points, even for Norton, who has struggled on the stump to speak on the issues in language that doesn’t sound like mere sound bites. But, as the ad makes clear, she is committed to her soundbites, even the ones with which she disagrees…

Comments

43 thoughts on “Norton Doubles Down on “Repeal Obamacare”

  1. Former Lt. Gov. Jane Norton submitted enough valid signatures to face off in the state’s Republican U.S. Senate primary, state officials said today.

    With Norton achieving enough signatures, a contentious summer primary season – already underway – officially gets its start

    .

    http://blogs.denverpost.com/th

  2. She needs something.

    Since she doesn’t have much, if anything, it might as well be this.

    Meanwhile, an acquaintance of mine, a staunch Mormon conservative, has just found out that her daughter is pregnant.  Under “Obamacare” her daughter is eligible to be covered under mom’s health insurance.  Under “Bushcare,’ not so much.  She’d be on medicaid, a ward of the taxpayer.

      1. .

        I thought that it was going to take 3 years to roll out, what with the rule-making process and the time the health insurance industry needed to respond.

        .

  3. Much of this ad seems like it was ripped straight from Buck’s talking points. Since when has she been against the Washington D.C. Republicans? That’s where she gets all her money! She’s flip flopping all over the place.

    1. To quote the rasmussen report:

      However, County prosecutor Ken Buck shows more strength than Norton in match-ups against the Democrats.

      If you are going to refer to the Jane C Norton website, can you explain how they also come up with Buck worked for Bill Clinton?

      Norton seems to have a problem with honesty.

      1. That looks like a Josh Penry truth twisting job.  He will do anything to get what he wants – even twist the truth.  Oh, yeah, and vote for higher and higher electric rates.

  4. For those of you that don’t know, SEO (Search Engine Optimization) is where you load the beginning of a blog post or web page with key terms so people will find it when they search for a topic.

  5. That is hyperbole at it’s best. I can’t stand when people say it. Do people who say this stuff REALLY have so little faith in their country that we can’t get through a recession??

        1. (and this only caused by 9/11), but Obama’s 1 trillion dollar deficit is just hunky dory. Bush’s deficit was survivable; Obama’s is not. Such hypocrisy!

          1. In your eyes, Republican deficits are good, Democratic deficits bad.  Period.

            You wouldn’t say Republican Surpluses are good, because you know they haven’t had one since Ike.  

            by the way, 9-11 had little to do with Bush’s deficits.  The moronic decision to launch a major war against Iraq, which did not have anything to do with 9-11, and pay for it with tax cuts made the deficit.

             Yes, your boy was actually stupid enough to think he could finance a major war with tax CUTS.  

            1. I think Republican deficits are just as bad as Democratic deficits; it’s just that Democrats have increased the deficit more. That’s why I don’t like the Republican establishment either. In fact that’s the whole point of the TEA party, deficits from both parties are bad. “The moronic decision to launch a war against Iraq.” Almost everyone supported this at the time in response to 9/11. Wasn’t it a unanimous vote in the Senate or something like that? It’s funny now when Dems try to act like the war was all Bush’s fault.

              You still haven’t answered my one overarching question about what Obama and the Dems plan to do against deficits.

              1. Almost everyone supported this at the time in response to 9/11

                In fact, there was no linkage and no reason to think there was.  The rationale for invading Iraq was , later discredited, that they were building weapons of mass destruction.

                Look, kid, I know you are too young to have lived through this.  But try doing a few minutes of research before blowing opinions out your ass.  You won’t look as stupid that way.

                1. .

                  BJ Wilson appears to be conflating two different AUMF’s.  One he is referring to was the 18 Sept 2001 Authorization for the Use of Military Force, which led directly to the invasion of Afghanistan, not Iraq.  The vote was lopsided, as very few Senators or Congressmen wanted to get steamrolled by the false patriotism of the day.  

                  … in the House of Representatives were: 420 Ayes, 1 Nay and 10 Not Voting (the Nay was Barbara Lee – D-CA)



                  … in the Senate were: 98 Ayes, 0 Nays, 2 Present/Not Voting (Senators Larry Craig – R and Jesse Helms – R).

                  Under this AUMF, Bush was given carte blanche to do whatever he wanted.  In effect, the Congress voted to suspend the Constitution indefinitely.  

                  Pure cowardice.

                  What did Bush do with all this power ?  Did he attack Saudi Arabia, who was the nation most responsible for the 9/11 attacks, through their support for extremist extremists ?  

                  No, he attacked Afghanistan, the nation ruled by Taliban religious fanatics who had just weeks before refused to sign over the rights to build a pipeline to a Houston cabal.

                  .

                  The other AUMF that BJ has mixed up with the first one was dated 16 October 2002, specifically authorizing an unprovoked invasion of Iraq.  

                  H.J.Res. 114 passed the House of Representatives  on Thursday afternoon at 3:05 p.m. EDT on October 10, 2002 by a vote of 296-133,[8]  and passed the Senate after midnight early Friday morning at 12:50 a.m. EDT on October 11, 2002 by a vote of 77-23.[9]  It was signed into law as Pub.L. 107-243 by President Bush on October 16, 2002.

                  I do not have much respect for Robert Byrd, the comatose Senator from WVA.  But in that debate, he fought long and hard for maintaining the Constitution as the foundation of our system of laws.  He lost.  

                  .

                  From my warped viewpoint, I say that we have waged TWO SEPARATE AFGHANISTAN WARS under the rubric of “Operation Enduring Fredom:”

                  The first one started in September 2001 and wound up in late 2002.

                  Then we just kinda hung around afterwards, waiting for President Bush to order a withdrawal.  But he had a short attention span, and completely forgot we had soldiers still there, while he was gearing up for the war to take Iraq’s oil.

                  The locals got tired of Americans running their lives.  They asked us to leave, then told us to leave, then started killing our soldiers to encourage us to leave.  Bush was so determined to get his Iraq war adventure that he neglected Afghanistan.  

                  By about mid-2004, the US military ramped up “kinetic military operations in Afghanistan, fighting to suppress the indigenous resistance forces, to where we now had a second Afghan war.  I don’t have a specific date for the start of this second war, but that’s the one we’re still fighting today.

                  Through these 2 AUMF’s, the Congress has abdicated from its Constitutional duties.  The only way that we ever stop the endless war is if the Congress acts, since NO president is going to voluntarily give up the perks or power that go with being a war president.

                  Bottom line, BJ is basically right when he says the Congress is ultimately responsible for getting us into both wars, and only Congress can get us out.  Now it is up to us to elect responsible adults to these two camerals.  

                  .

      1. And that one man, Obama, is to blame for it?

        Really?

        REALLY?

        I hate hyperbole. Partly because I always want to read it as “hyperbowl”, but mostly because it’s a waste of words.

        If you’re really buying into the “America is falling apart” crap, I’m not sure I can even take you half-seriously.

  6. Hmmm. When you have to actually remind people you are a conservative while you continue to dive further into the deep end of the right wing pool to save your political career, you’ve got a problem with your campaign.  

  7. Sounds like she doesn’t want to cut non-discretionary spending – Social Security, Medicaid, Medicare – and I bet most of the new Health Care Reform bill falls into non-discretionary spending.

    Hmm.  

  8. Just one more example of Norton’s inability to keep a consistent message…

    There’s her support of Ref C and her budget increase, which got hit by both sides ( http://coloradopols.com/showDi… ), while she’s trying to sound like the fiscal conservative.

    There’s her refusal to let anyone record her, which just seems like a cheap way to not have to own up to what you say.

    And there’s her beltway backers and her brother in law throwing fundraising gigs, and she’s still trying to sound like the small-government-outsider-fiscal-conservative.

    I’m waiting for her to say something that doesn’t contradict herself.

    Cinamon, what else? ( http://coloradopols.com/showDi… )

    PS-any tips on embedding links and such, I’d be happy to learn from you pros…

  9. I concede that there are problems with the health-care law, but it is a good start.

    Say for the sake of argument, you succeed in repealing the law. What do you do then? Does Norton want to revert back to a system where people to declare bankruptcy (or even die) because they cannot afford medical bills?  

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

167 readers online now

Newsletter

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