John Hickenlooper and Tom Tancredo talk to Denver Post editorial board
In their appearances before the Denver Post's editorial board, which endorsed John Hickenlooper as expected, Hickenlooper and Tom Tancredo discussed the issues that are most important to the Post's editorial writers and to the public. In the clips shown below, both candidates talked about balancing the state's budget, which is forecast to be $1.2 billion in the red in the next fiscal year.
Hickenlooper said budget cuts are inevitable but that he wants to make cuts that will have the least long-term effect. He obviously assumes the economy will recover fully and generate tax revenues that will allow Democrats to return to their disastrous spend and tax ways. Hickenlooper talked about the anti-tax, unhappy voters he's seen as he's traveled the state.
Tancredo stressed that retired and currently employed beneficiaries of the state's Public Employees' Retirement Assn. (PERA) will get their currently scheduled benefits. He supports changing PERA to a defined contribution from a defined benefit scheme for new government employees, including teachers. The clip chosen by the Post also shows Tancredo explaining that he doesn't hate immigrants, he supports allowing refugees to come into the country, and he believes that there should be a moratorium on immigration until recent immigrants are fully assimilated into our country, which he considers crucial.
I think Tancredo shows more knowledge of how the state government and political process works while Hickenlooper shows how he avoids taking stands on tough issues by avoiding specifics. LINKS: Hickenlooper clip and Tancredo clip by the Denver Post.
Tancredo “True Conservative” OR an ethically challenged gun grabbing chicken hawk?
I’m guilty as charged. I have self interest in passing this information on to you. No, not because Tambor was picked to run with Dan Maes. It’s because a person that I trusted and respected has turned out to be less than I thought he was. I believe most of you will agree that there’s a difference between making a mistake and repeated violations of important values and principles.
Here’s an important point: Con men seldom look like the bad guys in the movies. More often we like them and trust them. How often do we allow a person to violate our trust before we recognize a pattern of deception?
I have to say that for years I’ve called Tancredo a friend. Remember, he spoke at our Republican Breakfast because I asked him to. I’ve known him since college. We were a small tight knit group from 1965 -69 at UNC. We College Republicans spent a lot of time together. I moved to Wyoming, Utah and back to Colorado after college. I wasn’t politically active for several years but I knew that Tancredo had been teaching, was elected to the State House, worked at the Independence Institute and then was elected to Congress in the newly formed CD 6. Never once during the time I knew him did he miss any activity for mental reasons. For that matter, he wasn’t any different than me, Steve Duhram, Don Smith or Paul Weichel (all a bit crazy but not depressed) I remember being shocked when Mike Coffman refused to appear on the same stage with Tancredo in 2003. I hadn’t served in Vietnam because my lottery number wasn’t called. I was unaware what Tancredo did to avoid the draft. Its not whether a person serves or not, it’s what that person does when called to serve that counts.
SEE: http://dl.dropbox.com/u/3331940/Tancredos Transgressions.pdfPosted by Jim Eckersley on 10/04/2010 at 10:36 AM