Politics

6th CD race mirrors presidential primaries

Change, experience, fire, and command: those are the menu choices in the Republican contest to succeed Tom Tancredo in the 6th congressional district. Debating April 21 at a rec center in Highlands Ranch, ranged across the stage alphabetically, businessman Wil Armstrong and Secretary of State Mike Coffman -- money leaders in the race so far --sparred with State Sens. Ted Harvey and Steve Ward.

The debate was sponsored by the Sagebrush Forum, a newly formed conservative group in Douglas County, and the website PolitickerCO.com. Here's their story.

Throughout the 75 minutes of prepared statements and press questions, I kept experiencing deja vu from this year's GOP presidential primaries.

The youthful, clean-cut Armstrong emphasizes change and plays the outsider, seeking to make a virtue of his business successes and short political resume. Think Mitt Romney.

The quiet-spoken Coffman stresses military honor from his two tours in Iraq and trustworthy experience from a decade in statewide office. Think John McCain.

Ted Harvey leads the field in conservative credentials and true-believing fire. Think Tom Tancredo stirring up Iowa and New Hampshire.

Marine Col. Steve Ward projects command. He's the guy who has made government work, from clean water in Glendale to tsunami relief in Thailand. Think Rudy Giuliani, defiantly pragmatic, in charge and don't you forget it.

Ward and Harvey both scored their share of points last night, but the August primary probably comes down to a battle between the two deep-pockets candidates, Mike "Big Mac" Coffman and Wil "Mitt" Armstrong.

As honorary co-chair of Armstrong's campaign, I obviously hope his "hire someone fresh, try something different" pitch succeeds in this summer's congressional primary where Romney's didn't quite succeed in last winter's White House scramble.

One thing was clear from the Highlands Ranch debate, though -- Republicans in the 6th CD have breadth, depth, competence, and quality across the board in their 2008 congressional field.

There's no Tancredo clone in the bunch, not even Harvey. Rather, whoever succeeds Timid Tom will fill those shoes ably in his own way and continue providing solid representation for the booming south metro suburbs.

My experience with black liberation theology

What kind of Christianity did Wright teach Obama, that this man can believe a politician can be a Christian by tolerating hatred and endorsing abortion? The two men are part of an international, godless, socialist worldview, anti-free-society and anti-American. Editor: Hilmar von Campe, onetime member of the Hitler Youth, now a US citizen and Alabama resident, author of several books including the forthcoming "Defeating the Lie," wrote this piece for his website, voncampe.com.

The senior pastor at the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, the Rev. Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. stated that his theology “is based upon the systemized liberation theology that started 1969 with the publication of Dr. James Cone’s book, ‘Black Power and Black Theology’”. He explains on his website that he has a church the theological perspective of which starts from the vantage point of black liberation theology. With ‘systemized” he means that his theology integrates centuries of similar theological movements.

Black theology, however, is not the beginning of modern liberation theology it is a local version of the Latin American original which is aimed at Catholics. Black theology is aimed at Africans, for instance in South Africa, and African-Americans. There are other versions for American Natives, Asians and Women. The liberation they are talking about is not the teaching of liberation from selfishness and sin through Jesus Christ but of economic exploitation by capitalists, whites or males respectively. The message is divisive and subversive. “We are agents of change for God,” says the mission statement of Obama’s church, “who is not pleased with America’s economic mal-distribution.” Maybe they listen to Satan and not to God. They are no agents of God.

Reading or listening to the explanations of what liberation in this context means by their Spanish- German-, English speaking professionals you notice the same line of argument – abundant Christian language, themes and apologetics but underneath a subtle shift to liberation as an economic criteria. We are dealing here with fake Christians, a class war being waged against their specific different “oppressors”, which in America is disguised as race issue.

I spent a great part of my adult life in various countries of Latin America. That’s where I came across liberation theology. In my first book “Cowardice and Appeasement” which was published 1989 in Germany I have a whole chapter about it. I had read their literature and listened to their leaders like the Brazilian Franciscan priest Leonardo Boff, visited the priest Gustavo Gutierrez in his home in Peru, and discussed this theology in UNAM, the state university of Mexico, with the German Theology Professor Johann B. Metz. I counted 18 books he had written but it could be more. The ideas in his book “Political Theology” led to the articulation of the liberation theology. During this discussion in Mexico the Argentine Enrique Dussel named Communist leader Che Guevara and the top Sandinista Thomas Borge as the new types of man for the society of tomorrow. This event, like many others, served as instrument to attack “American Imperialism” and make Soviet agents acceptable to Catholics,

Gustavo Gutierrez is acknowledged as founder of the theology of liberation. He made a good impression on me. He lived a great part of his life as a priest among the very poor in Peru, in other words, he had his heart where his mouth was. His concern was how to make the poor into a power for economic change through political and social liberation. He had a list of priorities but unfortunately the liberation from selfishness came at the end of it. The Vatican sanctioned Boff and many others because of heresy but not Gutierrez as they most likely had the same impression as I had.

What happened then, I believe, was that Marxists without interest in the liberation from selfishness picked up the idea of social and political liberation and pushed the movement to the left into the global establishment of class war but without getting rid of the religious label. It is now a political leftwing movement, not a serious theology. Julio Giradi defined: “Christian love only is a historical force if it takes up class warfare.” That of course is complete nonsense. I have been in many of these “favelas”, the living areas of the poor in Latin America. It is true, that they live in sub-human conditions and your heart goes out to them. But morally they are no different from the “rich”. They steal and lie as Western politicians do. In Rio de Janeiro I was in the home of the leader of such a settlement. From the outside his “house” looked as terrible as all the others. But inside it was a normal comfortable home. He was rich compared to the poor since he took a cut for himself from the collections he was authorized to make for the payment of electricity, garbage removal etc. It is like Congress taking our payment to Social Security for their re-election. In Sao Paulo I was with the Communist leaders of the Port Workers Union. Their wives were not hungry but resented their husbands having other women besides them – a vice also very popular in this country - and were unhappy in their marriage and their lives. That changed as the husbands realized that the new world order they were promoting did not even work in their own families. They changed.

Barack Hussein Obama has been a member of the Trinity Church of Christ church for 20 years. He was baptized and got married there. I have seen and read about its liberation fundamentals: hatred and class war. It is more than doubtful that he as an extraordinary intelligent person has not become aware in 20 years of the ideological orientation of his church. In an interview in the “Hannity & Colmes” show of Fox News on March 2, 2007 the Rev. Wright expressed himself as a trained ideologist and not as a pastor. The video with a “sermon” he made in another church is even worse. He must have a strange view of God’s commandments. Obama’s explanation that he does not agree with everything that Wright says is no explanation at all. We are not talking about occasional anger but about the moral and religious fundament of a church. To escape into a racial issue and throw the ball into the camp of the whites is a brilliant attempt to fool everybody. His and Wright’s ideology is socialist world power.

What kind of Christianity did Wright teach Obama that this man can believe that a politician can be a Christian by tolerating hatred and at the same time endorsing abortion to his voters? His voting record is morally as terrible as Wright’s communications. Most likely, it seems to me, that the two men are part of an international godless Socialist world view, which is anti free-society and also anti-American. It presents itself as Christian, like the “German Christians” movement under the Nazis who promoted Nazi philosophy with a religious label. Barack Obama has a hidden agenda.

Those unbelievable Democrats

Editor: "Because it is unbelievable, I believe it," a mystic said. That's OK for spiritual things, but for politics and economics we'd prefer a little more common sense. Yet the mystical approach endlessly captivates Dems in the legislature and their friends in the media, observes former Sen. Mark Hillman in his latest Capitol Review column. Here's the piece with 15 examples, concluding with his invitation for you to extend the list. Any takers? You must be a Colorado Democrat if ...

(Note: A couple of months ago, I started this list after reading about the silliness that passes for seriousness at the State Capitol. Thought you might enjoy a little levity for a change.)

1. If you think taxing marriage will reduce child abuse, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

2. If you plan to pay for new programs with revenues from the oil and gas boom but hammer oil and gas companies with higher taxes and ridiculous regulations, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

3. If you believe illegal aliens should get a break on college tuition but decorated veterans should not, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

4. If you believe it's OK to require a photo ID to buy beer or cigarettes but not to vote, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

5. If you believe businessmen and women are motivated by greed but labor union bosses are not, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

6. If you think making someone pay higher taxes is a "freeze," you must be a Colorado Democrat.

7. If you believe trial lawyers want to sue for more money to help their clients, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

8. If you think there's really a difference between a tax and a fee, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

9. If you really believe in governmental efficiency or bureaucratic flexibility, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

10. If you believe an unemployed trial lawyer is a bad thing, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

11. If you think freedom of religion doesn't apply to churches, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

12. If you believe good education comes from relaxing academic standards but getting tough on soft drink sales, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

13. If you think we should raise taxes on working families to hire more college professors, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

14. If you worry more about the cost of keeping criminals behind bars than the cost of putting them back on the streets, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

15. If you think its wrong for government to legislate morality - except when it pays for that legislation with other people's money, you must be a Colorado Democrat.

Feel free to reply with suggested additions to the list.

Dems' 2006 storyline collapses

April has been a cruel month for Bill Ritter. The Kolomitz financial scandal engulfing his campaign deals one more blow to the Democrats' storyline of the 2006 governor's race as a morality play. Ritter was supposed to be the Boy Scout, righteously triumphing over the shady cheater, Republican Bob Beauprez. Wrong. That political myth, like the policy myth of Ritter as a centrist, pro-business and pro-life, has lost all credibility in recent days.

First, a jury didn't buy the charge that ICE agent Cory Voorhis broke the law when he outed former DA Ritter's lax treatment of illegal alien criminals, removing the cloud over former congressman Beauprez and leaving the Boy Scout's own laxity as a focus of outrage.

Next, in case anyone missed that little embarrassment for Colorado's chief executive, a constitutional amendment to ban such plea bargains in the future was introduced by state Sen. Ted Harvey.

And now the improper diversion of some $300,000 from Gov. Ritter's inaugural fund to pay off some 2006 campaign debts and enrich manager Greg Kolomitz suggests that it may be the simon-pure Democrat's turn in court.

What did the governor know about the 300K that went astray, and when did he know it? Has Kolomitz been unjustly scapegoated? Getting answers to questions like these, where the state's highest elected official, is exactly the reason we have prosecutors, grand juries, judges, and trail juries. Perhaps even, if necessary, a special prosecutor.

Bill Ritter now has his very own Cory Voorhis.

DU: No comment on anti-police event

"Cops lie: Don't trust cops!" was the theme for an hour-long training session for would-be protesters at the Democratic National Convention, held in Denver on April 14 by hard-left activist groups, according to a Denver Post story.   The event took place at the University of Denver law school, under arrangements made by individual DU students and with no official sponsorship by the university.  It included simulations of protesters being "bullied by... nightstick-bearing police officers," and outlined a plan for "hundreds of 'legal observers'... who bring video cameras to document any disruption." 

"I don't think it's helpful to portray the police in that light," said Denver city attorney David Fine. "Frankly, that's not the reality, so... it will give the participant a false sense of what their relationship will be like with police during the convention." 

After repeated calls to the DU office of news and public affairs this morning, I spoke with staffer David Brendsel, asking whether Chancellor Robert Coombs, Law School Dean Jose Juarez, or any other DU official wanted to go on the record as Fine had done, specifically dissociating the university from the event's unhelpful, unreal, and false portrayal of police ethics and methods. 

His answer: "We have no statement to make in response to that."  The studied pose of moral neutrality reminded me of those MSM news anchors (not to mention Barack Obama) who have made a point of not wearing American flag lapel pins in these wartime years.  Wouldn't want to take sides, you know.  Wouldn't want to compromise our objectivity. How pathetic.