Posted on 10/27/2014 6:07:19 AM PDT by Kaslin
When the left-leaning Denver Post shocked Colorado and the political world by endorsing Republican challenger Cory Gardner over Democrat incumbent Mark Udall in Colorados close race for US Senate, national Democrats were punched as silly as a victim of the knockout game.
One of the worst endorsement decisions by any serious newspaper in my lifetime, raged former Colorado Senator Gary Hart. Naïve! What was the Denver Post thinking? sputtered The New Republic. Asinine, intoned Salon, for good measure.
Liberals are enraged a liberal leaning paper endorsed a conservative challenger over a lackluster liberal incumbent. But expressing that would expose their long-requited sense of entitlement to favorable treatment by the media. Instead, they simply howled and vented at the Posts vexing (to them) decision.
Actually, the Denver Post was clear and concise:
Congress is dysfunctional and broken. Udall isnt much of a factor. His one-note war-on-women campaign, that spawned the moniker Mark Uterus, is an insult to political discourse and lays bare his lack of any accomplishment or record to run on.
In contrast, the Post noted, ABC News calls Cory Gardner a national rising star. The Post could have added that several pundits dubbed Gardner the best Republican candidate in the nation this year (Tom Cotton of Arkansas is also a contender).
As the Post cited, Gardner quickly became a leader each step on his path--in the Colorado legislature, in the US House, and now in working for creative solutions on energy, taxation, and immigration. Further, the Post observed, if Gardners election contributes to a GOP majority in the Senate, theres a historic pattern of presidents of one party and a united Congress of another party working together more effectively than when the House and Senate are divided on partisan lines. That circumstance produces especially toxic partisan conflict, as the last four years attest.
Liberal outlets like New Republic and Salon didnt rebut the Posts personal assessment of the two men or of the likely congressional dynamics. Instead, liberal pundits presented a list of Udalls liberal positions as obviously decisive, and expressed shock and awe that a left leaning paper couldnt just follow the program.
But for pure conservative schadenfreude, nothing matches Harts rant at the Post. Long on angry assertion and short on substance, Hart appealed to authorityhimselfto announce that Udall is a leader, maybe one of the nations best senators, and is in the middle of every important policy discussion.
Harts unqualified encomiumeulogy, almost-- lacked a thread of substance or illustration. If Udall is a workhorse not a show horse as the saying goes, Hart could have shared just one or two examples of his accomplishment or leadership--significant legislation, amendments, constructive hearings, creative policy proposals, influence within the Party, that sort of thing. Maybe Hart tried and couldnt identify anything to hold up. In any event, there isnt a single concrete, fact-checkable, falsifiable claim on Udalls behalf. Just a lot of table pounding.
Thats understandable. Udalls campaign hasnt offered up any accomplishments, either.
Gary Hart has the intellect to make a persuasive case if there is one to be made. Instead, he just voted Angry. His defense unwittingly amounts to branding Udall merely as a popular member of a very exclusive club: The United States Senate. That is exactly the problem and was part of the Posts rationale in giving the nod to Gardner. People are looking for change. Udall wont deliver.
Harts lack of awareness approaches self-parody when he cites Udallwho votes 97% for the presidents agenda and stands arm in arm with Harry Reids unprecedentedly cynical perversion of Senate rules and civilityas a model of statesmanship, while dismissing Gardner as an unserious soldier of the Tea Party. (I wish Gardner were solid Tea Party). This is I am rubber; you are glue stuff. Gary Hart thinks Udalls liberalism is self-evidently praiseworthy and Gardners conservatism is self-evidently mockable.
A truer assessment of Udalls contribution to public policy comes from a more current leader of liberal politics, President Barack Obama. He told Al Sharpton on that loathsome figures radio show that the senate candidates who, like Udall, are afraid to be seen with him on the campaign trail, nevertheless are liberal stalwarts. They are all folks who vote with me. They have supported my agenda in Congress These are folks who are strong allies and supporters of me.
There you have it. Mark Udall has been, and will be, a loyal soldier in Obamas fundamental transformation. Cory Gardner will cheerfully push in a different direction. Thats whats eating Gary Hart and company. To the surprise of many, the Denver Post is off the reservation on this endorsement and all of liberaldom can barely keep its latte in its nostrils.
I am hopeful but worry that the voting machines are still fanatical democrats and will vote accordingly.
Sen Uterus is a rubber-stamping Obama sycophant. The kind
of slavish party loyalty not seen since 1940's-era Europe.
Coached by the DNC, Udall endorses free-for-all, no limits, abortion and has perfected the Democrat party line: "For the government to step in at any stage of the pregnancy to militarize a woman's vagina is the equivalent of enslaving a woman to the inconvenient fetus just because she had sex w/ some selfish male in heat. I urge women to place their own interests ahead of the fetal parasites feeding off her body."
Sen Udall's vigilant Vagina Oversight Commiitte includes:
Buddy Balzer, Nikita Genitalia, and Sheldon Sheather
(on-loan from Planned Parenthood's Protection-R-Us).
"I'm pleased to announce Hardy Thruster and Homer
Handworker have joined my vagina oversight team."
The Udalls have been political pests for decades.
Rule number one: Never go against the Family.
The voter fraud machine will counter liberal discontent.
someone at the DP editorial board got smacked by reality
East Tincup and all that...
Maybe that is the effect the Post is seeking; scaring away conservatives by endorsing a Republican.
Even worse is that the Boston Globe endorsed Charlie Baker for MA governor, a Republican.
The MEME will be “Democrats lose” the headline will not be “Republicans win”. The media is too biased to see anything else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.