Is Ken Salazar Colorado's Charlie Rangel?
By Erik Rush
February, 6, 2006

Well, it's become quite apparent that U.S. Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) is quickly making a name for himself among the ranks of the slandering, sensationalizing far left. Since I live in Colorado, covered the primaries and election that put Salazar into office, and know some of the principals personally, I thought my take might shed some light onto the underpinnings of this bizarre phenomenon.

First, on April 25, 2005, Senator Ken Salazar (affectionately known as "Gollum" by Colorado conservatives) commented that Focus on the Family (FOTF), the organization founded by Dr. James Dobson, has relentlessly and unfairly attacked him. In an interview with KKTV in Colorado Springs he said, "from my point of view, they are the Antichrist of the world". The Colorado Springs based group has been very up front with their criticism of Salazar, a pro-choice Catholic.

Seems consistent enough for him to feel criticized, but hardly meriting the "Antichrist" label. The next day, Salazar retracted the use of the phrase "antichrist," downplaying it to "un-Christian". I guess he had a problem with the fine distinction.

Second, on January 25 2006, the Rocky Mountain News reported that while discussing the Senate debate over Judge Samuel A. Alito's nomination to the U.S. Supreme Court with reporters, Senator Salazar said, "I think [Justice Clarence] Thomas is an abomination when you contrast him to the leadership and principles of someone like Thurgood Marshall."

Of these comments, Project 21 member Mychal Massie commented: "Clarence Thomas rose up from poverty and racism in the rural Jim Crow South to sit on our highest court. It is a height only one other black man has reached in our nation's history. To dismiss Justice Thomas as an abomination is disrespectful to him as a man and to blacks everywhere" (Project 21, a nonprofit and nonpartisan organization, has been a leading voice in the black community since 1992).

Now, all we really have to do is look at the former Colorado Attorney General's current record to see where he stands, and that he's now delivering to his freak base in Denver (far-Left environmentalists, gay activist and pro-abortion groups, and well-entrenched unions) that backed him in his senatorial bid.

From Vote Smart:

In 2005, Senator Salazar supported the interests of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People 80 percent.

In 2005, Senator Salazar supported the interests of the Eagle Forum 25 percent.

In 2005, Senator Salazar supported the interests of the American Wilderness Coalition 100 percent.

In 2005, Senator Salazar supported the interests of the Defenders of Wildlife Action Fund 75 percent.

In 2005 Senator Salazar supported the interests of the Gun Owners of America 0 percent.

In 2005, Senator Salazar supported the interests of the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers 100 percent.

In 2005, Senator Salazar supported the interests of the Service Employees International Union 77 percent.

In 2006, Senator Salazar supported the interests of the Americans for Better Immigration 20 percent.

Doth a pattern seem to emerge?

Now, Colorado conservatives such as myself were disappointed at Salazar's winning of his Senate seat -- but not nearly as disappointed as we were in the reason for his win. For truly, there was but one man who had earned the seat and would have made a superb senator, as opposed to the consummate political sellout and stealth far-lefter we obviously have in Salazar.

The reason Salazar won? The Colorado Republican leadership.

The man who should be holding that seat? Beer baron Pete Coors, who ran against him?

Nope. Bob Schaffer, the two-term former Congressman from Colorado's District 4, who was succeeded by Marilyn Musgrave.

Schaffer ran against Coors in the Republican primarily. In fact, early on he really didn't have any competition -- and then Coors suddenly announced his intention to run. Coors: who had never held an office of any kind, but who had lots of money and some name recognition.

Schaffer had an incredible reputation statewide, a stellar congressional record, and was literally loved by conservatives in Colorado for being -- well, a conservative; a man who'd fought his way up the state political ladder with integrity, who made positive changes while in office, and who did what he said he'd do -- including holding to his promise to only serve two terms in Congress (he served from 1997 until early 2003).

Schaffer was, by the way, the only one of the three who had held national office and knew how to get things done in Washington without actually selling his soul.

But the leadership in Colorado thought that perhaps Coors' millions and his name recognition would make him a shoo-in over Salazar. Perhaps some of them owed him favors. Big mistake. So they, along with Colorado Governor Bill Owens (a Republican but hardly a conservative) shivved Bob in the back and threw their support behind Coors, whom many Coloradoans saw as a bored rich boy who wanted to have the name "Senator" before his name -- and perhaps cut some sweet deals for brewing industry.

As you may know, I was raised in New York. If anyone is thinking Lew Lehrman versus Mario Cuomo in 1982, you know exactly what I'm talking about. I think Cuomo wound up serving through several cycles of cosmic incarnation as New York's Governor.

The conservative Republican base in Colorado was enraged, so much so that many literally did not vote out of spite. Independents at least wanted someone who was somewhat familiar with politics, so they went with Salazar, who wound up trouncing Coors soundly. Now we have yet another opportunistic Democrat senator who represented himself as "the people's man" (he came from a family of farmers, ya know), but whose political capital is all big city.

And now he's openly slandering his enemies and those of the far left along the lines of rhetorical terrorists like Charlie Rangel and Julian Bond. Heck of a way to make a name for yourself, but for Coloradoans to suddenly have a senator who makes insanely ridiculous and abusive remarks on a regular basis -- with no-holds barred, even against Christians and minorities... well, they've never seen the like!

--------------------

Note -- The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, views, and/or philosophy of GOPUSA.