Red Colorado group now on Twitter

I've been learning Facebook and Twitter in recent weeks, finding them worth the investment of time. Twitter is essentially a chatroom where very short comments with links can be blasted to your selected network of friends. Easy to sign up, free, and easy to start using - the sophisticated wrinkles can come later or be ignored. This post is particularly addressed to Colorado Republicans and conservatives who I think would benefit from keeping in closer touch via Twitter. I have created a specialty group called Red Colorado for us to "talk" in. Here's how it works...

1- Create your Twitter account at www.twitter.com, start collecting others to "follow" (hear from automatically).

2- When you write an update, if it concerns the goal of making Colorado red again, include the "hashtag" #redco

3- Any time you want to check on what others in Red Colorado are saying, go to www.search.twitter.com, enter #redco, and presto - all the comments are show there, with options for you to reply directly to the individual or to toss in your own comment to the whole group.

A number of sample #redco items are already posted to give the idea. These things can be a time-wasting toy OR a real productivity tool for our political goals. So far I see potential for the latter. Let's experiment and find out.

In defense of social conservatives

For rank-and-file Republicans, our party's mission is to advance freedom through limited government, strong national security, personal responsibility and traditional family values. Although many Republicans generally adhere to all four of those elements, some do not; yet they remain allied because they are so strongly committed to many of those principles. Despite inner-party squabbles, most Republicans rationally accept that we must work together to form an electoral majority.

Recently, some have grumbled that social conservatives - pro-lifers, opponents of same-sex marriage and the "Religious Right" - are to blame for the party's recent setbacks and should be muzzled.

If the goal is winning elections, rather than purging membership rolls at the country club, throwing social conservatives under the bus is a catastrophically bad idea.

Roughly two-thirds of Republicans are pro-life; the balance are pro-choice. However, overwhelming majorities in both camps weigh other factors before casting their vote. According to Gallop, rigidly single-issue voters constitute just 22% of pro-life Republicans and 8% of pro-choicers.

Just four years ago, pollsters credited "values voters" with re-electing President Bush and expanding GOP majorities. This year, moderate "maverick" John McCain enjoyed strong support from evangelicals on Election Day, despite ranking as the least favorite primary candidate of pro-life Republicans.

Meanwhile, Republican moderates like Colin Powell, William Weld and Lincoln Chaffee endorsed the Democrat. Bob Schaffer experienced similar defections from social moderates who certainly would have disdained defectors had the shoe been on the other foot.

So why do some social moderates and libertarians find it so difficult to coexist with social conservatives?

Some believe social issues are a loser at ballot box, pointing to the 3-to-1 defeat of this year's "personhood" amendment. That's a poor example because Amendment 48 split the pro-life community between those who hope to end abortion in one fell swoop and those who think an incremental approach is more practical.

Gallup says the public "is split nearly down the middle" on abortion, but measures like a ban on late-term abortion enjoy overwhelming support.

The other galvanizing social issue, preserving the traditional definition of marriage, is the most successful citizen initiative since term limits and enjoys even stronger support among blacks and Hispanics than among whites.

Another reason social issues cause a rift is that many in both camps are very principled in their beliefs. Moderates and libertarians truly believe that abortion and marriage fall beyond the bounds of limited government. Social conservatives reason that life is the foremost of our inalienable rights and that traditional marriage laws merely preserve what governments have codified for centuries.

Fiscal conservatives must recognize that social conservatives are often their strongest allies in the battle for low taxes and limited government. In the last legislative session, pro-life Republicans scored an average 65% on the Colorado Union of Taxpayers scorecard, while pro-choice Republicans averaged 41%.

Most social conservatives don't care what goes on in someone else's bedroom but take to the ramparts when those matters move to a courthouse or seek taxpayer funding. In most cases, conservatives didn't seek out these battles until liberal activists and judges ignited them.

Social moderates who say they just want government to "stay out of it" will soon be tested. Will they vociferously oppose restrictions on religious speech, taxpayer funding of abortion, and federal legislation to pre-empt state laws on abortion and marriage?

Standing on principle is commendable, but beating each other over the head with our differences is a fool's sport. In the coming months, Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid will remind us all too clearly that the principles which unite us are far greater than those that divide us.

We need that reminder because, in the words of Benjamin Franklin, "We must all hang together or, assuredly, we shall all hang separately."

Anti-slavery then, pro-life now

(Denver Post, Dec. 7) What many call a concern for social issues, I call a passion for protection of the human person. With Democrats on a winning streak, some Republicans are asking why that passion is so strong in our party. Does it even belong in American politics? Thinking the question through, you’ll see that it does and it always has. Imagine you’re an Irish cop living in a Chicago slum. In the neighborhood you meet Barry and Shelley, a black couple who help the poor. You’re impressed with their efforts to bring the community better jobs, doctors, and schools. But one day you are ordered to raid their home and arrest them. Barry and Shelley are not criminals. They have harmed no one. But the year is 1858, and a man from Mississippi named Davis claims to own them as property. Federal law requires Illinois to enforce his claim. The black man “has no rights which the white man is bound to respect,” according to a US Supreme Court ruling in 1857.

You see your friends hauled away in chains. A month later you learn that Davis has sold the man into Alabama and taken the wife as his concubine. Their young daughters were put to work as field hands. The older one, defiant and desperate, dies after a whipping. Mississippi brings no charges.

After witnessing this, if a new political party called for changing the law so it would safeguard the life and liberty of all persons equally, wouldn’t you vote for them? If the same party insisted on strong marriage laws to protect women and children, wouldn’t you support that too?

I have just described the origins of the Republican Party in this country 150 years ago, during the crisis over human slavery in the South and plural marriage in Utah. Both injustices were condemned in the earliest GOP platforms on which Abraham Lincoln and his fellow partisans appealed to Americans’ moral conscience. A passion for protection of the human person is bred in our party’s DNA.

Bring the scenario forward to 1978. You’re an Italian nurse in Denver, mother of a pregnant 17-year-old. The whole family, even the expected child’s father, wants to see it born and either raised or offered for adoption. But your daughter wants the baby aborted.

Coloradans once made their own laws to balance this difficult issue where precious lives are at stake. Now they can’t. A US Supreme Court ruling in 1973 has barred state action, effectively saying that the child in the womb has no rights which adults are bound to respect.

Your long allegiance to the Democratic Party is no help; they favor court-sanctioned abortion on demand. If the Republicans called for letting elected legislators instead of robed judges seek a life-affirming compromise on the issue, wouldn’t you move their way? Millions would and did.

Forward again to 2008. You’re an African-American pastor in Los Angeles. You marched at Selma with Dr. King. You can’t wait to see Obama in the White House. California’s huge Democratic landslide will be partly your doing. But all your faith and common sense tell you marriage means one man and one woman, as voters affirmed by over 60% before the state’s highest court said otherwise last spring.

Now your congregation puts its weight behind Proposition 8, writing traditional marriage into the state constitution, even as most of them also vote for Barack. You’re not about to register Republican, but you’re quietly thankful that America still has one major party with a passion for protection of the human person, including the biological family.

Should the GOP abandon its defense of the unborn and the married moms and dads who await them? Not unless we’re ready to renounce our humanitarian patriarch and founder, Lincoln.

Sore winners should lay off Musgrave

Republican Congresswoman Marilyn Musgrave, targeted five years ago by the Tim Gill machine for the crime of defending traditional marriage and finally brought down last month, is the most relentlessly and unjustly smeared public figure I can recall in 35 years of Colorado politics. Since the election, amazingly, the smears have continued from the Democrat who defeated her, Betsy Markey, aided by biased or lazy reporting from the state and national media. The rap against Musgrave now is that she hasn't made a courtesy phone call to Markey, hasn't spoken to her supporters, and hasn't even thanked her own staff -- making her one of America's sorest losers, according to no less an authority than Newsweek.

These heinous offenses have been repeatedly alleged in the Denver papers, most recently this week with stories in the Post and the Rocky occasioned by Musgrave's campaign efforts in the Georgia Senate runoff. But they are baloney three times over. A stronger term occurs to me, but this is a family website.

First as to the allegation of ungrateful and ungracious behavior to her own side, longtime staffer Guy Short assures me that employees for both the campaign and the congressional office have been not only generously thanked but also financially looked out for. To the charge (quoting the Denver Post, but originated by the Fort Collins Coloradoan) that "she has yet to... publicly address her supporters or volunteers, many of whom had gathered at a restaurant on election night," Short told the Coloradoan editor in an email:

"I don't know where you heard that Marilyn didn't thank her supporters but that is simply not true. She thanked her supporters election night at Jackson's Hole in Greeley and at the Fairfield Hotel in Greeley. She has made hundreds of phone calls thanking supporters and has written hundreds of letters thanking supporters."

But the most damning piece of spin against Musgrave, reflecting political ignorance and naivete at best or sore-winner spite and conscious falsehood at worst, is the suggestion from Markey's camp that the losing candidate has committed some unheard-of pettiness and snub by not getting in touch with the winner.

As Ben Marter, spokesman for the congresswoman-elect, told the Post: "The voters have spoken and it's customary to call your opponent to concede the race, but we're moving forward."

Wrong. I can find no evidence of any such Colorado custom in congressional and legislative races. Tom Tancredo, retiring this year from Congress, says no Democrat ever called him to concede or extend congratulations after his two state House and five US House victories stretching back to the 1970s.

Mike Coffman, newly elected to succeed Tancredo, received no call or contact of any kind from Hank Eng, the Democrat he defeated. I received no call from the Democrat who pummeled me with negative mailers but lost anyway, in our state Senate race of 2000.

Musgrave herself, according to Guy Short, is in the same situation as Tancredo -- never in a long string of elections for state House, state Senate, and Congress has her defeated Democrat opponent bothered to call.

You see, it's just not done that way. Presidential combatants do the concede-and-congratulate thing because it's in glare of national and world attention. I don't know what happens in all governor's races, but I personally went to see Gov. Roy Romer after he beat me on election night 1990. But at the congressional and legislative level -- memo to Ben Marter and Betsy Markey -- to say it's "customary" is just not so.

Formal declarations of conceding or refusing-to-concede have relevance only in disputed races with razor-thin margins, such as the month-long 2002 duel in CD-7 between Dem Mike Feeley and eventual Republican winner Bob Beauprez, or this year's drawn-out SD-26 contest where Republican Lauri Clapp was finally edged out by Democrat Linda Newell.

If the new 4th CD congresslady wants to show some class, she can give this subject a rest and tell her cheering section to do the same. Instead of the sly statement "we're moving forward" while fanning the grievance in same breath, they need to lay off the victim thing, give a no-comment, and move forward.

In other words, Betsy, get over yourself. Where is it written that the campaign's not over until you're genuflected to? Didn't mom teach you not to kick someone when they're down? Isn't the victory enough in itself?

Disclosure: I am a longtime donor and endorser for Musgrave's congressional races.

Nine lessons from my CD-2 race

Needless to say, 2008 was not a good year for Republicans. Our nation faced major financial and energy crises brought on by direct actions and inactions of Democrats in Congress. Not only did Republicans fail to capitalize on these issues, but we were defeated at nearly every level. It is easy to try to lay the blame on the unpopularity of George Bush, or an ineffective campaign by John McCain or on a media bias. However, if we do not identify and address the root causes of our resounding defeat this year, we are destined to experience further political losses in the future.

Republicans have lost significant ground over the past four years. All areas of political advantage have suffered, including: lack of a positive message that resonates with people; lack of highly qualified, articulate candidates that are backed by the party at all levels; the need to repair the Republican brand which has been severely damaged; poor communication at all levels of the party; lack of leadership from the top – down; the need to appeal to the young generation; and the need to increase Republican voter registration.

Democrats had a full court press of registration while Republicans felt it was somebody else’s job. We must also increase our fund raising efforts at all levels, as well as increase grass-roots community involvement. Because Democrats have a media advantage, we must find alternative and more creative ways to get out our message.

I believe that to regain a majority in the state of Colorado, we need to address these fundamental systemic root causes of a weakened Republican party. Colorado is a center-right state, and we can regain majorities at the state and federal levels by articulating consistent and inspirational messages.

By turning around each of the shortcomings that I observed as a congressional candidate this year, we come up with the following 9-point agenda for a better showing next time.

1. Articulate a Positive Message

We need to articulate a positive message based upon conservative principals and values. People want to be inspired to vote for a candidate, not against the opponent. We must convey a positive message, based on the greatness of America. Ronald Reagan and the ’94 Republican revolution were so successful because we communicated a positive message from the top down. We must communicate that message always, even if it is not articulated from the top.

The fundamental messages that strike a chord with the people include: Personal accountability, freedoms and opportunities, as well as national security. It is acceptable to demonstrate contrast with the Democrats, but primarily negative campaigns never work. While trying to appeal to unaffiliated voters it is acceptable to present contrast, but it should be presented in a non-confrontational manner.

2. Candidate Development

People want to find reasons to vote for candidates, or to join a party. We must develop inspirational candidates and party leaders who think for themselves and are not partisan parrots. We must develop candidates at every level and compete in every race in every district. The Democrats have been very successful with their 64 county approach in Colorado, while Republicans have only tried to maintain status quo.

We cannot grow as a party or as a philosophy with a hunker-down mentality. We must adopt a Fifty-State approach nationally and a 64 county approach in Colorado. State wide races can be won by being competitive in Democratic strongholds. Ignoring these districts will further widen the divide and make is harder to ever change the tide. I believe this in one of the major contributory factors in Republican losses this year.

Unaffiliated voters do not want to be represented by partisan hacks. They want independent thinkers who will stand up for what they believe in. Most voters want the same opportunities and freedoms that make America great. If we communicate the conservative principles that provide the foundation of our decisions, Republicans will attract independents and even Democrats to their side.

Conservatism did not fail us this year, our abandonment of fiscal responsibility and our lack of inspirational leadership failed us. This is demonstrated by the fact that Obama ran on a platform of tax cuts and eliminating wasteful government agencies. Even though Obama lacked specifics, and was not challenged by the media, his message resonated better than McCain’s message.

3. Intra-Party Communications

We have had poor intra-party communications at all levels. Infighting and posturing have diverted energy that should be used to get our message out. I believe we must generate Candidate Handbooks and lessons learned manuals at all levels: Handbooks to include fund-raising ideas, lessons learned, campaigning “dos and don’ts” etc... These handbooks must cover all levels of party organization including State Party, county, and local republican clubs as well as candidates and candidate committees.

We must also collect and share available data about precincts, lists of voters and voting history. Gathering statistical data on registration is a key component in obtaining metrics by which we can gage our progress and focus in on programs that work. The current voter registration data and information process has been too cumbersome and the availability of accurate data has been lacking.

Additionally, Republican organizations must make more effective use of websites, blogs and email blasts. We are not making effective use of the internet for communication, and this must be addressed.

4. Party Leadership

I believe that with several exceptions, our party’s leadership has not adequately supported candidates, state and local organizations. Along with the lack of a strong, consistent and positive message, our national leadership seemed resigned to defeat this year and hoarded resources to a few targeted races. Leadership at the county level must be strengthened. Party leadership must be enforced with defined roles and responsibilities for leadership positions at all levels. We cannot tolerate complacent or indifferent performance from our party leaders. If they do not perform, they should be replaced.

5. Youth Movement

We need to plant seeds and take our message directly to the youth of America through the means they communicate, with a message that resonates with them. Several methods of effective communication are Facebook communication networks, internet sights & blogs, Young Republican and College Republican organizations. I believe county level organizations should subsidize and encourage local youth groups. I recommend at least 10% of county funds go to youth group organizations, such as Young Republicans. We must also focus on issues which resonate with youth including education, the environment, government fiscal responsibility including long-term social security viability.

6. Voter Registration

We have lost significant ground this year on the voter registration front. We must be diligent in our efforts to register as many new voters as possible. To do this we must contact newcomers into the area (County level responsibility). We must also hold registration drives at any public events. We must make people feel welcome and connected to the Republican party. We should find people’s interests and connect with unaffiliated voters to make them realize they identify with the principals of the Republican Party.

7. Fund Raising

Traditionally, Republicans typically held advantages in fund raising. That advantage is gone. We must reignite our find raising efforts at all levels. We focus too much at the top levels and ignore down-ticket candidates. Grass-roots level communication starts at the lower levels and we must support candidates financially to help communicate our message. Further, we must adopt a 64 county approach and support every candidate, every race, every time.

If every registered Republican in a congressional district sent their candidate $10, they would have over $1M to get our message out. This will have a significant affect on raising the tide and making all districts competitive. We must also put pressure on the federal and state levels to adopt this approach. If we had a holistic approach this year, we might be celebrating a McCain victory right now. I also propose adopting a “Change for Change” program that encourages Republicans to start spare-change jars, every two years, tally it up and divide the monies to candidates, with largest apportionment to the top ticket candidates.

8. Community Involvement

The party and all prospective candidates must be continually involved at the community level, and not just in election years. Voters (particularly unaffiliated voters) will vote for candidates they know personally or know of their community involvement. Being active in the community will generate positive press and the voters receive a sense of connectivity with the candidate.

Examples of community level involvement include Rotary Clubs, Optimist Clubs, Schools, PTA, sporting teams, Astronomy Clubs, VFW, Kiwanis etc... I also propose that we hold fund raisers for clubs typically not associated with Republican organizations (for instance environmental causes). Community level activists must also promote national level candidates. As an example, at every town parade I attended this year had dozens of Obama supporters, and no organized McCain supporters. There were people who would carry a McCain sign, but there was no organized effort to show support for the top of our ticket.

9. Communication Methods

We must use all available communication avenues to get our message out. We are the party of ideas, we must articulate those ideas any opportunity we can. Communication venues include: Websites, Blogs, Facebook networks, Yahoo groups, Talk radio, Letters to the editor, Community events and Conventional media (newspapers, TV etc...). There is no debate that most conventional media outlets favor Democrat principles and candidates. It serves no purpose to whine or lament this reality. We must increase our efforts to counter it. With new communication and information venues we can effectively get our message out.

Summary

The Republican Party is the party of ideas and we can regain a majority in Colorado by communicating those ideas in a clear, consistent and positive manner. A clear majority of people identify with our message, so we must be confident and consistent in connecting with people about our message. We must adopt a 64 county approach in Colorado (50 State nationally). We must compete in every race and support our candidates, even in Democrat strongholds. We must develop strong community involved candidates that can effectively articulate our message. Strong party leadership with clearly defined roles and responsibilities will also increase our effectiveness and ability to communicate within the party. We must take advantage of new media communication methods and appeal to a new generation of voters.

I believe that by addressing these systemic issues, we can turn the tide of the political winds, and regain a majority at the state and federal levels, but it will take diligence and determination.

Scott Starin lives in Lafayette and works in the aerospace industry. He was the 2008 Republican nominee for Congress in Colorado's 2nd District.