As long as he's in town...McCain tostump for Lang Sias

7th Congressional District Republican hopeful Lang Sias, who is going up against Aurora City Councilman Ryan Frazier for the GOP nomination to challenge incumbent liberal Democrat Ed Perlmutter sent out a press release that John McCain will be visiting Sias' campaing office on Sunday evening:

7th Congressional candidate Lang Sias will host Senator John McCain (R-AZ) on Sunday evening at Sias' Arvada headquarters. McCain will visit with weekend phone bank volunteers and rally with supporters.

Senator McCain is expected to arrive at Sias headquarters at 6:30pm. Campaign headquarters is at 5790 Yukon St.

Sias worked on McCain's 2008 campaign and I presume the men are friends, just as Jane Norton and McCain are friends.

What strikes me as interesting is that although I have not paid extremely close attention to the 7th CD GOP debate, I haven't heard Sias criticized for supporting McCain, or at least not as much as Frazier criticizes Sias for not voting in an election in the past decade.  (Something Sias also acknowledges was an error on his part as both he and Frazier make specific claims to "not be perfect" if we thought otherwise.  And I say that as someone who thinks both men are solid candidates and solid people.)

Presumably, this means (correctly) that having supported McCain in the last election doesn't automatically make someone a RINO or a "squish"; certainly nobody would suggest that Lang Sias, a Lt. Colonel in the Air National Guard and former Top Gun instructor, is anybody's liberal.

(This is of course not to say that nobody who supported McCain was a RINO or that conservatives or libertarians didn't have good reason to refuse to support McCain, which was the conclusion I reached.)

Yet Ken Buck and his supporters are simply glued to the guilt-by-association tactic, slamming Norton for knowing McCain and for having him campaing for her.

That said, since we all know that that's one of the biggest criticisms made of Jane, whether it's reasonable or not (and it's not), it still strikes me as a risky move, or at least a move designed to appeal to people other than the usual GOP base, to ask McCain to come stump for a campaign.  That goes for Sias as well as Norton.  It's a sign that neither is currently confident that he or she is in the lead.

  • joe harrington
    Comment from: joe harrington
    08/05/10 @ 06:20:58 pm

    As a Buck supporter, my decision to support him and not Norton was initially and solely based on my decision to voice a negative vote against McCain. She chose to be his State Campaign Chair while Thompson, Romney, Giuliani and others were still in the primary hunt, and that tells me that she is not being truthful about why she backed McCain. She says that she backed him because Obama was way worse in foreign policy (Iraq and Afghanistan) yet that choice between Obama and McCain didn't exist until May 2008 fully 10 months after she became McCain's State Chair. In fact she backed him because she is allied with the McCain faction of the GOP and while politics makes strange bedfellows she chose (metaphorically) to sleep with him and not with someone else. I am not saying I'm right, but I am saying that unless the McCain wing of the GOP is crushed (McCain, Lindsey Graham, any of the other 7 senators of the Gang of 14 that neutered Bush's capacity to appoint federal judges when the GOP controlled the Senate, and Owens to name a few ringleaders) we will continue to have the sort of disasters that have befallen us in the governor's race. For example, the Bush tax cuts would have been permanent in 2001 but for the liberal GOPers wanting to cut a deal with the Dems rather than rahm it through like the Dems would against us. Instead our side put a 10 year timer on the tax cuts and it will be the biggest single cause of the double dip recession up-coming. McCain is a squish, and if Graham was visiting Colorado Norton's house would be where the barbeque would be held. That tells me that Norton chooses to associate with squishs and RINOs... Sorry Ross - I think you have blinded your judgment on this Norton thing... PS - If you (and 4 million others) decided that voting Libertarian or staying home in 2008 was worth it to make your point against McCain (causing Obama's victory margin), then why isn't it worth underlining that point in blood with a vote against EVERY PERSON who ever associated themselves with McCain in a voluntary way? I dare say that is the reason (almost the sole reason) that Buck's support is so vociferous and deep - he was a county chair for Romney and more importantly not for McCain.

  • Comment from: Rossputin
    08/05/10 @ 06:30:11 pm

    Joe, I understand your position and I agree with you except to the extent that you think that Jane's politics must be the same as McCain's just because she knows the guy or even campaigns with him. Lindsey Graham must go! By the way, it's not really important but I'd bet that less than half of Buck supporters, probably less than a quarter, know he was county chair for Romney. To some degree -- but only some -- Buck's support is anti-Norton in the same way that some Maes support was really just anti-McInnis. I can't wait until this is over...

  • ken smith
    Comment from: ken smith
    08/06/10 @ 12:41:38 am

    There's a fair amount of that. My impression of Calamity Jane is that she is as dumb as a box of rocks and takes her orders from Cinamon, Josh, and Mike, and I haven't seen or heard anything that would disabuse me of that notion. She was the Anschutz wing's courtesan, and I have no reason to believe that she would act in the best interest of all Coloradans, where there was a conflict. Ken Buck is no prize -- he wears the stilletoes in the Party -- but he's head and shoulders above Jane. And the "outsider" bit was priceless. Is there anything Jane won't say to get elected?