GOP blasts Obama fundraiser
By Bill Scanlon, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published July 2, 2008 at 10:04 a.m.
Updated July 2, 2008 at 2:13 p.m.
Photo by Jae C. Hong © AP
Democratic presidential candidate, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., right, arrives at Colorado Springs Airport in Colorado Springs, Colo., on Wednesday, July 2, 2008.
Colorado GOP officials today blasted Barack Obama for holding a private fundraiser in Colorado Springs and for advocacy of gun control that they say is counter to the views of Coloradans.
"According to Senator Obama, rural folks are bitter people who cling to religion and guns," state Republican party chairman Dick Wadhams said in a conference call.
He and State Rep. Bob Gardner, R-Colorado Springs, noted that Obama's fundraiser today in Colorado Springs won't be a public rally.
"He's come to an area with one of the largest military and veteran populations in the country," Gardner said. "He's chosen to have private meetings because he knows the backlash he would experience here because of the actions of his surrogates."
Gardner was referring to Obama supporter Gen. Wesley Clark, who last week said McCain's experience in a prisoner-of-war camp in North Vietnam didn't qualify him for the presidency.
"Senator Obama has talked many times about having a new politics, about issues, not attacks," Gardner said. "But he stands back while his surrogates attack the record of service and heroism of Senator McCain."
Gardner acknowledged that Obama expressed displeasure at Clark's attack, "but he hasn't put a stop to these attacks by his surrogates."
Wadhams noted that Democratic U.S. Rep. John Salazar told the Grand Junction Sentinel on Tuesday that Obama can't win Colorado without winning western Colorado, and to do that, he must show support for gun rights.
Obama last week said he would uphold "the constitutional rights of law-abiding gun-owners, hunters and sportsmen," adding that "what works in Chicago may not work in Cheyenne."
He has said would try to close loopholes and help step up enforcement of registration requirements, without taking away American's rights to own guns.
But Wadhams this morning said: "Nobody could be further from gun rights in Colorado than Barack Obama." The visit to Colorado Springs today "is a good opportunity for him to tell Coloradans where he really is on gun-control laws."
Peter Groff, D-Denver, the president of the Colorado Senate, said Obama is in tune with Coloradans regarding gun control and the right to bear arms.
"Obama has talked about is support for the Second Amendment, but he also understands that cities periodically have to have some flexibility to protect their citizens," Groff said.
The two GOP officials also blasted Obama for the lower-than-average — 5.625 percent, 30-year — mortgage he got on his $1.65 million restored Georgian mansion in Chicago four years ago.
Obama spokesman Ben LaBolt noted that the Obamas had competing offers, and the discount offered by Northern Trust was a typical incentive in a competitive industry.
"It's time for Senator Obama to answer questions about how he got a good cut-rate deal on his mortgage," Wadhams said.
A recent poll showed Obama with a 5-point lead over McCain among likely Colorado voters and that he was especially strong among independents.
Wadhams said Obama is trying to move to the middle to appeal to independents but that McCain is the true moderate in the race.
Wadhams noted that Obama earlier had criticized President Bush's faith-based initiatives, but then recently embraced the idea.
Gardner concurred: "Senator Obama is trying to rush to the middle and paint himself as a candidate who would appeal to religious conservatives," but that, in Gardner's view, Obama "has disparaged people of faith."
Groff said it's Wadhams and Colorado Republicans flip-flopping on support for faith-based initiatives, noting that when he pushed a bill to encourage faith-based initiatives, Democrats supported it but the GOP did not.
"Now, they're rushing to defend a program they never supported in Colorado."
Groff noted that Obama wants to catalyze churches to cut poverty in half and to help deal with homelessness, drug addiction and other social ills.
"Barack comes out of a Christian tradition where the black church has done that for hundreds of years," Groff said. "the chairman of the GOP ought to go back and read history."
Wadhams said McCain is "in touch with the people in Colorado and the entire country on key issues such as fiscal responsibility and national security."
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
DPS improvements
This interactive shows you how schools will benefit under the bond proposal.
-
2008 Voter’s Guide
Use our Ballot Builder tool to compare your viewpoints to the candidates.
-
Broncos Game Action
Slide shows of the Broncos-Jags quarter-by-quarter photos from Invesco.
-
Rocky Truth Patrol
Rocky Truth Patrol investigates a claim about Colorado Sen. Shawn Mitchell
-
A Dozen on Denver
Manuel Ramos' story is featured this week on 'A Dozen on Denver.' Check it out!
-
Peak Picks
Submit your fall foliage photos to our contest and vote on other submissions.
-
Presidential Elections
See how Colorado counties have voted through the years.
-
County election profiles
A look at how residents in each Colorado county may vote.
-
A dream fulfilled
A Rocky Mountain News and MediaStorm production
July 2, 2008
10:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
FlyfishDude52 writes:
What "loopholes" is he talking about? When was the last time you bought a handgun? I don't care who you are, you can't walk in, buy a handgun and walk out with it.
If Chicago had a larger gun toting population (other than the criminal element) there would be less crime. See how well gun control worked for Washington, DC??? I rest my case.
I guess I'll just remain a bitter individual clinging to my guns and my faith. Wow! It sure feels good!
July 2, 2008
10:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
voicefromuphigh writes:
Is there a fundraiser that for Obama that the Republicans would have approved?
July 2, 2008
10:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
FlyfishDude52,
I think if you buy from certain sellers there is no background check like gun shows. This is pretty sad that all they can do is complain about something McCain did within a month and his was just because he didn't want to be in photos with Bush. I wish they could talk about McCain and his plans instead of just attacking Obama. I guess the GOP can barely stand their own candidate enough to discuss his virtues. They are still messed up because Rove called McCain mentally unstable when he ran against Bush.
July 2, 2008
10:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
So the best they can do is blame Obama for something Clark said and offer a straw man argument about what would happen if Obama spoke in public. I don't think "representatives" speak for the military personnel that don't get to vote in that district anyway. I only wish the soldiers stationed at Carson and AFA voted locally.
July 2, 2008
11:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
darkheath writes:
This Gardner guy is a moron, who voted for him?
"But he hasn't put a stop to these attacks by his surrogates."? Really? Surrogate? He doesn't even know what the word means! And what's Obama supposed to do, keep a high-ranking retired military officer from speaking?
Actually, Clark is right. Being a prisoner of war does not make you "president material". For the record, I like McCain (except for the 100 years stuff). He's a lot better than some of the others who could have come from the Repubs. Clark would have been a good president. Shame he didn't make it.
Flyfishdude... questions for you. How many guns would Jesus own? Would he prefer high or low caliber weapons? Rifles or easily hidden hand guns?
July 2, 2008
11:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
portal_pyramids writes:
I haven't really heard much good being spoken about McCain from anyone including Republican's. What i have heard from him is similar viewpoints to that of the current administration. Things are worse than they ever have been and McCain is promising more of the same. It is scary to me that people identify with the republican party after we witnessed what they are doing. America is now hated across the world and is known for violence and torture. Our economy is in the gutter and there will be consequences from this presidency for many years to come including, yes, more terrorist attacks. The war on terror is not the answer to this threat just like the war on drugs did not work stop drugs.
I do not know much about sen. Obama but i do know that he is a breathe of fresh air. Republicans are offering more of the same. It must be good for some people because it seems like a lot of people want more of the same. I would vote ANYONE different than someone offering war without end and promotion of fear. I truly believe Obama can be a difference maker in a positive way if people will allow themselves to get past his color and the fear and hate being propagated by the Republican war mongers and oil horrors.
July 2, 2008
11:26 a.m.
Suggest removal
GK writes:
"Senator Obama has talked many times about having a new politics, about issues, not attacks," Gardner said. "But he stands back while his surrogates attack the record of service and heroism of Senator McCain."
Quite the spin on the truth. Republicans are so incredibly desperate.
July 2, 2008
11:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
djbrav writes:
Attacking Obama's mortgage rate?! Really??? This is the level the GOP has stooped to? Laughable!
Wadhams - Obama does represent my views of gun control and I am 4th gen Coloradoan.
FlyFishDude52 - see how well gun control works in Europe. I would rather have nobody 'toting' a gun than put a gun in the hands of anyone with a heartbeat.
July 2, 2008
11:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
mark79trans writes:
Big_D writes:
FlyfishDude52,
I think if you buy from certain sellers there is no background check like gun shows.
__________________
Maybe you might want to find out what happens before you regurgitate a sound bite. Yes, you are required to have a background check at a gun show. At the Tanner Gun Show, they have multiple stations including several terminals up front. If you get caught on a private sale without going up front, then you are busted.
Now, there is a huge black market for firearms. Those of us who actually obey the current laws don't buy our firearms on the streets. Contrary to the gun-control belief, the weapons will remain on the black market regardless of what laws are passed. You would think by the proliferation of hand guns in DC, people would get that by now. Disarming those who don't commit the crimes is absolutely stupid! Obama is absolutely the worst thing we can do in the west (next to Ritter)!
July 2, 2008
11:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
Marshdale writes:
Mark79. With all due respect. Conservatives have been spreading the mantra " their going to take them away, their going to take them away" For about 45 to 50 years now. It has not happened. I will give some credit where credit is due. The NRA although I don't belong has helped to prevent this, but so have reasonable Democrats and Republicans alike. I'm a liberal who owns many firearms and have never been worried about losing our right to bear arms until the Bush administration came along with the Patriot Act, and The Homeland Security Bill. These two pieces of legislation are the single largest threat to our right as citizens to keep and bear arms. If you read between the lines in these documents entangled in the fog of it all, there are more ways the government can take your guns than ever before. Shame on the Republicans and Democrats who voted for these pieces of legislation.
July 2, 2008
11:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
windskull writes:
COME ON JANUARY 20 IF FOR NO OTHER REASON THAN TO PUT THESE IGNORANT VOLES BACK IN THEIR HIDEY-HOLES AGAIN!
July 2, 2008
12:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
aRe writes:
Obama's not going to take away anyone's guns if he's elected. As a liberal I feel there is nothing wrong with owning a gun for sports and or self protection as long as you don't have any record of violent crime in your past.
Most Democrats feel the same way including Obama.
Do Republicans feel that handguns should be given away as prizes at school bake sales? - Of course not. See, I'm sure even the most serious gun person can understand the need for some common sense regulation.
July 2, 2008
12:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
darkheath writes:
Gene... what's your problem? I mean, really? What bit of information was transformed in your warped head to call him "Obombist"? Are you truly so shallow to think that anyone with an Arabic or Islamic name is a terrorist?
Also, do you people think that as long as you have your guns, everything else that's been happening to this country and our place in the international community is all right?
Anyway... as Marshdale pointed out, it's a horribly WEAK argument. No matter who is elected, you'll be able to keep your dumb guns. Next issue please.
July 2, 2008
12:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
pdt2139 writes:
Somebody answer me this.
Why are Democrats for gun control and abortion rights but Republicans are against gun control but for the illegalization of abortion?
Some people want gun control so guns are not used to kill other people. On that same token people also want to make abortions illegal because they feel it kills a fetus.
Shouldn’t one party be for gun control and the illegalization of abortion and the other party for no gun control and abortion rights?
July 2, 2008
1:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
infidel91 writes:
Somebody start up a respectable party that supports gun rights and abortion rights, and I'll be the first to sign up!
July 2, 2008
1:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
darkheath writes:
infidel (interesting choice of title) -
The Dems already support gun rights and abortion rights. Unless by "gun rights" you mean that you can pick up a Saturday Night Special on the way home from work in the convenience store with a bottle of milk and a carton of eggs.
July 2, 2008
1:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
O_TRAIN writes:
pdt2139 - excellent question, I've asked that same question on these forums and get no answer. Seems like a glaring contradiction to me. It seems once you add religion to the mix, you get this contradiction, which goes against the concept of individual rights.
I've always thought- what if someones religious manual said guns were evil, a sin - would these religious folks still support the 2nd amend??
infidel91 - I would sign up for that third party too - until then it's called "unaffiliated"
July 2, 2008
2:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
darkheath writes:
Would someone explain to me what you people mean by "gun rights"? What exactly is it you want to do/have that you can't do/have? Or what are you so afraid of being taken away?
As far as I know the only restrictions are a 5 day background check (except at gun shows where you walk to the front and get "Googled" or something and walk out with it) and automatic assault rifles, which unless you volunteer for Iraq duty, there is absolutely no need for.
What am I missing here?
July 2, 2008
2:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
Awal writes:
I'm a Republican, and I believe that there are a lot of bitter people (rural and urban) "who cling to guns and religion." Do you think John McCain will still take my vote anyway? The GOP is just as full of $hit as the Democratic Party. I'd love to see them both go away.
July 2, 2008
4:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
darkheath writes:
I feel your pain, Awal.
I bet you are a FISCAL conservative as opposed to a RELIGIOUS conservative. Huge difference. That's what the Republicans USED to be about. I had a lot more respect for them then.
July 2, 2008
4:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
zivo24 writes:
"The GOP blasts Obama fundraiser"
Too funny!
More like they're dumbfounded at how he is able to raise money without having elitist parties where wealthy donors and corporations spend tens of thousands of dollars a plate so they can bask in the glow of their leader in exchange for his favor.
The GOP simply can't wrap their minds around average Americans supporting a candidate and only wanting the best for their country in return.