Armstrong aide downplays Coffman's military experience
Carrie Porterand Berny Morson, Rocky Mountain News
Published July 15, 2008 at 5:14 p.m.
Wil Armstrong
Ted Harvey
Photo by Coffman Campaign
Mike Coffman during the first Gulf War. He also served in Iraq in the most recent war.
Photo by Ward Campaign
Steve Ward is a Marine Corps colonel who was in Iraq when he decided to run.
A top aide for 6th Congressional District candidate Wil Armstrong ruffled feathers Tuesday when he downplayed the importance of a rival's military experience.
Jack Stansbery, Armstrong's spokesman and campaign manager, said Secretary of State Mike Coffman makes too much of his service in the first Gulf War and in Iraq.
"Coffman says it's critical to have a veteran in Congress, but currently Congress has 101 military veterans and 56 of them are Republican," Stansbery said.
"So I'm not sure what he can bring to the table that is different from what those folks can bring."
Coffman, one of four candidates seeking the Republican nomination, is a retired major in the Marine Corps who completed a tour in Iraq in 2006. He worked with the Independent Electoral Commission of Iraqi and helped establish local interim governments.
Coffman's spokesman and campaign manager, Dustin Zvonek, said Stansbery's claims are a "dishonest characterization of our campaign theme." Coffman would be the first Republican veteran in Congress who served in Iraq, Zvonek said.
"Mike believes that his experience, having been in Iraq and worked with Iraqi people to move their political process forward, would bring a valuable perspective to Congress," Zvonek said.
State Sen. Steve Ward, R-Littleton, a Marine Corps reservist who is also seeking the 6th District GOP nomination, objected to Stansbery's remarks on military experience.
"He doesn't want to go there, because if he goes there, he's going to get chewed up, and I'm willing to start chewing," said Ward, a colonel who has served in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Veterans can convey the perspective of people who do the actual fighting, Ward said.
"At a time when our nation is fighting two different wars and has hundreds of thousands of troops in conflict or in harm's way, it is very helpful to have people in Congress who have themselves served in harm's way, and it is unhelpful to have cheerleaders for a war who have not served and who have expressed no willingness to do so."
Ward added, "I speak for a lot of people in uniform who say they're tired of draft-dodging chicken hawks in Congress."
Armstrong, Coffman and Ward are seeking the Republican nomination for the seat that represents Denver's southern suburbs, plus parts of Jefferson and Park counties. State Sen. Ted Harvey, R-Highlands Ranch, is also seeking the GOP nod.
The seat is being vacated by five-term U.S. Rep. Tom Tancredo, R-Littleton.
Stansbery initially voiced his concerns in an e-mail to the Rocky Mountain News titled "Veterans in Iraq."
He is concerned by Coffman's decision to step down as secretary of state if he's elected to Congress, citing a lack of accountability to his Colorado voters.
"I just wish he would pay as much attention to voters in Colorado as to voters in Iraq," said Stansbery. "He takes credit for a lot of what happened in Iraqi elections, yet he says that in Colorado he has no influence as secretary of state."
Zvonek said that Coffman will be able to better serve Colorado residents in Congress than as secretary of state.
"What we're facing in Iraq is ongoing, and Coffman will be able to ask more detailed questions because of his experience," said Zvonek.
"That is a perspective that only someone who's been there can bring to Congress."
PorterC@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5625
Pulling rank
The importance of wartime service has become an issue in the Republican primary for the 6th Congressional District
Candidate Rank Service Details
*Wil Armstrong -- no military experience
* Mike Coffman -- Major Marines served in first Gulf war and the current Iraq war; retired
* Ted Harvey -- no military experience
* Steve Ward -- Colonel Marines served in Afghanistan, Iraq and the 2004 tsunami relief effort; Reserve status
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
-
Legislature Blog
Read live updates from the opening of the 2009 legislative session.
-
Rocky multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Who's next?
Complete coverage of the Broncos' search for a new coach.
-
Rocky year in photos
View an audio slide show of staff selections from 2008.
-
Winter Escapes
Your insider’s guide to the copious joys of the coolest season.
-
Sam Adams' Open Mic
Open Mic: Two-man advantage with Avs
-
Shanahan's career
See photos from Mike Shanahan's career as Broncos coach.
-
12 days of Drew
Look back at the year that has been with Drew Litton.
-
A dream fulfilled
A Rocky Mountain News and MediaStorm production
July 15, 2008
5:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
farsidefan writes:
I respect the Colonel because of his service in the Afhganistan and Iraq. He saw went there with no political motive. I believe one of the reasons that Mike Coffman went there was knowing he would use it for political gain.
He helped set up governments!
He is a calculating politician.
July 15, 2008
5:47 p.m.
Suggest removal
flash1 writes:
Well duh! What politican isn't.
July 15, 2008
6:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
KrisThomas writes:
Another politico's wanna be son who never had the courage to serve tries to disparage a veteran. Too bad little Willy didn't have to the guts to serve himself!
July 15, 2008
6:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
fastnloose writes:
I am a republican,but for some reason, I'm not a big fan of Coffman.I really can't figure out why,he just makes me uncomfortable.I know that sounds weak,but it just a crazy feeling I have.
July 15, 2008
6:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ted_in_Vegas writes:
flas1: the non-calculatin politician is the failed politician.
Stansbery is bomb-thrower who does a lot of talking without thinking. I've not met Wil Armstrong, but if he has Stansbery on his staff, Colorado is better off without him in office.
July 15, 2008
6:56 p.m.
Suggest removal
Shadow writes:
I unfortunately have met Mike Coffman. I am not impressed. The Col. on the other hand is a leader. I like his enthusiasm and ideas. As a replacemnet for Tancredo, State Sen. Steve Ward, R-Littleton is the choice.
Unfortunately Coffeman displays the office pog mentality of a rear echelon officer.
I do not like the fact he pulled an Obama and decided before his was even half over to run for another office. Fullfill your elected mandate Mike!
July 15, 2008
7:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
Brain writes:
Colorado would be better off if Coffman stayed as Secretary of State; Steve Ward is a very good man, I hope he wins the election.
July 15, 2008
7:51 p.m.
Suggest removal
Mike846 writes:
Well, Ward or Coffman are both okay by me. As for the idiot who made the disparaging remarks, maybe he'd like to stand a post and pick up a weapon. Naw. He wouldn't have the guts. Mike
July 15, 2008
9:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
WestminsterJ writes:
Mike846: Well, Ward or Coffman are both okay by me. As for the idiot who made the disparaging remarks, maybe he'd like to stand a post and pick up a weapon. Naw. He wouldn't have the guts. Mike
Like George W. and D*** Cheney did?
July 15, 2008
11:17 p.m.
Suggest removal
freethinker07 writes:
Tommy, a wonderful post and I'm not a veteran.
July 15, 2008
11:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
InformedVoter writes:
Wow-I am shocked at the stunts Wil, his powerful daddy and their paid staff will pull to get their unproven product to market, that being Congress.
If the Armstrong campaign wants to bash Coffman, it should use a reliable fact: If uninformed voters send Coffman to Washington, the Republicans lose The Secretary of State's seat to a Democrat. Coffman is demonstrating no Party Loyalty, only selfish desires. If Mike lived by Marine Corps values (which he touts in his campaign), he would not even consider giving up ground to the enemy. I voted for Coffman 2 short years ago and expect him to deliver on his end of the deal and complete his term.
In today's environment in Congress, military experience is necessary. Steve Ward has served his country in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Pentagon. Senator Ward has served as a Mayor, a County Commissioner and a current State Senator. He also runs his own small business.
I plan to vote for Steve Ward to fill Tom Tancredo's open seat because a vote for Steve gets me a smart, energetic Representative in Congress with political experience, military experience and a Businessman's perspective, too.
July 16, 2008
12:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
oddhours writes:
It is no surprise to me that Coffman and Armstrong are slugging it out in personal attacks against one another. It is what immature idiots do when they realize they can’t win an argument on the strengths of their principles and ideas. I have had the opportunity to speak with all four of the Republican candidates for the 6th Congressional District, and frankly, neither Coffman nor Armstrong impressed me at all. Steve Ward stood head and shoulders above these clowns.
As I spoke to Mike Coffman, he really seemed to have a backbone of Jello. He lacks charisma, enthusiasm and charm. The image of a “worm” stuck in my mind after that conversation. That is not to say Mike is a bad person. He’s just not a leader. He would probably be ok in a staff or support role carrying out bureaucratic procedures and policies. But I don’t see Coffman in a decision-making or leadership role. That is not his strength.
Armstrong, on the other hand, did show some enthusiasm. Borrowing a page from Obama, Armstrong talks about “change” without really saying what he would do differently. He says “we ought to change the resumes in congress. Wouldn’t it be nice if there were more Doctors or Farmers in Congress?”
Trouble is, Wil is neither a Doctor nor a Farmer. Wil is a mortgage broker in a business belonging to his dad, former Sen. Bill Armstrong. Sorry Wil, I don’t think congress needs more mortgage brokers. He also seems to be piggybacking on his Dad’s political network. Having a dad who was a great engineer wouldn’t qualify me as one. The same is true for my elected officials. Unfortunately that’s all Wil can offer, because he’s never held an elected office in his life. We have nothing on which to judge him but his rhetoric.
That brings us to Steve Ward. He can go Coffman one better. If elected, Ward would be the only veteran who had served in Iraq AND Afghanistan. Unlike Coffman, he would not be abandoning the post to which he was elected.
My conversation with Steve was refreshing. Instead of talking about what kind of congressman he wanted to be, he talked about what he wanted to DO. We spoke about the war, oil, the deficit, the dollar, immigration, taxes and a host of other issues and he had a clear agenda of what he planned to do on each. He was enthusiastic and passionate about real issues. After some more research on each, Steve Ward was the obvious choice for me at the 6th congressional assembly.
We need experience in our next representative. Ward’s 27-year military career including service in Iraq and Afghanistan brings a critical perspective and insights to a Congress that seems adrift on how to win the war on terror. His legislative experience will make him MORE effective in Congress (Sorry Wil). Ward has balanced more budgets and cut more taxes than all of his opponents, combined. That’s a record of service I’m happy to send to congress.
Talk with Steve Ward. You'll find in him the leadership and character we want in our next congressman.
July 16, 2008
1:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
GBUSA writes:
The e-mail from Armstrong's campaign manager demonstrates the inexperience that Armstrong will bring to Congress, should we elect him. To minimize the military experience of members of congress is consistent with his campaign that only Armstrong has the “right kind” of experience.
Not only is young Armstrong’s campaign willing to minimize the value of military experience in congress, but Armstrong disparages political experience as well. Armstrong’s arrogance will alienate members of congress he will have to work with to get things done and his political inexperience will cost us dearly.
We have a national crisis on our hands, and we need someone sitting in Tancredo’s seat that has the strategic vision and political experience to effectively deal with it.
Coffman needs to stay where he is at to fend off Democratic attempts to liberalize voter registration by preventing the appointment of a democratic replacement. And he needs to learn how to run a tighter ship as Secretary of State like getting the voting process right instead of just using his 4 year elected position as a 2 year springboard to congress.
Ward’s 27 years in the military have developed a well honed instinct to think strategically and act decisively. We have an energy and economic crisis on our hands and we need someone in Washington with vision and the leadership capabilities to deal with it. Ward is a leader. He never asks for something that he is not willing to do himself. His political achievements at the local, county and state level have demonstrated that he is effective in getting things done. Furthermore, he has a code of ethics that would never allow him to disparage the life experience of another human being.
July 16, 2008
7:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
WestminsterJ....
You mean like how Obama served?
Oh wait. Obama did serve. Not sure if Al Quaeda counts though.
July 16, 2008
8:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
I almost always prefer a fellow veteran over a non-veteran. It isn't that I feel non-veterans are not qualified, but I do know that veterans are familiar with taking and giving orders and are used to dealing with a chain-of-command. Their sense of service and sacrifice is proven.
I'll take a soldier over a lawyer any day.
The state-level politicians I LEAST trust are the millionaires too far removed from the people.
July 16, 2008
9:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
colovoter writes:
After reading about Armstrong's campaign manager's comments it really hit home the issues we face in the election for the 6th CD. These issues will effect our country, our state and the 6th CD. I have listened to the debates and discussions especially those held over the past few week and have found that my decision as to who to support has been very easy.
I am tired of "hanger ons" who think that the qualification of relatives makes them qualified for an elected office. We all seem to be tired of twenty years of political dynasties... why continue? The decision making that questions whether we need another veteran in Congress is poor at best. Are we better served with another mortage broker? In all of the dicussions and debates all I heard were quips and sound bites - no solutions.
I've concluded that Mike Coffman also has a history of poor decision making. His decisions concerning the voting machines were not only a fiasco but bordered on conflict of interest with his campaign manager. His decision to leave the Secreatry of State's office to enhance his political career after only two years reaks of a politican with only his personal goals in mind.
Who is Ted Harvey?
My conclusion is that Steve Ward is the only one of the four candidates who really understands the problems that we face. Since 9/11 he has served in Iraq, Afganistan, the Pentagon and the far east. His years as a small businessman has made him aware of the issues facing our ecomony and he made a smaller government work in Arapahoe County. Steve is the only candidate that talks about SOLUTIONS to the issues of security, energy and the weak dollars effect on our economy.
I think that we need someone capable of making strong informed decisions in Washington not people who have proven that they are poor middle managers.
July 16, 2008
9:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
jaymoveonorg writes:
froward69,
I agree that we need to insure fair and accurate elections. We need to pass a law requiring everyone voting to have a valid ID before they can vote. That would ensure we don't have people illegally voting.
July 16, 2008
9:13 a.m.
Suggest removal
Charles writes:
Let's see now....were there any notable 20th century politicians who gave up an office in mid-term to run for a higher office? Hmmmmm...Jack Kennedy comes to mind, and I think Eisenhower left his job as president of Columbia University in 1952 after only three years. The Republican myopians who are attacking Coffman for lack of "party loyalty" should consider whether Coffman is answering to a higher calling. To paraphrase JFK, ask not what you can do for your party, but what you can do for your country.
July 16, 2008
9:29 a.m.
Suggest removal
temurlan writes:
"Oh wait. Obama did serve. Not sure if Al Quaeda counts though."
LOL!!! Good one.
"Serving ones community, (without court order) is just as honorable, as serving in the military."
I never had the honor of serving but I know that putting one's life on the line and organizing a community (in BO's case that probably means dividing a community) are not even close.
It's the difference between "serving" and self-serving".
July 16, 2008
9:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
InformedVoter writes:
Charles:
Interesting comment, and thank you for taking time to read the posts carefully in order to pick up the "Party Loyalty" phrase.
What skills does Coffman bring to the party in Washington that Steve Ward doesn't? I can't think of one.
On the other hand, what penalty faces Republicans if Coffman abandons his current post of Secretary of State? I think oversight of elections and business processes in Colorado in HUGE.
Informed Voter
July 16, 2008
9:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
albarta writes:
It must be official that Ron Paul is out of the presidential race and his supporters have nothing to do. This would explain the sudden surge in grassroots support for Steve Ward.
July 16, 2008
9:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
king.kylee writes:
You Ward shrills need to find something else to do. While I respect Steve for his service and defending our veterans, you staffers should have other work to do. With $11,000 cash on hand he won't even be able to afford your salaries.
July 16, 2008
10:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
boy.bill59 writes:
I can't beliece Stansberry. How could he questions and bash the service of one of our veterans in an effort to divert attention from their poor fundraising #'s? Not very patriotic, especially in the month of July.
July 16, 2008
10:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
honestabe82 writes:
Steve Ward is the most liberal candidate in this race. Someone mentioned that we need someone with combat experience. Mike Coffman is the only candidate who has led marines in combat. Sorry Steve, you and your campaign manager posting on a blog is not going to win the race for you.
July 16, 2008
10:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
DrewKerin writes:
Jack Stansberry's inappropriate comments are just what one would expect from a campaign whose candidate has no concept of the importance of having military veterans in Congress. This is a race between a candidate of privilege (Armstrong) and a candidate of demonstrated public service (Coffman.)
What truly makes Coffman's military service extraordinary is that he twice -- voluntarily -- put aside his own political aspirations to answer his country's call to duty. Coffman's military service, in combat zones, was not a gimmick. He put his life on the line, as did Steve Ward.
The difference between Coffman and Ward is that Coffman has been able to garner enough support and financial resources to take his campaign through the general election. For whatever reason, Ward has struggled to get people to contribute to his candidacy. If Ward won the primary, that would just invite the Democratic National Committee to pour money into this race for the November race. I'm not interested in a competitive general election. As a 6th District GOP voter, I want this district to remain a safe Republican one.
We should not just be looking for another Republican to replace Tom Tancredo. I think we deserve the best one available! Coffman has won three statewide elections. He knows how to run a successful campaign. I'm looking forward to having his conservative fiscal beliefs and pertinent military experience in the next Congress.
July 16, 2008
10:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
wheresrongone writes:
Mike Coffman is a true patriot. He has served our country and our state honorably. He is the best choice in this race and is dominating it so far. He is now being attacked by Wil Armsrtong for serving our country? He is now being attacked by Steve Ward and his campaign manager on this site? I guess when you are the frontruuner people just throw mud and see what sticks. To bad these people can't beat Mike on the merits and talk about why they should be elected. Since they can't they are forced to make petty attacks at Coffman who is leading this race and picking up steam. I suggest you keep the attacks to a minimum. Steve will be giving up his seat when he loses. Wil will mostly try to run for something in the future and could use the support the endorsement of a sitting Congressman. Pissing off Coffman at this point is a bad idea.
July 16, 2008
11 a.m.
Suggest removal
colovoter writes:
I have no idea of how much money any of the candidates have raised but after listening to the candidates on Sunday I suspect that I know why Ward might be behind... he was in Iraq until Febuary 2008.
July 16, 2008
1:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Grim_Reefer writes:
Speaking as a vet, veteran status just doesn't seem to mean much anymore if you're of an opposing idealogy..hell, just look how the Bushies ruined Kerry's service record...(hey, at least the guy did time in Vietnam and I don't claim to know what he did over there or what medals he deserved or not, his chain-of-command awarded him those medals so it was their call at the time)...the fact is, he was a vet and the right pi$$ed all over that fact...and in doing so, in my view, discredited every person who has ever served. Why? What's to stop them from discrediting any veteran if they have a differing political view?
Point is, being a vet may benefit you in the eyes of your party, but it is something that can easily (and often falsely) discredited in order destroy your attempt at office.
I've had my service ripped apart on these very comment boards...so...does service matter (despite party affiliation or lack thereof)?
That is to say, are liberal leaning vets valued less than conservative leaning vets or vice versa?
July 16, 2008
1:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Dr_Snyder writes:
I am a conservative Repub and a WW2 veteran. I have personally discussed important political issues with Col. Steve Ward and I like all of his direct, straight-forward, non-hesitant and no-beating-around-the-bush answers. He offers not only excellent military experience, but significant business and political experience as well.
I think Major Coffman could do a great service to Colorado by giving his attention to the mess created by the Colorado Secretary of State's current policy that instantly changes two identical business names into "dis-similar" names by merely attaching different corporate designators to the names (e.g., Inc. and LLC).
July 16, 2008
4:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Strange writes:
Shrills? Nice to see a discussion of the issues vice ad hominem attacks. Unlike other candidates, mine doesn't have to pay me to help him win; I do it because I believe he is truly the best man in the race. I served with Col. Ward in Iraq and was there when officers who had served with Secretary Coffman talked to Col. Ward about the less-than-stellar job he did on his latest stint in Iraq. Col. Ward wasn't there on some political resume'-building blog opportunity, but rather as a *continuous* member of the Armed Forces who was truly demonstrating what it means to be a citizen-legislator. He quietly went to Iraq when the session was out (but still took an upaid leave as State Senator), then returned to finish out his term. Col. Ward is not, as some here have accused leaving one office for another; his term as State Senator is up and he decided before the 6th CD was in play not to seek another term. As for him being the "most liberal", consider the field. I have no qualms voting for the man at the edge of the spectrum if he is the man with the right ideas and the ability to work with members of both stripes to GET THINGS DONE. I take no interest in sending to Washington as my representative someone with high ideals but no horsepower.
July 16, 2008
5:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
oddhours writes:
DrewKerin wrote: "The difference between Coffman and Ward is that Coffman has been able to garner enough support and financial resources to take his campaign through the general election."
So your telling me I should choose my congressman not on his merits but on the size of his piggybank?
Get Real!
There are stark differences between Ward and Coffman. Steve Ward offers genuine leadership and solutions to the problems facing our country. Coffman offers platitudes. Coffman once said he was proud to have never voted on a state budget while he was in the legislature, even while he was in the majority. That means he was on the sidelines during some of the most critical work the legislature is responsible for.
Sorry, I'd rather send my first string to the US Congress. That's Steve Ward
July 16, 2008
8:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
mpestal writes:
When our nation faces an unprecedented war by Islamic facists bent on our destruction, we can use all the military experience in Congress we can get. Steve Ward is not just a veteran but one with 27 years of tested leadership on the front-lines. With the prospect of a non-veteran in the White House come November, isn't that one more reason to elect an experienced Colonel to keep an eye on the Commander-in-Chief?
July 17, 2008
11:43 a.m.
Suggest removal
hagelwon writes:
Strange, you are also the guy who sent out the nastiest letter I've seen in this campaign just before the 6th Congressional Assembly. You should be ashamed of some of the things you wrote and fabrications you tried to pass on delegates. You are also wrong to criticize Coffman's service because you like Ward better. Its one thing to attack a man's record but to go after his service is un-American. You think you would realize that being a member of the military yourself. You have no qualms about voting for a liberal because you are liberal yourself. You should do the right thing and get behind the marine who can win. With all due respect to Harvey and Ward, this is a two person race. Do you really want Armstrong to be your representative, given the things his campaign manager said about Mike and our veterans?
July 17, 2008
12:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
dbrown writes:
Mike Coffman never voted on a balance budget because he always believed there was government waste and inefficiencies that could have been cut out. Steve Ward meanwhile votes with the Dems all the time and is considered one of the most liberal Republicans in Colorado Politics. He will not represent the values of Republicans in our district. He thinks he is Charlie Wilson, but he is not. He has a 4x8 sign in front of a mental health institution on Santa Fe. If that's not desperate I don't know what is. Steve Ward has no chance in this race. He has no money to get out his liberal message and is polling lower than the janitor used as the test subject. Mike Coffman is our first string. He has been elected statewide 3 times and has the greatest name id in this race. He will beat the Democrat in this race by at least 15 points. He is the most well rounded candidate, a conservative and goes into depth when speaking to a greater degree than all the other candidates. I say with so much at stake this year, we need to send the most qualified person who will represent our values and be a strong voice for the citizens of Colorado. That is Mike Coffman.
July 17, 2008
10:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Strange writes:
Nasty? You must have pretty thin skin. Fabrications? I defy you to back that up. You seem to think that you know me, but if you did, you would know that I am far from liberal. I am, however, pragmatic. Getting along with those on the other side does not necessarily mean one shares their views. Politics is about give and take, and voting with the other side on matters that don't compromise your principles makes good economic sense vis-a-vis political capital.
As for attacking Coffman's record, he opened the door. Any politician who campaigns on how great they performed their military service and that such service is indicative of how they will perform in office should expect to have said service scrutinized. Ironically, his record was exactly what I referred to; the fact that he had the stones to serve his country remains remarkable.
As for Mike Coffman being our first string, I agree. Therefore, why would we take nearly the only office holder in the Colorado Republican Party who has demonstrated that he can win Statewide and run him in arguably the safest Republican district in the State? Gov Ritter is costing us more money by the day, and I would rather see Secretary Coffman run against him in 2010 than any other candidate we could put up, who would basically be our version of Rollie Heath in the 2002 gubernatorial race. There is little "at stake" this year relative to CD 6; a Republican will win, but will most likely still be in the minority back in DC, which means that we're gonna need someone who has the experience in getting things done when not operating from a position of strength.