Andrew Romanoff''s letter: Defending Seniors --- and the Truth

[Hawkeye-X]

For the second time in a week, my opponent has attempted to mislead the citizens of Colorado (1). Here are the facts:

• I oppose the privatization of Social Security. I said so in the vote I cast in the state legislature (2), and I renew that pledge now. The resolution my opponent cites has nothing to do with privatizing Social Security; in fact, it specifically urges Congress NOT to cut Social Security benefits (3).

• My leadership on issues of concern to seniors earned me 100% ratings from AARP, the Colorado Senior Lobby, and the Colorado Gerontological Society (4).

• My opponent voted against providing seniors with a one-time payment of $250 to cushion the blow of this recession, in the absence of a cost-of-living adjustment to their Social Security benefits (5).

• Instead of defending the votes he has cast or the falsehoods his campaign is peddling, my opponent continues to dodge the public and the press. He has ducked seven debates to date, despite repeated attempts by the hosts -- over the course of six months, in at least one case -- to accommodate his schedule. I said yes to all seven requests.

I will remain accessible and accountable to the people of Colorado when they send me to the U.S. Senate, just as I was in the Statehouse. And I will continue to defend our seniors.



(1) http://andrewromanoff.com/page/m/22ad0836/31729fa1/31b040c/1b04baa6/2687765658/VEsF/
(2) http://andrewromanoff.com/page/m/22ad0836/31729fa1/31b040c/1b04baa7/2687765658/VEsC/
(3) http://andrewromanoff.com/page/m/22ad0836/31729fa1/31b040c/1b04baa4/2687765658/VEsD/
(4) http://andrewromanoff.com/page/m/22ad0836/31729fa1/31b040c/1b04baa5/2687765658/VEsA/
(5) http://andrewromanoff.com/page/m/22ad0836/31729fa1/31b040c/1b04baa2/2687765658/VEsB/

[sandnsea]

1. Isn't Romanoff DLC?

Isn't that the real reason Bill Clinton endorsed him?

http://www.dlc.org/ndol_ci.cfm?kaid=110&subid=136&contentid=254556

[Hawkeye-X]

2. Ex-DLC

He returned to his progressive roots after realizing DLC is a piece of corrupt organization that needs to be burnt down.

He is running a 100% PAC free campaign, and Bennet took 7.5M out of state/PAC money to fund his campaign.

Bennet has refused to debate with Romanoff because Bennet KNOWS he'll get creamed. Even Andrew offered to accomodate Bennet's SCHEDULE.

He's also been my state representative and has done his job extremely well for a very liberal part of Denver.

So, yeah, I trust him, and would take a bullet for him.

Hawkeye-X

[sandnsea]

5. He made a statement?

I didn't see where he said the DLC is corrupt because I wouldn't know why he would take an endorsement from Bill Clinton if that were the case.

[harvey007]

3. No

Andrew Romanoff supported Hillary for President in 2008.

Romanoff is the overwhelming favorite of Colorado Democrats because he's been a fighter for progressive values for years and because he can win.

[sandnsea]

4. Well the Clintons are DLC

So I don't know what his support of Hillary has to do with anything.

[Bryn]

6. Your point is?

OP has already made it clear to you that Romanoff is no longer DLC.

[sandnsea]

7. I didn't get any validation of that

I asked for a statement or something. Do you have one?

[jgraz]

8. If someone gives you the response you want will you stop stirring the shit?

Just tell us what sort of reaction will give you enough validation so you can go away and let the adults discuss things.

[bvar22]

9. Nailed It.

The degree of difficulty was pretty light, but your execution was flawless.
:patriot:

[asdjrocky]

10. Indeed.

Totally nailed it.

[sandnsea]

11. Well, are you for DLC or against DLC?

I'm just so confused about your position. I don't understand why it requires a grove of "adults" to discuss such a simple thing.

[jgraz]

12. .

:boring:

[Bryn]

13. I don't know why you're confused?

I can read his message that he's not for DLC loud and clear. Are you for DLC? OP is showing his strong support for progressive democratic Romanoff. I think his platform is great!

[sandnsea]

14. Well could you link to it then

The message where he says he's not for the DLC anymore. Just curious.

[Bryn]

18. No, he's not for the DLC anymore. Here ....

He's on facebook so you can ask him directly yourself "are you for the DCL?"

Here's the proof that he's not ...

'The pledge formally obligates him to work to overturn the Citizen’s United Supreme Court ruling, support the Fair Elections Now Act and push a lobbyist reform bill through if elected. Romanoff said that if his opponents want to fight corruption in Washington, they too should sign on to the pledge and drop corporate donations.'

“It is a little lonely … to be the only candidate apparently in the race for U.S. Senate in Colorado and one of the very few in the country who believes that people ought to govern a democracy,” Romanoff said. “The government is of the people, by the people, and for the people. Not a government of Aetna, by Exxon, for Goldman Sachs.”

http://coloradoindependent.com/57278/romanoff-signs-pledge-to-legislate-against-corporate-corruption-in-d-c

Here is what wikipedia says about the DLC ...

"The DLC has become unpopular within many progressive and liberal political circles such as the organizations Center for American Progress, Democracy for America, and the blogs Daily Kos and MyDD"

"Others contend that the DLC's distaste for what they refer to as "economic class warfare" has allowed the language of populism to be monopolized by the right-wing. Many argue that the Democrats' abandonment of populism to the right-wing, shifting the form of that populism from the economic realm to the "culture wars", has been critical for Republican dominance of Middle America. (See, for instance, Thomas Frank's What's the Matter with Kansas.)"

"Still other critics believe the DLC has essentially become an influential corporate and right-wing implant in the Democratic party. Marshall Wittmann, a former senior fellow at the DLC, former legislative director for the Christian Coalition, and former communications director for Republican senator John McCain, and Will Marshall, a vocal supporter of the war in Iraq, are among those associated with the DLC who have right-wing credentials."

"Finally, detractors of the DLC note that the DLC has received funding from the right-wing Bradley Foundation as well as from oil companies, military contractors, and various Fortune 500 companies. However, the DNC proper has also benefited from funding by corporations like these via the Democratic Business Council."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democratic_Leadership_Council

Take Blanche Lincoln as an example: She's Wal-Mart's baby, takes money from health insurance companies for her help to kill the public option, takes money from wall street, oil companies, and is known as one of the worst corporate whores. I am not holding my nose to vote for her. My vote must be earned. Why should I support someone who's in bed with the corporate oligarchy? This is exactly what is hurting America and its people.

[Hawkeye-X]

19. Thanks Bryn!

I am really sorry about Lincoln. Can't believe Hot Sulphur Springs got screwed out of voting for Halter.

Would he have a chance if there was more than two poll locations there?

Hawkeye-X

[Bryn]

21. I believe he would have had a better chance to win

with normal 42 voting polls open for 80,000 people living in Garland County. But .... it's hard to tell because Republicans crossed over to vote in the runoff for her because they figured that (R) John Boozman would have had a better chance beating her in general election. It would have been tough beating Bill Halter because here in Arkansas Democratic voters come out in huge number. Now all polls are showing that John Boozman is way ahead of Blanche as repugs figured. Also some of Bill Halter voters ended up voting for Lincoln in the runoff because of Bill Clinton and Obama. I wish they had stayed out of it.

I hope Romanoff wins. I am pulling for him.

[Spheric]

16. +1 /nt

[laughingliberal]

15. K & R nt

[Spheric]

17. K&R /nt

[Greyhound]

20. Another K&R