Archive for September, 2013

Talk-radio host should correct House Minority Leader’s assertion that Amendment 66 would raise taxes on small business

Monday, September 16th, 2013

On a Sept. 5 show, KFKA talk-radio host Tom Lucero told Colorado House Minority Leader Brian DelGrosso that government shouldn’t be an obstacle to small business.

Agreed. But talk-radio hosts shouldn’t be an obstacle to small business either. Or to educating our children.

But Lucero established himself as such an obstruction by failing to correct DelGrosso when the new Colorado House Minority leader claimed that Amendment 66, which would raise income tax to support education, would be a burdensome tax on small businesses:

DelGrosso: Well, the reality is, I think it’s mid- to upper eighty percent of all businesses in Colorado are small businesses.  And close to eighty percent of those small businesses are set up either as a sole proprietorship, an LLC, or an S Corp., which means that their taxes that their business makes flows through onto their personal income tax.  So, you will see about 80% of businesses in Colorado see a tax increase as a result of this.  [Listen here.]

But Amendment 66 doesn’t affect Colorado taxes on businesses. It’s a tax on “individuals,  estates, and trusts.”

It’s true that some business owners (like me) choose to take profit from their businesses (e.g., in the form of dividends) and account for it on their personal income tax filings.  But that’s because it’s their income! So they pay personal income tax on it, just like they would income from any other source or employment.

If you make income from a business, whether you own the business or not, you pay income tax. The individual would be taxed, not the business, under Amendment 66, and no one will be taxed twice.

With Lucero apparently agape at the fictitious thought that small businesses could be facing a new tax, DelGrosso went on to say:

DelGrosso: When the taxes go up, not only does that get passed along to the consumer, another way that that affects folks is that affects pay raises for the business.  So maybe, because the taxes went up, I’m not going to be able to give pay raises this year.  I’m not going to be able to hire somebody, or I’m going to have to let somebody go, or I can’t expand.

It’s hard to imagine a small business owner who would look over his personal budget, including the income from his LLC or S Corp, and decide not to invest more in his business due to the tax increase under Amendment 66.

ColoradoCommitsToKids calculates that an individual making the gross median income of $57,000, will pay an additional $211 in tax. A small businessperson who claims gross income on his individual income tax return of $150,000 will pay an additional $24 per week. Double that and it’s still not enough for the greediest capitalist to do much with.

But, collectively, it’s enough to give our kids the opportunity they deserve to succeed on Colorado.

That’s why media figures like Lucero, whose background as a former CU Regent should sensitize him to the educational needs of our kids, should counter DelGrosso’s misinformation with facts. Or have an educator on the show who can.

GOP Chair put “a little cold water on our parade” during recall campaign, newly elected State Senator Says

Thursday, September 12th, 2013

Yesterday, I urged reporters to keep an eye on a sub-plot that’s emerged in the wake of the Republican recall victories: The “liberty” wing of the state GOP has apparently been re-energized by the election, and this could lead not only to a civil war among Colorado Republicans but also to serious election losses this year and into the future.

I mean, last time the base of the GOP got uppity in a sustained way, Ken Buck took down Jane Norton and Dan Maes fearlessly squeaked by Scott McInnis. (Maybe the insurgent air will inspire Scooter to write Musings Part II: Water Jaxine-Bubis Style.)

Happy and hot after Tuesdays wins,  the “liberty” faction isn’t being polite about its dissatisfaction with the state GOP establishment, as evidenced by Tom Tancredo’s comment yesterday, slamming State GOP Chair Ryan Call and expressing his amazement that the State GOP gets any “credibility whatsoever.”

Though he was kinder toward Call than Tancredo was, newly elected State Sen. George Rivera hit the State Chair in a more home-spun way during an appearance on KNUS’ Peter Boyles Show this morning:

Rivera: To be honest with ya, Chairman Call did come down and kind of threw a little cold water on our parade and so on. But, you know, after the meeting and so on, I sat privately with Chairman Call and I told him, I says, ‘Chairman, you don’t know Pueblo. You’ve not been here when we’ve been doing our campaigning and seen the support we’ve got from the folks.’ And I says, ‘I believe you’re wrong. And I believe the numbers will come out, and you guys will be very surprised.’ Hopefully this will get him to kind of take a different look come 2014.

Boyles: I don’t believe it.

George Rivera on KNUS Boyles Show 9-12-2013

You don’t need to know much about Tea-Party activists to understand that they’ll see this type of rain-on-your-parade behavior by Call as patronizing, to put it mildly.

They’ll undoubtedly think similarly of Call’s advice to Rivera on Tuesday afternoon, reminding him, like a well-intentioned mother might remind her son, to give a “gracious” concession speech, as opposed, presumably, to the hateful, spit-filled Tea-Party variety. (This was first reported by The Denver Post’s Lynn Bartels.)

Obviously, no concession speech was needed because Rivera won the election, and Tea-Party activists were snickering about Call’s “gracious” advice Thursday while they lambasted the State GOP for getting the Pueblo recall effort wrong every step of the way.

We’ll undoubtedly be hearing a lot more about this in the coming months or years or decades. Civil wars, we all know, don’t heal very fast, and, to the my real point, they make really good news stories, with intrigue, passion, and late-night stabbings.

Media Omission: Is the GOP recall victory, ironically, the final brush stroke that paints CO forever blue?

Wednesday, September 11th, 2013

Denver media should pay more attention to the real possibility that yesterday’s recall-election victories by Colorado Republicans will, ironically, cause the indefinite demise of Colorado Republicans, rather than ushering in the GOP resurgence that talk-radio hosts are hyping.

That’s what the most rational people on both sides of the aisle would conclude after hearing gubernatorial candidate Tom Tancredo say the following on KNUS Peter Boyles show this morning:

Tancredo: Remember the Republican Party? Remember Ryan Call, saying at the beginning he was against all this? It goes to show you how incredibly out-of-touch this party establishment is.

Boyles: Oh, I agree.

Tancredo: I don’t know, Peter, whether any of us who are running as Republicans can overcome that. But, as you said more than once, my biggest problem is the Republican Party…. These folks who believe they know how to both achieve power and retain power, in the face so many losses, it is incredible to me that they are given any credibility whatsoever…

Boyles: ..I guess [the Republican power elite] is up there in Vail right now, maybe looking for another Coors brother.

Does anyone think Colorado’s GOP establishment will nod in agreement at Tancredo’s bravado, and align itself with the right wing of the party? No way.

Meanwhile, if you hear Tancredo’s voice, as you listen to him talking here, you know he’s emboldened, and you have to believe his Tea Party followers, are ready to fight along with him.

And you’d predict that the so-called country-club Republicans will fight back against Tancredo with all their money and influence, leading to an inflammation of the self-destructive behavior that’s plagued Republicans in our state.

Maybe the right side of the GOP will find the strength and intelligence to win going forward where it has lost before.

But, regardless, you gotta be scared if you’re State GOP Chair Ryan Call right now. Because you know it’s credible to say that this recall election might be the final brush stroke that paints Colorado blue. There’s one big, ugly GOP family fight on the horizon that’s waiting to be chronicled by Colorado reporters.








CO Springs elections chief goes on conservative talk radio to warn Caldara: “You better darn well plan on really” living here

Tuesday, September 10th, 2013

Speaking on a Colorado Springs radio station yesterday morning (listen @28:35), El Paso Country Clerk and Recorder Wayne Williams warned political stunt man Jon Caldara that he “better darn well plan on really” living in Colorado Springs, or he’ll be prosecuted.

Williams: Caldara decided he was going to highlight this problem. Again, he better have really – I understand he’s got a lease. He’s planning on residing there, and as he said, “checking out the Springs.” And we welcome him to our community. We are happy to have legitimate people who are living here live here. But you better darn well plan on really doing that!

Caldara, who lives in Boulder, cast a blank ballot Saturday in the recall election of CO Springs Sen. John Morse, saying he’s renting a room in the recall district

On KVOR’s Richard Randall show, Williams said he’ll determine after the election if  “someone lied” about living in Morse’s district, and then voted. And “if they did, they can be prosecuted for a felony.”

Williams: But, what you have then, is a system that says, under the law, if I really do move there, I can vote. Now, the challenge is, we have no verification of that beforehand. What we will do is investigate. And we will find out if someone lied. And if they did, they can be prosecuted for a felony…. And that’s what we intend to do, Richard. We intend to prosecute.

Randall agreed with Williams, saying:

Randall: And I would say this: whether it’s Caldara or anybody else – some union thug from Boulder who does it, if it turns out you lied and you wanted to participate in an election, you had no business doing it, and you didn’t follow up by actually being honest about your intentions, I do want Clerk and Recorders like Wayne Williams and prosecutors like Dan May and John Suthers to hit you with a felony.

You have to appreciate Randall standing up against voter fraud, and nudging fellow conservative Williams along in the same direction.

Maybe Randall will inspire  Peter Boyles, over on KNUS in Denver, to apologize for telling callers yesterday to commit felony voter fraud.

“Give it a shot” is Boyles’ response to a caller who asks if he should commit voter fraud

Monday, September 9th, 2013

Operating in a reality that few people understand, during a typical one-sided pile-on in support of the recall of Sen. John Morse, talk-radio host Peter Boyles takes calls from “Ray” and “Tom” on KNUS radio today:

Boyles: Ray, you’re with the recall team [Recall proponents Anthony Garcia, Jennifer Kerns, and Timothy Knight are also in studio with Boyles]. Good morning, 710 KNUS.

Ray: Good morning. How are you?

Boyles: We’re well. Go ahead.

Ray: I have a question. I moved to Denver in June after I got married but I kept my Colorado Springs address for this election. But I’m not in the district. I’m just adjacent to the district of John Morse. How do I vote in the election tomorrow?

Boyles: Boy, I’ll get you jammed up. Anything I say is going to be wrong. Ahhhhhh, I was going to say, ask Caldara, but it looks like he can do it no matter what [laughs].

Kerns: [laughs]

Boyles: So you still have a Springs address. Is that right, Ray?

[Your BigMedia blogger wasn’t on the show, but if he had been, he’d have offered interventions along the way, like this: Peter, he just told you he doesn’t live in Morse’s district.]

Ray: Yes. Yes.

Boyles: Brother, I don’t know what the answer would be. Man, I just hesitate altogether to say anything.

[BigMedia intervention: Peter, you don’t know the answer? And I didn’t think you could get much lower since the days when you were a respected media figure in town.]

Boyles: Anybody? Nahh. These guys are going Nooo. They’re listening.

Kerns: [laughs]

Boyles: Give it a shot. What the hell, right?

[BigMedia Intervention: Is that what you’re thinking, Peter, ‘what the hell,’ when you beat up Muslims and undocumented immigrants.]

Ray: All right.

Boyles: What’s the worst that can happen?

[BigMedia intervention: Felony voter fraud.]

Ray: I’ll see what I can do.

Boyles: What’s the worst they can do, man?

Ray: All right.

Boyles: All right. Thank you.

Ray: I’ll call you back if I’m successful or not.

Boyles: I’d like to know.

[BigMedia Intervention: So would the District Attorney.]

Boyles: Let me know. That would be cool. Thank you.

Boyles: We go to Tom. Tom, you’re on the radio show. Good Morning.

Tom: Hey. Good morning, Mr. Boyles. It’s Colonel Tom from the Boston cruise.

Boyles: Hey, brother.

Tom: How ya doing?

Boyles: I like that mister stuff, Colonel. [laughs] Hey, man. It’s good to hear your voice.

Tom: As a military officer, I was thinking that maybe my vote could be counted this time. I live in Ft. Collins, but I’m planning to be in the Springs. Wondering if I went in uniform with a —

Boyles: Don’t start this. [laughs]

[BigMedia intervention: Hilarious, Peter.]

Tom: With a utility bill, they’d let me in.

Boyles: There are people in the room who are nodding their head yes.

Kerns: Technically, yes, you’re within the law. We don’t encourage or condone it, but the law says that that is correct.

[BigMedia Intervention: Wrong. Tom just said he  lives in Ft. Collins. Jen, how much non-encouragement have you been offering people like Tom?]

Tom: Then I could drive down to Pueblo. That’s not that far away.

Kerns: [laughs]

[BigMedia intervention. So hilarious.]

Boyles: [laughing] This is like a Chicago thing, man….

Tom: How many bus loads of people will the other side be bringing in.

Boyles: That’s a better question.

Kerns: That’s a good question. We don’t know. We have folks on the ground watching. What we do know is, we’ve seen operatives from OFA, Organizing for America…. Look, what you’re seeing with these laws, especially this election law, is a complete disregard for law and order….

[BigMedia Intervention: Disregard for law and order! Have you been paying attention to your own interview?]

Boyles: Good bless you, as always. Let me know, sir,  what you did, off air. [laughs]

Kerns: [laughs]

Boyles: I don’t want to know. You can give me a call off-air. I think we know how to find each other. Let me know what you did, okay?

[BigMedia Intervention: You know this guy’s phone number? Peter, show some honor and please call him up and tell him it’s illegal to vote twice? And that he can’t vote in CO Springs or Pueblo when he lives in Ft. Collins.]

Tom: Well, I’m just deciding whether to go–

Boyles: What do they say? In  Mufti.

Tom: in [inaudible] or in full regalia with all the buttons and bows.

Boyles: All the been-there buttons. How about what they used to say, ‘traveling in mufti.” You know what the means, like GIs traveling in civilian clothes. This whole Lawrence of Arabia book. Everybody’s in mufti all of the time.

Boyles: All right, sir. Thank you, Colonel. Be safe.

Listen to Boyles, Kerns discuss recall voter fraud 09-09-13

Media omission: Marble cries foul, slamming Fox 31 and saying it doesn’t matter if Saine ate chicken in silent protest

Monday, September 9th, 2013

On KLZ radio’s afternoon talk show Thurs., State Sen. Vicki Marble said that if Rep. Lori Saine brought fried chicken to a legislative hearing last week as a silent protest, it doesn’t matter because Marble is thrilled the chicken issue has returned to the news.

It must have been “angels from above” that caused Rep. Lori Saine to bring fried chicken to the hearing, Marble said on air, because it started an important dialogue, which, unfortunately, has been distorted by the “left” and the “news media.”

“The focus of this attack by the left and the news media has never been about chicken,” Marble told the radio audience. “It has been about spinning the narrative to destroy conservatives and our principles.”

Marble specifically called on Fox 31’s Eli Stokols to stop being an “ambulance chaser,” to “get to the truth,” and to “give all the people the information that they are literally dying for.”

Guest-host Stacy Petty asked Marble: “Here’s the thing, even if she did this as a silent protest? Does that matter?”

Marble: “No!”

Marble caused an uproar during an Aug. 21 hearing when she suggested that eating chicken and barbeque causes poverty among blacks. She also  said Mexicans who come to the U.S. gain weight because they stop eating as many “fresh vegetables.”

Partial transcript of Sept. 5 appearance by State Sen. Vicki Marble on KLZ’s Grassroots Radio Colorado. Bolded segments are BigMedia emphasis.

Guest-Host Petty: We have Sen. Vicki Marble on the line, and she wants to continue our discussion on chickengate.

Marble: Yes, it is chickengate. And what a chicken they have turned out to be. The focus of this attack by the left and the news media has never been about chicken. It has been about spinning the narrative to destroy conservatives and our principles. The liberal media has been carrying the water for the left for decades. Every news outlet, including Eli Stokols, has always known that my statement—they were about lies. Why do our friends, neighbors, and family in the black community die younger? It was never about ‘chicken causes poverty.’ That was ludicrous. But, if they reported the truth, there would be no attack. And they control the narrative and their goal is to destroy conservatives. Democrats never ask why. Imagine giving someone the motivation to take charge of their quality of life through their everyday healthcare choices, which include diet and exercise. They won’t even bring it up. Democrats say they are offended by my asking why, why, why are they dying? I want to know why…. And I want to ask Eli Stokols right now, will you please begin the dialogue? And give all the people the information that they are literally dying for. This is a serious matter, and I wish that he would treat it as such because their childish behavior is doing nothing to help the people of Colorado achieve good, high-quality, life…

Marble: And I am so glad that Rep. Saine decided to have chicken, because what did it do? It opened up that dialogue again that has died. They thought they were done roasting me. All of a sudden, I don’t know, it must have been angels from above, telling her to pull in the Popeye’s, because it started the dialogue. Now we can have the newscasts from I believe it was Fox News. I believe it was Meagan Kelley’s segment that comes on at 12 o’clock in the afternoon. Everyone needs to hear this. And everyone can make those health care choices. We can manage our quality of life just through the diet and exercise. And yes, the doctor did mention fried chicken. I did not. Now, Eli Stokols, please take note. Please start reporting the truth. You’ve been an ambulance chaser in the news media. I think you’re better than that. I think you can really serve Coloradoans well. Get to the truth. Quit carrying the water for the liberal Democrats. And make some sense out of life and the people, and what we’re supposed to be trying to achieve here in Colorado. And that is economic opportunity….

Marble: I knew that the chicken was there. I walked, and she had the chicken lunch. That’s fine. But was really funny to me was when Eli Stokols tweeted that, I did see it. And I thought, this is a great way to re-start the dialogue. And boy has it….

Co-Host Stacy Petty: Here’s the thing, even if she did this as a silent protest? Does that matter?

Marble: No!


Radio host should’ve corrected Herpin statement that he’d have no say on birth-control laws

Saturday, September 7th, 2013

A radio talk show host should have corrected Colorado Springs recall candidate Bernie Herpin, when he denied yesterday that, if elected, he wouldn’t have any power to restrict a woman’s access to birth control.

Here’s what Herpin said on KVOR’s Richard Randall Show yesterday:

Randall @4:00: When they say, certain types of birth control, the implication is, if you elect an extremist like Bernie Herpin, you’re not even going to be able to get your birth-control pills in the state of Colorado.

Herpin: …Of course I’m not going to do anything to restrict a woman’s choice on birth control. That’s completely ridiculous, and I don’t even have that power. Jeez.

In fact, state government tries to restrict access to contraception because anti-abortion lawmakers consider some forms of contraception, like the morning-after pill, to be abortion drugs.

Herpin apparently missed the news, for example, that Oklahoma just passed a law requiring women 17 and over to show ID (and younger women to have a prescription) to buy emergency Plan B contraception. Last month, a judge stopped implementation of the law, which conflicts with recent FDA guidelines, pending a review of whether it violates the state constitution.

Judging from Herpin’s past support for government restrictions to protect zygotes (fertilized eggs), you’d expect him to support such legislation, given that some believe Plan B potentially destroys zygotes.

Maybe Herpin supports the morning-after pill, but we don’t know until he’s asked specifically about Plan B and other forms of contraception. It’s not a silly question, despite what Herpin supporter Laura Carno said later during the same KVOR show:

Carno: It’s funny. I just say the Planned Parenthood ad, and this women, who’s the head of some branch of Planned Parenthood said, ‘Why are we still talking about this in this day and age?’ And I thought, exactly. Stop talking about birth control. Birth control is a product. We go to the store, the pharmacy, we pick it up. We might buy some chips and paper towels while we’re there. It is a product. Stop talking about birth control. It’s completely irrelevant.

You can say that birth-control restrictions aren’t likely to pass in Colorado next year. That’s fair.

But for Herpin to say he’d have no say on the matter as a state senator, or for Carno to say that it’s irrelevant in this day and age, is a falsehood stinking up airwaves at KVOR. Randall should clean the air.

Media should ignore Caldara’s latest stunt

Friday, September 6th, 2013

I liked Denver Post Reporter Lynn Bartels article about Jon Caldara’s alleged intention to vote against John Morse because Bartels framed the story as one of the many antics that Caldara is known for.

Bartels began the piece by labeling Caldara a “political stunt man,” and later she reminded us of some of Caldara’s media events:

He is known for his antics — whether it’s  setting up Dominos or  trotting out out a huge swine made from a propane tank and papier-mâché — to highlight his position on issues.

Bartels didn’t dismiss Caldara’s latest voting antic as meaningless, because Caldara, like any citizen, has the right to move into a new district and vote there.

But if his intentions prove to be fake, and he votes, he’ll face felony charges for vote fruad, as Bartels pointed out. But threatening to move into a new district and vote is no felony. It’s a good stunt, if you’re Jon Caldara, and you want to get media attention. Good enough to raise questions and get Bartels’ attention.

Caldara’s stunt reminds me of a story from book about manipulating the media: A guy puts out a news release saying he’s going to burn a puppy in one week. Animal rights activists and the media go nuts.

No one can do anything because there’s no law against threatening to burn a puppy. After a week, the guy holds a news conference and emerges with a blow torch and a puppy, and he decries common-sense gun-safety laws or something, manipulating the media into covering his pet issue.  And the puppy lives!

Caldara’s stunt is similar. In the end, he may say his intention changed, he won’t move to CO Springs to vote against Morse, and he wanted to make a point. He may actually move to CO  Springs. He may vote and “change his intention” after casting his ballot against Morse, and accept the possible consequences as an act of civil disobedience.

In any case, it’s a stunt, and the media should mostly ignore Caldara at this point.  Like any citizen, Caldara will face charges if he votes in a district where he has no intention, or fake intentions, of living.

Denver Post’s interview with Coffman shows value of posting online video

Thursday, September 5th, 2013

How fun it would be to sit on a newspaper’s editorial board and interview all the candidates who traipse by the office begging for an endorsement.

Over the years, The Denver Post has dabbled with putting those interviews online, where they’d be a valuable public resource, but this isn’t done in any systematic fashion, unfortunately.

But, moving its nose slowly in the right direction, The Post’s editorial-page staff produces an online video-interview, called the Roundup, which proved its worth this week with an illuminating interview with Rep. Mike Coffman.

Yesterday’s program broke news when Coffman affirmed his opposition to the longstanding U.S. law granting citizenship to people born on American soil, even if their parents are not citizens. This is commonly referred to the policy of birthright citizenship.

Coffman: I mean, the current law is, and the United States is separate from other countries, is that if you are born in the United States, you are, in fact, a citizen of the United States. You know, I think we should probably be, adopt the policies of other countries, that you are a citizen of your parents. But the fact is, that we have children who were born under current U.S. law. And therein lies the challenge that I have, particularly in meeting families up in what is a very new district. And that –

Denver Post Editorial Writer Tim Hoover: You’d see that changed, right? Is that what you’re saying?

CoffmanSure. I mean, I think we ought to look at that. But , the fact is, what we have to understand, the fact is, we don’t revoke citizenship once it’s given. [BigMedia emphasis]

Watch this portion of the Post’s Coffman interview here. And the entire interview here.

During his interview with Hoover, Coffman, who’s considered one of the most endangered Congressman in the country, also for the first time offered a vague explanation of how his immigration position is different from the bipartisan bill passed by the Senate. Coffman said:

Coffman @7:30:   Where I differ from what the Senate did is, to go beyond that [temporary] legal status, you really do have  a trigger. And you really do have to demonstrate that we’ve secured our border. And you really do have to demonstrate that we have mechanisms in place and the will to enforce all of our laws. And that’s a real concern of mine…”

Coffman also said he wants tougher English-language standards and other qualifications for citizenship:

Coffman @10:05: I think we really ought to raise the standards for citizenship across the board. I think citizenship really is sacred. I think between myself and my late father, we have 42 years of military experience and four wars. And I  think we understand the value of American citizenship. And so, I think that when we say that somebody ought to know English to become a United States citizen, I think we really ought to mean that they ought to know English and we should raise bar on that. When we say that somebody ought to understand the civic culture of our country, we really mean they ought to understand that to include a firm knowledge of the Constitution of the United States. I think we need to raise the bar on citizenship , period.

And Coffman also offered a new option for Dreamers to attain citizenship, saying he’s drafting a bill to allow young people, who entered the U.S. illegally, @8:40, “to achieve citizenship through military service and through higher education.” Previously, Coffman only supported allowing so-called Dreamers to achieve citizenship through military service.

Obviously, many questions flow from The Post’s interview with Coffman:

  • Will he be introducing a bill to stop birthright citizenship?
  • What specifically are his proposed triggers for citizenship? What does sufficient immigration enforcement look like? How else does his immigration position differ from what’s in the Senate bill?
  • Does Coffman support a path to citizenship for adults? (After speaking with Coffman, The Post’s Hoover doesn’t think so, because he wrote that Coffman “favors legal residency, but not citizenship, for adult illegal immigrants.”)
  • What does Coffman think of the accusation that he’s changing his positions on immigration and other issues simply to get re-elected in a more moderate new district?

That’s the point of the editorial page, partially, to raise questions and advance civic debate. The Roundup did so this week, by putting good questions to Coffman. The Post should offer more long-form interviews on its editorial-page website. In addition to the weekly Roundup show, why not post all issue and endorsement interviews?

A pat-on-the-back of conservative talk-radio host for direct questions to Wadhams

Wednesday, September 4th, 2013

Just as Republican gubernatorial candidate Tom Tancredo started pleading with Colorado Republicans to stop beating up each other, GOP strategist Dick Wadhams took to the radio waves to slam down Tancredo as unelectable.

On KNUS’ Backbone Radio show Sunday, Wadhams amplified on an a Sept. 1 Denver Post op-ed, where he made veiled references to GOP candidates who’ve lost previously and who, if nominated, would extend the Republican “losing streak” in Colorado.

Guest host Randy Corporon deserves credit for getting to the heart of the matter, when he asked Wadhams:

Corporon: “The two candidates who popped to mind for me who’ve lost state-wide office in recent history are Tom Tancredo and Senate candidate Ken Buck. Did you have them in mind?”

Wadhams: “Indeed I did. I cannot see how a candidate who has clearly had a history of rhetoric that has alienated Hispanic voters can get elected state-wide in Colorado. I don’t see it.”

[BigMedia intervention: One wonders if Corporon thought about asking Wadhams for the name of any GOP candidate, including Rep. Mike Coffman, who does not have a “history of rhetoric that has alienated Hispanic voters,” but let’s continue with the interview.]

Wadhams: In terms of Ken Buck, who I think would have been a marvelous U.S. Senator, and Ken, actually, was going into October with a lead. But he said some things that gave Michael Bennet the ability to come from behind and win that… And those issues don’t go away.

[BigMedia intervention: But Buck blamed his loss on Democrats, not on himself.]

Wadhams later in the interview: “I do not think that even if it had been a head-to-head with Hickenlooper and Tancredo, that Tancredo would have won in 2010. Hickenlooper never had to run a negative ad… He’s never been tested state-wide in a campaign like this. I don’t think he would hold up under scrutiny.”

Dick Wadhams on KNUS Backbone Radio 09-01-13

I respect the conservative talk-show hosts, like Corporon, who’ve been dedicating serious time to figuring out how to reform the Republican Party. Contrasting Wadhams’ attacks with Tancredo’s peace-offering is definitely part of this debate.

And again, Corporon took on the issue directly, asking Wadhams whether Tancredo’s “peace plan” is something he’d reject. Wadhams said “issues matter in campaigns” and ignoring them during the primary will just make Republicans go down in flames in the general election.

It’s a “bunch of bunk” that primaries hurt GOP candidates, Wadhams said, adding the bruising primaries benefit good candidates.

I started thinking about the U.S. missiles that are poised to bomb Syria. Peace is difficult to pull off, but at least they’re debating the topic, as it relates to the Colorado Republican Party, on conservative talk radio.