The Denver Post reports today that GOP U.S. Senate candidate Jane Norton is being hammered in campaign ads for her support of Referendum C in 2005, which allowed the state to spend roughly $3.7 billion in tax revenues slated to be refunded to tax payers. Conservative voters in the state see Ref C as a major tax hike and a betrayal of the state’s Taxpayer Bill of Rights. The campaign ads are part of an increasingly heated Republican primary battle. Norton is putting out her own campaign ads, one of which– a 60-second spot Politico reports looks more like a news update– targets Pres. Obama, a favored tactic of the Norton campaign so far.
Norton has been the effective frontrunner in the race since she entered in September. A long time political insider whose candidacy was boosted by Washington lobbyists and the national GOP, Norton has made it an unofficial policy that she doesn’t talk about or to her opponents. Nor does she talk to the press.
In reporting the story today, the Denver Post and Politico both talked to Norton Campaign spokesman Nate Strauch. That’s no surprise. As media critic Jason Salzman pointed out in a post at his Big Media blog, yesterday, spokespeople and pre-recorded soundbites are Norton’s preferred modes of dealing with the media.
She’s been quoted directly (words from mouth) in just four articles in The Post since she launched her campaign over five months ago.
Instead of talking to reporters, Norton is giving them spokespeople, written statements, and news releases, which were used in 10 additional articles.
Since Norton’s campaign announcement Sept. 15, ten of 14 articles in the print edition of The Post, plus an additional half dozen posts on The Post’s political blog The Spot, relied on this type of controlled information for quotes.
Given Norton’s disastrous track record in speaking off the cuff, where on separate occasions she has made policy pronouncements about abolishing federal departments and said that the president cares more about the rights of terrorists than he does about the lives of Americans and called for a national sales flat tax and proclaimed that health reform is unconstitutional, given that, it’s no surprise she chooses to dole out her communications to the press in drips and drops.
Norton has ideas and she expresses them. She just prefers to do so on conservative talk radio shows and at small conservative campaign gatherings.
The people in this state, whom she has said Democratic U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet “holds in contempt,” want to hear her elaborate on those ideas. They deserve to hear more from her directly and less from her spokesman Nate Strauch.









View Comments
Comment posted February 26, 2010 @ 4:08 am
Maybe John, who wrote this article, doesn't watch FOXNews. Just last week Jane Norton appeared with a reporter, unscripted, on live national television answering questions about her campaign. She has travelled all over the state speaking to voters face to face – maybe you were not able to attend those meetings John. Many of us did. You failed to mention that Jane Norton has a history of cutting spending in the departments she ran in Colorado government and that she has signed a taxpayer protection pledge to not raise taxes in Congress, she supports a balanced budget amendment to force Congress to cut spending and earmark reform – maybe you are not able to read her notes to the voters. You also fail to note that the guy running radio ads against her (Mr. Wiens) himself voted multiple times to actually raise taxes. You also failed to mention that Mr. Buck can't raise money so he is using under-the-table money from outside special interests to tear Jane down. Maybe your real goal here is to support Michael Bennet and Barack Obama's massive spending??
Comment posted March 1, 2010 @ 10:21 am
I consider it a point in Jane Norton's favor that she's smart enough to not talk to the lefty, liberal media at this point in the campaign. She doesn't need to right now because we're only at the primary stage and, right now, she only needs to reach the people in her party who can vote in the primary, e.g., Republicans. Not independents, who cannot vote in primaries because they don't have enough courage of conviction in their beliefs to take a stand and declare a party, and certainly not Democrats, who would just take any gaffs or poorly worded statements she might make and stuff them in their hip pockets where they'll be handy to whip out later and twist is all around–should she win the primary–when the real battle begins with Michael “Who?” Bennet.
I originally thought I was a Ken Buck supporter because he's done a good job as my county DA, but now I'm leaning toward Jane Norton despite her past support of Ref C as Lt. Governor. She pretty much had to “get in the boat” with her boss at the time, Governor Bill “Sell Out” Owens, who supported Ref. C and also signed an illegal Executive Order reinstating Colorado's Baby Brady system. I know what that's like, being forced to choose between keeping your job or “getting on board” with your boss and putting on a happy face, despite your personal opinion. She's explained her past support to my satisfaction to where it's no longer a show stopper for me.
Comment posted March 1, 2010 @ 11:21 am
I consider it a point in Jane Norton's favor that she's smart enough to not talk to the lefty, liberal media at this point in the campaign. She doesn't need to right now because we're only at the primary stage and, right now, she only needs to reach the people in her party who can vote in the primary, e.g., Republicans. Not independents, who cannot vote in primaries because they don't have enough courage of conviction in their beliefs to take a stand and declare a party, and certainly not Democrats, who would just take any gaffs or poorly worded statements she might make and stuff them in their hip pockets where they'll be handy to whip out later and twist them all around–should she win the primary–when the real battle begins with Michael “Who?” Bennet.
I originally thought I was a Ken Buck supporter because he's done a good job as my county DA, but now I'm leaning toward Jane Norton despite her past support of Ref C as Lt. Governor. She pretty much had to “get in the boat” with her boss at the time, Governor Bill “Sell Out” Owens, who supported Ref. C and also signed an illegal Executive Order reinstating Colorado's Baby Brady system in 1999. I know what that's like, being forced to choose between keeping your job or “getting on board” with your boss and putting on a happy face despite your personal opinion. She's explained her past support of Ref. C to my satisfaction to where it's no longer a show stopper for me.
Comment posted March 1, 2010 @ 5:21 pm
I consider it a point in Jane Norton's favor that she's smart enough to not talk to the lefty, liberal media at this point in the campaign. She doesn't need to right now because we're only at the primary stage and, right now, she only needs to reach the people in her party who can vote in the primary, e.g., Republicans. Not independents, who cannot vote in primaries because they don't have enough courage of conviction in their beliefs to take a stand and declare a party, and certainly not Democrats, who would just take any gaffs or poorly worded statements she might make and stuff them in their hip pockets where they'll be handy to whip out later and twist them all around–should she win the primary–when the real battle begins with Michael “Who?” Bennet.
I originally thought I was a Ken Buck supporter because he's done a good job as my county DA, but now I'm leaning toward Jane Norton despite her past support of Ref C as Lt. Governor. She pretty much had to “get in the boat” with her boss at the time, Governor Bill “Sell Out” Owens, who supported Ref. C and also signed an illegal Executive Order reinstating Colorado's Baby Brady system in 1999. I know what that's like, being forced to choose between keeping your job or “getting on board” with your boss and putting on a happy face despite your personal opinion. She's explained her past support of Ref. C to my satisfaction to where it's no longer a show stopper for me.
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.