Last week, the Johnstown-based group (which operates over a large swath of the northern Front Range but lists Johnstown south-east of Ft. Collins as its postal address) sent out an email blast littered with exclamation points announcing Paul’s brief visit to Denver. It also pointed caucus goers to the group’s “no rhetoric, all facts” GOP Presidential Voter Guide, a deadpan exercise in candidate demolition that leaves no doubt where the group stands.

The authors of the guide skewered Romney, Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum as unreliably conservative in both fiscal matters and in checking government overreach.

The guide’s list of facts on Romney, for example, opens on “Romneycare” and underlines that the Massachusetts healthcare plan steered into law by Romney was the blueprint for tea party-detested “Obamacare.” The list then moves onto Romney’s support for the big government-style anti-free-market TARP bailouts, gun right restrictions and climate change “cap and trade” proposals. The list wraps by calling Romney a “flip flopper” on amnesty for undocumented residents.

By contrast, not a single unqualified negative comment falls into the Ron Paul list. Paul’s record on government spending is described as “stellar.” Even Paul positions typically controversial on the right, such as his anti-interventionist foreign policy and commitment to ending “War on Terror” policies and programs, are described in an unabashed positive light.

The Northern Colorado Tea Party facts on Romney:

• Passed “Romneycare” into Massachusetts law, which eventually became the blueprint for Obamacare
• Supported TARP
• Opposed Obama’s stimulus plan and urged Republicans to vote against it
• Supported Cap & Trade legislation in Massachusetts
• Has also supported his fair share of anti-gun legislation and has refused to return the National Association of Gun Rights survey
• Has a horrible record on taxes, er, should I say fees…although he opposed tax hikes as governor, he imposed a mountain of “fees” to help balance the budget
• Has a mixed record on spending.  He did successfully cut government spending during the first part of his first term, but loosened the purse strings during the later years.  During his time as governor, he did save the state millions by cutting out waste within the system, eliminating meaningless government jobs, and going after local earmarks instead of dipping into the states rainy day fund.
• Supports ethanol subsidies
• Supports “Right to Work” legislation and states
• Mitt is a flip-flopper on amnesty and ultimately supports a plan similar to Newt’s, granting amnesty for “some”.

The Northern Colorado Tea Party facts on Paul:

• Voted against TARP
• Voted against Obamacare
• Voted against Obama’s stimulus
• Voted against auto bailouts and Cash for Clunkers
• Voted against Cap & Trade
• Supports Right to Work legislation
• Has never voted to raise the debt ceiling
• Is an outspoken advocate for the Tenth amendment and states rights
• Is an outspoken advocate for the Constitution and limited government
• Strongly supports auditing the Federal Reserve
• Has an excellent record on gun control, recently being crowned the “Defender of the Second Amendment” by Gun Owners of America.  He is the only candidate remaining to have returned the National Association of Gun Rights survey with a 100% score.
• He has an excellent record on taxes, never voting for a tax increase and always supporting tax cuts across the board.  He has voted to cut taxes by $80 billion in the past 5 years, voicing his opinion that cutting taxes is the only way to stimulate the economy
• He has an excellent record on spending voting against nearly every big spending bill and was 1 of  41 congressman to vote against No Child Left Behind.
• His stellar spending record aside though, he has become a strong supporter of earmarks giving him an undesirable 29% on the Club for Growth’s rePORK card (although earlier in his career he never used earmarks).  He believes that earmarks are held to much higher accountability and that if the federal government is taking funds from his state constituents, it is his responsibility to bring the funds back to them.  He typically votes no on the same bills he is inserting his earmarks in.
• Believes we need to end the billions of dollars we spend annually in foreign aid, especially to the countries we are at war with.
• Supports securing our borders and coastlines, supports enforcing visa rules by tracking and deporting anyone who overstays their visa, opposes amnesty, and supports ending birthright citizenship.
• Believes we should bring our troops home and readdress our approach regarding the War on Terror and military spending along with the waste, fraud and corruption that may go along with it.

It’s hard to say how much influence the Northern Colorado Tea Party leaders will exert on caucus activity today, but the group’s large presence in the state’s fourth congressional district and strong support for CD4 candidate Cory Gardner in 2010 likely played a large role in Gardner’s easy victory over Democratic incumbent Betsy Markey. The group also lead the state-wide tea party support that boosted Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck’s U.S. Senate bid that same year, propelling him to primary victory over establishment candidate Jane Norton.

Messages to the Northern Colorado Tea Party went unanswered this week, so its loose membership in the thousands or even perhaps tens of thousands couldn’t be confirmed. Estimates, however, put state-wide tea party membership in 2010 at something like 220,000. If those numbers have been even moderately sustained, tea partiers will have a significant impact at the GOP caucuses.

There are roughly 1.08 million registered Republicans in Colorado and only roughly 10 percent of those will turn up to caucus tonight. Politically engaged tea partiers will make up a disproportionate number of attendees.

Although tea party support for Paul will certainly thin Romney support, it bodes particularly ill for rival runner-up candidates Santorum and Gingrich.

Santorum at least is likely to do well among the state’s large Colorado Springs-based evangelical voting bloc.

“I ask you to reset this race,” Santorum told voters here this past weekend. “Create an opportunity for someone who can speak to Americans about what America is all about.”

Yesterday in Golden, just miles from the country’s National Center for Atmospheric Research, the former Pennsylvania senator let loose a stemwinder at an energy forum in which he attacked international climate scientists as partners in a conspiracy to willfully create panic that would open up the country to totalitarian-like government control of the economy. He laced his talk with tent-revival-style reference to god’s will and man’s dominion over the natural world.

Yet it may be Gingrich who seems to be hoping most for a miracle in Colorado. He still has minimal campaign presence in the state and has spent almost no time here. His three wives and outrageous Tiffany tab won’t help him win the Focus on the Family-Tim Tebow vote and his term as House Speaker and then as Beltway-influence peddler are sure to undercut his attraction to anti-government tea partiers.

Romney, however, despite tea party and evangelical resistance, may pull off a key victory in the Centennial State. He has gained momentum from a series of recent primary victories and will be boosted here as he was this weekend in Nevada by the Mormon vote. Mormons make up roughly 5 percent of all religious adherents in Colorado, or something like a community of 140,000 believers who generally vote Republican.

Romney enjoyed 60 percent support among Colorado Republicans in 2008, burying John McCain in that year’s caucuses.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Calls to Coffman’s 2012 campaign staffers went unanswered today. Coffman is running for reelection against Democrat Joe Miklosi in a formerly safe Republican district remade this year as a tossup, equally divided among Republican, independent and Democratic voters.

At the beginning of November, before his district boundaries had been cemented, Coffman announced he was proud to chair Perry’s campaign in Colorado. It was another in a series of moves that seemed to mark a sharp turn to the right for Coffman.

“Governor Perry’s experience, ideas and proven record of job creation make him the candidate we need to get our nation working again,” Coffman said. “I am looking forward to being a part of Gov. Perry’s campaign team.”

Now, Perry’s prospects here and elsewhere look dim.

Romney is running far ahead of the pack in the next contest to be held January 10 in New Hampshire and has already pulled down the endorsement of South Carolina Governor Nikki Haley. Despite his showing in Iowa, social conservative Santorum isn’t likely to catch fire in the Northeast.

Santorum spent nearly a year stumping in heavily evangelical Iowa and lost to Romney by a mere 8 votes out of some 150,000 cast. According to a Suffolk University/7News poll (PDF) released today, Santorum gained a full point’s worth of support in New Hampshire yesterday– but the bump only notched him 6 percent support over all. Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania who lost his seat to a Democrat in 2006, is running in fifth place in New Hampshire, according to Suffolk. Perry drew 1 percent support among the likely voters polled, trailing even Minnesota Rep. Michele Bachmann, who finished last in the Iowa caucuses and dropped out of the presidential race this morning.

The Colorado Republican presidential precinct caucuses are scheduled for February 7. In Colorado’s 2008 caucuses, Romney defeated John McCain in a landslide, winning 60 percent of the vote. This year’s race, the first presidential contest of the Tea Party era, however, seems different. Romney is being portrayed on the right as a new-model McCain, a flip-flopping moderate who can’t be trusted to push strong conservative policies, and so Romney seems unlikely to inspire the kind of enthusiasm he did four years ago here.

Pundits at the national Tea Party blog RedState have been strongly pushing Perry as the best alternative to Romney in the face of repeat signals that the campaign is doomed.

On Tuesday morning, tamping down expectations, RedState Founder Erick Erickson quoted Dan McLaughlin to say that a fourth-place finish by Perry would constitute a “life line” and would “ensure he will be the GOP nominee.”

Perry’s limping fifth-place finish, in which by some calculations his campaign and supporting committee spent nearly $500 in ads on each of the roughly 12,600 votes cast for him, wasn’t enough to dissuade Erickson. This morning, in a post-Iowa piece titled “Embrace the Suck,” he alternately blamed George W. Bush for the topsy-turvy GOP primary and pleaded with Perry to stay the course, painting him as the last great hope of the Tea Party.

If Rick Perry drops out of the race it will be the ultimate failure of the tea party movement to see the race come down to two or three big government conservatives. Romney and Santorum both hide behind compassionate conservatism to expand the state to suit their purposes. Only Rick Perry has run a campaign to make Washington “as inconsequential to our lives as possible.”

If I were Perry, I’d wake up tomorrow, say I refuse to surrender the Republican Party into the hands of big government conservatives after all the gains the tea party has made, and then announce I’m firing all my political staffers and communications staffers and ask South Carolina to help me reboot to victory. Make it an Alamo stand and, if like at the Alamo Perry goes down, perhaps there’ll at least be a rallying cry for small government conservatism left over.

Progressive groups pressured Coffman to defend a controversial anti-gay ad Perry ran in Iowa last month. Coffman made no comment. This week, in advance of the opening of the Colorado state legislative session, high-profile Republicans have come out in support of same-sex civil unions legislation defeated last year and on the slate to be reintroduced this year.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

U.S. Rep. Diana DeGette, D-Colo.

The U.S. Senate on Saturday overwhelmingly (89-10) passed a two-month extension that the House rejected 229-193 on Tuesday, with House Speaker John Boehner and the conservative Republican caucus insisting on a one-year extension. House and Senate Democrats are refusing to play ball.

U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman, R-Colo.

“Congress can’t even agree on a tax cut they all agree with,” said Joe Miklosi, a Democrat running for Coffman’s 6th Congressional District seat. “Senate Republicans and Democrats managed to negotiate a reasonable compromise and it’s unacceptable that House Republicans continue the relentless partisan bickering. The consequences of a failure to act will have major economic repercussions.”

The only silver lining for some Democrats and members of Colorado’s conservation community is that a provision compelling President Obama to fast track a decision on the controversial Keystone XL oil pipeline is also caught up in the congressional stalemate. Coffman this morning was blasted by environmental groups for supporting the provision.

Colorado activists wearing Santa hats delivered coal and sang coal carols at Coffman’s Lone Tree office. They accused Coffman of pandering to energy interests, which they say have contributed more than $145,000 to his re-election campaign.

“The House brings shame on itself when its members take tens of millions in big oil money and then do the industry’s bidding,” 350.org founder Bill McKibben said in a release. “Keystone XL creates no net jobs and pours carbon into the atmosphere. That’s why millions across the country opposed it. Its only beneficiaries are the fossil fuel industry and the politicians they support.”

The Keystone XL provision was seen as sweetener in the deal to get House Republicans to vote for the payroll tax break, but apparently it wasn’t enough to overcome reservations about the length of the deal. But DeGette said that the Senate deal is the best that can be hoped for in the current political climate.

“While a two-month extension is far from ideal, given the intransigence that has marked this year in Congress, and the difficult negotiations that have already taken place on this bill, it is clear more time is needed to develop an effective year-long solution,” DeGette said.

“This short-term extension would allow time for more negotiation without forcing American families to endure a tax hike or the devastating consequences of losing their unemployment benefits.”

Colorado Republican Rep. Doug Lamborn also tried to blame the Senate: “I urge my Democrat colleagues in the Senate to return to Washington and work with the House on a bill to give a full year tax break to American families. The House stands ready to get the job done and work through the holidays, just as many other Americans are doing. We are committed to giving middle class families a tax cut for a full year as the President has requested.”

But even some Senate Republicans are calling out their counterparts in the House.

“It is harming the Republican Party. It is harming the view, if it’s possible anymore, of the American people about Congress,” Arizona Sen. John McCain told CNN. “And we’ve got to get this thing resolved and with the realization that the payroll tax cut must remain in effect.”

House Republican leaders want Senate Democrats to return to Washington and appoint conferees to negotiate a deal with the House.

“We believe there is common ground on this issue and we can provide some certainty in a full year’s worth of tax relief for the working taxpayers of this country,” House Republican Leader Eric Cantor said in a release. “Now it’s up to [Senate Majority Leader] Harry Reid, because the bill is back in the Senate.”

DeGette urged Reid to do the same thing:

“I had no choice but to vote against the politically motivated motion to go to conference,” she said in a statement. “However, given the dire consequences for the American people, I must now strongly urge … Reid to appoint conferees and work toward a common-sense solution for our nation before Jan. 1. I stand ready to vote at any time to help the millions of Americans who rely upon these critical funds.”

In the wake of the arrest of two Americans, U.S. Senator John McCain is under fire today for his refusal to apologize for speculating earlier that Arizona’s Willow fire had been caused by illegal immigrants.

McCain’s office has told the press he won’t apologize and say his earlier remarks were not specific to this fire but merely that perhaps illegal immigrants cause fires.

A release from the National Tequila Party sums the situation up thusly:

In June 2011, Arizona Senator John McCain inappropriately blamed the Arizona fire blazes on “illegal” immigrants, and he has failed to apologize even though there was no factual evidence the fires were started by immigrants. New information has come full circle where we learnt two “legal” Arizona citizens face federal charges of leaving an unattended campfire that sparked the massive Wallow Fire this summer.

We insist that Senator McCain apologize for blaming the fires on immigrants because the hate climate in Arizona is flagrant. If McCain apologizes, it would send a positive message to the nation that native born Americans commit crimes, too, and we cannot and must not continue to blame undocumented immigrants and use them as scapegoats in an unjust manner. Hate crimes have increased 125% in Phoenix alone over the past few years, and this data should encourage McCain to do the right thing.

If McCain still has trouble apologizing for his ill chosen statement, we hope he will swallow his pride chased by a shot of Tequila which could only help us reverse the hate-filled climate in Arizona.

It’s angry Tea Party town hall month in America and, in Arizona yesterday, Senator John McCain got a taste of the kind of crazy that colored Colorado’s gubernatorial race last year. The longtime public servant and one-time GOP presidential nominee was called out of touch by town hall Tea Partiers who were shocked McCain didn’t know about “Agenda 21,” an alleged United Nations plan that would see a world government take over the United States by wresting control of its farms.

“First our firearms, then our farms,” one of the Tea Partiers called out, amid the hullabaloo, according to the Arizona Republic.

Baffled, McCain said no Congress would allow anything of the sort to happen, but few cared to hear it.

Indeed, the Gilbert, Arizona, crowd was riled up well before McCain arrived, upset that he had appeared to mock the naivete of Tea Party members of Congress by quoting on the floor of the Senate a Wall Street Journal editorial that characterized them as deluded, as acting like they were hobbits in the Lord of the Rings trilogy, battling the forces of evil.

Asked by the town hall folks to apologize, McCain said he didn’t understand. He said he only meant that the drive to pass a balanced budget amendment was fantasy.

“Is there anything wrong that I said?” McCain asked. “I don’t know what to apologize for.”

In Colorado, 2010 Tea Party gubernatorial candidate Dan Maes became the GOP nominee and something of a national embarrassment to the state party, in part for warning voters against the Denver bike sharing program, which he said was part of a UN one-world government initiative that would deprive Americans of liberty and end in miserable domination.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Endorsement of a candidate can often excite voters, especially Republicans and social conservatives as they try to find the candidate who best speaks to their values and can take over the White House next year.

However, in a year when the Republican party is trying to unite, endorsements can backfire the effort, some Republican State Central Committee members believe.

Four members of the Iowa Republican State Central Committee are backing U.S. Rep. Ron Paul (R-Texas), the media-dubbed “intellectual grandfather of the tea party” movement, which has picked up momentum since 2008 when high profile tea party leader former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin ran as the vice presidential nominee with the more moderate Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz).

Dr. Drew Ivers serves as chairman of Paul’s Iowa campaign. Also endorsing Paul are Committee members Jeremiah Johnson, David Fischer and A.J. Spiker, who is vice-chairman of the campaign. Paul has also drawn state legislative endorsements from social conservatives Reps. Glen Massie (R-Des Moines) and Kim Pearson (R-Pleasant Hill).

“Congressman Paul’s voting record is true to the U.S. Constitution, and he understands that human life and individual liberty come to us from our Creator, not from government,” Spiker, who identified himself as a Constitutionalist, rather than a tea party activist or a social conservative, said. “His limited government principles are unmatched by any other candidate.”

Committee members are allowed to freely endorse or work for any candidate of their pleasing, but must fully disclose to the committee their campaign positions, if they hold any.

Former Iowa Rep. Jim Kurtenbach stepped down from his position with the state party to focus on former Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty‘s campaign. Committee member Wes Enos has also said he will recuse himself from Committee voting pertaining to his candidate of choice.

Still, some are biding their time before giving their investment to a potential president.

Iowa GOP Treasurer Craig Williams has yet to back a candidate — and will not do so until the Iowa Caucuses early next year.

“For me personally, the best way to assure fairness in the process is to remain as neutral as possible in that process right up until caucus day,” Williams told The Iowa Independent. Once the caucus arrives, he intends to “become an opinionated Iowan with the full right to speak on behalf of my favorite candidate and try to persuade my neighbors and friends to support hat candidate as well, but not until then.”

And though he stayed mum on his preference for 2012 thus far, Williams gave his stamp of approval on the wide range of GOP candidates, “any one of whom I would gladly take over [President] Barack Obama.”

Chelle Adkins will also wait until the caucuses to announce an endorsement.

Other committee members are against the idea of endorsing entirely, including Republican State Central Committeeman Steve Scheffler. Scheffler is also the president of the Iowa Faith and Freedom Coalition (formerly known as the Iowa Christian Alliance) and on the Republican National Committee.

“You never say never (to endorsing a candidate), but I haven’t and I won’t (endorse anyone),” Scheffler said. “If there’s an endorsed candidate so contrary to the core values of our party’s platform, it does not motivate the base and is not a good idea.”

Fellow member John Ortega simply said, “I just think it’s wrong” to endorse any candidate. Once a candidate has been nominated to square off against Obama, Ortega said, “then I will happily give that person my full support.”

GOP 2012 presidential frontrunner Mitt Romney has decided to pass on the Iowa straw poll this summer, a warm-up event for the election-year Iowa caucuses, which increasingly have become a sort of warm-up event for the real primary campaigns. Romney’s decision is making headlines as a risky move but the fact is non-incumbent winners of the GOP Iowa caucus don’t win the GOP national nomination in any kind of consistent way. And the record of caucus winners is even less a predictor for success in the general election. As Romney knows and as the New York Times suggested Saturday, Iowa is now way too Christian right and Midwest parochial to serve as a barometer for Republican America.

“If Iowa becomes some extraneous right-wing outpost, you have to question whether it is going to be a good place to vet your presidential candidates,” Iowa GOP activist Doug Gross told The New York Times.

But there’s no real “if” about it.

In 1980 Ronald Reagan won the GOP nomination and went on to pummel President Jimmy Carter in the general election. He lost the Iowa Caucus to George H.W. Bush, 30 percent to 32 percent.

In 1988, Vice President Bush won the GOP nomination and went on to defeat MIke Dukakis in the general election. He trailed in the Iowa caucus behind both Bob Dole and television evangelist-Christian Coalition founder Pat Robertson. Dole pulled down 37 percent of the vote; Robertson won 25 percent; and Bush just 19 percent.

In 1996 and 2000, the Iowa caucus winners won the nomination. Bob Dole beat Pat Buchanan and George W. Bush defeated Steve Forbes.

In 2008, Mike Huckabee led the pack with 34 percent and John McCain, the eventual nominee, came in fourth with just 13 percent of the vote.

So, in the last 36 years– the entire post-Nixon era of modern U.S. election politics– a single non-incumbent Republican candidate, George W. Bush, won the Iowa caucus and then won both the nomination and the general election. Of course, Bush won the general election by way of the Supreme Court. He trailed Al Gore’s tally by more than 540,000 votes. No one looking at this record would bet anything on the GOP winner of the Iowa caucus.

The problem is personified in Christian-right Iowa politico Bob Vander Plaats, the caucus kingmaker. Years out from Election Day, he shepherds presidential hopefuls around the state on event tours where his brand of hard-core social conservative voters meet the candidates. For Vander Plaats Iowans, gay marriage is the number one problem the would-be president would address from the White House– gay marriage and abortion.

Vander Plaats is pure in his politics. He’s unbending and confrontational, and he has lost every election race he has ever run. The Atlantic provides a snapshot in the wake of the most recent Vander Plaats loss:

After roaming the state inveighing against the country’s parlous moral condition, he narrowly lost the Republican [gubernatorial] primary, refused to endorse the victor, [now-Governor] Terry Branstad, and instead returned to the passion that animated his campaign: outrage over the Iowa Supreme Court’s landmark 2009 ruling that legalized gay marriage.

As things stand, far-right Tea Party caucus leader and Christian-right Congresswoman Michele Bachmann is likely to jump into the presidential race soon and she will do well in Iowa. In fact Bachmann, and perhaps the Bachmanns of the Republican party, can only consider making presidential runs because of Iowa, because of the far-right religious nature of the caucuses and the prominence they have been given over the years. If she runs, Bachmann may well defeat Romney there next year. And that would be big, just like Sharron Angle’s victory over Sue Lowden last June in Nevada.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

Mitt Romney is announcing his long-coming official 2012 presidential bid on a New Hampshire farm today. A metaphor for the Romney candidacy, the announcement will look good– all rolling hills, blue skies, tractors and hay bales, according to the New York Times– but it will be undercut by the fact that the family farm is propped up by major federal subsidies, thinning Romney’s small-government message for those in the know.

Romney, a one-time moderate Republican who advanced health care reform as governor of Massachusetts that became a prototype of the controversial national plan passed last year, has been attacked for months on the Tea Party right. Those attacks will now increase and are being led today by the Western Representation political action committee founded by high-profile failed Alaska Tea Party Senate candidate Joe Miller. The group unveiled a campaign today to hobble the Romney run.

“On issues like gun rights, gay rights, abortion, immigration, and health care, Romney has flipped more than John Kerry flopped,” Miller says in a release. “We’re committed to making sure Mitt Romney spends 2012 in his home state of Massachusetts, or whatever state he’s calling home today,because conservatives deserve a better choice than Mitt Romney.”

Romney has been the de facto frontrunner for nearly half a year in a GOP field of official and unofficial presidential candidates that has so far failed to garner much enthusiasm.

Romney led in a fairly unserious straw poll of Colorado Republicans taken at a fundraising dinner in March. He also swamped GOP presidential nominee John McCain in the 2008 Colorado GOP caucuses, taking 59 percent to McCain’s 19 percent.

Today’s release from the Western Representation PAC, however, gives a taste of the kind of primary rhetoric Romney will face in what is sure to be a grueling primary campaign.

SPARKS, NV — Western Representation PAC, one of the largest and fastest-growing conservative action groups in the country, unveiled its campaign to prevent the nomination of former Massachusetts Gov Mitt Romney for President. The Nevada-based political action committee, chaired by 2010 Republican US Senate Nominee Joe Miller, is committed to ensuring Romney is not the Republican Party’s Presidential candidate in 2012.

“In a matchup against Obama, Tea Party voters are looking for a consistent constitutional conservative,” said Miller. “We will never get behind Mitt Romney. On issues like gun rights, gay rights, abortion, immigration, and health care, Romney has flipped more than John Kerry flopped.”

[...]

“As of right now, we’re not making an endorsement on who should be the Republican nominee,” said Executive Director Bryan Shroyer. “We just know that if Mitt Romney wins the nomination, we’ll be looking at a repeat of Bob Dole’s feckless 1996 campaign and a landslide defeat.”

Western Representation PAC… has purchased the domain name StopRomney.org and has started a Facebook group by the same name.

“We’re committed to making sure Mitt Romney spends 2012 in his home state of Massachusetts, or whatever state he’s calling home today,” said Miller, “because conservatives deserve a better choice than Mitt Romney.”

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.

McCain wrote a measured heartfelt op-ed for the Washington Post this morning and then delivered a passionate anti-torture and anti-torture-propaganda speech on the floor of the senate this afternoon.

From the op-ed:

I asked CIA Director Leon Panetta for the facts, and he told me the following: The trail to bin Laden did not begin with a disclosure from Khalid Sheik Mohammed, who was waterboarded 183 times. The first mention of Abu Ahmed al-Kuwaiti — the nickname of the al-Qaeda courier who ultimately led us to bin Laden — as well as a description of him as an important member of al-Qaeda, came from a detainee held in another country, who we believe was not tortured. None of the three detainees who were waterboarded provided Abu Ahmed’s real name, his whereabouts or an accurate description of his role in al-Qaeda.

In fact, the use of “enhanced interrogation techniques” on Khalid Sheik Mohammed produced false and misleading information.

[...]

As we debate how the United States can best influence the course of the Arab Spring, can’t we all agree that the most obvious thing we can do is stand as an example of a nation that holds an individual’s human rights as superior to the will of the majority or the wishes of government? Individuals might forfeit their life as punishment for breaking laws, but even then, as recognized in our Constitution’s prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment, they are still entitled to respect for their basic human dignity, even if they have denied that respect to others.

All of these arguments have the force of right, but they are beside the most important point. Ultimately, this is more than a utilitarian debate. This is a moral debate. It is about who we are.

I don’t mourn the loss of any terrorist’s life. What I do mourn is what we lose when by official policy or official neglect we confuse or encourage those who fight this war for us to forget that best sense of ourselves. Through the violence, chaos and heartache of war, through deprivation and cruelty and loss, we are always Americans, and different, stronger and better than those who would destroy us.

From Capitol Hill (he gets going at around the 5:40 mark):

McCain may be derided by the tea party right for what has been characterized as his tepid conservativism but he speaks with authority on torture and he has better access to information about the mission to kill bin Laden and the interrogations of captured members of al Qaida than do Fox News talking heads and the bloggers at RedState.

Got a tip? Story pitch? Send us an e-mail. Follow The Colorado Independent on Twitter.