Things must be going well for Republicans this year. While I know how great a campaigner Dr. Mike Fallon is, and how much he deserves more national support, I was resigned to the likelihood that the big-wigs of the Republican party were writing off (as they do every year, stretching back to the tenure of that other hag) Colorado’s First Congressional District in 2010.
Lo and behold, news comes this week that the National Republican Congressional Committee has added Mike to its “On The Radar” list. As Mike’s press release states, this is a good indication that the national party believes “that the traditionally Democratic district in Denver may be more competitive than expected.”
In fact, Diana DeGette, who feels she owns the seat, is even using this great news to try to drum up fund-raising support of her own.
This can only mean good things for us. And no better time for all of us to help this excellent candidate by volunteering, or if you don’t live in CO-1, contributing as best you can.
Way to go, Mike!
– Nick (ColoradoPatriot, from HQ)
How can any gay person support a social conservative like Mike Fallon? There is a reason why he opposes the Reid bill to set aside “don’t ask, don’t tell.” And how would he vote on repealing the Defense of Marriage Act?
We can vote for him because the future of the republic doesn’t hinge on replacing DADT and DOMA, it does, however, hinge on restoring fiscal sanity, which includes repealing ObamaCare and reversing other idiotic Obama/Liberal/Progressive policies.
I live in the Colorado 1st and I’m happily voting for Fallon and displaying a yard sign.
James:
I’ll address and answer (fruitlessly, no doubt, I imagine) what was likely simply a rhetorical red-meat question from the Gay Borg:
As a gay person (and a conservative, and a member of the military), I can support Mike Fallon (who is by no means a social conservative if you’ve been paying any attention whatsoever, which I recognize is highly unlikely anyway) because his attitude about DADT is one of deference to the military leaders, not elected politicians.
Were I a snark like those who oppose Fallon (clearly not knowing his friendliness with gay folks on every occasion so far this campaign), I’d ask why you might support someone like the incumbent who cares so little about the military and disrespects the leadership thereof so blatantly that she’s forging ahead with her social experimentation in spite of their request to give them time to survey the effects of a change.
Curious, too, that you’d call it the “Reid bill”, considering that paragon of affection for the “gay agenda” himself voted against it. Then again, subtleties like that rarely make their way into the HRC propaganda emails, do they?