On the surface, Former Colorado Lieutenant Governor Jane Norton, looks like a good conservative candidate for the Senate Race in Colorado this 2010 season. I’ve not looked into her background other than what’s been posted on her website. She’s received a few notable endorsements including Josh Penry and Mark Hillman, on the other hand Tom Tancreado has said publicly that Norton is not ready (Denver post article). She’s clearly a concern to the left since she’s managed to be the target of The Huffington Post on a few occasions. (article 1, article 2, article 3)
The most notable insight to Norton’s candidacy comes from blogger Michelle Malkin in her January 22nd article where she’s called Norton “Mini-McCain”.
In Colorado, McCain and his meddlers infuriated the state party by anointing former lieutenant governor Jane Norton to challenge endangered Democrat Sen. Michael Bennet. She’s a milquetoast public official who has served on a lot of task forces and GOP clubs – and who happens to be the sister-in-law of big Beltway insider Charlie Black. An estimated 40 percent of her coffers are filled with out-of-state money (and much of that is flowing from the Beltway).
The mini-McCain of Colorado claims to oppose “special interests,” but has raised hundreds of thousands of dollars from D.C. lobbyists at McCain’s behest – stifling the candidacy of strong conservative rivals led by grass-roots-supported Weld County District Attorney Ken Buck, an amnesty opponent whose aggressive illegal immigration prosecutions have earned him the rage of the far Left and big business Right. A recent Rasmussen poll showed Buck and another GOP candidate Tom Wiens beating Bennet – despite the huge cash and crony advantage of front-runner and blank-slate Jane.
I like her stance on a balanced budget, Card Check, Energy, earmarks and many other issues. (read more here)
My thought is are we getting more of the same republican middle of the road politics, or are we getting a true conservative with Jane Norton. What are you thoughts?
From http://www.janenortonforcolorado.com/about
- Colorado’s 46th Lieutenant Governor, sworn in January 13, 2003.
- Because of her extensive healthcare background, the Governor asked Jane to act as point person for the Owens Administration on reforming Colorado’s healthcare system. This effort focused on improving health care for low-income, working families through commonsense reforms; giving individuals and families more power over their health care decisions; helping rural Colorado meet its unique health care challenges; and on making health insurance more affordable for Colorado’s small businesses.
- Jane was named the first executive director for the Denver Police Foundation (DPF) February 1, 2007. The DPF supports individual officers and their families in times of crisis and provides equipment, training and technology in support of Denver’s police officers.
- Jane is a 1972 graduate of Grand Junction High School. In 1976 she graduated from Colorado State University with a Bachelor of Science degree with distinction in health sciences. She also has a Master of Sciences in Management degree from Regis University, Denver.
- Colorado’s 46th Lieutenant Governor, sworn in January 13, 2003.
- Because of her extensive healthcare background, the Governor asked Jane to act as point person for the Owens Administration on reforming Colorado’s healthcare system. This effort focused on improving health care for low-income, working families through commonsense reforms; giving individuals and families more power over their health care decisions; helping rural Colorado meet its unique health care challenges; and on making health insurance more affordable for Colorado’s small businesses.
- Jane was named the first executive director for the Denver Police Foundation (DPF) February 1, 2007. The DPF supports individual officers and their families in times of crisis and provides equipment, training and technology in support of Denver’s police officers.
- Jane is a 1972 graduate of Grand Junction High School. In 1976 she graduated from Colorado State University with a Bachelor of Science degree with distinction in health sciences. She also has a Master of Sciences in Management degree from Regis University, Denver.
- Jane was born (October 12, 1954) and raised in Grand Junction with sister Judy Black of Washington, DC and brother Walt Bergman. She has lived in Fort Collins and Greeley and currently resides in Englewood. Jane is married to Mike Norton, former US Attorney of Colorado.
Jane was born (October 12, 1954) and raised in Grand Junction with sister Judy Black of Washington, DC and brother Walt Bergman. She has lived in Fort Collins and Greeley and currently resides in Englewood. Jane is married to Mike Norton, former US Attorney of Colorado.
February 16th, 2010 at 11:58 am
I am usually a fan of Michelle Malkin, but when that article came out several weeks ago, I respectfully disagreed with her stance. She cited the Rasmussen poll as “evidence” that Buck or Wiens could win a race against Bennet, but pointedly omitted Norton’s far-stronger numbers to suit her own interests. She doesn’t have the closest hand in CO politics that many of us here in the state do, and her mistaken usage of Wiens as an opponent to “big money” Norton falls really flat considering Wiens’ subsidization of more than 3/4 of his own campaign.
I think Norton is a strong conservative who can really win in this state; sometimes we treat the McCain association as a bit of political leprosy, but we forget that people like new Republican favorite Scott Brown and SARAH PALIN are actively campaigning for him. It doesn’t discredit those Republicans, and it shouldn’t disqualify Norton as a candidate.
The fact that Huffpo and the lefties of at a lot of the CO-based blogs are always criticizing her is a clear sign that she is NOT a McCainite; we all remember the left-leaning media’s dalliance with the “maverick” during primary season.
February 17th, 2010 at 3:42 pm
Sheepskin is exactly right. I have been to 2 of her events and have asked her pointed questions. She does not support amnesty – though the article kind of implies she does by omitting her stance on it. She clearly is saying that the issues most important to her right now are economic because she is hearing little from the public on social issues. I believe that she will be an economic pit bull. She also clearly has the best statewide organization and the best chance to unseat Benett.
February 17th, 2010 at 3:55 pm
I think she “may” be good for economics, however, do we just settle for the status-quo, just because we desperately want One-Vote Bennett out of office? Or do we look to other candidates that do line up with our traditional conservative standards? I fear that the sheepskin is hiding a RINO, which has been all too often the case here in Colorado.
February 17th, 2010 at 4:19 pm
Go to one of her events. It is early enough in the election cycle that if you do, you will have a few minutes to talk with her and voice your concerns and get her immediate feedback (without cameras watching.) That is what I did.
Also if you do find someone who is slightly more in line with your beliefs, dont forget about electability. She has a statewide machine that will be tough to beat. That machine means nothing if she is a “sheepskin” I admit, but quite frankly I was pleasantly surprised with her answers.
The main thing is that I find the report baseless. She is not espousing any McCain-like points of view. I am basing this on personal interaction with the candidate. The report is basing it on the fact that Republicans are financially supporting her. She is not espousing any status quo positions. One thing that impressed me is the fact that any time she administered a governmant program, that program was smaller when she left than when she started. Doesn’t sound like a sheepskin to me.
BTW I just subscribed to your blog.
February 18th, 2010 at 9:28 am
Sorry if it seems like I’m taking over your blog, but I spent the last day reading all the links from Huffington, Malkin, and all the links they had. I did the research because I was a little concerned that I might be defending a moderate. I found no evidence that I am.
The Huffington article basically said that the GOP is picking electable moderates over conservatives. Then they pointed out how electable Norton is, then they went into how moderate other candidates the GOP is picking are. Nothing about how moderate Norton is. Then in the next article they criticize Norton for not standing up to far right tea party activists. (they were just upset because they thought she was moderate.)
The Malkin article cites some obscure connection with McCain but is not too specific so I have to assume that it is a loose connection. In fact the connection to Palin is much stronger and Palin is not a moderate. The only real criticism in that article the fact that she is good at raising money outside Colorado. Is this a bad quality to have? I attribute this ability to her experience in state-wide campaigns. I prefer someone with this kind of experience because Bennet will get lots of money and it is gonna be a tough race. I love having a candidate that shares my beliefs and can raise money. I have never seen a politician before that had both of those traits. I guess that may be the concern, but it is not logical. If it were true that a true conservative could not possibly raise money, then we are in big trouble. But if we criticise candidates just because they can raise money, we by definition could never support an electable candidate and are destined to always lose.
Please, before you start calling our best hope to take back the senate seat for Colorado too moderate, figure out what issue she is spouting moderate rhetoric. And don’t count on suspicions that she is connected to McCain.
One more question. Does accepting money from groups like the NRA (a beltway special interest group from outside Colorado) really make someone a moderate? I have no idea if that is where she is getting the money from, but the fact that she is supporting right wing stances leads me to believe that she is getting money from right wing groups. Also the fact that the articles conviniently leave out the sources raises an eyebrow.
April 12th, 2010 at 5:38 pm
bagzz, don’t know if you live in Colorado, but Jane Norton voted for higher taxes with Referendum C. She is a squishy conservative if that and I wouldn’t put it past her to run to the left once she gets elected, and probably in the general election. Malkin and Tancredo are right, she is a milquetoast public official and isn’t ready for the U.S. senate. Despite what the polls say now, I can easily see her losing the general election. Buck is a strong defender of the Constitution and the strongest candidate. (Tidwell is great too, but doesn’t have enough support.)