The Rocky Mountain News has a fine editorial this morning about the intra-party mess that Beauprez is making of the primary:
Colorado law says no person may "knowingly" make a false statement "designed to affect the vote" for anyone running for public office.We have a somewhat different take on this matter.
If Holtzman wants to employ someone who lies to the press in such brazen fashion, that's his business. Journalists will adjust their reports depending on whether they feel they can trust anything he now says. For some, the answer will be no.
But as for there being an obligation to fire Leggitt, that's nonsense. The Colorado law is - or at least should be - unconstitutional. You can't outlaw false campaign rhetoric, intentional or not. Indeed, we can hardly think of anything more destructive to free speech than inviting courts to rule on political truthfulness and honesty.
Then this, on the "substantive" complaint:
Holtzman appeared in a TV ad attacking Ref C, a 2005 issue campaign in which there were no contribution limits. But those ads did not mention he was running for governor. Why shouldn't a candidate enjoy the same free-speech rights to support or oppose a statewide referendum as any other citizen - whether or not it elevates his public profile?
It's bad enough these laws are on the books. It's worse when a Republican betrays party principle and uses them for their intended purpose - to squelch political opposition.
Comments
Amen to that!
What would the reaction be if Holtzman decided to charge Beauprez with sponsoring a piece of legislation on Capitol Hill "to raise his profile."
Let's decide as a Party on principle... are we going to stand up for free speech or not?
Posted by: Ben | May 2, 2006 1:18 PM
Criminy, I'm glad I don't have to make a decision based solely on the emails from each candidate bashing the other. Can I toss both of them back?
Posted by: RichieD | May 2, 2006 2:51 PM