Labor Union recall candidates refuse to answer to public
The Colorado Springs Education Association (CSEA) labor union came out of the closet and endorsed D11 recall candidates Jan Tanner and Charlie Bobbitt. Interestingly, CSEA president Irma Valerio had met with Sandy Shakes only 2 weeks prior to this endorsement. At the time, she informed Shakes that Tanner was not someone that the labor union had any interest in endorsing. She felt that Tanner was not a politically attractive candidate.
The Black/Latino Leadership committee conducted a debate on Tuesday, November 21st, and all 7 candidates were invited. Recall organizer Anne Oatman-Gardner was furious over the fact that Shakes and Eric Christen were invited. She felt that it was unfair that these two sitting board members might know facts about the district that her 2 people would be unable to address. Typically, left-wing candidates and board members are unable to speak publicly without having to refer to pre-written notes from their handlers. Anyone who watches or attends D11 board meetings can verify that this is true by watching John Gudvangen, Tami Hasling, or Sandra Mann.
Tanner and Bobbitt refused to attend the Tuesday debate, claiming through their spokesman Oatman-Gardner that the debate was rigged. The rules for the debate were that all questions would come from audience members. The threat of having to address citizen questions was apparently a bridge-too-far for the status quo pair. The lack of pre-screening for these questions might have meant that the candidates would have to answer questions on education issues rather than repeat their mantra that, "Eric Christen is mean and he sends mean emails sometimes." Recall note-taker Lois Fornander did make her presence known when she begged debate organizer (and Democrat) Joe Barrera to believe that Tanner and Bobbitt really, really, really had a prior committment. Thanks, Lois.
Also in attendance at Tuesday's debate were long time Christen antagonists Luis Cortez and Angelo Christopher. Mr. Cortez rose to ask a question that he claimed was asked at a previous debate that Bobbitt and Tanner did attend since Shakes and Christen were not invited. Cortez revealed that his question related to what the candidates would do to address the dismal performance of poor and minority students in D11. Cortez, no conservative he, stated that Bobbitt danced nicely around the issue without ever answering the question. He also pointed out that Tanner said absolutely nothing in her answer to his question. Is it any wonder that these two refused to face the public for a second time? The point is, Tanner and Bobbitt have no knowledge of the current academic situation in D11. That is not their concern. They offer nothing that will help teachers, parents, or students, but the labor union chose to endorse them anyway. Maybe these two have promised to allow more absentee time for labor union members to travel to outlying districts to picket with the steel workers.
During the 2005 campaign in D11, the 3 conservative candidates were roundly criticized for failing to appear at a debate hosted by the Citizen's Project. This organization was founded to advocate for left-wing social causes, and all debate questions are pre-screened to ensure that they deal with left-wing social causes. Additionally, the sponsor of the debate was a financial supporter of the 3 "Progressive" candidates that year. Despite this obvious bias against the conservative candidates, I believe that they should have attended the debate. I attended all debates during both of my runs for office. I believe tha the candidates in 2005 were hurt by their absence, and I believe that Tanner and Bobbitt were hurt by their absence on Tuesday.
Bobbitt and Tanner were both active in the recall effort. They had the courage to talk bad about Shakes and Christen while collecting signatures for recall, but they did not have the courage to face the two in person. This is typical of liberal candidates in this town. It is much easier for them to spread rumors and go into hiding than it is for them to stand up and debate facts.
The Black/Latino Leadership committee conducted a debate on Tuesday, November 21st, and all 7 candidates were invited. Recall organizer Anne Oatman-Gardner was furious over the fact that Shakes and Eric Christen were invited. She felt that it was unfair that these two sitting board members might know facts about the district that her 2 people would be unable to address. Typically, left-wing candidates and board members are unable to speak publicly without having to refer to pre-written notes from their handlers. Anyone who watches or attends D11 board meetings can verify that this is true by watching John Gudvangen, Tami Hasling, or Sandra Mann.
Tanner and Bobbitt refused to attend the Tuesday debate, claiming through their spokesman Oatman-Gardner that the debate was rigged. The rules for the debate were that all questions would come from audience members. The threat of having to address citizen questions was apparently a bridge-too-far for the status quo pair. The lack of pre-screening for these questions might have meant that the candidates would have to answer questions on education issues rather than repeat their mantra that, "Eric Christen is mean and he sends mean emails sometimes." Recall note-taker Lois Fornander did make her presence known when she begged debate organizer (and Democrat) Joe Barrera to believe that Tanner and Bobbitt really, really, really had a prior committment. Thanks, Lois.
Also in attendance at Tuesday's debate were long time Christen antagonists Luis Cortez and Angelo Christopher. Mr. Cortez rose to ask a question that he claimed was asked at a previous debate that Bobbitt and Tanner did attend since Shakes and Christen were not invited. Cortez revealed that his question related to what the candidates would do to address the dismal performance of poor and minority students in D11. Cortez, no conservative he, stated that Bobbitt danced nicely around the issue without ever answering the question. He also pointed out that Tanner said absolutely nothing in her answer to his question. Is it any wonder that these two refused to face the public for a second time? The point is, Tanner and Bobbitt have no knowledge of the current academic situation in D11. That is not their concern. They offer nothing that will help teachers, parents, or students, but the labor union chose to endorse them anyway. Maybe these two have promised to allow more absentee time for labor union members to travel to outlying districts to picket with the steel workers.
During the 2005 campaign in D11, the 3 conservative candidates were roundly criticized for failing to appear at a debate hosted by the Citizen's Project. This organization was founded to advocate for left-wing social causes, and all debate questions are pre-screened to ensure that they deal with left-wing social causes. Additionally, the sponsor of the debate was a financial supporter of the 3 "Progressive" candidates that year. Despite this obvious bias against the conservative candidates, I believe that they should have attended the debate. I attended all debates during both of my runs for office. I believe tha the candidates in 2005 were hurt by their absence, and I believe that Tanner and Bobbitt were hurt by their absence on Tuesday.
Bobbitt and Tanner were both active in the recall effort. They had the courage to talk bad about Shakes and Christen while collecting signatures for recall, but they did not have the courage to face the two in person. This is typical of liberal candidates in this town. It is much easier for them to spread rumors and go into hiding than it is for them to stand up and debate facts.
posted by Craig Cox | 6:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home