“I’m true to conservative principles, and we need people who will have broader appeal,”

I mean…in the very same sentence, she says both:

(1) I am true to conservative principles

(2) We need to have broader appeal, (which is RINO code for we have to govern like Democrats).

Toomey & Rubio campaign for Norton and it’s a negative.

Seems odd they weren’t campaigning for Buck if he’s the true conservative.

preception / perception, para 2
“are their to build” / there para 6

Jane Nortons’ reliance on her handlers and human teleprompters is troubling. They will not be able to go with her to Washington and sit on the floor of the Senate and prompt her words and actions. She can try to absorb success from the Toomey and Rubio camps and she may well pull that off, but in the end, its her viewpoint and her votes that matter to CO, not those of other Senators. Buck stands for the average person and his quiet manner, rejection of smear tactics and thoughtful responses are more in tune. The very thought of a candidate with ties to Washington insider politics and John McCain leave a bad taste these days. Ms. Norton’s heavy reliance on assistance from her inside support system reminds me of watching senators such as Ted Kennedy sitting in a hearing, asking questions that were prepared in advance by his staff, or that he was hearing from a tiny headphone. We want legitimate candidates that can stand alone, answer questions alone and can take responsibility for their actions. We are not interested in carefully crafted statements and rehearsed responses.

Jane Norton is a really solid candidate. She is a conservative and we should not claim anything to the contrary. However…. Ken Buck is the more Conservative and better candidate. I think both would be great, but Buck is the more reformist candidate and therefore, he has my support.

Until the Democrat Party gets finished trashing Marco Rubio in this Florida GOP corruption scandal, probably all candidates for the Senate would do well to avoid him at this point. Hitching your wagon to him may not be a good idea as they will attempt to not just pull him down, but then will have other candidates aligned with him to take down with him. They give 100% effort to defend Charlie Crist’s involvement because he’s the new Democrat darling. Rubio will take the heat.

It’s disturbing to me to read the accurate criticisms of people calling Nikki Haley a “raghead” and then see Erick Erickson repeatedly come out with these petty, personal, damaging-to-conservatives attacks on Jane Norton, a candidate he said he liked, but it was just that he liked Ken Buck better.

I’ve said this before and I’ll say it again: I’ve met with both Buck and Norton individually, i.e. just me and the candidate in a one-on-one meeting. Actually met with Norton twice. Norton is just as smart as Buck and just as conservative.

She is not “McCain-picked” just because he has the misfortune of her sister having married a guy who was close to the McCain campaign. Furthermore, why doesn’t Erick use “McCain-picked” as a slur against Sarah Palin? If anyone is “McCain-picked”, it’s Governor Palin, obviously. (Anyone hear the crickets?)

I like Ken Buck as well, but I’m sick of this site’s attacks on Norton. This is not Toomey v Specter of a few years ago where one candidate was a liberal and one a conservative.

To put a finer point on it: I asked Norton directly “Are you a female John McCain”. Her response was “absolutely not” and she further explained that she’s against:
1) McCain-Feingold
2) Amnesty
3) Cap-and-Trade

Furthermore, there is nothing in her campaign rhetoric or positions which should cause a web site dedicated to promoting the success of conservatism to keep attacking Jane Norton.

If she is the nominee of the GOP, we NEED her to beat Bennet or Romanoff in November.

Those of you who are in tune with Colorado politics might remember what happened a few years ago in a GOP primary for the governor’s race when Marc Holtzman took on Bob Beauprez. Holtzman tagged Beauprez as “both ways bob”, claiming in an outright lie that Beauprez had taken positions on both sides of a major tax issue in Colorado (called Referendum C.) Again, it was a LIE but it stuck to Beauprez and did so much damage to him that he then lost the gubernatorial election to Bill Ritter, a man who has done tremendous damage to our state.

Erick, you are this election’s Marc Holtzman and you are doing Colorado conservatives no favors.

I encourage you to cut it out…now. Now, before you give us six more years of a Democrat holding that Senate seat.

I have not endorsed anybody in this race on my web site or on my Sunday evening radio show. I have to say that Erick’s actions are pushing me toward Norton, however. She is a solid conservative. She strikes me as a good person. She is highly intelligent. She would be an excellent senator, in my view.

I feel basically the same way about Ken Buck (except for the “she” part.). But just as Red State is trying to get people to support other candidates like Haley based on their being unfairly attacked, it’s troubling to see Erick play the part of attack dog against someone who I think is one of our nation’s better senate candidates in 2010. Jane Norton deserves the support of many and the consideration of all in this primary process, Erick’s petty and internecine attacks notwithstanding.

Is this the worst criticism of Jane Norton? I don’t know much about the race, but it sounds kind of petty and silly to me. From everything I have read, she is a solid conservative, and the only reason people doubt her is because she has some establishment support. I’m sure I would be happy with either Buck or Norton, unless someone gives me some ISSUES that would convince me otherwise.

Yesterday, she had a joint picture opportunity with Rubio and Toomey. It looks like it was arranged by a specific PAC for that specific reason. Collusion anyone? Just askin’…

Norton didn’t qualify for Sen Jim DeMint’s endorsement so she will show us pictures with Rubio and Toomey, and try to convince us that she has the Senate Conservative Fund’s endorsement; that she is one of them.

How low will Jane Norton go?

Norton was hand-picked by McCain. She has even admitted it.

And no self-respecting conservative would ever support the largest tax increase in Colorado history. She did just that, and she still tries to defend her liberal behavior.

NightTwister: Why is it perfectly OK for you to have strong opinions (which obviously show you DO have a perferred candidate, despite your inability to be straight forward)? Why do you get to define terms? Seems that you label anything you don’t personally like an “attack”. Too personal! Are you that naive? Obviously a person’s personality and character are part of the equation, but your rules say we can’t discuss how capable an individual candidate is to handle issues. I’m afraid personality and character are rather important issues. Does the candidate have what it takes to stand strong and put conservative ideals into actual practice? (Newsflash: Democrats have their own sources. Our discussions are not “letting the cat out of the bag!”)
I think most people would agree that Erik’s article is NOT an attack. Who are you to decide what we may or may not discuss? Who are you to force your definitions on anyone else? They are just your opinions. Drop the “shoulds.” And the attitude. I must say, though, that your name is highly appropriate…TWISTER. Rather ironic that your posts come across as attacking. I’m outta here.

Nice try. It seems to me thst if Jane were a storng candidate she would not have to call in her friends to advocate for her. Rubio and Toomey are good people but they are not Coloradoans andnot familiar with the issues of our State. Why can’t Jane stand on her own merits and deal with the issues question by question? I believe that she lacks confidence and is weak. In the dayto day batlles of the Senate she will wither and not stand strong for Colorado. This a stunt quite imaginative but it would be better to see her stand tall and answer the tough questions and take her lumps and stay on message.

Norton and her staff. Obama and his tele-prompter.
Remove staff and tele-prompter both are speechless.