"When they allow a talk show host to play them like a two-dollar banjo, they demonstrate what kind of backbone they'll bring to the job later on, if we elect them. After they get elected will they continue to allow Jeff Crank to put a nickel in them and wind them up every Saturday morning?"

Barry Noreen, former columnist, Colorado Springs Gazette

Monday, May 23, 2011


“We have a winner…and a loser”
by John Alexander Madison
May 23, 2011


The 2011 City of Colorado Springs mayoral election is finally over and we have a new mayor. And the winner…the citizens of Colorado Springs! After a bruising campaign can the result be classified as a triumph of good over evil? While some may believe that perhaps that is a bit of a stretch. But there is no doubt that the winner took the high road to victory.

Steve Bach is a very good and decent person. He conducted the type of campaign we long for…bringing a positive message of change, focusing on his experience and decades of leadership in our city, while avoiding negative attacks on his opponent. On the other hand the distant runner-up, known by those who know him as a rather decent person himself, allowed his supporters and his campaign to engage in a win at all costs mentality. Slash and burn, destroy the enemy, leave no prisoners. It’s quite clear a large majority of voters did not like that message.

This election was a triumph of good over evil at least with regard to campaign tactics. One candidate took the high road to victory and the other (let’s refer to him as the “loser”) did not. He was convinced, as we’ve seen all too often in the past, that bringing down your opponent is only the path to victory. The “loser” got so wrapped up in this theory he actually believed negativity was the road to victory. That is why he is the “loser” today.

This election was a victory for the truth vs. lies, honesty vs. distortions, misleading statements, and vicious and unsubstantiated personal attacks. Let’s hope this election was as much a victory for Steve Bach as it was an end of the politics of personal destruction. The “loser” was devastated on election night claiming HE lost because of negative campaigning by his opponent. Really? Five days after the results were known sour grapes from the “sore losers” continue through Letters to the Editor.

“Voters, how could you turn the keys to our City over to a developer?” (Have we forgotten that the “loser” voted for one development after another while serving on City Council?)

“Over 40,000 voters did not think you, Mr. Bach, were the best choice for Mayor.” (Forgetting the fact that fifty-seven percent of the voters thought his opponent was much worse.)

“…my condolences to the city for having elected Steve Bach as Mayor. We needed the progressive thinking of (the loser) to bring a better life to the citizens who want a better life…but instead we got a narrow thinking Mayor.” (Not understanding that the election of Steve Bach is just what this city needs, a new direction led by a successful businessman who had the purest motivation for running for Mayor…he really cares about this city and all its citizens, not just selected special interest groups. A prosperous city means jobs will be created and we will all benefit.)

“It saddens me that special interests like the Koch brothers (Americans for Prosperity), the richest 1 percent in this country, can buy elections.” (Forgetting the fact that every dollar that AFP spent on the ads about the record of “the loser” was raised in Colorado. Never mind that every statement in those ads was the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.)

Let’s hope we never forget that the voters got this one right and that the truth prevailed. Looking ahead, if we all get behind Mayor Bach we will all be winners! And let’s give our most sincere gratitude to all the candidates who offered to serve and those who voted in the election. There were really no losers.

EPILOGUE
In contrast we are still living with the lies and false promises made by our current President in 2008. He won because he told the voters what they wanted to hear, not what he believed, not what he was planning to do, but what the voters wanted to hear. Now that he has a record, how can he hide that in 2012? Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.

http://jamadison.wordpress.com #89

No comments:

Post a Comment