Josh Penry, Mike Coffman Butt Heads Over Pinon Canyon

Long a hot-button political issue in Colorado, the proposed Pinon Canyon Army Base expansion seems now to be dividing Republicans heading into the 2010 election cycle. Don Bendell, a supporter of Gubernatorial Candidate Josh Penry, penned an op-ed piece in the Colorado Springs Gazette defending Penry from criticism he's faced for opposing Pinon Canyon expansion. The article was a direct response to an article written in the Colorado Statesman by Republican Congressman Mike Coffman (CD-6), who accused Penry of putting politics above the interest of the military.

Penry's opponent for the Republican nomination, Scott McInnis, who supports expansion of the Army base, was recently criticized by Republican State Senator Ken Kester for his position. Kester told the Pueblo Chieftain "I understand where McInnis is coming from, but I also know that he's on the wrong side of that issue," Kester said. "It absolutely is a property-rights issue, whether Scott wants to admit it nor not."

The Army proposed tripling the size of the current Pinon Canyon Maneuver Site in February, 2007, a plan that has been vehemently opposed by many local ranchers who fear their land will be taken over to facilitate the expansion. The Colorado Legislature has passed legislation barring the Army from selling state land to the Army for the expansion.

Comments

[1differentdrummer]

05:46 AM on 11/08/2009

Coffman makes me wonder. His very professional web site says nothing so far as I can see.

[hellboundtrain]

02:58 AM on 11/05/2009

Another option is stop creating situations where military members are sent anywhere in the world that keeps them from their families and loved ones through stop-loss treatment. The rigors of fighting war and stop-loss just dramatically increases the likelihood of bringing PTSD home to all and destroying the members chances for living any kind of normal life. Stop waging war!

One would probably have to have lived in a PTSD family or have a large sense of compassion to understand this.

[hellboundtrain]

02:43 AM on 11/05/2009

If the Army needs a large site for training maneuvers it would be more appropriate to locate it in the desert areas of Nevada, Arizona, or New Mexico since they are more closely similar to hostile desert lands. Probably neither of the three states mentioned here are anywhere close to what Iraq or Afghanistan can dish out though. Use the deserts! There should be no question. The land will be cheaper. And. their are fewer families living there to contend with.

If the war will be in a desert, train in a desert.

[1differentdrummer]

05:17 AM on 11/05/2009

Doesn't the army already have a desert training site?

[JBVT]

10:52 AM on 11/03/2009

It does not matter how much property the Army needs.

They have not won a war since..., Grenada!

[Lordcron]

09:10 PM on 11/02/2009

Republicans are so full of hate, they can't even stand each other. Pure and simple.