More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
David Sirota

David Sirota

Posted: August 4, 2010 04:27 PM

On the AM760 morning show today, I interviewed Democratic Rep. Ed Perlmutter about the state of Colorado politics. In our discussion about the Senate Democratic primary, I asked Perlmutter whether he believed the questions about the connection between Sen. Michael Bennet's (D) massive corporate PAC fundraising and Sen. Bennet's votes on key issues were legitimate and fair. Perlmutter, who had previously endorsed Bennet, twice said he believed such questions were entirely fair. You can listen to the interview here (the relevant section starts at about 36:30 in).

This is a pretty interesting statement from Perlmutter, considering he is one of the biggest Colorado Democratic Party powerbrokers to have previously endorsed Bennet, and considering that the Bennet campaign has said such questions about money and votes are not acceptable and/or are overly "negative." Indeed, Bennet has bridled at questions about whether the Wall Street money he has taken had anything to do with his vote-switching on credit card reform and vote against cramdown, and whether the oil/gas money he has taken had anything to do with him being one of the handful of Democrats to vote against eliminating massive tax breaks to the oil and gas industry.

If even Sen. Bennet's key Democratic Party surrogates and supporters say such questions are entirely fair, how can he argue that they are somehow off limits?

 
 
 

Follow David Sirota on Twitter: www.twitter.com/davidsirota

 
 
  • Comments
  • 6
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
03:43 AM on 08/07/2010
Michael Bennet is finally being exposed! A bit too late but hopefully not as most Coloradans have voted by mail already. His campaign will find a way to blame Romanoff somehow. Sigh.
nothingchanges
too soon old, too late smart
10:32 PM on 08/05/2010
A simple observation, from a simple independent voter.............."the Bennet campaign has said such questions about money and votes are not acceptable and/or are overly "negative.""

How could those questions be considered overly negative if Senator Bennett voted for the good of his constituency over the good of big business as his campaign ads repeatedly state?

The votes he made are a matter of public record. Who benefited most from those votes?
Big business?, or the average citizen of Colorado? We already know who spent the most to be heard. The question then becomes whose interests Senator Bennett really represents? An honest appraisal of that question is not out of order. Isn't that the underlying basis for representative government?
09:32 PM on 08/05/2010
The notion that Bennet votes are conditional on campaign contributions is ludicrous-that fact is his natural disposition is to favor the interests of the wealthy elite he belongs to rather than those of the middle class or the great unwashed.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Sharon Hanson
Skeptical of the *pseudo-skeptics*
08:37 AM on 08/05/2010
I don't trust Bennet period. He has already already voted in favor of the banks a couple of times and I expect he will do so in the future if he wins the primary but he won't. The good people of Colorado saw through Bennet's long range plans for the constituents of Colorado and they didn't like it. And now even with all his money the people will soon speak by electing Romanoff the better candidate by far for the people.

I only wish Obama would get the message and stop insulting our intelligence with his meddling.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
JohnHKennedy
07:38 AM on 08/05/2010
Bennet's "negativity" is Romanoff's follower's facts.

Publish and republish the facts, it drives them crazy.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bgorden
didn't cause the economic crisis
06:30 PM on 08/04/2010
It's simple: Caliban doesn't like to look into the mirror. Corrupt politicians fear the the truth. And they should.