Colorado has been a centerpiece of political and editorial attention for a while. In fact, just before the last election, an upstate N.Y. published an editorial piece, titled “Politics of exclusion”. It ascribed Colorado’s culture clash to the tea party and GOP and attributed their opposition to the fear of social change; specifically fear of the “new norm”.
Why, I asked myself, is a N.Y. newspaper’s locally-minded editorial column focusing on Colorado rather than local elections? The editorial was a hit piece, primarily against the tea party. What elevated my Constitutional radar was the author’s intentional or blinded disregard of the Democratic-dominated legislature’s policies that led to overregulation, overspending, and the gun control laws that were massively unpopular and the primary catalyst to voter resistance. Instead, the piece framed the Right as being unable to accept this new norm, which was brought about by the state’s changing demographics; that the changing values should be accepted by long time residents without further debate to their needs or concerns.
Candace Reed, a politically active tea party member now living in Louisiana is a former Colorado resident. Reed says, “Colorado has been ‘Californicated’ and Hispanics have moved there in droves. The same is happening to Texas!” As such, she explained, the whole dynamics of the State changed, resulting in a democratically elected majority in the legislature.
Colorado’s culture has indeed changed over the past ten years. But as Michael Barone of www.WashingtonExaminer.com points out in his article, Democratic policies rejected in America ,writ small’, while the Democrats had only a narrow majority, they pressed ahead with a liberally social agenda and became heavy handed. Reed noted, however, that the Left’s over-reach led to the Coloradan voters-turned-activists recall of the two senators, resulting in their removal. At a glance, Colorado can appear like a typical tug of ideological war—each side winning some and losing some. But that is a superficial glance. There is a much deeper cause for concern for those of us who are Constitutional Republic patriots.
In July of 2008, Fred Barnes of The Weekly Standard wrote an in-depth article on, The Colorado Model – The Democrats’ plan for turning red states blue. A “confidential” memo written by a Democratic insider in January of 2008 had surfaced. Democrats were 3rd in registered voters, behind Independents and Republicans, respectively. It exposed a plan to spend over $11 million dollars in 2008 to “crush Republicans”. The concern is not the obvious targeting of Republicans—that’s a given, but the uniquely conceived political blueprint, which has become known as the Colorado model.
The group behind the takeover of Colorado’s culture is known as the “Gang of Four”. It was masterminded by the former president of Colorado State University, Al Yates. (Yates biography is worth reading to understand the mind-set and methods used by him and his “gang” to take the state.)
In 2004, Yates and his cohorts: Tim Gill, Rutt Bridges, Jared Plis and Pat Stryke devised a plan to recapture both chambers of the state legislature for the first time in 30 years. Under Yates’ leadership, these multi-millionaires spent record amounts of money, pouring them into every local race, the details of which are reported in Barnes’ article.
Yates formed the Democracy Alliance (CoDA), a secretive organization bankrolled by a handful of very influential progressive millionaires and billionaires. The Alliance became a canopy over an extensive publically synergistic infrastructure of 30 plus organizations. Jennifer Fender, writes in The Denver Post (Oct. 2008), the article titled Colorado Democratic scheme called ingenious,
The ever-evolving network of nonprofits, advocacy groups and 527 committees that benefits from the alliance forms an alternative political universe that allows progressive power brokers to direct money more efficiently and effectively than ever before—and almost entirely out of the public eye.
This “brand new, privatized political infrastructure” was an intentional decision by these wealthy progressives to ignore the state Democratic establishment, a model unique to the American political landscape—or at least to what is intended by our founders.
The Left’s takeover of Colorado’s government through carefully targeted races is further expounded upon in Rob Witwer and Adam Schrager’s 2010 book, The Blueprint: How the Democrats Won Colorado (and Why Republicans Everywhere Should Care).
The “Gang of Four” strategy changed the whole state’s dynamics. It led to the newly elected, but narrowly held Democratic-dominated legislature. They forged ahead with a progressive agenda: passing civil unions for same-sex couples, in-state college tuition for children of illegal immigrants and green energy requirements. Then, after the Aurora movie theatre massacre, they passed a gun-control law with universal background checks and gun magazine limits. But the Progressives then hit a couple of snags.
In September, 2013, voters-turned-activists led to the recall the two Democratic state senators who supported the state gun control law, resulting in their recall. The legislature then passed an education reform bill dependent on voters approving $970 million in additional funding, called Amendment 66. The Amendment 66 supporters included Bill and Melinda Gates, Michael Bloomberg and local teacher unions and involved raising proportional taxes on certain income brackets. But in the last 2013 election Amendment 66 was rejected by 65-to35 in over 62 counties, passing in only Denver and Boulder counties.
Many in the rural counties of Colorado reacted in opposition to the forced change by these wealthy Progressive elites. The “new norms” (regulating and taxing marijuana, gun control, green energy, etc.) are really a cultural invasion leading to those in rural Colorado to seek secession to form a 51st state because they no longer have a voice in their government. While the effort failed 6-to-5, it’s important to point out that Colorado has become a template for the radical progressive elites to capture the nation.
What happened in Colorado is not how a Constitutional Republic’s government functions. Rather Yales’ blueprint manipulated the election system from one that is of the people, by the people and for the people to one steered by a group of elites who basically instigated a cultural value shift through election candidate selection and legislation.
A culture is based on a system of thinking—a value system that encompasses moral, economic, and personal codes of conduct. That system of thinking becomes a “filter” to form judgments by weighing certain factors in a prioritized manner, then giving credence to one standard over another. When a select group of unelected people can change those dynamics by using their wealth to overcast traditional values, intentionally creating a new perception, that state is being hijacked. Our system was designed to have open discussion and debate so thought and reason of consequences can prevail—and be a conscious choice. If this model prevails and is repeated America will no longer be a Constitutional Republic.
The method used by the Gang of Four is not really new. What we see in the making, if not the arrival, is called an oligarchy. An oligarchy is a form of government based on a power infrastructure, led by a small number of people.
“Oligarchy is not displaced by democracy but rather is fused with it”, writes Jeffrey A. Winters, author of Oligarchy (2011). The populace in an oligarchy government has no contrast, conflict, or comparisons given to them to make different choices. They are led to the choice made by a few.
Josef Stalin wrote, “America is like a healthy body and its resistance is threefold: its patriotism, its morality, and its spiritual life. If we can undermine these three areas, America will collapse from within.” The founding values of our nation are being undermined and usurped with new norms, which are being artfully woven into our culture without widespread legitimate debate, collective consciousness and against many of our wills. Our nation’s trajectory rests with the Right; will we comply or resist? Will we remain passive or activate?
This video below is an explanation of the various forms of government, showing the political spectrum of government.