Prima Ballerina: Jane Norton

Image via Wikipedia

The ballet term “chaines” is an abbreviation of the term ”tours chaînés déboulés,” meaning a series of rapid turns on the points. Seasoned political campaigns and their lead “ballerina” politicians are experts at dancing on the political stage, masters of the chaines. These ballerinas use lighting effects to create scenes which hide what would, outside the political theatre, be labeled a lie. Unfortunately, like all stage shows, once you can spot the strategic moves and turn up the natural light, the beautiful theatrical aura fades.

Let’s bring down the stage lights and bring up the natural light on a very compelling stage show. Several chaines, performed by Jane Norton, have become obvious to political observers. Let’s analyze a few spins Jane has pulled off.
In June, Jane Norton, Marco Rubio (Florida Senate candidate), and Pat Toomey (Pennsylvania Senate candidate) attended joint fundraising events. Each candidate agreed to take portions of the proceeds raised at the events. Afterward, the Norton campaign sent out an email stating:

“…conservative upstart Marco Rubio…is such an important figure in American politics: Rubio’s a conservative, and he’s running to shake up the status quo in Washington. Today, it was an honor to campaign alongside my friend Marco Rubio and longtime conservative, Pat Toomey…Rubio and Toomey joined me at campaign events and fundraisers in Colorado Springs and Denver today.”

There seems to be no problem with this statement. They did come to Colorado and were seen at events with Jane. On closer examination however, we can see the rapid turning on the point.

Rubio and Toomey are part of the Senate Conservatives Fund. The Senate Conservatives Fund has endorsed Ken Buck. Calls to Rubio’s and Toomey’s campaigns have confirmed that they have not, and will not, endorse Jane Norton. As far as Rubio and Toomey are concerned, they were at the events as fellow Republicans, not “with” her as conservative candidates. Neither campaign would give any further specifics except to say the candidates go where the money happens to be, and that is just good politics.

Technically, Norton never directly stated that Rubio, Toomey, or the Senate Conservatives Fund endorsed her. The implication was clear, and there was a photo of the three candidates for set dressing. One spin smoothly executed. Will Jane attempt a second one?

On July 20, another email came from the Norton Campaign. This time it was Josh Penry, who said, “A Washington, D.C.-based special interest group wants to buy this election. We won’t let this happen.” It looked like a good idea to find out just who this D.C. group was. The only D.C. based group this reporter could find that has spent money for Ken Buck is the…wait for it…Senator DeMint’s Senate Conservatives Fund. Again, technically, Norton never directly stated the name of the special interest group. So either there is another hidden group with scads of cash, or the Norton camp just landed their second spin, on the same point. A true work of political ballet beauty.

For Jane’s next spin we have to first go back and remember the scene from the June 29 debate at Stargazers Theater. While getting the logistics together organizer, Lana Fore-Warkocz, asked each campaign for a candidate bio. She received an email from Josh Penry in which he tells Cinnamon Watson, Jane’s campaign staffer, “For these debate bios I want to sex it up on the substance of our candidacy.” Did he miss the memo that said Jane doesn’t like that kind of talk?

The actual stage for the debate was going to be set with high stools and no table. Jane’s campaign was informed of a potentially embarrassing clothing situation so that she could dress accordingly for the event. Josh Penry asked in an email that the format be changed to standing because, “Yes, Jane does wear a skirt and heels—it’s the preferred attire for those who haven’t increased their budget by 40 percent in 5 years.” Amazing! Penry clumsily manages to assert Jane’s feminine appeal, and yet manages to land heavily on what must have been that day’s talking point against Ken Buck (budget).

Jane didn’t seem to mind using her gender to differentiate herself at the event. She was asked, “How are you and Ken Buck different?” Jane replied, “I would hope it was obvious…” at which point she got laughs from the crowd, then looked slyly at Ken who also laughed.

Fast forward to last week… When asked by a person off camera, “Why should we vote for you?” Ken was recorded answering, “Because I don’t wear high heels,” which got laughs and was promptly explained. Jane’s campaign quickly jumped on Ken’s joke. They are now calling for conservatives to defend the honor of their prima ballerina.
Jane sent another email to supporters that including a comment from State Senator Nancy Spence: “I was appalled to hear Ken’s latest and most ridiculous comment.” Spence goes on to finish by saying, “Will you join me and stand up to Ken Buck’s childish remarks?”

With that, Jane lands the most recent in a series of chaines. She doesn’t quite stick the landing—and I thought I heard Josh Penry’s back crack as he tried to work that Ken Buck slam into his routine—but the lights are on now. How much beautiful aura remains?

A publication written by "We the People," The Constitutionalist Today is comprised of articles from a range of writers, journalists, and bloggers. As such, the opinions herein may not reflect the opinions of our staff, management, or editorial board.