Pete Coors in Colorado Senate Debate

On Government Reform: The 527 loophole is also a freedom of speech

A: This is a great country where we've got freedom of speech and we should never do anything or pass any laws that abridge that right. I think it was a total surprise to Congress when the Supreme Court decided the McCain-Feingold Act actually was acceptable, because I don't think Congress felt that the Supreme Court would uphold it. The flaw is the 527 loophole, which allows outside organizations with very little reporting and accountability requirements to come in and do advertising as they see fit to slam the other opponents. I regret that they did that, frankly, and I wish that wasn't the case. But we have freedom of speech and we should never do anything to remove freedom of speech.

On Homeland Security: We'll never have perfect security in the US

COORS: But Coors responded that the US had no plan to bring troops home when it went into World War II. He also said that while Americans don't feel as secure as they did four years ago, they feel more secure than they did last year. "We'll never have perfect security in the US," he added.

SALAZAR: Salazar said that wasn't good enough. "I believe we have not done enough, we have not acted with a sense of urgency. before 9/11 or after," he said, referring to reports that warned of terrorist attacks before the World Trade Center and Pentagon were hit. Salazar also said the reforms recommended by the 9/11 Commission should be implemented immediately.

On Homeland Security: Important to check baggage and freight

On Immigration: Give no benefits to children of longtime illegal immigrants

On War & Peace: Support adding more troops, oppose setting a war deadline

On Homeland Security: We should be more worried about Iran and North Korea

A: Clearly, we should be more worried today, actually, about Iran and North Korea than we are about Iraq, based on weapons of mass destruction. But I think that the conditions change on an ongoing basis, and we must look at the facts that we have before us at the time we make a decision.

On Homeland Security: Scrutinize the massive intelligence failures in the US

A: Bush made a very persuasive case to the American public, and if there's a gun that's pointed at one of my children, we ought to take action and essentially that was the presentation that was made by the president to the American people. And, today, we know that there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq and what we ought to be doing is learning from the mistakes that have been made and also looking forward to what we ought to do in Iraq to try to stabilize the country. The most important thing we ought to be looking at is why we have such massive intelligence failures in our country. We had massive intelligence failures before 9/11 and before going into Iraq, and yet I haven't seen one person being held accountable. Creating a director of intelligence and doing all the rest of the things that we need to do in order to have the right intelligence in our country I think is imperative for us.

On Homeland Security: Get people in a coalition that's been working with the enemy

A: When I talk about appeasement [I mean] as he aligns himself with Senator Kerry, who has consistently said we should have had more of an effort to get a coalition. "We should have, we should have, we should have." It's a campaign of hopes and wishes. Frankly, I haven't heard yet Salazar's plan to get people into a coalition who have been working with the enemy. We were attacked on 9/11. This country was attacked; 3,000 people were incinerated. We have an enemy that, if they could have killed 300,000 or three million, would have had no more remorse. I think it takes strong, bold action. I think that's what Bush did, and I support that action.

On War & Peace: Go with the best intelligence you have

COORS: We have an enemy who is a horrific enemy. These are barbaric people who want to destroy our civilization. Every vote, you go with the best intelligence you have. I don't think it's appropriate today to second-guess what decision would be made today based on the information we have. I suspect that given what we know today, there would be a much different outcome than we had a couple of years ago.