Colorado is a mystery to most of the country, and it’s an unsolvable enigma to carpetbagging political pundits.

So let’s get this one point out of the way as Colorado’s race for governor gets under way.

I know. Me, too.

I’m still in therapy from the last election. But like shingles, dysentery and strep throat, it’s always something when it comes to politics. This last week, a smattering of high-profile types made it obvious or official, they’re seeking to replace term-limited Gov. John Hickenlooper in 2019. Election Day for that job is in November 2018 — almost two years away. The list of high-profile types seeking that job is growing longer every day.

I know. Me, too.

Arapahoe County District Attorney George Brauchler, a Republican, and Democrat Congressman Ed Perlmutter, whose 7th Congressional District previously encompassed part of Aurora, made it Face Book official this week. They’re in.

Minutes after Brauchler made his pitch public, Democrats chimed in about Brauchler’s shortcomings, chief among them that is that he’s a Republican and a district attorney. Just as Perlmutter was explaining a few days later why he should be running the state in a few years, critics lambasted the veteran congressman for being a congressman and a Democrat.

But one group who tried to rain on Perlmutter’s Sunday parade was the Republican Governor’s Association. If you’ve never heard of it, it’s a collection of Republican governors like Chris Christie, Mary Fallin, Rick Scott and, my personal favorite, Robert ‘Impeach Me Already” Bentley, who think big thinks and then inflict that on the rest of us.

I know. Me, too.

Well, these GOP governors think they know just how to sour a Perlmutter campaign, and the gubernatorial campaigns of other Democrats. Mostly, it’s things like taxes, clean energy, biting the heads off of bunnies, you know, the usual partisan ploys.

But there’s one thing they’re nailing Perlmutter for that RGA pundits don’t get about Colorado.

“Rep. Perlmutter is opposed to letting the state of Colorado assume control of federally protected land.”

That is absolutely true. They criticize Perlmutter with this oblivious that this is Colorado. Unlike Republicans in Wyoming, Montana, Utah and Arizona — states that boast the same cache as Oklahoma, Texas and Kansas — Colorado doesn’t want public lands turned over to salivating state politicians for slicing and dicing to the highest bidder.

Oops.

Oh, sure, there are a few Republicans who talk the talk about “state’s rights.” They go on about those whack jobs in the Bundy family who blazed a trail for the little people when they blazed a trail to the Oregon Malheur National Wildlife Refuge Standoff, saying they were heroes and not criminals. Former Colorado Gubernatorial Candidate Bob Beauprez built and lost his campaign on that kind of stuff. Colorado Attorney General Cynthia Coffman tripped on it early in her career.

The issue is whether vast public lands in western states like Colorado should continue to be held and managed by the agencies that have watched over them for eons, or whether the states could do a better job of protecting and managing these priceless jewels. You see, that’s what proponents of the switch, mostly big oil companies, Wall Street types and a smattering of well-placed Republicans want you to think is the issue. What’s really at stake is whether public lands should remain public, or whether they should be turned over to the states to be sold off to well-heeled insiders as political spoils.

What the RGA pundits don’t know is that most of Colorado knows what’s what with this red herring. Republican ranchers who use the land for grazing cattle don’t want a state takeover. Just ask them. Republican commissioners in rural and mountain counties that see a bazillion dollars flow through the state because of rafting tourism, hunting tourism, fishing tourism, skiing tourism, camping tourism, and road-trip tourism don’t want some greedy state official get their hands on public lands and parcel them out to drilling rigs, campaign contributing real-estate barons and private clubs for the rich.

Republicans and Democrats alike in Colorado, at least those who have a clue about what’s what out here in Colorado, want to keep our amazing public lands public for everybody and forever.

There’s absolutely  room for improvement. A bipartisan congressional effort just last month allows for common sense and non-controversial land trades and management changes across the state. It shows that there certainly should be local advisory bodies with real influence leading the federal land agencies on what works for each western state.

But the RGA’s shame-on-Perlmutter-for-protecting-public-lands callout will backfire across Colorado. And for those gubernatorial hopefuls who think they should take the lead from the RGA on this issue, you’ll be pointing to stuff just like this in November 2018 as avoidable mistakes that cost them the election.

For the rest of us, the public lands and so-called state’s rights controversy is just another instance of how things aren’t always what they seem. And it’s another instance of how politicians in places like Alabama, Florida, Ohio and Nebraska just don’t think like we do here in Colorado.

I know. Me, too.

Follow @EditorDavePerry on Twitter and Facebook or reach him at 303-750-7555 or dperry@aurorasentinel.com