Westword, Statesman aren’t Schmucks; pick up extreme GOP comments

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)



I blogged March 14 about how bizarre it was that, apparently, no news outlets had picked up on ColoradoPols video of Colorado Republicans (Tim Neville) comparing Hitler  to Obama, (Ted Harvey) saying a mandate for health insurance coverage of contraception leads to “genocide,” (Ken Lambert) saying such a policy is “mind control,” and (Scott Renfroe) saying the policy could lead to a government takeover of the church.

Oh, I forgot to note that all of those Republicans are elected members of the Colorado Senate, making them impossible to ignore from a public-interest, journalistic point of view–kind of like Tom Tancredo running for President.

I uploaded my piece prior to the publication date of the Colorado Statesman, which reported the GOP comments March 16.

The Statesman also offered remarks by Sen. Greg Brophy, who seems to be a quote machine for thoughts harkening back to the 1950s.

Last week Brophy tweeted:

Ms. Fluke, I don’t want to buy your booze, pay for your spring break or your birth control. Call your Dad for that.”

Then the Statesman reported:

Brophy told The Colorado Statesman that before he sent his Twitter update, he knew the comment would likely spark animosity and criticism, but he said he felt it was necessary to send a strong message since he only had 140 characters to do so, as is the limit with the Twitter technology

“When you’re limited by 140 characters, either you make a point, or you don’t make a point… The discussion is over whether it’s appropriate to hand out birth control to 18-year-old coeds on campus… I don’t think it sells the college experience to mom and dad looking to send their kid to that school,” said Brophy.

Brophy doesn’t mention Hitler, as you can see, which might explain why he didn’t get “Schmuck of the Week” honors from Westword’s Patricia Calhoun, though you might think he deserves it.

Sen. Tim Neville got the Schmuck award for his deeply analytical Hitler comment.

Westword posted Pols’ video of Neville on its website, making it the only news outlet to do so. I’m tempted to call the Denver news media a bunch of Schmucks (with the exception of Westword and the Statesman), but I won’t.

56 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. davebarnesdavebarnes says:

    Brought to you by the Save the Apostrophe From Overuse Society.

    • Duke Coxdukeco1 says:

      Some help over at the “We Love Adverbs” Foundation Please help us restore “mostly” to its’ rightful place in the English language. It has fallen out of use…for the most part…   ;).

        • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

          Its’ possessive form for it

          • RedGreenRedGreen says:

            I used to think you knew what you were talking about, even if your conclusions were suspect. Now I don’t.

          • BlueCat says:

            the possessive was just plain “its” no apostrophe, the apostrophe form “it’s” being, as everyone correctly points out, the contraction for “it is”. An apostrophe after the “s” shows plural possession,  but as “it” is singular, I’m pretty sure that there is no its’.  

            • Duke Coxdukeco1 says:

              but that battle…its or its’…has been engaged for a long time. I prefer to use the latter, however it may be assessed, by some, as incorrect. I will not argue the point…as I am only barely literate anyway.

              And…to the point of Jasons’ fine piece. I declare war on stupid fuckers who say stupid shit…more to come…  :)

              • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

                And Word is fine with its’ – now Microsoft is not the final arbitrator but it is interesting that they don’t flag the usage – it must be somewhat common.

                • Diogenesdemar says:

                  Jobsian iPhone autocorrects its’ to it’s.  Who you gonna believe, that thievin’ Gates fucker, or the sainted Jobs?

                  PS. Love your experiment, however. It has all the rock-solid “science” of a Libertad post.  ;~)

                  • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

                    But it’s not flagged as a mis-spelling on my iPad. And keep in mind the iPad autocorrects its to it’s also so that may be more it’s going for the most common case, not the only correct case.

                    Anyways, as I said above, I’m happy to say I was wrong because the grammar police appear to be of one opinion on this.

                    Ps – did anyone else have their elementary school teachers tell them that ain’t was not a proper word and it was incorrect to use it? I’m still afraid to use the word.

                • sxp151 says:

                  Find ONE example of anyone using it the way you write it without making tons of other mistakes. I’ve never seen it that way before in my life, and I’ve seen a LOT of grammar errors.

            • BlueCat says:

              It backs up the no such thing as its’ view while sounding curiously illiterate in itself.  Still I think the gist is correct though the phrasing and arbitrary use of capitalization is pretty strange. I think spelling and grammar soft wear is ruining the language. I’m constantly seeing “an” used in newspapers for no apparent reason such as “an dog”, for instance, but here it is:

              Best Answer – Chosen by Asker

              its – is meaning possession of. [ The boy had its ball. ]

              It’s – Is Meaning It Is. [It’s time for you to go to bed. ]

              Its’ – Is No Such Word

              Is meaning? The boy had its ball? Was this out-sourced to some non-English speaking country?

              http://answers.yahoo.com/quest

              • Diogenesdemar says:

                The boy had its (possessive, as in — the hamster’s, or the dog’s, or Libertad’s .  .  .) ball.

                Not the best example, granted, but it’s hardly Mandarin.  

                • BlueCat says:

                  don’t generally refer to a boy as “it”.  This reminds my of instructions that are written in English by Japanese.  Yes, you can understand them but, no, they don’t sound like anything a native English speaker would write or say. The “is meaning” instead of “means” is very typical of the phrasing of some English as a second language speakers. See Apu on the Simpsons.  

                  • Diogenesdemar says:

                    “its” doesn’t necessarily refer to the boy, “its” refers to the moron — see?

                    • RedGreenRedGreen says:

                      The boy had his ball, the girl had her ball, the robot had its ball. None of those have an apostrophe.

                    • BlueCat says:

                      but boy as it?  May be technically permissible but doesn’t sound like the way anyone with R English as a first language talks or writes.

                      In any case I think we have absolutely established that the possessive for it is just plain its.

                      “I am seeing the boy with its ball”  may mean the same thing as “I see the boy with his ball” but it sounds pretty odd.  

              • Old Time Dem says:

                I have never seen that in print.  Clearly it is not the possessive form of “it”–that is “its”–nor is it a contraction of “it is,” because that would be “it’s.”

                However, the plural of “it”–i.e., “its”–requires a possessive form, and the proper way to form the possessive of a plural noun formed by adding -s is to append an apostrophe.

                Thus,

                “Those two bears live in a den under the an old dead tree. Its’ den is quite roomy.”

            • Jason Salzman says:

              Remember it from the Adams Family?

              It’s Cousin It’s time to give us a grammar lesson.

  2. Libertad says:

    Both backed infanticide …. Obama = Hitler

    Sure it’s a crude and simple statement, but unfortunately it’s true.

    So you get a few politicos hopped up on the bible, Obamacare, free birth control for spring breakers Jesus, and $1 trillion in Obama ARRA slush funds that have never been accounted for and well you can imagine that a genius of a full on demonstration has been formed.

    Tonight you go to sleep knowing that hundreds of thousands of Coloradans will be waking up tomorrow and skipping on down to the Chursh of What’s Happening Now for a good old dose of religion.

  3. JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

    The Post wrote an editorial about Jim Kerr and “shut it,” but nothing about Neville and Nazis or the other videos Pols posted. I just don’t understand why they are ignoring this. It doesn’t make any sense. It’s like the Post knows the public will be outraged and they’re trying to keep these GOP Senators under the radar. Why the hell would they do that?

  4. ScottP says:

    Please tell me there’s some cool little Appointed-By-Vacancy-Committee rule that says I get to vote against Neville this year.

  5. nancycronknancycronk says:

    Westword has done all it can, using tons of money to justify allowing pimps to sell human beings on the “back pages”, some of whom have wound up dead, and many of whom have been proven to be underage. Their lawsuits continue. In the anti-human trafficking community, you can’t get any lower than Back Page and Village Voice.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account


You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.