Open Line Friday!

“This is a raw, naked assertion of flat-out excrement.”

–Rush Limbaugh, yesterday

64 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. JFrackenlooper says:

    I am not sure if ‘raw, naked’ and ‘flat-out excrement’ are wise tactical terms for El Rushbo to utter.  Conjures horrific imagery. Can you put up another pls?  

  2. ClubTwitty says:

    “The war on jobs must stop. The war on the West must stop – and must stop now,” [New Mexico Rep. Steve] Pearce said as he told of protests in his state against federal policies on petroleum drilling, forest management and roadless areas.

    Yes, the War on the West being waged on the poor multi-national corporations by communities and people that want to protect clean water sources, healthy wildlife, breathable air, and diverse economies must be stopped–so that a great Pax Gaslandia can sweep the mountain west, that we may all pay tribute to the centurions, in their bright red fleet of vehicles.  

  3. JFrackenlooper says:

    http://finance.townhall.com/co

    Perhaps that’s how 13 environmentalist groups were able to demand in all seriousness in recent weeks that Gov. John Hickenlooper pull from the air a 30-second public service announcement of the Colorado Oil and Gas Association.

    Hickenlooper, a former geologist who worked in the oil-and-gas industry for five years and has studied hydraulic fracturing extensively, features in the ad, in which he says that since 2008 there have been no known cases in the state of hydraulic fracturing contaminating groundwater. A joint letter from the organizations gallingly and falsely contends the COGA ad “ignor[es] the high incidence of groundwater contamination from spills and releases of toxic chemicals at or near drilling sites.”

    Those pesky fellas were pointing out facts about all the many spills…averaging about one-a-day over the last decades, although they have been increasing in recent years.  I mean, the ones that get reported.  Hey!  We have 11 inspectors state wide!  That’s nearly a dozen.  So just calm down.  Read what Bob has to say.  And ask yourself?  If you can’t trust Both Ways Bob to point you straight, who can you!

    PS-Thanks Bob!

    • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

      People like Bob Beauprez, Bob Schafer, Josh Penry, etc. go down to major defeat and their political career is over. Yet they are still hired as lobbyists, talking heads, etc. Why? They have no present or future influence. No one listens to them. So why do special interests hire them?

      • Libertad says:

        I’m looking for real names … So don’t just list a bunch of ONG businesses.

        BB retired to his ranch and an opinion column to plot out his race for the Udall seat.

        Schafer is running a charter school and moon lighting as Education Commissioner…I think.

  4. SSG_Dan says:

    …some guy that edits some commie-pinko rag says that it’s OK…

    New Republic: Medicare Is Ok, So Is Obamacare

    Put aside, for a moment, the fine distinctions of the interstate commerce clause and other constitutional matters the court must ponder. In principle, is the basic obligation that comes with health care reform – to pay for a mutual protection scheme that some individuals might not find advantageous or desirable – really so novel?

    Hardly. It’s an obligation most of us meet on a regular basis, every time we get a paycheck.

    I’m speaking, of course, about Social Security and Medicare. Each program is a form of “social insurance” and each serves the same basic function: To protect us from financial shocks that we cannot anticipate or avoid. With Social Security, the shock is reaching retirement without enough income. With Medicare, the shock is high medical bills during old age. During our working years, we pay into these programs by handing over portions of our incomes, in the form of payroll taxes. And we don’t have a choice about it, unless we want to start evading taxes.

    http://www.npr.org/2012/03/23/

    BTW, has ‘tad, Beej or ArapaGOP managed to find any death sentences on Grandma from those mandated death panels? Anyone?

  5. Fidel's dirt nap says:

    once again, Pat Robertson can go fuck himself.  Hateful, dried up old piece of shit that he is.

    Bring on the Manning !

  6. Algernon MoncriefAlgernon Moncrief says:

    If you’re like me, and you simply cannot get your fill the public pension theft debate raging in the hearts of Americans, then perhaps you’ll enjoy this retrospective of noteworthy quotations from the 2010 Colorado pension theft debate.

    As is often reported in the press, we Coloradans excel in all areas of human endeavor . . . and pension theft is no exception.  Our 2010 pension theft bill (SB 10-001) was bold, brazen, ruthless, depraved  . . . exemplifying that western “can do” spirit.

    I’ll kick off the retrospective with one of my personal favorite pension theft quotations:

    Joel Judd, Chairman, House Finance Committee:

    During the hearing on Senate Bill 10-001 Judd stated (near the end of the hearing) that SB 10-001 (the “COLA theft bill”) must be supported “because that’s where the money is.”

    Senators Josh Penry and Greg Brophy:  ”Fully 90 percent of the PERA fix comes from benefit cuts to current and future retirees.”

    Greg Smith, Colorado PERA General Counsel:  ”The attorney general’s opinion seems clear that fully vested employees – those retired or with enough years of service to retire – cannot see any benefits reduced, including cost-of-living adjustments.”  (Link: http://www.denverpost.com/news

    Greg Smith, PERA before the Joint Budget Committee on 12-17-09:  ”The statutes are in fact binding, and they are constitutionally protected from reduction.”

    Greg Smith, PERA General Counsel:  Reilly Pozner has “really talented people. I certainly couldn’t get a job there.”  (Link:  http://www.prweb.com/releases/

    Meredith Williams, Colorado PERA Executive Director:  ”The AG’s opinion states that when a PERA member retires and begins receiving pension benefits such member’s pension rights have fully vested and such pension benefits may not be reduced.”

    Representative DelGrosso (in February):  ”I voted against SB 1, not because I didn’t think we needed to fix PERA, I agreed with that part of it, but I voted against Senate Bill 1 because it did adjust some of the COLAs, and it did adjust that for folks that were already retired and people that were about ready to retire,” said DelGrosso. “And to me, I felt like that was violating the contract that those people got into.”

    From the 2010 debate on SB 10-001:

    Rep. Lambert: “I have heard from my constituents, as many of you have, that this proposal will breach retiree’s contracts.”

    Rep. Swalm: “We’re breaking new territory in this state by trying to reduce the COLA. We’re probably going to get a lawsuit out of that. If we cut the 3.5 percent COLA there will be a lawsuit.”

    Rep. Gerou: in committee, said that it is a disservice to the state to rush a bill through when her committee knew that it will go to litigation, and said what we are doing to the retirees is wrong.

    Rep. DelGrosso: said that it is “tough” for him to tell people that he is going to break their contract.

    Senator Harvey: “We have made a commitment. We have a contract with current retirees. That is already in place. Reforms should be made for new hires. We do not have that commitment to new hires.”

    Senator Spence: “The bill places an unfair burden on retirees.”

    Senator Scheffel: “We are breaching our promises to existing retirees.”

    Senator Lundberg: “This bill is a deal that was cut before this body met.”

    Rep. Jack Pommer, JBC Chairman to JBC on 12-17-09:  ”Are we not just saying we’re going to pick 30 years (as a PERA investment time horizon) because if we’re not balanced within 30 years that creates actuarial necessity which then let’s us change retiree benefits?”

    Colorado PERA:  ”In any event, members and retirees with fully vested rights and entitlements provided by the PERA statutes will not suffer any impairment of those rights and the Board of Trustees will continue to fight to protect the PERA membership.”

    Colorado PERA:  Retirees “will receive an automatic increase of 3.5 percent in their monthly retirement benefit to help keep up with the cost of living.”

    Colorado PERA:  ”If you began PERA membership on or before June 30, 2005, you will receive an annual increase of 3.5 percent.”

    Colorado PERA Update – (Spring 2006 – page 4):  ”See that PERA’s (actuarial) funded status was lower (61.5 percent) 30 years ago than what it is now. You may recall that there was no perceived “crisis” in PERA’s funded status in 1975.”

    Colorado PERA News Archive for 2004 (9-16-2004):  ”PERA’S funded level was below 60 percent in 1970, and there was not a perceived crisis in PERA’s financial health.”

    Mike Coffman’s “Commission to Strengthen PERA”:  ”For those Coloradans already collecting benefits from PERA, their retirement funds must be protected.  The Commission may not make any recommendations that materially affect current retirees.”

    Colorado Supreme Court, in Denver Police Pension and Relief Board, 1961:  When conditions are satisfied for retirement . . . . “at that time retirement pay becomes a vested right of which the person entitled thereto cannot be deprived; it has ripened into a full contractual obligation.” “Whether it be in the field of sports or in the halls of the legislature it is not consonant with American traditions of fairness and justice to change the ground rules in the middle of the game.”

    Colorado Supreme Court, in Colorado Springs Firefighters v. Colorado Springs, 1989:  ”Rights which accrue under a pension plan are contractual obligations . . . entitlement to annual pension payment increases is also statutorily determined. These statutory provisions have established a defined benefit contributory pension system in which most public employees are required to participate . . . . . By making these contributions, employees obtain a limited vesting of pension rights, which ripen into vested pension rights upon attainment of the respective eligibility requirements.”

    PERA Hires the Lobbying Troop (how many? 12 to 20?):

    State Bill Colorado article, regarding the initial recruitment of the PERA lobbying troop:  ”PERA is obviously gearing up for some heavy-duty lobbying, one observer noted. The agency has hired two lobbyists from the firm Colorado CommuniquГ©, Collon Kennedy and Steve Adams, former president of the Colorado AFL-CIO. The pension system also has hired Mary Alice Mandarich, a well-connected Democratic lobbyist who formerly was chief of staff for Senate Democrats and who worked on campaigns for former Senate President Joan Fitz-Gerald, former Gov. Roy Romer and gubernatorial candidate Gail Schoettler.”

    Is it normal for public pension administrators to hire a lobbying troop?

    Jeanne Chenault, spokeswoman for the Virginia retirement system:  ”We do not take positions on bills, we provide information on bills.”

    Denver Post Editorial Board in the piece AFirst, let court rule on PERA”:  ”Before legislators take on reforms, they should first ask the state Supreme Court to determine how much leeway they have.”

    John Bury, Actuary:  ”Giving a government the ability to renege on a contract at their convenience means the end of any pretense to democracy.”

    Algernon Moncrief (pension rights blogger):  ”Senate Bill 1 is a contrivance designed to permit defined benefit plan sponsors to escape their debts.”

    Visit saveperacola.com, support the pension theft lawsuit, Like saveperacola on Facebook!

  7. sxp151 says:

    is even better than the Cretan paradox. I’m going to start using it in my classes.

  8. DaftPunkDaftPunk says:

    As Santorum Fires Gun, Woman Shouts ‘Pretend It’s Obama’

    http://news.yahoo.com/santorum

  9. taterheaptom says:

    This old friend calls me up out of the blue back, oh, the other day or so and says

    “Buy Etch-A-Sketch” and I’m like what?  ’cause the skybeam and the cell and all the towers, it just don’t work like it did with wires always.  So there we were, me on the phone and this old friend–I’ll call him EF–we go way back to our wild frat days in the Reagan Youth but I do digress, and–believe me–my politics have changes 235 degrees.  If you know what I mean.

    I’m like “What…Er..” “Shut Up!” he hisses.  So I listen.  ”Buy Etch A Sketch.” He says and hangs up.  

    So, I sold the hen house and the missus, bought 10,000 shares of Etch A Sketch.  Oh, back about the other day or so.

    And now I also think my friend EF is a rich man.  

    http://finance.yahoo.com/news/

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.