(D) John Hickenlooper*
(R) Scott Gessler*
(R) Tom Tancredo*
(R) Tim Foster
(1-4)↓
(6-1)
(8-1)↑
(18-1)
(D) Stan Garnett
(D) Morgan Carroll
(R) Mark Waller
(D) Don Quick*
(R) Ken Buck*
(1-1)
(1-1)
(3-2)
(3-2)↑
(9-1)↓
(D) Ken Gordon*
(R) Pam Anderson
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Scott Gessler
(3-2)
(3-2)
(4-1)↓
(OFF)
(R) Scott Tipton*
(D) Joe Garcia
(D) Gail Schwartz
(2-3)
(4-1)
(4-1)
"The Democrat Party is a repository for liberals and leftists today, and their church is the state. There is a reason why Karl Marx and every communist/socialist philosopher has wanted to do away with religion–because they want blind, unalterable faith in the state."
–Rush Limbaugh, yesterday
You must be logged in to post a comment.
You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.
which is somewhat different than the blind, unalterable faith in the corporations you so slavishly serve, eh, Rush? Is that the best you can do? Socialism isn't scary anymore, Oh, Fat One…Maybe try convincing America that Democrats are space aliens…maybe that will work.
Sounds to me like Mt. Rushbo is starting to tremble…the ensuing eruption could be cataclysmic.
People are getting tired of being serfs for the one percent, Rush. You might have found success as their attack dog, but your bark is definitely worse than your bite.
As long as the demo that responds to his bark keeps him rich, what does he care? He has not only been powerless to affect elections for a long time now, he's actually hurt GOP chances by being such a prominent and outrageous voice for everything about today's right right that turns people off.
I vote ColPols dispense with the Rush quotes and find some rightie radio or TV talking head to quote who, you know, still matters. Nobody immediately leaps to mind as they all seem to appeal mostly to the dead-in-the-not-too-distant-future age demo but I suppose somebody at Fox might have more influence left. Rush is now pretty much completely irrelevant as a political, rather than niche entertainment, celebrity voice.
And speaking of age demos, I'm happy that Ed Schultz is being replaced in his MSNBC evening slot by Chris Hayes. I think it's great to have a good ol' boy voice like Ed's on the liberal side and am glad he will continue to have a strong presence on talk radio but I personally can only take him in small doses. His bombastic emotional style wears thin pretty quickly. Hayes is smarter, more professional and way, way less hysterical.
Might start watching evening MSNBC again for more than a few minutes at a time as I do now, mainly during commercial breaks and half time when I'm watching basketball.
Chris Hayes is a really smart guy. I often watch his show on Saturday. On Saturday, unless you're dealing with a really big crisis, you get lesser known guests because they have been on TV M-F and some will be on Sun. Chris always gets smart guests and leads smart discussions.
I've been over Schultz for a long time.
I'm finding myself over Maddow too. It seems like she just repeats everything over and over anymore as if she's afraid we're too stupid to get it the first time or maybe to stretch a half hour's worth of stuff into an hour show. I get really bored after a few minutes. I always enjoy Hayes as a guest host on any of the shows but his Saturday show is too early for me.
who are you pulling for in the NCAA tourney?
Don't really have a strong rooting interest there. I have strong NBA rooting interests but just enjoy watching the various promising young players in the NCAA, regardless of the school they play for, and also find myself rooting for the underdogs.
Always a good Friday when the NBA is mentioned. Big game tonight for the Nugs. Hope they run the Grizzlies out of the gym!
@GIM…
the Blue Devils…of course….
I'm rooting for a terrible performance by Trey Burke and an early exit from the tourney by Michigan, so he'll come back next year to settle his "unfinished business." UM #1 all season if that happens.
I know: GLWT.
So far so good, just lost to Wisky in th B1G tourney.
my interest in NBA is pretty minimal. Haven't watched more than 5 minutes yet this season. I will watch more in the playoffs. I love college b'ball. I usually a fan of several teams &/or coaches. I dislike Pitino. When L'ville lost in 5 OT to Notre Dame in January I became a fan of their coach. I like KU, KState and Mizzou. Probably at this moment a friend of mine has his team in the 1A final 4 for CO high school. I'm pulling for the Vail Saints
I love the NBA, especially now that so many countries are represented on our NBA teams, including the Nuggets.
Of course lots of them play in college here first. I know college is supposed to be purer and all that, fewer divas and egos but, sue me, I love watching all the great big beautiful American and international men of the NBA.. And the current Nuggets team is chock full of great, fun to watch, quality, good guys. I love them. I love NBA history. I love a once a year birthday treat of great seats at the Can. And, to tell the truth, the soap opera that is the NBA is kind of fun, too.
Besides, too many of the college kids cover up there arms with silly T-shirts. I hope I never see the day that Andre Igoudala covers up those gorgeous arms to play! I may be old but I'm not dead.
i definitely appreciate the international additions to many sports. More obvious in the NBA I think because there are fewer teams, only 10 players on court at a time. have you seen the Turk that plays for W Va? Kilicli. He actually went to high school also in the US. Hard to know if he has an NBA future
A benefit to all the international players is that American players and coaches I am certain are learning a lot about different peoples and cultures. That has to be a good thing. But, I'll still discount Rodman going to N Korea
Mornin' Ari…
Is it just me or is the scent of desperation in the air around our righty friends these days?
They ARE a bit more blustery lately. A-GOrP's little meltdowns on the gun threads have been entertaining.
But that is the strangest part of Marx, enact more and more state only to ultimately abolish the State. Makes no sense.
The above post was a reply to the post from Meiner49er.
Meiner49er wrote:Ah, but you see once religion was gone, the state was supposed to be next to go! It's called reading, Rush. Try it
Marxism has never been put into practice anywhere. The people in rural, unindustrialized nations who called their thing "Marxism" were really practicing "Stalinism," something which Lenin would barely have recognized, and his own Leninism was something that Marx would have repudiated as so far off the mark as to belong to a different family of political philosophies.
Marx expressed his exasperation with the distortion of his ideas by famously stating before his death: "I am not a Marxist."
I see…..Duvall shirtless .. On beach ,helicopters, fire…I love the smell of gotp desperation… Smells like victory
Ah, but you see once religion was gone, the state was supposed to be next to go! It's called reading, Rush. Try it.
All ideologies, carried to there logical conclusions, are equally unworkable IMHO. Granted some lead to more brutality than others but, as the material world is the one in which we live, I strongly suspect that all ideologies, in there purest possible forms, are dead ends because they are premised on making manifest an ideal in the material world.
Since ideals, while laudable as guiding lights, are perfections that can't exist on the material plane, strict idealogues are all barking up the wrong tree, regardless of the ideology in which they believe. Better to allow any ideology a place as a flexible framework for practical solutions.
Ohio Senator Rob Portman (R), one-time sponsor of DOMA, comes out in favor of gay marriage.
http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2013/03/15/portman-reverses-stance-on-gay-marriage-says-son-is-gay.html
I think changes like this are inevitible from major GOP figures, so I regard this more with a sense of anticlimax than surprise. But it is a big deal, and it will be interesting to see how the hard right wingnuts react to it.
I love the way so many Rs nly seem to be moved on issues like this by what affects them personally. What would his position be if he only had straight children? Still, no matter how these people get there, ir's good to have tham get there.
Rush is ignoring the fact that most churches are infested with “republicans” who worship the State. These so called “republican” church goers have perverted Gods word into a socialist mandate. These church attending “republicans” are so naïve, they think they and CPAC control the State. When in reality, the State will devour them both.
It is a shame the church is being used to return us to bondage…
CPAC n and the religious right are all about socialist mandates? Who knew?
Well, that Jesus fellow was a commie, after all. Egad, turning water into wine! Just think of the patents he infringed in so doing. And then he shared all those loaves and fishes with the multitude.
Thall shall not steal or kill. This also applies to government.
Stealing and killing requires private property.
Socialist don’t want no stinking private property…
"Stealing and killing requires private property."
Even by Nockworst's standards, that is a stupid thing to say.
The Nazi death camps were not private property.
The bible also does not say that thou shalt not kill applies to government…another stupid Nockworst ism. The Bible specifically celebrates war, as waged by the Israelites against numerous enemies. In some cases the genocide of cities … men, women, children, even animals … was commanded by Yahweh.
Are you just drunk, lunchmeat boy. Even for you, these are very stupid statements.
Person is private property…
The Bible uses war as an example of what happens when you are disobedient…
Whether you are talking about Bible or not, for example moral atheism, any morals must apply equally to the individual and government otherwise it is simply poppycock…
Government, not just American government, is guilty of more theft and murder than any other entity or individual and or group of individuals…
1 Samuel 8
8 When Samuel grew old, he appointed his sons as Israel’s leaders.[a] 2 The name of his firstborn was Joel and the name of his second was Abijah, and they served at Beersheba. 3 But his sons did not follow his ways. They turned aside after dishonest gain and accepted bribes and perverted justice.
4 So all the elders of Israel gathered together and came to Samuel at Ramah. 5 They said to him, “You are old, and your sons do not follow your ways; now appoint a king to lead[b] us, such as all the other nations have.”
6 But when they said, “Give us a king to lead us,” this displeased Samuel; so he prayed to the Lord. 7 And the Lord told him: “Listen to all that the people are saying to you; it is not you they have rejected, but they have rejected me as their king. 8 As they have done from the day I brought them up out of Egypt until this day, forsaking me and serving other gods, so they are doing to you. 9 Now listen to them; but warn them solemnly and let them know what the king who will reign over them will claim as his rights.”
10 Samuel told all the words of the Lord to the people who were asking him for a king. 11 He said, “This is what the king who will reign over you will claim as his rights: He will take your sons and make them serve with his chariots and horses, and they will run in front of his chariots. 12 Some he will assign to be commanders of thousands and commanders of fifties, and others to plow his ground and reap his harvest, and still others to make weapons of war and equipment for his chariots. 13 He will take your daughters to be perfumers and cooks and bakers. 14 He will take the best of your fields and vineyards and olive groves and give them to his attendants. 15 He will take a tenth of your grain and of your vintage and give it to his officials and attendants. 16 Your male and female servants and the best of your cattle[c] and donkeys he will take for his own use. 17 He will take a tenth of your flocks, and you yourselves will become his slaves. 18 When that day comes, you will cry out for relief from the king you have chosen, but the Lord will not answer you in that day.”
19 But the people refused to listen to Samuel. “No!” they said. “We want a king over us. 20 Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go out before us and fight our battles.”
21 When Samuel heard all that the people said, he repeated it before the Lord. 22 The Lord answered, “Listen to them and give them a king.”
Then Samuel said to the Israelites, “Everyone go back to your own town.”
Jesus came to fulfill the law, and specifically says not to steal or kill.
He says to love Him with all your heart and soul and then love your neighbor. No mandates to wage war, what so ever.
Political trivia question of the day (no Googling):
The only hard one is France. I'm not sure DeGaulle was the man yet or not. But the others were Truman, Stalin, and Churchill.
I'm not sure France merits inclusion. The famous pictures are of the three I named.
Ah. After looking it up (and no, I won't spoil it), I see that France wasn't part of it. I believe I know the fourth now.
There were only 2 heads of state at Potsdam: Truman and Stalin.
The others were heads of government. George VI was not at Potsdam.
I don't think France had a head of state at the time. Charles DeGalle was Chairman of the Provisional Government of the French Republic.
Wikipedia lists four Heads of Government, not State, including two British Prime ministers:
Dave B is correct in making a distinction between a Head of Government and a Head of State, with the British Monarch, not Prime Minister, always being the Head of State regardless of how much or how little political power resides in that office, while the American president is indeed head of state.
But more important, what the heck brought this on, Dave T?
Sorry. I did google but just to back up my answer .
I see I should have named the 4 first then put in the quote box but have trouble getting the quote box to work the way I want it to (sometimes I can't make changes without getting things in it that belong out of it) when I edit so I got ahead of myself.
I figured this was more fun than the typical "you suck", "no you suck" comments we've been getting on the threads recently. It's also a great trick question – 3 countries but 4 heads of
stategovernment.It's been a few hours. The UK general elections were just prior to the Potsdam Conference, and Churchill of course lost. So the fourth was his successor as PM, Clement Attlee. They were still counting the votes when the conference got underway.
Okay, that was weird. I saw BlueCat's subsequent comments (about checking wikipedia) but her post with her answer was not visible to me when I opened the thread. Hence my post.
Wierdness happens on the old intertubes, I guess.
Same thing happened to me…
The War on Women continues:
You've offred no dispositive proof of any such "war", just evidence for love of unborn children.
Well in any case, it won't stand. The constitution guarantees a woman's right to choose a long way past 6 weeks. Kudos for working in the word "dispositive", though. Very lawyerly..
Assault weapon ban passed from Senate Judiciary on 10-8 party line vote