U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) George Stern
(D) A. Gonzalez
(R) Sheri Davis
40%
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
September 08, 2006 09:49 PM UTC
24 Comments
John Murtha, the terrorists’ friend, is honored by the Democratic Party of Colorado.
You guys sure know how to lose an election.
with you, Another Cynic. Slandering a veteran? Go rejoin the republicans, the chickenhawks in charge could use your BS.
You guys want to piss all over a Vietnam Veteran. You disgust me.
Murtha has less credibility than John Kerry.
before he called for the troops to come home. Hmmm, how convenient now that he’s opposing the chickenhawk party. They have LOTS of credibility… with each other and all the dopey dittoheads.
This is why I’m sick of you, Cynic. You post opinionated BS – nothing wrong with that in of itself – but someone calls you on it and what do you say? Nothing. Not a word. It’s pretty friggin immature, the sort of stuff hardcore shills do, and it undermines everything you post. So much for debate. So much for thoughtful opinions.
Because a permanent occupation of Iraq is just what we need isn’t that right? Why aren’t you over there helping them?
Iraq had NOTHING to do with terrorism before we got there. Bush himself said several times that there was no connection to 9/11. Even the republican controlled Senate says that. So now that Bush made Iraq a hotbed of terrorism, who do you think their best American friend is anyway? Hint: look at the current executive branch of gov’t.
Not expecting an answer (really, what can you say?)
Ok, maybe not all republicans, but at least John Murtha had the courage to stand up and say something. Its nice to be able to sit back and point your finger and say “TERRIST LUVER!!!1” I am tired of the attacks by people like you and moonovermyhamie and Rumsfeld, attacking a persons character rather than address the facts. People who can only attack a person because they took a stand against something that is clearly flawed shows that they have no moral high ground and no personal integrity. The fact that you parrot a party line bothers me because you can not think for yourself.
How many people have come out now with their own plans to withdraw troops? Are they nazis like Rumsfeld said? Should we continue to paint the picture a rosy color and say that things are great? Irag is not democratic, it is an Islamic republic. There is not freedom, like we were promised, but what are we too expect when the anti-constitutionist, neocons who want to do away with our own freedom take over. If you and your neocon friends want to create a Christian Iran in this country than you are the friend of the terrorists. If you want to be a part of the “crusade” than pick up a weapon and stand a post.
I for one, as a democrat, would be happy to hear him speak. I am sure that a bronze medal winning congressman has more experience and knowledge than you can comprehend.
Though having more experience and knowledge than he could comprehend isn’t that much of an achievement because he can’t comprehend much.
Murtha wants to be majority leader so bad that he’s already campaigning for the job. Pelosi had to call him off.
Kerry wants to be president so bad that he pretends the Swift Boaters never existed and he did all kinds of good things in Vietnam, which is a lie.
Neither they nor their fellow travelers comprehend that we’re in a world religious war, the worst kind of war you can be in when you are all about ideology, as America is, and the other side is all about religious ferver, which is where the Islamic terrorists are coming from. Read the current issues of Foreign Affairs and American Interest to improve your comprehension.
To bad members of Congress only read their press notices and sleep walk through educational hearings.
Every cohort has its black sheep, and Murtha and Kerry are the blackest of black sheep of all Vietnam vets. Both inflame patriots and depend on left wing nuts for support. If either ever gains power, we’re in trouble.
Sorry I couldn’t respond sooner. Been out and about.
Idiots like you sure are having serious problems identifying the enemy in this world religious war. Veterans that served this country honorably are not the enemy, Bin Laden is. Too bad chicken hawks like you don’t go after Bin Laden with the same vigor that you attack veterans…and VA benefits with.
…go fucking fight. You sit in your chair and post on this blog telling us this crap, but you are so afraid to lay your life on the line for it. You sit here and repeat all the lies and the platitudes that got us into this situation and willfully ignore the fact that we as a country are fucked because of people like you, not because of Kerry or Murtha. You want to exhalt the great George W. Bush who went AWOL from a National Guard post that his dad got him into because he didn’t want to fight in Vietnam even though he stated that he supported that war. Kerry and Murtha layed their lives on the line to fight in Vietnam and because they decide that this war is wrong, you accuse them of doing it to gain power. Well, what about the chickenhawk administration that played on the American People’s fears to stay in power and justify illegal invasion of our privacy? If you believe in a religious war, go fight that war. Don’t wag your finger at me. Don’t denigrate people who actually have fought in war because they disagree with you.
You guys seem to be programmed by moveon.org.
passes as empty, uncomprehending blather if you are a Republican.
Probably why Bush doesn’t give it much thought.
I bet you felt good about that little zing too. So lets see, Murtha who earned a bronze star with distinction is an anti-patriot, Kerry who served noblely is also a traitor? What about Max Cleland is he an America hater too? Jesus Christ, why dont you put down the Weekly Standard, turn off the 700 club and join the real discussion.
Here is how debate works: You make a point backed up with evidence. The other side makes a counterpoint with evidence. Repeat. Here is how you totally negate your side: “you must be programmed by moveon.org, hehe.” So in effect you have clearly demonstrated that you have no real response.
I can spout off names of magazines too, look Atlantic Monthly, The Nation, Mother Jones, The New Republic. Boy thats a hoot!
The hard left, anti-Bush, anti-war and anti-American diatribes don’t deserve thoughtful responses.
Simply repeating the same old talking points of moveon.org will get you nowhere.
Come up with an intelligent comment and analysis, and you’ll get a thoughtful response.
of this nation are the only ones that wonder where Bin Laden is?
Here is something intelligent for you to comment on with your infinite wisdom.
Bin Laden’s trail goes cold: report
Oh and I pulled it off a far left website called Google News. It was below the World News section.
Two points: (1) If we are programmed by moveon.org than why post at all. You know what are responses are going to be, since you are so familiar with moveon, which I have never seen, it seems like a waste.
(2) why dont you shock and awe us with your powerful knowledge. Put us in our place so to speak. It seems that having dealt with people like us, you would have some breadth of knowledge to put our screwy, progressive, freedom loving ideas to shame. So please, I wait with peacefully for your response.
…from someone who is afraid to actually engage in a real debate. You’re a coward. That’s all there is to it.
that the war in Iraq started out as one against terrorism? Not whether it’s one now, but back in March 2003 did taking Saddam out of power have anything to do with terrorism?
John Murtha has long been one of the military’s staunchest supporters in Congress, and if you don’t know that yet, you need to actually understand who it is that you’re baselessly trashing.
I suppose you’ll be calling Chuck Hagel and other lame-o Republicans out for their calls for withdraw, too. I mean, when the Senate Intelligence Committee releases the two least damning portions of its “Phase II” Iraq intelligence review saying that our intelligence sources NEVER reliably pointed to either Al Qaeda or WMD activity in Iraq, it must be that damned liberal bias that GOP Sen. Roberts is exerting, right?
Let’s have a dialog here:
What is it about the current plan that offers a greater chance of success than either (a) increasing troop levels to “do the job right”, or (b) re-deploying troops over the horizon to provide support for Iraqi forces to “stand up” on their own? Plan (a) is offered by Mark Udall and Hillary Clinton among others; plan (b) is offered by Murtha and others. What do you offer that’s better, and why?
And do you think that, for the purposes of recruitment and training, Osama bin Laden would rather have US troops in Iraq or out? (Hint – he’s said which he’d prefer…)
Now, who is appeasing the terrorists by their actions?
Give Another Skeptic credit – he’s at least maintaining some civil composure despite being called out by several other posters. Normally his conservative cohorts have already resorted to profanity and wild accusations . . .
Not too much credit though, as he’s clearly dogmatically repeating the talking points of far-right pundits.
I like the Max Cleland example. The GOP slandered Cleland as a coward and liar regarding his military career. A guy with one remaining limb, a coward! Republicans are terrified of decorated veterans in the Democratic party, and they’ll pretty much sink to any level to discredit them. I can’t think of a Veteran that the GOP hasn’t gone after if they’ve voiced any opinions critical of the Bush Administration and our current wartime policy. Hell, they even went after McCain on the veteran angle, suggesting that he ‘broke down’ and talked when detained as a POW. It’s a disgusting practice, but the Chickenhawk squad knows that they’re always on the verge of being completely discredited in the public’s eyes if somebody with established military credentials comes out hard against them. Murtha did a lot of damage, and his criticism coincided with the start of the opinion shift against the war.
The GOP always posture as the party of military common sense, and need to appear infallable on all defense (or offense in the case of Iraq) issues in order to maintain appearances. Veterans coming out against guys like Bush and Cheney (AWOL from the Guard, multiple deferments), make the party’s Chickenhawk stances look foolish, and they’ll do what it takes to keep from getting knocked off. They know that their base’s perception of them as the party that’s better suited to handle the military and effectively fight wars is a crucial electoral stat, and everytime a guy like Murtha comes out against them, they stand to lose a lot.
They do the dirty work of slamming veterans for political gain with their mouthpieces and pundits – radio hosts, bloggers, privately financed groups, etc. Then, unfortunately, some impressionable individuals repeat their fabricated PR ad nauseum, and then years later we’re still hearing about John Kerry spending his entire tenure in Vietnam faking injuries due to his craven need for medals and ordering his men to shoot children.
When people refer to somebody being ‘swiftboated’ today, Republican or Democrat, it means they got slandered in the press by a private group, not that the facts came out. The word ‘Swiftboat’ is now forever linked to dirty advertising and blatant distortions. Think about it Skeptic, and if you really are skeptical then take a closer look at the rhetoric you’re repeating. You might not like MoveOn.org, but there are a plenty of non-partisan sources out there as well. Go to them for the facts.