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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
August 08, 2012 04:24 PM UTC

Wednesday Open Thread

  • 74 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“It is only prudent never to place complete confidence in that by which we have even once been deceived.”

–Rene Descartes

Tweet
Share

Comments

74 thoughts on “Wednesday Open Thread”

    1. Who has ever heard of such a thing?  Oh, how will our delicate businessmen and businesswomen cope with the fact that the future is…well…unknown?  May as well just fold up now and crawl into a hidey-hole, assume the fetal position and wait.  Who knows what tomorrow will bring?  Let’s cower.  

      1. those rugged individualists who built their businesses single-handedly in the face of adversity and scorn are cowed by the possibility that marginal income tax rates might revert to boom-time levels at some time in the future.

    4. “Two overarching reasons explain the failure of Obamanomics. First, administration economists and their outside supporters neglected the longer-term costs and consequences of their actions. Second, the administration and Congress have through their deeds and words heightened uncertainty about the economic future. High uncertainty is the enemy of investment and growth.”

    5. “Most of the earlier spending was a very short-term response to long-term problems. One piece financed temporary tax cuts. This was a mistake, and ignores the role of expectations in the economy. Economic theory predicts that temporary tax cuts have little effect on spending. Unless tax cuts are expected to last, consumers save the proceeds and pay down debt. Experience with past temporary tax reductions, as in the Carter and first Bush presidencies, confirms this outcome.

      Another large part of the stimulus went to relieve state and local governments of their budget deficits. Transferring a deficit from the state to the federal government changes very little. Some teachers and police got an additional year of employment, but their gain is temporary. Any benefits to them must be balanced against the negative effect of the increased public debt and the temporary nature of the transfer.”

      1. You must be very old because you seem to forget recent history (or maybe you’re just a REpublican).  Who was it that wanted so much of the stimulus to be in tax cuts?  That would be your frient, god, mentor Grover Norquist and all of his lackeys on Capitol Hill.  If it hadn’t been for you guys, we would have had a real economic stimulus package with jobs, jobs, jobs.  But no, you had to stick with the martra, tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts.  How stupid to you people think we really are?

  3. With his statement about Romney paying no income taxes for the last 10 years, he is a key hero in Obama’s win in November regardless of how it plays out.

    Romney doesn’t release his tax returns. Reid keeps this story front and center to election day and is credited with having brought a key argument to Romney’s defeat.

    Romney releases his tax returns and they show him paying little or nothing each year for the last 10 years. Game over due to Harry Reid.

    Romney releases them and they show he did pay. Harry Reid is embarrassed for a day, but the damage inflicted to date remains impactful.

    No matter what, Harry Reid wins.

    1. Reid didn’t say that.  He said that someone told him that Romney didn’t pay any taxes for ten years.  If Romney releases the returns (yeah, fat chance) and it turns out to be true, it doesn’t affect what Reid said, because someone did tell him that Rmoney didn’t pay taxes.  Sorry, I don’t even think there’s any embarassment if it turns out to be true.  All there is is a reminder that this is the kind of play on words that the Republicans are so good ad and that so many people hate.  Remember, Obama re-painted Air Force One with his campaign logo?

      1. Reid isn’t bearing false witness.

        He’s merely channeling false witness.  A little bird told him those convenient, prevaricative things about Romney’s tax returns.

        Which makes it OK

        (see Exodus 20:16, footnote 7, as interpreted in US Court of Public Opinion [USCPO] 44:3213, cited as “baloney”.)  

    2. the one person who has seen all of the RomneyBot tax returns is Sen John McCain, the Grandpa Simpson of the Senate who’s inclined to speak (scream?) his mind regardless of the political consequences.

      He was on the floor of the Senate when Reid was engaging in Grey propaganda, and he didn’t say a word.

      Why? Because he knew there was something to Reid’s accusations?  

      1. .

        If that structure of argument makes sense to you,

        then can I use it to prove that you personally were in on the 9/11 attacks ?

        .

        by which I mean, of course, that the argument is silly.    

        1. …not defending my Masters thesis in Ethics.

          Grandpa McCain saw the whole ball of tax mess that was Romney’s finances and decided to go with Caribou Barbie.

          McCain was there when Reid was making his accusations on the floor of the Senate. He’s usually ready to scream and yell at just about anything else – why didn’t he stick up for Romney?

          I don’t claim to have anything…I’m just wondering…

  4. Missing the Key Issue?

    I think you’re missing a key nuance from Romney’s denials and indignation here. Note that the response always appears to be “I paid a lot of taxes” and not “I paid a lot of income taxes.”

    Anyone making $10 to $20 million per year will pay a lot of taxes in absolute dollars – state taxes, property taxes, city taxes, sales taxes, etc. But the distinction you’re missing is whether or not these taxes were income taxes.

    2. There is no question that this is exactly what Rmoney means.  Also, just remember the line that he pays plenty of taxes.  Well given his belief that rich people shouldn’t pay any taxes, he could pay zero and still be paying “plenty” in his opinion.

  6. Seems to have recovered completely to election year levels. I’ve been here since 2007, and I think they were about a month late this election cycle.

    Just like old times, boys and girls!

      1. Cash is King denotes the critical importance of sufficient cash for short term operations, purchases and acquisitions. A company, say Solyndra, could have a large amount of ARs, government contract commitments, or other government backed schemes on its balance sheet, but the company could still be short on cash due to over extending itself or failing to see basic competitive threats. In this case it would not be able to conduct purchases or pay wages to workers for labor as an example.

        Unless it was able to convert its current assets to cash, it would fail and be technically bankrupt despite a positive net worth.

        Maybe a realistic and full examination of Solyndra and Abound by banks was the reason Democrat billionaires needed the government subsidy. Competive banks just wouldn’t risk depositors cash on such investments.

        Then of course there is the more reasonable explaination …. close government ties by Democrat Billionaires allowed them to realize massive returns on invested capital by foregoing costly  real world debt and instead leveraging taxpayers coffers and anti competitive government supplyside schemes.

        Results …. taypayers lost and more unemployment created resulting in even greater losses in future taxes to federal, state and local revenues.

        1. fucking acumen, it’s too damn bad that you weren’t running things at Solyndra — I, mean it’s so obvious . . .

          So much potential, so much time wasted trolling from your mother’s basement.  

          1. taypayers lost and more unemployment was created resulting in even greater losses in future taxes to federal, state and local revenues … not to mention the additional burden on the state (er other businesses) to pay unemployment …

        2. Check out the Bush-era, $500 million ‘clean coal’debacle funded from the same DOE program.  Where’s your outrage?  R-money/Bain could only dream of having the kind of success ratio the DOE Loan Program enjoys. Every gamble they make can’t be as good as Pro-Life R-moneys investment in Stericycle. Thanks to a plethora of both good and bad investments in this sector, solar is approaching grid parity in most markets.  That’s a good thing.  

        3. Romney’s whole business model was to amass massive debt to finance investment in businesses he took over.

          Get your talking points straight. But kudos on not using a racial epithet in this post of yours!

          1. Obamanomics result …. taypayers lost and more unemployment was created resulting in even greater losses in future taxes to federal, state and local revenues … not to mention the additional burden on the state (er other businesses) to pay unemployment …

            Nice attempt to divert raymond1 …  

            1. Forget that I disagree; Romney’s entire, lucrative tenure at Bain was premised on his complete disagreement with your shitty, 4th-grade “debt is bad” understanding of economics.

              But I don’t expect deep understanding of economics from a Tancredo-following Klansman like you.

            2. Ahem.  Economy tanking, losing hundreds of thousands of jobs a month.

              Remember who was in the White House?

              Or have drugs and games zapped your medium term memory?

        1. Seriously, my Dutch wife spent most of the night on web trying to figure out who is guy is, and how he won this medal.

          The Dutch expert to kick ass in all of the various skating events, cycling and soccer, but this seems to have caught the entire soggy nation by surprise.

          The Dutch tabloid De Telegraaf has the headline “Zonderland steelt de show.”

          1. doing that flip manuver once is risky, but 3 friggin’ times in a row, with near flawless execution ?  I think that will seriously raise the level of difficulty for this event in the next olympics.

            I thought your wife would certainly know about this guy, but maybe he was a bit under the radar in his home country too. That makes it even better.

    3. That is awesome! It’s so good, it’s breathtaking to watch.

      Their first Gold medal ever in this event…and well deserved.

      Thanks for posting that, Fidel.  

        1. When I watched it again, I watched the reaction of the athletes, coaches, et all on the side lines, even those that weren’t on the Dutch team and they had the biggest grins on their faces when he landed.

          Just such a great moment to see the appreciation from his colleagues–sportsmanship at its finest.  

          1. IMHO those who today watch the Olympics for the teams, countries, medal counts, etc. miss not only the point of these games, but also so much of that which is makes them most fascinating.  This is not, and never should have been, a competition of nations and ideologies.   It’s the performances of the individual athletes who are among the best in the world at their endeavors which matter — the astounding products of years of practice, sacrifice, and determination.

            The greatest efforts, the most inspiring performances, the most ennobling triumphs of human courage and spirit can come at any time, from any individual participant, regardless of the flags waved or the anthems sung.  Even more interesting as far as I’m concerned, this often occurs from participants who never make it past a preliminary event or heat.  I love the last place finishers.  I find inspiration in the dignity of folks who go out and give the very best effort that they possibly can, even when they know – and all the rest of the world knows – that they’re going to get their asses kicked by everyone else in the field.

            And, if someone from China triumphs over the American that was highly favored to win a gold in some event, I’m happy for that Chinese athlete.  And, I’m happy for the American who got the silver.  And, if that American is gracious in defeat, or that Chinese is gracious in victory — then I’m even happier for having seen both of them.

            In today’s world it no longer matters where you’re from . . . Latvia, Columbia, Iran, Sri Lanka, Bolivia, Finland, Lithuania, or Pottsylvannia . . . it’s entirely possible to be and become the single very best [ ] in the world.

            We’re exceptionally fortunate to witness the efforts of these, or any, athletes.

  12. http://www.redstate.com/erick/…

    Also, the rest of us should understand that Democrat [sic] multi-millionaires seem to do quite well in electoral politics. What’s the difference? More often than not, they are running because they believe in a cause. Most Republican multi-millionaires seem to run because they believe in themselves.

  13. When you can’t run on your record you resort to negative ads, when that doesn’t work you hook your super PAC up with a ladies husband who has an axe to grind and trust he’ll lie for you.

    The ad, featuring former GST Steel worker Joe Soptic, suggests Romney was in some way responsible for the death of Soptic’s wife because his plant was shuttered after a takeover by Romney’s firm and others — and because his wife died of cancer after he lost his health insurance.

    However, the ad hides details about the timeline of those events. Soptic’s wife died five years after GST filed for bankruptcy. His wife reportedly had her own health insurance after Soptic left GST. And Romney had long since left Bain Capital at the time of her death.

    Romney spokeswoman Andrea Saul called the ad “disgusting” and “despicable” in an interview with Fox News. “This ad just shows the depth to which the Obama campaign and their allies will go to try to smear Mitt Romney,” she said.

    …snip….

    Soptic appeared in a pair of Obama campaign videos in May which hammered Romney over his former company Bain Capital’s role before GST filed for bankruptcy.

    Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politic…

    1. http://www.politico.com/news/s…

      “To that point, if people had been in Massachusetts, under Governor Romney’s health care plan, they would have had health care,” Andrea Saul, Romney’s campaign press secretary, said during an appearance on Fox News. “There are a lot of people losing their jobs and losing their health care in President [Barack] Obama’s economy.”

      But alas, he didn’t live in Massachusetts. Oh, if only Obama had done something to make Romneycare national. Something, I don’t know what, but something, and maybe he could call it “Obamacare” and it would do the same thing but in every state.

      Oh, if only…

      1. And what red-blooded American wouldn’t have chosen to watch his wife die of cancer if the alternative was a 1 percent increase in the marginal tax rates of people earning more than $1 million a year.

          On a state by state basis, Socialism is all right, in fact, it’s not Socialism at all, it’s just State’s Rights.  But take a good idea in one state, import it to another and it is Socialism!

          Damn, didn’t you learn ANYTHING watching the Republican debates?

        2. From that they provide feedback and training. It is moving forward in steps but it’s way too early to have much of an impact. It was set up to go forward with all due deliberate speed. (And while I would prefer that it worked faster, the rate it is going at is probably the best that can be done within the education bureaucracy.)

  16. ….I never thought a civil case would tear down Colorado’s MMJ law, but it appears that is has (by removing the force of law from any contract):

    Medical marijuana at state level found illegal in potential blockbuster court ruling

    The tension between state medical marijuana laws, which allow patient use, and federal regulations that criminalize all pot has existed for years, with occasional court rulings — like the 2011 conviction of Highlands Ranch MMJ grower Chris Bartkowicz — touching on the contradiction. But a just-issued decision in Arapahoe County District Court may be the most sweeping to date in Colorado. The conclusion: The medical marijuana industry here and in other states is illegal. Period.

    At first blush, the case hardly seems like a landmark. It involves a medical marijuana grower whose name is being withheld at his request and Blue Sky Care Connection, a dispensary in Littleton. The plaintiff maintains that he delivered approximately $40,000 worth of MMJ between June and October of 2010, but he never received compensation in the form of either cash or what’s referred to in the document as “a potential business partnership.”

    As such, the grower took Blue Sky to court, with a trial taking place this past April. But in May, rather than weighing in on the basic dispute, Judge Charles M. Pratt ordered the combatants to “file briefs explaining why this Court should not declare the purported contract void as against public policy.”

    As Pratt acknowledges, neither the plaintiff nor Blue Sky “raised the issue of legality.” Rather, “the issue was…raised by the Court” to determine if the contract violated public policy.

    This last phrase is as loaded as it is important to the judgment. Going way back to Russell v. Courier Printing & Publ’g Co., a Colorado Supreme Court ruling from 1908, to support his view, Pratt argues that “if the disputed contract violates federal law, it would be against public policy and would be void and unenforceable.”

    With this matter as a backdrop, Pratt determines that the plaintiff and Blue Sky did indeed enter into a contract, and the dispensary breached it. But to cut through the legalise: If the contract involved something illegal, that didn’t matter.

    http://blogs.westword.com/late…

    1. Courts have also been holding MMJ businesses as unable to take business deductions, meaning many of them have had to pay huge penalties to the IRS for otherwise legitimate deductions.

      The current hope for MMJ is the suit seeking to force the feds to reclassify MJ.

      1. and also pretty clear under Section 280E of the Internal Revenue Code, which prohibits deductions incurred in connection with any trade or business of trafficking in Schedule I and II controlled substances.

        Just because someone deals in MMJ doesn’t mean they shouldn’t consult a competent accountant or tax attorney before they open their doors.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

120 readers online now

Newsletter

Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!