U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(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) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
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%
August 17, 2008 05:46 PM UTC
95 Comments
What I so much appreciate here is that by and large the disagreements here come with an explination of why that person disagrees. I agree that we’re not all going to agree (wouldn’t that be boring) but that when we do so thoughfully and civily(?) it makes for a great place.
And I will add my apology for the fact that sometimes I also go for the quick quip rather than the thoughful response.
It was a challenge to me from my father. I’d rail against something for five minutes without stopping. He’d wait patiently until I was done and say “now, can you argue the other side as passionately as you argue your own?” It showed me that mine wasn’t the only opinion, and that others mattered just as much as my own.
Apologies for quick quips are unnecessary. You help keep things reasonable around here. It’s when people react without thinking and say something out of spite.
I aqree.
The only reasons I stay anonymous are (1) I have a job that could be jeopardized were my political affiliation to be known, and (2) when I HAVE used my real name to write letters to the editor, etc., my wife and children have had to deal with horrible people who’ve called my home and left disgusting messages.
But I agree that it’s far too easy with the anonymous internet to go for the quick ugly and hurtful comment instead of reasonable, rational discourse.
This is an arena for Liberal Democrats to spread only their view of the world. Just as the Liberal Meda does. Now over 50% of the people polled by Rasmussen believe that the Media is helping Obama. These are sad times when the Mainstream Media supports a candidate so openly.
Yet when a conservative like me states the truth on this fourm I get called names. Told that I am stupid. So yes I call names back.
The day of people just blindly being lead by Left Fourms and Blogs is over. Oh yes, people are very aware that many Independents and even Conservatives read this Fourm and Fourms like this one. However, more and more Conservatives are posting on Fourms, Blogs and News Outlets that allow Opinions.
Conservatives everywhere are standing up for what we believe and it is about time.
However, ColoPols Nation is a scary name reminds me of Communists, The Third Reich, and Fascism. Maybe that is why there is a book Obama Nation out on the best sellers list people are afraid and they need to be afraid.
I too will try not to call names and be civil but when the truth is spoken do not get angry.
While I disagree with sjintheknow, I don’t know if I would classify them as an idiot. Misguided, perhaps. Rude, absolutely. Not knowing them personally, I can’t judge on intellect, but on lack of anything substantive.
And am not ready to back away from either confrontation, or calling a spade a spade, as it were.
Your “letter” was clearly an attempt to enjoin civility, and define a more substantive, polite discourse. SJ’s knee-jerk response was idiotic.
This is a lefty board meant to promote lefty candidates, and those of us who bring some perspective often get called names by people who have no other way to respond.
But, on balance, we are allowed to post our opinions, which aren’t taken down unless they are obscene or are just too nasty.
My objection to the lede post is that it is in keeping with Obama’s efforts to shut off criticism and debate. As Jonah Goldberg points out in “Liberal Facism,” shutting down opponents and trying to destroy or even kill them is a typical fascist tactic, and it’s being used by the left today.
To point out the fascist tactics of the left, of course, brings on name calling by people who have been brainwashed with the idea that fascism is right wing when it’s really left wing. Only Communists called fascists right wingers, and they did that to make themselves look more left wing than fascists.
So if you really want to have a civil discourse, respond thoughtfully to this post. If you can’t, that’s ok, we’ll understand.
🙂
First, “lefty” is a narrow definition of the many bloggers on this site, who range across the political spectrum. I would say, in all honesty, there are few “lefty” posters here as I define lefty. In other words, there is little talk here of nationalizing the oil industry, imprisoning polluters, greatly reducing the military budget, nationalizing the press, putting the nation at the top of the political heirarchy above individual rights…..often with a dictator at the top. (Sounds like Bush). (See definitions of fascisim here: http://www.google.com/search?h…
Your assertion that Obama tries to “shut off criticism or debate” flies in the face of the evidence. Can you post specific examples? That would be helpful.
When you honestly look at the Bush Administration, Rove’s tactics, the lock step Republican behavior….you have an uphill struggle to convince anyone here your position is worth honoring.
You rock Sir Robin.
I would also like to see some examples of Obama shutting down criticism.
The only political killings in this country that I know about have all been committed by conservatives against liberals (Arkansas Democratic chair gunned down). Perhaps brainwashed can also supply some specifics regarding this accusation.
What a terrible example to support such a ridiculous statement! Are there even any liberals in Arkansas?
I doubt the shooter, Timothy Dale Johnson, even had a rational reason for shooting Arkansas Democratic chair Bill Gwatney. IF he did, it might have been because he was striking out against what he perceived as the head of the most powerful organization in the state.
Just some random shooting like the church in Tennessee.
How about the charge that liberals are targeting conservatives? Where is the evidence of brainwashed’s proclamation that all liberals are evil who are trying to kill conservatives? It was total garbage. How about calling brainwashed on his crap?
This is why it is so difficult to even consider “discussing” issues with conservatives. They are convinced that liberals are “evil” and the only way to deal with “evil” is to destroy it. They invent crap like brainwashed regurgitated and use their fantasy paranoia to justify cheating in elections because they have to defeat “evil”. If conservatives get away from the “evil” narrative then they have to consider liberal solutions to problems as legitimate alternatives. It is easier to say that liberals are “evil” so then they don’t have to think. Their solutions are righteous and correct because nothing that comes from “evil” can ever be good. Liberals don’t think conservatives are “evil”. Just stupid and gullible (ie. evangelicals who believe Republicans ever want to really criminalize abortions).
The guy who shot the people at the church in Tennessee was mentally unstable, as was the guy who shot the people at the mission center in Arvada and the church in Colorado Springs. Let’s not give these kinds of people any degree of respectability by claiming that had any basis for rational political thought.
Do I believe liberals are targeting conservatives and trying to kill them? Of course not. If I did, I wouldn’t be blogging under my real name!
Another Skeptic made a number of inflammatory statements about liberals and all you can do is say that my analogy is not appropriate. The core problem with discussing mutual problems with conservatives is that they have been brainwashed into believing that liberals are “evil”. Go read Another Skeptics outrageous statements again. You are attacking my analogy but you don’t say zip about his insane belief that Obama is suppressing dissent and liberals want to kill conservatives. He offered no examples or evidence but you being the good little conservative you are, ignore his stupidity and pretend that my analogy is inappropriate. Where is your condemnation of his stupidity? I thought so. Birds of a feather.
and I don’t think liberals are evil. I also don’t believe anyone who guns down unarmed people is motivated by any particular political philosophy. I question if they are even capable of rational political thought.
There are a lot of topics covered on this blog. I don’t feel compelled to weigh in on everyone of them. I didn’t enter the fray between Another Skeptic and you because I thought you were both a bit on the edge with your statements.
For the record, I do not believe Barack Obama is suppressing dissent, nor do I believe liberals want to kill conservatives. I also don’t subscribe to the concept that conservatives want to kill liberals.
By the way, I wasn’t pretending your analogy was inappropriate; it was. You took actual events and stated facts that were not in evidence regarding the gunman’s motives.
http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/…
What I find so disheartening about your responses Drew is your continued evasion regarding Another Skeptics bogus statements. Maybe you don’t see liberals as “evil” but he/she/it does and there are deliberate actions within the conservative community to portray liberals as traitors and “evil”. Your previous post implied that we are both at fault which is a classic Republican tactic of trying to balance the blame. You can not and will not condemn Another Skeptic for his over-the-top statements but somehow my analogies are the focus of your criticism. You claim that these acts of violence are random events but they never happen to Republicans. Read the above link and then decide whether you should apologize for your willful ignoring of the facts.
With a blog that clearly has more liberals than conservatives, why are you looking to one of the latter to come to your defense? It’s not my job to criticize Another Skeptic on your behalf. You should be more concerned as to why your brethren aren’t rallying to your position.
I implied no such thing. I never claimed either one of you were at fault. What I did clearly state was: I didn’t enter the fray between Another Skeptic and you because I thought you were both a bit on the edge with your statements. In short, I found the reasoning of both sides to be seriously flawed.
As far as the Tennessee church shooting goes, I suspect the shooter, Jim David Adkisson, was more motivated by his inability to get a job, and the fact that his food stamps were being reduced or eliminated. Learning, from the link you provided, that he was on food stamps to begin with makes me doubt he was likely a Republican or even a conservative. I think his written rantings against liberals were his attempt to justify his lack of a job and the loss of his food stamps.
The fact remains that none of us knows for certain what the shooter’s motivation was in this case or the one in Arkansas. The only common thread I can see is a loss, or lack of, job issue. The possibility that either, or both, men were mentally ill or unstable seems more probable than the rationale you have put forth.
You went to great lengths to not discuss the great conservative lie that liberals are “evil”. The interesting point for me is you never ever brought up one example of liberal violence against conservatives. You spent all your time as the local psychologist explaining why these individuals didn’t mean what they said. Quite a feat of sophistry if you know what I mean.
I don’t believe the alleged conservative lies that liberals are “evil.” I don’t believe the reverse is true either.
I am not aware any example of liberal violence against conservatives. I never claimed there was any.
Keep in mind that Lee Harvey Oswald plotted to kill arch conservative retired General Edwin Walker in Texas before he succeeded assassinating more progressive President John F. Kennedy. Arthur Bremer stalked — with a loaded gun — GOP president Richard Nixon before actually shooting Democratic presidential candidate Gov. George Wallace.
These kind of whackos are more interested in getting their names placed in infamy than they are striking out on behalf of any particular political cause.
Of course I know what sophistry means. I see examples of it every time you try to convince us there is a vast right wing conspiracy to kill liberals in this country.
Everyone here understands where I’m coming from.
Obama’s strategy is to call or have his surrogates call critics racists, morons, unfair and out of line whenever he is criticized.
Watch the debate over new reports on his father who was a Communist and who obviously has had a tremendous influence on Obama’s thinking. Obama’s father corresponded with him frequently while he was in college, according to at least one report.
This is typical:
http://www.powerlineblog.com/a…
Lede graphs from Powerlineblog.com post:
You want examples, here they are.
Not journalists, not very credible.
Read it for a week. You’ll like the brainpower behind it. And the forums are very good, too.
Calling us fascists isn’t going to bring about any kind of rational discourse, AS. I was trying to start a new trend, but some people don’t want to, they want to continue name-calling and use baseless attacks.
I’m simply appealing for a little more civility than using fascist to describe peopel you don’t know.
One way to shut down debate is to ban accurate descriptions of the participants.
Liberal fascism is a political fact of life and should be discussed-civilly.
Personal knowledge? I won’t make any definitive statements on posters here because what they post only reflects a portion of their opinions. What I post here is maybe 25% of my actual opinion on any given subject. I don’t post more because my opinions, like many here, are nuanced and the explanation would be lost in digital translation.
“Liberal Fascist” seems to me to be a catchphrase meant to be thrown out to see who it sticks to. It adds nothing to the discourse, and is meant to be a distraction from the debate itself. Like saying “neener-neener” when you have no substantive response.
but you are dealing with brutish Republicans who don’t have any reasonable solutions to our current problems and are obsessed with achieving permanent power. They don’t believe in Democracy or sharing in the decisions of our generation. Everything is a win/lose situation to them and they have been conditioned to believe that liberals or “evil” so they can’t afford to lose which then justifies their vitriol and cheating. Your Utopian forum where everyone plays nice isn’t going to happen until our conservative brethren learn to love us liberals like it says in the Bible “Love thy neighbor as thyself”. Good luck with that one bud.
the entire premise of the letter, as well as prove the usefulness of shills like yourself.
This site has a liberal bias. That said, there are certainly conservative viewpoints here.
If you don’t like this liberal bias, you can leave. Nobody is forcing you to post here, unless you’re a paid McCain staffer, and that would be a considerable surprise to me.
I imagine that you meant to say: “Yet when a conservative like me states my opinion on this forum…”.
Your words represent your opinion – not the absolute truth.
I was wondering how she would know that, “Yet when a conservative like me states the truth on this fourm…”, as I personally don’t recall that ever happening.
The fact that “over 50% of people polled by Rasmussen…” think anything is no measure of truth. It only shows that it has been so drummed into their heads, they believe it. Polls shortly after we invaded Iraq showed that the majority of people believed that Saddam Hussein, not Osama bin Laden had ordered the attacks.
I wrote “ColoradoPols Nation” to represent the gathering place of different ideas and people.
You missed the point I was making of being civil when you accuse me of identifying with everything I abhor on this earth like “Communists, The Third Reich, and Fascism,” you insult me directly and unnecessarily. As I have done in the past, I invite you to find somewhere else to release that kind of bile. I’m trying to promote our differences and hope for a civil place of discourse, where “truth” is a metter of perspective and not the sole possession of one singular ideology.
Lastly, read the first line of the diary again for the explanation of “ColoradoPols Nation.” The professor I adapted the phrase from is a man of great respect and honor.
If you choose to stay, and I hope you do, please refrain from equating my ideology with the Third Reich. Being of German descent, it’s a grave insult.
I was not trying to insulting you. I was being honest that calling yourselves a Nation reminded me of those ideologies and it does scare me.
“between the pitiful spelling and grammar” see I guess for you Elitist Liberals the form is so much more important than the message. It must be so fun to be so smart and make fun of people.
How about all the poor in this country that do not spell and have wonderful grammar…as long as they vote for the Democrats that is just fine. However, let a conservative woman, with a real job, children and a husband, who really does not have the time to care about spelling or grammar enter your palace and you all get mean and angry and call names.
No you all are not interested in other peoples message you are just interested in your message and how wonderful you write.
This Elitist attitude is why your candidate for President will not win this election. You all need to come down to earth and live in the real world.
Aside from “liberal,” doesn’t everything you wrote apply to you as well?
I do not make fun of your spelling and grammar. I read your messages and respond.
I believe the message is more important. You all just love to write to see who can do a better job of zingers and dissertations.
I am no elitist, I live in a real world where working hard is a way of life. An example of Elitist is Obama at Saddleback he gave flowery answers (much like all of you do)that said nothing to people or avoided answering the question. McCain on the other hand was short and to the point with yes and no answers with solid examples.
Elitist liberals live in a world where only they have all the money and they will dole it out as they see fit to the moron little people.
Conservative Republicans on the other hand at least tell people to get out there work hard and everyone has the chance to have the big money.
So no, what I wrote does not apply to me.
Were you outraged to know that two other “conservative” candidates were barred from the Saddleback debate? Bob Barr and Chuck Baldwin were nowhere to be seen.
Where does one even begin?
That’s the why the right fights so hard when we try to create less disparity of wealth.
We’re cool with it:)
Conservatives have just been ignored by the MSM…you all have every right to be upset. Join me in advocating for the Fairness Doctrine. Then, the MSM could not spew its liberal bias.
Of course, that means that right wing radio would have to give up half its public airwaves. But, I am sure you would agree that that would be only fair.
Air America if it is still on the air was the Liberal attempt at the airwaves and was a failure. Why because people chose not to listen.
The people needed and wanted news outlets to report facts without bias. Fox has been the only network that has provided facts. Fox has been fair to Obama and McCain.
Many people do not have cable or dish so they are stuck with ABC, CBS and NBC for national news. If these are your only outlets for election coverage you would believe that Obama is the only candidate.
If you read newspapers you would believe that Obama was already President.
There is no need for the Fairness Doctrine because the people of America see what is happening and are smart enough to deal with the bias. I believe this blatant bias will hurt the Democrats/Liberals now and in the future.
.
Wow, this statement paints all of sjintheknow’s comments with a whole new brush.
You know that the fairness doctrine only applies to airwaves, which are, evidently, government property. Print media (NYTimes, Time, Newsweek, LA Times, etc.) would not be affected, the same for cable, and internet.
The only mediums affected would be network TV (which already pretends to be objective) and radio.
So Dem’s use the fairness doctrine to target radio, the one conservative bastion in the sea of liberal media. I for one see media as a marketplace of ideas, if some is liberal, and some conservative, then fine. People know what they want. Why make the government the arbiter of what is and isn’t biased, ideoligical or partisan?
But, the complaint said MSM without specifying which media, and I was just repeating.
The rightwing always includes Network TV in the rant about “media liberal bias.” I am only pointing out that if the rightwing really believed that, then they would be for the Fairness Doctrine which would provide for balance in the airwaves,( which have been determined by Supreme Court ruling, to be public property.) That would eliminate so-called liberal bias..the right wing wants no part of the Fairness Doctrine. …which gives the lie to their lament about “liberal bias” on Network TV….absent large rightwing “foreign born” control of many media outlets, the right wing would shrivel up and die…
SJ, you do know that Murdock is an Australian and, I believe, that the Washington Times and UPI is owed by the Unification Г‡hurch…the Rev. Moon’s church..out of Korea….
Air America is still on the air….but the range of the station in Denver is not as wide as the powerhouses of KOA and KHOW which are wall-to-wall right wing…selling a product…that product is right wing political opinion…
Traditionally, controlling radio is what revolutionaries always do….once people own a receiver, there is no further cost, unlike cable….and radio is mobile…you don’t have to be stationary to hear it, like you do with a TV or read commentary on computer blog….
Ironically, one of the things which rightwing radio always does….is attack, attack, attack, if anyone mentions the Fairness Doctrine…they use their power to keep their power….and SJ, you are well indoctrinated..
between the pitiful spelling and grammar, and a third-grade grasp of capitalization, I’d said My Pet Goat Boy must be taking some time off from his Georgia rants to post on ColoradoPols.
To the right wing, bias means assembling and considering the facts before declaring an opinion, and truth is whatever reinforces their own biases (that’s the plural of bias, sj, just as media is the plural of medium). And as Rob Corddry so aptly put it, the fact have a well-known liberal )or is that librul) bias these days.
May God have pitty on your soul.
“The Liberal Media”. Do you mean the ClearChannel Empire with O’Reilly, Limbaugh, Boyles, Rosen, Caplis, etc. etc. etc. ad nauseam? Give me a freaking break.
Do you mean the same “Liberal Media” like Fox News that is supporting that discredited piece of trash book you mentioned?
“Third Reich” = Godwin’s Law = you lost this argument before it even got started. You troll.
I don’t know whether you are an idiot. But that post was certainly idiotIC. THAT is a fair and reasonable response.
You are so angry about Fox. Hey, it is the only outlet that reports anything about McCain that is positive. If any of the other media outlets say one word about McCain it is negative.
Clear Channel is not as large as all of the Newspapers and the Big Three TV Channels together.
So my post was not idiotic. Clear Channel is the only outlet that has been fair.
I do not know what a troll is, as you all have pointed out so well I am new at this net posting stuff. I am sure a troll is a not nice name. I am just a conservative woman posting what I believe just as you post what you believe.
You are all so angry.
look at the New York Times best seller list, you will notice a small cross or dagger next to the Obama Nation listing. This symbol indicates bulk sales rather than individuals buying the book. Right wing groups are buying the book in quantity to make it seem that this book is popular
It’s very sad but not suprising that people who disagree with most us call us call us “scary” and other ridiculous names.
Rightwing radio has ruined politcal discourse in this country.
I have had my “fights” with some on here, but appreicate the fact that we can do this and still care enough about our country to be engaged like we are.
I try to be respectful of those who treat me with respect.
There are a couple of hot buttons that set me off and for that I will not offer an apology.
First, don’t tell me I don’t love my country or question my “patriotism”. If I didn’t love my country I wouldn’t be so concerned about it’s direction or be working to impact the direction it is going.
Second, don’t try to trample on my rights as a citizen. If you don’t think that I should be free to enjoy the same rights as every other taxpaying American because I’m gay, then I will not hesitate to show you the same level of disrespect that you are showing me in holding that position and attempting to deny me rights. I don’t argue political positions relative to gay rights in the abstract.
Finally, if you come on here and behave like an idiot, (sjintheknow, this applies to you) you can expect me (and others) to call you on it.
Questioning someone’s patriotism is ridiculous. and unfair. No one’s in any position to judge anyone here.
Also, we pay taxes. That there is admission fee to the political world and all rights and privileges therein, no matter what your orientation is. You have every right to be angry that those rights are being denied. A friend of mine has gone through the same thing. She’s marrying her girlfriend next year.
sjintheknow is like a barking Chihuahua. I don’t expect anyone to stand for some of the insulting posts they drop, and I’m not criticizing anyone for pushing back. I’m only advocating challenging people like that to back up their statements with logic or reason. That will shut them up if they have nothing substantive to say, which classifies sjintheknow.
Keep fighting the good fight.
Many on the left want the U.S. to lose in Iraq, Afghanistan and in the war against Islamic Terrorists.
Some admit it, most don’t. But they show their loyalties over and over again, and their patriotism must be questioned.
While I am not ready to question Obama’s patriotism for putting his election over the welfare of the country and our military, I do question is judgment and integrity. Same goes for a couple of current and recent congressional candidates in this state.
….which people “on the left” have admitted that they want the U.S. to lose in Irag, Afghanistan, and vs.terror? Do give us the names! (and spelling counts)
Take your gd sh..t and go dump it on another blog. How dare you question my patriotism…with that namby bamy crap…straight out of that draft dodging group of radiowhores,.,,,none of whom had the guts to put on the uniform…did you???
If you did, you would have learned all about the miitary code of justice…lawful and unlawful orders…..you would have been able to bring something, besides crap, to the debate over Iraq.
Good and decent Americans can disagree over the preemptive war…..International law and the right wing Vatican guidelines set out principles under which a preemptive strike against another country would be lawful or just…..the preemptive strike against Iraq did not meet that criteria….As the truth unfolded and we learned that even the reasons given for that strike were lies, Americans, patriot Americans know that we must hold our government accountable when mistakes are made…
You side with disloyal Americans who seek to continually divide this country with senseless and unfounded charges against other Americans..
Are you a Moonie? Do you support the diplomatic goals of Saudi Arabia and Iran? Both countries have benefited enormously from the US invasion of Iraq. Do you have stock in Haliburton….which has profited tremendously from the war in Iraq….and has now moved offshore so it doesn’t even have to pay taxes which supports the war and the nobid contracts which make them rich…
I question your patriotism, for the very specifc reasons I have stated Are you even an American?
I say curse, cuss and complain. Good writers get it done even in rough and tumble forums. Insisting on playing “by the rules” and being careful not to offend anyone is the road to bland writing. Poor writers like sj are always whining in an effort to cover up their weak logical and grammatical skills. Regular contributers know who can communicate and who is a joke. To insist that only sissified writing should be allowed is a grave disrespect to the concept of the public square where lunatics and scholars can hold forth to any who will listen.
The argument that anonymity somehow coarsens the dialog is also off the mark. In this day and age when berserk conservatives gun liberals, it becomes a safety issue to protect peoples identities. When Obama wins and Democrats control Congress, you are going to see more killings by frustrated conservatives. Gunning down the state chair in Arkansas is the first fruits of decades of sowing hatred toward liberals by the conservative punditry. I don’t want people like sj knowing everyones identity because you never know when one of these people will snap. Better anonymity than bloodshed.
You do not know me and I resent the fact you state that I might “snap” and hurt someone.
I am a Christian and I would never hurt anyone.
You Liberals are sad people who resort to calling people names and accusing them of acts that would never happen.
Gilpin Guy you need to go to church and look at why you have so much hate that you believe people would kill you or anyone else just because they do not agree with you.
You people are scary.
look in the mirror.
You don’t know me either buddy. I have been a lay leader and lay preacher in my church and have as spiritual an outlook on this experience as you do. Your claim that you are morally superior to this “liberal” is just more bland writing.
Even if you don’t have a hair trigger personality, there are many more bobble headed Limbaugh supporters who are more than willing to step over the line. My point is that conservatives are now desperate people who have been exposed as incompetent and are now on the verge of seeing thirty years of propaganda washed away. I’m predicting more political violence by conservatives against liberals because they have been brainwashed to believe that liberals are the enemy and violence is acceptable. It is not about finding workable solutions to common problems. It is about “winning” and when you have a corrupt product like the conservative brand, you are reduced to cheating or violence.
It wasn’t the conservatives. And except for the anti-abortion nuts and radicals, who aren’t conservatives, lefties are the ones who think violence in Denver and Minneapolis will change American votes in their favor.
Totally delusional folks seem to be on both sides, but to say conservatives want to kill anyone says more about the poster than anything.
Your history is screwed up…again, leaving me to believe that you are not a native American. An independent commission found that the problem in Chicago in 1968 was a police riot.
The only one calling for riots in Denver is that draftdoging, unamerican former dopper Limbaugh.
How dare you excuse people who are coming to Denver to peaceful protest of wanting violence? People like you don’t support the Constitution of the United States. People like you are trying to divide my country.
I’ve met some of the people in groups like unConventional Denver and recreate ’68, and most of them are peaceful. However, there are a lot of folks who consider themselves “anarchists” or something–I honestly don’t even know what they think they are–who just want to throw rocks at the police and generally be violent.
And you’re right, 1968 Grant Park riot was caused by Mayor Daley and the CPD–not the protesters.
My concern is that protestors were labled “leftists” who wanted to create violence by another skeptic, et. al.
That is a wrong characterization. It is self indulgent and destructive of democracy by ignorant unamericans.
Now you are talking about another group…which may well be funded by media types or conservative groups or anyone who wishes to discredit legitimate protestors…who love this deeply and have sacrificed greatly for it…
you youself say you don’t know who they are or what they think. Why in hell would you discuss them in the same sentence as Recreate 68, etc?
Do you really believe what you wrote? There is absolutely no basis in fact for your comment regarding the tragic shooting of the Democratic state chair in Arkansas.
http://coloradopols.com/showCo…
I don’t think people, who would go as far as to shoot someone else, have well thought out, rational political philosophies that guide them. Didn’t an armed Arthur Bremer stalk GOP president Richard Nixon in 1972, before gunning down Democratic presidential candidate George Wallace because he was an easier target?
…a position and maybe get someone of an opposing view to at least consider the view you wish to debate. It is somewhat frustrating to engage in a debate and have the opposing person return with a comment that is either pejorative in its response or totally flippant. The debate ends for me at that point.
This place is a ‘hotbed’ of points of view that really need to be challanged. And I’m more than happy to lend a hand. 🙂
And Dave is not all that civil either.
We van tap your phones at will.
I work for a major telecom company. There is no anonymity. We can track your ip address too.
This is the low leval stuff. The government can trace all your communications w/o a warrant.
If you complain, then GWB can put you in jail with no habeus corpus and no access to legal council.
But what do I know, Im just a sour grapes ingrate according to the people that post on this site.
I’m not afraid to give you my name up front.
If you want to whack me, then get in line.
I’m not afraid to tell the truth.
I’m not afraid to die.
People that think the Government cannot find you because you use an alias on the internet are foolish.
Private contractors can do the same things.
Ask Blackwater…………
But until actual public leaders can show the type of civility you discuss, it seems like there’s little chance that folks around here will.
Since Bush won in 2000, the Dems have done their best to show they could be nastier than Repubs ever were when Clinton was president.
And it’s been no contest. Dems sought to make Washington a battleground under Bush, and they’ve succeeded.
What’s ironic is that now it would be in their best interest to show that they would support Obama’s phony bipartisanship, they just can’t hold their bitter tongues.
You forgot Ralph Nader…so don’t go there with me! You know why these guys were not invited they are not viable.
The above posting was for Skyler in reply to his Saddleback post to me.
and bashed Obama, you would say they are all fair? Hardly… if one were to take all outlets and lay them across a political bias line FAUX would be far right. MSNBC would be far left. with all the others in between CNN would be closest to center but still right. I would say taken as a whole there are enough news outlets to balance the Political scale. However ALL are biased “Liberally” to the conservative, with FAUX the only telling the truth. So Rush Lies too?
I’m not laying down the law or handing out orders. My word carries no more weight than anyone else’s. I’m just making suggestions.
I’m also not criticizing anyone for not posting their real name. As you can see, I don’t either. I was merely pointing out that anonymity comes with a sense of greater freedom that some have misused in the past. I’m not accusing anyone of anything.
There is NOTHING elitist about me. I got through college on loans and work full time. I live in an apartment. I WORK for everything I have. “Elitist” is a guy with 9 houses and a rich wife who never had to worry about healthcare and went to the Naval Academy. Calling me elitist is uninformed at best, and at worst ignorant.
To Arvadonian, BlueCat, Half Glass Full, Sir Robin, DavidThi808, Skyler and many others here, keep fighting the good fight.
To sjintheknow, you whine about “Liberal this” and “Liberal that,” but you still come here and post the same stuff over and over again. Don’t hold back, tell us how you really hate us and we’re out to destroy the country. Your hate speech is not welcome here. And yes, I’m talking directly to you. That “you people” crap is old. And do we really scare you that much? You must have really thin skin. Go listen to Savage, Limbaugh, or Hannity, and don’t forget your bottle of “truth.”
You are a member of the political elite of this country, and this state, because you participate in this blog. That said, you are no more of an economic elite than the rest of the middle class of this country. SJ doesn’t understand that just calling someone an “elitist” doesn’t make them an elitist.
Everything in politics has been boiled down to talking points and buzzwords. This is true on both sides.
Try to ask a politician or pundit anything on policy or why we should vote for their candidate, and you’ll hear the same words. I’ve noticed that Obama will actually expand on those buzzwords. I haven’t seen so much of that from McCain, unless he goes off-script. Then the spin from the back begins, and they reign in his speech with what? Buzzwords and talking points.
I think that is true everywhere, not just in politics. My own opinion is that it’s a symptom of the 24-hours news cycle, and the internet making everything so much smaller. Since we’re used to getting everything on-demand (total buzzword) we apply the same standard of review that the news does–knee-jerk reactions. If we’re wrong we either apologize, or not, and then go about like nothing happened.
One good thing about the internet is that places like this, where thoughtful debate often occurs, are made possible. I’m not anti-technology, but sometimes there’s a tendency to drift away from a three-paragraph way of explaining things, and want to try to use one or two buzzwords instead.
It gave us music videos where it was constant cuts and trained a new generation that every point should take under 2 seconds to make.
Look at movies now vs 30 years ago, they are cut for much shorter shots and much shorter scenes. Casablanca would have an audience leaving the theater part way through because it would be too slow for them.
One of my favorite parts of these threads is reading the incessant whining of the Righties. For a bunch of guys who like to talk tough about their manly man candidates and their up-by-the-bootstraps mentality they sure are quick to whine about how unfair and mean we liberals are.
That is when their not calling us all a bunch of French loving pussies and communists.
🙂
Cartesian, I share the sentiment. I come here read informed discussions from people who know the issues. We know who to read and who not to read from experience.
There are far lefties here that are just as caustic and rude as the righties, but I ignore them since their contributions are negligible.
Thanks for the thoughts and keep up the good fight yourself.
We should all simply ignore SJ. She loves making us go off, and all it does is create animosity.
Despite all of those hard feelings, I think that the bipartisan debates on here, while they can get out of hand, are usually fairly civil, and are much more productive than anything that happens in a legislative body.
That is why I continue reading and posting. People here are educated, know the issues and rarely get involved in the tit for tat that occurs in real world politics (especially at the legislature).
Here’s to many more years of successful debate and high spirited fun on CoPols!
Cartesian Doubt,
Great open letter.
Sometimes it’s frustrating when the discourse goes south and the insults, quips and one liners replace the meat and potatoes. Nonetheless, a post such as yours’ here reminds me that everything at Colopols is opinion.
My opinions are shaped by my upbringing and my life’s experiences, no different than any one else here.
Like you I am a moderate Democrat. I joined the military fresh out of high school. My mom and dad were both retired military, Democrats that had served during the leanest of times from the late ’20’s through the end of the war. They voted for FDR in ’32, ’36, ’40, and “44. Truman in “48, and voted for Ike, as Democrats in “52 and ’56. JFK in ’60. I know this because politics dominated our household when I grew up.
When I was around 7-10 years old I actually got to meet president Eisenhower at Fitzsimmons Army Hospital while he was convalescing from a heart attack he suffered while president. Believe it or not, he was just finishing a round of golf at the post course, and my dad and I literally passed by him. (The old course ran north/south along Peoria Street, inside the post fencing.) My dad approached the president’s group and the Post C.O., a friend of my dad’s, introduced both of us to Ike. These days you wouldn’t get that close.
It was a different time. Politics went to the water’s edge. For the most part people respected one another’s’ political beliefs and didn’t go to the questioning of their “motives” when they disagreed. The U.S. had literally been the catalyst and biggest factor in defeating Nazi Germany, Fascist Italy and the Empire of Japan, and millions of our kids had served, returned, and began the baby boomer generation. Mutual respect ruled the discourse for the most part, although the war on the Korean peninsula, the “tail gunner joe” and “blacklisting” shames were out there. Democrats and Republicans lived across the street from eachother and next to eachother etc. and still were great neighbors to eachother.
We’re all Americans here. We all love our country and our kids. We want the best for our kids and their kids. If our methods of getting there are different, so be it. I don’t suppose the candidates don’t love their country any less.
Cartesian Doubt, thanks for pointing it out. I needed the reminder.
I will say this, though. If there is any one on this site that is just trying to inject malice or sabotage, trolls or shills as their called, shame on you. I love my country.I post here because of my love for the United States of America and because I want my kids and my grandson to have as wonderfull a life, here, in the good old U.S.A., as I’ve had. I hope everybody feels that way.
It is an insightful open letter, Cartesian Doubt. Thank you for taking the time to write it. You expressed a lot of what I think when I read over different people’s posts.
I recognize that this is a largely liberal blog. I find posting here to be more thought provoking for me than participating in conservative blogs. It’s the same reason I listen to Air America, in the car, than the conservative talk shows. I don’t mind listening to (or reading) arguments from open-minded people on the other side.
Personal attacks, name calling, and unnecessary swearing are my only complaints about this blog. I find such behaviors to be the first signs that the blogger has no legitimate argument to offer on the subject at hand.
As far as the need for anonymity here, I have always thought that it was grossly overrated. You can almost count on one hand the number of bloggers here who post under their real name. We seem have to be some “Deep Throat” wannabees, a lot of “I’m too important to let you know who I am” folks, far too many campaign sock puppets, and a few paranoids. Having stated that, I do recognize that some people have a legitimate reason based on the nature of their employment… and I respect that.
I have no problem posting under my own name, as “Letters to the Editor” in newspapers require. I’ve always adhered to Mike Rosen’s political adage of “tell me where where you sit, before you tell me where you stand.” Besides, someone out there might be so impressed with my writing that they will offer me a job! 🙂
I’m glad this forum exists and I’m delighted it seems to be so widely read. I enjoy reading the viewpoints of others and offering up my own. I am well aware that I am not always correct in my positions, but you’ll never see me cussing anyone out, or engaging in name calling.
We’re all Americans here. I presume most, if not all, of us are from Colorado. I don’t believe anyone is advocating a violent overthrow of our government. Regardless of where you may be on the political spectrum, we all can stand to learn something from others who do not share our viewpoints.
Thank you all.
Your responses are sincerely appreciated.
…for taking the great risk of calling for fair debate. Perhaps I’m too rude for words, but the goody-goody character of your post gave me a toothache. BUT, I loved, loved, loved this line of yours:
“I’m a moderate pragmatist Democrat who favors capital punishment and less government intrusion in personal affairs.”
The irony is dee. li. cious. (3 words) I love that you don’t mind the “government intrusion” into the “personal affair” of continuing to live.
“The use of words to convey a meaning that is the opposite of its literal meaning.”
Irony? Where?
What I do with my life, as long as I break no laws and hurt no one, is none of the government’s business.
Jambalaya’s pro-life?
….but sometimes it comes of as pro-life. 🙂
…seems pretty hands-on to me