Mark Couch Q&A Tomorrow

13 thoughts on “Mark Couch Q&A Tomorrow”

1. A few points on C&D:

   1. Owens is a hypocrite – and has lost his way.

   How he managed to justify making government the answer after years of fighting for taxpayers, we may never know…

   2. Owens is an liar.

   He knows better than most that no government solution is a short term solution. THIS IS A PERMANENT TAX INCREASE – DO NOT FOOL YOURSELF.

   3. Owens is done.

   Once the love of the GOP, Owens’ support of C&D is seen outside of Colorado for what it is – a permanent increase in the size of government and a slap in the face of the people Owens claims to idolize. (No Bill, neither Churchill nor Reagan would have supported this – quit fooling yourself)

   4. Owens is a disappointment.

   There’s no other way to say it: disappointing.

   5. Once C&D die, so will Owens’ career.

   What a failure. Enjoy retirement Bill. No Bush post for failed governors.

   Log in to Reply

2. How nice to know you keep your talking points consistent.  I am not sure how many Republicans would want help from bush or cheney anymore.

   Log in to Reply

3. I’ll be first to admit I don’t know enough about C&D. What I do know is that the Republicans at the Federal level are shrinking the tax base (tax cuts for the richest among us and loopholes for corporate taxpayers) which is shifting the burden locally. We hear the phrase, “Freedom is on the March” from certain “leaders”. What about freedom from hunger? The seniors in this state can’t even sign up for meals on wheels anymore because the money has run out. What about freedom from ignorance? For those who believe that shrinking the government is good for the common cause, look at what this Republican controlled Congress just doled out in PORK and what they cut, i.e., funding to bolster the levies in New Orleans. I’m tired of stupid politicians beholden to special interests. It’s no longer a government by, for and of the people. They’re all bought and sold.

   Log in to Reply

4. Thank you Mr. Bruce for fighting the tough fight to pass TABOR. It’s easy to grow government – and campaign for it. We’ve all heard it: “you hate children”, “you hate sick people”, “you hate teachers”…. blah blah blah.

   It takes a true leader to fight the uphill battle. Thank you Mr. Bruce. Thank you Blair Richardson. Thank you Marc Holtzman. Thank you Jon Caldera and Joe Stengel.

   It’s easier to say “more” than to say “less”. C&D say “more” is the answer. It never is.

   Log in to Reply

5. Thanks Bruce!

   How depraved. More and Less in quotations gives you away. THAT is not the question! I’m not going to give you the answer, because you would SIMPLY and GREEDILY DENT it! You DONT GET IT! Wake Up!

   Log in to Reply

6. *This comment was removed. We are going to start removing long blocks of text that are cut and pasted into the comments section. There’s no reason you can’t just paste links to the pages in question.

   Log in to Reply

7. Sensenbrenner to Katrina Victims: Drop Dead

   House Judiciary Committee Chairman F. James Sensenbrenner was one of just eleven heartless House Republicans to vote against last week’s $50 billion emergency aid package for Katrina relief. Today, he proves that the “F.” really does stand for “Fuckstick”:

   The chairman of the U.S. House Judiciary Committee said on Tuesday he had no intention of reopening a sweeping bankruptcy law passed by Congress earlier this year, despite proposals to exempt Hurricane Katrina victims from some of its provisions.

   The new, more stringent bankruptcy law will not harm people left “down and out” by the storm, Wisconsin Republican Rep. James Sensenbrenner said.

   He said he would not hold a hearing in his committee on a bill by the panel’s ranking Democrat, Michigan Rep. John Conyers, and 31 other Democrats who want to exempt Hurricane Katrina victims from parts of the new bankruptcy law. A chairman’s decision not to hold a hearing usually prevents a House bill from advancing.

   Obviously, Katrina victims need to take personal responsibility for the fact that they chose to live in areas which might get flattened by a hurricane. (This is actually a genuine wingnut talking point, if you can bear to believe it.)

   Meanwhile, though, big companies – particularly the airlines – are using the corporate bankruptcy code (which wasn’t amended unfavorably, unlike the consumer provisions) to dump their responsibilities without consequences. Of course, some of their biggest obligations include pension funds, which creates an especially perverse situation: When a big company files for bankruptcy and defaults on its pension funds, it makes it more likely that its employees will in turn one day have to file for bankruptcy. And at that point, of course, they (the employees) are hosed.

   Log in to Reply

8. Responders:

   Be specific; and in great detail justify your resonse.

   I am not looking for crap.

   Log in to Reply

9. I think this the thread where we’re invited to ask the Denver Post’s Mark Couch some questions about his series on C&D. I have some questions ( please pardon the tone and some repetition, which may reflect some irritation on my part):

   1. Did you have a written assignment for the series, and if so would share it with us? Otherwise, what was the plan, and how closely did the final articles follow the plan?

   2. Why do Denver Post reporters feel compelled to find uninformed man on the street sources to make your points for you? Do you consider the use such anecdotal evidence ethical and professional journalism?  Do you call this “Gregg Moore Style,” or what?

   3. Was it impossible to find man on the street sources who were happy with the tax relieve that TABOR has provided during the last 13 years, or were they just to boring to quote?

   4. Why was there so much irrelvant history in your series. Were you trying to discourage readership? Did you succeed?

   5. I couldn’t find the series on your Web site this evening, after I told Chis Frates I’d read it and evaluate it. I had to come to Coloradopols.com and find the links. Are your editors ashamed of the series, or what?

   6. I couldn’t find the text of either TABOR nor of C and D in your series. Is there a problem with letting readers see this information, or what? Or was this in the print edition?

   7. Why didn’t you investigate the “nonpartisan state staffers” who came up with the misleading estimate of the tax increase that C & D would cost taxpayers. Are any state employees, civil servants whose pay depends on C&D, “nonpartisan” when it comes to a tax increase that wouldn’t cost them much, personally?

   8. Why didn’t you investigate why supporters of C&D are supporting the referenda? How many of the chambers of commerces’ members stand to benefit in the form of state contracts?

   9. You uncritically report that an evaluation of the surface condition of roads and city streets has deteriorated in Colorado over the last few years, according to some obscure agency. Have you driven those streets and roads? Have you driven in Oregon, New Mexico and Illinois where the roads are in worse shape?  Have you asked who financed the surveys you quoted and looked at the financial incentives of those involved in doing those surveys? I’ve driven a lot of Colorado roads this summer, and they feel and look good to me, but then, I’m not an expert on roads.

   10. Why did you lead one part of your series with a sob story about a killed prison guard? Why not lead the series with the story of an employed person who has a job because our taxes are among the lowest in the country. Why did you quote some supporter of C&D who compared Colorado with Mississippi and other poor states and not quote a supporter who might compare the state overall budget conditions with those of California or Illinois. Too inconvenient, or what?

   11. Following up on 10, why did you develop a whole story to people who feel they’ve been hurt by TABOR and not do the same for those of us whe feel that TABOR makes Colorado one of the better states for employers?

   12. Why did you (the Post) quote Benson and the president of CSU on how the failure of C&D would hurt their institutions, and not find someone who would explain how they would make those schools thrive without C&D? Are our academic leaders so strategically short sighted, or what?

   13. Followup on 12, why didn’t you find sources who challenged all the claims of pending doom that are coming out of the mouths of our integrity-challenged academic leaders?

   14. Which editors assigned, rewrote and edited your series? Did they rewrite and edit your pieces, or did they just hook the graphs and cut or pad to fit the available space?

   Oh, well, nice try.

   Log in to Reply

10. APPARENTLY “LOYALTY” TRUMPS LEADERSHIP FOR RICK O’DONNELL

    Official gets called out on Ref C
    By Lynn Bartels, Rocky Mountain News
    September 15, 2005

    Democrats on Wednesday called on the GOP director of Colorado’s colleges to stump for a tax measure they say is crucial for the future of higher education.

    In addition, the student Democratic group at Colorado State University questioned whether Rick O’Donnell, head of the Department of Higher Education, really supports Referendum C.

    Advertisement

    O’Donnell said Wednesday he publicly backs the measure out of loyalty to his boss, Gov. Bill Owens.

    “Of course I’m not going to take a position different from the governor,” O’Donnell said. “I’m in the Cabinet, for crying out loud.”

    “When I’m asked about Ref C I say, ‘Here’s the position of the administration.’ “

    But O’Donnell said he has not been stumping for Ref C because under state law he would have to take vacation to do so.

    He said he is using his vacation instead to campaign for Congress in the 7th Congressional District. So far, he is the lone Republican candidate in next year’s race.

    “Look, I’m running for federal office,” O’Donnell said. “Ask my position on any federal issue and I’ll tell you.”

    That drew a blistering response from former state Sen. Ed Perlmutter, a Democrat also running in the 7th.

    “If he’s not out there stumping for this, he shouldn’t be the commissioner on higher education, that’s for sure,” Perlmutter said.

    “It’s irresponsible, given the cuts that higher education has taken and that it will take.”

    The governor helped craft Referendum C, saying it is necessary to help the state recover from a recession that resulted in $1 billion in budget cuts, including $200 million from higher education. More cuts are planned if the measure fails.

    O’Donnell was out of state Wednesday when asked where he stood on the measure.

    He issued a statement thanking Owens for allowing him to serve, first as the governor’s policy director and now as his director of the Department of Higher Education.

    “The least I can do in return for the responsibility he’s given me is offer the governor my loyalty,” O’Donnell wrote.

    “That means that on the issue of (Ref C), loyalty to my boss demands that I publicly adopt his position on this issue, regardless of what I may personally believe.”

    Later, O’Donnell said he did not mean to imply he would be voting against Ref C.

    Log in to Reply

11. Thanks Bruce:

    Is it really easier to say “more” than to say “less”?  We all see what is happening to Owens.  He seems to have been the one to make the tough political decision.  Many of today’s conservatives differ in one crucial aspect from yesterday’s conservatives: the latter believed in small government, but believed, too, that we ought to pay for all the government that we need.  I believe Owens came to this conclusion, and decided he did not want to preside over a fiscal crisis.  I give him the credit for making a very difficult decision, an deciding to fight a self-defeating ideology.

    Log in to Reply

12. penis enlargement

    In fact http://atlas.walagata.com/w/penisenlargment‘ rel=”nofollow”>penis enlargement pair!

    Log in to Reply

13. free ringtones

    free ringtones is a niceblogers.

    Log in to Reply