President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

50%

50%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

70%

30%

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
February 11, 2010 10:41 PM UTC

Hickenlooper Rips McInnis Lobbying, Tom DeLay Days

  • 50 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

The Grand Junction Sentinel reports:

Addressing the 112th National Western Mining Conference one day after the leading GOP gubernatorial challenger did, Hickenlooper told the 200 miners that he, and not Scott McInnis, has the right experience to lead the state.

The Democratic mayor said his experience as a geologist who was laid off in the 1980s during a bad recession, and building a profitable business afterwards, taught him the lessons any governor should know.

“What really drove me nuts was when government wasted tax money to create needless red tape that really hobbled private businesses,” Hickenlooper said from Washington, D.C., where he has been snowed in for two days.

“Congressman McInnis spent a number of years … in Congress, and since then he’s been a lobbyist for large companies trying to get things from Congress,” he added. “I’m not sure that’s the right experience if you’re really trying to figure out how to make government more efficient and reduce the red tape.”

In McInnis’ address to the conference, he attacked Hickenlooper and other Democrats, saying they were responsible for hurting the oil and gas industry with new regulations…

After which there was some banter about climate change and the Copenhagen climate change conference Hickenlooper attended. Which led to this gem from McInnis spokesman Sean Duffy:

“(McInnis) would be one of the skeptics that the mayor needs to sit down with and convert,” Duffy said. “He, like a lot of Coloradans, have a lot of questions and doesn’t accept what the mayor and a lot of others say about it … particularly when the mayor couldn’t be here because of a 4-foot snowstorm.”

Seriously? The cold day “global warming must be a myth” thing again? Who wants to go first?

Tweet
Share

Comments

50 thoughts on “Hickenlooper Rips McInnis Lobbying, Tom DeLay Days”

  1. ok, no, I really don’t.  Too bad Sean has to say dumb crap that he doesn’t really believe himself just to pander to a blessedly ignorant base that would rather deny a risk than acknowledge it.

    2. Someone should ask Scooter whether he believes in the theory of evoluation.  If he says no, he proves he doesn’t believe in science.  If he says yes, he loses the Tea Party types.

    1. Walter, you have to get your talking points right. It works if, and ONLY if, you begin measuring global temperatures with 1998 (and it works only if you ignore 2005, the warmest year on record! Oh, and don’t pay attention to 2007, in a statistical tie with 1998 for second warmest year. Oh, and damn, every year from 2001-2009 was warmer than 99 of the years in the 20th century, ). And one more thing, you must use the HadCRUT model for your temperature record.

      As you can see (below) if you begin in 1997 (or earlier) the trend is obvious warming. If you go with 11 years (beginning in 1999), the trend is warming also.

      >

      As recently posted on Real Climate. Read the essay at the link if you want an introduction to the differences between the HadCRUT vs. GISS-NASA models. There are sound arguments for using HadCRUT instead of GISS, so if you want to use this British (East Anglia) analysis, you might want to understand what the differences.

        1. If you turn the boxes with the pretty colored lines upside down and repeatedly insist that this is the correct way to present them, you will get paid a hell of a lot more than the folks who made these pretty things with data.

          Just sayin’

        1. and thus I tried to go a bit over the top with my “lecture” on your getting the talking points wrong. Sorry if the tone wasn’t absurd enough. 😉

          BTW, I’m always willing to consider scientific re-evaluations of analytical studies. My brief glance at the site you linked to did not impress me. There’s an awful lot of “arguing” from incredulity instead of thoughtful and quantitative comparisons of techniques. And I don’t recall seeing any acknowledgment of any reviewers with expertise in his little screed.

    1. I’m super happy that Hickenlooper has taken off the gloves and is swinging for the fences. His messaging is right on and if he say’s them enough, Mclobbyist will be in worst shape than Both Ways Bob was in Nov.  

  6. http://andrewsullivan.theatlan…

    Andrew Sullivan links to this helpful bit:

    The problem is that more severe winter weather tends to confirm rather than contradict climate change theory. Warmer overall temperatures produce moisture, which in winter tends to produce snow. Climate scientists have long predicted more turbulent winter weather as a result of climate change. And by the way, last month was the world’s warmest January on record.

    This won’t keep conservatives from taking cheap shots at anyone who wants to deal with climate change, but it’s worth knowing that this particular attack line is particularly cynical and wrong-minded.

    Oh, and Vancouver is hurting…great bits on the Daily Show and Colbert on all that last night.  

  7. http://www.gjsentinel.com/news…


    But the audience was more interested in Hickenlooper’s stance on climate change, particularly after the mayor’s statement at a United Nations conference in Copenhagen last December that he wanted to “sit down with every skeptic (and) walk them through all the evidence.”

    The mayor backed off that statement, saying climate change is like having homeowners’ insurance. A house may never catch fire, but it’s smart to guard against it anyway.

    “I don’t think the scientific community has decided with certainty that this climate change is as catastrophic as so many people think,” he said.

    1. I am totally available to help you with your talking points and messaging on climate and energy, ok?  That last statement was not pretty.  Email me — you’ll find my email when clicking on my name below.  Really, I want to help.  

    2. What Hickenlooper is saying is not contradictory and is close to what the latest reports are saying:

      http://www.dailycamera.com/bou…

      The work of the climate change panel, or IPCC, is often portrayed as one massive tome. But it really is four separate reports on different aspects of global warming, written months apart by distinct groups of scientists.

      No errors have surfaced in the first and most well-known of the reports, which said the physics of a warming atmosphere and rising seas is man-made and incontrovertible. So far, four mistakes have been discovered in the second report, which attempts to translate what global warming might mean to daily lives around the world.

      “A lot of stuff in there was just not very good,” said Kevin Trenberth, head of climate analysis at the National Center for Atmospheric Research in Boulder and a lead author of the first report. “A chronic problem is that on the whole area of impacts, getting into the realm of social science, it is a softer science. The facts are not as good.”

      But your side, Ellie, doesn’t bother with thinking about it, they just look outside and decide if there’s global warming or not. Do you really think that is preferable to a man who is genuinely interested in the issue–enough to go to Copenhagen? Enough to have an open mind?

      #FAIL

      1. but it comes off bad.  He doesn’t need to go all Al Gore on us (and shouldn’t), but the last statement comes off as waffling a bit.  What Hinkenlooper needs to push is the risk and risk management angle.  For whatever moronic reason, R’s just want to deny that there is a risk at all; just pretend it doesn’t exist.  But you don’t need perfect science to understand a risk.  There’s a lot of room for him to play here and I hope he does.  

        1. It’s not the blatant anti-intellectualism that Duffy seems to engage in, but Hick should acknowledge that snow in the northern hemisphere in winter does not refute climate change theory; and that acting with some precaution and using the opportunity to build CO’s economic portfolio around changing needs would be a better route messaging wise.

          I believe, on the other hand, that McInnis would praise flat-earth theory if he thought it would gain him votes.

        2. Hick needs to be careful speaking in complete paragraphs or trying to convey ideas with any subtlety.* Like the “mental recession” Phil Gramm-spun stuff last week, by itself this does sound like Hickenlooper could be going wishy-washy. That’s a skill he’ll pick up quickly, I hope.

          *I’m not saying he needs to dumb down to a Scott McInnis or Jane Norton level, but he does need to pay attention to this.

        3. of this

          For whatever moronic reason, R’s just want to deny that there is a risk at all; just pretend it doesn’t exist.

          is part of an old triad of tactics that seem to have become habitual with right wingers (lefties too , in some cases). It is quite common in oil and gas circles and is mentioned by Andrew Nikiforuk in his prize winning book entitled “Saboteurs: Wiebo Ludwigs’ War with Big Oil.” Deny, deflect, and dismiss are satisfactory responses to almost every situation faced by oil and gas guys, and they use those tactics relentlessly. If you have enough money, it often works.  

  8. I was only pointing out how selective your quotes opposing McInnis and criticizing Sean are on Pols.  

    But a teaspoon of humor from a Facebook friend during the snows of January.

    “Would someone help me shovel this global warming off my driveway?”

    She claimed it was the funniest “You Said It” piece she’d ever read in the Sentinel.

      1. because of statements like this from JB above:

        But your side, Ellie, doesn’t bother with thinking about it, they just look outside and decide if there’s global warming or not. Do you really think that is preferable to a man who is genuinely interested in the issue–enough to go to Copenhagen? Enough to have an open mind?

        I’m not trying be mysterious but Pols participants are generally like the attitude people had toward me when I moved West and before they knew me.  They assumed I was a bigot because of my accent. It took a keen editor/reporter in a weekly to farret out I’d been heavy into the Civil Rights movement.  

        1. but, if you don’t want us to misunderstand you, explain it to us.

          In my years on CO Pols, I’ve learned that when people are condescending to you it’s generally because either (a) you’ve earned it, or (b) they misunderstood you.

          When it’s because of (b), a clarification or explanation on your part will often earn an apology and respect. (I’m saying this from experience – I’ve been on both ends of these sorts of interactions). I’m prepared to acknowledge (b) on your part even now.

            1. then don’t take it personal.

              What I don’t get is why pols is suppose to be some standard of proper decorum with no warts.  People who like to post here post here.  People who want to be outraged by the people who post here will be outraged.  If you can’t take an elbow in the midsection then don’t go into the paint.  If you want to stick around and make some points then ignore the sloppy stuff and enjoy the gems.

            1. Humans make generalizations. It’s one thing that makes us such successful animals.

              Challenge our stereotypes if you’d like. Or continue to whine about how we just don’t understand you. It’s your choice.

            4. Have a little love, Ellie.  After all, we blitzed, stunted and even did some Bill Belichick signal stealing to help you put Penry on the disabled list.

              “The U.S. economy will bottom in the next two years. It will need 15 to 17 years to recover fully, if past recessions and depressions can be used as guides.”  -Scott McInnis

              “Three or four years from now, we’re not going to have a conversation about jobs and all of that kind of stuff.”  -Scott McInnis

        3. Like Bigfoot it has been a myth for most of us for most our blogging experiences.  We’re used to Tea Party riff-raff who come in just before an election and spew utter nonsense for about three weeks.  They try to hijack treads with irrelevant points and generally work to destroy this little back water community.  Laughing Boy was a big break for us because he actually made sense on subjects even though his conclusions were invariably the wrong ones.

          If you really are capable of putting predicates in the right place then we generally recognize talent and read your posts.  You can’t just walk in and play the selective outrage card and not get a BS flag called on you.  Show some chops with your writing like your clip and you’ll get some thoughtful replies.

          1. If you knew her in Real Life, you’d love her to death.  I do.

            Politics aren’t everything.  I respect anyone I can argue with and still stay friends.  Ellie is one of those people, and much easier to stay friends with than you think.

            She’s paid her dues.  That’s all I’m going to say about her.

            1. but I respect her a great deal. I find what you wrote about her to be believable because she really refrains (unlike most of us) from taking cheap shots at folks and I like what she adds to the conversation. Who says we have to agree with somebody to be friends, you know?

    3. Reminds me of Douglas Adams’ explanation of why he stopped doing comedy.

      http://www.charlesarthur.com/b…

      There’s always a moment when you start to fall out of love, whether it’s with a person or an idea or a cause, even if it’s one you only narrate to yourself years after the event: a tiny thing, a wrong word, a false note, which means that things can never be quite the same again. For me it was hearing a stand-up comedian make the following observation. “These scientists eh? They’re so stupid! You know those black box flight recorders they put on aeroplanes? And you know they’re meant to be indestructible? It’s always the thing that doesn’t get smashed? So why don’t they make the planes out of the same stuff?” The audience roared with laughter at how stupid scientists were, how they couldn’t think their way out of a paper bag, but I sat feeling uncomfortable. Was I just being pedantic to feel that the joke didn’t really work because flight recorders are made out titanium and that if you made planes out of titanium rather than aluminium they’d be far too heavy to get off the ground in the first place?

      I began to pick away at the joke. Supposing Eric Morecambe had said it? Would it be funny then? Well, not quite, because that would have relied on the audience seeing that Eric was being dumb, in other words they would have had to know as a matter of common knowledge about the relative weights of titanium and aluminium. There was no way of deconstructing the joke (if you think this is obsessive behaviour you should try living with it) that didn’t rely on the teller and the audience complacently conspiring together to jeer at someone who knew more than they did. It sent a chill down my spine and still does. I felt betrayed by comedy in the same way that gangsta rap now makes me feel betrayed by rock music. I also began to wonder how many of the jokes I was making were just, well, ignorant.

    1. You forgot to mention that little detail too.

      I thought we were all suppose to applaud those who retooled and started new careers after the corporations outsourced our jobs to China or laid us off so that the CEO could get a bigger yacht.  John was a good geologist and earned his pay scale and his severance so you being all butt hurt about him taking his severance pay reveals more about you than him?

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

133 readers online now

Newsletter

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