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
September 01, 2010 02:22 AM UTC

Don Beezley Doesn't Believe in Public Roads (and Other Bizarre Facts)

  • 32 Comments
  • by: Broomfield County Democrats

(If he loses he might find a position in Maes’ cabinet.   – promoted by ClubTwitty)

Before Don Beezley was the Republican nominee in House District 33, he told the unvarnished truth about his vision for Colorado, and his vision is, in a word, bizarre.

The Broomfield County Democrats launched a website today (www.BizarreBeezley.com), dedicated to educating voters about the real Don Beezley.  We could say more, but we’ll let Mr. Beezley speak for himself.  Each of the following are direct quotes, fully sourced at www.BizarreBeezley.com:

I don’t believe in municipal or county government. It strikes me as 100% superfluos [sic] in all its functions. Police and courts can be handled at the state level, supplemeted [sic] with private solutions. Nothing else the cities or counties do is valid except for recording property titles. If someone (non-libertarian) wants to argue about streets, the state level could handle that too.

That’s right friends, Mr. Beezley does not believe the government should provide roads.  Mr. Beezley also has thoughts on Coloradans with disabilities:

I used to own small restauarants [sic] shortly after ADA was passed. When building out a new one, the existing bathrooms were off in dimensions by a few inches. Rather than risking a lawsuit under the newly energized ADA, I spent $5,000 to redo the bathrooms (on a small budget with no money).  Prior to that, it had been a pleasure to help a disabled person out with a tray, a door or whatever. After that, I could only think, “you better use my d*** bathroom!” when someone rolled in. ADA took other human beings from being someone with a challenge whom it might be a joy to help, and turned them into a burden. An enemy. [our emphasis]

And this is just the beginning.

Mr. Beezley’s musings on crime include the belief that all drugs should be legalized…as well as prostitution.

Stop manufacturing violent criminals with unjust laws against actions that may be morally questionable but are no one’s business (drugs, prostitution, etc.).

How should governments respond when their citizens’ are killed and injured by natural disasters?  Mr. Beezley says by doing nothing at all.  But you ask, what should the survivors of Hurricane Katrina, huddled in the Superdome, have done for food?  Mr. Beezley has an answer for that too:

I suspect if Dominos had gotten a call, they might have found a way to get it there!

There is much more where that came from at www.BizarreBeezley.com.  Now there’s nothing that says Mr. Beezley cannot be an extreme libertarian.  He’s an American, and he’s free to believe that all cities and counties should be abolished, that Coloradans with disabilities should be stripped of their rights, and that when tornadoes rip through Colorado, the government should turn a deaf ear.  

What would be wrong, would be running for election and misleading voters about his views on how our society should be in Colorado.  Mr. Beezley has no right to conceal the type of legislator he will be simply because he knows it will be wildly unpopular. We sincerely hope that he does not.

Which of Don Beezley's views is the most bizarre?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Tweet
Share

Comments

32 thoughts on “Don Beezley Doesn’t Believe in Public Roads (and Other Bizarre Facts)”

  3. I think an argument could be made that there is duplication of functions vis-a-vis municipal governments.

    To save money, I think it might be worthwhile to see where such overlap is happening and then try to eliminate it by consolidating the service in question either at the city/town level or the county level.

    There could also be savings to be had from consolidating counties themselves. Does Colorado really need to have more than 60 counties? There are other western states that have less than twenty of them.

      1. but that doesn’t mean that more money couldn’t be saved by ending the duplication of services between county and municipal governments and, possibly, combining some rural counties and, thus, ending up with fewer counties and fewer county agencies.

    2. For instance, Parks & Rec, Fire, 911, Roads, Drainage are all done by the county within the city.  The city police use the Sheriff’s jail.

      It was a financial decision and I’ve not heard of anyone complaining.  

  5. What you assert, pretty much along the lines of the dumbass ‘Somalia’ straw man the lefties just think is so clever:

    That’s right friends, Mr. Beezley does not believe the government should provide roads.

    And here’s what he said:

    If someone (non-libertarian) wants to argue about streets, the state level could handle that too.

    He believes the State government should provide roads.

    Accuracy is important when you’re looking to assassinate someone’s character, right?

    1. It seems like when he says “If someone (non-libertarian) wants to argue about streets” he’s saying that a libertarian would not want to argue about streets, for they would know such things would fall within the “superfluous” functions that cities and counties are currently providing.  

      He definitely did not say he thought states should be providing roads.  He said, if anyone is going to provide roads, the state should, but implies you’d have to be a non-libertarian to believe that.

      Mr. Beezley can certainly clarify what he meant if he would like.  So far, in another space, he has stated he does not remember.

        1. It seems like if he thought that streets were a “valid” purpose “Police, courts and streets can be handled at the state level. Nothing else the cities and counties do is valid.” But only one person can answer for sure.  

            1. I thought the diary was interesting, but I would have chosen a different title myself.

              Your a class act, LB.  Some of the other conservative posters here might learn a thing or two.  (As might I).

      1. that government is best that is closest to the people

        man.

          That used to be a conservative tenet.  I don’t believe in letting counties have their own navies, of course, but local roads are much better (and more cheaply) maintained by counties that by a single state bureaucracy.

        That’s why the highway users tax fund includes a share for county and city roads.

        1. We like county and state roads.

          But generally I think that roads within municipalities should be maintained by the municipality, within counties (outside municipalities) by the county, and intercounty (or several counties) by the state, etc.  

          I think in some situations it makes sense to combine county/municipal governments, but not necessarily in rural areas.

          I also think that in managing resources that impact people outside a particular jurisdiction need to be managed in a broader sense–water, air, wildlife are the ones most affecting my ‘jurisdiction’ (i.e. work)–but also, for instance, I love federal public lands, even those in Moffat County, and I don’t think T Wright and Comstock should have fiat over how they are managed.  

  7. Up until, and including, World War I, the loser of a war paid reparations. That is the way it was.

    (This has not been true since then, for the most part. The Russians did “liberate” a lot of factories and move them to Russia. But, WW2 losers did not pay reparations.)

    If the USA had not entered the war in Europe, then a stalemate would have probably been the result. Neither side would have paid reparations. Our entry enabled the English and French to “win” and make the Germans “pay”. These onerous reparations were a contributing factor in the post-war conditions in Germany and helped lead to the rise of extremism. It was nip and tuck between the Communists and Nazis for awhile, but eventually, the National Socialists prevailed.

    So, if Woodrow Wilson had “kept us out of war”, then Hitler might not have come to power.

      1. Actually, yes he is.  You’d be surprised how level headed and consistent the man is on his viewpoints.

        You’d probably disagree with him on how to move forward, but he never felt the initial actions in Iraq were justified.

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

168 readers online now

Newsletter

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