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 01, 2012 03:43 PM UTC

Wednesday Open Thread

  • 110 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“Let us make a special effort to stop communicating with each other, so we can have some conversation.”

–Mark Twain

Tweet
Share

Comments

110 thoughts on “Wednesday Open Thread”

  3. You can’t make this stuff up. But Rmoney can.

    He’s running an ad that I just heard audio of.  It features a dealer who lost his dealership – and 37 employees – during the reorganizing of GM.  You know, downsizing.

    So, he was against saving GM in total, but he’s against doing just what he did, 37x???, in his Bain days.

    Probably had a SBA loan, too.  

    1. problem is that D supposes Mitt might suffer the impairment but honestly it is Mitt trying to inflict it on the whole electorate.

      Gov Etch-a-Sketch campaign already told us that everything he said & stood for during those clown car primaries is magically gone (yeah, it takes a little violent shaking but its better than a lobotomy).  Once Mitt clinched the candidacy was when we were supposed to start paying attention.

      Now watch here whiles Mitt “World Tour” Willard insults friends and makes enemies … (ugh! that didn’t go well). Next up … um, um … hide tax returns, tease a Veep pick, and don’t make any more pressers ’til Tampa’s August All-white Birther Bonanza & GOPer Gala.  

    1. The polling sample was D36, R27, and I32.

      In 2008 – the biggest landslide in the history of politics (according to Colorado Pols posters circa November, 2008) the turnout was D37, R34, I29.

      In 2010 it was D36, D36, I29.

      Do you really think the Dems and Repubs are going to to all of a sudden reverse their enthusiasm numbers, particular the D’s?

      If you skew the sample enough, you can get any result your (not you, personally, but the media at large’s) heart desires.

      2. though I am enthusiastic about President Obama I still see that there is a real race in CO, mostly because of uninformed voters and lies by Rs and fool teabaggers

      3. I just think that most people have had enough of your so-called “Republican” Party and are identifying with other parties.  I know that I am.

  6. And is favored to win.

    a) He wasn’t born in the USA.

    2) He bat the establishment supported state AG.

    DIck lugar – out.

    Yertl the Turtle – in.

    ANd now Ted Cruz.

    There’s a punchline here somewhere – I got nothing.

    2. ‘Well, I don’t know if it’s true, but someone (who I won’t name) called me and told me that X is a child molester.’

      Not a shock, considering the source.

      2. Then Romney can show he is not a child molester wealthy scion with off-shore accounts stuffed full of cash made from outsourcing American jobs, and who paid zero taxes for a decade.  Easy, isn’t it?

        1. Why should he release more than he’s required to?

          So freaky-deaky lib bloggers can talk about what a bad person he is?

          They’re doing that anyway.

          How about this – Obama releases all school records and Romney will release his tax returns.

          Dod you get on Kerry for not releasing all of his, and his medical records?

          2. From the FEC website:


            Do I need to disclose my personal financial information?

            Yes. Candidates for federal office must file disclosures of their personal finances.

            http://www.fec.gov/ans/answers…

            If you go thru the rest of the site, NOWHERE does it say you have to disclose anything personal, like school records.

            And to prevent you from repeating the dumbass email meme about how Obama’s records are “sealed”, please follow the link:

            http://factcheck.org/2012/07/o…

            Good morning, BTW.  

              1. It’s like his taxes, whatever he did pay.  All by the book, I’m sure….other than those pesky state of residence issues…retroactively…but why would a family paying 30% think that a man who has century’s of said family’s income should pay half that?

                Legal, sure.  Moral, not at all.  Like slavery once upon a time.

                (Surely I can fit Godwin’s law in here somehow…..)

              2. The GOP completely fucked over the president, and that’s why it stinks.

                Now, let’s ask ourselves, Why on earth would we put a guy in charge, when he won’t do anything to build our trust?

              3. …apparently the most-respected Conservative publication’s editorial board feels the same way:

                Release the Returns

                Money Quote:

                The Romney campaign says he has released as many returns as candidate John Kerry did in 2004, and cites Teresa Heinz Kerry’s refusal to release any of her tax returns. Neither is an apt comparison. John Kerry actually released returns from 1999 through 2003, and also released tax returns during his Senate runs. As for Teresa Heinz, Romney isn’t the wealthy spouse of a candidate, but the candidate himself. In 2008, John McCain released two years of returns, but he had been filling out financial disclosure forms for decades as a senator. Romney protests that he is not legally obliged to release any tax returns. Of course not. He is no longer in the realm of the private sector, though, where he can comply with the letter of the law with the Securities and Exchange Commission and leave it at that. Perceptions matter.

                http://www.nationalreview.com/…

                2. Oh noes – there they go giving the guy the best campaign advice he could get for free.

                  I own a dancing horse – but it’s ok because my wife has MS. It’s a therapeutic tax deduction.

                  Yes – we need an elevator in one of hour homes. But it’s ok because the dog once rode on the roof of one of cars.

                  Sure – I’m worth hundreds of millions, but it’s ok because you people have all the information you need.

                  Taxes are for suckers and poor people. Which one are you?

              4. Rmoney has released everything the government requires him to release.  I think the American Public has a more stringent standard.  But, please, continue to insist that he shouldn’t release them.  Tomorrow, I’m going to start the rumor that he has moved all his money off-shore and has nothing left in American Banks.  You people are so stupid it’s not even fun anymore.

              6. Has Romney released his Stanford and Harvard transcripts? Let’s expand that: Has any presidential candidate released their college transcripts?

                I think Romney failed all his classes. How do I know? It’s obvious because he won’t release his transcripts.

                Duh.

                1. Because he was out picking on kids.  Its all in the file.  Why is he hiding them?  

                  He claims he doesn’t speak Frenchkin, or whatever its called.  Show the transcripts?  Did he take Franchish is school?  Why won’t RMoney come clean???  

      3. those who reside along with Romney in the top .001% are paying taxes at such low rates (the year he’s willing to show he paid 13.9% and if not Romney himself, many of his peers have had many 0% years), lower than anything seen since the gilded age before the advent of the world’s broadest most prosperous middle class that became the most powerful economic engine the world had ever seen, it’s very hard to argue that they need to pay less.  How much lower than nothing will it take, after all these years of historically low taxes, to start showering us with well paying  middle class jobs?  

        The second part of GOP economic policy, severe spending cuts to right the economy, is also completely discredited by history.  No economy has ever…ever… cut it’s way out of recession. Rs love to say that it was WWII that rescued our economy, not Roosevelt”s policies.  While those policies were demonstrably working to send us in the right direction it’s true that WWII was the huge shot in the arm that changed everything.  Why? Because it was the mother of all stimulus spending programs.

        And then there’s the third part. The GOP insistence that regulation strangles the economy. The role of abuses in the unregulated financial markets in our economic tailspin shoots that theory down pretty decisively.  

        Every single pillar of GOP economic policy has not only been proven to be total bull but together are clearly and completely responsible for the decline of the the economy and the shrinking and impoverishing of the middle class. For that, Bill Triangulating Clinton must bear a share of the blame even though his two terms were the brightest spot in the decades since Reagan’s election put what Bush senior rightly called voodoo economics into full motion. With Rs, aided by a few cowardly Dems, fighting to keep any changes from going forward at all or, if they must go forward, keeping them too small to do the job, no President could possibly have “fixed” the economy in a matter of a couple of years.  

        So what if Romney never actually paid 0%, although it would hardly be extraordinary if that turned out to be true?  True or not, what we can know for sure is that more GOP policy will make things much, much worse, Except for those in Romney’s class.

         

        1. …the difference between dividend income and salary income?

          Please don’t leave out the part that talks about how dividend income has already been taxed at a much higher rate when the initial investment money was earned the first time.

          Harry Reid is just flat out making things up, otherwise he wouldn’t have been so ‘artful’ in the way he said it.

          BTW – someone called me last week and told me Harry Reid wants to outlaw “Up With People”.  I’m not going to tell you who told me that, and I’m not sure if it’s true, but just think of the implications!

          1. Because those in the top small fraction of the top percent make all or most of their money from dividends, taxed at a much lower rate than income earned via paychecks and because of the cap on social security related taxes the extremely wealthy already have a huge advantage over middle class people in terms of how much of their income they have to pay. In spite of this they whine that their taxes are too high for them to create jobs even if they wind up paying zero in taxes.  This tends to destroy their argument that their taxes are too high and that’s why the job creating class hasn’t been able to create any jobs .  

            The flaw in this argument is that they have been demonstrating for over a decade during which their tax burden has been at historic lows that they are not the job creating class.  Not creating jobs has been the give away.  

            The middle class, when it is prosperous enough to create demand throughout the economy, has always been the job creating class. They are the customers with money who fuel the economy. When they do very well, everyone including the wealthiest do very well. When only the Romney class does well it doesn’t trickle down.  In fact the middle class loses ground, shrinks and more fall into poverty. Fewer can rise.  We are already no longer as, much less more, upwardly mobile than Western European societies.  

            That’s because creating profit is not the same as creating jobs and all the dividend class need are profits.  In fact cutting jobs and outsourcing jobs to lower wage markets is terrific for creating more profit which they have have demonstrated they are fiercely determined to keep in their portfolios, allowing as little as possible to trickle anywhere. At first the lower prices are nice but eventually the lower incomes make even those low prices unaffordable for the masses.

            The result is that we are returning to the kind of society we had before the rise of the middle class in which most are doomed to struggle and remain stuck with little opportunity for improving their lot so a tiny few can live like Kings.

            Sure their is opportunity to get into the top 1% but that still leaves 99%. Arithmetic will prevent 99% of us from squeezing into the top 1% no matter how a hard we work. Which is OK when the 99% can still have decent lives and livings.  Not so much when they are desperately impoverished.  That’s where GOP economic policy is taking us.

            Your welcome.    

          2. Dividend income is not necessarily taxed.

            And so what?  I earn my salary, yet still pay sales taxes.  Double taxation!

            I earn my salary and pay the dry cleaner, who also pays taxes (I assume, anyway).  Double taxation!

            1. Working folks, not such much–remember, we need to ‘broaden’ the tax base…

              ‘Double taxation’ is only a problem when it affects the Vulture Capitalist ‘Private Equity Executive’–who despite signing SEC forms to the contrary was NOT really an executive when all the bad shit happened that he made oodles of cash from and likely squirreled away off-shore in some tax haven, paying some unknown (but likely miniscule if not non-existent) amount in taxes.  

              Because that fine police and fire protection in La Jolla, and those nice bridges Ann likes to drive either of her Escalades over, really needs to be borne by a ‘broader base’ than poor misunderstood and maligned Willard.  

          3. “Please don’t leave out the part that talks about how dividend income has already been taxed at a much higher rate when the initial investment money was earned the first time.”

            Are you talking about capital gains? That only occurs when stock is sold – and therefore not generating dividend for the stockholder because, you know, he or she isn’t holding the stock any longer.

            “Harry Reid is just flat out making things up, otherwise he wouldn’t have been so ‘artful’ in the way he said it.”

            Again… does he have a record of doing this? Or are you getting this from your gut?

        2. That is exactly what they and their masters intend.  Let them eat cake.  They don’t really care about or even want to dirty themselves up with “you people.”  Very telling Mrs. Rmoney.

  8. Enjoy.  From American Spectator.

    (Emphasis mine).

    Looking at the polls in this context, the worry should be clear: despite significantly outspending Romney, Obama has gotten no separation from him. Nor is it just Democratic spending that has assailed Romney. He weathered a long grueling primary, during which he was the constant target of all challengers.

    Over this prolonged pummeling, Romney has not simply endured, he is even with the incumbent. Shouldn’t the incumbent Obama, who faced no primary and was able to save, focus, and control massively more resources, have opened up a lead? Has Obama taken his best shot, while Republicans are still waiting to throw theirs?

    SNIP

    Without his huge cash advantage and with the election just over three months away, there are a diminishing number of potentially positive variables for Obama. The Fed recently downgraded the economy’s projected performance and Congress’ stalemate eliminates the possibility for any great political victories. Abroad too, it is easier to see things getting worse — such as an economic collapse in Europe — than better.

    The realization should be emerging that Obama was not really that strong in 2008, when he massively outspent a disadvantaged opponent. And he is even weaker now — despite an early and significant spending advantage — when he will be unable to financially overwhelm a stronger opponent. The questions Democrats must be asking is: Has Obama already peaked? And can he hold on just long enough?

    1. questions Dems are asking…

      here is one they are…

      but HOW IN THE FUCK CAN ANYONE ACTUALLY JUSTIFY VOTING FOR THIS ASSHOLE? HOW??? Christ on a cracker, it just doesn’t make any goddamn sense.

    2. ….while the base analysis is sound, the “spending” numbers are a great example of selective data. It glosses over the “outside group” spending, and cherry-picks the money data to support his arguments.

      It also ignores the ground game of either candidate. Obama had a cash advantage in ’08 and most of that was building his campaign infrastructure. That’s all still there, and doesn’t need as much to restart and run as it did the first time.

      Still some of the points are fair, but it’s like predicting the winner of the Stanley Cup in August (Kings, BTW.) Name an election where the numbers 100+ days out predicted the actual winner.

      All my Prez has to do is let the RomneyBot keep speaking. One of your former quotes was from Napoleon – it’s all so true right now.

      1. THe only people crying and shrieking about the ‘gaffes’ on this trip are the press, the Palestinians, and people who were already going to vote for Obama.  Really.

        As to your money argument, here’s a good explanation, from the Spectator link above:

        The National Journal’s Hotline publication has been tabulating the race’s television ad buys. According to their latest calculation of 2012 advertising in thirteen swing states (CO, FL, IA, MI, MN, NV, NH, NM, NC, OH, PA, VA, and WI), Obama has outspent Romney almost three to one — $120 million to $43 million thus far. The advantage is not only deep but broad: Obama has outspent Romney in all eleven states where either campaign has spent.

        When adding in spending by outside groups, the Democrats’ superiority seems to vanish. Democrats and their allies have spent $141 million, while Republicans and theirs have spent $203 million — outspending Democrats in all states.

        However the cash’s quality is not equal. Democrats still hold a decided advantage for two reasons. First, Democrats have far greater control over their resources because a far greater proportion is under Obama’s direct control — not outside groups’. Second, under FEC rules, campaigns pay less for advertising airtime — so Obama’s campaign dollars go further than Republican Super PACs’.

        And in terms of gaffes, here’s a great one.  An actual gaffe:


        1. Why those perpetual winners John McCain and the Newt!

          And ‘only the press, Palestinians, and people who were already going to vote for Obama. Really’…plus some of your own.  http://www.globalresearch.ca/i…

          Plus R-Money donors and GOP insiders…

          http://www.businessweek.com/ne…

          While the presumed Republican nominee’s string of gaffes and international mini-incidents may not sway U.S. voters, whose chief concern is the domestic economy, it has reignited some Republicans’ concerns that the troubles Romney encountered abroad are indicative of his campaign’s weaknesses at home.

          And, from the above link, influential GOP-leaning publications…

          “Maintaining the secrecy creates the impression, justly or not, that there is something there to hide,” concluded a July 26 editorial in the New Hampshire Union Leader, a newspaper influential in Republican politics. “No escaping that reality. The impression is there. And it will cost Romney votes he cannot afford to lose.”

          And Team ‘Kiss My Ass’ Romney it would appear…http://www.equities.com/news/top-financial-story?dt=2012-08-01&val=330975&d=1&cat=fin

          WASHINGTON — Republican challenger Mitt Romney huddled with advisers Wednesday after a gaffe-prone overseas trip as the presidential race swung back to more familiar issues, including the struggling U.S. economy and his looming choice of a vice presidential running mate.

          Three months remain before the November election, and the political parties’ nominating conventions are drawing near. President Barack Obama was making his ninth trip to the all-important battleground state of Ohio on Wednesday.

          A new poll of voters there and in two other key states, Florida and Pennsylvania, showed Obama with a clear advantage going into the national conventions. The Quinnipiac University/New York Times/CBS News polls found Obama with a 6-percentage-point lead over Romney in Florida and Ohio. The president was up by 11 percentage points in Pennsylvania.

          And, perhaps, not ONLY the Palestinians…


          How bad was it? Washington Post editorialist Eugene Robinson called the voyage the “Romney Tour ’12 – Gaffepalooza.” French newsweekly Le Nouvel Observateur described it as having lurched “from failures to polemics.” Outraged over his second-guessing of London’s Olympic preparations, U.K. tabloid the Sun dubbed Romney “Mitt the Twit.” And French daily Le Figaro – a militantly partisan supporter of conservatives no matter where they hail from – on Tuesday ran a blog post with the headline, “Is Mitt Romney a Loser?”

          http://world.time.com/2012/07/…

          Really.

          1. You have to be more specific.  I don’t know who “Rmoney” is.

            Whoever he is, he’s in DEEP TROUBLE!  Noted non-partisan genius Eugene Robinson is really mad at him!

            1. And commie ‘freaky-deaky libs’ like William Kristol, Charles Krauthammer, and Rupert Murdoch.

              “There’s still a lot of disquiet” in the GOP, says a top conservative strategist. “He’s just running a general campaign based on Obama’s poor economy. Let’s face it, Romney is not a strong candidate. He could still win but he needs to do things differently.” Among those second-guessing him have been conservative commentators, including William Kristol and Charles Krauthammer, conservative media owner Rupert Murdoch, and veteran GOP strategists who have been instrumental in past presidential campaigns.

              Presidential historian Robert Dallek summed up one of Romney’s biggest problems. “He comes across as a scold and people don’t like that,” Dallek told me.

              The critique of Romney within the GOP also is based on the concern that he has allowed Obama and the Democrats to define him as an insensitive, aloof millionaire and a predator capitalist who doesn’t represent or understand everyday people.

              http://www.usnews.com/news/blo…

              And…

              As Republican leaders fell in behind Mr. Romney this spring, many members of the party’s foreign policy establishment have been more muted. Reluctance by this group to come forward for Mr. Romney more quickly reflects an unease over some of his positions, including his hard line on Russia and opposition to a new missile treaty.

              http://www.outsidethebeltway.c…

              In spite of your rosy scenario–unless it is just that evil MSM–there seems to, in fact, be some dissatisfaction with your presumtive nominee.

              The story goes on to outline the biggest fears that Republicans have about Romney:

                 He says dumb stuff: Although the Romney campaign has managed to cut down on flubs since the primary race, Republicans are still worried that Romney’s lack of political nuance will turn the candidate into a caricature.

                 He still can’t connect with voters: Some Republicans fear that, no matter how bad the economy gets, Romney will never be more likable than Obama.

                 He can’t broaden the GOP base: Top Republicans are seriously concerned about Romney’s ability to woo women and minority voters, two demographics that will be key to winning the independent vote this fall. On the other end of the political spectrum, Republicans are also concerned that Romney won’t be able to energize conservative voters, especially if the Supreme Court defeats Obamacare.

                 The Mormon ‘problem’: The three Politico writes point out that top Republicans fear that voters are more freaked out about Romney’s faith than is detected in polling.

                 Donald Trump: As evidenced by last week’s birther resurgence, Romney still has trouble controlling a) his surrogates and b) the more extreme fringes of the Republican party – both of whom could cause problems for the candidate down the line.

              http://www.businessinsider.com…

              Here’s some advice that Team RMoney seems intent on ignoring:

              Instead of crying that the Obama campaign has gone negative, why not find compelling answers to refute their claims? Don’t come across as a crybaby. Karma is a bitch. Look what Mitt Romney did to Newt Gingrich during the primaries.

              http://hinterlandgazette.com/2…

              1. The critique of Romney within the GOP also is based on the concern that he has allowed Obama and the Democrats to define him as an insensitive, aloof millionaire and a predator capitalist who doesn’t represent or understand everyday people

                Reality is that Rmoney is all of these things, so Obama didn’t have to do anything.

            3. Really?  Or just trying to change the subject.  I don’t notice any new replies to points made about the economy.

              Bottom line.  If you aren’t in the top 1% and you are voting for any Republican you are voting against your own economic interests.

              If you aren’t in the top .01%, you aren’t getting much bang for the buck n by voting for any Republican.

              In order to really get your money’s worth out of voting R you ought to be in the top .001%.  Otherwise you and your progeny are just next in line to be thrown under the bus by the new oligarchy.  

              1. RMoney is . . . the final version hasn’t yet arrived.  That’s the problem with “evolution,” you can’t ever be sure what you’re gonna find standing on your doorstep.

                Ellbee’s problem is not at all unique.  That’s why he can’t ever talk about his candidate’s record — past performance is no guarantee of future results.  (That, and the small fact that Willard’s past performance is negligible to suckey.)

              2. Again, I don’t live to be obsessed with Pols.  Please don’t take a lack of response to your repeated queries as anything but the fact that I do lots of other things.  

                Like go to funerals.

                Have a good day.

                1. Ellbee, I’ve been on and off Pols all day. As I’m wont to do, I check to see who else is logged on each time. And you’ve been there most every time today.

                  So for someone not “living to be obsessed with Pols,” who does “lots of other things,” you’ve been on a hell of a lot today.

                  You’re under exactly zero obligation to comment when you are – it’s a free country and free website, right? But you’re basically pulling the “I’ve got better things to do than comment on Pols all day.” Even though you apparently have plenty of time to log in and read Pols.

                  So pulling this funeral excuse is total bullshit. No, I’m not saying you have a funeral to attend; no, I’m not saying that posting to Pols is mandatory for anyone logging in (although it’s reasonable to expect of someone who threw down a challenge to participate when it’s been met); and I’m not even saying that you couldn’t be reading for a bit of escape, or coping with the loss of someone from your life.

                  But it is manipulative. You could have mentioned this hours ago, instead of pretending that today was just another day to shoot the shit on Pols. Instead you spring it on bluecat like a gotcha because she’s been pressing the point.

                  That’s fucked.

                  I think you owe her an apology.

                  1. I left my computer on.  In fact, at work and at home.  I didn’t log out of Pols.  I just left to go do something else.  Would it make you feel better if I clocked out next time I plan to be away from or not checking Pols every five minutes?  

                    I wanted her to stop telling me I was avoiding her when I was actually doing something else.  It’s none of her or your business where I am, but it was tiresome of her to keep prodding me as though I was afraid to finish my point when I got back on later in the day.  

                    I just thought I’d tell her why I wasn’t there, but the reason’s not important.  My mistake, but I was a little crabby.  So, yes.  BC – sorry for being crabby to you.

                    Truly, I could have been doing almost anything and it would have been more important than responding to most of the folks here.

                    1. My sincere condolences, especially if it was someone near and dear to you. Feel free to be crabby to me at will, with or without funerals to attend. You know I can take it.

                    2. I don’t put you in the same league of people who don’t deserve any kind of reply, that’s all.  That’s why I said anything.

                      I handled it badly with you.

                    3. Look. You haven’t been CONSISTENTLY logged in. I’ve forgotten to log out before, too, so I know that’s possible.

                      But not today. You’ve been on and off. That takes actually clicking “log in” and “log off.”

                      I already acknowledged what is and isn’t my business. But you’re bringing it up, so you’re making it fair game.

                      What WOULD make me feel better would be if you would just tell the truth and follow through with the discussions you initiate.

                    4. but, Jesus, Ari . . . right or wrong (my bet) . . . these last two comments are just cold.  “Fair game”? — not hardly.   You don’t have a habit of dealing with others with arrogant certainty, ‘sup?

                      There’s nothing to be gained here by goading an answer from someone, whether they want to give it or not — no one’s keeping an official debate score.  Anyway, this isn’t like having a face-to-face where it would be rude to ignore someone speaking to you.

                      If I’m wrong, please forgive me (and feel free to ignore me) — I won’t take it badly.

                    5. I read ellbee’s comment as being fairly cold. I would not have reacted in kind if that wasn’t my honest interpretation, especially since I knew that his account was on and off all day – as I said, I always check to see who’s in the room when I come here, every single time. It’s pretty fascinating at times, especially when someone with an old account and maybe only three comments in 2006 shows up.

                      I’m sorry for his loss. I’m sure he was having a hard day. But unless he leads off with that news somewhere, it’s fair to assume that if he’s here, on and off, he’s up for discussion.

                      Anyway, I do take anything and everything written here to be fair game for discussion, so I hope adding that clears it up. Please let me know if you understood that but still don’t agree with it. I feel strongly about what’s right and wrong, but that is far from being proof that I’m always right about that.

        2. The guy who posted an entire diary about a gaffe suddenly doesn’t care when the shoe’s on the other foot.

          Are you going to talk about the economy, like you challenged us to do? Or are some of us simply not worthy of response now?

        3. The guy who posted an entire diary about a gaffe suddenly doesn’t care when the shoe’s on the other foot.

          Are you going to talk about the economy, like you challenged us to do? Or are some of us simply not worthy of response now?

    5. the pundits timing how many seconds Mittens spends with the deer-in-the-headlamp look during his very first debate with Obama.  You know, Obama the guy with the intellect who can think on his feet vs the guy who can’t remember the name of the oppo leader in the UK Parliament?

      * * *

      Oh, by the way, I see you your Obama gaffe and raise you Mittens insulting the British PM, Netanyhu’s intelligence, the Palestinians, and many, many more such gaffes.

      I know the R base doesn’t care about them nasty Europeans, but you R base-y people keep forgetting you need the indies to win.  Indies can read.

      Great quote from the late and (by me) lamented Gore Vidal:  “Half of the American people have never read a newspaper. Half never voted for President. One hopes it is the same half.”  But I know a lot of non-reading R.  Just sayin’.  

          1. Sorry also to insult and run, but I am about to volunteer in an attempt to unseat Coffman.  Have a lot of work to do at the office first.

            Later, Ellbee, much, much later, hopefully.

  9. Starting 1 Aug, insurance companies can no longer hit you with a co-pay for having those “Lady parts.”

    When eight Obamacare regulations go into effect tomorrow (sic), 47 million women will benefit from the guaranteed coverage of preventive services – including contraception coverage – without co-pays. The new rules will require most insurance plans to begin including the services at no additional cost at the next renewal date that falls on or after August 1, according to a news release from the Department of Health and Human Services.

    http://thinkprogress.org/healt…

    Gigantic-ass graphic on the subject created by the Center for American Progress, and found here:

    http://www.americanprogress.or…

  10. http://thehill.com/blogs/healt…

    House Republicans called the Obama administration’s birth-control mandate “religious bigotry” and compared it to the events of Pearl Harbor and Sept. 11, 2001.

    The heated remarks came at a press conference convened to mark the date the mandate took effect.

    “I know in your mind you can think of the times America was attacked,” said Rep. Mike Kelly (R-Pa.), a freshman.

    “One is December 7 – that is Pearl Harbor Day. Another was September 11 – that was the day of the terrorist attack.

    “I want you to remember August 1, 2012 – the attack on our religious freedom. That is a date that will live in infamy, along with those other dates.”

    Because making sure half the population (and electorate) has access to medical care is like a sneak attack that killed thousands of Americans and launched us into WW2.  Really, just like it.  

  11. Frank Gaffney v Grover Norquist mud wrestling match:

    If Frank Gaffney gets his way, Grover Norquist won’t be at a high-profile conservative gathering known as the Conservative Political Action Conference in October. Not only that, but the anti-tax crusader and his allies will be totally discredited and branded as supporters of the Muslim Brotherhood.

    Gaffney is head of the Center for Security Policy and committed to raising the alarm about what he sees as the growing influence of Islam in American politics. Most recently, his work inspired Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) and four other conservative lawmakers to write to federal agencies and ask them to investigate whether the Muslim Brotherhood is infiltrating the U.S. government. Those accusations were harshly denounced by lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, political pundits and a long list of religious and secular groups.

    But long before he was going after top State Department official Huma Abedin, Gaffney was targeting two men connected with CPAC: Norquist, head of Americans for Tax Reform, and Suhail Khan, a former official in the administration of President George W. Bush. Both are board members of the American Conservative Union, which runs CPAC.

    “Grover Norquist is credentialing the perpetrators of this Muslim Brotherhood influence operation. … We are in a war, and he has been working with the enemy for over a decade,” said Gaffney in a January 2011 WorldNetDaily op-ed.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/…

    Paranoid McCarthy style Muslim Bashers v The King of the Anti-tax, Shrink the Government to Bathtub Drowning Size movement. Don’t know who various Rs and TPers will root for but Ds can always root for mutual destruction.  Or at least mutual profound embarrassment. Who needs Mothra v Godzilla? Just pop some corn, pour some adult beverages and enjoy.

  12. (sorry ellbee….I’ve now got a new retort!)



    Obama Is Leading in Florida, Ohio and Penn.: Poll

    President Barack Obama holds an advantage over Republican Mitt Romney in three swing states critical to the outcome of the presidential election, according to a poll conducted by Quinnipiac University, CBS News and the New York Times.

    The telephone survey of likely voters in Florida, Ohio and Pennsylvania also finds support for the president’s plan to increase income taxes on upper-income Americans.

    The swing-state polling finds Obama supported by at least 50 percent of the voters surveyed in all three states, with the president leading Romney by 51 percent to 45 percent in Florida, 50 percent to 44 percent in Ohio and 53 percent to 42 percent in Pennsylvania.

    According to the polling institute at Quinnipiac in Hamden, Connecticut, since 1960 no one has won election as president without winning at least two of the three states surveyed.

    Support for Obama’s proposal to allow the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts to lapse for households earning more than $250,000 a year ran at 58 percent to 37 percent in Florida, 60 percent to 37 percent in Ohio and 62 percent to 34 percent in Pennsylvania. Romney and the Republicans running the U.S. House want to extend the tax cuts for all taxpayers, and Romney proposes additional cuts in all income tax brackets.

    http://www.businessweek.com/ne…

  13. Or, you know, let’s not.

    Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) filed an amendment to pending cybersecurity legislation that would outlaw some abortions in the District of Columbia.

    The measure matched a bill from Rep. Trent Franks (R-Ariz.) that the House considered Tuesday. Both efforts would ban abortion after 20 weeks of pregnancy in D.C. except when the mother’s life is threatened, and imprison or fine doctors who disobey.

  16. Ok, as someone who’s worked in a news station, there is NO WAY IN HELL this is an accident.

    I don’t care if they use Vizrt, Chryon, Pinnacle or freaking MacPaint, and the producer was asleep at his/her iNews station, this was intentional.


    Notice that the scale of the graph only goes from 34% to 42%, with the true difference being a modest 4.6% tax increase with the expiration taking place. Once again, the mouthpieces at Fox attempt to use the ignorant right-wing sheep to increase revenue for the super-rich.

    http://www.addictinginfo.org/2…  

  17. Mitt Romney’s Plan for a $2,000 Middle Class Tax Hike

    As we reported yesterday, we already know that Mitt Romney has an economic plan to enrich the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. Well, a new non-partisan, independent analysis of Romney’s tax plan released today by the Tax Policy Center shows just how far Romney would go to help the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.

    Here’s the rundown.

    Much Higher Taxes on the Middle Class

    •Romney’s plan raises taxes on the bottom 95 percent of Americans.

    •The average middle class family with children will see a tax increase of more than $2,000.

    •Among everyone making less than $200,000, the tax increase averages out to more than $500 per person.

    Much Lower Taxes on the Wealthiest Americans

    •Romney’s plan includes a large tax cut for the only the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans.

    •A new $247,000 tax cut for the wealthiest 0.1 percent on top of the Bush tax cuts.

    •A new $87,000 tax cut for every millionaire on top of the Bush tax cuts.

    Really? Voting against your best interests, because I doubt right win

  18. Mitt Romney’s Plan for a $2,000 Middle Class Tax Hike

    As we reported yesterday, we already know that Mitt Romney has an economic plan to enrich the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. Well, a new non-partisan, independent analysis of Romney’s tax plan released today by the Tax Policy Center shows just how far Romney would go to help the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.

    Here’s the rundown.

    Much Higher Taxes on the Middle Class

    •Romney’s plan raises taxes on the bottom 95 percent of Americans.

    •The average middle class family with children will see a tax increase of more than $2,000.

    •Among everyone making less than $200,000, the tax increase averages out to more than $500 per person.

    Much Lower Taxes on the Wealthiest Americans

    •Romney’s plan includes a large tax cut for the only the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans.

    •A new $247,000 tax cut for the wealthiest 0.1 percent on top of the Bush tax cuts.

    •A new $87,000 tax cut for every millionaire on top of the Bush tax cuts.

    Really? Voting against your best interests, because I doubt right win

  19. Mitt Romney’s Plan for a $2,000 Middle Class Tax Hike

    As we reported yesterday, we already know that Mitt Romney has an economic plan to enrich the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. Well, a new non-partisan, independent analysis of Romney’s tax plan released today by the Tax Policy Center shows just how far Romney would go to help the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.

    Here’s the rundown.

    Much Higher Taxes on the Middle Class

    •Romney’s plan raises taxes on the bottom 95 percent of Americans.

    •The average middle class family with children will see a tax increase of more than $2,000.

    •Among everyone making less than $200,000, the tax increase averages out to more than $500 per person.

    Much Lower Taxes on the Wealthiest Americans

    •Romney’s plan includes a large tax cut for the only the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans.

    •A new $247,000 tax cut for the wealthiest 0.1 percent on top of the Bush tax cuts.

    •A new $87,000 tax cut for every millionaire on top of the Bush tax cuts.

    Really? Voting against your best interests, because I doubt right win

  20. Mitt Romney’s Plan for a $2,000 Middle Class Tax Hike

    As we reported yesterday, we already know that Mitt Romney has an economic plan to enrich the wealthy at the expense of everyone else. Well, a new non-partisan, independent analysis of Romney’s tax plan released today by the Tax Policy Center shows just how far Romney would go to help the wealthy at the expense of the middle class.

    Here’s the rundown.

    Much Higher Taxes on the Middle Class

    •Romney’s plan raises taxes on the bottom 95 percent of Americans.

    •The average middle class family with children will see a tax increase of more than $2,000.

    •Among everyone making less than $200,000, the tax increase averages out to more than $500 per person.

    Much Lower Taxes on the Wealthiest Americans

    •Romney’s plan includes a large tax cut for the only the wealthiest 5 percent of Americans.

    •A new $247,000 tax cut for the wealthiest 0.1 percent on top of the Bush tax cuts.

    •A new $87,000 tax cut for every millionaire on top of the Bush tax cuts.

    Really? Voting against your best interests, because I doubt right win

    1. brackets where the tax CUTS occur. This plan just moves the dangerous inequality further along, further pressures the middle class, and exacerbates the class warfare we’re seeing in this country.

      h/t ThinkProgress

  21. …because it seems the last few days of postings have been plagued by multiple entries.

    What they hell’s wrong the SGI Octane running the site? Does it need a IRIX update?

  22. My family brought me Chick Fil A chicken – they said they had to wait in line for an hour and a half.  What’s up with that?  I thought there was a boycott.

    1. But the boycott will go on far longer than a one day surge of supporters.

      (I’ve been boycotting Chick-fil-A for decades, so I have nothing to contribute to being a hole in the ordering line…)

      Of course, the other option is that there were a lot of people ordering water….

      2. they dislike teh gays soooo much.

        As you might imagine, the line at the Chick Fil-a in Grand Junction was out the door and the length of the building. There appears to be quite the homophobic crowd in this town.

        1. People like Huckabee make a mockery of the teachings they purport to follow.

          Bringing glory to himself with his public ‘piety.’  It is all quite shameful IMO.

          “Everything they do is done for people to see…

          … The greatest among you will be your servant. For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted.”

        2. Makes sense.  If you are in favor of marriage then you hate gays.  If you eat a chicken sandwich you are a homophobe.

          Very strange customs you practice, they are very foreign to me.  Is that how you Americans do things?

            1. I have a job and I didn’t stand in line at all.  Frankly I wouldn’t have stood in line – but that wasn’t my call.  I frequent Chick-fil-a alot and will continue to do so, maybe more now that I know it pisses you off.

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

56 readers online now

Newsletter

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