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%
May 25, 2007 03:23 PM UTC
34 Comments
The invasion of Iraq can be likened to the criminal invasion of Poland by Nazi Germany. The Poles had not threatened Germany, and Iraq posed no threat to the United States. The criminal invasion of Iraq, resulting in the deaths of over 650,000 innocent Iraq men, women and children has not “gone wrong” it has always BEEN WRONG.
Just listed to “The decider” yesterday. Only on Planet Bush could these two statements be made in practically the same sentence.
“I obviously thought he had weapons, he didn’t have weapons; the world thought he had weapons.”
And then, seconds later:
“As you might remember back then, we tried the diplomatic route: 1441 was a unanimous vote in the Security Council that said disclose, disarm or face serious consequences. So the choice was his to make. And he made — he made a choice that has subsequently left — subsequently caused him to lose his life.”
Saddam did disclose. He said he didn’t have them. The problem was that Bush refused to believe that Saddam didn’t have them.
And, given the fact that he didn’t have the weapons, we can assume it was impossible for him to disarm a second time, so what was Saddam’s choice again?
Crazy…..and horrible. I am disgusted.
I can’t believe that the Democrats did not have a legislative strategy to begin with…what crap….they make Bush look good..this is being played as a victory…..repubs will be back in power in 08….then look out Iran and US Constitution….
The war was immoral to begin with…violated international law…plus…it set the US up for failure and defeat the same way which Afghanstan destroyed the Soviet Union…
Thank god i don’t have a kid in Iraq…just kids of friends..which is tuf enough……the news had the winner of American idol competing with the war in iraq…..
Fly the flags upside down…..
The overwhelming thought I have is that the botched strategy of the Democratic Party will backfire on them in 2008. If Party leaders don’t come up with a realistic, workable strategy in the very near future, they’ll have a huge number of very angry core supporters on their hands who – at best – will not vote to support Dem candidates in 2008. The result? The tyranny of a Republican presidency will continue, with power continuing to be amassed by that office, and individuals will continue to lose their rights and their voice. The only good way to “spin” the current situation positively is to say it presents a great opportunity for an outstanding Dem Presidential candidate to step forward with clarity, direction and a plan for the Iraq quagmire — hello, where are you????
1) Hillary and Obama both voted against it. So our presidential front-runners will be able to campaign successfully in ’08 and get us out in ’09.
2) A lot of Dems voted against it in the house. Not all but a lot.
We are taking our party back from the powers that were running it. It’s a slow process but we’re getting it back.
hanging tough on this and getting another veto wouldn’t have accomplished anything concrete in the near future, wouldn’t have brought a single soldier home, and the power the Dems have in this situation shouldn’t be over-rated.
In the Senate, since Leiberman is as loyal to Bush on the war as any R and Johnson of South Dakota is still not recovered enough to come to DC and vote, we don’t even have a simple majority on the war in an institution that requires 60 votes to force anything through. Dems only real advantage there is heading all the committees and having the power to investigate and subpoena and they are using that power on many fronts. In the House Dems need lots of Rs to pass anything over a veto, so there was never a potential win here, just the opportunity for another statement. There too, the power to investigate and subpoena is their most powerful tool.
What this DOES accomplish, besides passing a long overdue minimum wage hike and getting more funding for victims of Katrina and farmers recovering from disasters among other things, is to block Bush from being able to use the soundbite he’d LOVE to use every time some new piece of bad news comes out of Iraq from today on: “We’re losing ground because the Dems blocked the funds we need.” Never mind it wouldn’t be true. It would be repeated over and over and the main stream media wouldn’t be much help in countering it with facts. They haven’t been much help in separating the facts from the bull from day one.
So, Dems were going to be defeated on this in any case. This way Bush is deprived of a convenient scapegoat, individual Dems, especially those running for the 2008 nomination, can stand against it and nothing is set in stone. At any time, even before September, events could cause more Rs to turn against this war and join Dems in a veto-proof block. Then we’d probably have a constitutional crises as Bush would no doubt keep trying to find other means of continuing the war regardless. He’s not a big fan of the rule of law, the constitution or the rights of the legislative branch.
Nothing Dems could have realistically achieved at this point in time has been sacrificed and Bush doesn’t really have all that much to celebrate here unless Dems let it lead to another one of their famous suicidal circular firing squads.
I think you and Dwyer are overstating the political fallout. According to polls, what most Americans wanted was legislation that continued funding but with benchmarks. That is what they got. What Congress does in September will matter more, politically.
. . . is that military action in Iraq is not likely to accomplish anything between now and September, except produce more deaths. Why is it acceptable to continue on a failing path for 3 or 4 more months, then assess AGAIN where we are? What will the deaths in that time period have accomplished?
I wasn’t defending it as policy, only as politics. I think our military withdrawal from Iraq will, at least in the short to medium term, make a terrible situation considerably worse. Since I think that will prove true whether we leave now or in two years, I would as soon we get the hell out.
Look, IMHO, the gd dems did not have an effective legislative strategy and they should have….this is not politics as usual…they attempted to embarass Bush and he made them look like fools…they needed to have an effective way to be true to their mandate from the 2006 election….and they did not..
Now, the Repubs are playing this as a bush victory…over their stranglehold on public airwaves….which will reinforce their base..who are critical in a close race….meantime, the dems have fractured their base…….
AND, the american people are way out ahead of both parties and see the dems as ineffective and may just sit home in 2008….
Cowardly sobs…
. . . is that, IMO, it’s another example of how the Dems are still allowing the Repubs (under the direction of the Wizard of Karl) to FRAME THE ISSUES. THEY say, “we must fund our troops, you’re evil if you don’t vote to fund our troops,” when the more accurate view is, “our sons/daughters, brothers/sisters are fighting and dying for a regime that thinks it’s okay for their Parliament to take a two-month recess this summer!” AND “adding death upon death does not make the outcome better.”
How about this for the first “benchmark”: we won’t spill any more American blood for your miserable, incompetent, cowardly, Shiite-theocratic-deathsquad-fronting government unless you at least have the decency not to take a summer vacation.
If Cheney can’t even accomplish that, what the F good is he?
He became a new Grandpa this week to Samuel David Cheney! And rumor has it that the baby’s moms want to add some gender symmetry in the child’s life have having two Godfathers to balance w/ the two Moms. The frontrunners for the positions of co-Godfathers are Dubya and Rev. Ted Haggard.
http://www.youtube.c…
This country needs more voices like his….and now.
The Dems should put into legislation EXACTLY what Bush says he wants. Simply stated, the military should be fully funded to only HUNT DOWN AND KILL AL QUIDA IN IRAQ! Bush has stated that is the ONLY national security issue to the US. Let the Iraqi’s figure out how to deal with their civil war. We did this in Afganistan. We ignored their internal political strife and went after Al Quida. We can do it in Iraq as well.
If we don’t do exclusively this, then we have no reason to be there!
and when September comes, they’ll say we’re turning the corner and making progress and al Qaeda is scary and we reset for another 6 months.
Boyles should be looking to his own conservative talk radio host buddy Mike Rosen when he’s looking to lable individuals as “Speech Nazi’s.”
Instead of debating, discussing, trying to understand what Churchill wrote, Neo-Con Mike Rosen simply would fired him for saying it. http://www.rockymoun…
No wonder Amnesty international ranked the US right behind Russia for not allowing it’s citizens the freedom of expression. http://news.amnesty….
From Rosen, Boyles, Hannity, Limbaugh and all the way to the top of the Bush Administration, putting aside their use of political fear, if you don’t agree with them you are to be silenced.
Blue, it seems to me that you are conflating two issues here: what private citizens are doing to suppress speech, and what government officials are doing. AI generally focuses on the latter, which is the more pernicious.
The right to speak freely on issues of the day, free from the fear of government retaliation on account of the content of that speech, is absolutely essential to the continued health of a representative democracy. Indisputably, the fundamental purpose of the First Amendment is “to protect unpopular individuals from retaliation — and their ideas from suppression — at the hand of an intolerant society.” McIntyre v. Ohio Elections Commission, 514 U.S. 334, 337 (1995).
Indirect retaliation is every bit as dangerous as the direct kind. As the Colorado Supreme Court explains:
This is, of course, one of the most problematic aspects of the Gonzales scandal: Whenever a Deputy Attorney General’s career is held hostage to the views he holds, his freedom of speech is seriously impaired. This is proscribed by the Constitution, but as Gitmo has demonstrated, our government often ignores the niceties of the rule of law.
The problem you seem more concerned with is the dearth of civility and rational argument in American public discourse, which has been exacerbated by the success of the Limbaughs and Crossfires. While an ad hominem personal attack is not regarded by those with a semblance of intellect as a logical argument, the politics of personal destruction proliferates because of its effectiveness. Poisoning the well is cheaper — intellectually speaking — than presenting a rational argument, but it is frequently more effective. But while we know that the approach is intellectually bankrupt, it is generally accepted as common currency, even here.
By way of example, those who question the official version of 9/11 are denounced as crazies, and anyone who questions Israel’s right to exist is denounced as “anti-Semitic” (unless that person happens to be Noam Chomsky, wherein he is denounced as a “self-loathing anti-Semite.” It creates no light, but an awful lot of heat. But this kind of dishonest argument will only flourish as long as you tolerate it, not just here but in every corner of the public discourse.
The line blurs on occasion — e.g., the psy-terrorism that the Bush Administration has been committing against us for the past five years — but they are generally two very different issues.
I am rapidly loosing faith in anything that the Democratic congress says they are going to do. Many of my friends and I worked our collective asses off to get votes. And this cave to Bush is disgusting.
The Republican party seems to get things done, however they are not concerned about anything that matters to me. I could care less about the abortion issue, and gay marriage, and I am not a free market capitalist.
The Democratic party says it is concerned with things like the ongoing occupation in Iraq, global warming, the minimum wage etc. But they have done NOTHING about it.
Does it really come down to having to make a choice between a party of rabid radical conservatives who definitely get things done, and a party of idealists who do not have the spine to stick up for what is right?
Is anyone out there listening?
I am an Obama supporter. But I can say this, if he votes for this sorry ass cave of a bill, then I will be an Edwards and Richardson supporter from here on out. I am sick to death of cowardly politicians who treat Bush like he is an Emperor.
The Democratic party needs to get some balls.
First of all the Dem. Congress just raised the minimum wage with last nights vote.
How to you expect this to play out? The Congress is not the Commander in Chief! I’m so sick of people bitchin’ that Congress alone hasn’t gotten ourselves out of Iraq.
#1) They can’t pass an absolute deadline of withdrawl. Dems dont have the votes to override. That’s Government 101.
#2) Democrats in tough districts cannot vote to cut off funding that’s going to protect the lives of our soldiers who are already over there. The GOP would frame every single one of them as unsupportive of not only the war but of our brave soldiers fighting everday. Then those Dems will be voted out of office and we’re back to a GOP Congress who will put NO PRESSURE on Bush. It’s politically impossible.
So, stop your whining. Dems are making progress, and will continue to put pressure on Bush. The longer this goes on, and public opinion tears away at GOP Congressman’s re-election chances, they will jump ship from Bush’s stance on the war. Soon enough, we’ll have enough votes for real benchmarks with real teeth, and then we’ll be set up for a Dem Commander in Chief who will truly get us out of Iraq.
So settle down.
It’s going to be a long summer for George Bush. This is just the beginning — and benchmarks are the first time he has accepted ANY kind of accountability on his leadership.
You gotta be kidding. No Social Security reform, no successful war, no immigration reform, a half-assed prescription drug benefit plan, botched emergency response efforts…
On the other hand, they are extremely efficient at corruption.
that are do nothing-its the whole congress. I swear to God that none of them can walk up stairs and chew gum at the same time. Money governs this country and nothing more. You are worried about the war and I worry about amnesty and neither of us will be happy with the outcomes of each.
Pelosi, Clinton, Obama, and even Perlmutter voted against this appropriation. I’m sick of this rhetoric that the entire Democratic party caved or that Pelosi even pushed this compromise. It’s just not true.
This appropriation funds the war, with benchmarks and strings attached, until the end of summer. And if what the President wants us to believe what he’s saying is true, that’s it’s going to be another god-awful-bloody summer, then this occupation is over sooner than Cheney, Bush, et. al have planned.
Dems have done more oversight, pushed reform, and a new path in Iraq than that Do-Nothing GOP Congress ever tried. If the R’s still held power, their wouldn’t have been debate, amendments or numerous bills going to the President to force his hand in a new direction. They are holding the Bush Administrations feet to the fire.
This is reality, not a instant gratification world where after Nov. the fight is over. You lack of patience is what truly amazes me. I was upset with the bill, and I’m happy many Dems opposed, but this is only round 2. We have a long battle ahead of us, and for you to give up now is incredibly weak. We’ve just begun.
Don’t give up. This is when we have to keep supporting our Dems in power to get it done. While it’s one step in the right direction, we have a long way to go, and Im not going to cave on Perlmutter, Udall, Salazar and the rest. Im going to keep pushing them to do what’s right.
That is why the GOP has been succesful in the past. Their base doesn’t fold after one step-back. So why are you? Im not going to quit. Im going to work harder.
President Bush’s recent disclosure of 2005 al-Qeida plots aimed at Iraq and the U.S. represents yet another transparent manipulation of (un)intelligence information by this Administration designed at shoring up support for the increasingly unpopular War through fear tactics.
Isn’t it just a little bit hypocritical that this Bush-League Administration would have the American people believe that we must face terrorists in the Middle East so that they don’t make it to American shores while simultaneously refusing to secure our own borders. Not only has this Administration put our Country on every terrorist organization’s chart, it has laid out the welcome mat.
And doesn’t it bother anyone that this Bush-Wacking Administration’s hypocritical foreign policy condones civil-rights violations in China, Saudia Arabia, Korea, the Soviet Union, Africa, and the U.S. but would invest $1 trillon to halt civil rights violations in Iraq (and install a government which still tolerates stoning women to death for allowing themselves to be raped.)
This Administration is not about fighting terrorism, eliminating WMD’s, installing democracy in Iraq, or defending the American people. This Administration is about one thing and one thing only, greed. This Administration has perpetuated and proliferated the corporate war-machine-for-profit and the interests of it’s wealthy friends, period. You may recall that President Eisenhower first warned Americans about the corporate war-machine-for-profit, and how it had pervaded every level of government, in 1960 just prior to leaving office. Any do any of you think it is a coincidence that Cheney’s Halliburton relocated their top executives to Dubai shortly after it was learned that they had bilked American taxpayers out of $2 billion.
All of this, however, does not in any way diminish the honor or tremendous sacrifices of our Service Men, Service Women, and their families. If Americans want to truly support our troops, then they must continue to pressure Congress to end our involvement in Iraq regardless of what those two tyrants in the White House want. It’s time to halt the bloodshed for profits agenda of Bush and Cheney and bring our troops home now.
. . . Bush-wacky! He IS wacky and some think he has diagnosably lost his marble(s). But isn’t that one of the most sobering issues – if you were to have a maniac serving as President of the United States, how would Congress stop him?
Is he even TRYING anymore? His latest pathetic efforts to bring the focus back on Bin Laden merited a mention at what, page 9 of the Post?
1.20.09! 1.20.09! 1.20.09!!!
September is shaping up here in US as the next major checkpoint for Gen. Petraeus’ spin (er, report) on Iraq progress and reconsideration of war funding. Late September-October is the date of the major Muslim religious observance of Ramadan (it goes on for a month). The convergence of those events could make for a very dangerous time in Iraq.
According to the senior counterinsurgency advisor to Petraeus: “When there is more force and violence)in Iraq – the worse the campaign is going.”
Democrats need to repeat that statement a million times between now and September. ‘To quote the senior counterinsurgency advisor to Gen. Petraeus, “the more force you have to use, the worse the campaign is going”.
“War is Peace.”
DeGette was in Denver for her daughter’s graduation from George Washington High School. DeGette made clear that she would have voted “no” had she been in Washington and that she would have missed the graduation if her vote had been needed to defeat the measure.
My daughter goes to the same school. The graduation was the day before. There is no reason she should have missed that vote.