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
June 05, 2007 03:23 PM UTC

Tuesday Open Thread

  • 63 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“I love democracy. I love the Republic.”

–Chancellor Palpatine, from Star Wars: Attack of the Clones

Tweet
Share

Comments

63 thoughts on “Tuesday Open Thread”

  1. Cal Thomas: A new report by The Heritage Foundation says the American taxpayer pays for tens of billions of dollars in services and other benefits to households of low-skill immigrants, many of them illegal.

    Analysts Robert Rector and Christine Kim write that on average, each of these 4.5 million households receives nearly three dollars in taxpayer-funded services for every dollar it pays in taxes. They say that while low-skill immigrants paid an average $10,573 in taxes in fiscal 2004, they received nearly three times as much – $30,160 per household – in government benefits and services for a “fiscal deficit” of $19,587.

    Actual study: http://www.heritage….

    At this rate, sending ’em all back looks to be a real bargain….

    1. Yes, the always reliable Coors-funded Heritage Foundation is a great source for a Con, but one that is not going to be taken in any way serious by the other 70% of us.

      1. From infidels.org:

        A second form of argumentum ad hominem is to try and persuade someone to accept a statement you make, by referring to that person’s particular circumstances. For example:

          “Therefore it is perfectly acceptable to kill animals for food. I hope you won’t argue otherwise, given that you’re quite happy to wear leather shoes.”

        This is known as circumstantial argumentum ad hominem. The fallacy can also be used as an excuse to reject a particular conclusion. For example:

          “Of course you’d argue that positive discrimination is a bad thing. You’re white.”

        This particular form of Argumentum ad Hominem, when you allege that someone is rationalizing a conclusion for selfish reasons, is also known as “poisoning the well.”

        Nancy Pelosi recently complained about how illegal immigration depresses the wage base, which hits us where it hurts.  Do you accept her views?  Then, there is the issue of water.  Like watering restrictions?  Better get used to it under the new immigration bill; visit the Gold Coast of Australia to see a harbinger of how bad it can and will get.

        I don’t know whose word you’d accept.  How about Lou Dobbs?  Who will you believe … and why?

        Our criticism of the courts is haughtily dismissed as the carping of “disgruntled litigants,” without making any serious pretense of conducting an examination of whether we have a reason to be disgruntled.  If I bought a lemon from General Motors, would you dismiss my gripe as the carping of a “disgruntled consumer?”  And how can we ever trust you, without knowing exactly who you are and whose sacred cow you are wont to defend?

    2. ….that “studies” this issue always comes up with the results that one one would expect for the political base of the organization.  I’m not saying that the HT is right or wrong, although i would suspect more of the former than the latter. 

      Here’s my very simplistic typical example.  In fact, this example, I just realized, just moved in next door: Jose y Josephina Seispack have three kids in public schools, ballpark taxpayer cost $18,000.  If each makes, pull it out of the air, $15,000/yr, there is no way that just the educaitonal burden gets paid for.  If they stay here there whole lives, perhaps but not likely.  If they have more kids, definitely not likely. 

      If they are employed, they probably don’t have health insurance.  Off to the ER or an indigent clinic.  Perhaps SS and other taxes are withheld but they can never claim.  I’ve read that this is estimated to be $7B a year. 

      I hope to meet my neighbors soon, I’ve been out of town.  They seem to be decent folks.

      1. The reality is that if America does not “share the wealth” in some real way, then there is something wrong with us.  This is the wealthiest nation in the world.  Is it really such a burden to open our borders to those willing to work, along with their families?

        1. This isn’t the wealthiest nation in the world, nor is it the freest or the most respectful of individual human rights.  And the cost of open borders is just too high for us to reasonably bear.

          Let’s invade Mexico, and redistribute the wealth there — it is a wealthy country, albeit with a GINI score above 50.  If they could stay home, they would.  If they could go home, they would.

        2. BlueAndOrangeDem, If USA is the world’s “wealthiest” nation then why is it USA is the world’s largest ‘debtor-nation’?

          BlueAndOrangeDem Quote:
          “Is it really such a burden to open our borders to those willing to work, along with their families?” 

          Ok, what about the price on displaced American workers as a result of all this job snatching???  I know, they don’t count.  Not to mention the price for all the hard working drug dealers and other criminals who crossed the boarder running amok.  Oh, did someone mention all the medical / education expenses Americans have to pay for people who broke the law and shouldn’t even be here in the first place?  How about the enviormental impact price by letting everyone from everywhere wonder accross the boarder? 

          Sure, USA can pay for it all.

            1. Referring to my new, all purpose response to any and all of Chorro-Chico’s posts, found, I believe, in the diary by Coloradokid on judicial misconduct.

        3. First, we are not longer the wealthiest nation in the world on a per capita basis.  Many are ahead of us, and perhaps not coincidentally, they have strict immigration laws.

          Labor is a commodity.  The more available, the lower the wages.  One reason, among several, that we had a strong middle class from the 1930’s to the 1970’s is that the immigration act of 1926 put a cork in the number of people coming to American.  We had 4 decades to mop up this surplus labor, creating higher wages for all. 

          Then, in 1965 we undo this and here we are 45 years later with the same problem….too much labor.

          “Open our borders?”  Are you kidding me?  Actions have consequences and consequences from opening a border with a nation that is so economically different would be catastrophic for both us AND Mexico.

          If, perchance, you suffer from urban congestion and all it’s effects, higher costs of housing, etc, the cause is immigration.  About 95% of our population growth since 1973 is immigrant and the next generation fueled.  America was on a ZPG track with native and naturalized citizens.

      2. If their kids stay in Maerica then that education is an investment that will pay off (that’s why we have public education).

        If they return to Mexico then it’s a donation we made in Mexico’s future and again, that will help us long term.

        So I wouldn’t call the education an expense. I’d say it’s an investment that pays back a very good return.

    3. (Much easier to read in the PDF format.)

      Seems pretty reasonable to me.  They use a lot of National Academy of Sciences data, pretty respectable.  They use the group title of “Low skilled immigrants” which includes both most illegals and the many legal immigrants that fit the category.  So, it is not just about illegals. 

      The only good thing that I see in the current immigration package in congress is a return to skills based admission.  We had that from 1926 to 1965 (I think)and as a result, we literally got the rocket scientists.  The Kennedy authored bill of 1965 opened the family floodgates of qualifications by blood, not skills.  A disaster for America that will be spread over several more generations as those folks finally get assimilated.

      I’ll also through into the discussion this little oversight: If everyone who has been here since before 1/1/07 is eligible for the amnesty, what about the 150,000 that came over the border last night and the previous 158 nights?

      1. Most countries insist upon skills-based admission; we should, as well.  Beyond that, we should show the others the door, as it would be cheaper and better in the long run than trying to assimilate them.

        1. They have a budget and enforcement item of something like 2500 families who they will pay to leave…..probably cheaper than finding and deporting.  Something like $4300 for a family, I’m sure some will bite.

    4. with too many counterbalancing effects, to come to any unambiguous and certain economic conclusion concerning illegal immigration. The Heritage Foundation does partisan analyses that come to partisan conclusions, which means that they look at those variables which serve their agenda, and ignore those variables which don’t.

      Some variables not considered:

      1) The United States requires massive immigration of working age adults (or children who will become working age adults) to counterbalance our impending demographic burden of retirees.

      2) There is an absolute demand for low-paying manual labor that is being supplied by illegal immigration, that could not be adequately supplied in its absence (unless, of course, such immigration, or some version of it, were simply legalized).

      3) Immigrant labor contributes massively to low prices for consumer goods, which in turn contributes massively to higher rates of consumption, which in turn fuels the national ecnomic engine.

      4) Many, if not most, illegal immigrants pay income taxes (all, of course, pay sales taxes), some of which go to services and programs that, as things stand, they will never be able to collect on (e.g., social security benefits). Since the actual numbers are impossible to track, even to within a reasonable approximation, the Heritage Foundation’s calculation of the balance sheet is utterly meaningless, and a clear indication of a biased analysis.

      There are also, of course, numerous non-economic factors to consider, such as:

      1) American wealth was built, historically, on the combination of conquest and near-extermination of the indigenous population of the land we now occupy, combined with the importation and exploitation of enslaved inhabitants of another continent. Those are crimes against humanity that cannot be undone: Opening our borders to the impoverished citizens of our southern neighbors, most of whom are descended mostly from the indigenous people of this continent, would be a mere token payment on that moral debt.

      2) The entire southwestern United States was taken in a land-grab from the Mexican nation (Polk having provoked the war for precisely that purpose). Allowing Mexicans to share in the wealth of the nation that deprived them of such a large and lucrative chunk of their former territority in pursuit of that wealth is, let’s say, just the neighborly thing to do.

      3) America is invigorated by infusions of new cultural material: It is good for us as a nation.

      4) We’ve long talked the talk; it’s way past time to walk the walk as well. We should be, and proudly be, the kind of nation we keep telling ourselves and others that we are. No one believes us anymore: We have come to live in our own delusional reality of what America is, while the rest of the world looks on shaking its collective head in disgust and despair. We should either end the delusion and admit that we are simply a powerful nation that is not willing to make any serious investment in the welfare of humanity, but is willing to use military and economic force to pursue our own interests at others’ expense; or we should make the delusion an honest assessment, by acting according to the values we hollowly and self-servingly espouse.

      Whether the current immigration-regime offers us a net-gain or imposes on us a net-loss is impossible to definatively determine. Certainly, a large part of the current flow of illegal immigration contributes to a net-gain, and has, historically, been kept illegal for the dual purpose of providing cheaper labor than our own laws permit, and retaining the right to chase those workers away when they cease to be an asset to us. But, regardless of whether we benefit on the whole, or suffer on the whole, maintaining a liberal immigration policy is simply the right thing to do. If, as has been the case, we lack the political will to legislate such a policy, and are only able to maintain it by loosely enforcing the laws as they exist, then so be it. Social institutions aren’t just about laws: They are far more subtle and complex than that (as anyone who ever gets stuck behind two cars driving just below the speed limit, side-by-side on the interstate, well knows).

      1. 1) The United States requires massive immigration of working age adults (or children who will become working age adults) to counterbalance our impending demographic burden of retirees.

        Fine.  Let’s solve this problem by picking and choosing the ones we want to invite across the border, and require them to learn English (and do those other things necessary to enable them to blend into our culture).

        2) There is an absolute demand for low-paying manual labor that is being supplied by illegal immigration, that could not be adequately supplied in its absence (unless, of course, such immigration, or some version of it, were simply legalized).

        Wal-Mart Nation?!?  Other countries (e.g., New Zealand) get along just fine without it.  Besides, without the artificial depression of wages in America, South and Central American farms might become more competitive, thereby eliminating the need for migration.  Your argument here is elitist.

        3) Immigrant labor contributes massively to low prices for consumer goods, which in turn contributes massively to higher rates of consumption, which in turn fuels the national ecnomic engine.

        But who benefits?  Blue-blooded elitists such as yourself, or the average American?  I have no problem with spending a few extra bucks for a hotel stay, so that those on the bottom of the American ladder can live decent lives.  This doesn’t add appreciably to the net net.

        4) Many, if not most, illegal immigrants pay income taxes (all, of course, pay sales taxes), some of which go to services and programs that, as things stand, they will never be able to collect on (e.g., social security benefits). Since the actual numbers are impossible to track, even to within a reasonable approximation, the Heritage Foundation’s calculation of the balance sheet is utterly meaningless, and a clear indication of a biased analysis.

        While the actual numbers may be impossible to track, they are not impossible to estimate.  The HF seems to be taking their figures from generally reliable sources, and all we are trying to achieve is a materially correct estimate.  I accept the HF figures as materially correct; whether they are off by a few thousand is quite beside the point.

        Non-economic factors: Those are crimes against humanity that cannot be undone: Opening our borders to the impoverished citizens of our southern neighbors, most of whom are descended mostly from the indigenous people of this continent, would be a mere token payment on that moral debt.

        My government owes me a moral debt, and unless and until it pays that, I have no interest in our paying moral debts to others.  Besides, most of those who emigrate here are not from indigenous stock and as such, we can owe them no moral debt.

        2) The entire southwestern United States was taken in a land-grab from the Mexican nation (Polk having provoked the war for precisely that purpose). Allowing Mexicans to share in the wealth of the nation that deprived them of such a large and lucrative chunk of their former territority in pursuit of that wealth is, let’s say, just the neighborly thing to do.

        And your position with respect to the repatriation of the people of Palestine is?  (If you channel Noam Chomsky, you will at least be consistent, but be prepared to advocate the destruction of the state of Israel).

        That having been said, when the Southwest changed hands, the residents didn’t leave — all it meant was that there was a new sovereign.  What obligation do we have to the Mexicans?  Not a large one, to be certain.

        3) America is invigorated by infusions of new cultural material: It is good for us as a nation.

        But is it worth the price of admission?  That is an entirely different equation.  Putting a dollar sign on this “benefit” is problematic, at best.

        4) We’ve long talked the talk; it’s way past time to walk the walk as well. We should be, and proudly be, the kind of nation we keep telling ourselves and others that we are. No one believes us anymore:

        Why should they believe us, and why should we even care what others think of us?  The Bill of Rights has been reduced to toilet paper, and the ‘promise of America’ has died a brutal death.  If we are to be of value to the rest of the world as a moral leader, we have to start by fixing our own problems.

        We saw this game played out in the First Gilded Age, when our elites wanted to flood the market with the world’s poor to put pressure on the wage scale and exacerbate the gulf between rich and poor here in our own country.  Distilled to essentials, that has been the purpose of illegal immigration and the lack of enforcement today: to destroy the American middle class, and create a Norte Mexico.  You can bet your last amero on it. 

        The net cost of the immigration bill will be staggering for the average American, even though the elites will benefit greatly (as does its Mexican counterparts).  And in many respects, this is a fight for the very existence of our nation as a nation.  What you propose cannot be defended, at least as it applies to the interests of Americans as a whole.

    5. just as much as anyone else on the same economic rung as them.

      Sales tax doesn’t care if you’re legal.

      Property tax doesn’t care if you’re legal.

      Gas tax doesn’t care if you’re legal.

      Sin tax doesn’t care if you’re legal.

      And on the flip side, it’s rich, white guys who get 90% of all the no-bid contracts from our gov’t, which equals a helluva lot more than anything else we spend.

      I take it you’ve stopped shopping and using services that employ people you think should be round up and shipped home?

      1. …and that covers a lot. 

        Property taxes via rentals, gasoline taxes, sales taxes, are all included in analysis of immigrant’s cost/burdens. DOH!

        Read the report that rio pointed to, and if you want to make an informed comment, have at it.

        So, if I shop and use services that use illegals, I’m a hypocrite?  No, I have no choice in the matter. 

        As to the rich white guys, why yes, coconuts come from palms.

    6. of the ‘elite will benefit’.  who the hell do you think the Republican party is?  the heritage foudation?  elites.  The uber-wealthy.

      But hey, lick their boots man.  I hope they pay you well for your dance!

  3. TONIGHT: Live Coverage of the GOP Debate At the Denver Post

    I’ll be liveblogging the Republican presidential primary debate over at the Denver Post’s website tonight with some of the newspaper’s regular columnists. We’re going to be covering the debate with a look to Western-specific issues – especially significant considering the electoral significance of this region. Action starts at around 5pm Mountain time (7pm EST, 4pm PST) – check it out at:

    http://blogs.denverp…

    David Sirota

  4. While I was in Florida, a colonoscopy found a malignant tumor in his colon.  A CT scan lat last week found two more on his liver. 

    Surgery can correct all that.  But at age 90 with rapidly escalating Alzheimer’s, do we put him through it?  If he didn’t have the ALZ, I wouldn’t hesitate.  But the worst, of course, is what this is doing to my mother.

    Cosmic hugs to my family would be appreciated.

    -Paul

    2. There were times I was going through my treatment when I so wanted to just give up. And that was just 6 months and I’m only 50.

      But most of the time it was worth it as I wanted to be with my wife and daughters. And I am so glad to be cured now.

      So I have no idea what is best in your case. My condolances.

  5. here is the infamous Star Wars holiday special from the 70s in a five minute abridged format. Warning: This is five minutes of your life you will not get back.

    H/T to Slog

  6. Lopez 53%
    Phillips 47% a closer race than expected and one headed to court

    Nevitt 68%
    Watters 32%
    Labor wins big

    Bailey 60%
    Madison 40%
    All the Gallagher team does is win

    Does anyone else have predictions for tonight’s Council run offs in Denver?

    1. Interesting thing about these races is that Gallagher very publicly endorsed all these candidates early on and actively worked on their behalf.

      The Gallagher team does win and it will pay dividends for him when he has issues before Council.

      I am guessing that the Mayor is not going to like the outcome of these races.  It will be a different council than he has been dealing with in the past.

      1. Although I think corruption on the other side of the aisle seems to bother a partisan the most.  I know I’m guilty of this.

        I do wish Pelosi would have acted more decisively on this.

        1. Kudos, Phoenix.  You were very admirable in your condemnation of Jefferson.  I went back and read yesterday’s post.  Too bad you and the other PR are really the only ones coming correct on this one.

          1. The guy’s a freaking joke and Pelosi should have flushed him early on.  The real disgrace is how the CBC continues to prop Jefferson up.

          2. But, as I note, there are some House members willing to stick their necks out and a decent population in his home district…

            You won’t find any love for him on the lefty blogs, though.  kos has two front-page posts on Jefferson (a “flashback” to Jefferson’s actions during Katrina, and one titled “Why is Jefferson Still In The House?”); there were, I think, two Recommended Diaries on the subject as well as a link from kos’s Midday Open Thread.  TPMMuckraker was all over Jefferson, too (if you count them as “liberal” – they’re pretty good about beating on all sides when there’s a target to be had).

            Sorry for the sarcasm; sometimes I just don’t know where you’re going to come down.

          3. I didn’t see much point in commenting because no one is coming to this guy’s defense. The scandal broke last year and the Dems immediately stripped him of important committee positions and otherwise started to keep him at arm’s length. (I should interject – what else would you like Pelosi to do? She may have more options now that he’s indicted but I don’t think there was anything else they could do up til this point, and they may have to wait until he’s tried and convicted.)

            Also interesting to see PR say that DailyKos had a whole page condemning Jefferson. It’s quite the contrast to some of the ‘pub scandals where the GOP leadership staunchly supported the guilty as hell individuals, and the pundit noise machine went to work defending them.

  8.   Libby was sentenced to two and half year today.  Judge will decide next week whether to allow him to stay out on bond pending his appeal. 
      Paris Hilton is in the slammer (probably fending off amourous glances from the jail matron), Scooter may be heading for the slammer next week, and things are not looking good for Joe Nacchio.
      There is indeed a God, and She all mighty and just!

      1. The GOP-controlled Justice Department accepted a misdemeanor plea leading to a substantial fine and suspension of his security clearance.  Considering he didn’t apparently destroy enough to alter the historical record and that the final destination of those copies (read: his trash can, in pieces) was determined, it’s probably the best resolution they could reach.

        Contrast that with Libby’s actions, which have in effect blocked access to an accurate accounting of history and led to a probable cover-up of a serious crime…

  9. Amy Goodman has a piece in today’s Snooze which is as good an example of any how conservatives control the media.  It centers on General Baptiste being shown the door because he didn’t agree with his corporation’s stance on the war.

    Please note the research done on positions on the build up to the war.

    I found it online: http://www.alternet….

  10. It’s been a roller coaster. My involvement began with my extreme disappointment and anger with the republican controlled guvmint….and I’m not terribly pleased with their replacement…..but it is a hell of an improvement.

    I fear for our country, but am ever optimistic that the goodwill, compassion, generosity and intelligence of the majority of the country…and the world…will respond with the necessary steps to right the good ship Earth.

    Thanks to everyone for tolerating my posts…I know they’ve been angry and not…unfortunately, full of solutions.

    My solutions would include:

    Honest and full education from enlightened and well paid educators

    Economic justice…fair taxation, wages and distribution

    Structural Peace instead of structural war

    Vigorous scientific and passionate love of the planet and all its diversity

    Tolerance and brotherhood……hey, you have to strive for greatness and not be willing to accept smallminded, small hearted bigotry

    True freedom for all. My heart aches for the number of imprisoned in this once great country! I know some readers here understand the implications of the data that we imprison more people on a per capita basis than anyone else. And on that note…..I want

    Honesty

    Sayonara.

    2. Sir Robin – you will never see your solutions come to fruition. Human beings are way too imperfect.

      But to strive for those, that one of the things that makes humanity civilized and humane. TO give up that striving is a terrible thing.

      So keep up the good fight. Because 40 years from now you will be able to look back and say that over 40 years we did come a little closer to your goals. And forward progress adds up over time.

      – dave

    3. Wherever it is that you go, carry those sentiments with you and spread that vision.  The world is full of idealists, some good and some bad; take your most kind idealism and continue to light a flame in others; the world will be enriched thereby.

    5. I admire your passion, no matter how displaced I think it may be. Passion moves you forward and I hope you’re headed that way.

      You’re joining a long list of old timers who left and are leaving some old timers still around.

      Best to you and yours.

    6. Like the others, I’m curious about where you’re going and also agree with Lauren that this marks a downturn with Pols, just like Gecko’s departure.

    7. Sir Robin you will be missed. I havent been able to keep up with the news as much as I used to and I knew I could count on you for much desired info. I didnt often respond, but I always read. Thank you for your contributions. I hope you check in every know and again, let us know whats going on.

      My screen name was bequeathed due to my favorite sign off. So I say: Toodles, my friend, toodles.

    9. Happy trails to you, until we meet again.
      Some trails are happy ones,
      Others are blue.
      It’s the way you ride the trail that counts,
      Here’s a happy one for you.
      ~Dale Evans

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

192 readers online now

Newsletter

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