U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

(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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
May 15, 2008 03:13 PM UTC

Thursday Open Thread

  • 52 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“If you don’t say anything, you won’t be called on to repeat it.”

–Calvin Coolidge  

Comments

52 thoughts on “Thursday Open Thread

  1. “Mr. Coolidge, I’ve made a bet against a fellow who said it was impossible to get more than two words out of you.”

       ~ Dorothy Parker

    “Fuck you.”

       ~ Calvin Coolidge  

        1. says the lady had bet she could make him say at least three words, the “You Lose” is far funnier.  Presidents had a bit more wit and a bit less frat boy in those days.

  2. “Some seem to believe we should negotiate with the terrorists and radicals, as if some ingenious argument will persuade them they have been wrong all along,” Bush told the Israeli lawmakers. “We have heard this foolish delusion before. As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: ‘Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is — the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/

    Getting a lot of press this morning, viewed as a veiled comment about Democrats, particularly Obama.

    The Prez loves to try to put things in the context of history.  In the context of history, a few years from now, many will say he should have been impeached.

    1. s Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared: ‘Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.’

      I’ve read a lot of history but never encountered this anecdote. It could be true – Lord knows the Senate has seen a lot of buffoons in its ranks – but does anyone know if it is?

      (My query is beside the point – Bush is clearly trying to slime Obama with this irrelevant story. After all it was Britain and France who appeased Hitler, not the USA or any of our Senators.)

      1. trying to paint Obama as an isolationist or appeaser is actually a pretty good idea.  he doesnt have a long foreign policy background so repubs would be smart to define him in their own words before he defines himself…

        just a thought…

        1. Is the same old tired Rethug playbook.

          Obama hits back

          “It is sad that President Bush would use a speech to the Knesset on the 60th anniversary of Israel’s independence to launch a false political attack,” Obama said in the statement his aides distributed. “George Bush knows that I have never supported engagement with terrorists, and the president’s extraordinary politicization of foreign policy and the politics of fear do nothing to secure the American people or our stalwart ally Israel.”

          Bush and McCain are worse than appeasers, they’re war profiteers and war mongers.

          1. 1. association with the Eugenics movement

            2. Directorship of the Hamburg-American line which was investigated for being a front for Nazi activities including the  1933 coop attempt against FDR

            3. the violation of the 1941 “trading with the enemy act” by continuing to do business with Germany after we we at war with them.

            4. the joint ventures with Thyssen in the 30’s that used jewish slave labor.

            Bush didn’t just invoke Godwin’s law–he reminded us of his own family history.

  3. From The New York Times

    Imagine, reporters protecting a candidate from himself! But, then again, since the reporters on the bus liked Mr. McCain too much to report on his gaffes, he really didn’t need protection. His candor was without consequence. It was another blandishment to the press.

    Yet however much his accessibility, amiability and candor may have defined the news media’s love affair with him in 2000, and however much they continue to operate that way in 2008, there is also something different and more complicated at work now. Joan Didion once described a presidential campaign as a closed system staged by the candidates for the news media – one in which the media judged a candidate essentially by how well he or she manipulated them, and one in which the electorate were bystanders.

    By this standard, Mr. McCain’s joviality and seeming honesty with the press in 2000 constituted a very effective scheme indeed, until it came time to woo actual Republican voters. As Time’s Jay Carney once put it, “You get the sense you’re being manipulated by candor, rather than manipulated by subterfuge and deception, but it is a strategy.”

    Who would have guessed.

  4.    The California Supreme Court struck down that state’s ban on same sex marriages this morning, making California the second state after Mass. to legalize gay marriage.

      Two down, 48 to go…..

    1. It isn’t October.  I’m glad this decision came down this month so there is a good stretch for it to stop being front page news.  Nothing turns out Republicans like hating the gays.  

      1. “I’m aout to lose my house and we are stuck in Iraq, but what get me riled up is those dern homersexuals”

        I’ve never understood it.

        1. Being cynical about bread and butter promises might be part of the answer. It is not that they are not upset about their house, but they think Democrats cannot actually do anything about the houses or if they do it will come out worse in the end like insurance. So they vote on what they think can be delivered.

  5. Right-wing stalwart Face the State spews its usual scorn over SquareState‘s selection as Colorado blogger from the floor of the Democratic National Convention yesterday.

    Face the State’s daily news roundup today somehow manages to miss any mention of right-wing darling Bob “Our Children Is Learning Geography” Schaffer’s latest stumble.

    But when a rival blog wins press credentials, Face the State takes notice with the scolding headline

    Media fawns over liberal blogger, picked to cover DNC



    Fawning? The headline links to a simple, two-paragraph announcement in the Denver Post:

    Blogs log a victory

    The Colorado liberal-blogger website SquareState.net has been credentialed by the Democratic National Convention Committee and its bloggers will have full access to the floor of the Pepsi Center when the party comes to town, officials announced Wednesday.

    SquareState and progressive blogging sites for each of the state delegations and territories were awarded credentials in what is a new high-water mark for political bloggers. The credential-per-delegation gives one blogger at a time a seat with his or her state or territory.

    Clearly, Face the State knows all about fawning. Maybe it’s just blog envy.

    1. President Bush’s comparison of any Democrat to Nazi appeasers is both offensive and outrageous on the face of it, especially in light of his failures in foreign policy. This is the kind of statement that has no place in any presidential address and certainly to use an important moment like the 60th anniversary celebration of Israel to make a political point seems terribly misplaced. Unfortunately, this is what we’ve come to expect from President Bush.

      unqualified support of Obama.

      Thanks Hillary

          1. And I can’t get near the computer because he got bigger than me somehow so I can’t pick him up and remove him from the chair.

              1. My son is 16 months and loves to press every button on the keyboard (or just press one button over and over and OVER), usually when I am in the middle of posting.  

  6. Welcome to the Big Leagues Senator Obama.  

    President Bush sets the bait by talking about appeasement before the Knesset. Senator Obama jumps out of the water and grabs the bait.  Hopelessly naive. Now the story is about the weakness of Obama and his crazy ideas about foreign policy. Every day he is looking more and more like the second coming of George McGovern. McGovern too had all kinds of energy and new voters and lost in a landslide.

    1. That would be a kind characterization, actually. Need I repeat all the lies and wishfull thinking we heard from the Republican Neocons?

    2. Why do you keep posting the same shit on different threads? Are you a broken-ditto-record?

      If you think McCain aligning himself with Bush is actually a good thing, you’re one of the 20% kool-aid drinking fools who can’t tell the difference between rhetoric and reality, in other words you’re a hopeless hack.

      Be sure to read tomorrow’s Washington Post to see McCain’s public statement (with video) supporting talks with Hamas.

      What a hypocritical liar both Bush and McCain are.

    3.    Barack Obama leaves open the possibility of someday speaking with Hamas and he’s labeled an appeaser, while “the Shrub” sends his Assistant Sec. of State to kiss Kim Jong-Il’s ass while bearing gifts of food and oil for this despot who happens to be part of the axis of evil.

        Throughout history presidents of both parties have spoken with some really nasty leaders of other regimes whether it was FDR dealing with Stalin or Richard Nixon dealing with Mao and Brezhnev. Even Ronald Reagan negotiated with the head of Evil Empire, going so far as to make substantive concessions in the area of arms control.  

        I distinctly remember the picture of Daddy Bush’s Sec. of State shaking hands (albeit with a grim expression on his face) with Tariq A’ziz in Jan. ’91 shortly before the start of the First Persian Gulf War.  Was Daddy engaging in a last minute attempt at appeasement with Saddam Hussein?

      1. is that it isn’t simply talking to someone, it’s caving to their every demand. Thanks to Chris Matthews for reminding me of that important distinction. The appeasers in the 30s let Hitler have whatever he wanted; the appeasement was in that, not in sitting down with him.

        1. The appeasers in the 30s let Hitler have whatever he wanted; the appeasement was in that, not in sitting down with him.

          Hitler was taking a huge gamble in 1936-1938 when he militarized the Rhineland, committed the Anschluss in Austria, and then facing off against England and France over Czechoslovakia.  Germany could have easily been cracked like a rotten walnut.  But neither Neville Chamberlain nor France’s Eduoard Deladier would stand up to him.  He took the Sudentenland, and then less than a year later took the rest of the country.  

          The problem is that there are elements of the left that look at any strong tactics against tyrants as “war-mongering”.  If Neville Chamberlain had told Hitler to back off of Czechoslovakia or face military action, he most likely would have been painted by the “peace at any price” crowd of the time as wanting a war.  He would have most likely saved us from the worst one of the century.  

          1. And the crowd was pretty big – everyone had been through WWI just 20 years earlier and there were few people like Churchill (and Stalin) who really understood what Hitler was up to.

            Also, keep in mind that the French were even more gun shy – after Hitler took the rest of Czechoslovakia, they still wanted to appease Hitler. Chamberlain’s eyes were finally opened and that’s when he forced France to go along and guarantee Poland.

            That said, there’s nothing any Dem politician has said that can reasonably be construed as appeasement. That’s a slander from the right who are well schooled in using emotional appeal with the voters, since their policies aren’t in the nation’s (as a whole) best interest.

          2. Didn’t the Bush family have a bunch of assets seized after the war started for violation of the trading with the enemy act?

            Wasn’t GWB’s grandfather part of the eugenics movement?

            I don’t blame people for the acts of their forefathers, but he should be careful about throwing around terms like Nazi appeaser.

  7. From politicalwire.com:

    Rep. Tom Davis (R-VA) sent a memo to the Republican House leadership explaining his party’s prospects in November noting “the political atmosphere facing House Republicans this November is the worst since Watergate and is far more toxic than the fall of 2006 when we lost thirty seats.”

    “The loss of three straight special elections, in once solidly Republican districts cannot be explained simply by ‘bad candidates’, or by being out-organized. They are canaries in the coal mine, warning of far greater losses in the fall, if steps are not taken to remedy the current climate.”  

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

128 readers online now

Newsletter

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