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%
December 02, 2014 04:16 PM UTC
96 Comments
Why do they bother to do this?
Not Bartels I mean, she's a hack and everyone knows it. I mean the industry. Why make a commercial destined for hypocritical blowback? It really makes no sense to me, unless all those millions really do pay for people who don't know their asses from holes in the ground.
Because it worked for them?
How many people are going to find out that Ms. Smith is a bona-fide O&G industry specialist? The ad says she's an organic farmer, and it's been running for weeks now, so it must be true – organic farmers love fracking on their land.
There's no effective penalty for non-disclosure, and no corresponding deep-pocketed conservation group that can effectively counter the deceit. Why shouldn't they make up crap like this?
One also wonders, if she's so highly placed at an O&G firm, whether her family organic farm is really just a vanity farm for tax purposes.
Ya' think???? I'm sure Bartel's will get right on that . . .
Is her farm named Rafalca?
That was a medically prescribed Olympian horse to help Mrs Mittens w/ her MS. At least, that’s how she explained it.
…and apparently we need rich people growing organic food so their rich friends can buy organic goats milk at Whole Foods while they fill the Front Range corridor with VOCs? I don't mean that as snarky as it may sound, but there are plenty of organic farmers on the Front Range who don't need royalty income to create a viable organics business; for every 'one' of her there are a hundred who participate in a legitimate, non-subsidized, organic food business.
How many? You mean not counting us? An elevator full, maybe?
Why? Because the Governor's Oil & Gas Task Force is leaning towards making recommendations which emphasize local control, and protecting residents from pollution from drilling activities.
So the industry shills are trying to preempt the conversation. After all, if an organic farmer thinks fracking on her land is A-OK, it must be harmless – possibly even nutritious, right?
Audio from previous hours of public testimony was 2:1 in favor of additional regulation and/or limits on drilling, specifically fracking. My notes on the November 20 meeting are available here.
The next public meeting, in which the task force will hear public testimony, will be in Rifle on December 10.
I am making plans to be there and mobilize as many western slope people as possible to come to this event. You can bet the industry will have a substantial presence.
It is important to show up to this if you support the notion that our air and water should be clean and our homes should be protected from an industrial invasion.
I know that you western slope folks will give the O&G lobbyists an earful. I'm sure that many will show up. At the end of 16 hours of testimony in Loveland Nov. 19 & 20, there were still dozens of people waiting to speak.The moderator did a decent job of impartially limiting everyone to three minutes.
The lobbyists have more money, hence their paid 'speech" is louder and slickly produced, like that of this shyster, Michelle Smith.
But the speech of regular people impacted by oil and gas development is much more credible, has more emotional impact, and so is potentially more threatening to the corporate clones. Go Duke!
Keep in mind that CRED purchased a whole section of the Denver Post to run Big Oil puff pieces. The Post will be the last news entity to rat CRED's bullshit out no matter how shameless their trickery.
Worse than a lobbyist. She's a "land-man," which is truly one of the lowest forms of humanity, specializing as they do on ripping off landowners.
Quit bitching and ask Bartels herself. I will do that myself, if necessary, after I return from Brazil next week. We should at least give her a chance to defend herself.
Bartels is not the story, the industry's deception is the story.
It is part of the story in that this media outlet which takes a lot of money from this industry failed to disclose to their customers the nature of the deception.
expect very little from the Denver Post these days…….they've shown their true colors more than once. Expect even less from R's and the local energy extractors. Hey, a buck is a buck, no?
Why? Didn't she have access to the same information? Isn't it her job to discover and report the entire story? The only two conclusions you can come to is that she is either too lazy to do her job or she's in on the scheme to sell fracking as supported by ordinary organic farmers. Either way she is no Mike Littwin.
You're right on, GG. It IS Bartels' damned job to check things out. I don't think for a minute that she's in on any scheme. But she is a real fangirl of all things GOP and is lazy on top if it. She'd be well-qualified to work for the Grand Junction paper should she require employment.
Not that it excuses Bartels, but I'm more often disappointed with reporting these days than impressed by it. The pressure is to get stories out the door; not good stories, just stories that have the names right and the facts as presented on first blush.
Investigative journalism is way too hard to come by these days.
PR: journalism is journalism. It can be good or bad, but all reporters, by definition, do
investigative'' journalism. If you can't or won't check things out, you're not a reporter. You're a stenographer.Then we have an increasing proportion of stenographers to journalists.
Yes, we do. Even worse, editors are becoming an endangered species. Reporters need supervision and often kicks in the ass. Trust me on this. What few editors remain are managers tasked with assembling crap reports for the bottom-line people, who wouldn't know the difference between a good story or bad one. Except, of course, if the advertiser is pissed.
Bartels should take more pride in her work, even if her editors or lack thereof don't.
So Bartels didn't bother to check it out.
I'm shocked, shocked I tell you.
So the person in the ad doesn't own, or have income from, an organic farm contribute to her livelihood at all?
Straw man alert! Nobody said that she didn't own an organic farm, Elliot. It just isn't her main livelihood, nor professon.
What she's admitting to is a 'market failure' (hers). She claims she can't offset her production expenses without the income of an entirely separate enterprise. The farmers I know offset their production expenses with the proceeds from the sale of their 'crops'.
. . . It's that or blow them to smithereens with a machine gun.
("If you melons don't make me some big bucks, real fast, it's hasta la vista time, suckers!")
..and yes, 'words' have meaning: Elliot attributed the words 'contribute' and 'livelihood' to describe a commercial that admits her goats are in fact, incapable of fulfilling the meaning of either word.
As an O&G gal, she's used to others, usually the tax payers who subsidize big O&G, providing insulation from any failures or mishaps. She wants to play farmer for fun and fracking offsets (probably much more than offsets) the cost of her expensive hobby/lifestyle: Look at me. Just a simple organic farmer.
She says the income from mineral rights assists her . Straw man much?
The
Straw man not at all on mama's. Try to read what mama wrote, not whatever you choose to put into her mouth.
Besides, as Elliot totally ignores, a better question would be "how much do taxpayers contribute to her livelihood?" Talk about Welfare Cadillacs (maybe a Lexus or two)?
The argument against fracking is that it creates externalities, not that it relies on giant subsidies
having been messages some facts on this in last few minutes, some of you guys are going to have some real egg on your face if what I was told both is true and becomes public
Sorry. I don't know what "having been messages some facts" means. I recognize the individual words. Let me take a stab at a reply… Hat car having spoken bananas.
Laughing so hard right now that it hurts!!!!
typo. It should have been "messaged"
Gonna share those facts?
Still looking forward to you sharing those facts that are going to leave us all with egg on our faces.
Elliot…
I wouldn't go there if I were you. This is deception, plain and simple. Your question is feeble…
No one is questioning that she owns a little farm…lots of wealthy O&G people do. The point is, per the usual Republican MO, that this little kernel of truth is designed to obfuscate a big lie…which is that this woman is an O&G mover and shaker and her testimony in this commercial is disingenuous…she has an unstated motive to love her some fracking…
In fact, counselor, check out the quote in the Wednesday Open Thread…it applies here.
Are you suggesting that the tactic of using people with hidden connections/agendas in ads where they appear to have narrower interests than they actually have is a tactic used only by the right/O&G industry? If so, OH REALLY??? 😉
Address the issue at hand, counselor…
Your "Johnny does it, too" argument is even more feeble than your question…
try again….
Don't expect an honest answer by this dick Duke. It's like getting Andrew to explain what Republicans are going to do after they repeal the Affordable Care Act. Never going to happen.
I never expect an honest answer from "Der Fladenmaus", GG.
Just the usual straw men, red herrings, misdirection, and other obfuscatory crap we have come to expect from our counselor….
OK but he did add a smiley face to his Johnny Does It Too this time so I guess that means…. I know I'm going to get slammed for the same tired old lame tactic but indulge me. I've got nothing else. Now I'm just going to quietly exit stage right. But with a cute smile icon so… we're good, right?
natch…
I can imagine Elliot, if he were in a trial up against hopeless odds, shooting for a hung jury with his endless "baffle them with BS" arguments.
Ah, the Chewbacca Defense
You know it's bad when Fladen shows up to deflect. It's as reliable as clockwork.
Actually, I don't stop by this page very often. Even when I do, I only really comment when I see a double standard, shoddy analysis, or somebody doing something ridiculous.
So you are not denying then that this…
is what is actually going on here?
And which of these…
is what you perceive going on here?
Find me a political ad which doesn't have somebody with connections to a campaign or a cause which are hidden. You can find them, but the opposite is pretty standard fare for all sides.
So you're OK with deceiving the public especially if it corporations who stand to benefit at the expense of the local citizens. How evil you are to accept deception as no big deal and a standard practice that 'everybody' uses. I thought you were just beside yourself with outrage and how considered it beyond terrible that Obama didn't qualify that if you liked your health insurance policy you could keep it only if it met minimum standards. Then it was the worst of the worst. In this situation, its 'So What". A double standard hypocrite you have always been.
Talk about reaching for highly attenuated analogy to support a barely understandable argument!
Maybe barely understandable to you, Fladen.
I was thinking it was more because you have nothing to offer other than the usual conservative lies, dodges and double fakes. Either that or they stopped paying you by the comment.
I am paid to comment here? Where do I pick up my check? Because I really would like to get myself a decent lunch tomorrow…
May I recommend the frackganic goat cheese salad with the fracked pepper vinaigrette that's served at the O&G Club downtown? . . . Word on 17th Street is that it's out-of-this-world frackalicious!
(OK, I've tortured this enough, I'm done. Promise.)
Can I get it with a side of the same fracking fluid our governor drank? 😉
Let me dissent on Elliot. True, he usually voices a conservative view at odds with the prevailing wisdom on this board. But he is generally using facts and reasonable arguments to support his view, rather than Ayn Rand fantasy or 6,000 year-old earth theology. If we no longer welcome the loyal opposition, then we risk becoming a mere echo-chamber, a Fox News of the left.
Elliot, you're welcome here any time.
Of course he is, V. Didn’t see anyone suggest otherwise…
that won’t keep me from pissing in his Phony’Os when he serves up a bowl.
😀
Maybe you should check your aim then 😉
Disagree Voyageur that we're too big of meanies to let Elliot play. Even on this thread he was asked multiple times to clarify his positions and offer concrete examples highlighting his grasp of the situation. He disappeared never to return. Is it mean to ask him how he can be so worked up about Obama's health care deception but not a phony Oil & Gas ad? Of course he has every right and opportunity to post here just like everyone else but why should he get special treatment for repeatedly lying? He makes a claim that there is only a double standard, shoddy analysis, or somebody doing something ridiculous at this site but doesn't offer a single instance to verify his claim. How are we suppose to react to such a statement without resorting to ridicule?
I know this may surprise you, but this is a hobby for me and I have a very busy job and family obligations all the time. Plus, to the extent politics is an unpaid hobby you aren't the only ones who want attention. In the past few days I had to get ready for an Indy high noon event, I had a conservative call up about legislation ideas and I had a dem message about testimony ideas for a congressional committee hearing. And again I have a day job where I have some very contentious cases heading towards hearing/trial/arbitration all in next few months. But I have a few minutes now while I wait at the airport for my wife/kids to arrive back from visiting my parents
I always enjoy arguing with Elliot. He's a good sport.Besides, it keeps our bullshit detectors in tune. And, occasionally (horrors!) he is right, or at least has a cogent argument.
Agree that Elliots' welcome but Johnny Does it Too is an argument used exclusively when you've got nothing so that's clearly all Elliot's got on this subject. And BTW, I'm sure that a woman with Smith's career profile doesn't "depend" financially on her cute little organic hobby/lifestyle farm for anything much less the things she mentions.
It's the usual load of crap ad just like all those Obamacare sob story ads, a grand total of 0% of which turned out to be in any way legit. Which is not to say nobody had a legit sob story. Rs just never bothered to go to the trouble of finding one instead of just making stuff up.
They probably could have found an actual farm family whose living depended mainly on the farm who really did need the extra income from fracking for things like healthcare and educating the kids if they thought being honest mattered at all. For all their alleged family values, they don't. But Elliot will always defend them, even when the best and only defense he can come up with is the lamest in the book: You caught me, mommy, but Johnny did it too!
Umm.. Elliot is not a Conservative; he is a Libertarian. The specific Ayn Rand fantasy is idolatry of the individual.
He's not even a real Libertarian. A real Libertarian would be pro-choice and against government interference in family planning and personal health decisions. Almost no one in the Tea Party or in the alleged Libertarian wing of the Republican party is anything Ayn Rand would recognize as a fellow traveler. Certainly Rand Paul is no Libertarian.
Basically Fladen is far rightie on everything but immigration and gay rights issues. Still, he supports the nasty anti-immigrant R candidates despite having an immigrant wife, probably the reason he parts with the Tea Party on immigration issues. Don' t know why he's always deviated from the party line on gays. Friends or relatives perhaps?
The reason his views are so incoherent to the rest of us is because they're so Fladen-centric., not because he's a Libertarian.
You are forgetting war on drugs, police violence, personhood, and other issues. I am a small l libertarian…which means I am libertarian for pragmatic and not absolute moral code reasons
Whatever makes you feel like Fladenworld makes sense, dear.
What’s black & tan and looks good on a lawyer? (answer at bottom) This ad set off bullsh*t detectors when first viewed. One, it’s a slap in the face to organic farmers who turn a profit ( biz plan, hard work) w/o a weepy eyed, woe is me, if only big govt would get out of the way, etc. There is a media fund out there, paid for by you, with deferred severance taxes that provides this type of post election (stylized ad quality) propaganda
Second, there is an axiom of fibbery, to keep it simple. Instead, the ad piles on, w/ a dig at affording health care for her spawn.( bet me there’s trust fundery going on).
What’s black & Tan? A Doberman Pincher
Too funny that the Saudi Princes ( OPEC) are going hammer & tong w/ O&G frackers, ready to eat their lunch at the same time this ad is running. BTW, that attrition will result in the greatest boost to our US economy, surpassing any “pie in the sky” plans yet to be put forth by any political party. Saving $1100 yrly at the pump if nothing else, should be THE wake up call to Americans of the yoke of servitude to multinational oil companies in collusion with facile government energy policies. The man is keeping us down. Car sales are at record high, sadly, with the red shift back to Guzzler class of SUVs. Like there is no tomorrow. It has taken the wind out of R sails, plans to scuttle the economy before their next last ditch plan to capture the 3 branches of govt..
What do you have if you have 300 lawyers buried in sand up to their necks?
A good start.
(With apologies to my son who's in law school, but he knows I collect bad lawyer jokes–er, bad jokes about lawyers–not that there aren't bad lawyers out there, nudge, nudge, wink, wink, EF, not lookin' at you.)
Check out what our supporters and partners have to say, not the CRED.org line…
ColoradoFarmFood.org
Here are a couple stories that have run on our efforts, but we don't have an industrial bankroll. So feel free to spread the word.
Thanks. Hope you stick around and continue to contribute.
Best of luck in your endeavors. Please keep us informed of these statewide efforts..
I have to say, I found this commercial insulting and condescending. Not surprised by the industry connections. My experience, and I have a lot, is that the petroleum industry tends to have a Texas mindset where they're just going to tell you what's right and it you're too stupid to understand, well then screw you. Frankly, I'm a supporter of fracking. Look at gas prices with the increased production in the US. I know that it's not a long term solution. These new horizontal wells tend to produce big at the beginning and then peter out over 6 months. Frankly, a lot of farmers don't even own the minerals under their land any more. I wonder if she does? And if organic farming can't make it on its own in the free market, well then maybe it's not worth doing, to borrow a line from them about solar. Just a terrible ad, made worse by the fact that she's not really a farmer at all.
Besides which OPEC is refusing to cut production to get prices back up where they need to be for this expensive process to be profitable. Guess when they'll be ready to cut production and jack up prices?
Are you saying Craig that it ranks right up there with one of Udall's campaign ads?
Fracking: It's what's for dinner!!
( . . . but don't tell Mikey it's good for him, too!!)
Nothing says 'Organic' like 2,2-Dibromo-3-Nitrilopropionamide
"Just like grandma used to frack, only better!"
Pure demonization. Is this woman not entitled to an opinion?
And Elliot is right. Sure she has an agenda, but show me an ad that doesn't.
Weren't you the guy who was so pissed that Obama didn't disclose that people with substandard insurance policies couldn't keep them? Shouting incoherently with spittle flying in all directions. If what you say is true than you owe Obama an apology for behaving the same as your kind.
Yes, of course she is. But she is deliberately misleading people about her involvement in the issue…you approve?
She is entitled to mislead because FREEDOM. If a Democrat did this kind of misleading of the evidence regarding the dangers of Climate Science then by god they should go to jail. The word hypocrisy has been so overused that it no longer elicits even a blush of embarrassment in these people.
WWCD?
(What would Cory do?)
WWJF
Well? Who? The Pharisees? He seemed to be pretty down on them.
Demonization?! Show me where someone says that she and her cloven-hoofed friends are part of a demonic energy conspiracy?
Did someone say demon?!?
Hi Doc. Yup. And it's comin' t'get ya.
Dear Dr. Chaps,
We've lost a lot of our formerly regular features here at Colorado Pols — the Rush Limbaugh quotes, the Slavik Video Porn (thank effing God . . . oops, sorry there Chappy . . . anyway . . .), participation in Friday Jams is way down . . .
So, anyway, if you haven't already noticed, we're all pretty excited about your, um, unique views here and your media whoring . . . I mean, celebrity. And, so, I was thinking that, maybe, you might consider a regular question-and-answer diary here at CP. We could call it, "Ask Dr. Chaps" or "What would Chappy do?" (or something way cool like that) Maybe weekly on Fridays?? I've got dozens of questions and life problems you could help me out with, and there's lots of democrats here even more fucked up than I am (oops, sorry again. See, we need your help . . .)
Think about it, . . . pray about it . . . pleeeeze???
Thanks,
Another lost soul
First nobody is being demonized. Second. Try reading. You could use the reading comprehension practice.
This discussion isn't about her opinion. It's about the fact that she presents herself as a small organic farmer trying to make make a living for her family and relying on the income from fracking to help make ends meet. She isn't. She is an O&G career woman who apparently enjoys having a little farm as part of a country lifestyle she enjoys.
Of course she has every right to promote fracking and she even has the right to be deceptive, when it comes to that. She's not under oath or anything. Love the way she implies she's just a simple, aw shucks farmer who has had the safety of the fracking process explained to her by experts so even an ordinary gal like her can understand. But it's definitely an intentionally false picture.
It isn't a small farmer trying to make a living off the farm delivering those opinions. It's a long time O&G industry professional with a hobby. Pointing that out is hardly "demonizing". It's just calling a phony a phony and a deceptive ad a deceptive ad. BTW, whether or not some Johnny somewhere does it too is entirely irrelevant. We can talk about whatever Johnny you like another time. This is about this person and this ad. Period. Got anything on that? Didn't think so.