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 02, 2009 03:30 PM UTC

Tuesday Open Thread

  • 67 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

We live in a political world

Under the microscope

You could travel anywhere and hang yourself there

You’ve always got more than enough rope

–Bob Dylan

Tweet
Share

Comments

67 thoughts on “Tuesday Open Thread”

  1. from the Denver Post

    Gov. Bill Ritter signed into law Monday a bill to make it a crime to send text messages – including e-mails and tweets – while driving.

    …

    Ritter signed the bill in Fort Collins, where a little girl was struck and killed last year by a motorist who was distracted while talking on a cellphone.

    The bill is what the bill is and Ritter does not bear any responsibility that it still allows cell calls (for those over 18). And he is right to sign it.

    But tying it to that death, when the bill does not address the problem that led to the death of that child – that strikes me as wrong.

    Am I missing something?

        1. Just like DPS superintendent Bennet’s ProComp, a ballot fraud.  That 2005 ballot measure increased property taxes, used the money to reward teachers who increased student achievement. So how was it a fraud, well they never implemented the performance part (other then CEA member paychecks) of the deal.

          Now go gather up your playmates, huddle up over at the CEA and put a measure on the ballot to modify or repeal TABOR, CSAPs, etc…

            1. How’s that free preK for illegal aliens program going?

              What I want to know is when will Hickenlooper announce he is going to primary the Guv? Man is the Guv. looking tired …



              Maybe that fishing trip to MT and some counsel from Guv. Brian will help him get into leadership mode and deliver on the Colorado Promise.

    2. So, to be safe we would  need to ban eating or drinikng coffee in your car (ever spill cooffee while driving), we would need to ban your kids in your car, we would need to ban your dog in your car. Or how about those fancy new screens that have GPS and play messages from radio stations?

      We all do far too much while driving, yes cell ohones are a good part of the issue.  But people were getting hit by cars long before cell phones were ever invented.

      2. When I went through Driver’s Ed in the 80s, I was told that it WAS illegal to eat and drink while driving.

        But, WLJ, speaking as someone who has done all the activities you describe while driving (except texting), I can attest that cell phone use is catagorically more distracting. It’s not unreasonable to draw a line there. I’m in full agreement with David when he calls it as dangerous as drunk driving.

        1. A democrat bill was signed by a democrat guv in front of a mother they used as a media mouthpiece and it is really a do-nothing POS.

          And this was all conducted within a filibuster proof legislature.

          I guess you should be questioning the value of those you elected. It seems to be failure after failure.

              1. some kinda jobless Ted Tupa stay at home husband who even Ritter wouldn’t grant a patronage position too?

                Now go read to your daughter or work on her fine motor skills versus playing on the computer.

                1. but I am a stay at home dad, albeit one with a part time job.

                  And my girl has advanced social and fine motor skills, thank you. 🙂

                  1. That Libby would rather insult your children than make sense.

                    It’s probably almost time for him to don his uniform and head to Burger King for the start of his shift.

                    Assuming, of course, that he can bring himself to get out of 1) his underwear, and 2) his mom’s basement.

                    1. Ralphie, Why do you post negative statements about working class people?  Why are you against commerce and peoples right to work at a job?

                      Ralphie you are probably the little d-bag that whips out his phone to calc a 10% tip (everytime) screwing the server over.  

                      Now go take that 8% your shorting the waitress/waiter and go over leverage yourself with a new flatscreen from Circuit City.

                      ps Ari Tupa lays around blogging and surfing kiddy porn while his daughter tries to get his attention … evidence above. He’s the one shirking his duty to care for his child setting her on a course for a 70% chance at a DPS diploma (if she’s white) and 50% if she’s a racial minority.

                    2. He’s kinda like Rio Grande but without that added extra degree of nastiness. That’s fine; he doesn’t know me and therefore can’t lay a finger on me.

                    3. can’t lay a finger on me

                      That’s the statement of a person who regularly sees violence or projects it. Do you hit your wife or S.O. too?

  2. from the Denver Post

    “It’s certainly not easy to lose your seat in Congress. And harder still to be true to your values as I have been, but the radical homosexual lobby, abortionists, gun-grabbers and all the rest of the extremists finally spent enough money, spread enough lies and fooled enough voters to defeat me.”

    Marilyn honey, it wasn’t lies that did you in, it was the truth. The voters in your district, including many Republicans, took a clear look at you and found you repugnant.

    As to your pledge to “tell the truth” – do you know how to do that?

    2. but this Huttner quote is priceless:

      Among the left-wing groups that targeted Musgrave was Progress Now. Director Michael Huttner on Monday disagreed that his organization distorted Musgrave’s record.

      “That’s complete nonsense,” Huttner said. “She is as crazy as ever. She’s a right-wing nut job, and the voters in her district held her accountable.”

    3. she lost her seat.  I’d say losing it was the cause, rather than the effect, of losing the election but that’s not quite right either. This wack job never had “it” to lose in the first place. She and Wadhams and Tancredo ought to be sharing the same padded room.  

    4.    She still hasn’t realize it but her jihad against equal rights for GLBT folk is what cost her her House seat last year.

        Clueless…

    1. Hold as job fair across from the state capitol.  Because it’s SO easy for families looking for work in Trinidad or Greeley or Durango or Grand Junction to load up in the family truckster and drive to Denver.  

      There he goes again, the Governor of Denver.  

      Moron.

  4. This is what republican talk  radio has accomplished in the last week:

    1) Established the framework for the debate on Sotomayor. She will have to defend herself against charges of racism and judicial bias.  Way to go, Rush.

    2) Reframed the Roe debate in terms of abortion procedures and NOT the Constituion of the United States.

    3) Alerted the base so that they can begin calling Senators from their state to vote against Sotomayor.

    All of this cost the party not one damm cent.  Nor, did any republican senator have to do the dirty work.  Brilliant.

    Meantime, back at the ranch, Clear channel has evidently pulled the plug on local “progessive” radio.  There are no local democrats on the air.  I don’t know what the status is with Jay marvin…but Sirota is gone and no opportunity for local issues to be aired from a democrat point of view.

    What does this mean?  Bennet/Udall are probably not going to get much flack on Sotomayor, as I would think their support of her nomination is a far gone conclusion.

    But, what about the Employee Clear Choice Act?  the progressive troops will NOT be marshalled by local radio to support the bill….rather all over Colorado, republican talk radio will exhort constituents to call elected representatives in Congress and vote against it.  I think Bennet will be able to do that w/o recrimmination.

    Unions will have to pay to be able to even approach the kind of communication links that the republicans get for free on the public airwaves….way to go.

          1. See, cable is not interactive and ColoPols is not extensive and neither belong to the public.

            But libertad is carrying the water for the repubs…supposing that everyone is a passive receptor and so somehow listening to CNN is the same as calling up your state legislator on local radio and giving him/her holy hell for missing the boat on so many items….it is not.

            David thinks that if he can talk to an elected official and post the interview here it is the same as if we all were talking to

            elected officials….it is not.

            But we shall see:  Will talk radio succeed in getting Sotomayor fillabustered?  Will the ugly violent hate talk on republican radio continue?

            1. but I don’t think it quite carries the power that it once did. By any measure, talk radio is a conservative tool. But it seems to me that the great majority people who really listen are political junkies – mostly the hard right base but the remainder are mostly committed liberals. I don’t think conservative radio can have much power when almost no one with a hope in hell of being swayed listens.

              Now obviously there are other ways these clowns can influence things. It’s clear that this tail wags the GOP dog, so if they want a filibuster they just might get it. It depends on how much reason the GOP Senate leaders possess. The Dems did not filibuster Bush’s appointees when they could have, presumably because they know that it would come back to bite them in the ass once a Dem was in the White House. If the GOP has half a brain among them, they’ll realize the same thing.

              But radio hosts don’t give a shit about functional government and care just as much about the legitimacy of elected Democrats making Democratic policy. They play the role of the 3 year old throwing a tantrum because he doesn’t get his way, which is perfectly in tune with the psyche of their listeners. (Few reasonable ‘pubs will be caught dead with Rush on their radio.)

              I’m not pooh-poohing your concerns, dwyer, just reminding you that the power of talk radio is diminishing. No, we rarely get to engage with elected officials here on the blogs like you do when they show up on KOA, but if a wingnut yells over the phone at one and only other wingnuts listen, does it make a sound?

              1. So far, they killed the in-state tuition bill for kids who have been residents for three years and graduated from a Colorado HS, regardless of immigrant status.  That was powerful.

                Ritter is on KOA one morning a month; ditto for Hickenlooper.  Republican state legislators have been on for hours, in partisan commentary, on KOA,  and KHOW.  There is no parity.

                My main concern right now is what is going to happen with the Employee Free Choice Act when local republican radio; and god knows the Independence Institute’s Caldera (15 hours a week on KOA) goes after it and urges people to contact the Colorado Congressional delegation and demand a no vote.  It could give Bennet the out he needs…”I had to listen to my constituents.”

                I don’t see talk radio standing alone.  It is a vital part of an overal republican party strategy…..for which the party does not have to pay one red cent.

                1. I was thinking more nationally than locally. However, let’s keep in mind that Colorado is one of the anti-illegal immigration movement’s homes. They sway a lot of influence with or without talk radio. And I still believe Colorado is more conservative than liberal, no matter that Dems hold so many state-level offices as to have a virtual hegemony. They are going to be careful with all the hot topics.

                  Bennet is still something of a wildcard in my book, largely because of Ritter. Who would have thought he’d be such a management shill? It’s possible Bennet is too.

                  I do agree that talk radio is, for all intents and purposes, a propaganda wing of the GOP, and do not wish to diminish its importance. But the moderates who ultimately decide the course of the country seem to be turned off by it all. I’m sure many still tune in and some will find their arguments persuasive, especially if they find no alternative. But I do believe that’s an insignificant number at this time. Only hysterics like to listen to other hysterics, which is all I’ve heard or seen from the prominent radio and TV pundits in the past year. In other words, they’re diminishing their own importance more effectively than a balanced discussion of the issues would.

                  1.  One successful strategy  is to gear up the locals to call their congress people to vote against a certain measure.  

                    This is how they stopped immigration reform.

                    I predict that republican talk radio will do this with the Employee Free Choice Act….I predict that Bennet will vote against it and claim that he had to listen to his constituents….vamos a ver

      1. I haven’t heard an update on Jay’s health in a few weeks.  When I heard Montel on Monday I thought they’d canceled the show, either leaving Jay stranded in bad medical straits or after having heard bad news from Jay.

  5.    Another convert to the radical homosexual lobby (or would it be more accurate to call him a recruit?) is Dick Cheney.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/…

      This solid conservative has come out in favor of same sex marriage as long as it’s done at the state, not federal, level.

      Perhaps he’s expecting to walk Mary down the aisle at some GLBT-friendly church in Iowa sometime soon.

  6. .

    He’s the guy nominated to take over military ops in Afghanistan.

    http://cosmos.bcst.yahoo.com/u…

    He’s also the guy who initially tried to cover up what happened to CPL Tillman (friendly fire.)

    Testifying in answer to a question from John McCain, he as much as admits he got caught in a cover-up.  

    The guy specializes in assassinations.  Is this really the right guy for the job, when we are transitioning from total dependence on kinetic operations to vaguely grasping that kinetic ops cannot win hearts and minds ?  

    What was Obama thinking ?

    .

    1. Is McKiernan was too conventional in thinking and Obama wanted a counter insurgency thinker.

      You would know better than I having been both armor and special forces, but the feeling was that McKiernan, though good with maneuver elements, he lacked a vision for the more complicated mission of counter insurgency.

      I agree that the Tillman episode is a black mark and I do hold it against McChrystal, but he does have the resume.

       

      1. ….but he also pissed off Gates  by (rightfully) asking for more troops  every time he sent commo to the Pentagon.

        But he also assisted in the transition from the “Blow it all up” thinking under the Deserter President to one that focus more on Civil Affairs. The idea being that the Afghan tribes were more inclined to support the national government if they were able to do such radical things as grow food, sell stuff and generally thrive as human beings.

        McChrtstal is a Black-Ops spook….he’s spent his career humping with a rucksack, but he also spent too much time at the flagpoll during GW2. He was the one that doing the Warnography briefings to cable news. He provided that great line “I would anticipate that the major combat engagements are over.” (A variation of which was used by some President playing dressup on a carrier…)

        I’m with Barron X – don’t give a shit was his cred was before he was part of the coverup of Tillman’s murder. He may have come clean when questioned by Congress, but he’s the dirtbag who covered his ass while he sent out the bogus citation for the Silver Star.  

        1. .

          There was a discussion of McChrystal’s nomination on the News Hour.  

          There was a fellow ring-knocker testifying that the guy was Superman and would whip the Taleban singlehandedly.  

          There was a former CIA officer.

          And there was an editor from the liberal Mother Jones magazine.  

          The Mother Jones guy was the only one who had anything perceptive to say.  He observed that McChrystal was an expert at Counter-Terrorism, and that people were confusing that with Counter-Insurgency.  Two completely different types of war, requiring two completely different skill sets.  

          McChrystal might do a good job, its possible.  But he has no more experience running a counterinsurgency effort than Danny the Red Hair (who has zero such experience.)  

          If Staff Sergeant Dan is right about McKiernan wanting to make this more of a Civil Affairs / Aid & Development / win the “hearts and minds” campaign, then Obama has taken a fatal step backwards in firing the competent and promoting the political brown-noser.  

          The News Hour report suggested that Stan was selected because he got along well with Petraeus, who also has zero counterinsurgency experience.  

          McKiernan was Dave’s boss years ago, and resented that Petraeus, with no accomplishments to speak of other that kissing the rear end of GW Bush, was made CENTCOM Commander.  

          Obama has embraced Bush’s Wars and Bush’s Generals.  

          That’s not good for the troops or the country.  

          .  

    2. Interesting comments by Dexter Filkins of NYT on PBS radio this morning to the effect that in Afghanistan, infantry units pinned down by Taliban call in air support which eventually results in civilian casualties, sometimes on a large scale, that increasingly costs the U.S. popular support (shades of Vietnam!). The deaths of 50-60 (or more) women and children in a single air strike gone wrong is long remembered by every Afghan…not unlike the way 9/11 still inflames people in the Far Flung Territories of the United States (my characterization, not Filkins’s). Anti-guerrilla tactics notwithstanding, we are inevitably going to use the weapons we have and that includes air cover–helicopters and fighter-bombers. [Devotees of military power yields control take note.]

      Also quite interesting on new law signed by Our Man Karzai in Kabul affecting only Shiites (a 20% minority in Afghanistan) that codifies harshly oppressive rules enforced against Shiite women and girls, essentially caving into pressure from mullahs a la Iran in order to gain support for forthcoming presidential election.

      IF the government backed by the US in turn backs this sort of legislation, and IF Al Qaeda has moved its hq & ops into the Pakistan Tribal Areas, then why should we be risking American lives in Afghanistan? To what end?  

    1. then I support his call for a veto. But honestly this editorial is the only thing I’ve read about it.

      It’s interesting: he says that the state constitution prohibits this sort of thing, but tax dollars helped fund the construction of Pepsi Center, Coors Field, and Invesco Field. Seems like it wouldn’t be unconstitutional to build a NASCAR track either, although it would be just as foolish.

      1. Your point about Coors, Pepsi and Invesco would be correct if state dollars went into them, they did not.  Each had a sales tax question posed to the voters within the established voter district to approve (by the bye, I voted against all three, as I live within the districts.

        Special district were created, by the state legislature for the purposes of establishing sales tax contributions to build the facilities.  That is how the state constitution prohibiiton was circumvented.

        1. I know a lot of things, but Colorado constitutional issues aren’t among them.

          [And now that I’ve set myself up, let’s see what Libertad does with this…]

  8.    Pres. Obama has appointed John McHugh, a RINO from upstate NY to be Sec. of Army.  This, of course, will trigger a special election in NY-23, a district Obama carried by 52% to 47% last Nov.  

     

  9. is that Ritter’s Econ. Dev. guy used to work for the Wal-Mart family that owns the Pepsi Center.  No surprise where he thinks the bread is buttered.

    This is all about turning public venues into private toys.

    McNichols Arena, owned by the taxpayers of Denver, was torn down to be replaced by the Pepsi Center, owned by private ownership, but built with public funds.

    Mile High Stadium was torn down to be replaced by Invesco Field.  Owned by private interests but built with public money.

    You and I pay for these facilities, but we don’t own, control or profit from their use.

    It is in point of fact the fat cats full profitability acts.

    I don’t have a dog in the hunt on the two labor bills that are creating so much discussion lately, but I do find it offensive, that Ritter is more than willing to subsidize private development in the guise of creating jobs but do very little to actually ensure that tax dollars do more than simply line the pockets of those more than capable of making money on their own.

    2. He’d be trying to follow the mayors (Webb-Hick) and the Denver chamber. The problems as you point out are tax v. ownership and a lack of voter approval.

      This will justify those “Why Does Ritter Hate Mesa County” signs as he uses taxes paid by businesses there to subsidize his political supporter, benefactor and single event NASCAR profiteer Mr. Hamill in Denver.

  10. With Gingrich backpedaling from his “she’s a racist” canard, Mcconnel diving for cover, and even Sessions sounding almost decent on Meet the Press, looks to me like the republicans have deduced that this one’s not a fight they can win through defamation prior to confirmation hearings. I don’t think they’ll filibuster, based on what I’m seeing now.

    Really, they’ve had since 1998 to dredge something, anything up. Klukker Jeff said as much last week when he pointed out voting against her appointment then. And all they’ve run so far is the quote the President took care of with class and dignity last week.

    Truth be told though, I honestly don’t know her opinion on a woman’s right to choose in matters pertaining to her own health. My gut is that as a woman she’d be more sensititive to it than say, Alito or Roberts were/are, but I just don’t know.

    The hearings will be nasty, make no mistake about that. Every republican inquisitor will feel the heat of red radio and fox news. The line of questioning by red lawmakers will be not so much about Judge Sotomayor and her qualifications as it will be about getting in  as many low blows and cheap shots about her ethnicity as possible. The goal, probably run through CPAC, will be to make her appear angry , resentfull, and an “activist” to the red base. If the reds can gin up enough bile through their surrogates on fox and hate radio, the Democrats just might fold and back off, without a vote. Unlikely since they’re dealing with President Obama, but probably the best bet at torpedoing her. If the Senate votes, she will be confirmed. Elections matter. 59-40 counts.    

    In our history, 107 of the 111 slots on the United States Supreme Court have been filled by wealthy white men. That’s no coincidence. The legacy won’t die without a fight.

    1. … that they’re backing off the “she’s a racist” line (since that’s absurd to anyone but a diehard red), then I think the fight is won. I don’t know what you’re thinking of when you say that maybe the Dems “just might fold and back off, without a vote.” You mean not going through with the confirmation vote on the Senate floor? Inconceivable!

      I do agree that they’ll get nasty and try to dredge up her race somehow, but the “wealthy white men” thing is a legacy of who’s held the power in our country, and not a legacy of qualified candidates for SCOTUS being shot down by the Senate for not being white men. The various “isms” at work prevent them from getting nominated in the first place. If anything, they’re only hope of making her race or gender an issue is to get her to say something that even closely approximates the statement she made that gave the “racist” canard any life in the first place.

  11. Will Rogers said it a century ago.

    “I don’t belong to any organized political party. I’m a Democrat”.

    I’ve been a voting Democrat since my first opportunity in 1972. I love the Democratic Party and its’ ideals. I allways will. But if there is one thing that drives me crazy about the Democrats, it’s their ability to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

    The scenario of withdrawing Judge Sotomayor prior to confirmation vote is, as you say, probably nill. President Obama and Rahm won’t let it happen. But my point was the republicans are down to that scenario.

    I obviously didn’t phrase it well in my prior post.  

    1. I know what you mean. That, along with other spineless actions (most recently the wiretapping bill from last summer) have kept me from ever registering as a Dem, even though I vote that way 99% of the time. (Yes, I have voted Republican on a couple of occasions, and can proudly say that those individuals earned my vote and did not disappoint.)

      I think I understood your point. Mine is that the Dems as a whole won’t even consider withdrawing Sotomayor either. In my memory, the only time SCOTUS appointees were withdrawn prior to voting were both ‘pub nominees (Ginsberg in the 80s and what’s her name in 2005) who had issues with the right wing (Ginsberg because he admitted to smoking pot, what’s her name because the base didn’t trust her). I can’t imagine either party backing down from pressure fro the other side. (IIRC, Bork was actually voted down by the Senate.)

      Yes, the Dems can be wimps. But to their credit SCOTUS appointments get their attention and work. Obama and Rahm aren’t needed as far as I can tell.

      BTW, if you are responding to someone, it’s a good idea to this the “reply” link under their post rather than the “post a comment” link. Word to the wise. 🙂

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

63 readers online now

Newsletter

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