President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) J. Sonnenberg

(R) Ted Harvey

20%↑

15%↑

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Doug Bruce

20%

20%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

40%↑

20%↑

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
September 13, 2009 01:14 AM UTC

Kaminsky's lunacy hits the big time

  • 39 Comments
  • by: Steve Balboni

(Kind of embarrassing, isn’t it? – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Today’s WaPo in an article about the extremism of the conservative grass-roots,

One blogger who writes regularly for Freedomworks, Ross Kaminsky of Boulder, Colo., compared Obama’s Tuesday address to U.S. schoolchildren to the tactics of Mao Zedong, Joseph Stalin, Pol Pot and other murderous dictators. “Totalitarians of all stripes put great emphasis on brainwashing the young, and Obama is no exception,” he wrote on the group’s Web site under the name “rossputin.”

This post from Kaminsky is also featured on the Denver Post’s website “Politics West” (You can find it if you want to.)

Does the Post endorse this rhetoric or are writers who appear on their website allowed to operate without any editorial supervision whatsoever? What do the professional writers at the Denver Post think of having someone like Kaminsky tied to their brand?

Kaminsky is a ridiculous caricature of a right-wing nutter who is free to make as big an ass out himself as likes. Why though the Denver Post believes they need to provide him with a public forum is a question I cannot answer.

It’s probably a question worth asking yourself though before you continue your subscription, pick up a copy at the newsstand or direct any traffic to their website.  

Comments

39 thoughts on “Kaminsky’s lunacy hits the big time

  1. Will want to come defend himself here.

    Oh, that’s right, he only comes here every three months or so to call us a bunch of idiots and then disappear.

    If Obama is a totalitarian, what was Bush? Emperor of the Universe?

  2. Not that I need to defend myself, but I think a little clarification is in order given the way the Washington Post quoted me.

    The quote is accurate, but there’s an important bit they missed.  What I objected to regarding Obama’s speech was the “lesson plan” that was to accompany the speech, not the speech itself.  

    You may recall that the lesson plan asked students “how they could help the president”, which I believe was an utterly inappropriate and stupid question for a government to be asking children.

    The speech itself was essentially unobjectionable although it was amusing to see Obama’s usual narcissism shine through with his references to all that He is doing for the children.

    In any case, I stand by my assertion that trying to steer the youth toward an adoration of the government and, in particulary, its charismatic leader, was what the Administration was originally trying to do and is uncomfortably close to what those dictators I named also did.

    1. then you proceed to object to it.  The President’s speech was fine.  Similar speeches to students have been made by other Presidents including George H.W. Bush.  The so-called lesson plan was a throwaway – if folks didn’t like the wording of it they didn’t need to use it.  

    2. What I objected to regarding Obama’s speech was the “lesson plan” that was to accompany the speech, not the speech itself.

       

      Newsweek, “The Legacy of Pol Pot: a Photographic History of Mass Murder”

      Why are you running away from your words so quickly?  Embrace the crazy brother!  Don’t try to lie ummm spin your way out of the hole?, you’ll only dig deeper.

    3. Interesting that you state:

      You may recall that the lesson plan asked students “how they could help the president”, which I believe was an utterly inappropriate and stupid question for a government to be asking children.

      There was a President awhile ago, you may recognize the quotes, that said,

      …let us begin anew – remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof

      This gentleman also said,

      And if a beachhead of cooperation may push back the jungle of suspicion, let both sides join in creating a new endeavour, not a new balance of power, but a new world of law, where the strong are just and the weak secure and the peace preserved.

      And finally, you’ll get this one, he said,

      And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you – ask what you can do for your country.

      What, in you view, is objectionable about a President asking the youth of our country to believe in helping and caring for those less fortunate? Isn’t that the cornerstone of Republican values – the Christian mantra? Why is it dictatorial to have a President ask children to believe in him when the country lacks strong moral leaders?

      It is the hieght of hyperbole to compare any President to those murderous dictators.

      1. because asking what you can do for your country is NOT the same as asking you to help the president.

        there’s a reason that the various oaths sworn by our leaders, judges, and members of the military swear to defend the Constitution and not a particular person.

        1. I’ve repeated this a few times…and been there when my troops (and occasionally, my officers) have done the same:

          I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same;

           and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States and the orders of the officers appointed over me,

          according to regulations and the Uniform Code of Military Justice. So help me God.

              1. After all, all he has to do is stop hiding behind his lawyers. He should release all of his criminal records, with all of his aliases, and the matter will be cleard up.

    4. What is wrong with that? He’s leading our country so and suggestions, advice, or other help would be a good thing. Keep in mind help coul be a letter that says “President Obama, I think your health plan is a bad idea.”

    5. “How they could help the President…” is a perfectly acceptable question to ask ANY AMERICAN.

      I remember another beloved President who said “Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you do for your country.” Was he like Stalin?

      Seriously, Pol Pot? You’re a fucking moron.  

    6. Not that I need to defend myself, but I think a little clarification is in order given the way the Washington Post quoted me.

      Let me translate that for you,

      Not that I need to defend myself but here I go anyway and by defend I mean point the finger at the entirely accurate quotation from my hysterical post. I’m a conservative which means I believe in personal responsibility unless I’m the one who’s being held personally responsible for my own words and deeds.

      Continuing,

      The quote is accurate, but there’s an important bit they missed.  What I objected to regarding Obama’s speech was the “lesson plan” that was to accompany the speech, not the speech itself.

      See I’m a reasonable guy, it’s not that I object to the content of the speech it’s just that… well totalitarianism! cult of personality! brainwashing!

      It’s funny to see Ross in one sentence point the finger at WaPo for the way they reported his post and then in the next sentence admit that the quote was entirely accurate. In other words Ross Kaminsky is a coward. He’s willing to paint comparisons between history’s greatest mass murderers and dictators and the democratically elected President of the United States but he has to equivocate when he’s called out on it. Instead of saying “Yes, I said it and I stand by my belief that the President is the equivalent of Stalin,” Kaminsky hems and haws trying to avoid fully owning his own words.

      Ross Kaminsky has demonstrated time after time that he is a man of exceedingly small intellect and of dubious ethical construct. Such men are best ignored and left to their own deranged minds. Unfortunately though the Denver Post has deemed his fringe rantings and paranoid delusions worthy of a very public forum and as such Kaminsky’s increasing recklessness cannot be simply ignored.

      In decades past Kaminsky would be left to stand on street corners screaming out his delusions as passerbys shuffled past avoiding any eye-contact and covering their children’s ears. In 2009 he has a featured spot on the website of a major American newspaper.

    7. In any case, I stand by my assertion that trying to steer the youth toward an adoration of the government and, in particulary, its charismatic leader, was what the Administration was originally trying to do and is uncomfortably close to what those dictators I named also did.

      It’s much better to keep our kids ignorant and uninformed so that they’ll be more likely to buy into your extremist bullshit.

      “Blessed are the clueless…”

  3. Obama will try to put the prettiest face (his) on a “new” health care reform bill.  It will contain some of the same key provisions of the widely detested HR3200, but he’ll re-word what they mean, wrap them in soft language, and try to get the public to buy into the building blocks of full-blown socialism without the public understanding that fact.  He’ll try to explain why the major provisions are good for the country, why the current system is unfair and inefficient (which it is, but not because there is too little government involvement), and why he’s going to “make the system work” for us…because he cares. (emphasis Twitty)

    link

    And from his write up of the Steamboat Institute’s Inaugural Freedom Conference we get a sense of what the crazy wing of the crazy party argues over:

    Next was an interesting and very controversial presentation by Mario Carrera and Marcelo Gaeta, both of Denver’s Spanish-language Entravision television station.  They suggested that politicians are making a huge mistake by not running ads in Spanish to reach Hispanics who are American citizens but who prefer to speak Spanish at home.  Rather than write more about this panel, which generated some rather tense moments in the room

    Really, that’s where the tension lies–whether the party should use electoral strategies to reach out to the state’s (and nation’s) fastest growing demographic??

    Also from that ‘Recap’ we get to glimpse the world through the crazy lens ourselves:

    One of the most interesting things [Michelle Bachmann] said was confirming something I’ve said to many people: When people tell me that Obama will back off the policy proposals that the public most hates, I generally reply that Obama is a committed ideologue and, unlike most politicians, will be perfectly happy to leave a far-left legacy even if it means losing his second election for president. Bachmann said that Obama said that very thing to her and a group of Congressmen (and Congresswomen) that he was meeting with earlier this year.

    I assume this is when the President told Members that he was going to do what he felt was right for the country and not worry about his re-election?  

    Terribly radical comments from a President in difficult times (if you’re a wingnut who thinks that Obama is really a dictator akin to Pol Pot and Stalin out to indoctrinate our children with a Dept. of Education ‘lesson plan’).

    Ross, feel free to respond when you have something intelligent to say…

  4. I found and read the Kaminsky piece:

    Truly, what horrendous dictator of the 20th century did not try to create a cult of personality within the nation’s young people.  Stalin and Mao both created youth groups. We’ve all heard of the “Hitler Youth.”  Pol Pot operated similarly and Kim Jong Il does now. Obama’s tactics smell far too close to that same rancid broth.

    The Obama Adminstration knows that much of its support at the ballot box and in grassroots efforts came from young people who fell into Obama’s cult of personality.

    Totalitarians of all stripes put great emphasis on brainwashing the young, and Obama is no exception.

    And that’s why there has been so much outcry against Obama’s addressing the students.  It’s not that we know what the content of his speech will be.  But it’s that they’ve already tipped their hand as to their intent. emphasis Twitty

    Ross, spell out what their intent is, don’t insinuate and make weak links

    Otherwise I am left to imagine your argument going something like this:

    1. Kim Jong Il, Stalin, and Pol Pot all (presumably) put their pants on one leg at a time.  

    2. Obama (presumably) puts his pants on one leg at a time.

    Ergo: Obama is just like Kim Jong Il, Stalin, and Pol Pot.

    I note that you love to make the connection between reprehensible historical characters and Democrats (in a post, ironically, which has a tile calling out ‘political hackery’ on the left:

    http://www.politicswest.com/26

    It says a lot about the character of “liberals” these days: You’ll do or say absolutely anything to win, just like liberals of old such as Joe Stalin or Pol Pot. As I said, in a way I don’t blame you for attacking Schaffer given how little positive there is to say about Mark Udall other than that he’s a very nice guy (which I hear is absolutely true). It’s just troubling that the attacks are almost all lies. But as Goebbels said, and as you’ve clearly taken to heart, if you tell a big lie often enough, people will come to believe it.

    Question Ross–are you a political hack or just crazy?  This is not a trick question, you can answer ‘all of the above’.

    In another post you suggests maybe Obama is a kinder, gentler fascist–like Mussolini:

    http://www.politicswest.com/36

    Essentially the plan mixes fascism and socialism, with the government moving to dominate the energy industry and partly redistributing revenue derived from it, all at a massive cost to business and individuals. (Please think Mussolini, not Hitler.  This is about economics, not racism or genocide.)

    And where, Ross, do you turn when you want to cite solid information on climate change?

    (From the same post)

    …The Bloomberg article also notes that “Senator James Inhofe of Oklahoma, the top Republican on the Environment and Public Works Committee, says capping such emissions would cost taxpayers as much as $330 billion a year.”

    Ross, to quote our previous decider:

    Bring it On!

  5. for spending so much time writing about me.

    And again, let me be clear.

    I stand by MY words, in the context I wrote them.  I don’t have to stand by how the Post tried to make it look like I was objecting to the fact that The One wanted to speak to the kids.

    But, for those of you who think I’m backing away from criticizing Obama, think again.

    I do believe his tendencies are statist, totalitarian, anti-capitalist, and anti-American.  And why wouldn’t they be, given his influences throughout his lifetime.

    Beyond that, if you guys want to debate more, you can come to my site at http://rossputin.com and offer your mind-numbing leftist commentary.  Actually, I’d prefer not to waste my time with you since I think you’re at least as ridiculous as you think I am.

    1. but I’m not laughing with you.

      I’d prefer not to waste my time with you since I think you’re at least as ridiculous as you think I am.

      Stated like a true coward.  

    2. because only a witless moron so casually uses words like “statist, totalitarian, anti-capitalist, and anti-American” while not having the slightest clue what they mean.

      You’ve just gone further in proving the validity of Steve Balboni’s original questions. Millions of people live in Colorado. There are going to be intelligent conservatives who can write in this population. Why can’t the Denver Post recruit one or two of them that can really get people thinking, instead of giving space to a witless moron who has the argumentative skills of an especially dim high school sophomore.  

    3. I do believe his tendencies are statist, totalitarian, anti-capitalist, and anti-American.

      Statist – Government having a major role in the direction of the economy.

      Obama is statist, but so is every other president we have had from FDR on (including Reagan). This is akin to complaining that Obama believes in our government (which leads to the question – does Ross want is to disband the military which is our largest statist impact?).

      Totalitarian – really? After Bush/Cheney you want to claim that Obama is totalitarian? If so, how about some links to your complaining about Bush/Cheney on this subject. Because Obama is rolling back the totalitarian initiatives from Bush/Cheney.

      Anti-Capitalist – really how? Keep in mind that this country is capitalist but has never been libertarian. The west was built on free land and government subsidized railroads.

      Yes the government had to step in when the financial system self-destructed (and that effort started under Bush). But only an economic illiterate would disagree about the need for massive intervention.

      Our capitalist system requires government involvement to function smoothly. But that effort is fundamentally pro-capitalist. Because if capitalism had continued it’s horrible boom & bust cycles in the ’40s and on – we’ld all be living under communism by now.

      Anti-American – this is where Ross goes off the deep end. Obama still has the active support of over half the country. By definition that means he is with the mainstream and therefore pro-American.

      What is so deeply disturbing about this claim is it is a small minority that has decided that they, and they alone, will define what it means to be pro-American. And they will insure that the rest of us, the majority, will learn how we are supposed to think & to live.

      Ross – your approach to this is fundamentally anti-democratic. No matter how much your small minority thinks you should still be running the country – you lost. Deal with it as members of a democracy.

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

235 readers online now

Newsletter

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