Tell Us How You Really Feel, “Dr. Evil”

When is candor not a good thing? When a leading proponent of Amendments 60, 61 and Proposition 101–collectively known as the “Dr. Evil initiatives” or the “Bad 3”–decides to tell the world what he really hopes will happen. The AP’s Steven Paulson reports:

Gregory Golyansky, vice president of the Colorado Union of Taxpayers, told students and professors from the University of Colorado Denver on Friday that printed books are going away and light rail is 19th century technology.

“Do we really need to fill our prisons with nonviolent offenders, drug offenders, prostitutes and what not? We will have about two-thirds less people in our prisons. Government doesn’t need to be involved in building golf courses or exercise facilities or ice rinks. Libraries are going away. Paper books are the yesterday technology, being replaced by online information. Government should stop subsidizing things like light rail. It’s essentially a 19th century technology,” Golyansky said.

Natalie Menten said Friday she is the campaign spokeswoman and Golyansky doesn’t speak for the campaign, even though he has appeared on their behalf at a half dozen interviews and televised debates over the past few months. She did not return phone calls seeking further comment.

“His personal opinions are repugnant to our campaign. His political views are unrelated to the three ballot issues. He is anti-books, anti-transit, anti-prison; we disagree with him on all three,” she said…

Natalie Menten’s biggest problem here is not the uncomfortable frankness of Gregory Golyansky. She can bemoan how ‘repugnant’ Golyansky’s views are, but she has a much harder problem explaining how these initiatives do not directly service Golyansky’s nutty goals. Because, as virtually every elected official and government agency in the state is sounding the alarm about, what Golyansky wants is what these initiatives work towards.

All Golyansky did was spell it out–he’s done the people of Colorado a great service.

And we’re loath to mention it, but this wouldn’t be the same Greg Golyansky who Ken Buck risked his career to slip helpful information to as a federal prosecutor, when Golyansky was facing gun charges–would it? Say what you want about Golyansky, but he’s certainly more plugged in to conservative politics than Jane Norton let on this summer, while using Golyansky’s gun case against Buck, and representing Golyansky as a gun-peddling thug. And that explains a lot.

We suppose Buck doesn’t want the libraries to ‘go away’ either, but who knows? Perhaps somebody ought to ask, just to make sure–despite the fact that it’s virtually impossible to say what the answer would have been before the primary.

59 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. sxp151 says:

    I suppose once taxes are eliminated, churches and community groups will be able to house criminals in jails (after they’re done building libraries and light rail systems).

    • Libertad says:

      The problem here is the Democrat’s 6 year overreach … TAXES AND FEES and now we have 10%+ unemployement.

      Its no wonder these very fiscally conservative people went to the ballot – you forced them into a corner with the radical spending policies. You can’t even blame Bruce for these.

      So thanks Democrats for making the business community spend $6-10 million dollars to cover for your mistakes.

      $6-10million that’s not going to job creation or investment, way to go Democrats!

      • sxp151 says:

        Here’s a napkin. You might want to get a shot later.

        • Libertad says:

          Thanks Democrats for making the business community spend $6-10 million dollars to cover for your habitual spending and tax hikes!

          • NoCo_Indy says:

            Umm. It’s helping pay Adam Schrager’s salary, which allows him to stay on the political beat doing analysis instead of the much cheaper chasing-the-police-car beat. It helps pay for local print shops — you can’t outsource that, either. No, it’s not long-term spending, but it’s not like that money won’t find its way through the regional economy a few times.

      • DavidThi808DavidThi808 says:

        You’re right that this money could be much better spent growing businesses which would create more permanent jobs.

        You’re wrong that this was forced on anyone. Doug Bruce & Co. can run for the legislature and/or lobby for the changes they want. The bottom line is the people of Colorado don’t want Doug or what he’s peddling.

        The state and local governments are not perfect. Some people are overpaid, some positions are overstaffed, some employees are marginally competent. But that’s the human condition, we get the same thing in the private sphere.

        We constantly need to work to improve government. We need to best allocate our public spending. We need to watch carefully how much goes to the public sector.

        But our big problem today is not too much money going to the state and local government (except possibly Boulder – some of the stuff they fund here is nuts).

  2. JeffcoBlueJeffcoBlue says:

    They’ll never take responsibility for their Golyanskys, or what their bullshit campaign rhetoric actually MEANS (Golyansky explains it better), but if I didn’t immediately take to the streets with torches when I saw the ACORN video, I might as well have been helping prostitutes myself.

    Just another reason I sleep well at night.

  3. bullshit!bullshit! says:

    Was just in the nick of time! I wonder how long it takes before video from when Buck did have opinions on state initiatives is going to surface? He’s already screwed himself hopelessly on personhood, can the Bad Three be far behind?

  4. marilou says:

    is good.  It reverses the Colorado Supreme Court’s 4-3 opinion that freezing property tax rates is not a tax increase.  Even Treasurer Kennedy admitted under oath that it was a tax increase.  When the lefties on the supreme court make lefty decisions, voters ought to reverse them.

  5. In reality, the “bad 3” would let out a lot more than two thirds–more like 100%–of current inmates, violent and not.

    But it’s not wrong to support alternative corrections options for non-violent offenses. There are many people in prison now at a net cost to society who could be rehabilitated in their own communities while working and paying taxes and providing a net benefit to Colorado.  

    • I’m not sure the guy belonged in jail. Of course, it’s a self-serving attempt (of, by and for Golyanski) and he may be a sleeze, but if two DAs couldn’t make a case, he shouldn’t have been convicted at the felony level. His is a nice balance to Norton’s, Penry’s and Strickland’s self-service, too.

      Anyway, Cowgirl, I’m posting these comments here because it gives me a chance to acknowledge your concern about Colorado’s prison industry and your support of criminal justice reform, a citizen’s thanks, so to speak.

      • Fidel's dirt nap says:

        I was just commenting about how he tries to frame himself as an everyday guy when in fact he is pretty well connected and plays the game himself.  Either way I still think what Jane Norton did with this issue is disgusting.

        • for putting this video up. I had been unfamiliar with the episode, and his video, at least, recounted some of the issues, if only from his perspective. I, in no way, could feel sympathy for him, considering his record of stubborn, mean assaults on our institutions for his obviously anarchistic purposes. How anyone could ally himself with this guy is beyond comprehension.

  6. bjwilson83 says:

    despite that being the whole point of the article in the first place.

Leave a Reply

Comment from your Facebook account

You may comment with your Colorado Pols account above (click here to register), or via Facebook below.