CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

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) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

30%↑

15%↑

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

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%↑

35%↓

30%↑

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 08, 2009 03:40 PM UTC

Monday Open Thread

  • 59 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“True friends stab you in the front.”

–Oscar Wilde

Tweet
Share

Comments

59 thoughts on “Monday Open Thread”

  1. The Denver Chamber, Colorado BioScience Assn and the Metro Denver Economic Development Corp were three of five groups who ran a 2/3 of a page ad in the Daily Sentinel this morning about how wonderful a Governor Ritter has been.  THe others were PhRMA and Amgen,  

    The ad headline is “Bill Ritter Understands Colorado’s Economy”.  

    Did this run in any other papers?  Interesting that it is in the GJ paper.  We do not have Pharma research jobs.  Sort of dicy to tought your accomplishments in other parts of the state when the unemployment rate in GJ has jumped from 3% to 8% in 5 months.  

    1. My sense is that Colorado’s economy is in at least three part: Agriculture; Finance/Tech/Services; and Natural resources, especially oil shale.

      Lots of people in the Front Range view the Farther Flung Territory west of Georgetown as a place you go to ski or hike or camp or look at ancient ruins–not where you go to rip up the scenery to extract carbon energy sources. And the High Plains are what you fly over in even higher planes to and from other outposts of civilization.

      Relatively, the balance among these three is constantly shifting, mostly in favor of the Front Range Corridor, which looks more like California than Kansas.

      The “economy” of Colorado should be economies, plural, and they generate quite different viewpoints.

      2. Is not a part of the economy, and until questions about technology, power and water can be answered, it won’t be.

        Perhaps you’re confusing it with oil and natural gas.

        At any rate, you’re right that Colorado has many economies with the advantage to the Front Range. Just like always.

      3. Would “extraction of mineral resources” be more accurate? Can’t say exactly how I got the impression  that the prospect of exploiting oil shale causes rapid breathing and an elevated heart rate among some politicos.

        And I left out a fourth leg–and a big one– of the state’s economy: the federal government, particularly the Defense Department, which helps explain the other-worldly politics of a certain congressional district that coincides with the Tribal Area dominated by the domestic Taliban an hour’s ride south of Denver, purely by coincidence I’m sure.

        As to “the advantage of the Front Range just like always,” isn’t that where the people live, Native Born Cowboys and Migrating Coasters alike? If trees could vote….but they can’t. Dollar bills can, of course, but not the trees, nor the cows, nor the amber waves of grain. And the fruited plain? Well…

  3. Picking up on an exchange at the end of the Weekend Open Thread relating to Ritter’s vetoes of two pro-labor bills after the the legislature had adjourned:

    Whether or not Ritter was playing games by waiting for the legislature to go away–clearly obviating the opportunity to override the vetoes (which may or may not have happened)–appearances can take on a life of their own. Thus, it’s undeniably true that “Ritter waited until the legislature adjourned before vetoing two bills favored by labor unions.”

    Was the waiting part of some grand strategy, cooked up by a “master strategist” plying his trade in the backwaters of the Far Flung Territories? We’ll never know. The sequence brings to mind The Silent One’s statement after the death penalty repeal bill narrowly failed: “I have an opinion, but I’m not going to tell you what it is.” Was this also the case when the lockout and firemen’s bills were progressing through the legislature? Or was The Silent One waiting to score points with the CofC et al., figuring this would be more beneficial to his campaign than pissing off the left would be harmful?

    Silent One’s motives are impossible to know. His way of proceeding reminds me of cooking. Individual ingredients may withstand scrutiny, but the final dish can come out as a savory stew, or a stinkin’ mess that smells like it already passed through at least one alimentary canal (or is that “cowimentary canal?”)..

    Ritter Stew anyone?

    2. A quick check of the General Assembly’s website will tell you your conspiracy that the Gov purposefully waited until the Legislature had adjourned is wrong.

      Ritter didn’t receive HB 1170 until after the last day of the session, which was May 6th.  He vetoed it one week after he received it.

      Likewise, SB180 wasn’t signed by the Speaker until the 14th and the President didn’t see it until the 19th.  they sent the bill to the Governor on the 19th..

      So yes,

      Thus, it’s undeniably true that “Ritter waited until the legislature adjourned before vetoing two bills favored by labor unions.”

      but that doesn’t mean the Governor waited to veto these bills with some malicious design in his head.

      1. …of my comment will reveal that I happily distinguish between facts and appearances. Intentions don’t really enter the picture, since they are hard to know with any degree of certainty. But in the cases of the labor bills–as in the capital punishment bill–one is hard-pressed to imagine that had Big Bill wanted them to become law, he could have/would have spoken up and helped formulate acceptable versions. Manifestly this did not happen. Why it didn’t happen is a matter of endless speculation, nothing more.

        What DID happen was (a) both houses of the legislature passed the bills; (b) Ritter vetoed both bills after the legislature had adjourned.

        What did NOT happen was Ritter speaking up before vetoing both bills.

        No conspiracy theory whatsoever; just a simple chronology.

        Now, sir, may we bring you some Tobasco (r) for your stew?

  4. I guess the Army really doesn’t need more training land to add more units to Fort Carson:

    Thousands of soldiers relocating to Fort Carson

    “FORT CARSON (AP) – Fort Carson will see a surge in the number of soldiers moving to southern Colorado, with thousands of arrivals expected this summer.

    “Military officials say they expect to see an average of as many as 300 new soldiers a day relocating to Fort Carson. Lynthia Washington, who handles the paperwork for arriving soldiers, says the big increases will begin during the middle of June.

    “The majority of the new arrivals are expected to come from Texas’, as about 6,500 soldiers from the 4th Infantry Division headquarters and its 1st Brigade Combat Team move to Colorado.

    “Local businesses are hoping the thousands of soldiers will be an economic boon. The Apartment Association of Southern Colorado says the military is its biggest source of renters.”

    http://www.9news.com/news/loca…

    Remember folks, these are members of the Republican Party, the so-called experts on the Military.  

    1. .

      and didn’t the US Congress have to approve them ?

      So how is it that you think that the Army can stop the transfers in a month’s time, after spending more than $2 billion on new facilities and upgrades to infrastructure ?  

      If they don’t need the land, why all this fuss ?  

      To prepare soldiers for wars like Afghanistan in the future, the compact (10 miles X 25 miles) downrange portion of Fort Carson is of little use.  Ditto for PCMS.  

      I suppose that a lot of benefit can be had with simulations conducted inside buildings with computer mockups of remote villages,

      but for my money I’d like to let soldiers actually go outside, disperse the way they are dispersed in Afghanistan, and learn how to move, shoot, communicate and reprovision in that situation.  That is tough to do when you can see the next unit, only a mile away.  Soldiers are nothing if not resourceful.  Rather than practicing going through established procedures to get fuel for a generator, if a different unit just down the road can trade for it, that’s what will happen.  And the unit doesn’t figure out how to deal with the problem once they are deployed to Mali.

      .  

      1. …usually Major unit redeployments are part of the DoD budgeting process, and do get the 5-year treatment.

        Smaller, subordinate units can and do get redeployed with only a Congressional Briefing. Post-GW1 Fort Hood was a combination of both.

        And we were woefully unprepared to deal with the Family Member issue – we had housing and barracks space for everyone, but nothing for the family members to do other than be good Army spouses. The divorce rate skyrocketed the first couple of years back from The Suck Part1

        As far as training for resourcefulness, you just described my NCOER for all the years I supervised troops. It was up to the guys with stripes to figure out how to get fuel for the heaters and extra wood for the GP medium tents (usually at the expense of a nearby unit.)

        I do know that at JROTC at Fort Polk, the guys in the AAEFES gut trucks were cadre, mining the newly-arrived training units for Intel. They also do put them in the odd logistical situations to see what they come up with. My buddy stole stuff he needed from the training cadre.  

  5. On Saturday in Parachute, Rep. Kathleen Curry (D-61), who has been spending her legislative career working on tighter oil-and-gas regulations, and Democrat Garfield County Commissioner, TrГ©si Houpt, who is also a member of the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission (COGCC), were invited to speak to a mineral royalty owners meeting.

    Republican politicians, GarCo commissioners John Martin and Mike Samson, Rep. Steve King (R-54), and gubernatorial candidate, Scott McInnis, also attended.

    What started out as a civil Q&A with Curry and Houpt turned into a vicious verbal assault by some members of the audience.

    The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel reported: http://www.gjsentinel.com/hp/c…

    Mineral owners Saturday assailed a Democratic lawmaker over the state’s new oil and gas rules….

    “The new regulations basically took away my minerals rights,” Tom Rutledge told state Rep. Kathleen Curry, D-Gunnison, at a meeting of the National Association of Royalty Owners in Parachute.

    The Grand Junction resident said his land in North Park was declared off-limits to drilling under new rules designed to protect wildlife. “I didn’t donate my land to become wildlife habitat,” he said.

    “I don’t appreciate the tone of this entire discussion,” Curry said after also hearing criticism from other mineral owners, including one who said “Demoncrats” are responsible for taking people’s property rights….

    “This is your fight; this isn’t my fight,” McInnis joked to Curry when she asked the Grand Junction resident whether he wanted to jump into Saturday’s debate over the new rules.

    What the GJ reporter failed to do is Google Mr. Rutledge’s name. He works for Laramie Energy as a landman. http://www.laramie-energy.com/…

    Rutledge “has been engaged primarily in lease acquisitions and mineral/ leasehold title research and due diligence in developmental areas for exploration companies. Tom has also acquired transmission and gathering lines for his clients and has negotiated over 150 surface use agreements in irrigated farmlands.”

    Meaning, Rutledge was not at the meeting as a royalty owner, he was there to fry more fish. He doesn’t own a ranch in North Park either.

    Plus, Rutledge has tried to monopolize other public meetings featuring Democratic elected officials, like Sen. Bennet a month or so ago in Grand Junction. Rutledges’ MO is to spout off on takings of private property rights, etc. Then other industry plants in the audience join the chorus, shouting down the speaker.

    Did the Republicans at the royalty owners meeting try to retain decorum? They sat silent and McInnis even joked about Curry’s situation to the audience. That’s leadership for you.

    The most disturbing fact is the oil-and-gas industry is trying to hijack public meetings in Gas Country, targeting Democratic elected officials — and the local media lacks the depth to do any investigative reporting. No doubt, this is a preview of things to come along the 2010 campaign trail.

    1. particularly the part about him not being a property owner in North Park, then this needs wider exposure. Maybe float this to the Denver Post?

      1. The key issues are the guy does not identify himself as a Laramie Energy landman and he is purposely disrupting public meetings held by Democratic officials.

        Here is his bio, I don’t see “owner” mentioned, but we are mincing words. http://www.laramie-energy.com/…

        “Having also been a rancher from 1995 – 2005, Tom knows firsthand the challenges of coordinating surface operations with the concerns of farmers and ranchers in the conservation of their agricultural heritage. Tom operated a 2,000 acre ranch in the North Park, Colorado area that included the management of irrigation, pasture for owned yearlings, hay crop harvesting, and maintenance of fence lines.”

        1. That’s past tense. Does he own it now or not? That really is the question here for me. Your other points are equally valid, particularly about who he represents, but if he is no longer a land owner, then he flat out lied and frankly, that’s what caught my attention n your comment.

                  1. of the Q&A portion of last winter’s Ritter/Bennet meeting (available for download on my blog).

                    If it’s Rutledge, he did not deceive at that meeting–he said “I’m, uh, been a rancher for 11 years over in Walden and now I’m in the oil and gas industry.”  He also said that he still owns 320 acres near Walden–just not ranching it.

                    1. Damn, it pays to record this stuff, I have to say.

                      Thanks for this, Ralphie. I appreciate it.  

                    2. Thanks! I was at the royalty meeting (and at the Ritter/Bennet event) and Rutledge did NOT identify himself as a member of the industry when he started to bully Rep. Curry and COGCC member/GarCo Commissioner Tresi Houpt last Saturday.

                      I’m sure these ladies have been in a lot of hot discussions with certain members of the industry — and under law enforcement protection in these situations (last year’s COGCC’s hearing in Grand Junction comes to mind)– but should they expect to be ambushed at a small royalty owner meeting in Parachute?

                      Take another look at the Sentinel article http://www.gjsentinel.com/news… and you will find Rutledge, a Laramie Energy employee, has replied to the story. He wants some “eye-to-eye” contact with another blogger.

                      He sounds threatening to me.

                    3. Royalty-owners meeting was hijacked by industry supporters

                      I attended the mineral royalty owners meeting in Parachute on June 6. Several members of the audience turned an interesting question-and-answer session into a verbal political assault against Rep. Kathleen Curry and Garfield County Commissioner and COGCC member, TrГ©si Houpt.

                      The two women were invited to talk about how state regulations were working to protect mineral owners, who claim industry under-reports gas production and overcharges on production costs. As some attendees turned rude and vicious, I began thinking this group deserved to be out-maneuvered by the oil-and-gas industry.

                      In particular, one person, Tom Rutledge, riled up the audience claiming his private property rights on his North Park ranch had been taken away. If you Google his name, you’ll discover that Rutledge is a landman for Laramie Energy, “engaged primarily in lease acquisitions and mineral/leasehold title research in developmental areas for exploration companies.”

                      Rutledge might be an industry “agitator.” I saw him try to hijack another meeting with the same spiel, this time with Sen. Michael Bennet in Grand Junction a month ago.



                      Visiting Republican politicians, County Commissioners John Martin and Mike Samson, Rep. Steve King and governor candidate Scott McInnis did nothing to restore order at the royalty meeting. In fact, McInnis joked about it to the audience. Gentlemen, indeed.

                      When will the public and the media get wise to how the oil-and-gas industry continues to speak with two heads? Obviously, one sector of the industry is out to disrupt our political process and public meetings, and to keep the public bamboozled.

                      LESLIE ROBINSON

                      Rifle

                      NARO meeting was to brainstorm issues

                      I am extremely disappointed in Dennis Webb’s article on the front page of The Daily Sentinel June 7. I am a land and mineral owner who attended the NARO meeting and applaud the rules.

                      Mr. Rutledge is employed by the industry and is not a NARO member. His manner was inappropriate and disrespectful, and co-opted our meeting. Perpetuating indecent and inaccurate labels is harmful to considerate discourse. Mr. Webb’s portrayal that this one person represents anyone other than himself does an injustice to the majority of us royalty owners in attendance. Such inaccurate reporting further injures our ability to receive fair treatment and respect.

                      The purpose of the meeting was to brainstorm our issues, not about the adopted rules where the majority has spoken on a balanced need. Based on my experiences with the oil and gas development, I need all the assistance I can find to protect my property and way of life. Those rules are crucial to my survival, as well as for wildlife, neighbors and Colorado residents at large.

                      Kathleen Curry is the one legislator who has worked with land and royalty owners to understand and address the major obstacles we face on a variety of fronts.  I am impressed by the courtesy she afforded the bullies in this audience.  She is to be commended for her representation of her constituency and Western Colorado, as a person as well as a politician.

                      MARION WELLS

                      Parachute

          2. Got confirmation that Rutledge owns some property in North Park that has a conservation easement. I made the wrong conclusion from his bio on the Laramie Energy website.

            However, a mineral rights expert asked if Rutledge might have bought that property knowing there was an easement already designated on that ground. Still investigating…..

            But let us not forget, that does not give him a green light to try to intimidate Rep. Curry and Commissioner Houpt.

            2. I really appreciate that. And good on you for getting all the facts and making that correction. That’s more than I can say for about 90% of the MSM. Well done, Sloper.

              And yes, your larger point still stands.  

            1. I had a recorder on the podium and recorded the entire meeting.  I didn’t run the Ritter-bashing part on my blog because the audio was so poor (the “rancher from Walden” was halfway across the room).

              If you want me to try to dig up that portion of the meeting, go to the link in my profile and use the “contact” link to email me.

  7. I just got an email blast from her campaign and there is no lonk to contribute and no request for money. Not even a little one at the bottom.

    Whoever gets the GOP nomination in CD-4, be careful what you wish for…

  8. Unfortunately the Sentinel reporter didn’t dig into this, but here is a response from the Nat’l Assoc of Royalty Owners on the meeting last week at which McInnis and Curry spoke, online now at the Sentinel…

    Curry works with mineral owners

    When an open meeting is publicized, there is no control over the folks who attend. Unfortunately, the Rocky Mountain Chapter of the National Association of Royalty Owners meeting on Saturday in Parachute was attended by a non-member who tried to attack the most heroic and champion legislator that the mineral owners have ever had, Rep. Kathleen Curry.

    This person has been an oil and gas industry worker for over 20 years and attempted to subvert the philosophy of the members of the organization. Fortunately, the experience and expertise of the members of the National Association of Royalty Owners over the last 28 years will continue to remain true to those members of our leadership who have a desire to learn about how to protect our minerals and our money.

    The mineral owners have worked excessively hard to make sure that all of school districts, towns and other special districts receive their fair share of the mineral income earned in our state. Rep. Curry has fought for and with us over the last 7 years to protect our state and none of us, across the state can thank her enough. She and Commissioner Tresi Houpt go beyond exemplary.

    Thank you to both of them for being strong leaders and we promise, NARO -Rockies will never again allow any disrespectful behavior at any of our functions. Thanks to themfor all of their years of service and we hope they enjoy many more.

    Mary Ellen Denomy, President

    NARO-Rockies

    Parachute

    1. The Larmie Energy PR guys better be working overtime on this situation. Verbal intimidation towards two female politicians by one of their employees — and he had to pick on two of the most influencial women in state oil-and-gas politics — wasn’t exactly a way to win friends in the legislature and on the COGCC.

      I bet EnCana, Williams, Antero, et al, are not happy someone messed in their nest either, especially when their list of friends in state government grow smaller.

      When one company does wrong, it’s a reflection on the whole industry.

  9. The idea of going green by using white makes sense to some. For others it causes a special kind of internal warming.

    …

    Mesa County Commissioner Craig Meis called the global-warming mention “a great scare tactic.”

    “They can have their opinion about white rooftops and white roads. I can have my opinion that they are smoking something,” he said.

    http://www.gjsentinel.com/news…  

  10. Here’s an easy call: Boycott FedEx.

    From the WSJ no less: http://online.wsj.com/article/…

    How to boycott FedEx? Well, don’t send something that way. Don’t go into Kinko’s (or the former Kinko’s). Insist that any online purchase go some other way…NOT FedEx. Make this campaign known far and wide.

    Maybe you can suggest some other approaches.

      2. In Denver, Teamsters Local 435.

        One reason you see UPS drivers huffing it all the time is that the company pays them a lot so demands a lot.  

    2. Contact Udall, Bennett, and your representative in support of the bill that FedEx is opposing.

      Trade a post, or two, or three, on ColoradoPols for messages to your glorious representatives in Washington.

  11. Iran

    Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has hurt the nation by creating tensions with other countries, his main challenger in the June 12 presidential election said in a televised debate.

    “In your foreign policy, you have damaged the nation’s dignity,” former Prime Minister Mir Hossein Mousavi said during yesterday’s evening debate in Tehran broadcast live by state television. “Shame has been brought on Iran. You have created tension with other countries. Heavy costs have been brought on the nation in these four years.”

    1.    I wouldn’t be surprised if the Guardian Council (the mullahs who vet all candidates for political office) removes Hossein Mousavi’s name from the ballot for taking their sock puppet Ahmadinejad to task for some of the stuff he’s said and done.  

      1. There was more than a bit of tension a while back when I’m-Mad-in-the-Head started threatening nuclear weaponry.  Khamenei was pretty quick to come out against that statement, and there have been rumors of ongoing distrust/dislike – mostly from the Council toward Ahmadinejad.

        The problem is, if they don’t have Ahmadinejad, they get Mousavi who is more of a reformer than Khatami ever was and might threaten the rule of the Council.

        Best guess – they’ll let the election happen and will try to control Mousavi (if need be) the same way they controlled Khatami – by edict, by the limited power of the Parliament, and by their influence over people.

        1. pretty democratic. Not perfect. Not the way we would do it. But you have different centers of power, most of them elected. And their Council is like our Supreme Court (especially in the 2000 election).

          Again – not identical but it is pretty democratic.

          1. but without checks and balances it will never be a true democracy.

            It actually highlights a point from a fareed zakaria book, that liberalism (in the classic sense) is more important than democracy.

            That’s why I put my money on Jordan, he’s trying to teach his people to be liberal democrats (lower case letter in the classic sense).

            1. Iran is messy and it’s not the way we would do it. But out of that mess comes a concensus where everyone is part of the process and accepts that they live with the results of the process because they have a shot in the next election.

              It’s like betting on India over China.

        2. The Supreme council is the senior branch of government and they will retain control.

          The tone would change, but they can control the substance by edict.

          The reality is the economy is a mess and their people need jobs–how/if they deal with that problem will occupy the president no matter who wins.

    2. Heard on the news this morning that Ahmedinejad went off the deep end and insulted Mousavi’s wife.  All of the opposition is rallying to defend her, and Mousavi is benefiting immensely because of it.  (Poll says he’s up by 15 points?!?!?)

        1. Not so good in Iran, which still remembers something about women’s rights and still elects lots and lots of women to Parliament every year.

          The Iranian President has always been, um, “flamboyant” (okay, arrogant) in his speeches, which went over reasonably well internally when it was Iran Member of the Axis of Evil vs. George Bush’s Crusading United States.  It obviously didn’t go over so well in the debate.

        2. The Iranian Revolutionary Guard has not stepped in to halt large protests against Ahmedinejad.  That’s probably a good sign that the Council is on Mousavi’s side – or at least is not against him even with all of his reform rhetoric.

          Gonna be a fun ride ahead in Iran, I think…

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

255 readers online now

Newsletter

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