Gardner Wants Obamacare Replacement to Make Colorado Better, But No GOP Bill Does This

(“Undecided” for Gardner is another word for “Whatever Mitch wants” — Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Yuma) is a glorified page at this point in his career.

U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner (R-CO) has told multiple reporters he’s undecided on the latest GOP bill to kill Obamacare, in part, as he told KOA radio this morning, because he wants to see “whether Colorado is better or worse” under the legislation.

But every analysis of the bill so far, like the one from the progressive Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, shows that Colorado will be worse off.

Gov. John Hickenlooper told reporters yesterday that the legislation would cost the state $800 million to $1 billion in federal health-care dollars.

And it’s widely predicted that millions of people would lose health insurance under the latest GOP bill, just as they would under previous Republican proposals that upend Medicaid, the state-federal health insurance program for children, elderly, disabled, and other poor people.

So it’s hard to know what information Gardner is waiting for.

In fact, when asked directly by Denver Post political reporter Mark Matthews what specific information he’s looking for, Gardner replied, “just additional information.”

Strangely, though, Gardner told KDMT’s Jimmy Sengenberger last month that the Cassidy-Graham bill would put the country in the “right direction” on health care and “could result in a 42 percent increase in funding for the state of Colorado.”

Gardner did not divulge where he got this information and a call to his office was not immediately returned today.

On KOA radio, Gardner said of the latest Obamacare replacement bill, “I hope it has bipartisan participation and support.”

It’s not clear why Gardner or anyone would express hope for the unreal outcome of bipartisan support, given the GOP’s seven-year partisan campaign to kill Obamacare. Could Gardner possibly be trying to score political points with rhetoric that’s completely divorced from reality?

Here are Gardner’s full comments from KOA, followed by his comments to The Post.

(more…)

Coffman says Tancredo is “bored” and angry

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Tom Tancredo y Mike Coffman, hermanos por vida.

Former Republican Congressman Tom Tancredo is considering a run for governor because he’s “bored” and mad at Republicans for attacking him last time he ran.

That’s the opinion of U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman (R-CO), as explained in a radio interview yesterday.

“I think [Tancredo] misses the spotlight,” Coffman told KHOW guest host Krista Kafer Tuesday. “He really thrives on the attention. And I think he’s bored. I mean, this is cheap entertainment for him. I think it will be awfully hard on the Republican Party.”

Harsh stuff, but it didn’t seem to faze Tank, who joked, “If that’s the best he can come up with, I’ve got nothing to worry about from Mike Coffman.”

“If Mike Coffman was living up to the promises he made me before he was elected, and the people who are running for governor would say the things I believe need to be said, I wouldn’t be thinking about running,” Tancredo told me.

“The idea that I’m bored, well, maybe it’s because he doesn’t have grandchildren, and he doesn’t know how much time they take up with baseball games,” said Tancredo. “It’s constant. Baseball, hockey and basketball. Believe me, I’m not bored.”

A Tancredo’s campaign could “give us a Democratic governor, and I don’t think [Tancredo] cares,” said Coffman on the radio.

If that’s true, Coffman must think a lot of Republicans don’t care or are deluding themselve, because Coffman believes Tancredo can win the GOP gubernatorial primary next year.

Coffman, who once called Tancredo his hero, said on air that if Tancredo can “bring a certain element out” to vote in the crowded Republican primary, Tancredo “may just do it.”

“A certain element? I don’t doubt that to him, that means the troglodytes,” Tancredo laughed in response, adding that he agrees he can win the GOP primary, especially in a crowded field, due to the loyalty of his voters. And in the general, he thinks he’d get serious support from unaffiliated voters.

On the radio, Coffman called it “just bizarre” that Tancredo “came back to register as a Republican so he could run for Governor.”

(more…)

A Denver Post Editor Disputes GOP Gubernatorial Candidate’s Claim that Post Has Decided Not to Endorse Polis

(Mitt Romney’s Nephew jumps the gun – Promoted by Colorado Pols)

At a Sept. 9 campaign stop in Grand Junction, GOP gubernatorial candidate Doug Robinson told the crowd that the “editor” of The Denver Post informed him that U.S. Rep Jared Polis (D-CO) is “too left” for Colorado, and that the unnamed editor “can’t see [The Post] endorsing” Polis.

“This is an interesting story,” said Robinson told supporters at the meet-and-greet event. “When I announced my candidacy, the editor of The Denver Post called me. I was like, ‘Really?’ [laughter]. You know what I mean? Because they have endorsed Democrats for generations. [crowd: “Oh Yeah!”] You know what I mean? And he said, ‘Don’t write us off.’ He says, ‘We are going to endorse a candidate. And if it’s Jared Polis, I can’t see us endorsing him. He’s too left.’ [crowd: “Wow! Ohooo”]. ‘Too far out for Colorado.’ He says, ‘He may be too far out for Colorado.'”

That’s an “interesting story,” to say the least.

Asked about it Friday, Denver Post editorial Page editor Chuck Plunkett said via email that no one on The Denver Post’s editorial board, which has the job of making endorsements for the newspaper, spoke with Robinson about Polis in April, when Robinson claimed the call took place, and that The Post has “not reached any conclusions about endorsements in any of the races.”

Robinson had a phone conversation with the Chair of The Post, Dean Singleton, a few days before Robinson entered the gubernatorial race, but Singleton did not talk to Robinson about Polis at all, according to Plunkett.

(more…)

Buck Now Says He’s “Very Unlikely” to Run for Attorney General

(So much for that? – Promoted by Colorado Pols)

After first mulling a run for Colorado attorney general if current AG Cynthia Coffman decided to enter the gubernatorial race–and then allegedly being on the verge of diving into the race and creating chaos–U.S. Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) is now saying it’s “very unlikely” he’d run for state AG.

Asked by KHOW 630-AM’s Ross Kaminsky whether he’d run for the office if Coffman ran for governor, Buck said, “Probably a month ago I would have said yes. Right now, I think it’s very unlikely that I do anything other than stay focused on running for the 4th Congressional and doing the job that I enjoy doing here in DC.”

“I think it’s getting late in the game to put a campaign together for governor or for attorney general,and therefore I am happy doing what I am doing,” Buck continued.

Buck’s comment about it being late to start a gubernatorial campaign may come as news to Colorado Treasurer Walker Stapleton and Coffman, both of whom are still rumored to be considering a run. Former GOP Congressman Tom Tancredo may still jump in, he’s said.

Buck grabbed headlines last month for stating, in a Denver Post op-ed, that the Republican Party is “dead.”

This pessimistic view fueled rumors that Buck would jump at the chance to run for Colorado attorney general.

But after penning the op-ed, Buck said on a Denver radio show:

“I am very happy where I am,” Buck told KNUS’ Dan Caplis. “And I am really feeling emboldened, in a lot of ways, about things – having a voice that can try to change the direction of policy in DC. And so I’m very thankful for that.”

But in the same radio interview, Buck also said that the GOP, as a “political party, that is fighting for the conservative beliefs that that you and I share – and that many others share – the Party is dead.”

Buck lost a close U.S. Senate race in Colorado in 2010 to Democratic Sen. Michael Bennet.

Coffman Says Dems Want to Score Political Points with “Visual of Mass Deportation” of Immigrants

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

In a radio interview last week, U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman (R-CO) said Democrats would love to exploit imagery of mass deportations of young immigrants.

Asked by KHOW’s Ross Kaminsky how he thought Democrats would feel about Trump’s decision to end Obama’s DACA order, which allowed immigrants who came here as children to remain in the U.S., Coffman said:

Coffman (here at 28 min 30 seconds): “I think they would love a visual of mass deportation of these young people. The young people who are essentially a combination of working and going to school. I mean that’s the visual they want to take them into 2018 midterm… They want to appear to be on the side of these DACA children but, if given the opportunity, they’d just as soon [laughs] let Republicans have their fingerprints on the failure to pass this.”

Coffman did not specify which Democrats told him they’d like to use imagery of deportations, ordered by Republicans, in the political campaigns. Nor did Coffman say he was speculating. Coffman’s office does not return my calls.

And I couldn’t find Democrats who want to have a “visual of mass deportation” on the shelf for future political use.

Coffman has said he supports Trump’s decision to dismantle protections for DACA immigrants, but he also backs legislation to put DACA protections into law.

Coffman’s comment about the Democrats’ views on DACA reflects the thinking of some politicians and political operatives who become so focused on the “optics,” “visuals,” and political strategery of campaigns that they forget about the actual people involved.

In November, Coffman will have served 28 years in elected office, a point his opponents often highlight. His career in politics started in the state legislature in 1989. He was also Colorado’s State Treasurer and Secretary of State, prior to his election to Congress.

Brauchler Wants Undocumented Immigrants Out…And Also to Remain Here

(Mike Coffman must be so proud — Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Over the weekend, former Trump strategist Steve Bannon warned of a Republican “civil war” over whether immigrants, who entered the U.S. illegally as children, should be allowed to stay here.

One response to a civil war is to try to be on both sides of it.

That’s apparently what Colorado gubernatorial candidate George Brauchler is doing, judging from recent media statements, in which he sided with Trump’s decision to end DACA and deport young immigrants.

But he also reportedly said young undocumented DACA immigrants should remain in the U.S., possibly with legal status, with the permission of Congress.

In one KNUS radio interview Sept. 7, Brauchler compared Obama’s DACA order delaying the deportation of young immigrants to Hickenlooper’s decision to stay the execution of murderer Nathan Dunlap.

“And I think what we’re seeing here – not just with DACA – but you can see, whether it’s the reprieve of Nathan Dunlap or, you know, the different steps that different Democrat executives have taken, there’s a real interest now in circumventing our representative and constitutional processes in order to accomplish what someone believes is some altruistic goal,” Brauchler, a Republican, told KNUS host Dan Caplis Sept. 7.

Brauchler said, “So, what President Trump did, I think, was exactly appropriate. We should have never been in this boat, and I do think it’s up to the Congress now to figure out how to navigate these waters.”

How should Congress do it? That’s when Brauchler jumps to the other side of the GOP’s civil war, saying he’s open to giving DACA recipients a “path to some legal status down the road” but not citizenship.

Brauchler struck a similar note in a Grand Junction campaign stop, where WesternSlopNow.com reported, “Brauchler also says he does not agree with DACA students losing the right to be here and achieve higher education. Therefore, he hopes Congress can come up with a solution to this ongoing situation.”

Listen to Brauchler on KNUS 710-AM’s Dan Caplis Show Sept. 7:

Former state GOP leader wants to “fire up” Trump voters

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Former Colorado Republican chair Steve House wants conservatives to “really fire up our base and all the people who voted for Donald Trump.”

How to do this? House explained on Facebook that he wants Republicans to press on with conservative legislation, like a repeal of Obamacare.

“Imagine how fund raising would increase if we were all ecstatic about the results we were getting,” wrote House on Facebook. “Do they somehow think that blaming Trump and the issues in the White House will get people to vote for them?”

In his Facebook post, House was reacting to a CNN piece pointing to voter discontent with Trump and the possibility that Republicans will react by backing off the president’s right-wing agenda.

“As a business person if I wanted to get my agenda implemented and the company on a pathway to success I wouldn’t sit around thinking about how to keep my job,” House wrote on Facebook. “I would actually implement the solution that would make the company successful. Career politicians continue to be the issue, in my opinion.”

Last year, House decided not to seek a second term as state GOP chair, and Colorado Republicans elected Jeff Hays to the position. Hays has also backed the Trump agenda, most recently defending the President’s pardon of Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

It’s overreach to blame increased insurance costs on Obamacare

Predictably, Colorado Republicans are blaming Obamacare for increases in the cost of health insurance purchased from Colorado’s health insurance exchange.

“Thank you, #Obamacare,” tweeted Brauchler, a Republican, citing a Denver Post article about the rate hikes. The Post reported that U.S. Rep. Mike Coffman, U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner, and U.S. Rep. Scott Tipton, all Republicans, also blamed Obamacare for the rate increase.

Something tells me this won’t be the last time these folks will be blaming Obamacare for this or that healthcare problem.

Trouble is, if you read the Post’s story, by Jon Ingold, you find that the cause of the rate increase is, at least in part, the Republican efforts to kill Obamacare, according to state insurance commissioner Marguerite Salazar, who was quoted in The Post:

Salazar said insurers told regulators that the ongoing debate over whether to repeal the Affordable Care Act — and, essentially, change the rules for the individual market only a few years after the rules were first rewritten by the law, also known as Obamacare — led in part to the price increases. Insurers also cited more general market conditions in filings with the state justifying the proposed premiums.

“It was a struggle,” Salazar said. “Markets don’t like uncertainty, bottom line.”

Obviously, we don’t know what “general market conditions” contributed to the rate increases–or to what extent they were related to Obamacare. Though we do know that health insurance prices were increasing prior to Obamacare as well. And we know Republicans have so far chosen not to try to fix problems with Obamacare.

But it’s clearly a ludicrous overreach for Republicans to blame insurance increases on Obama’s health care law, after we just witnessed the spectacular crash of the GOP’s seven-year crusade to repeal Obamacare.

“Disgusted” Former State Senator Leaves Republican Party

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Former State Sen. George Rivera (R-Pueblo) has dropped his affiliation with the Republican Party because he is “absolutely disgusted with the current leadership” of Pueblo’s GOP.

 

Rivera, who revealed his decision in a Facebook post obtained from a source, defeated Pueblo State Sen. Angela Giron, a Democrat, in a 2013 recall election. But he promptly lost his Senate District 3 seat to a Democrat Leroy Garcia in the next general election.

Rivera was then elected as chair of the Pueblo Republican Party, until last year when Marla Spinuzzi Reichert took over the job.

Now, he wrote on Facebook, “Kathryn and I have in fact registered as independents because we are absolutely disgusted with the current leadership who have misled the membership with your Steak Fry Fundraiser but ho have also let slip away from us a valuable asset in the form of the trailer which was donated by Keith Swerdfeger and it was me who had to look in the eye and tell him his kind donation had been auctioned off.”

Rivera did not return a call seeking confirmation and comment.

Rivera got into a heated Facebook debate with Reichert over how funds from annual steak-fry fundraiser, organized by Tom Ready for the Let’s Win Committee, would be spent. (Exchange included in this post.)

(more…)

String Them Up?

Arvada’s former State Sen. Laura Woods updated her friends on Facebook about the struggles she’s been having with her livestock where she is now helping out.

She’s apparently so upset with someone who allegedly tampered with her cows, calves, and bulls that she hopes they “hang him.”

Asked by a commenter if you can “still string them up” for stealing livestock or running them off, Woods apparently wrote, “Oh, I wish.”

Woods, who does not return my calls and could not be reached to verify the post, provided by a source, lost her seat in a hotly contested race in November against Democratic State Sen. Rachel Zenzinger.

State Sen. Vicki Marble and lobbyist Joseph Neville “liked” Woods’ post.

Exit Interview: Political Reporter Marcus on his Decision to Leave Journalism

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Veteran Colorado political reporter Peter Marcus will leave journalism at the end of August to become  communications director for Terrapin Care Station cannabis company.

Marcus started his newspaper career in Colorado in 2005 at the Longmont Times-Call (as an intern). Then he had stints at the Denver Daily News (defunct, tragically), Colorado Statesman (recently absorbed by ColoradoPolitics.com), Durango Herald, and, finally, ColoradoPolitics.com.

Marcus answered a few questions via email about his future, his work as a reporter, and the state of journalism in Colorado. (See similar “Exit Interviews” with scribes who’ve left journalism here.)

(more…)

Conservative radio host dropped after showing independent streak

Denver radio legend Steve Kelley’s retirement last month from KNUS 710-AM made some news, but less noticed was the quiet shuffling off the air of Krista Kafer, who was Kelley’s KNUS co-host on the Kelley & Kafer show.

KNUS’s decision not to offer Kafer her own show, or pair her with someone else, was disappointing to me, because she frequently took less conservative stances than her fellow hosts. This enraged KNUS listeners, which made for fun listening.

For example, she endured months of radio attacks and anger for being a NeverTrumper, and she wasn’t shy about her stance. Sometimes she’d interject something about her garden, which spoke to me personally, and then she’d get back to a calm dissection of Trump or to something else, like a defense of the basic civil rights of Muslims.

I hope Kafer wasn’t pushed off the air because she wasn’t conservative enough for KNUS, but the fact that station manager Brian Taylor didn’t return my call doesn’t help quell my suspicions. To be clear, Kafer is super conservative, so it’s not like she was such an outcast there. But the duo who replaced here, Chuck Bonniwell and Julie Hayden, is far more conservative, especially Bonniwell. And they don’t elicit the same right-wing anger on air.

I was reminded of Kafer this weekend because she showed her guts and independence by writing a Denver Post column linking the Taylor Swift trial to her own experience being sexually harassed by a “syndicated columnist and cable news contributor.” A while back, on the radio, Kafer referred to him as a FOX News contributor whom she met when she volunteered at a conference.

Kafer wrote this weekend:

Some years ago when I was a technical writer with aspirations, I met a well-known syndicated columnist and cable news contributor at an event. He agreed to talk with me after his speech about my writing prospects. Advice over coffee! I was grateful and excited about the possibilities.

When I saw him at the post-speech reception, he didn’t ask me to sit and talk; he asked me up to his room. Completely stunned, I mumbled something vague and walked away. At 11:30 p.m. he called. I let it go to voicemail. When was I coming up, he asked. Bewildered and ashamed, I didn’t call him back. The incident hit me harder than the time a D.C. lobbyist slapped my butt.

Two months later the man called me and suggested that I’d misconstrued his invitation. Giving him the benefit of the doubt I suggested we have that coffee when I went to D.C. the next week. He wasn’t interested. He just wanted to know if I’d told anyone about the invitation to his room.

That’s pretty close to a mea culpa, but what am I to do with it? What he did wasn’t illegal. He has money, lawyers and prestige. What little I have can be taken from me. Plus my accusation would rouse a torrent of wrath from his supporters, who would accuse me of making it up or causing it to happen. Once again I would be objectified.

Wouldn’t you like to hear more of that kind of talk on KNUS?

Denver Post Coins New Term: “Colorado Obamacare Lie”

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

In an editorial this week, The Denver Post coined the term the “Colorado Obamacare lie” to describe repeated statements by GOP gubernatorial candidates that Obamacare is gobbling up the state budget when, in fact, it has “very little impact” on the state budget.

Nicely done.

And the phenomenon goes beyond GOP gubernatorial candidates, to Republicans in the state legislature and beyond.

For example, last January, State Sen. Tim Neville (R-Littleton) told the “Americhicks,” Molly Vogt and Kim Munson, on KLZ 560-AM, that the Obamacare, also called the “Medicaid expansion,” is “eating every single dollar that we have,” that could be spent on other priorities.

Neville: I believe it’s time for the government to re-prioritize, and of course the 800-pound gorilla in the room is the Medicaid expansion, which the governor did several years ago, eating every single dollar that we have in increased expense.

Also last year, we got this Tweet from the Colorado Senate GOP (@ColoSenGOP), linking to a chart of state and federal Medicaid expenditures: “Maybe Colo could afford FullDayK if #Dems weren’t pouring every spare $ into Obamacare #choices #copolitics #coleg pic.twitter.com/zrS1L6v5KO.”

The Post’s reporting, followed up by its editorial, should put an end not only to this kind of talk on the campaign trail, but in the state legislature as well.

Tipton Won’t Fully Condemn Trump Comments on White Supremacists

(Leave it to Tipton to equivocate on racism — Promoted by Colorado Pols)

This is why you need regional reporters who will hold elected officials accountable.

Realvail.com’s David O. Williams wanted to report the thoughts of his area Congressman, Scott Tipton, on Trump’s handling of the recent actions by Neo-Nazis. So he called his office last week, and here’s what he reported.

Williams noted in a post that Tipton had been “careful not to criticize the president, tweeting: ““Neo-Nazis are abhorrent & only try to drive America apart. We must stand up to racism, antisemitism & hateful rhetoric wherever we see it.”

Williams: I asked a Tipton spokeswoman for the congressman’s thoughts on the president’s handling of the situation, including his comments Tuesday that demonstrated sympathy for neo-Nazi, white supremacist and KKK protesters, calling some “very fine people.” I also wondered if there should be a federal law banning the use of Nazi and other white supremacist logos, the way there is in Germany.

But she referred to his original tweet, saying, “Those are his feelings on the situation, period.”

Colorado Republicans Gardner, Doug Lamborn and Mike Coffman all pushed push back directly against Trump’s comments on Charlottesville.

Although he called Trump’s Access Hollywood sexual assault comments “appalling,” Tipton steadfastly supported Trump and refused to outright condemn his anti-immigrant, anti-Muslim rhetoric during the campaign, instead trying to link his Democratic opponent — former state Sen. Gail Schwartz — to Hillary Clinton.

Obviously, this is a grain-of-sand contribution to the national and local debate about Trump and the local reaction to him. But it’s a grain that would never exist unless a reporter created it.

Colorado’s Senate GOP Spokesman Calls Fact-Check Journalism “Largely Phony” (And More)

(Grrrr, facts are dumb — Promoted by Colorado Pols)

paige on Ingold article 8-2017Colorado’s Republican Senate spokesman, Sean Paige, isn’t shy about expressing himself on Twitter.

So I was surprised that he wouldn’t explain why he took to Twitter to call into question the “objectivity” of John Ingold’s excellent Denver Post article, “Is Medicaid Gobbling Up Colorado’s Budget?

“What’s wrong with The Denver Post article?” I tweeted at Paige, who’s the former Deputy Director of Colorado Americans for Prosperity. “This is one of the most serious topics facing #coleg #copolitics.”

He disappointed me by tweeting back, “I’ll leave the faux media critic shtick 2 U and share what critiques I have with the paper. But I thought the piece was flawed.”

I eventually got more details on Paige’s thinking, because someone passed along a Facebook post by Paige, in which he explained his problems with the piece and with journalists.

Basically, he seems to hold them in very low regard, calling fact checking by reporters a “largely phony” activity carried out mostly by “left-leaning journalists not correcting but counter-spinning points of view they disagree with.” (Now I feel much better about him calling me a “faux media critic.”)

Ingold’s Medicaid piece is an example of the left-leaning, counter-spinning work of the press, writes Paige:

Paige: “The ‘reporter,’ who in this case becomes an advocate disguised as an ‘analyst,’ takes on the question of whether the Medicaid expansion that accompanied Obamacare is really, in fact, devouring a bigger share of Colorado’s budget. But instead of just reporting the facts and the truth — which of course is taking a bigger bite out of the budget, squeezing dollars that could be going to schools, roads, etc. — the writer [Ingold] works to soften that harsh but factual conclusion by mounting a defense of the program and putting the problem in a context that makes it appear like a non-problem. He’s doing what Democrats do, in other words, every time a non-Democrat asks and impertinent question about the blob that’s eating the state budget.” [emphasis added]

So Paige is openly advocating for shallow journalism. He wants Ingold to write that Medicaid costs are increasing and stop there!

Ingold’s sin was to dig into the budget Medicaid numbers, instead of just regurgitating the budget pie charts.

He determined that none of the money being spent on Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion can go to “roads, schools, etc.,” as Paige wants. You’d think this would be important information for Paige, like he other facts reported by Ingold: The Medicaid budget has, in fact, increased, from 17 percent of the general fund in 2000 to 26 percent today. But how to cut it? Ingold reports that if you took the advice of many conservatives and took away Medicaid from “able-bodied” poor people (most of whom incidentally, are already working), you’d save hundreds of millions of dollars out of a $10 billion general-fund budget.

Ingold tells us where a disproportionate amount of Medicaid spending goes: “People with disabilities and people in nursing homes, for instance, make up 10 percent of the state’s Medicaid enrollment — but account for 42 percent of state Medicaid spending.”

These nonpartisan facts didn’t stick in Paige’s brain, because he accuses Ingold of doing “intellectual contortions” to avoid “reaching a politically incorrect conclusion.”

Since Paige cites no factual errors, it appears he thinks Ingold contorted by failing to report on, as Paige puts it, “the trap [Obamacare] set for the state, by creating the potential for a fiscal crisis when ‘the feds’ either can’t or won’t continue with that arrangement and Obama’s check bounces.”

All of Paige’s hostility toward Ingold seems to stem from Ingold’s decision to leave that dubious notion out of his article. Seriously? Every time reporters write about a federal program with a state impact (military, national parks, roads, BLM, EPA), they should discuss the possibility of Uncle Sam’s check bouncing?

Paige, who didn’t return a call for comment, concludes his post with a broad slam at fact checking, which is one of the most honorable missions of journalism in our age of degraded discourse.

Paige: “I believe ‘yes but’ stories, like the dishonest ‘fact-checking’ exercises that have become such a trend among media outlets, are just another way for opinionated journalists to have the last word, while pretending to be honest brokers of information.”

I have to say, I’m glad he’s not my press secretary. But if he were, and I were his honorable Republican boss, I’d tell Paige to immediately stop blaming Obamacare for Colorado’s budget problems and, instead, come up with reality-based solutions. I doubt a specific list of Medicaid cuts would be among them.