President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

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

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

50%

50%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

52%↑

48%↓

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
August 22, 2009 03:23 PM UTC

Weekend Open Thread

  • 94 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“Confidence cannot find a place wherein to rest in safety.”

–Virgil

Comments

94 thoughts on “Weekend Open Thread

  1. Could someone please buy our Governor shirts that fit his neck size. I watched him on TV the other night and couldn’t focus on what he was saying becaus his shirt was a size or two too same.  

  2. from the Boulder Daily Camera

    Students at Westlake Middle School showed they were tuned in to this summer’s roiling political debate when U.S. Sen. Michael Bennet visited their school on Friday.

    The Democrat spent more than a half-hour fielding questions from about 30 eighth-grade honors students in the school library.

  3. *Tom Ridge- too little, too late…

    *Opponents of Tom Ridge- Me thinks you protest too much…

    *John Stewart-  After his dismantling of McCaughey, can we now make it a national priority to get Stewart into Congress so he can introduce and vote on legislation (and most importantly DEBATE it) while at the same time still doing his TV show?

    *Rockies- WTF?  Get over your nerves and win the series against SF!

    *Brandon Marshall- We are going to suck this year anyway, so let’s trade him and load up for the future.  The Chargers would be coming down the hill in a year or two and we can once again rule the west for the next half decade.

    *National Democrats- OY!!!  Your ability to prove the addage of Mark Twain again and again is as astounding as it is damaging to any sort of reform.  If the GOP is the party of “NO” then the Dems are the party of “OH NO!”

    *The mountains of Colorado in late August.  Cool mornings, gentle mountain breezes, sunny and 75 degrees.  How is the concrete in Denver?

    1. Stewart could teach reporters a thing or two about actually calling BS on liar who run around perpetuating lies against health care reform. I can’t embed the clip here, but here is where you can watch him take one leader of the conspiracy nuts.  

      1. I point out interviews like this and the Jim Cramer one and ask them to show me a better journalist. There are others as good but Jon Stewart, Josh Marshall, & Michael Yon are three of the best journalists this country has.

        1. … but on this point, David, I’ll have to agree with you.

          Besides, the bar for TV Journalism is (or used to be, sadly) much lower than for print journalism.

  4. He was a good staffer. If he’s to be believed, he wrote me very nice letters about what I’d done for him. He asked me to give his announcement speech (when he first ran for the Legislature).

    Take a look at his first brochure. If this is such a bad deal, why does he have me plastered all over his first brochure when he ran for office?

    The fact is this: Experience comes with time.

    I think he’s got a good future, but I think experience helps.

    If you’re ever in a car accident, when they rush you to the hospital as they’re wheeling you in (and you’re) in critical condition… Well, the state is in pretty tough shape right now. It is in critical condition from the fiscal point of view. As you’re being rushed into the emergency room, you be sure and say, “Give me the new guy, the guy just out of medical school.” (Laughs.)

    By the way, remember Dan Maes? You’ve got other people out there besides Josh.

    There’s more…

    1. If I was him, I’d immediately admit that I made a mistake by opposing the expansion. …

      That bill was not about property rights. That bill was (to oppose) expansion of the base.

      Well, there’s no finesse the question here. Points to the candidate for that.  But I think that’s going to be a tough sell in some parts of the Especially the bit about state.  “not about property rights.”

    2. McInnis blew a golden opportunity to attack Penry in this interview. Nobody thinks that Penry has been pulling the punches when it comes to McInnis and his record, why should Scooter and his campaign give Josh penry a walk on his?

      Unless McInnis is turning into Penry’s anti-Ritter mouthpiece, it seems like Scott blew yet another chance to try to gain some ground.

      I still think, as I said before, that unless he goes hard negative against “this young Turk”, he has absolutely zero chance.

  5. Don’t like being referred to as “Brownshrts”, especially if they’ve served their country honorably.

    Just because there are one or two idiots in a huge crowd with Swastikas on homemade posters doesn’t give anyone the right to declare any and all opposition to this shitty healthcare bill Naziesque or racist.

    Want me to post more pictures of jackasses at anti-war rallies?  I assume most of you don’t identify with “Death to Bush” and “I support the Iraqi resistance” posters or the people who carry them.  

    This is why Obama’s attempt at this particular “reform” bill is dead. Maybe it takes a Marine who knows his history to get this across.  Nobody was shouted down, nobody was stopped from making their views heard.

    This is a philosophical ass-kicking, plain and simple.

    1. Just because there are one or two idiots in a huge crowd with Swastikas on homemade posters doesn’t give anyone the right to declare any and all opposition to this shitty healthcare bill Naziesque or racist.

      But in the meantime, there are Hitler posters.  And so I don’t agree with you.

          1. So, all you have to say is that you didn’t have anything to do with them and you’re okay.  But LB can’t get away with just saying the same thing, he has to condemn and apologize for them?  

            Typical, really.  A few crazies show up at Republican rallies, and all Republicans are crazy and racist until they wear the hair shirt.  A mob of crazies show up (and, indeed organize) Democrat rallies, and they’re not really liberal Democrats and don’t count.  

        1. precisely because they embarrassed me. That’s why I stopped going to protests that were organized by nutjobs. And I don’t think the 9/11 truthers helped the antiwar cause. Turned out we didn’t really need them to pad our numbers.

          1. These are open town halls.  It’s a violation of the first amendment to stop any asshole with a swastika from attending.

            Look up my comments.  Anyone comparing Nazi Germany to US politics is ignorant.  The Marine in the video was responding to twice being compared to a Nazi by elected officials.

            Sorry, guys, the left blew it by trying to marginalize genuine, thoughtful opposition to this bill.  

            My favorite part of that video is the guy saying [I’m paraphrasing]:

            ‘you say I get to keep my own healthcare? Well THANK YOU…’

              1. So, idiots at both kinds of rallies.

                Thank you for no longer generalizing all opponents of healthcare or Republicans as racists or Nazi sympathizers.

                Link.

                   …they get stonewalled at town halls packed deliberately with union supporters, or find that their Representative has literally decided to phone the meeting in, and they are accused of being astroturfed, even as they watch people from out of state bused in to support the health care fiasco.  They see Lyndon LaRouche wackos carrying Obama Nazi signs characterized as right-wingers.  They hear that their concerns are those of a small and demented minority.  They see videos cropped to make it seem as though they’re racists. They are told that their opposition to Obama’s policies springs from racism on talk shows and in editorials.  They receive unsolicited emails from Axelrod after being told that their information’s not being kept by the White House, and then it’s blamed on advocacy groups across a broad political spectrum.  They recall that there were 8 years of BusHitler rhetoric that went unchallenged in the MSM, which suddenly is up in arms about the extraordinary incivility of such comparisons.

                   [snip]

                   Oh, yeah, they’re angry.  But it’s not because they’re stupid.  It’s because “Trust us; we despise you” isn’t really very civil, is it?

                1. I think most of them quietly cheer on the ones with the courage to be openly racist.

                  Later on they said she was “Crazy Eileen” and they never liked her anyway. But just listen to them cheer.

                  You can find the left’s “Crazy Eileen” yelling about 9/11 Truth, but you won’t hear the cheering.

                  Michelle Malkin had no problem with the swastika. Her first response was, “Well I saw someone do it to Bush once, so I get to do it with Obama.”

                  Rush Limbaugh calls Obama a Nazi. Glenn Beck calls him a racist and a Nazi. Jonah Goldberg calls us all fascists. These are the mainstream conservative thinkers today. We’re not dealing with moral equivalence here, as much as you may wish it’s there.  

                    1. Glenn Beck is the fringe?

                      Jonah Goldberg is the fringe?

                      Michelle Malkin is the fringe?

                      Who exactly do you have left without them? Can you name a prominent conservative commentator who’s never compared Obama or the Democrats to Nazis?

                    2. I’ve generally found him to be thoughtful. I disagree with him most of the time but I respect him for taking a nuanced view most of the time.

                    3. Were contextually responding to Pelosi.

                      The picture with idiot at rally was not Malkin’s finest moment, but I’ll bet she didn’t know what his sign said.

                    4. … I’m sure they appreciate your being their apologist, and contextualizing their otherwise “honorable” intentions.

                    5. As much as those of us who aren’t racist or “Nazis” enjoy being whined at because we oppose crappy-ass domestic policy.

                    6. … you’ve actually done pretty well with that.  But stop apologizing for Limbaugh and the rest’s atrocious, self-agrandizing (and highly profitable) hate speech.

                    7. How dare he look at the history of the term and point out that fascism was actually a direct offspring of the early 20th century progressive ideals, notably Wilson’s administration, and that fascism did indeed have American analogs in the actions and acts of FDRs administration.  

                      Historical analysis when it makes the left wing look bad is simply not allowed.  Sorry.  

                    8. …there’s a perception that your argument comes down to things like both Nazis and liberals being proponents of organic food. Is that how it works? Because the Nazis liked dogs and I like dogs, I’m a Nazi?

                      No, no. I mean, I try to reject that kind of thing … I don’t believe that liberals are Nazis; I believe that if Nazism came to the United States it is entirely possible that liberals would be at the forefront of the battle to stop it. So would conservatives.

                    9. That’s the kind of criticism you hear from someone who skimmed the blogs for criticism.  Though it’s a step up from “But your cover has a Hitler moustache!” so I’ll give them that.  

                    10. … So Goldberg writes a book saying that Modern Liberalism is the philosophical heir to fascism, laying the intellectual foundation for chuckle-heads like Limbaugh, et al, to call liberals fascists. And then when the author is called on it face-to-face in an interview, essentially says “Just kidding”?

                      Nice…

                    11. … Goldberg is being misinterpreted by the right wing to be saying…

                      But I only read the interview, not the book, nor do I have any desire to.

                    12. From “only a few crazies call Obama a fascist” to “but really, the liberals are the real fascists” in, what, ten minutes?

                    13. Where?  All I said was the thesis of Goldberg’s book was that fascist government was a descendant of progressive thought.  I didn’t say modern liberals are fascists.  Didn’t even imply it.  

                      It’s kind of hard to take you seriously when you pull out accusations like that.  

                    14. and you’re being dishonest to imply that, unless you only read the first four chapters (and not the latter six).

                    15. The other half is how modern-day liberalism is  a cousin to fascism, and we need to be careful that the tendency toward seeking state control to create better people is looked upon with suspicion.  

                      Still didn’t answer my question:  

                      Where did we say “but really, the liberals are real fascists?”  I can’t find it anywhere.

                      I’m sure I can find a lot of places where Republicans are racist until proven innocent, and explicitly so.  Can’t so much find anything in this thread, however, where liberals are fascist until proven innocent.  

                      You might want to save your indignation for your own assaults.  

                    16. is still not the premise of the book. But at least you’re not trying to completely deny reality anymore, which is progress. The thesis is that modern liberals are the descendants of fascism, not “cousins.” That modern liberalism in the form of Hillary Clinton and others is basically fascism.

                      And yet you’re such a victim if people point out how you’re calling liberals fascists. That mean old feminazi Nancy Pelosi just won’t leave you alone, will she?

                    17. Because I’m not.  ‘Twasn’t a conservative who brought up the book.  All I said was it was a legitimate historical analysis and he was very careful not to draw an actual equivalence between the two.  (There are at least a dozen times in the book where he says something like “Now, I’m not saying that just because of x, liberals are really fascists.”)

                      You still haven’t answered my question.  So far, the only thing untoward I’ve seen is someone lying about what conservatives actually said here.  Not that it would come as a surprise to me for that to be something that someone to lie about.

                    18. Are you gullible or something?

                      That’s like Glenn Beck saying, “I think Obama has a deep-seated hatred for white people,” then a minute later saying, “I’m not saying he doesn’t like white people.” In other words, plausible deniability for the extremely credulous conservative.

                      Not that it would come as a surprise to me for that to be something that someone to lie about.

                      That was almost a sentence, and then it went in a totally different direction.

                    19. (Yeah, I don’t know what happened there.  Incomplete re-edit, I’d imagine.  Put “like you would” in place of the last “to”)

                      Who called liberals fascists here?  

                      Or is this more straw-doggery in the vein of “racist until proven liberal?”  

                    20. especially since the main character was a mathematician.

                      Defending Jonah Goldberg’s book == calling liberals ‘fascists,’ as far as I’m concerned. You don’t have to like that, but you won’t change my mind on it.

                    21. If you aren’t the king of absurdly presumptive bigotry lately.  

                      (You didn’t answer my other question.  Did you read the book?)

                    22. No, Yokel, Goldberg does NOT provide a “legitimate historical analysis” in his book.

                      Fascism is a right wing phenomenon, and Goldberg is a crude revisionist who is doing what it takes to generate controversy because “legitimate historical analysis” pays few bills these days. Your belief in the soundness of his scholarship is just one more measure of your hard-right inability to look objectively at anything.

                    23. Fascism sold itself as a “middle wing” phenomenon, and it was, oddly enough, left-wing revisionists who sold it as “right wing.”  Your belief in the soundness of mid-century Democrat revisionism is just one more measure of your hard-left inability to look objectively at anything.  

                      It was right of communism in that it was nationalist rather than internationalist (Workers of the Fatherland, rather than Workers of the World).  But, being just another form of statism, it was left of darn near everything else.  

                    24. When you throw back some cutting remark that’s the same as one aimed at you, you’re all but admitting that you’re too flummoxed to really retort. Better to say nothing at all.

                      Now, since it’s apparent that the sum total of your studies into Fascism is this one book by a desperate revisionist, let me school you a bit.

                      Conservatives in Germany, Italy, and France all rallied behind Fascists because a) the autocratic nature of Fascism was familiar to these people who had grown up under (and profited under) autocratic monarchies; b) they promised to preserve business and keep the workers in line, unlike Socialists who proposed to strip the industrialists and nobility of their property and possessions; and c) all extremist movements sell themselves as middle of the road; they’d hardly garner any popular support if they said Yeah, we’re extremists. In times like the 20s and 30s when everything was in upheaval, people were more likely to be drawn to extremist movements, so both Fascism and Socialism flourished. Leftists (which in the Weimar Republic included all who really believed in building the republic) were all suppressed by the Nazis.

                      It’s a modern conservative myth that being right wing is synonymous with being anti-state. That wasn’t true before Goldwater, possibly not even before Reagan, so saying that Fascism’s statism makes it left wing is utterly absurd.

                      Now, go read some real scholarly works on the subject before you embarrass yourself further.

                    25. Did you read the book?  

                      You can, you know.  90% of it is actual historical analysis.  It’s a real book, not that pop-politics drivel that so many pundits write.  Agreements notwithstanding, I can’t bring myself to read, let alone purchase, those pop-politics books that Coulter and the like write.  

                    26. Do you get how weak it is to walk around yelling “racist! racist!”?

                      It’s over.  People get it now.  One isn’t a racist siply because one is levying criticism at this completely inept Administration.

                    27. More like “snidely remarking.” And all I really asked for was some polling data to confirm a statement you made that most Republicans aren’t racist, because that wasn’t obviously true to me. You’re taking that very personally.

                      Though I notice you’re no longer trying to defend the idea that Limbaugh and Goldberg preemptively retroactively coined “feminazi” and “liberal fascism” in anticipation of Nancy Pelosi criticizing them. So that makes things easier.

                    28. You are getting held hostage on the health care issue by the fringe right. There is thoughtful opposition (still waiting on that “long diary” on health care–that goes for any Republican who posts here BTW. I’ve seen a lot of rhetoric, but very few facts) but they are getting undermined by the extremely vocal minority of largely racist, ignorant, idiots.

                      I disagree with SXP’s notion that all racists are Republicans–I’ve come across racists of all political persuasions–and the red herring of calling all health care protesters, or tea party attendees for that matter, a bunch of racists for disagreeing with the president is not helping my side’s case.

                      However, to ignore the hate and ignorance that is coming from your side right now–starting with the disgusting behavior at some of the McCain/Palin rallies last year, to the misinformation of “death panels”, abortion funding, and all of the holocaust references–and to also deny that much of their ammo is coming from some of the most popular right wing political pundits, is beyond blind.

                      The GOP should be condemning this kind of behavior as you have. Instead, they either say nothing or encourage it. To me, that says it’s all part of their strategy to win back Congress in 2010. That’s what this is all about anyway, right? Isn’t that why the Republicans have been totally unwilling to talk about any health care reform whatsoever? It’s starting to get a little stale.

                      Even if this strategy does work, what are the Republicans going to run on in 2010? “Fuck Obama. Vote Republican.”? I guess it could work, but from my experience people may get upset with certain political parties, but in the end they will vote with whoever offers them solutions–no matter how weak or ill-advised they may be. It’s why they picked Bush over Kerry in 2004, Dems over Republicans in 2006, and Obama over McCain in 2008. If all the Republicans can run on is criticizing what Dems did, without offering any solutions themselves, they might find themselves out of power for some time.

  6. Maybe this Presidency will accomplish more for us than previously expected.

    Forty-nine percent (49%) of U.S. voters say working Americans should be allowed to opt out of Social Security and provide for their own retirement planning.

    A new Rasmussen Reports national telephone survey finds that 37% disagree and do not believe Americans should be able to opt out of Social Security. Fifteen percent (15%) are not sure.

        1. My mom was on social security for years before she died. She would have had to sell her house without it. And even if I hadn’t known anyone personally benefiting from it, I think it’s important for it to be there for other people. Lots of “smart” people invested badly, because a lot of investment is luck. I don’t want them to starve either. Even the racists.

          1. just the people you consider “racist” (about 60% the country?) opt out?

            They’re not concerned with your labels, but they are concerned about their money, I’ll bet.

            1. Which is whether you want to live in a society where old people who invested in Pets.com when they were 50 should starve to death. Do you believe in a safety net or not?

        2. Remember Enron? The dot-coms? Or more recently, the banks?

          There’s a good reason not to let people invest social security; and that is, what would we do with the ones who lose their shirts?

          Social Security is meant to be a safety net. You don’t invest a safety net.

          Now, I agree that it’s broken, although that’s in large part due to demographics (who could have predicted the baby boom, followed by the baby bust?) But that means they need to come up with a fresh way to fund the pool. Investing would be great if it guaranteed returns, but we all know how that works in reality.

          1. It’s only “broken” if we decide we’re not going to honor the T-bills held by the Social Security trust. And if we make that decision, the ramifications will be wider than just Social Security.

        1. I do think there’s a ton of effort going in to everyone trying to get their interest groups a good deal. But I think there is also a lot of work going in to trying to craft a good bill.

          This is not an easy thing to do. Healthcare is 20% of our economy (and growing). And this bill fundamentally alters the entire thing. That’s not a trivial effort.

            1. The government merely becomes an alternate insurance provider. If the private sphere can do a better job, they have nothing to worry about.

              What I see happening is that the insurance companies have set themselves up as monopolies and use that position for predatory pricing. Their concern is that they will have to actually compete.

  7. Where is our President in this?  Did he really say ‘just don’t make too big of a deal out of his coming home…’?

    ADVERTISEMENT

    comfort to terrorists.

    London and Washington have condemned the ‘hero’s welcome’ given to Abdel Basset al-Megrahi on his return to Libya after being freed from a life sentence in a Scottish jail on compassionate grounds because he is dying of cancer.

    ‘The idea that the British government … would sit down and somehow barter over the freedom or the life of this Libyan prisoner and make it all part of some business deal … it’s not only wrong, it’s completely implausible and actually quite offensive,’ said British Business Secretary Peter Mandelson.

    In Washington, FBI director Robert Mueller released an angry letter he sent to Scottish minister Kenny MacAskill, who ordered the release, calling it inexplicable and detrimental to justice.

    ‘Indeed your action makes a mockery of the rule of law. Your action gives comfort to terrorists around the world,’ Mueller wrote in the letter posted on the FBI’s website.

    1. Government is in the business of justice, not mercy.  Justice would be making him serve the full sentence for which he was convicted.  Mercy is letting him go because he’s sick, though unrepentant.  

      That people seem to think the law is in the business of mercy and not justice is more disconcerting to me than accusations of corrupt oil deals that may or may not have brought this about.  We can handle corrupt politicians.  We can’t handle improper expectations of our government’s purpose.  

  8. from The Denver Post

    Last week, First Data, the state’s largest private company, announced it would relocate global headquarters from Greenwood Village to Atlanta.



    Two high-profile episodes may have also left First Data feeling less welcome here, although they weren’t a factor in the move.

    One came in 2004, when former Congressman Tom Tancredo proposed taxing worker remittances to Mexico, directly harming Western Union, then a First Data subsidiary.

    1. Tax the shit out of the remittances and apply them directly to paying for unpaid emergency room visits and the educational system.

      How much money do the lobbying arms of FirstData and Western Union spend?

      1. Illegals pay a lot more into the system than they get back out.

        Now if you want to tax all wire transfers, then you impact every business in the country (most of our payments are wire transfers). Try to get that through…

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

134 readers online now

Newsletter

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