Weekend Open Thread

“A person who won’t read has no advantage over one who can’t read.”

–Mark Twain

50 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Negev says:

    California judge declares ban on high capacity magazines unconstitutional

    • Curmudgeon says:

      Just until the 9th Circuit Court slaps it down.

       

      • Negev says:

        You may be right… I'm reading the gun boards and the hope is that the 9th upholds it so it does not go the SC and ruin it for other states… not real sure what to expect…

         

        • spaceman65 says:

          Of course, DC v. Heller does not support striking this down, but the second amendment snowflakes don't comprehend that

           

          • Negev says:

            Of course. Except when it does. 

            The judge found because magazines over 10 rounds are commonly owned by “law-abiding responsible citizens for lawful uses like self-defense,” ownership of the weapons passes the Supreme Court’s Heller test which found citizens have a right to keep and bear arms that are not unusual and are “in common use.”

            “Neither magazines, nor rounds of ammunition, nor triggers, nor barrels are specifically mentioned in the Second Amendment. Neither are they mentioned in Heller. But without a right to keep and bear triggers, or barrels, or ammunition and the magazines that hold ammunition, the Second Amendment right would be meaningless,” Benitez wrote.

            • Diogenesdemar says:

              Yeah, maybe . . . 

              But without a right to keep and bear triggers, or barrels, or ammunition and the magazines that hold ammunition, the Second Amendment right would be meaningless.

              . . . except for those muskets with match locks?  Damn original constructionism is such a beotch!

              It also probably doesn’t help your case here that Benitez has been overturned more times than an East Colfax streetwalker, huh?

              • Negev says:

                I doesn't matter if its overturned Monday. It has basically resent the grandfather clause after 20 years and this weekend my be the largest sale weekend of high cap magazines in U.S. history. That's a beotch if CA was trying to limit them. Which they were. 

                The CA ban came before Heller, now "in common use" may be quantifiable. 

                • Diogenesdemar says:

                  Dude . . .

                  this weekend my be the largest sale weekend of high cap magazines in U.S. history.

                  . . . you’re stepping all over your talking points.  Remember:  It doesn’t matter one whit that hi-cap magazines can’t be sold in California, the good-guy gunheads there will just drive to Nevada, or Arizona, or ColoradoWyoming to buy them!

                  . . . does Dudley have any idea how badly you’re fucking up, here?

                  • Negev says:

                    Now they don't have to and remain law abiding… and all those clandestine trips to Vegas to get mags the last 20 years have been reprieved. But the industry thanks you for recalling talking points as their websites crash from sales volume…..

    • Duke Cox says:

      And this is surprising, how?

      This is precisely the reason Mitch McConnell is packing the court with extremist, right wing, judges.

      Among others, I will add.

    • JohnInDenver says:

      So, with several courts (and at least one Circuit Court) upholding other states enactment of bans on high capacity magazines constitutional, is there something so different about California's approach that there is a reason for this? 

      People certain the bans are unconstitutional have an interesting problem "To date [July 2018], the Supreme Court has repeatedly refused to hear cases surrounding these “high-capacity” magazine bans."

      The Supreme Court weighed in on Federal powers to regulate weapons this week

      The U.S. Supreme Court on Thursday handed President Donald Trump a victory by rejecting for the second time in three days a bid by gun rights activists to block his new ban on “bump stock” attachments that enable semi-automatic weapons to fire rapidly.

      Now, we will have someone convicted of keeping a bump stock and we will perhaps get the court system's decision … or they may simply continue refusing to take such cases.

  2. Diogenesdemar says:

    Yo, Duke — saw Willy Porter @ the Soiled Dove here in SinCity last night.  He’s headed out your wayish —Steve’s Guitars in Carbondale on the 31st — before heading back to Wisconsin.

    • Curmudgeon says:

      It's okay with me if Biden gets dumped, and Democrats show they have higher standards of behavior than Republicans.

      • Voyageur says:

        How high can our standards be if we let Curmy and Moi join?smiley

      • Duke Cox says:

        This just doesn't help with the "creepy uncle Joe" meme the T***plicans have been throwing at him. 

        • mamajama55 says:

          Honestly, we're not going to find a completely pure candidate. We just have to have our own (admittedly relative) standards. The only things I really care about are policies and electability.

          Uncle Joe's likeable and  electable, but based on the past, shaky on progressive policy. This latest incident is creepy, but not a deal-breaker.  I'm fine with letting Joe go to enjoy his golden years and remaining kids / grandkids in peace.

          • MADCO says:

            I perfectly remember when you said the same thing about Bennet. And Franken.

            • mamajama55 says:

              I wish Franken was still in the Senate.  Bennet can stay there, too, unless we get some firebrand willing to primary him.

              • itlduso says:

                You and I have been together on Franken, mama, and I appreciate it.  I was blasted by Davie, R&R, DenDepends, and the always popular, "F*** Off" from DP when I said that Franken was politically assassinated by Gillibrand, Harris, and even Bennet.  Many people have changed their position on Franken recently, including Kristen Powers a conservative pundit and even Julia Louis-Dreyfus.  I can overcome my distaste and give at least Harris and Bennet a pass, but I'll ask them directly about this if given a chance.  I'd like to know what political courage means to them using this specific example.

                 

                • Voyageur says:

                  I have mixed feelings about Franken.  Yes, there are worse.   Still, when you tell the world you're a good guy, maybe you ought to be a good guy!

                  • itlduso says:

                    So the standard to allow a politician to finish his term, in your view, is whether he's a "good guy", in your view.  Pathetic.

                    But, let me put it in political terms.  Male voters look at what's happening in the Democratic Party with Franken, and now Biden, and are turned off.  Doesn't anyone here know how to play this game?

                    • Voyageur says:

                      So, you're cool with sexual harassment and hypocrisy?  Well, we can get that from Trump.  As to Biden, he's too old.  Way, way too old.  Ridiculously too old.

          • Voyageur says:

            Joe, like Bernie, is just too damn old.  After two terms he'd be 86, Bernie 87.

            Way, way, too old.

  3. MichaelBowman says:

    There aren’t enough eye roll emojis to do this one justice. From the man who opposed every ballot measure and bill that made Colorado a leader in renewable energy – then stood by a turbine in his first political ad as if it was all his idea.

    GARDNER: The New Green Deal is a raw deal for Colorado. 

    We cannot deny the devastating effects the entirety of the Green New Deal will have on our state. Unfortunately, the first wave of it has already crashed into Colorado. The state Legislature is poised to pass a bill that could decimate the oil and gas industry, kill thousands of jobs, erase billions in wages and annual economic impact. The tax revenue from oil and gas operations funds our schools, fire departments and other important local projects in our communities. The real-life impact this anti-jobs measure will have on tens of thousands of hardworking Colorado families must be taken seriously.

    • mamajama55 says:

      He really never stops lying. On the bright side, (for us) his low approval numbers show that most people don't believe him.

      All we can do is keep telling the truth to counter his lies.

      • notaskinnycook says:

        MJ, You didn't ding him for using decimate when he obviously meant devastate? That one's a pet peeve of mine. One of those cases wherein I think people believe one word is classier or makes them sound smarter than the other.

        • Voyageur says:

          So, I have ten wives?  I decimated!

        • mamajama55 says:

          When davebarnes sets up his UN re-edjumacatin' camps, I volunteer to teach Cory Gardner's people how to proofread.

          • Voyageur says:

            Youse can teach Ingsoc, MJ.  But not math or statistics.  You suck at those!

            • mamajama55 says:

              I actually use nonpartisan, objective sources,like the Colorado Department of Labor – not the industry propaganda organ, or the Frackademia-funded puff pieces.

               

              • Voyageur says:

                So how come not one single authoritative source agrees with you?  Even PK, no friend of the oil industry, put their jobs at 81,000.  You actually were too dumb to count associated white collar jobs, like banking, that directly support the industry.  I can believe experts, like the Leeds study, or think that only you, in this entire state, got it right.

                Yep, you suck at statistics.

                Bigly.

                • mamajama55 says:

                  On 3/22/19, Pete actually quoted the industry spokes people, but only to mock them and say that the Colorado media put out whatever the industry wants them to do. It wasn't exactly a ringing endorsement.

                  But I can tell that you're just gearing up for an insult fest here. Maybe you're bored, drunk, feeling the lack of trolls on which to vent your considerable spleen- so you felt that you had to randomly insult my math skills in your usual petty, spiteful way.

                  Classic Voyageur – Anyone who disagrees with you on anything must be "stupid", "dumb" or "lying". I get that attitude from middle school kids – we try to educate them out of it, so that they can manage to construct an actual argument.

                  It's the same namecalling and branding normalized by  our unfortunate President – your "discourse" is very Trumpian. Like him, you never admit mistakes, never back down, never apologize, never concede that there may be more than one way to view a problem. Just sling the insults and feel like a man.

                  As far as lack of authoritative studies "agreeing with me", just google "Frackademia" again to see how the industry buys academic research. There may be other schools of business other than CU's Leeds out there that don't conult with COGA before they publish anything, but I haven't found them yet. Leeds itself was sticking with the 30,000 oil and gas jobs until 2014, when they started to inflate the figure with the magic multipliers, at the same time spreading the lie that the ballot initiatives being circulated would "ban hydraulic fracturing in Colorado." 

                  So I'm content to use the work of the Colorado Department of Labor, which employs a staff of hundreds of demographic, statistical, economically trained people to compile and forecast industry trends. I don't need to be an expert when there are experts  who don't have a partisan ax to grind, and make their expertise publicly available.

                  So you just go ahead and stand with Vicki Marble, Christine Martinez, COGA, COGCC, the API, and the like with your magic multiplier numbers that show the oil and gas industry contributes more than any other to the Colorado economy. I'll keep on going with the boring statisticians who actually study the Colorado economy.

                  I've already posted links  many times, and don't have time for more  this morning. You'll just keep on doing what you do. It says much more about your character and math skills than mine, or anyone's.

                  • Voyageur says:

                    So, you're admitting that no source, anywhere, agrees with you.  You insist that an industry generating at least $10.5 billion a year in impact doesn't create even one job in banking and finance.  It also doesn't have even one job in transportation — all that pipe just magically appears at drill sites.  And workers go home and bury their paychecks, generating not one penny in multiplier effect.

                    Actually, the API study you misquote claims 232,000 jobs and a $31 billion impact. It includes multiplier effects. PK apparently counted only direct jobs cited, incuding transportation and finance — and still tripled your number.

                    The fact is when I mentioned multiplier effect you had to goggle it!  And then you got it wrong.

                    Your hatred of the industry is so great that you desperately lied about the numbers. And you are furious with me about calling you on your lie.

                    Not a single job in finance?

                    Or transportation?

                    Or even a food truck to feed all those drillers.

                    You don't just fail math and statistics.

                    You get an F in ethics as well!

                     

                    • Curmudgeon says:

                      And what do your golden boys of the energy industry do, those godlike paragons of humanity from whose pipes you gladly suck every bit of corporate propaganda you're all too willing to swallow, the second their profits in any region dip below an acceptable level?   They're out.  Gone. No notice. They lock the gates and leave the workers high and dry, every time.   No penalties, no repercussions.   And welcomed back by their supplicants when they return, as if nothing ever happened.  

                    • mamajama55 says:

                      deleted

  4. mamajama55 says:

    To recall Meg Froelich, they'd need 9587 valid signatures from her Arapahoe County District 3. Their recall petition (this is from Good's recall polis group, recallcolorado.org)  will need work; it isn't allowed to have false statements or profanity on it. The secretary of state hasn't received any recall petitions yet.

    The recallcolorado.org website lists dubious reasons (lots of factual errors) to recall Froelich:

    Recap of overreaching legislation:

    SB19-042, National Popular Vote:
    An unconstitutional attempt to undermine the Electoral College and steal Coloradan's votes.

    HB19-1177, "Red Flag" Gun Confiscation:
    A gun-grab that violates Constitutional rights with no provisions to help the mentally ill.

    HB19-1032, State Sexuality Indoctrination:
    A state indoctrination plan to undermine parental rights to educate their children about sexuality.

    SB19-181, Extreme Oil and Gas Regulation:
    Oil and gas regulations that go even further than Proposition 112, the ballot measure widely rejected by Colorado voters in 2018.

    HB19-1042, Sanctuary for Criminals:
    Dems voted down an amendment that would block felons from receiving state funds.

    Pending Introduction, Sanctuary for Criminals 2:
    Announced by Colorado Dems, this pending legislation will restrict police and public entities from assisting Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).

     

    • Genghis says:

      SB19-042, National Popular Vote:
      An unconstitutional attempt to undermine the Electoral College and steal Coloradan's votes.

      lol "unconstitutional." The internet didn't actually need another dumbfuck lolyer, but it has one just the same.

      MJ, can you see your way clear to extend the proofreading education you volunteered to give Sen. Gardner's staff to teaching recallcolorado.org the difference between singular possessive and plural possessive? I suppose it's possible these clowns think SB10-042 "steals" exactly one Coloradan's votes, but it doesn't seem likely.

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.