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

50%↑

15%

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(R) Dave Williams

60%↑

40%↓

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%↑

40%↑

20%↓

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
November 06, 2010 03:03 PM UTC

Weekend Open Thread

  • 123 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“We combat obstacles in order to get repose, and, when got, the repose is insupportable.”

–Henry Brooks Adams

Comments

123 thoughts on “Weekend Open Thread

    1. I volunteered for the Information Technology committee, as I have 30+ years experience in the computer industry with large scale systems and I am currently a part-time Ph.D. student in computer science at CSU. Having watched debacles like CBMS over the past 20 years, I know we can do better.

  1. From the paper that must not be quoted Wadhams blames “lying” ads from the Bennet campaign. Yeah right. Both Bennet & Buck personally believed that their ads were honest and the other guy was lying his ass off. But the bottom line is they were roughly equivalent in their veracity.

    In this campaign, as in war, victory went to the side that made fewer mistakes. Bennet made very few mistakes, while Buck made numerous ones. But Dick, go ahead and blame the other side. Lack of introspection means you’ll continue to blow it in the future. And that’s part of why you have my vote for most valuable Democrat this year.

    1. His record has been a perfect 0-fer, even in a “wave” year.

      The lesson I’m sure he’s “learned” is the one he already knew – clear the field before the primary and make sure there’s only one candidate.

      1. To have two losing candidates for one Governor’s seat in the same year!  Dick, again–from the bottom of my blue, blue heart–thanks from Colorado, just for being you.  

  2. from Jeffrey Feldman

    Despite all the excuses and political flim-flam masquerading as “explanations” for the Great Shellacking of 2010, I want to offer a very straightforward theory for the outcome: Democrats have become a party that “lists” when they should be a party that “tips.” Listing, bad — tipping, good.

    By “listing” I mean that Democrats spent way too much time compiling lists of so-called policy accomplishments that they then presented to voters. Like fourth graders hoping to be rewarded for bringing home a good report card, far too many Democrats in the midterm elections were convinced that the only way to get voters to support them at the polls was to present inventories of positive actions they had performed in office. Here’s my list, gimme your vote. Sorry folks — that don’t work.



    If there is one book every Democrat in the White House should read this weekend, if not sooner, it is Malcolm Gladwell’s The Tipping Point.

    Gladwell’s book is exactly what the doctor ordered for shellacked Democrats because it makes the case that great change is most often set in motion by small, but significant events — and this can happen in a very short amount of time.

    Finding the the next tipping point in politics is precisely how Democrats need to start thinking.

    1. Count me among them.

      Facts, ration, and intellect don’t matter much when it comes to lever pulling. The vote goes to the person that could arouse the most passion.  

      It’s that simple.  

      1. There is also a need for truth.  When only 10% of people know about their tax breaks since early 2009, that is a problem.  Hitting back on the lies ‘passionately’ needs to be done every day!

        1. liars? I mean if they clearly full of shit, what can it hurt to point that fact out?

          The vast majority of the voting public seems to know that Dems are castrated and feeble and they punish us for it. How in the hell does a party get to bring us to the brink of disaster then two years later get rewarded with such a resounding victory for simply standing in complete opposition to doing anything to bring us back from that brink anyway? I mean fucking hell, what’s wrong with us???

        2. And, on that point Bfly: You’re so damned good at it, get out there and keep messaging. Do you write to a larger audience than here at Pols? You should. You should be someone’s speechwriter, or spokesperson, advisor, or something. You’re access to and translation of information is awesome. Honest.

          And, to your last sentence: Amen.

          1. Do you think that you could convince the DNC to pay me?  I could use a little money coming in.  I have contacted them several times to let them know how frustrated I am with their website.  Have never heard back from them and the website doesn’t improve so either they don’t agree with me or they don’t read the comments on their contact form.  The website is worthless when it comes to real information.

            I don’t have unusual access.  I do, however, spend way too much time reading about politics.  And when I find something that I want to remember I copy it along with the website and file it on my computer.  The old memory isn’t the best anymore, especially when it comes to remembering where I read something.  So, I spend too much time at that also.

            I only comment on a couple other websites.  I beat myself up too much when talking in person because there are always things that I wish I had said.  So, writing is better for me and my mulling over methods.

            And to jps:

            I agree. Lies should always be called out and the truth repeated as long as the lies are floating around out there.  It would take a lot of persistence to be able to beat them back, especially with the right-wing circular media.  I think that Tim Kaine is a nice guy but his messaging has been really terrible and there doesn’t seem to be any connection between the DNC and, for instance, state or county party organizations.  And when there is, I think that they just talk to themselves and not to the public.  

            The right wing makes sure that they are in front of the cameras and making headlines in the newspapers and websites every day.  We seem to think that being right is enough.  It isn’t!

            Here is a headline that I would like to skewer…

            The ego factor: Can Obama change?

            By JOHN F. HARRIS & GLENN THRUSH | 11/5/10 11:37 AM

            It is, as you can guess, from Politico.  I don’t visit there much because it isn’t worth the anger and I am working to keep my blood pressure down as it is.

            The Ego Factor?  This about a guy who has said numerous times that he has no pride in authorship and encourages all good ideas, from all directions.

            I have to admit, I didn’t read the article and I moved off their website pretty quickly.

            By the way, FOX is supposed to have such a good audience.  I wonder if half of their audience is lefties who just have them turned on in order to see what garbage they are spewing.  I don’t have cable but maybe if lefties all refused to turn to FOX News their ratings would go down.

            Ok, so this got a little rambling.  Good night!

          2. If the lies perpetrated by the rightie spin machine are accepted common wisdom while the truth that Tea Partiers could find just by reviewing their own tax returns is virtually unknown, along with the reality of jobs preserved and added, albeit not enough but not lost,  the problem isn’t with a whiny, unenthusiastic Dem base.  The problem is with our leadership’s communication savvy and ability to inspire passion from the WH down.

            Gibbs and Biden can stuff their complaints about the rank and file where the moon don’t shine and Obama had better find some better communicators and sound bite producers of his own. This rising above the fray, disdaining effective sound bites in favor of genteel attempts at being the national school teacher, and refusing to do it to them before they do it to us (or even after in the false belief that that’s what voters mean by a return to civility) has got to be well and truly and firmly rejected.  

            It’s long past time to turn the tables in the message wars and you don’t do that by quietly asking people to please, if it isn’t too much trouble, listen to reason and research the truth for themselves. You sell it.  You make it easy to identify with.  You make it inspiring. You give people a rallying cry better than “We’re trying and, trust us, it could be worse”.

            1. as long as we’re reactive, responding to the frames the right keeps pushing, we’ll always end up losing in the long run. Until we frame the debate as we want it and consistently hammer home that frame, we’re doomed I’m afraid.

              I’m not afraid of Class Warfare (the right’s frame). In fact, bring it on! They’ve been practicing it in fact while decrying it in rhetoric for multiple generations. It’s time we stood up to them and fought back.

              The list of like issues is long. But on all of them, we always seem to play defense, always user their frames. When will we start fighting from our values?

              1. That’s why nobody ever said that the best offence is a good defense. Well, maybe except in basketball where great defense generates offense but not in politics or military tactics. And even in basketball the ability to take offensive advantage of the ops provided by great D is the only way to win.

                But I digress. As long as we are always responding to the GOP, the GOP will be the natural default party and our victories will be short lived.  When we force Rs into defensive crouches we win. And since fact based reality is on ourside, it really ought to be easier for us to grab the high ground with the facts than it has been for the GOP to do it with lies.

                We have let the GOP define liberal as bad.  We’ve let them define any attempts to roll back tax payer subsidized benefits for the wealthy as commie class warfare.  We’ve let them define universal health care as a socialist evil even though all military, vets, government employees, fire fighters, police, seniors and others are covered by publicly funded plans already and those who aren’t get covered via the  ER at the  expense  of the insured.

                Until our leaders figure out that the proper response is not to beg for mercy, to beg for compromise as something that is only the Rs to give as some big fat favor when they are the minority or to demand as the will of the people when they are the majority but to turn the tables.  A misplaced worship of civility and cool above any and all other considerations is going to make Obama a one termer and put the Rs right back in charge of the White House and both houses of congress in 2012 if something doesn’t change radically and immediately.

  3. from James K. Galbraith

    The original sin of Obama’s presidency was to assign economic policy to a closed circle of bank-friendly economists and Bush carryovers. Larry Summers. Timothy Geithner. Ben Bernanke. These men had no personal commitment to the goal of an early recovery, no stake in the Democratic Party, no interest in the larger success of Barack Obama. Their primary goal, instead, was and remains to protect their own past decisions and their own professional futures.



    Geithner, Summers and Bernanke should have known this. One can be fairly sure that they did know it. But Geithner and Bernanke had cast their lots, with continuity and coverup. And Summers, with his own record of deregulation, could hardly have complained.



    President Obama didn’t see this. Or perhaps, he didn’t want to see it. His presidential campaign was, after all, from the beginning financed from Wall Street. He chose his team, knowing exactly who they were. And this tells us what we need to know, about who he really is.

    1. Obama’s single, great, grave mistake(It cannot be overemphasized.) in the beginning was these choices.

      Galbraith’s last sentence, however: I believe it shows us that Obama was naive and unschooled in economics and finance. I’m hoping he’s learned a great deal since his early days. For all our sakes, he must, must, bring Volcker, Reich, Galbraith and Krugman into the decisionmaking circle and get rid of those neoliberal holdovers.

        1. Some of the people you are complaining about are Clinton people!  You really think that Hillary would not have had Summers in her administration?  I can envision Geithner and Bernanke in her administration also, especially under the circumstances of how fast a worldwide calamity was coming about.

          The Volker rule is in the bank legislation.  I would like to see some bankers in prison, and some of them may get there yet but the people in the administration did prevent a worldwide depression.  I think Galbraith has a big ego and thinks he got slighted. And apparantly Galbraith didn’t see the CNBC town hall with President Obama if he thinks that Wall Street loves the President.  And Galbraith must not have heard candidate Obama’s speech to NASDAQ in Nov 2007 when he scolded and schooled them.

          It is interesting how President Obama can be so hated by Wall Street (Did you see the ‘townhall’ by CNBC?  Especially their opening?) and still be perceived as being on their side.    

          As far as President Obama being unschooled in economics and finance (sorry GL)read the speech he gave in 2007:

          http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09

          That was in September 2007.  Candidate Obama was doing what he could to try to get Wall Street to take a good look at what they were doing.  Not long after this speech, I spoke to someone whose brother worked at NASDAQ and she said that the worker bees understood what he was saying and agreed but that the people making the decisions were not about to change course.

          Even so, a lot of Wall Street ’employees’ donated to his campaign and now many of them hate him.  Hmmm. I wonder why that is?  Because he was too easy on them? I doubt that.  But I don’t doubt that a lot of them will not be donating in 2012.

          Ask Warren Buffet if President Obama is ‘unschooled in economics and finance’.  I think that I can come up with a Buffet interview on the subject if you need it.

          In addition, Hillary was too interested in bombing Iran for my liking.  That would be a travesty!

          Hillary is doing a great job as Secretary of State.  It has been 2+ years since the primary ended.  Let it go!  Hillary AND Bill have moved on, Hillary supporters should do the same.

          Ok, so now I have probably ticked off several of you.  Many of you?  It is just more of my ‘truth’. Peace!  🙂

          1. sorry you think so. I supported Obama since Bill’s disastrous South Carolina debacle. Jesse Jackson? Really? Talk about playing the race card heavy-handedly. But then I think Bill never really wanted to be first bubba. I think he blew up Hillary’s campaign either consciously or sub-consciously, but he cost her my support and many others I am aware of.

            And I am really not that impressed by what people say in speeches. It is far more telling about what they do in real life. And President Obama has really not done enough to support workers, especially compared to his enormous efforts supporting the banks and bankers who drove our economy over the cliff, got us on the hook to bail them out and then took obscene bonuses for doing so well with our largesse.

            Candidate Obama was much more progressive sounding than President Obama has been progressive acting in my book. And this is not idle chit-chat. He dissed the base in 2010 and it cost him dearly. While he was tryin gto appease the Republican party who will have nothing to do with him, he forgot all about all those people who helped get him where he is today. And it’s sad too.

          2. and some of our current problems are directly traceable to the Clinton era. Let’s not forget how big Bill was on deregulation.  But I do think Krugman is spot on that the stimulus wasn’t big enough.  When you make a leap you’d better commit to making it big enough to get where you need to be if you don’t want it to end in a splat.  The same goes for healthcare.

            That said, we are definitely better off than we would have been under anything proposed by the GOP. But we could have been better off to the extent that voters would already be feeling it.  I also agree entirely with Galbraith’s assessment of Geithner, Summers and Bernanke. Not at all the change we were aiming for.  

            Back to HRC, I do think she is doing a fine job as SOS.

  4. from Macrowikinomics: Rebooting the Economy

    From 1980 to 2005, nearly all net job creation in the United States occurred in firms less than five years old. Without start-ups, net job creation for the American economy would be negative in all but a handful of years.

    Basically you need more people like me if you want job growth. And specifically like my case (no venture capital) because we need a lot more start-ups than there’s V.C. money to fund.

    1. that’s a great but ultimately useless in it’s simplicity, observation.

      Entrepreneurial action requires a combination of factors.

      A start up idea to act on.

      Ability and willingness to act.

      Funding.

      Right now, the only ideas I have are not fundable.

      If you have an idea that requires no funding, or you have funding for one of mine, I’m all ears.

      A lot of people with jobs, in this economy, are neither willing nor able.   If there are two working in the household, one could perhaps roll the dice and self fund. Need the idea.

      Oh, and by the way, a new restaurant or plumbing crew is not net job accretive.  It needs to expand a market or create a previously non existant market.

      I’d guess that from 1980 to 2005 the years we had net job creation we also had net positive employment in construction. Perhaps the conclusion is that we need to start (over) building again.

    2. I don’t recall the source or the researcher, but it was found that most startups fold, and along with them, the jobs.  Just think “restaurant” for what is probably the extreme. The volatility of the small employer is inherent and risky for employees.

      I frankly can’t recall the model that led to the most long term sustainable jobs.  

      We talked about this article a few months ago.

      1. But those that succeed tend to grow at a very good rate. So if 6 die (providing jobs until they do), 2 grow slowly, and the final 2 add 20 jobs one year, 100, the next, 250 the next, well across a bunch of successful companies that adds up.

          1. But there has been a ton of studies showing that the vast majority of new jobs come from small companies under 10 years old. It’s also been shown, as MADCO said, that most startups fold.

            I was trying to illustrate how both statements are true. But I don’t know the specific percentages of great success.

        1. ….that in theory, when one startup folds, another opens, and the net job change is zero.

          Of course, few individual employees (other than restaurant or some grunt IT work) move from the one to the other directly.  But globally startups could be considered one large, important hiring pool.  

          One of the great arguments for universal health care here.  Oh, do you think that this might be a factor in why the EU has more startups than we do now?  

    3. “Most” startups covers a wide range, including self-employed individuals.

      I wonder how many successful startups sell goods/services to large, established corporations? It’s not as if “startups” operate in a void, independent of what else is going on. In that category I’d include restaurants pitched at lunch trade from … branches of large corps nearby ( or suppliers to large corps).

      Point: Distinction between startups and established businesses can be a false one.

      1. How many “startups” are downsized or “right-sized” employees who then consult back to their former employers? Does that really count as a net job created?

        1. When a person goes from salaried to consulting and it’s just them, that’s no real change. But in some cases (I’d guess well under half) a couple of people get together and start a consulting group. And they grow it winning more business. BEA actually started that way.

          As to JO’s point, yes. And I’d take it further, what matters is selling to companies (of any size) out of state. Because that’s what brings more dollars into the state and that’s what’s required to increase employment in total.

          But that can start small – my company at first had 1 employee and my first sales were worldwide, from Asia to Europe. So small can bring in outside bucks.

        2. Do I detect a trend towards companies outsourcing an ever-greater share of work to “startups” that used to be “departments,” “divisions,” etc.? In those cases, a startup is a Corp by another name.

          1. the amazing thing to me is how companies still use long term (permanent?) contract staff to replace former employees. I thought the Microsoft case had settled that that is actually illegal, yet companies still do it all the time.

          2. When I was helping janitors organize and strike in Denver ca. 1999, it struck me how no building owners or managers had custodians on their payroll.  It was all outside contractors. From a business perspective, I do understand that.

            I recall a friend’s father who was a janitor for US Steel in PA.  Never made a lot of money, I’m sure, but a safe and decent retirement.  If that steel plant were still in operation, or looking at the one in Pueblo, do you think that the janitors are direct employees?  Not a chance.

            The only reason small outside contractors can compete with in-house services is lower wages and lack of benefits.  That, despite the owners peeling off their profit. Less probability of being union, little or no chance for advancement or changing jobs, and the whole company can fold with the loss of one contract.  

  5. NPR this morning, during an interview with a new representative, he said the republican’s top priority is jobs. Good! Then five sentences later he says they need to cut the federal workforce. So a federal job is NOT really a job, only private sector jobs are REAL jobs. I’m sure all those federal employees while they are buying food and paying the mortgage are thinking — I should get a job…

    1. Most federal employees are unionized. The Republicans and their corporate masters don’t like unionized employees, it makes sense that they would discount federal jobs as real jobs.  

    2. the knee-jerk response from the right is that only the private sector can create jobs. The public sector destroys jobs. Never mind that many if most of those private sector jobs are part-time, minimum wage jobs with no benefits and screw most people. That doesn’t really matter. The rhetoric is much more important.

      Even Hick would have to admit that his restaurants for the most part did not provide much of a real living wage to most employees I’d bet.

      Now a decent government job with real job security and decent wages and benefits and retirement? That is anathema to the conservative point of view. I mean, how could we feel beholden to their lords and masters for our daily sustenance like that? They will gladly drive us right back to the age of serfdom and slavery if they can.

      1. My parents knew how the government created many jobs through the New Deal, many of them leading to permanent infrastructure improvements; hence, more continuing jobs.

        The CCC, the WPA, Hoover Dam, the TVA, rural electrification and universal phone service.  To say nothing of the jobs WWII created.

        Would private enterprise ever have gotten into the satellite launching and space tourism business without government going there first.

        Not a chance.  

        1. infrastructure, not only are we due for a new round for jobs sake but also to avoid becoming a wasteland  devoid of reliable roads, bridges, water and sewage systems, you name it? The benefits of all those projects and of the Eisenhower era highway projects didn’t just create jobs for a few years.  They built and maintained economic strength for decades. What today’s Rs call spending really is investing, though they like to disparage anyone who says so.  

          What’s not investing?  The tax break for the rich.  That will cost unfunded billions that will only be invested in growing the gap between the haves and the have nots. As has been demonstrated, it will not be invested in growing the economy with good jobs and will not be spent creating anything of real value, like infrastructure or manufactured goods including those needed for national security. That is all spending with no return.

          But I give up. There seems to be almost no chance that Dems will ever successfully compete with the rightie propaganda machine.  Not that they couldn’t.  They just don’t for some reason. Then they blame the grass roots for complaining about being left hung out to dry after we fought and contributed like crazy to put them in charge. Then they’re nicer to the shrinking GOP base, nicer to the Tea Party, nicer to the Blue Dogs who gave them nothing but grief, than they are to us.

          Does it never occur to them that you need to add other elements to the base, as the GOP finds ways of doing? Screwing and dissing and deflating all the enthusiasm of the base will not turn righties into BFFs or keep the volatile indies in your tent.

            1. gulfs between a tiny wealth and power elite and everybody else is not, has never been and will never be compatible with maintaining a successful, stable, democratic republic for long. That should be as obvious to anyone with more brains than a piece of toast as it is to someone like Kristoff. There’s certainly no connection accept, perhaps, a little common sense.

    3. are unemployed workers. It does not matter where you came from. If you were employed and then not employed you are unemployed.

      And, the Repubs want to cut unemployment payments too.

      So far the only groups saying the Repub’s plans will not damage or destroy American economy are the far right “thunk tanks”. Even those admit the Repub’s plans won’t help job growth.

    4. Biggets public works project in nation derails

      http://articles.latimes.com/20

      New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie — a star within the GOP as a fiscal conservative — says his state can’t pay its share of the $9-billion rail tunnel under the Hudson River. The project would have provided 6,000 jobs immediately and 40,000 jobs after its completion, officials said.

      Officials estimated it would provide 6,000 construction jobs immediately and as many as 40,000 jobs after its completion in 2018

      ***************

      http://www.dailykos.com/storyo

      Governor-Elect Kasich in Ohio has killed the federally-funded passenger rail project that would have connected Cincinnati, Columbus and Cleveland. Apparently, Kasich does not like the idea of putting Ohioans to work

      http://www.dailykos.com/storyo

      “Passenger rail is not in Ohio’s future,” the Republican said at his first news conference after Tuesday’s win over Gov. Ted Strickland. “That train is dead.”

      Those are just a couple examples of GOP jobs programs!

      1. from Newsweek

        What would we get for this huge investment?

        Not much. Here’s what we wouldn’t get: any meaningful reduction in traffic congestion, greenhouse-gas emissions, air travel, or oil consumption and imports. Nada, zip. If you can do fourth-grade math, you can understand why.

        1. I don’t get it. What am I missing?:

          “High-speed intercity trains (not commuter lines) travel at up to 250 miles per hour and are most competitive with planes and cars over distances of less than 500 miles. In a report on high-speed rail, the nonpartisan Congressional Research Service examined the 12 corridors of 500 miles or less with the most daily air traffic in 2007. Los Angeles to San Francisco led the list with 13,838 passengers; altogether, daily air passengers in these 12 corridors totaled 52,934. If all of them switched to trains, the number of airline passengers, about 2 million a day, would drop only 2.5 percent. Any fuel savings would be less than that; even trains need fuel.

          Is there 53k daily air passengers or 2M?

          If all 53k switch to high speed rail (not trains), that’s 100%.

          Where does the 2M airline passengers a day come from?

          Annually, about 1.4M fly from SF to LA (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Francisco_International_Airport#Top_Destinations).

          The numbers don’t seem to add up.

        2. And I had relatives and friends in LA.  I would have found a train, especially high speed, much easier than either driving or flying.  Driving and flying are both way too time consuming, for different reasons, of course.

          There are thousands of people in the Bay Area who would never give up BART.

          Maybe it is addressed in the complete CRS report but what I didn’t see addressed in the Newsweek article was traffic congestion and the amount of time that is wasted, collectively, by people stuck/stalled in traffic.  I suspect that the tunnel from NJ to NY would do a lot of good in alleviating non-productive hours stuck in traffic.

          I think as cities grow and populations grow, we need to think of the future and our current highway system does not meet future needs.  Also, as people get used to trains, more people will use them.

          So, what would you propose for future traffic solutions?

          1. I know nothing about the economics of high speed rail. I also would like the convenience of rail here both Colo Spgs to Cheyenne and out to Grand Junction. It would be filled with kids soccer teams on the weekends.

            But it worries me that no private company wants to do it. And the ski train keeps losing money. That generally is a sign that something does not make economic sense.

  6. 11-06-2010

    Last night, District Court Judge John W. Madden ruled.  We have a link to the complete ruling on the kathleencurry.org website.

    The Secretary of State has 3 days (by 5:00 pm Wednesday) to appeal to the Colorado Supreme Court.

    Here is a quote from the ruling:   “It is possible Curry may have received the greatest number of votes in the HD 61 race. Refusing to count these votes would thwart the clear intention of the electorate, as well as the intent of the election code. Accordingly, the Court finds that in this particular circumstance, the Secretary has not substantially complied with the election code.

    For the reasons stated above, the Secretary of State is ordered to perform an inspection of the ballots constituting the undervote in the HD 61 race, and to include in the vote total for Curry those ballots in which Curry’s name has been written on the write-in line for the HD 61 race whether or not the target area designating the selection of a write-in candidate has been marked pursuant to the same procedure as stated in Election Rule 27.7.4.3..”  

    1. though Curry was not your usual D, though she misunderstood (probably by failing to research) just when she had to declare her U status, she really has been a good rep for her constituents. She carried a water bill I believe every year. That is guaranteed to tick off a lot of folks.

    2. SOS Buescher makes the ruling, right? I mean, not him personally but his office. Not that it will make too much of a difference, but they are both west slopers and, I’m guessing, he doesn’t want the R’s to have control.

      If I understand the snip – if Curry’s name was written on the ballot, she should get that vote, whether or not it was in the right place.

      Not very optimistic, but very interesting.

      1. It’s the Democrat’s lead that could be lost.  So do with that what you will.

        Your understanding is correct; the argument is that the bubble wasn’t filled in, but Curry’s name was spelled correctly and in the proper place.

      2. The SoS rule (and one clause of the law) requires that you both check a box for write-in AND write in the candidate’s name.  It conflicts with another law that says you only have to write in the name. The ruling said that as long as the name was written in, the voter’s intent was clear whether the box was checked or not.

        Am I wrong, but does this race not matter for control?  Winning this race I think the Dems are down 33-32, without it 33-31-1.

  7. So, you rent an apartment that overlooks someone’s yard and you are upset that they filmed you snooping on them.  Bite my ass, McGinniss.

    This law firm represents Joe McGinniss.  It has come to our attention that the first episode (titled “Mamma Grizzly”) of the above referenced television show, scheduled to air on Sunday, November 14, 2010 at 9:00 PM on TLC, contains unauthorized videotaped images of Mr. McGinniss which were obtained without his knowledge or consent.  In addition, you have already placed a video clip containing this image of Mr. McGinniss on your website and it has been picked up and reproduced by the Huffington Post and many other online sites.

    Mr. McGinniss was not asked if any production crew could videotape him as he read a book on the secluded deck of the house he was living in at that time.  He was not aware that any camera crew was in fact videotaping him.  Mr. McGinniss had a reasonable expectation of privacy under those circumstances.  The mere taking of the video therefore gives rise to an actionable claim for invasion of his privacy.  The publication of the video on your website and in the television show constitutes an additional wrong – the unauthorized use of the likeness of Mr. McGinniss.  Finally, the manner in which Ms. Palin describes Mr. McGinniss in the episode is defamatory: Mr. McGinniss has never invaded the Palins’ privacy, contrary to the many statements made by Ms. Palin and her husband, both prior to this television production, and now repeated in the episode referenced above.

    1. I don’t play a lawyer on TV, but I’m pretty familiar with photographic rights, releases, etc.

      There are two factors in play here.  The first is that he was not in a public place, where no one has a right to not have their picture taken.  The logical corollary to this is that when you are not in public, i.e., your home, you have a right to not have your picture taken.

      The second factor is what do you do with an image (or video) that you have in your possession? Presuming that it doesn’t fall into a category like kiddie porn, you can have any image you want, even acquired when the subject is in a private setting.  BUT, when you “profit” from its sale, its viewing, then you need to have permission from the person in the image.  Profit need not mean money.

      “Public figures” (stars, politicians) excepted, no permission needed.  

  8. …how long is Colorado going to allow the decriminalization of running over cyclists? Will you finally act when YOU get run down?

    Oh, wait….the perp is rich, and he manages mega-millions for rich people. Now I see why he skates.

    Alleged hit-and-run driver may not face felony

    EAGLE, Colorado – A financial manager for wealthy clients will not face felony charges for a hit-and-run because it could jeopardize his job, prosecutors said Thursday.

    Martin Joel Erzinger, 52, faces two misdemeanor traffic charges stemming from a July 3 incident when he allegedly hit bicyclist Dr. Steven Milo from behind then sped away, according to court documents.

    Milo and his attorney, Harold Haddon, are livid about the prosecution’s decision to drop the felony charge. They filed their objection Wednesday afternoon, the day after prosecutors notified Haddon’s office by fax of their decision.

    Haddon and Milo say this is a victim’s rights case, that Erzinger’s alleged actions constituted a felony, and that one day is not enough notice.

    “The proposed disposition is not appropriate given the shocking nature of of the defendant’s conduct and the debilitating injuries which Dr. Milo has suffered,” Haddon wrote.

    As for the one-day notice, Haddon wrote, “One business day is not sufficient notice to allow him to meaningfully participate in this criminal action.”

    Milo, 34, is a physician living in New York City with his wife and two children, where he is still recovering from his injuries, court records show.

    Milo suffered spinal cord injuries, bleeding from his brain and damage to his knee and scapula, according to court documents. Over the past six weeks he has suffered “disabling” spinal headaches and faces multiple surgeries for a herniated disc and plastic surgery to fix the scars he suffered in the accident.

    “He will have lifetime pain,” Haddon wrote. “His ability to deal with the physical challenges of his profession – liver transplant surgery – has been seriously jeopardized.”

    http://www.vaildaily.com/artic

    1. The Kobe Bryant prosecutor is changing a case to misdemeanor because the alleged perp is rich?!!  

      The same DA just finished getting a second hung jury on a porn possession prosecution, and has decided to try that case a third time.  

      1. Rich local, unknown white guy in a he said he said maybe.

        or

        Rich out of town celebrity in sex assault.

        Hmmm. If I was trying to make a career, I wonder which I would pursue.

  9. that’s been brining in a cooler in my garage for the past 48 hours, has now been smothered completely in fresh-made dry rub, and will shortly find it’s way into the Big Green Egg for 6 to 7 hours of Sunday afternoon slow smoking.

    Dinner’s at 7:00 . . .

      1. My basic barbecue rub (for pork or beef) is a slight modification of a Steven Raichlen* recipe:

        1/4 c. dark brown sugar

        1/4 c. smoked paprika

        3 T. coarse black pepper (freshly ground)

        3 T. Kosher salt

        1 T. hickory-smoked salt (or more Kosher)

        2 t. garlic powder

        2 t. onion powder

        1 t. celery seed

        1 t. dry chipoltle (or jalepeno) pepper powder

        makes about 1 cup.

        *author of several fantastic barbecue and grilling books.  My favorite is “How to Grill” about 500 pages of recipes, techniques, and equipment — got mine at Sam’s Club about 8 or 9 years ago.

        For folks like MADCO who don’t cook, the pictures alone are worth the price of the book.

        1. … also has a PBS series, although I think it’s mostly relegated to the “Create” network.

          I plan on getting a Big Green Egg at some future point but for now, to the meager extent that I BBQ, I’m using my Weber grill.

          1. used off of Craigslist a half-dozen years ago after lusting for one ever since the very first time I cooked with one, during my Navy days, about 1980.  Long story.

            There’s a place called “The Outdoor Kitchen” in south-Denver that sells the whole line — really nice folks.  (I’ve also seen them locally at some ACE Hardware stores.)  Every year around September or October they have a kind of “green egg festival” at the store.  The brand-new Eggs that they use then get sold at demo-model prices.  You might want to this on your calendar for next year.

            1. before I bought my Egg, I made a reasonable facsimile from two large Azalea pots — ala Alton Brown.  It works really well, although it doesn’t see all that much duty any more except as a salmon smoker.

              1. I get my lump charcoal from Lehrer’s. They used to be on S. Broadway but have since moved to Holly and County Line (aka b.f.nowhere). They sell Big Green Eggs too. Nice people; they also have a location at Holly and Evans which is on the way to my parents’ house.

                Thanks for the tip! I’ll definitely check craigslist when I have the necessary amount of disposable income saved up (probably 2023 if the GOP has their way).

          1. 5 to 8 lbs depending on the shape of the cut, with a little left over to spinkle on the meat post-cooking.

            When I do a chicken, I use about 4 Tbsp per bird (although I use a slightly different rub mix for poultry, this basic rub would work well) — two on the inside, and two on the outside.

  10. today is the 2nd time my car was broken into and I’ve had my GPS unit stolen. It is horrible that the economy has been driven into a ditch by supply side shock doctrine policies. The more poverty the higher the property crime, thanks Alan Greenspan.  

          1. Tweakers, drug abuse in general is related to poverty. You don’t find houses in Cherry Creek exploding because they are cookers. However a few blocks from me in Englewood, there was a house that exploded because it was a cook house.  

            1. they’re not stealing in your neighborhood.

              And I don’t think meth use is strictly correlated to the state of the economy.  It was a pretty big problem even when things were going strong on this side of the hill.

        1. as I’m in SW Denver too, but a section where I have to say I’m in Englewood for mailing purposes. When people move in, they think they’re Englewood residents sometimes.

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

46 readers online now

Newsletter

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