CO-04 (Special Election)
See Full Big Line
(R) Greg Lopez
(R) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Biden*
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%↓
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
90%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
90%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
(R) Ron Hanks
40%
30%
20%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(R) Deborah Flora
(R) J. Sonnenberg
30%↑
15%↑
10%↓
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Dave Williams
(R) Jeff Crank
50%↓
50%↑
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
90%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) Brittany Pettersen
85%↑
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
(R) Janak Joshi
60%↑
35%↓
30%↑
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
March 22, 2011 07:21 AM UTC
25 Comments
Since we finally have someone with sense, send her over to manage the clean up locally. She’ll go in with a hardhat and a clipboard!
After that she could counsel Chernobyl thyroid cancer patients and then show us how the town can be thriving again.
Completely serious now: What was the point of her being interviewed on this? It’s not a political pressure situation. Dunno, maybe the way Billy got to squeeze in how “the establishment” doesn’t know what they’re talking about… It’s almost like a legitimate news show. Almost. Only without news or legitimacy.
Heck, let’s spring for a first class ticket!
If that’s all she was wearing, I see big ratings for an unreal reality tv show.
n/t
If one squints she could be just a tiny bit right. There is this thing called the “radiation paradox” where people living in areas with slightly elevated levels of background radiation (like Colorado) are actually healthier than people living in areas with less background radiation. The thing is that this is far, far, far, far lower than what one would be exposed to standing next to the damaged power plant. And different than ingesting radioactive iodine. And it might turn out to be a statistical mirage since it has not been as thoroughly studied as one could hope before putting ones life on the line.
We do treat cancer with radiation…so radiation isn’t all bad (and the medical community is well aware of this). Other non-scientific claims (radon caves have a following as having therapeutic value) should be eyed warily for spurious claims.
But have you ever been treated with radiation? Lesser of two evils. I wouldn’t wish it on my worst enemy.
In medicine, it’s used to target cancer cells and kill them, it’s not given to the whole body.
Seriously, Ann Coulter is the Atari/Kaypro/Parachute Pants/Banana Seat With Sissy Bar of the Conservative Movement — the game has passed her by. She’s doing whatever she can to be noticed, and she’s failing.
Sounds like a GOPer to me!
Love that movie.
As for darling Ann, she’s past breeding age, right? Let’s hope so.
That’s insulting.
This means that smoking is good for you as well! Smoking can lead to various kinds of cancer, which will lead to increased doses of radiation through treatment methods.
Aaaaand, if I live in an apartment or home with higher than normal levels of radiation and smoke there, according to Ann, I’m good.
This woman is a life saver! I’m so grateful for her insights.
that said smokers who drink copious amounts of coffee are less likely to get cancer. True story.
Think Ann Coulter would be interested?
should’ve keep his eye on the road and his hands upon the wheel
is not what’s surprising here. I mean, we’re talking about Ann Coulter. The fact that she cites (multiple times) the New York Times, that MSM commie rag, as a credible scource? That’s downright shocking! What’s the Wacko Limbaugh/ Beck/Tea Party Right to make of that?!?
You don’t say the New York Times is generally wrong, you say it’s biased against you. That way, you can cite it and it gets extra credibility (even that biased paper…) but if other people cite it, it doesn’t mean anything (of course they’d say that…).
Getting the general population to believe the entirety of mainstream media is “biased” was a stroke of genius.
Still think the hatred of the NYT in particular is so visceral among the Tea Party set and the general feeling that radiation is bad for you so well accepted by the public that this may be an instance of creating a WTF moment on the wacko right.
Even O’Really seems to be struggling lately with how far some of the wacko faves are going as he tries to continue to appear as some semblance of a serious journalist. Claiming fears of certain amounts of radiation are overblown by hippy anti-nuke peaceniks is one thing but he was definitely thrown by Coulter’s embrace of radiation as great stuff.
Beck and Fox are now reportedly set to part ways I think the Becks, Coulters, etc. may be fracturing the wacko right because their constant quest to go even more extreme has brought them to a point where they are so far right it isn’t even recognizably right sometimes anymore and is causing serious WTF talking point confusion.
But it fits in with the concerted effort the nuclear power industry is putting forward right now because, as we know, the growing nuclear disaster in Japan ain’t good for their industry. She’s probably on the payroll of one of the industry groups – just doin’ her job.
She should have testified with the supporters last week in Pueblo. Probably not enough money to get her there.
the only sector that really matters, Wall Street, wants nothing to do with them. Coulter can blather all she wants.
Fortunately for the staff and students in these schools, radoniation is good for you.
there’s something about her that makes Glenn Beck seem hot by comparison . . .
It’s like choosing between lethal injection and the gas chamber.
I’ll pass.