U.S. Senate See Full Big Line

(D) J. Hickenlooper*

(R) Somebody

80%

20%

Governor See Full Big Line
(D) Michael Bennet

(D) Phil Weiser

60%↑

50%↓

Att. General See Full Big Line

(D) M. Dougherty

(D) Jena Griswold

60%↑

40%↑

Sec. of State See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez

(D) J. Danielson

(R) Sheri Davis
50%

40%

30%
State Treasurer See Full Big Line

(D) Brianna Titone

(D) Jeff Bridges

(R) Kevin Grantham

40%

40%

30%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Somebody

90%

2%

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

(R) Jeff Hurd*

(D) Somebody

80%

40%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert*

(D) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank*

(D) Somebody

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen*

(R) Somebody

90%

10%

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

(R) Gabe Evans*

(D) Manny Rutinel

(D) Yadira Caraveo

45%↓

40%↑

30%

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
February 09, 2012 04:33 PM UTC

Thursday Open Thread

  • 96 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“Every decision is liberating, even if it leads to disaster. Otherwise, why do so many people walk upright and with open eyes into their misfortune?”

–Elias Canetti

Tweet
Share

Comments

96 thoughts on “Thursday Open Thread”

  1. Those middle of the page webinar ads may be  hosing up the site – I’ve had a lot of trouble getting the main page to load, both with an ad blocker and without one.  

    2. I congratulate you for directly addressing this with the site editor. Likely his financial backers and the site owners see this as a revenue opportunity needed to fund the site.

      However, the editor does provide an email address for you to vent your issues privately. I suspect theyd prefer you address them via this contact process. I say that because it doesn’t seem that the editors are responding to your daily grievances.

      Last I congratulate you as a flaming liberal from directly addressing the site editor. Unfortunately many others would seek to blame large multinational corporations when in fact it might be the fact you have a crappy computer or failed to perform basic maintenance or your using some crappy browser . Not to worry though you might think of blaming your Internet provider …. You know scream net neutrality … Of course there are a few other people probably using the same Internet provider and they might out you.

      2. it looks like you have Libertad on your side in this mid-page advertising thing.  Is there really anything more you need to hear about what a fucked-up decision this has been?

  2. Other than the Miss Laura (Bradford) Chronicles, co-staring the Nutty Speaker and Disturbing PD, we have given very little attention to this year’s legislature.  Why is that?  Are the bills that non-controversial?  Is it election year paralysis?  Or is it the Repubs presidential race is so compelling we can’t seem to focus on what’s happening under the gold dome?  

    Anyway, I’ll be off the Reservation most of the day so I leave you with this wish – May the “Webinar” disappear in my absence.

    1. He keeps pissing himself with policy failures (making pesky catholics offer abortion serivces and rubbers) and the facts and outcomes of his previous policies keep coming back to haunt him (Solyndra).

      1. You can’t create enough new government jobs to hire those former private sector workers …. your policies did not encourage the private sector to rehire after the economic downturns conclusion that occured back in the middle of 2009.

        You remeber Obama telling us back in 2009 that the recession was over and things would grow …. don’t you?

        3. …I’ll just post some headlines and links for you to follow:

          Fears fade as economy flexes its muscles

          http://www.reuters.com/article…

          (the left-leaning news and financial information website.)

          Bernanke-Led Economy Proving Critics Clueless About Federal Reserve Policy

          http://www.bloomberg.com/news/…

          (noted Commie-pinko Left Wing news source)

          New surveys: Catholics want birth control coverage

          http://content.usatoday.com/co…

          (yes, it’s a tabloid newspaper, but it is in the Faith and Reason column.)

          Solyndra: Blame It On Bush, Say Obama Officials

          http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/…

          (D’oh! Looks like the loan started under the previous administration, thanks to a Repub bill passed when they dominated all three branches of government!)

    2. 1. Civil Unions will pass and the Republicans will try to do it as quietly as they can to minimize the blowback from the haters in their base.

      2. The economy is improving so the budget will still be tight but increasing, even if by a little, beats the snot out of decreasing funding.

      3. SB-191 is moving along well so there won’t be any major fights over K-12 because we need to see how well this works. (And if it fails the next step is ship all our kids to Finland.)

      4. Transportation is (barely) adequately funded. Republicans will propose reducing the funding for political advantage, but they won’t change it.

      5. Hickenlooper will stay focused on his approval rating so he’s lined up for the V.P. slot.

      6. Enough will avoid addressing the mess our funding system operates under that nothing will be done.

      1. public public funding for Colorado higher education left anymore, that would be the final straw . . . every college in this state would be pushed private, (except for maybe that new Holy Christian Evangelical Charter College — they are open to everyone who’s a true believer . . . and really, deep down, who isn’t? . . . and might even be finally partially accredited in a year or two.)

      1. I am looking to make an amazing profit in these times of economic crisis – are there any good webinars out there ?  Damn I wish I could find one…

  4. Usually, nothing happens when I click on post a comment.

    Pita’s point is appreciated. There seems to be little discussion for a policitcal blog on Bills submitted in the legislature.

    I just finished the book Confidence Men by Ron Suskind. It’s a great read, especially for those whom banking regulation, derivatives trading, Wall Street titans and manipulations of the market are of interest. The evolution of globalization, the “free” market, the brain drain away from productive enterprise all compete for what is best about the book.

    I certainly agree with Byron Dorgan’s direct comment to President Obama when he emphatically stated (regarding Geithner and Summers) “You hired the wrong two guys!” Much like is written in Naomi Klines. “The Shock Doctrine” (also a must read), an opportunity presented itself with the Bush stock market crash that was missed. The bankers and wall street traders were on their heels and the issue of gross compensation could have been reined in-but the chance was missed.

    Obama is a brilliant guy with great personal charisma, but the book more than confirms he started his job as POTUS less than competent, especially in the face of the huge challenges he was confronted with.

    The other part of the book that was very well researched and educational relates to heaalth care costs, and the health care delivery system in general. That alone made the book worth the price.

    If nothing else, now that Rahm Emmanual is back in Chicago (rendered mute with his middle finger missing), and the brilliant Pete Rouse having reorganized critical WH cabinet positions, Obama’s 2nd term should be very interesting.

      1. Clinton inherited a weak economy with (then) huge budget deficits because of the S & L scandal, and Obama had essentially the same scenario only worse.

        Clinton had a learning curve his first two years and many pundits were writing him off for a second term. But he rebounded,  grew into the job, and left office with a booming economy and budget surpluses.

        1. But he (Clinton) rebounded, grew into the job, and left office with a booming economy and budget surpluses.

          There is nothing even remotely on the horizon that would be a repeat of all the economic & industry bubbles that benefited Bubba. We all truly hope for an improved economy but there will not (nor should there be) a return of over-inflated home prices, unqualified loans & finances, the unfettered globalization (nee offshoring) of manufacturing/jobs/services, the rampant deregulation of resource capitalization, and such.

          Dems, progs & libs often fall into the melancholic longing for the 90s without seeing it was all built on so many bubbles — and the trouble is that all bubble POP.      

  5. I see the issue of the federal government mandating insurance coverage for birth control has come up.  The Catholic bishop’s and the right wing’s push back seems to have caught many progressives flat footed.  Let me help.

    First, 26 states, including Colorado, already mandate that health insurance policies include “coverage for contraception.” Colorado Law  Furthermore, Colorado makes no exception for or accommodation of religious beliefs.  So, this is no biggie here in the Mile High state.

    Second, the Supreme Court has long recognized a distinction between “belief” and “conduct” when applying the Free Exercise clause of the First Amendment.  Beginning with the polygamy cases, the “belief-conduct” dichotomy has a winding and sometimes contradictory past.  But, the the current trend holds that “general laws” which have a incidental impact on religious conduct are constitutional.

    Let me suggest this article as an excellent primer on the subject.

      1. If we are going to be intellectually honest, it does mandate conduct – that the employer pay for the additional insurance benefit for contraception. You are right that the regulation does not require anyone to purchase or use contraceptives. However, the Catholic church does not want to “aid or abet” anyone’s (Catholic or not) use of contraceptives. If the Supreme Court does not go completely off the rails, ala Citizens United, the Catholic church will face the same problem as the 19th century Mormons.

        1. There is nothing that can be forced on anything remotely related to religion or to people of that religion.  And, of course, that’s exactly what the Catholic Church wants.  “Aiding or abetting”  really?  If the Catholic Church is only held to that standard, well, then no Catholic would need to pay taxes for wars or abortion for rape and incest, or any death penalty case expenses or costs of the actual execution.  This would lead to absolute chaos, as all parties to this discussion know.  The position of the Church in this is nothing but a political statement.  The Catholic Church has much bigger problems to worry about, not the least of which is that over 90% of American Catholics have ignored this “central” teaching of that Church that birth control is “evil.”  Maybe they ought to get their own house in order.  

          1. “Quantity has a quality all its own.” is a favorite, especially regarding red army material like the T-34 tank.

              He may not have actually said the one about He would buy the rope to hang the last capitalist from the capitalists, but it certainly reflected his policies.  

    4. I have for years been in favor of a national lottery for public office.  Unless you have an IQ below 90 you are automatically entered.  The loser of the national lottery has to be President for four years.  Losers of local lotteries have to be Congresspersons and legislators.  If we did this, on average, we would get a more representative Congress and other things.  Yeah, sure, every once in a while you would get Ron Paul for President, but the reality is that with a Congress made up of a cross-section of America, how much could he do.  And Congress certainly wouldn’t be more unpopular that the current Congress is.  Frankly, I believe the collective goodness and wisdom of the American people and I think the bastardized system we have today has allowed hacks and idiots to run things, and no one will argue that the whole system as it is now is screwed up.

      1. I think your lottery Congress would be ten times more corrupt and reactionary.

        Our system may be broken, but taking an infinite monkeys approach to governing is ludicrous.

        Read some comments on Denver Post stories and YouTube videos sometime to see what random collections of people would be like in office.

  7. decides it should probably do something.

    WASHINGTON (Reuters) – The House of Representatives voted to give President Barack Obama a limited line-item veto authority on Wednesday in a rare display of bipartisanship on bitterly divisive spending and budget issues.

    The House voted 254-173, with 57 Democrats joining Republicans in favoring the bill, which allows the president to propose elimination of individual items in spending legislation and subject them to a separate, second vote by Congress.

    …

    Republicans are pushing more than 10 other budget reform bills this year in an effort to seize the election-year high ground and portray themselves as the party better equipped to conserve taxpayer dollars.

    http://news.yahoo.com/house-vo…

    Well, it only took 13 months.

    2. First of all, “we can’t be trusted so the black guy has to choose all the hard cuts in the budget” isn’t very inspiring as a campaign slogan.

      Secondly, it’s unconstitutional just like every other time it’s been done.

      And thirdly, if the Court hasn’t already abolished it, Republicans will campaign on its repeal as soon as Obama uses it to cut something they like.

  8. “20% of Republicans leaning to Obama!”

    But, wait, there is more.

    “The latest…Poll shows none of the current crop of Republican presidential candidates has solidified the base of the party, with one in five GOP voters leaning toward support of Obama in November.

    The poll was conducted by telephone Feb. 1-3, 2012, and has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.44 percentage points.”

    Now, for the best part.

    http://www.wnd.com/2012/02/20-…

    Yes, that World Net Daily.

  9. Orly Taitz and the Birther Clowncar shut up again…

    PDF to full decision: http://beingliberal.org/public…

    Money quote:

    CONCLUSION:

    President Barack Obama is eligible as a candidate for the presidential primary

    election under O.C.G.A. 21-2-5(b).

    SO ORDERED, February 2nd, 2012.

    MICHAEL M. MALIHI, Judge

    Justified snickering from the blogosphere:


    Orly Taitz loses birther case to an empty table

    Orly Taitz represented one of four plaintiffs challenging President Obama’s eligibility for placement on the Democratic ballot in Georgia. The President and his counsel were subpoenaed to appear in court to defend against these challenges, but the President’s attorney issued a nice letter to the judge stating that the Court had no business or jurisdiction even hearing the case and therefore the defense would not be in attendance.

    So Taitz and her fellow attorneys presented their best arguments without challenge from the defense, and requested a summary judgment on the merits.

    And the Court’s judgment: the plaintiffs have no case and no credible evidence, and there is no law to support their claims. Judgment for the defendant, represented only by an empty table, on the merits. Or in this case, utter lack thereof.

    http://www.dailykos.com/story/…

  10. Among other things, I am morally opposed to money being spent on wars and capital punishment. And yet I am inexplicably forced to pay for these things through my taxes. And when I hire someone to work for me, I must pay a share of taxes for these things on their behalf as well. I demand that I be allowed a “conscience” exemption.

    It truly does pain me to participate in these activities. I’m not kidding. But for some reason I’m forced to pay for many things the government does that appall me. But my conscience isn’t given any special dispensation. And the funny thing is that Catholics who believe as I do — and there are many — aren’t given any dispensation for those beliefs either. The only area where religion trumps citizenship is when it comes to private sexual behavior. Isn’t that odd?

    h/t Hullabaloo

    http://digbysblog.blogspot.com/

    2. I have a funny “At least he’s not…” that I’ll post myself in a while, even. We haven’t had one of those in a while, and this guy I found deserves his time under the dunce cap.

      Haven’t seen anything I wanted to promote these last couple of days. Doesn’t mean the diaries weren’t good, but they didn’t have the whole-audience relevance that I prefer to see in something promotable.

      1. – MS Rep. pushing for “Gulf of America” (to spite Mexico and maybe create some jobs)

        – or the LA Repug Rep. that believed the Onion’s “Abortionplex” story

        – or Santorum’s rant on Obama leading Christians to the guillotine

        GOP krazee is nothing if not entertaining

      1. As Colorado goes, so goes the nation.  Remember when Jerry Brown won the Colorado primary, went on to defeat Bill Clinton and become the 42 President?

  13. If my math is correct, on Inauguration Day in 2013 Mitt Romney will be exactly 65 and 315 days old. If elected (and that’s a BIG IF), he would tie with James Buchanan as the 3rd oldest President in U.S. history behind Ronald Reagan and William Henry Harrison (69 and 68 respectively).

    There is one caveat, however, that I argue would give Romney the edge for the #3 spot. President Buchanan was inaugurated on March 4th as was originally required in the Constitution. But, upon the realization that having a lame duck Congress for 4 months was a bad idea, it was bumped up to January 20th. So, had Buchanan been sworn in on January 20th, he would be younger than Romney.  

      1. I think an argument can be made that a younger President can better understand emerging technologies and trends that will shape our economy and society in the coming years. That being said, Presidents typically just rely on advisers for that information so age doesn’t have that much of an impact on one’s ability to serve. Getting elected is a different story though.

        I think the real question is, how does Romney make himself look roughly the same age as Rick Santorum despite being 11 years his senior? It’s certainly more than just the hair.  

        1. And you can make your argument all you want, but think I understand emerging technologies better than my kids.

          The reason has nothing to do with age.  I pay attention.  They don’t.

          Once again, what does age have to do with anything?

          The founders, in their infinite wisdom, set a MINIMUM age for the President.  Not a maximum age.  They were right then, and they’re still right.

          1. Romney already looks the same age as Santorum, and I suspect it’s more than the fact that he dyes his hair. I think the great lengths he clearly goes to in order to look significantly younger than he really is shows his absolute obsession with power. I don’t see that as a good quality in a candidate.

            In terms of the role age plays in being President, I already agreed with you that one can be 65+ and still be an effective President. However, I think the older a candidate is, the more challenging it is to convince voters 50 and under that you can relate to them. That’s why there have been just 3 Presidents (Eisenhower, Reagan, and Bush I) elected to their first term above the age of 60 since Reconstruction (Truman and Ford took office before being elected).  

              1. I don’t think employers should discriminate based on age. But that’s not at all what I’m saying so I’m not sure how you came to that conclusion. We have laws meant to prevent age discrimination.

                Are you suggesting we have laws that prevent people from judging candidates based on their age? Last I checked we have the right to vote for someone for any reason we choose. And if age doesn’t play a role in how people vote then why would Romney go to such great lengths to disguise his age?

                Reagan was the victim of much criticism for his age affecting how he governed. Romney isn’t quite that old, but he’s not too far off either.  

          2. with the cap on, to rewind the cassette tape after it gets caught and pulled out by the tape player.

            You can also use the pen to write “Beegees” on the cassette label . . .  

          4. There are two kinds of people at The Denver Post.  Those who know what carbon paper is and those who don’t.

              The ones that do, work for the ones that don’t.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

51 readers online now

Newsletter

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

Colorado Pols