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%
March 07, 2012 04:02 PM UTC
28 Comments
You can’t be serious? You say.
I am. SB-15, the Asset bill to give undocumented students the opportunity to attend college without having to pay out of state fees needs Republican support to pass the House. The Democrats are holding the bill in the Senate in order to gain the few votes they will need for it to pass the House.
To date the State Board of Regents, thanks to Republican Tilman Bishop of Grand Junction, has passed a resolution and 25 of 28 college boards are in support. The latest is Fort Lewis College in Durago.
http://www.durangoherald.com/a…
If you are one of the fortunate to have a Dem., contact the Gov. So far he has failed to take a stand.
And kudos to Republicans like Tilman Bishop for taking a stand. Will contact the Guv today. Thanks for the heads up.
….USA Today warns their readers of the “ticking time bomb” on our streets. The Christian Science Monitor says that the arrest of a serial killer (who is a Marine) in California portends “a larger problem with the US Military.”And CNN’s barely-qualified experts tell us that Vet Violence and PTSD are a “growing problem.”
All of these stories have about one Libertad-quality Google search behind their facts…if that. And as other media outlets parrot the scary news, the country is being brainwashed AGAIN that our returning warriors are a roaming pack of ruthless killers ready to pounce on the unsuspecting population.
Allow me to present some of those facty-things:
(includes a big wide chart with lots of other facty-things.)
http://www.blogs.va.gov/VAntag…
Despite a much-different attitude by the general population after the Vietnam War, the media is stroking the flames of ignorance with irresponsible headlines and lazy reporting. That leads to popular media parroting the same urban legends, meaning we can look forward to the bundle of cop and medical shows on TeeVee using the “Crazy Vet” as a plot device.
It’s not unheard of – as a kid, I remember watching Kojak with my Uncle (just returned from his 2nd tour in Vietnam) and seeing his jaw lock when the Bald detective would turn to his staff and say “round up all the recently discharged Vietnam Vets, and grill them about this murder.”
Now, I realize we’re a bunch of online slackers who post stuff and complement (or criticize) each other’s posts. Maybe you can keep this in your back pocket, and pass it on in the appropriate forum…
use their advertising for that show to promote care for veterans like the USO Invisible Woulds program.
I don’t really have a problem with TV shows using “Crazy Vet” as a plot device. Some characters are easier to use to show tragedy than others. “Evil Foster Parent” and “Too-Strict Religious Parent” are some other examples that are over-used bad guys in TV shows.
When it comes to news shows asking stupid questions like “Hint of a Larger Problem?” I do have a big problem with that. Veterans with underlying psych issues is a problem. Veterans with underlying psych issues who could kill random people in their sleep with their military-ninja skills is not. That belongs in the fiction section.
Since there were no contested upper ticket races, any place that has a contest legislative race should have send their delegates to the county/district assembly based on preferences in those races.
Any word on how those various candidates did?
here’s what I LOVE
– the Palins are making their love for Newt known wide & far and what happens — Newt gets just his home state and Mittens takes Alaska.
– Frothy loses OH in a very close race. Had Frothy paid attention and did the minimal amount of work it took to get on all the district ballots he likely would’ve won and pundits would be frothing
– Frothy blames Newt’s presence on the OH ballot (where he took 15%) as a factor in his loss. Again, had Frothy paid attention maybe those lost districts could’ve made the difference
– Frothy & Newt both failed to get on VA ballot so Paul gets 41% of the vote. Both fools woulda/shoulda knocked Mitt out of VA and picked up all those delegates but they FAIL again.
Yeah Mitt’s millions do make a difference in this race but so does paying attention to the basic things — like getting on ballots. Wonder if either of these asses are will to hear the truth and take the blame in their post-primary recaps or will they play the victim and blame Mitt & his money? Are they willing to admit that even though God told ’em to run he didn’t give ’em enough brains to get er done.
he wasted zero time in blaming ” the system “. If the rules don’t help your cause, tough. If the rules don’t help my cause, they are of course flawed.
Hey you Christians who want to keep other people from using birth control, I have something important to tell you:
YOUR religion and your beliefs is about YOUR relationship with YOUR God and YOUR church.
So keeping that in mind, how does buying an insurance plan that covers birth control infringe on your freedom of religion? How does having a co-worker who takes birth control get in the way of your relationship with your God?
or if the insurers or employers have moral reservations. Remember when all of us who opposed the Iraq invasion got a break on our taxes based on the portion that would support, directly or indirectly, a war we objected to? Me neither.
(priest, pastor, wizard, bishop, pope, snake-charmer, minister, burning bush, imam, televangelist, rabbi, parson, salamander, vicar, reverend, little man who lives in my refrigerator, prophet, sage, shaman, mystic, radio …) said so . . . who I am to question god’s messenger?
I am a Christian that does not want to prevent others from using birth control, but I think there is a legitimate argument that requiring religious organization, as employers, to provide coverage (or otherwise facilitating coverage) that they find morally objectionable is wrong. I believe one justification for religious organizations not paying taxes is that religious organizations should not have to fund government activities, such as war, that are morally objectionable to them. The obvious solution to this dilemma is to get rid of the historic anachronism that is employer funded health care insurance, and go to a single payer model. Everyone would get the same basic coverage, which would cover contraceptives (and other cost efficient care), and catholic church, which would not be paying for it, could preach about how evil it is without claiming persecution.
What Early Worm said. In the meantime, many of us who are not churches and object to various things such as war in general or particular wars or even public education, do have to pay for them through our taxes and, so far, no one has argued successfully that the constitution provides us with a right not to have our tax dollars spent on things we object to. As citizens of a representative democracy, if the representatives of the majority want tax dollars spent on something, all tax payers are stuck with it. So, as things stand, if someone doesn’t like to have their tax dollars spent on contraceptives, tough luck. Churches, as you point out, don’t pay taxes anyway.
Tax dollars do not, repeat: do not, pay for these insurance policies. Individuals and employers do. This whole subject has nothing to do with tax dollars or religion, repeat: or religion. Just because a bunch of fidgety old codgers in dresses, who happen also to be big-time employers, jumped into this, doesn’t make it a religious issue. (followed by a couple dozen exclamation marks) Please (a few more)
That made a lot of sense.
But now I wonder, do hospitals and private universities run by religious organizations pay taxes?
Non-profits don’t pay corporate and sales tax, but they do pay payroll taxes for their employees…
If they were for-profit, then because they’re not churches but rather religiously-affiliated companies I believe they’d be paying taxes.
Gives them a competitive advantage in the marketplace against Hospitals, etc. which are purely commercial entities.
give the Wasilla hillbilly a mic and she can’t help but prove the stupid
Anyone remember when Letterman made a joke @ Bristol’s expense? Oh the outrage, the cries of victimization, the rants about leaving the kids outta this …? Remember $arah (well, surely her publicist) wrote that comments like Letterman’s contributed to low self-esteem among young women and that such jokes contribute to the “acceptance of abuse of younger women.” Got that?
Now, let’s let $arah opine on Rushbo’s tactless assholism:
Now aside from the stupidity evident when you read what she says let’s just figure out how Letterman’s less offensive joke was far worst and outside of 1st Amd rights vs. the 3 day tirade Rush continued? And let’s revisit that definition of hypocrisy.
Does anyone have results from the HD1 and HD9 caucuses?
I know at least two precincts in HD9 went 100% for Rosenthal, but I don’t have any more information yet.
How was yours? Ours was pleasant but (general undercurrent of consensus) could have benefited from an open bar. Not happening in an elementary school.
It seems that policy is usually coming at us top-down. Modifying the party platform at our caucuses theoretically could nudge policy bottom-up. Our precinct causus approved planks a) supporting equal protection under the law, with pointed reference to marriage law, for all citizens (to replace the current civil unions plank) and b) calling for the repeal of the Price-Anderson Act of 1957 (to hasten the end of nuclear power production).
This link may get you at least partway to a reference; Yes, I’m still the weakest link!http://www.bing.com/search?q=price-anderson+act+1957&qs=AS&form=QBLH&pq=price-anderso&sc=8-13&sp=2&sk=AS1
And just wondering: Any plank discussion/suggestions at the caucuses of any of you fellow Polsters? And, more importantly, will there be an open bar at the state convention?
http://www.examiner.com/knitti…
Here’s my favorite; the snatchel.
http://www.nationalpartnership…
‘Dirty 8’ Erode Three Decades Of Landmark Environmental Law