Rejecting GOP Advice To Be ‘Compassionate,’ Saine Goes on Anti-Abortion Offensive

(Can’t hide it under a bush oh no! — Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Defying the advice of national Republican leaders that GOP candidates should be “compassionate consensus builders” on abortion, Colorado congressional candidate and Weld County Commissioner Lori Saine, a Republican, went on the offensive today in a Facebook ad, accusing her Democratic opponent, State Rep. Yadira Caraveo, of “pro-abortion zealotry,” which Saine calls “murder.”

“It’s time to confront and expose radical pro-abortion Democrats for who they are and defeat them by standing strong for what we believe,” states Saine in her 30-second advertisement.

“I’m calling out my abortionist opponent Yadira Caraveo for her militant pro-abortion zealotry, which includes forcing taxpayers to pay for Partial-Birth Abortions up to and including the moment of birth and forcing Catholic hospitals and physicians and nurses of all faiths to do abortions against their will. That’s not health care. That’s murder. And I’m not afraid to call it out.”

Taxpayer dollars are not used for abortions in Colorado and abortion is not allowed at the moment of birth.

Caraveo, who is a medical doctor, is pro-choice, and recently denounced the draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.

“As a health care provider, I give the pregnant women and teens that I care for choices about their futures. To live in a world where I have to tell them they have no choices is devastating,” she wrote on Facebook.

She also stated on Twitter: “With Roe overturned and Republicans on a crusade to ban abortion across the country, millions of women will lose that essential freedom. I was proud to help lead the fight to guarantee Colorado women the right to choose. My opponents have pledged to not only ban all abortions, but IVF and birth control as well. Help me stop them.”

Caraveo and Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser during a May 3 rally at the Capitol following the leaked draft of the Supreme Court ruling that would overturn Roe v. Wade.

Caraveo’s campaign didn’t return an email seeking comment on the ad.

Saine is competing with three other Republican candidates to win the June 28 primary and the chance to take on Caraveo to represent Colorado’s new 8th Congressional District, which is located north of Denver and was awarded to Colorado after the 2020 Census.

One of Saine’s opponents, state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer (R-Weld) ran an anti-abortion advertisement on Facebook in March, denouncing a law pushed by Democrats that codifies the right to an abortion in Colorado law. In a Facebook post, Kirkmeyer denounced Roe last week.

The stance of Saine’s two other opponents, possibly heeding advice from national Republicans, aren’t talking about their position on Roe, though Thornton Mayor Jan Kulmann has vowed to be a “voice for Life and the unborn” in Congress. Another opponent, Tyler Allcorn, a former Green Beret, hasn’t issued a statement on abortion.

92 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. tim-tam says:

    My opponents have pledged to not only ban all abortions, but IVF and birth control as well. Help me stop them.”

     

    Doesn’t ever outright say she supports abortion. Saying her ‘opponents’ want to ban all abortions ≠ saying she condones all abortion. It very much leaves the door open she doesn’t want to ban ALL abortions, just the ones she sees fit. She is historically untrustworthy to her leftmost constituents. More worryingly:

    Caraveo, who is a medical doctor, is pro-choice, and recently denounced the draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.

    Pols, you guys are doing all her campaign legwork for her. She has an MD, let HER speak about what she plans to do with it, because I don’t trust that she takes a medical standpoint when all her comments are in terms of “family” values, the coded language of neoconservatives that only accept very limited cases like rape/incest. Why not mention she has been added to the payroll of BOLDdems a PAC that also supports anti abortion candidate Henry Cuellar.

    Of course, she took the sponsorship after insinuating she is pro abortion. 

    1. “I’m honored to have the support of

    @BOLDDems

    in our fight for Colorado families this year.”

    https://twitter.com/YadiraCaraveo/status/1523767268991143937

    2. “Congressman Cuellar was raised with strong family values”
    https://www.boldpac.com/members/henry-cuellar

    3. “My faith does not allow me to support extreme positions such as late term or partial birth abortions.”

    https://twitter.com/CuellarCampaign/status/1521614378637869070?s=20&t=OEp0hv00X4dh9S5cD_A5Wg

    Roe v. Wade is being overturned. The vague label of “Pro-choice” is not good enough anymore, and it’s alarming how obsequious dems are just b/c she has the same credentials as Dr. Oz but with runs on a blue ticket.

    • kwtree says:

      “Protect a woman’s right to choose.” It’s on Caraveo’s campaign website. What do you think it means?

      May we assume that in your blind hatred of Caraveo for her cannabis-access-limiting laws, that you now support one of the Republicans who would take away that access altogether? 

      • kwtree says:

        Caraveo , on the other hand, voted for three laws that directly benefit the cannabis industry: 

        Authorizes Dual Marijuana Businesses

        Rescinds Marijuana Possession charges, two oz or less

        Establishes a program to benefit entrepeneurs in the marijuana industry.

        That was just over the last 2 years.

        You think Kirkmeyer, Saine, or Kuhlmann gives a crap about cannabis shops?

        • tim-tam says:

          What are you on about? 

          Bully for Big Cannabis and the legislators greasing the wheels for them, but my concern is about abortion.

          To be clear, you are blindly fawning over her and don’t actually give a hoot about that issue. You’re trying to use it to discredit my legitimate (and better reasoned and sourced) worries about Caraveo.

          Kudos for your googling a few marijuana related yes votes. Or do you actually care? How do those three laws benefit the cannabis industry?

          I can google too, what do you think of this?

          “Protect Our Kids will engage as an independent voice in races for legislative and congressional seats nationwide. Its aim will be to take out candidates who support marijuana legalization and bolster candidates opposed to drug use. And the PAC backed a successful primary bid by Colorado’s own Democratic state Rep. Yadira Caraveo, of Thornton, in her run for the newly created 8th Congressional District.”

          https://denvergazette.com/opinion/editorials/editorial-countering-big-marijuana-s-big-bucks/article_76687754-b7c3-11ec-8814-57e587fb6c5c.html

          Weird. I seem to recall you and some other boomers on here some time ago picking on someone pointing out that she is being paid by anti-marijuana lobbyists via dark money. Kinda seems like they were right.

          Unless you have some specific source explaining otherwise? Or are you down to clown with dark money?

          • unnamed says:

            Hmmm.  Posting an opinion piece from the Phil Anschutz-owned Denver Gazette.

            And insisting that Caraveo should say she "supports abortion" as opposed to her saying she supports a woman's right to choose.

            If it looks like a troll, and talks like a troll…

            • tim-tam says:

              There it is. All that’s left is someone to pull out the paedo accusation on top of the anti-semitism discussion John dropped in and you guys have the ad hominem triple crown!

              If you hate Anschutz, buddy I got bad news about who is paying for Caraveo’s campaign.
              🤡

              THIS CLOWN STILL HASN’T ADDRESSED ANY OF THE CONTENT OF THE LINK. (and says I have no substance). He literally employed a genetic fallacy and wants to claim high ground!

              • unnamed says:

                Referring to my earlier comment:

                If it looks like a troll, and talks like a troll…

                • tim-tam says:

                  …Then accuse it of hating Jews, being a shill, ignore their sourced responses and pretend like your attitude is not exactly what got us here?

                  Is that how it goes?

                  • unnamed says:

                    Man!  So, if we don't agree with you, then we hate Jewish people?!?!  

                    That's even more ridiculous than saying Caraveo is anti-choice because she says she supports a "woman's right to choose" as opposed to saying she "supports abortion".

                    If you're so passionate, why don't you run for office?  Only people who think exactly like you can get it right. /s

                    • tim-tam says:

                      No, JohnNorthofDenver likened me to an antisemitic cohort of kwtree. 

                      Bringing in someone who “hates the Jews” (his words) to compare to someone to refute them is gross ad hominem. You are acting in the same maelstrom by making baseless accusations. It is the playbook of reactionary people who don’t have something of substance to back them up.

                      I didn’t say she’s anti-choice, did I? Show me.

                      “Supports abortion” is different from “pro-choice.” 

                      unnamed, are you pro-abortion? I am pro-abortion. Easy enough to say. And right now, since it WILL be abolished on a federal level, there is no room for coded terms. Abortion should be legal. She needs to say that instead of hiding behind “family values” and other unspecified qualifiers.

                      And good response numbnuts. Can’t have an opinion about politics unless you try to run for office? Which district did you represent?

            • tim-tam says:

              What do you think of this troll on Twitter? Is it Anschutz trickery propaganda?

              https://twitter.com/SethKlamann/status/1524556016834121728

              "So: Possessing >1g of a substance containing fent is a felony under this bill, unless you can prove at trial that you didn’t know your meth/coke/pill/etc. had fentanyl in it. Some quick thoughts

              Regardless of your thoughts on this, it’ll have a profound impact. I talked to a sober living provider today who said every meth user they screen these days tests positive for both meth and fent. Fent is everywhere, & arrests for new felony possession will reflect that.

              Per law enforcement and health folks, medium to heavy users take anywhere from 20-40 fent pills (so 2-4g) a day. Depending on how much they buy at once, that’ll be felony weight (assuming this becomes law). That’s people with severe OUDs ending up in jail on felony poss. charges.

              Whether you think that’s right or wrong, necessary or unnecessary, that’s an indisputable impact here. Question now must become: How does the state help those folks get *evidence-based, effective treatment* and ensure they can lead a life conducive to recovery post-release?"

              Wow. What a troll.

        • tim-tam says:

          “Many within Colorado see this bill as a huge step backwards for a pro-cannabis state. It’s a big reason why Colorado’s “medical cannabis access grade” was knocked down to a C in 2022 by Americans for Safe Access (ASA) (see Weed Between the Lines, “Front of the medical middle,” March 3, 2022). HB 1317 harms patient rights and civil protections, according to Abby Roudebush, ASA’s director of government affairs. And it does so without just cause.”

          https://www.boulderweekly.com/features/attack-of-the-lobbyists-sam/

          Who does she help, you said?

          Again, just responding to your weedy accusations, kdubs. I only came here to talk about abortion.

      • tim-tam says:

        1. “I’m honored to have the support of

        @BOLDDems

        in our fight for Colorado families this year.”

        https://twitter.com/YadiraCaraveo/status/1523767268991143937

        2.  “Congressman Cuellar was raised with strong family values”
        https://www.boldpac.com/members/henry-cuellar

        3. “My faith does not allow me to support extreme positions such as late term or partial birth abortions.”

        https://twitter.com/CuellarCampaign/status/1521614378637869070?s=20&t=OEp0hv00X4dh9S5cD_A5Wg

         

        Where’s the bit where Caraveo says she supports abortion?

        What do YOU think she means? And what are you basing it on?

        • kwtree says:

          The bill where Caraveo supports abortion? You mean the Reproductive Health Equity Act that she sponsored
          Pure enough for you? Never.
          Jeebus…..

          • tim-tam says:

            Jesus indeed.  That’s fine if you settle for second worst,  but get off your horse if you don’t know how to ride it. 

            The evidence game is hard for new right democrats, I guess. 

            • Thorntonite says:

              "Support Abortion"?  Good grief, it sounds like the only way you MIGHT support her is if she were to either perform an abortion and upload it to YouTube…or actually have an abortion herself…and then you would likely demand to either be in the room or see a video of it yourself.

              She is on record as pro-choice, has carried pro-choice legislation in the legislature.  Your only evidence to the contrary is that she has been endorsed by a PAC that has endorsed one pro-life Democrat, Henry Cuellar…whom she has not endorsed or campaigned with. Your issue is with Cuellar and BoldPAC.  Not with Caraveo. 

              • tim-tam says:

                Don't be so hyperbolic. If you are comfortable supporting any alliance with anyone who opposes abortion then yeah,  you're out as a candidate. 

                This is not something you can shrug off so easily,  or if you do you're on the wrong side

                • Thorntonite says:

                  Gotcha.

                  So Mark Kelly, Val Demings, and Tim Ryan are out by your standard.  So are Catherine Cortez-Masto and Alex Padilla.  So you are prepared to kiss the Senate good bye.  

                  What a jackass.

                  • tim-tam says:

                    Yes? Is this hard for you to understand?

                    I support bodily autonomy. Full stop. If the candidate is on the “subjugate woman” freighter running through BOTH parties, then yes fuck them.

                    A senate with people like that is literally how we got to this state, so your ballyhooing that we can’t let “THEM” take over is, in the face of this legislative crisis, INSANELY outdated. 

                    And I’m no jackass, I’m an Independent. 😛

                    • Thorntonite says:

                      Being and independent and being a jackass are not mutually exclusive states….as evidenced by…well….you.

                    • tim-tam says:

                      Thorny, independents don't have a mascot. cheeky

                    • Voyageur says:

                      Of course you independent fence sitters in times of crisis have a mascot, Tom-Tom.

                      The Dodo bird!

                    • tim-tam says:

                      What up V? How's the family? Staying healthy?

                      No, the independent party doesn't actually have a mascot. It's not really a "party" per se, either, insofar as it is not constituted of enough billionaires to maintain an independent media outlet or information campaign free of partisan interference.

                      It's kind of a remnant of a time in America before the two-party system you and your friends thrust upon we younger folk. That's not to offend, gramps, just chronological. 😉 We independents are relics, a bare skeleton in a museum of the fleshed out possibilities of times past when outsiders like Debs could stand a chance.

                      Then cis-white men came and fucked the women and minorities, essentially extinguishing progress. You remember! 

                      Hey, I guess dodoes are kind of an apt metaphor after all!

                       

            • tim-tam says:

              Tim-Tam: 2

              kwtree: 0

              Did you find a quote from her that says she "supports abortions" without post-Roe wiggle room? 

               

              • kwtree says:

                Get bent, troll.

                • tim-tam says:

                  Ad hominem is a troll’s best friend, kdubz. Might be good for you and unnamed and especially V, but not for me. I’m not here to troll.

                  Humble pie doesn’t taste so bad if you act like a grownup and just eat your slice.

                  Please stop calling me a troll. It’s ridiculous and childish.

                  I know you won’t. Even though you’re a teacher and ostensibly ought to know better. I know V won’t, even though his family was sick and he came HERE of all places for emotional support and you gushed over his poor old heart like your best friend.

                  Take it to facebook if you want your feelings to be safeguarded from counterpoint. Or, ya know, be a decent person and recognize you are wrong, or at least you can’t support the claim that she fully and completely supports the medical procedure of abortion beyond coded language?

                  You all love her for her MD, and here I’m saying again it should come to bare and yet she only brings it up in commercials.

    • JohnInDenver says:

      there's a bit of difference between accepting an endorsement and a donation from a PAC and being "added to the payroll of BOLDdems"

      There are a variety of Democrats taking issue positions I don't approve of.  Arguing that a candidate "isn't enough" of "my kind" of Democrat seems short-sighted to me.  Doing so in a district designed to be competitive seems especially unfortunate. 

      The choice NOW is Caraveo or one of the Republicans that emerges from their primary.  Which side are you on?

      • tim-tam says:

        JID: You expend a lot of energy trying to discredit the evidence without having anything to counter apart from “Don’t blame me, I voted for kodos”?

        She already squeezed out her dem opponent Chaz Tedesco because her pockets are lined by insurance companies, lawyer lobbyists, and “tough on crime” dark money groups. The choice NOW is a rigged game you’re mad at anyone for saying as much. Don’t demand others compromise values you never held in the first place, unless you have something solid to point to.

        Evidence persuades.  If you have anything substantial to counter my contentions apart from “not AS bad” and adhominem against myself then you would be worth a listen. 

        “Added to the payroll” is an accurate description. Pacs are payrolls. Walk me through how that is not the case.

        • JohnInDenver says:

          here’s the usual understanding of “payroll.”

          1. a list of a company’s employees and the amount of money they are to be paid.

            “there are just three employees on the payroll

          2. the total amount of wages and salaries paid by a company to its employees.

            “small employers with a payroll of less than $45,000”

          Thus, the “payroll” of the PAC are those people employed by the PAC. The work they do produces a financial resource to share, but those who get the donation are not a part of that workforce – they actually are a recipient of the “product” of the paid work. By your logic, apparently if I take a loan from a bank, I’m on the “payroll” of the bank. If I get a gift from my parents, I’m on their “payroll.”

          Tedesco didn’t get “squeezed out.”  “Adams County Commissioner Charles “Chaz” Tedesco missed the primary ballot in the race for the 8th Congressional District by the closest of margins, failing to reach the required threshold by less than 1 percent during Tuesday night’s Democratic congressional assembly.”  He couldn’t persuade 30% of the most active Democratic party members that he ought to be on the ballot. 

          Money helps, obviously, But a two-way race, resulting in “Caraveo received 70.720% of the delegate vote to Tedesco’s 29.279%” is not a “squeeze.”

          And I’m still wondering … at this point, which side are you on?

          • tim-tam says:

            That is a narrow and disingenuous definition, to be sure. Formidable if you want to play centrist political word games of the sort that allows supporting someone who is funded (or on the payroll) by a group that also funds and fully endorses democrats supporting republican policies it might be worth looking in the mirror and asking

            I brought up Tedesco only to compare how easy Colorado Dems (and y’all) have made it for her. He didn’t have as much money, ergo could not mount as extensive a campaign as her. Her campaign budget is much larger than his, and largely came from lobbyists in the healthcare industry who directly or indirectly benefit from reactionary public policies. She also had the benefit of years of campaigning alongside Republicans on a state level which greases the wheels of other legislators who she meets (as we know) behind closed doors with. While not carrying an exact monetary figure, is arguably harder to buy than ad time. That is a “squeezing out.” 

            Or does your dictionary definition of “squeeze” mention the percent threshold of delegate votes required too?

            edited to remove a rough estimate that isn’t relevant to the topic of her being secretive and friendly with the GOP, the party that is right now subjugating half of humans in the US.

             

            • JohnInDenver says:

              "Her campaign budget is 5-6 times what he had" …. what is your source?

              FEC reports as of 3/31/2022 showed

              Yadira Caraveo (D) raised $553,309 spent $226,712

              Chaz Tedesco (D) raised $241,193 spent $180,734

              As for sources:  https://www.opensecrets.org/races/industries?cycle=2022&id=CO08&spec=N

              Caraveo … top 5 "industries" Retired$109,056; Health Professionals$41,995; Education$41,373; Hospitals/Nursing Homes$18,010; Securities & Investment$17,508

              Tedesco … top 5 "industries" Real Estate$28,745; General Contractors$12,600; Retired$9,384; Business Services$9,247; Building Trade Unions$8,600

              and you can look at top contributors here:  https://www.opensecrets.org/races/contributors?cycle=2022&id=CO08&spec=N

               

              • tim-tam says:

                To my mind the two years of kid gloved free publicity and the support of every newspaper, attorney, and neoliberal PAC might have some dollar value. But I guess that’s a stretch for Pols!

                My larger point is that she openly sides with anti-abortion legislators and has a perfectly established history of backstabbing leftists. I think you supporters of hers are coming up short of anything but attacking me in lieu of having anything to respond with other than “yeah, so?” and it shows. 🤣

                • Voyageur says:

                  She spent $226,712.  He spent $180,734.

                  Tom tom says she spent 2.5 times what he did.  Nope.  She spent just about a fourth more than he did while earning more than twice the delegates.

                  I'm afraid our boy has ruined his math skills by too many drugs.

                  • tim-tam says:

                    You pro abortion, V?

                    Forgive me, I forgot sarcasm doesn’t land with the over 30’s. I was being hyperbolic.🤥 Amended for doddering codgers like you.

                    😇

        • Thorntonite says:

          Bullshit.  Caraveo didn't "squeeze" anyone out.  Tedesco lost at the caucus and was too stupid to have a backup plan to access the primary ballot with petitions. 

          By the way, if he had gotten the nomination, do you for one second think he would have declined BoldPAC's endorsement?

          • tim-tam says:

            I never said Tedesco had the right view on the issue or nor advocated whatever it might be. If he accepted anonymized donations from a group that supports an anti-Roe candidate that would be something he ought to answer for. Absolutely.

            It would be strange for Tedesco who does not, so far as I know, identify as latino to win their support, wouldn’t you say?

            “Too stupid to have a backup plan” sounds very much like you agree he was edged out by the mainstream press darling of ColoradoPols. No need to swear just because your choice coasted her way to the top.

            • Thorntonite says:

              Actually, I donated to both Caraveo and Tedesco and there is a better than even chance I would have voted for him in the primary had he gotten himself on the ballot.  (I actually think his working class roots would have appealed to this district in the general….but he fucked up before he got to the ballot.)

              First, Chaz does identify as Latinx.  Second, BOLD-PAC does endorse candidates who do not identify as Latinx….Mark Kelly, Val Demings, and Tim Ryan have all been endorsed for the Senate…and they have a virtual rainbow of folks endorsed for the house…so even if he didn’t identify as Latinx, he likely would have both sought and received their endorsement.

              Now, given that we’ve already shot down a number of your idiotic assertions, how about you get off of here and do a bit of research so you have your facts straight before you dig the hole even deeper?

              • tim-tam says:

                Lol, okay grandpa. Again, I didn’t come here to campaign for him.

                We can talk about Latinx politics if you want, (is that your preferred terminology? I’m on the fence about it after reading Ed Morales’ book since I’ve yet to encounter anyone outside academia or public radio who commonly use the term, but it’s not something I would want to misuse, are you trans or cis? White-identifying Latinx or no? Do your friends and family use Latinx in everyday discussion? How do they feel about genderized words?)

                The POINT of the discussion is the simple transitive property. A = B = C, ∴ A = C.

                A= Yadira, B = PAC, C = Anti-Abortion fuckwad.

                qed. So mentioning a bunch of other things equal to “B” then the math is easy enough Voyageur could do it. Tim Ryan, Mark Kelly, etc. yes are taking “dirty” money and you are writing it off as the lesser of two evils.

                Weird, you haven’t seemed to “shoot” at anything I’ve put up except my character. Almost like you can only resort to personal insult…

                • JohnInDenver says:

                  Don't like Cuellar and assume that everyone accepting him is tainted by "anti-abortion" cooties? 

                  Why are you here rather than spending time on the Texas run-off? 

                  Incumbent Henry Cuellar and Jessica Cisneros are running in the May 24 runoff in the Democratic primary for Texas' 28th Congressional District. In the March 1 primary, Cuellar received 48.4% of the vote, followed by Cisneros with 46.9% and Tannya Benavides with 4.7%. This year's runoff is a rematch of the 2020 primary, which Cuellar won outright, defeating Cisneros 51.8% to 48.2%.[3]

                  • tim-tam says:

                    The site is called COLORADOpols. 

                    Caraveo represents COLORADO.

                    🤔  

                    I hear you, John: You👏dont👏care👏about👏abortion👏rights

                    Less concerning, you also don’t care about “following the money” which sort of makes us wonder:

  2. Conserv. Head Banger says:

    Perhaps Ms. Saine and Ms. Kirkmeyer can explain why the four "personhood" ballot initiatives since 2008 here in Colorado lost by landslide margins.

    Saine calls abortion "murder." I call Saine stupid. 

  3. tim-tam says:

    Hey, KWtree: The forum hiccuped and moved my reply.

    You need more practice in la langue politique.

    “Protect a woman’s right to choose” means a hundred things to a hundred people and literally says nothing about the practical argument the nation is having. She could be construed as fully supporting abortion (in which case, say so? She’s had ample opportunity and is ducking questions) to only supporting the right to choose*

    *offer only applies to married people legally identifying as “women” over the age of 21 with the consent of their husband of course because this is a medical decision that affects the family, and the family is a patriarch, oh and no medicare coverage of course because that’s unfair to people uncomfortable with abortions. Plus, let’s leave room for excessive red tape to really really really discourage people from pursuing their free CHOICE.

    Obviously there are miles between fully recognizing a persons’ right to reproductive/sexual autonomy versus supporting restrictions.

    Please address the dark money she’s openly taking from people aligned with ANTI abortion politicians and how you square that circle. 

    • JohnInDenver says:

      Just curious, tim-tam …. do you have other tests for having someone be "a true Democrat" or do you limit yourself to being an absolutist on abortion, alone?  Are candidates supposed to check every donation to insure ideological consistency in all the other political donations made, or do you limit your concern to only PAC donations?

      A first term Representative will have absolutely NO influence on the legal doctrines from the Supreme Court and next to none on any legislative response to whatever the Supreme Court opinion defines.  As a candidate accepting donations, she has absolutely no power over whether BOLDPAC does or does not support Cuellar.

      You do you — but from where I sit, it looks like you would insist on someone be absolutely on your side, using your standard for accepting support and expressing themselves in ways you find acceptable, before you would accept them as a candidate.  Want a party that looks more like what you think is best?  Go win a primary. 

       

      • tim-tam says:

        As a candidate accepting donations, she has absolutely no power over whether BOLDPAC does or does not support Cuellar.

        crying What is she supposed to do, stand up for what's right and say "no I do not stand with anti-abortion legislators?"

        Where on earth do I get off pointing out morality when $$$ is on the line!

    • JohnNorthofDenver says:

      Obsessive behavior, ranting, ridged moral code that excludes others… 

      tim-tam –

      Take a deep breath, look in the mirror, and ask “why can’t I get help?”. 

      • kwtree says:

        John NorthO D

        timmy likes to play “forum flame wars”. If you don’t, leave him/them to stew in their own juices. No “debate” is possible with them. 

        • tim-tam says:

          Lol.  Flame wars rarely have sources backing up one side. 

           

          They do often resort to ad hominem when one side doesn’t have a case tho…🤔

        • JohnNorthofDenver says:

          Im sorry that you have absorbed a directory of commenters. The last commenter you were apologizing for rambling about “the jews” you knew as well. I agree, to stop repetitive behavior, engagement should be cut off. I should have acted with the warning signs in mind. 

      • tim-tam says:

        Ridged moral code that excludes others

        Lol, wut? “Rigid” morals? Or do you think my morals are sinusoidal?

        You mean I have a moral code i use to judge things right or wrong? Do you not?

  4. Lauren Boebert is a Worthless POS says:

    Does anyone else on here share my suspicion that Flim Flam is a Barbara Kirkmeyer plant? (You know, another Denise Spencer.)

    • unnamed says:

      If it looks like a troll and acts like a troll….

      • tim-tam says:

        Yep, hey V, get your stinky old man butt in here to finish the trifecta and accuse me of being a paedophile because I don’t wholeheartedly embrace the clip kwtree showed where Caraveo clarifies that she does not stand on the same side of the issue as the guy she JUST signed on to campaign with. That really put me in my place and showed that she is definitely not at all a liability to progressive policy.

        • Duke Cox says:

          Tim-tam…

          I have been reading your back and forth with others on this forum. I don't really have a dog in this fight as I live in the western hinterlands. With your kind indulgence, I have a couple of observations.

          You really suck at this. If you have to ask people to refrain from calling you a troll, you are losing. Your inability to refrain from a truly offensive habit of displaying your conviction that your argument (and your bad self) is superior, is a handicap that eliminates your credibility.

          You might consider revisiting your predilection for wielding ageism as a bludgeon. It will increasingly become a problem for you.

          I am engaging here because, if you are a progressive, as you say, I respect that. But it seems to me, the product you are selling ( Caraveo is secretly anti-abortion) isn't borne out by the facts. And, your sledgehammer approach to argument isn't serving you well.

          Good luck convincing anyone. You are off to a very slow start. 

          You're welcome.

           

           

          • tim-tam says:

            Whattup dukie? First of all, hit me up with those facts that refute the sources clearly showing she takes money from a dark money group that funds anti-abortion candidates? I missed that in all this old school BBS era flaming the users of Pols have collectively embraced.

            This forum stinks, and like I said a year ago, is stagnant. It’s rude. I have passionate feelings on one issue and y’all boomers can’t handle having your bitch eyed by another handler’s dog. This forum is intellectually lazy.

            You are a latecomer, or if you were silent, you’re complicit with the people facilitating the complete meltdown of human rights our country is facing. Either in this thread, or in district 8, or in SCOTUS, or the press. Standing as silent witness is frankly spineless.

            Good luck hiding behind identity politics if that’s all you have going “right” for you. Ageist sentiments inevitably WILL sort itself out and those of us picking up your trash will be able to blame each other for mismanagement. Until then I’m perfectly content bringing to up how out of touch the attitudes you are clinging to are, but you and V are the ones who brought that crap up in the first place. I’m sure the ONLY reason I haven’t been also labelled a paedo on top of anti-semitic, sexist, ageist, whatever Q-style smears you clutch like pearls, is because I preempted it in the conversation.

            With all due respect, 

            Kindly pocket your genteel grace up your arse and start policing your own.  Try starting with that twit of an octogenarian V. He could use a muzzle.

            • Duke Cox says:

              Adolescent response noted.

              Good night.

              • tim-tam says:

                Childish pouting is an excellent retort when you have nothing to support your attitude and decorum, Duke. You've clearly set a bar to which I aspire.

                🙄

              • tim-tam says:

                Shame you duck out like you are simply above reproach when you clearly want to say more.

                Hey, where were those facts that didn't bear fruit about how she rubs shoulders with anti-abortion politicians?

                Apart from BoldDems, She and Henry Cuellar are also now buddies on the "Protect Our Kids & Our Healthcare" PAC. The ones who are campaigning against a politician explicitly because she is pro-marijuana?

                Again, Caraveo joined Cuellar and this avowed anti-"HEMP" (like that term, MichaelBowman and kdubz?) and she joined them AFTER the facts were shown.

                Hit me up with your counterpoints, Duke!

    • tim-tam says:

      Wow, you are sooooooo covert. 

      Idiotos, I'm a progressive in Colorado who doesn't like neoliberals turning the wheels of the republican agenda.

      "What a pain to have a leftist making points on a thread. Surely they must be right-wing plants!"

      Which means bitching to the mods will come soon. And then banishment instead of anyone actually responding to the substance of my issue.

      • unnamed says:

        And then banishment instead of anyone actually responding to the substance of my issue.

        Why don't you write something of substance first.

        • tim-tam says:

          Doesn’t ever outright say she supports abortion. 

          Caraveo, who is a medical doctor, is pro-choice, and recently denounced the draft Supreme Court opinion overturning Roe v. Wade.

          Gad, you guys are doing all her legwork for her. Care to mention she has been added to the payroll of BOLDdems a PAC that also supports anti abortion candidate Henry Cuellar.

          Of course, she took the sponsorship after insinuating she is pro abortion. 

          1. “I’m honored to have the support of

          @BOLDDems

          in our fight for Colorado families this year.”

          https://twitter.com/YadiraCaraveo/status/1523767268991143937

          2. “Congressman Cuellar was raised with strong family values”
          https://www.boldpac.com/members/henry-cuellar

          3. “My faith does not allow me to support extreme positions such as late term or partial birth abortions.”

          https://twitter.com/CuellarCampaign/status/1521614378637869070?s=20&t=OEp0hv00X4dh9S5cD_A5Wg

          Anyone? Anyone? Bueller?

          Oh, feel free to pick up any of kwtree's dropped threads too.  I'm keen to read your response!

          • unnamed says:

            Again.  Write something of substance.   Then you can get a response of substance.

            You have yet to do the former.   Why don't you prove you have more to offer than you have shown.

            • tim-tam says:

              🤡

              I get it. You oppose abortions. My mistake. It didn't really come thru with all your calling me "troll" and offering to engage with substance and then backing out when faced with three sources that demonstrate clearly she aligned herself with an anti-abortion legislator AFTER the Alito leak and AFTER Cuellar bilked Cisneros, a real supporter of abortion (see? That is me endorsing someone for a platform, Thorntonite).

              Carry on, repugnant neocon.

              • unnamed says:

                By your logic, I never called you a "troll".

                I said "If it looks like a troll and acts like a troll…" referring to you.  I did not say "You are a troll".  

                Kind of like how you said when Caraveo said "I support a woman's right to choose" still means that she is anti-choice because she never said "I support abortion".  

                Yeah, I know.  You won't get it.   It's over your head.

                • tim-tam says:

                  My logic? Lol, which one is that?

                  No, you exercised apophasis, dummy. Trump does it all the time.

                  When I say that “right to choose” can be coded for “abortion with a giant asterisk,” that is nothing of the sort you’re trying to ascribe to me.

                  • tim-tam says:

                    My bad, here’s a link for you and your friends, unnamed. Inconsiderate of me not to save you the search in the first place.

                    https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/apophasis#:~:text=Definition

                    • unnamed says:

                      Here's a link for you flim-flam.  On Projection.  Something you do that Trump also does all the time:

                      https://www.britannica.com/science/projection-psychology

                      projection, the mental process by which people attribute to others what is in their own minds.

                      Also, I'm sorry about saying "logic". You don't have any logic.

                    • tim-tam says:

                      Nice, you want to still talk logic. I LOVE logic.

                      While we’re addressing each others’ logic, check this!

                      You: “Posting an opinion piece from the Phil Anschutz-owned Denver Gazette[…]And insisting that Caraveo should say she “supports abortion” as opposed to her saying she supports a woman’s right to choose.

                      This is subject identification via “omission.” Using the present tense aspect of the verbs “post” and “insist” one can infer the subject as the person you responded to, myself. Immediately following that:

                      You: “If it looks like a troll, and talks like a troll…”

                      “it” retains the subjective inference established in the prior premises.

                      Ergo, yes you called me a troll. By your logic, you used apophasis! qed.🤣

                      How do you like that substance? Also dismembers whatever pseudo psychoanalytical argument you are resorting to!

    • JohnNorthofDenver says:

      That's my suspicion as well Lauren. 

      Yeah, Kirkmeyer has nothing else to do. Kulmann I guess is doing door to door. 

      I don't get either of their campaign other than they have some money for mailings… 

      • tim-tam says:

        Duke,

        This is the healthy, and not at all paranoid behavior people uncomfortable being in the slightest bit challenged are showing that you think I need to get better at, right?

    • notaskinnycook says:

      Denise Spencer, that’s the name I was trying to recall! It definitely sounds familiar. So this troll is working for Kirkmeyer? I figured someone was paying them. I hope not much. Oh well, gotta make a living somehow. 

      • tim-tam says:

        👮‍♂️📞 Ma’am, the call was traced. It came from inside the house
        🙀

        Maybe, now this might sound crazy, maybe there is more to the left political spectrum than New Dems, wait HEAR ME OUT… and there’s a chance that maybe a few of those leftists might raise an issue that is further that way than you are comfortable with.

        If that were the case, you sure look like a paranoid fool.

        But no, much more likely someone who invests this much into a basic human right that is about to be stripped as I should be a troll.

        Please tell me you don’t vote. Or drive. And left enough tinfoil for the rest of us.
        🤭

  5. Voyageur says:

    There is an easy test of whether you’re a troll, tom-tom.  You’ve filed dozens of posts, attacking everyone in sight, then claiming you somehow defeated them.

    And in all that time, not a single post has supported you.

    Your claims of victories come from you. 

    Supported by no one.

    Your eructations are seconded by none.

    Nobody.

    Not a single voice in your defense.

    Sounds like a troll to me, and a racist/sexist/ageist one at that.

    Tee hee.

    • tim-tam says:

      Look at that five dollar word! You are kinda late to this conversation gramps. Don’t you have family tend to? Or to tend to you?

      Are you pro abortion?

      • Duke Cox says:

        You know, troll, your ignorance is overpowering. As you flail first one way and then another desperately seeking validation, I am amused by your inability to escape your designation as an obnoxious creature that should be living under a bridge, challenging passersby with riddles.

        I believe your mission and perhaps your job description is to convince others of some point you want to make. As I told you from the outset of this ridiculous exchange, you have failed. Who have you convinced? No one, I think. Let’s hear from all those you have swayed to your point of view.

        Certitude is a dangerous attitude to carry with you. So is your “I’m a Jerk” card. Maybe you can see where a change of strategy might increase you level of success.

        Of course, I don’t give a rats’ ass what you do…or say. Your irrelevance is obvious. You have “loser” written all over you. 

        Ideologically, I suspect we may be aligned. But try to work on your predeliction for arrogance and name calling. Oh…one more thing…

        I was serious when I cautioned you about your habit of invoking ageism at every opportunity. It is a bad look and will cost you if you keep it up. Not here, of course, because no one here cares what you think. But if disrespecting older Americans is your fun spot, you may find it won’t pay off in the long run.

        You may, and likely will, respond with the childish snark you display as your “go to” move.It is OK. You are nothing to me but an anonymous, annoying, troll.  No one takes you seriously. You haven’t earned it.

        • tim-tam says:

          If we are ideologically aligned, to quote yourself, "you suck at this." That's the response you start with, so no new snark there for you to hang your argument on.

          You have "loser" written all over you.
           

          Oh yes, throw some more Trumpisms at me, that's a good look for someone who purports to give a hoot about progressivism. 

          • Duke Cox says:

            1…what is that rubber and glue thing..? Tiresome and weak. Really?

            2…what does your loser status have to do with Donald Trump? Are you intimating some support  on my part for The Orange Pretender in your 2nd paragraph?

            Gracious me…I thought you read this blog. So far, incoherence seems to be your strong suit. You are, though in uncommon moments, entertaining.

            • Voyageur says:

              Just so Tim-Troll understands, we're laughing at him, not with him.

              Tee hee.

            • tim-tam says:

              Rubber and glue? Use full sentences,  Duke.  Are you suggesting it's childish of me to have pointed out your condescending introduction? Yes,  really. 

               

              Your abuse of the word "loser" in lieu of responding coherently is Trumpist rhetoric, and what I'm referring to.  Savvy?

  6. Conserv. Head Banger says:

    As a long time student of linguistics, and after careful study, I'm thinking tim-tam and Denise Spencer are the same person.

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.