President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

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

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

52%↑

48%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

52%↑

48%↓

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
June 02, 2012 03:02 PM UTC

Weekend Open Thread

  • 30 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“There are few, very few, that will own themselves in a mistake.”

–Jonathan Swift

Tweet
Share

Comments

30 thoughts on “Weekend Open Thread”

    1. Popping “Captain Arapahoe” into Google traces it back to him pretty quickly.

      Oh, but it wasn’t him. He was done using that email address but it was so awesome that he didn’t want it to go to waste so he handed it over to someone else and they were the ones impersonating the county party.

      See, there’s a simple explanation.

  3. I admit in the last 3-4 months, my days seem to have gotten longer and my reading time shorter.  Somewhere along the way, I missed the political motivation for the US Attorney’s office to try John Edwards.

    The prosecution of Edwards was never so much about Edwards as it was about George Holding.

    Wait — who is George Holding? And why should we care?

    http://www.cnn.com/2012/06/01/…

    Somehow I had missed this:


    After winning a recent primary, Holding is likely the next congressman in the 13th District of North Carolina. He initiated the prosecution against Edwards while he was a U.S. Attorney. But he didn’t argue the case in court. Instead, after receiving a year’s worth of headlines (and Republican praise) for charging Edwards, Holding resigned from the case to run for Congress.

    Don’t get me wrong.  What regard I had for John Edwards went further south than NC several years ago, but why this case went to trail after the FEC ruling escaped me.  

    Now I know.

    1. Mainly because I was so furious at Edwards.

      But I did the same as you after the curious outcome of the trial.

      And yes, Holding’s prosecution looks purely politically based.

      The John Ensign case in comparison exposes republicans for what they are.

  5. reminds us that job creation is not one of the purposes of business. This might go a long way in explaining why CEO presidents, Herbert Hoover and GW Bush (though it’s arguable whether Bush was a real CEO as much as window dressing as the son of a prominent man), were also the ones on whose watch we experienced our greatest modern era economic disasters, the Great Depression and the Great Recession. Daddy Bush, who also had business experience in the oil industry, failed to win a second term because of “the economy, stupid”. That about does it for modern era CEO Presidents.

    On the other hand,neither GOP saint, Ronald Reagan, nor Dem fave and proud owner of a really solid peace and prosperity portfolio, Bill Clinton, had any business experience, Reagan being cited only as an example of a president Rs are wild for, not because of his economic contributions.

    Could it be that the goals of business and the goals of a government of, for and by the people are sufficiently dissimilar that the skill set required for leadership in the two arenas are also dissimilar?  

    A business simply has to be profitable. An economy has to produce numerous decent paying jobs for a very high proportion of people in order to benefit from a solid base of consumers with money to spend.

    The right can’t have it both ways.  The tiny elite for whom they reserve all the tax benefits can’t be job creators on the one hand and relieved of responsibility for creating anything other than profit for a few major players on the other. It seems pretty obvious that the real primary job creators are the masses of ordinary people that can make up a broad middle class with money to spend.  

    It was just such an American middle class that used to be the engine of not only the US economy but the world economy.

    We can see where that downward spiral has been leading us ever since the Reagan era with an all too brief period of relief during the Clinton administration and now a slow,  because universally GOP obstructed, path back to prosperity under way under another Dem, Obama, but delayed and under constant threat of being completely derailed by the GOP.

    An interesting piece on why CEOs make lousy Presidents:

    http://www.writing-reid.net/20…

    1. Because as a businessman i do try my best to be as efficient as possible and that means hire as few people as possible. In act the explicitly stated rule I have heard at many high tech companies is if a project absolutely requires at least 5 people, assign 4.

      1. that profitable businesses and the people who lead them aren’t of value. Great value. It’s just that the United States of America is not America Inc. A nation is not a business venture. The goal of the state isn’t exactly the same as the goal of a business; profit generation.  

        Great CEOs probably fail to make great Presidents of nations because the job description, outside of qualities and skills such as good leadership, delegation and organizational skills necessary for success in any private or public sector organization, simply isn’t the same for the top executive positions in such fundamentally different enterprises.

        Some on the right seem to think that the government should be run like a corporation with the CEO (the president being the nation’s chief executive officer) serving the same purpose as the MBA CEO of a business venture.  Others on the right seem to think that the government should function as a national church with the President as the Spiritual Officer in Chief. Both of these hard right factions are seriously off the mark in their assessment of our government’s function and what a president needs to be.

        Fingers crossed Romney won’t be elected to demonstrate just how seriously far off.  

    2. The right-wing’s abusage of the word competitiveness is part of a larger effort to get us think that whatever is good for profit is good for people.

      They would have us believe that a former CEO knows how to decrease unemployment and increase prosperity because he has made a lot of money for himself and his shareholders; and they would have us conclude that with Mitt Romney as president everyone will see their wages and their employment prospects improve because he knows how to make wealthy people even wealthier.

      Mr. Romney wants people to think he will be a job-creating CEO President. But the public must be reminded that the last two CEO Presidents [Herbert Hoover, George W Bush] were poor stewards of the national economy and that expertise in business is no guarantee of proficiency in public policy making.

      As Romney’s record at Bain shows, his focus was on the growth of the company and the wealth returned to the owners.  Cutting overhead (pension plans, health benefits, wages, jobs) and getting more work out of cheaper employees was their pathway to success.  And if a highly leveraged business couldn’t dig out from under the newly created debt, pull the plug and screw the third party lenders!

      Unlike the visionary Henry Ford, who almost single-handedly created the middle class by increasing the pay of his workers so that they could afford to buy their own products, thus being the true job creators.

      One last point.  Almost all CEO’s are driven (and hansomely rewarded) by quarterly results, not for having the patience and vision for long-term strategic success.  Thus the difference in performance between Apple’s Steve Jobs and HP’s [CEO du jour].

  6. G.W. Bush didn’t do that well in business ( except when he got taxpayer subsidies to build a new ball park for the Texas Rangers which he profited from).

    And brother Neil (whom I personally knew when he lived in Denver in the 80’s) was on Silverado’s board approving loans to developer Ken Good while doing secrete business deals with Good. Silverado failed at a cost of almost a billion dollars, and brother Neil lost all of a $100,000 “loan” from Good in a business venture – a “loan” he wasn’t required to pay back.

    If the founding fathers wanted our country run “as a business” then why didn’t they draft Articles of Incorporation instead of a Constitution, and why did they create a Congress instead of a Board of Directors?  

    1. Is the goaltender for the Boston Bruins.  He’s a bit of a teabagger.  He’s also regarded by some (myself included) as an asshole.  When the Bruins were invited to the White House after their Stanley Cup victory last year, Thomas quite famously (or infamously) refused to go, issuing this statement:

      I believe the Federal government has grown out of control, threatening the Rights, Liberties, and Property of the People. This is being done at the Executive, Legislative, and Judicial level. This is in direct opposition to the Constitution and the Founding Fathers vision for the Federal government. Because I believe this, today I exercised my right as a Free Citizen, and did not visit the White House. This was not about politics or party, as in my opinion both parties are responsible for the situation we are in as a country. This was about a choice I had to make as an INDIVIDUAL. This is the only public statement I will be making on this topic.

      (From his wikipedia page)

      He’s considering taking the 2012-2013 season off for reasons he hasn’t fully explained, although ScottP’s post might be hinting at a reason.

    2. is not a requirement for being progressive, though fans can feel lonely among the liberal crowd.  Hard as it is to believe, even here on this blog we have left leaners who also are sports fans.  Basketball is my particular passion.

      Also Scott P is someone who has been posting here occasionally for some time and there isn’t any particular reason to care less or more about his opinions than anyone else’s including mine and yours, dwyer.

    3. To help you with your first 2 questions, the text on this site in blue are called “links”. If you click on them it can answer stupid questions for you. Although since I see you post on this site often, I thought you knew how to do that.

      You should care because instead of just scrolling past my comment, you took the time to post a reply to it. I seriously wonder about the intelligence of people who post “Why should I care?” or “This is teh stoopid” comments on websites.

      I hope the rest of your day was less bitter than this comment.

  9. Of the 29 contested primaries that will be voted on this months, 25 of them are GOP primaries, only 4 are Dem primaries.

    I found that interesting. Thought you all might, as well.

    1. is still running full throttle. The republican party is now little more than a victim in the old horror classic…” the Invasion of the Body Snatchers”.

      The alien takeover of the republican body is almost complete.  

          1. that even handed shit isn’t getting us anywhere. They don’t play fair.

            The “Niedermeyer Principle”, if you will.

            Michael Steele was on UP this morning and again for a spot on Alex Witts’ show. Between him and Kasich on whatever show he was on, it is a wonder the people on set don’t drown in the bullshit.

            From one red herring to the next strawman to the next outright lie…it is almost nauseating…certainly infuriating.

            I’ll say this for Michael Steele, he is about as glib as they come. He is able to say the most obviously made up bullshit with the coolness of a con-man extraordinaire.

            Sometimes the left has someone on that can and will point out his obvious speciousness, but not often. I wind up yelling at the tele in a snit.

            I would love to get the chance to publicly debate that weasel.

            1. He’s a super sharp dresser.

              And, off on a tangent but it’s the weekend, that’s one thing I always notice when I go to the Capitol with a group of women of a certain age for one reason or another.

              Is there a rule that says progressives have to dress like crap while the GOP gals show up in nice suits or mixed pieces including a nicely made jacket? You can get a few nice pieces on sale or at high end resale shops for such occasions.  Don’t have to be top 1% to look classy and don’t have to look frumpy to stand up for the 99%.  I always go dressed sharp. Just a suggestion, progressives. Looking good can be very empowering.

              1. When I was a spokesperson for the environmental community on oil and gas issues, I always wore a tie to the capitol, or to anywhere I was representing members of my organization. It is almost as if the oil and gas guys don’t even take you seriously unless you dress as well as they do.

                Your advice is right on.  

  10. He released a statement today saying he was going to take the year off to focus on faith, family and friends, but I think he might be taking time off to campaign for Ron Paul or maybe Glenn Beck’s Blaze site needs a sports columnist.

    Just in case you cared.

    (Hint: The blue text will tell you more.)

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

68 readers online now

Newsletter

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