Memorial Day Weekend Open Thread

Photo by Colorado Pols

14 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. 2Jung2Die says:

    Johnston's campaign haul for the Mayor's race now nearing $6 mill, with about $4 mill from the PAC Advancing Denver. Top 3 contributors to the PAC: Reid Hoffman of LinkedIn about $1.3 mill, Michael Bloomberg $500K, Kent Thiry $450K.

    • Lauren Boebert is a Worthless POS says:

      I don't have a horse in the race since I live in Jeffco but thought that had I still lived in Denver, I would probably vote for Brough.

      But seeing that Mike Bloomberg saw fit to spend $500,000 on Johnston puts Johnston into a whole different and better light.

  2. ParkHill says:

    "Pride Month Is A Cynical Exercise In State-Enforced Homosexuality". Federalist Society:

    Conservatism circles the drain of the culture wars. Apparently Obamacare will require us to have sex with someone of the same gender sometime in June.

    More seriously, David Kurtz at TPM points out how radical the Supreme Court has become, but it isn't even Conservatism any more:

    I’ve been working on paring back the conservative v. liberal construct in describing the Supreme Court. “Conservative jurisprudence,” as existed as recently as 20 years ago, arguably had an internal logic and consistency to it. It could be applied – though it wasn’t always, of course – in a consistent and even-handed way that defied particular outcomes. There was a discipline to it, at least in theory. It possessed some intellectual rigor that was worth grappling with even if you were a progressive. There is very little that remains “conservative” about the current Supreme Court majority or what we think of as the Federalist Society’s conservative legal movement. It’s right-wing radicalism that is more outcome-based than they ever accused liberals of being.

    Ultimately, however, this is no longer a legal issue to be solved in court. It’s a political issue to be fixed by winning elections. It will be a long, slow climb out of a deep, dark hole. No hand-wringing. Just do it.

    • spaceman2021 says:

      Typical load of Federalist Society horseshit.  Extolling the "virtues" of "conservative jurisprudence," which is basically 19th century thinking and judges playing very bad, rank amateur historians.  Not to mention the financial and ethical corruption the Court embraces more and more. 


  3. Chickenheed says:

    Skipping Friday and just going right into the weekend, Pols? I like your style.

  4. ParkHill says:

    Ian Millhiser tweets:

    One thing that I hate about covering people like Clarence Thomas or Neil Gorsuch is that if you accurately describe their beliefs, using quotations from their opinions, you still sound like an insane person.

    The most important thing to understand about Clarence Thomas is that, in addition to being corrupt, he's is completely fucking batshit insane and wants to do utterly sociopathic things to the United States of America.

    • ParkHill says:

      Thomas & Gorsuch Declare Child Labor Laws Unconstitutional. Ian Milhiser at

      On Thursday, the Supreme Court imposed strict new limits on the Clean Water Act. The Court’s decision in Sackett v. EPA is likely to do serious harm to the government’s ability to quell water pollution, including in major waterways such as the Mississippi River and the Chesapeake Bay.

      Meanwhile, Justice Clarence Thomas wrote a concurring opinion that would so severely limit Congress’s power to legislate that he might as well have taken several volumes of the United States Code and lit them on fire.

      To be clear, a concurring opinion is not the law — it merely reflects the views of the justices who sign onto it. And this particular opinion is unlikely to garner five votes to become law unless the Court’s membership changes drastically. But that does not change the fact that Thomas (and Gorsuch, who joined his opinion) is one of only nine justices, and their views tend to shape the ideas of lawyers and judges throughout the legal system.

      Under the approach Thomas lays out in his Sackett concurrence, the federal ban on child labor is unconstitutional. So is the minimum wage, federal laws protecting the right to unionize, bans on workplace discrimination, and nearly all other regulation of the workplace. Thomas’s approach endangers countless laws governing private business, from rules requiring health insurers to cover people with preexisting conditions to the ban on whites-only lunch counters. And even that is underselling just how much law would be snuffed out if Thomas’s approach took hold.

      Though Thomas has said similar things in the past, his opinion in Sackett is one of the most nihilistic opinions written by any federal judge in the last nine decades. This opinion is particularly notable, moreover, because it is joined by another justice, Neil Gorsuch. Gorsuch, who was appointed to the Court in 2017, had not previously revealed just how far he is willing to go in sabotaging the United States government.

      That means that there are now at least two votes on the Supreme Court for an act of judicial arson unlike any in US history.

      The one important point to understand from this very technical conversation about US constitutional law is that decisions like Darby laid out the legal framework that makes it possible for the federal government to regulate private industry.

      Countless laws — including anti-discrimination laws like the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Americans with Disabilities Act, environmental laws like the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, and basic workplace regulations like Occupational Safety and Health Act, the minimum wage, or federal laws governing labor relations and unions — exist today because Hammer was overruled and the Supreme Court stopped placing arbitrary limits on the Commerce Clause.

      And Thomas and Gorsuch would sweep all of this away.

    • Lauren Boebert is a Worthless POS says:

      And the really scary part is that starting next to Ginni Thomas, Clarence is the more rational and stable one.

  5. davebarnes says:

    In 911 call, Lauren Boebert’s son accuses father of “throwing” him around the house

    Boebert, who filed for divorce last month, said she has “taken action to ensure there are better days ahead for all of us.”


    Lauren Boebert Bristles At Biden Plan to Tackle Anti-Semitism: ‘They Want to Go After Conservatives’

  6. Lauren Boebert is a Worthless POS says:

    CNN Poll: Biden has a lead over Democratic primary challengers, but faces headwinds overall | CNN Politics

    RFK, Jr. is polling at 20%. He can probably nudge that up to 30% by rolling out his announcement that his cousin, JFK, Jr., will be his running mate.

    Where they go one, they go all.

  7. Washopingmylastpostwouldbemylast says:

    Just as I suspected . . .

    ChatGPT is a Republican

    Here’s What Happens When Your Lawyer Uses ChatGPT

    The lawsuit began like so many others: A man named Roberto Mata sued the airline Avianca, saying he was injured when a metal serving cart struck his knee during a flight to Kennedy International Airport in New York.

    When Avianca asked a Manhattan federal judge to toss out the case, Mr. Mata’s lawyers vehemently objected, submitting a 10-page brief that cited more than half a dozen relevant court decisions. There was Martinez v. Delta Air Lines, Zicherman v. Korean Air Lines and, of course, Varghese v. China Southern Airlines, with its learned discussion of federal law and “the tolling effect of the automatic stay on a statute of limitations.”

    There was just one hitch: No one — not the airline’s lawyers, not even the judge himself — could find the decisions or the quotations cited and summarized in the brief.

    That was because ChatGPT had invented everything.


  8. Lauren Boebert is a Worthless POS says:

    Who knew that when they really want to, Republicans can actually grow some cojones and do the right thing …..

    Texas House of Representatives votes to impeach Attorney General Ken Paxton (

    If only they had done this with Trump in DC.

    • JohnInDenver says:

      Texas Tribune clarifies the vote

      The vote to adopt the 20 articles of impeachment was 121-23…. Impeachment was supported by 60 Republicans, including Speaker Dade Phelan and all five of the representatives from Collin County — where Paxton and his wife have lived for decades. All 23 votes in opposition came from Republicans.

      So, it is increasingly clear:

                                              REPUBLICANS ‘R’ REVOLTING                                        

      With Paxton, it is clear that the 24 Republican TX Representatives voting against impeachment and those beyond the House (Trump, Cruz, et al) supporting his continued tenure in office are the sort of Republicans who are revolting, in the sense of disgusting, sickening, or nauseating.

      With the threats of retaliation from Paxton and Trump, it is clear there are two factions who will be embattled in upcoming elections. I’m expecting some sort of conflict, or as the thesaurus suggests, one side rebelling, rising up, taking to the streets, and perhaps even taking up arms against those who formed a majority to impeach.

  9. Lauren Boebert is a Worthless POS says:

    If it pisses off the Free Dumb Carcass and if it pisses off the Squad, it can't be all that bad ….

    Biden and McCarthy Reach Debt Ceiling Deal to Avert U.S. Default – The New York Times (

    IMHO, the cut to the increase in IRS funding was probably the worst part of the deal. Everyone is screaming about the debt, but they've decided to reduce funding for one thing that would actually bring in more money without raising tax rates. 

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.