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

50%

50%

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
May 23, 2007 03:19 PM UTC

Wednesday Open Thread

  • 44 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

The whole nation is counting on you to say it.

Tweet
Share

Comments

44 thoughts on “Wednesday Open Thread”

  1. Seems that John “Abscam” Murtha is in trouble again.  The consistent rule is that all our legislators are the scum of the earth, who only object to corruption when the other guy’s hand is in the till.  After enduring six years of the most corrupt administration ever, we hired the other guys, who promptly used their new-found power to indulge in a little corruption of their own.  While Boehner doesn’t have any moral standing to complain, we certainly do.

    Tom DeLay’s little junket to Royal St. Andrews was “legal,” or so we are told.  Amendment 41 is needed, not just here in Colorado, but nationally.  Here’s Boehner’s press release, excerpted with a link and comment by Free Republic: 

    WASHINGTON, D.C. – House Republican Leader John Boehner (R-OH) strongly backed Rep. Mike Rogers (R-MI) after he announced his intent to file a privileged resolution in response to the threats by senior Democratic Rep. John Murtha (D-PA) on the House floor today. The resolution, set to be introduced by Rogers on Monday, will force the full House to vote on whether to reprimand Murtha for his conduct. Boehner issued the following statement:

    “The resolution offered by Congressman Rogers outlines a blatant abuse of power stemming from a Republican-authored proposal to cut wasteful earmark spending from legislation pending before the House. This egregious action is not only beneath the dignity of this institution, it constitutes a violation of House rules, which preclude Members from conditioning earmarks on another Member’s vote, and the House should reprimand Murtha for his conduct.

    “Mike Rogers knows public corruption and he knows about threats and intimidation. For five years as an FBI Special Agent, it was Rogers’ job to go after those who abused the public’s trust and to stare down mobsters. No Member of Congress should be threatened or intimidated because of his or her efforts to crack down on wasteful spending and protect the interests of taxpayers.

    “This is yet another example of the Democrats abusing the rules of the House and breaking the commitments they made to the American people. In fact, over the last four months they have not led at all, nor have they delivered anything remotely close to an open, deliberative, and results-oriented House.”

    NOTE: Last Friday, Rogers offered a GOP motion-to-recommit to the FY 2008 Intelligence Act that would have taken funding away from an illegitimate, wasteful earmark tucked into the bill to benefit Murtha in order to restore funding for human intelligence programs. The Murtha earmark would authorize tens of millions for the National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC), a government agency based in Murtha’s district that the House Government Reform Committee has deemed “an expensive and duplicative use of scarce federal drug enforcement resources,” according to an article in the May 8 edition of The Hill.

    http://www.freerepub…

    I’m tired of the relentless stream of corruption.  Perhaps if we made it a capital offense, and required family members to do the honors upon conviction, we’d be able to clean up this mess.

    1. John Campbell (R-CA):

      I just returned from the floor of the House where Speaker Pelosi and nearly all the Democrats officially voted to cover up Rep. Murtha’s ethics violation and shield him from an official reprimand. It’s important to note that this entire incident has been substantiated by witnesses and not denied by Murtha. This is a clear violation of House Ethics Rules and general decorum. There is no legitimate justification for not supporting a formal reprimand.

      As if an ethics violation has ever stopped a legislator before….

    2. what in the world does Murtha have to do with A41? That’s one of the things that has really bugged me about the “clean up government” folks here in Colorado, they have taken a DC scandal and run with it as an excuse to “fix” Colorado government. When Tim Jackson bitch slapped errrr debated Pete Maysmith he made this point numerous times. Pete would cite some “problem” that he wanted to “fix”, Tim would ask for examples and Pete would have none. It would have been funny if it weren’t so serious.

    1. I don’t see why it would be so problematic or perilous to our interests for Iran to have the Bomb.  Pakistan has it already, and if we tried to over-reach yet again, Musharraf might fall.

      The only winner here is Israel (the only country imperiled by Saddam’s support of the Intifada — which was the only act of terrorism he was involved in).  Why should we be their proxy army?

      1. IMHO, our risk from a nuclear Iran springs from our dependance on Middle Eastern oil and the impact of Middle Eastern politics on global oil prices.  If Iran announced tomorrow that it had a nuke, do you think the price of oil would go up, down or be unchanged?

        My bet is that if Iran announced it had a nuke, $3.10 gas would look like a bargain.

        By the time OPEC finished increasing prices in the 1970s, our economy was left with 21% interest rates and 13-14% annual inflation rate.  Those price increases were merely fueled by OPEC’s greed and not by a military/political crisis in the Persian Gulf.

        In contrast with the 1970s, today, there are a billion or so more drivers in India and China, and our country has not built a new refinery for more than 20 years (and the ones we did build were in Louisiana waiting to be wrecked by a hurricane) that help to drive the global price of gas higher.

        Israel has not fixed its relationship with the Muslims that live within or next to its borders even though it’s had decades to do so.  I doubt whether Israel would or could be a stabilizing influence on a nuclear-armed Iran.

         

        1. Last summer’s war was with Hezbollah, but Israel really fears Hamas.  And guess who their patron is?  That’s right!  IRAN!!! And we all know about religious crazies, now don’t we, Dobby?

          Israel’s long-term position is untenable, and Israelis know it.  It is a country of six million, of which about 20% are Arab.  As others have pointed out here, it is essentially an armed camp.  The more that Iran feels its oats, the more pressure they can bring to bear on Israel (which is moving to the right because the people fear for their safety).  And the Pallies have the ultimate weapon — one overwhelming the West as we know it:  They breed. 

          Who else benefits from a war with Iran?  Iran has done what it can to hurt us, by switching to the Euro and yen as the preferred reserve currency.  They sell their oil to China, and oil is a fungible commodity.

          Let’s say that Iran had a nuke.  What would they really do with it?  Probably the same thing Pakistan has.  Especially if we hadn’t empowered the religious crazies in Iran with our senseless invasion of Iraq, the ‘quiet revolution’ that was going on in Iraq would have succeeded, and the country would have continued its turn toward the West.  But if we had been pursuing a pro-America foreign policy, as opposed to the pro-Israel policy bought to you by AIPAC[sic], the state of Israel might be well on the way to its demise — and we’d be a lot further away from ours.

          Geopolitics is like chess: You have to be playing six moves ahead to be a viable player.  The overthrow of Mossadegh in 1953 has ramifications even today.  Either this game has been played with scandalous ineptitude by our leaders, or others with designs on destroying America are calling the shots.

          Dazzle me with your brilliance, Gentlemen.  Instead of tossing around tawdry accusations of anti-Semitism, offer a plausible rationale for how invading or even pressuring Iran advances America’s legitimate interests.  I am prepared to be persuaded here by a persuasive argument.

          1. Don’t worry: We’ll all pitch in and buy you a thesaurus for your birthday.

            By the way, the beauty of your previously used phrase, “for your tawdry polemic(al) purposes” is that it is a phrase that clearly can be used only for…you guessed it… TAWDRY POLEMICAL PURPOSES!!!

            And, from what I’ve seen, you are never persuaded by persuasive arguments, nor do you ever mobilize persuasive arguments. You throw a plattitude or two into a blender with a few stock arguments and some crushed bigotry, and press “liquify,” and then hold it up in a gold-painted goblet as you place a laurel wreath on your head and parade around for the cheering crowds that populate your imagination.

            Geopolitics is like chess when you assume a certain set of goals and values. It’s far more subtle and complex when you realize that the pieces, the rules, and the object of the game are forever changing. The invasions of Vietnam and Iraq (both of which the court of you have ruled to be illegal) were chess moves, but they were chess moves in a simpler game than the one that truly would serve the interests of either the United States or humanity as a whole. You take as a given the imperative of the nation-state. And that exemplifies the fundamental error in your thinking: You simply take too many things as givens. Too many assumptions, and not enough analysis deconstructing those assumptions.

        1. for continuing to mention the holocaust? This guy is such a piece of work, Dobby, that he makes me feel like you and Gecko are my ideological soul-mates in comparison. Just as, perhaps, the world requires an extraterrestrial invasion to unite itself, people from the extremes of the left-right spectrum only need a toxic-chump like Rio to unite us.

          1. …in a completely fraternal, non-sexual way, of course.

            Anybody who’s been to Israel cannot possibly say it is anthing BUT one of the world’s most decent, open, and vibrant counties…to a fault!

            1. When I was there I was struck how the Palestinians were treated just like I saw our blacks treated in the segreationist south.  Where I grew up and am sitting right now.

              This is the same country that has spied on US and lied to the world and US about having a nuke program. 

              I have no love for the nation of Israel.  Neat place, many good people, just like anywhere in the world.  But don’t let’s us become their water boy.  Emphasis on “boy.”

              1. about Israeli policy, both foreign and domestic, as well (actually, I’m highly critical of many of their policies: Somewhat similarly to us, their political ideology is dominated by conservative hawks, to the dismay of the many liberal humanitarians among them). Such topics can legitimately be discussed and debated without accusing anyone of antisemitism for doing so. However, when a passing comment comparing the proposal to track all muslims in America to pre-holocaust Nazi policies provokes a rant on how Jews (presumably including me) are whiners for ever mentioning the Holocaust, that’s a whole ‘nother story. That poster failed to notice that the topic of THIS jew’s post, to which he was responding, was discrimination toward MUSLIMS, when he complained that my post was typical of an attitude of exclusivity universal to Jews vis-a-vis the Holocaust. He also imputed to me opinions and motivations diametrically opposite to those I actually possess and express, attributing to me by virtue of my judaism some unflattering quality that he attributes to jews in general. Lastly, I would assume from that poster’s arguments that a non-jew would be welcome to mention the holocaust if relevant to some point being made, but jews, for being jews, are behaving offensively by doing so, a bizarre and ludicrous form of discrimination. Mostly, I am in the mode lately of hammering this particular instance of gross bigotry, and the broader ignorance and pomposity of the person expressing it. None of my comments related to this theme are meant to go beyond the parameters of that narrow goal.

                I believe in norms of conduct, which are not generally legislated (nor need be): They are diffusely enforced by the social approval and disapproval of those who witness the offending (or admirable) behaviors. When appropriate, I express both (approval and disapproval) quite robustly. Besides, I hope you’ll all forgive me, but I have had a great deal of fun dismantling the self-inflated buffoon who so frivolousy aroused my ire. I hope some of the pleasure has been vicariously shared by others.

                Now, back to reading about more important matters (string theory, of all things)….

                1. …not merely because of the particular self-inflated buffoon whom you deflated, but mostly because of your side-splitting wit.  I’m still chuckling about the “tying a red cape around your neck and jumping off the sofa” remark.  That slayed (slew?) for me for days!

                    1. ….title of post was “Whatever.”  Yev also had other worthy posts in that same thread.  I laughed and laughed..

                    2. were on the “Gunny Bob” thread, following Chorro-Chico’s anti-semitic rant in response to a passing comparison between G-Bob’s suggestion to mark and track Muslims in America to pre-Holocaust Nazi policies vis-a-vis the jews. That’s pretty much when I decided to make sport of our pathetic little friend. Check out the “Who you calling ‘they’?” post. (I’m just trying to live up to the standard for wit that you’ve set for the rest of us, L.B.).

      3. The last time I was in Israel, I was struck by several observations:

        1.  There were armed soldiers throughout the country, everybody had a gas mask in their home.  There was an armed guard at the shopping mall.  The explanation was “We have to be ready for attack ’cause everyone around us hates us and an attack can come in 10 minutes or less.”

        2.  There was a huge difference between where the Palestinians lived and the Israelis lived.

        3.  I visited a power plant on the coast.  I asked “Where do you get your coal?”  Answer: “From you (the US).”  The US is several thousand miles away and, apparently, nobody closer was willing to sell coal to Israel.

        4.  I visited the tank museum outside Jerusalem and the spot where our guide’s brother was killed in the ’47 war.  Every tank technology was represented there, and I would guess there were 50-100 tanks on display.  For me, it was a sad testament to decades of fighting that has resolved nothing, and seems to only have spilled beyond Israel’s borders.

        5.  Our passports were taken by the government and held in their possession while we were there.  I was issued some kind of temporary passport to carry.  I still don’t know what was going on.  No other country I’ve visited ever took my passport.

        6.  I visited the former British museum outside the Arab quarter of Jerusalem.  Our cab driver could not park in front of the museum to wait for me because of security concerns (i.e., a parked car often indicates a suicide bomber, so the police chase them off).

        7.  Everyone I talked to (men and women) had been in the army.  We left the draft behind in the US in the 1970s.

        While some folks may accuse me of being anti-semetic, from what I saw, Israel is a militarized state under siege and not what our country should strive to become.

        While I am a Republican, I believe that Jimmy Carter is right when he calls for our leaders to insist on pressuring Israel and the Palestinians to make peace.

        1. It is a militarized state. In fact, I would go so far as to say, technologically, Israel is second only to the US in military technology. I was talking to an air force friend of mine who mentioned that Israel’s air force technology is so advanced a pilot need only to look at a plane for its missile tracking to lock on. That isnt to say that Israel shouldnt be as militarized as it is, but Israel can take care of itself.

          1. I am not sure why you are surprised by this. Remember the Persian Gulf war of 1991? Saddam sent more than a couple of SCUDs their way. I thought they had a sort of missile defense system, but I could be wrong.

          2. Absolutely. There is a fundamental difference between Palestinian and Israeli living situations, basic infrastructure, housing, and movement.

          3. I do not know the availability of coal deposits in the nearby area. Where is it located?

          4. Care to delve deeper into that?

          5. Thats interesting. My dad travels there regularly and he has never mentioned that. He does travel to other areas to and got questioned for not wanting his passport stamped due to the fact that he may not be able to enter into other countries with that stamp.

          6. Doesnt surprise me. When I was in Turkey 5-6 years ago a company my dad was working for had an employee drive us around. Anytime we stopped in front of a posh location he had to drop us of and drive away for fear of terrorism.

          7. I am sure you know this, but everybody short of hasidic jews are required to join. 3 years for men and 2 for women. We have not left the draft behind. Men still have to sign a selective service card when they turn 18. Yeah, its not enforced, but the names are there.

          I think the anti-semetic label is thrown out often without backing. That is not to say that it is not necessary, but for someone to call you an anti-semite is laughable. Just like Jimmy Carter being labeled an anti-semite is also laughable. Considering that the peace process has stalled and the administration is trying to halt any peace talks between Israel and Syria, I think Carter is right to call  for  pressure to be put on Israel and Palestine.

          1. is thrown around pejoratively for polemic purposes, creating more heat than light.  But the mud-slingers know precisely why they are slinging that mud … in the spirit of Karl Roverer.  Because they know it works.

            1. the posts above concerning the militarization or Israel, or the discrimination against Palestinians, to be anti-semitic, as I have already written. But, the fact that some (many) criticisms of Israel are not anti-semitic does not, ipso-facto, mean that no criticisms of jews are anti-semitic.

              I can only remember one other time in my nearly 48 years on this earth when I have accused someone of anti-semitism, and maybe two or three times beyond that when I felt that I had observed it but chose not to say anything. The fact is that your response to my comparison of tracking Muslims in America to tracking Jews in Germany, in which you couldn’t distinguish between, on the one hand, the individual who wrote that post and what the post actually said from, on the other hand, the unflattering stereotype of jews you hold in your head and what you presumed any jew who ever mentions the holocaust must by definition have been saying, was pure, unadulterated, anti-semitism; the real deal.

              In response to what I wrote (in which I very lightly mentioned my judaism), you accused JEWS of whining about the holocaust and claiming for themselves some exceptional status when others have suffered genicides as well. The two gross errors in that response is that *I* wrote the post, not “THE JEWS,” and that the actual substance of my post was the opposite of claiming exceptionalism since it said that treating Muslims in the manner suggested would have been *similar* to pre-holocaust Nazi policies toward the jews.

              The tone and content of your posts on the subject bear no resemblance to a rational criticism of Israeli foreign and domestic policy, and you have no right to hide behind the cloak of legitimacy to which such criticisms are entitled.

              You keep accusing those who criticize you of doing so for “polemical” purposes, though my only purpose in criticizing you, to be frank, is to criticize you. I think everyone who has read my responses to your posts recognizes that. It’s personal, not polemical. It really doesn’t take a genius to figure that one out. Ironically enough, though polemics is the name-of-the-game on a blog such as this, you actually far outstrip the norm in that department. But, since it’s one of the few words in your arsenal, you can’t help but throw it around, hoping it will stick to someone else, assuming that it can’t be applied to you if you aim it away from yourself enough.

              You had already proven yourself to be a fool, and before you had demonstrated your bigotry to go along with it, I had even posted, in response to someone poking fun at your ridiculous pomposity, that your folly should be “lovingly tolerated,” since “we are all works in progress.” Sometimes, however, a work gets so badly mangled that it’s time to throw it back in the fire and forge it anew. If you were even a thousandth as smart as you think you are, that’s exactly what you would do for yourself at this point. Remake yourself entirely: It’s bound to be an improvement.

          2. The tank museum was a bizarre epiphany for me.  I had dragged my wife to the tank museum because I was pretty excited to see it.  There truly are tanks of every make, model, nationality, technology on display in a huge area.  For military buffs, there’s really nothing else like it in the world.

            After strolling around for an hour or so, I got grossed out by what this display of hardware represented — DECADES of serious armed conflict.  Not a “good” war with a beginning and an end to save democracy, but a series of conflicts where lots of folks were killed, Israeli society had been wrecked by its militarization, but nothing has been resolved.

            The three religions for whom the Middle East is significant all share the Old Testament and claim to be the children of Abraham.  Yet, the killing and conflict in the area is about as far from the fundamental principles the three religions hold in common as is possible.  “Thou shalt not kill” seems to be a commandment that does not apply to the Holy Land where folks seem to relish in killing or want to justify killing.

            “Blessed are the peacemakers” — my visits to the Middle East taught me that it’s a lot harder to stop fighting than to continue with one.

             

        2. This is a problem that desperately needs solving, and our persistence in a bellicose stance will have ramifications for generations to come.

          Like some of the settlements in the West Bank were to Israel, Israel is “a bridge too far” for the West.  Ahmedinejad was correct in observing that it was created to solve a European problem.  Problem is, its creation was Kelo v. City of New London on a galactic scale, wherein land was stolen from the rightful occupants (I personally knew a Pallie with a deed to land that is now in “Israel,” issued by the Crown, who has never received a shekel for it) to create the long dreamed-of Jewish State. 

          If we are going to solve this problem, we have to wade past the pond-scum of Zionist propaganda, and recognize the real equities on both sides.  Second, we have to recognize that if the state of Israel is to long survive, the residents must be more valuable as good neighbors than as intractable enemies.

          If we are going to save Israel (a good thing, imho), we need to take a different tack. 

        3. As the MidEast has the best supplies of oil in the world, so the US has some of the best coal supplies.  The MidEast isn’t much of a coal region, and I haven’t heard much about coal on the African or Indian (sub)continents, either.  We’re Israel’s best buddies; it’s not surprising we sell them coal.

          1. I’m a bit of a coal geek …

            The US has about 267 billion tons of recoverable coal reserves.  Most of that is in Western states (i.e., Wyoming, Colorado, Montana) or interior Eastern state (West Virginia, Illinois, Kentucky), so exporting US coal requires very significant/expensive land transporation in addition to trans-Atlantic transport.

            The US is not among the top 4 coal exporters for power generation (China, Indonesia, South Africa and Australia are the biggest exporters).  US coal that is exported is typically for steel production (coke), not burned for steam-powered electric generation.

            Russia has about 173 billion tons

            India has about 100 billion tons

            Europe has about 150 billion tons

            Africa has about 55 billion tons

            Russia is swimming in coal.  Coal producing industrial nations closer to Israel are South Africa (about 5% of world reserves), Germany (7%) and Poland (2%).  It’s gotta be cheaper to ship coal from any of these three than from the US.  Why don’t they sell coal to Israel or why can’t Israel buy coal from them?

            Japan — with no coal reserves — buys most of its coal from China even though both countries have a long history of war, animosity, and polar-opposite political/economic systems (communists vs capitalists).  If they can bury the hatchet and do business, why doesn’t that happen in the Middle East?

  3. Dobson, you best repent before it’s too late!

    Dobson assailed on abortion ruling stance

    By The Associated Press

    Colorado Springs – Leaders of four anti-abortion groups criticized Focus on the Family founder James Dobson today, saying he misrepresented a Supreme Court decision that upheld a ban on a controversial abortion technique.

    In a full-page ad in The Gazette newspaper in Colorado Springs, the group said Dobson wrongly characterized the court’s April ruling as a victory for abortion foes. The ad said the ruling will actually encourage medical professionals to find “less shocking” methods than late-term abortions, which abortion opponents often call “partial-birth abortion.”

    “Dr. Dobson, you mislead Christians claiming this ruling will ‘protect children.’ The court granted no authority to save the life of even a single child,” the ad said. It concludes by asking Dobson to “please repent.” A spokesman for Dobson did not immediately return a call.

    Dobson’s conservative Christian ministry is based in Colorado Springs.

    The letter is signed by Brian Rohrbough, president of Colorado Right to Life; the Rev. Tom Euteneuer, president of Human Life International; Flip Benham, director of Operation Rescue/Operation Save America; Judie Brown, president of American Life League; and Bob Enyart, pastor of Denver Bible Church.

    Rohrbough is the father of Daniel Rohrbough, a Columbine High School student who was killed in the April 20, 1999, massacre.

    http://origin.denver…

    2. He spoke for about 30 minutes at the Capitol on Pro-Life Day in April assailing the Supremes’ ruling.  He is simply crazy. 

      He basically called Dobson and Clarence Thomas pro-abortion radicals.  Yeah.  Right.

      Dobson knows that you have to work within the political process–and specifially courts–to achieve any given political agenda.  Carhart was hardly ground-shaking or monumental, but it a small, sure step toward the advancement of America’s culture of life.

      Something few liberals know is that in Colorado and National Right to Life there is a massive schism.  On the one hand you have gradualists who believe in taking little steps that all lead towards to ultimate overturning of Roe V. Wade.  In other words, if you shove the culture it will shove right back.  But if you give it gentle nudges–small court rulings, parental consent laws, etc.–it will move your direction.

      On the other hand you have your hard-liners who are probably more harmfull than helpfull to pro-lifers.  They take an all or nothing approach that simply doesn’t work.  In America it’s about a 50/50 split between those who would make abortion illegal in most, if not all, circumstances and the other half which believes that abortion should be generally legal. 

      Here’s an analogy:  It’s the beginning of the fourth quarter, the score is tied, and the pro-life movement is at their own 30-yard line.  We just got a first down and the defence is on their heels.  Is this the time for the hail mary???  If we play smart we’ll win this thing–but if we go throwing up bombs we’ll get picked off and lose this thing.

      I sat at the Capitol listening to Alan Keyes ane Benham go on and on about how America is a damned nation and folks like Dobson and Scalia are pro-abortion.  I was just shaking my head.

      Finally, I think that it is obvious who more Americans take seriously.  There’s a reason that Flip Benham is marginal, maybe even kookish, pastor and James Dobson is an internationally recognized and respected author, radio host, and Christian personality.  When conservatives need a guiding light on the abortion debate, we don’t look to the fringe.  We look to Dobson, Scalia, and others who follow Ronald Reagan’s directive and work within the movement for change.

      That strategy will ultimately bring the end to the horrific procedure of abortion in America…unless Benham and Friends gets us intercepted.

    1. saying that as a former McCainiac, I would not support him unless and until he came correct on the issue of immigration obviously didn’t meet with their need for propaganda. 🙂

  5. Something fun I just sent out in my county party’s weekly e-newsletter. Enjoy!

    ***

    Here’s something I stumbled on that is too good not to share, a parody of the old kids TV cartoon, the Wonder Friends. It seems to be a trailer for a longer web production coming out this summer. Worth a view just to see Hillary in a Wonder Woman style costume!

    “Hillary, Obama, Edwards and Gore use their superpowers to thwart the administrations conquest of the universe.”

    http://youtube.com/w…

  7. Does anyone know if the state in which Mary Cheney lives recognizes second-parent adoption or, even more, full-blown domestic partnerships?

    Cheney Daughter Gives Birth to Boy
    By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

    WASHINGTON (AP) — Vice President Dick Cheney’s daughter Mary delivered an 8-pound, 6-ounce baby boy on Wednesday, the first child for her and her female partner of 15 years, Heather Poe.

    Samuel David Cheney was born at 9:46 a.m. at Sibley Hospital in Washington, the vice president’s office announced. Vice President Cheney and his wife, Lynne, paid a visit to their new — and sixth — grandchild a few hours later.

    Mary Cheney announced in December that she and Poe had decided to start a family. Her decision to become pregnant and raise a child with Poe was criticized in some conservative circles. James Dobson, founder of Focus on the Family, asserted that children need to be reared by heterosexual married couples, for instance.

    The vice president bristled at questions on the topic.

    1. which is reputed to have some of the most draconian anti-gay legislation in the Union. I believe but am not sure that that includes laws outlawing gay adoption.

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

51 readers online now

Newsletter

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