Monday Open Thread

“The government should not be guided by Temporary Excitement, but by Sober Second Thought.”

–Martin Van Buren

18 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Zappatero says:

    Does the fact that Big Time Conservative Columnist, and Lying Climate-change Denier, George Will's wife works for Scott Walker account for Walker's easy ride through DC's press corps?

    Will disclosed that his wife works for Walker at the bottom of his Post column on Wednesday. Will's column is entirely about Democratic presidential candidate Bernie Sanders, but he still disclosed his connection to Walker.

    "Disclosure: This columnist's wife, Mari Will, works for Scott Walker," read the tail of Will's column. It did not say in what capacity she works for the governor but a spokesperson for Walkers super PAC, Our American Revival, told the Washington Examiner that she serves as an adviser.

    I've wondered how Walker, with his various trials and tribulations (and non-trials) at home in Wisconsin, gets such an easy pass from the supposed world's best and most critical  political journos.

    He's the Original Koch Whore, and if he continues to get an easy pass in the Republican Clown Car Competition he might be our nation's first Koch-Brother-in-Chief with Cory Gardner standing at his side.

  2. Chickenheed says:

    If Van Buren had a Twitter account, I'm sure his response to today's Senate vote about defunding Planned Parenthood would be "OMG! SRSLY?! WTF?"

    A few thoughts on this shit-show:

    – If GOP wants to stop the transfer of fetal tissue for research, why don't they vote to stop that? Probably just because Planned Parenthood is their real target.

    – It's not a baby until it's born. This is an easy to understand transformation. It's like rain. When water is falling from the sky, it's "rain" but when it's on the ground it's a "puddle". There are not tiny puddles falling from the sky. A harder transformation to grasp is when exactly does "laundry" transform into "clothes" and vice-versa.

    – If you truly think a fetus is a baby then you should be encouraging expectant mothers to have the "baby" removed as soon as it is physically possible to exist on its own which just sounds sick and wrong.

    – If you're "pro-life" but against welfare programs to help the needy, then you're just pro-birth. I stole this thought from an op-ed by a nun and it's awesome.

  3. Zappatero says:

    Bennet, too late to the party:

    "He can't possibly win the nomination," is the phrase heard most often when Washington insiders mention either Donald Trump or Bernie Sanders.

    Yet as enthusiasm for the bombastic billionaire and the socialist senior continues to build within each party, the political establishment is mystified.

    They don't understand that the biggest political phenomenon in America today is a revolt against the "ruling class" of insiders that have dominated Washington for more than three decades.

    In two very different ways, Trump and Sanders are agents of this revolt. I'll explain the two ways in a moment.

    Don't confuse this for the public's typical attraction to candidates posing as political outsiders who'll clean up the mess, even when they're really insiders who contributed to the mess.

    What's new is the degree of anger now focused on those who have had power over our economic and political system since the start of the 1980s.

    Included are presidents and congressional leaders from both parties, along with their retinues of policy advisors, political strategists, and spin-doctors.

    Bedside reading for the senator who can't figure out what those ingrates are complaining about…….and the spin doctors who could enlighten him.

    • Conserv. Head Banger says:

      The article makes no mention of Michael Bennet.   C.H.B.

      • BlueCat says:

        Just what I was thinking.

      • Zappatero says:

        "Included are presidents and congressional leaders from both parties, along with their retinues of policy advisors, political strategists, and spin-doctors."

        Naming names is kinda the easiest part of this discussion……if we're pretending Mike Bennet is not part of that description then we're pretending to care about these issues.


        • Conserv. Head Banger says:

          "Naming names is kinda the easiest………."    I will agree. However, coming up with substantive proof that backs up the naming of names is another matter. Of course, when one is not getting their personal needs met by one politician or another, then it is real easy to throw all sorts of mud and see what sticks. 

        • BlueCat says:

          If we're pretending there is any viable Dem alternative to Sen Bennet here in Colorado for the 2016 election we're delusional. Furthermore on most of the issues grass roots Dems care about Bennet is just fine.

          With the weak R field, Bennet's status as incumbent and the enormous amount of money he will have at his disposal, pretty much the only way Dems lose this election is by replacing him with another candidate.  

          Udall's problem was not that he was too moderate. Once again, only moderate Dems win statewide in Colorado. His problem was his horrible scolding, scowling, all lady parts all the time, Gardner is a flip flopper campaign. In fact, it made him look too much like a lefty for Colorado tastes, not too moderate.

          Contrast this with the farther right, more corporate friendly Hick who wins with positive upbeat campaigns. Dems vote for him, no matter how reluctantly, and so do enough moderates and even a chunk of Rs. On most issues he's far superior to any R alternative no matter how aggravating he may be on a few issues. You don't have to be quite as R lite as Hick to win statewide as a Dem but you can't be too far from center.

          If you think a candidate like DeGette would do better you are out of touch with what flies here statewide. I get that we'd prefer less corporate friendly candidates and I applaud progress in that direction but the degree to which your camp over-vilifies Bennet is truly astounding. Be careful what you wish for. You may wish to replace Bennet but all you'll get in return in 2016 is an R who'll make Bennet look like Bernie in comparison.

          • Republican 36 says:

            Well said BC. Z has spent months on Coloradopols and other blogs bludgeoning Senator Bennet and attempting to make him over in his image which won't fly with the electorate in Colorado.

          • notaskinnycook says:

            And for the 327th time, Gardner didn't win that election. Udall threw it away with some terrible advice from people who were just as far left as Zap. It sounds nice, but it just doesn't fly here. It wasn't that long ago that our Congressional delegation was 5-2 R. And the electorate haven't changed that much

          • FrankUnderwood says:

            You are never going to get a coherent explanation for Z's contempt for Bennet. I don't even think it is ideological anymore; I think it's some kind of personal grudge masked as ideological.

            As you've pointed out before, BC, Bennet's positions are extremely similar to that of Obama's (with some exceptions such as Keystone) but we don't hear ranting against POTUS.

            Do as I do……just skip over the rants. They're usually too long to read and we know what the bottom line is going to be.

            Your insight on the state of the Colorado statewide electorate is right on the money (no pun intended since we're talking about Bennet). I remember caucusing for Senator Josie Heath and Senator Gene Nichols and Governor Mike Feeley. While they were great candidates and good people, they were too liberal for this state.

            By the time Mike Miles came along, I was tired of working for losing liberals and figured a moderate who could actually statewide was the candidate to vote for. Thanks you, Ken Salazar and Bill Ritter for sparing us from the Beer Baron and Both Ways!

  4. FrankUnderwood says:

    Any thoughts on who Biden takes more votes from:  HRC or Bernie?

    • Progressicat says:

      Ultimately, I'd say Bernie's, along with anyone else not HRC, and then HRC's to the extent her closet ejects skeletons.

      I'm a socialist, and aligned with Bernie philosophically, but I see Biden as a flawed but honest guy who could be elected and govern.  I still see Hillary as a Clinton, and I'm wary of that.  If he gets in, he'd be my pick.

      • BlueCat says:

        I find myself close to completely agreeing with you. I really really tried to be for HRC. She sure doesn't make it easy. It's not as if there's been any ground up swelling demand for her.  She's super famous. Thus the polls. Which also include a very high negative rate BTW.  She's been foisted on us from the top of the all powerful Clinton machine down as inevitable. Don't think she would have won in 2008 if that upstart hadn't beat her machine. Not confident she can win now. Suspect the Bernie contingent would rather see Joe if they can't have Bernie. I know I would and I don't believe I can have Bernie. As my little old lefty Jewish mom says… in 2016 America isn't going to elect a little old Jewish socialist.

        I'm seriously considering whether Biden with someone like Castro for VP could unite the party. He's way more likeable, way more trustworthy, more experienced, great feel for the legislative process and relations with Congress, no financial, personal or political scandals or whiff of unsavory stench. A stand up guy. The gaffes seem pretty meaningless compared to what comes out of the right.  Great story. I'm feeling more and more rebellious as the planned coronation approaches.

        • notaskinnycook says:

          And I'll take his experience in foreign relations over HRC's any day, Secretary of State or not.

          • BlueCat says:

            Not that American voters seem to care all that much about the international scene but you're right and he's very respected in that role. It may all come to nothing but I've got to admit when the talking heads first started talking about a Biden run again, the prospect of maybe actually getting out from under the increasingly oppressive inevitability of HRC was kind of thrilling. His warm, comfortable in his own skin, natural demeanor is such a contrast to HRC's stiff, cold, arrogant, annoyed persona.  And his trustworthy numbers are off the charts compared to her dismal ones.

            He is Obama's VP and even though Obama always says all the right things about his relationship with HRC, he's got to know how much both Clintons loath and resent him for raining on their 2008 parade. Bill in particular does a really lousy job of hiding it. Pretty sure they're the types who, once you get on their shit list you never get off.

            Obama's got a pretty formidable machine of his own. It beat the Clintons'. Would he throw it behind Biden if push comes to shove? This could get seriously interesting.


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.