U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
October 13, 2008 04:36 AM UTC
22 Comments
.
http://www.ppcitizensforlife.org/
then
click on “El Paso County Voter’s Guide” over on the right.
The newsletter that omitted me is under “Latest News” then “October Newsletter.”
.
At least you’re consistent Barron.
I think when you look up political expediency in the dictionary there’s a picture of Lamborn (or Musgrave.)
Keep the government out of our personal lives and all that.
I’m strongly pro-choice and for stem cell research, but I agree with you on the death penalty and the Iraq war.
There’s no doubt you’re getting screwed. Even if they decided to make the political decision to endorse Lamborn, the least they could have done was list you as another “pro-life” candidate on their voting guide.
you’re confusing classical liberalism with modern conservatism. It’s a common mistake.
The notion of the government keeping their hands out of people’s lives is more associated with classical liberlism (which is more like Libertarianism [capital L] if you wanted to associate it with a current political ideology.)
Conservatism (in the tradition of Edmund Burke) has a strong basis on duty to the State. It also has a strong religious basis, and values traditionally held beliefs–like not aborting pregnancies.
Ironically, classical conservatism holds that the government should intervene economically in order to provide for the best interest of the State.
Modern conservatism (the kind Reagan made popular with a great deal of inspiration from Barry Goldwater) tends to become a hybrid version of both classical conservatism and classical liberalism. Economically, it believes in the laissez-faire economic writings on Adam Smith (unabashedly a classically liberal belief) while socially it takes a page from Burke’s traditionalist writings.
I hope that cleared up why nobody who is pro-choice could call their stance on abortion conservative.
while campaigning for office.
I know you’re a Constitution Party candidate based on some of your other posts, but if I were you, I’d probably mention my name, party affiliation, and the office you’re running for in every comment.
There are a few lurkers around you might persuade, aren’t there?
He arrives anonymously. Leaves an interesting calling card and then disappears into the night.
The original sin argument is one of those ugh moments. “Those women and children standing under the bombs could have run away but because they were vaporized they must have sinned therefore their deaths are not as important as a fetus”. We are one sick nation to accept such logic.
What really really angers me is the resources devoted to criminalizing women when a breathing child dies every 16 SECONDS from impure water and excrement related illnesses. If these fat Americans used a fraction of their passion, peity and resources to help the helpless and vulnerable children of the world most who happen to have non-white skins, the world would be better place.
IIRC, he’s been around posting under this name before he was outed by some opponent of his. His identity hasn’t really been secret since, but you don’t switch handles in mid-blog. Or you can if you want (Bob Ewegen apparently used to be “Voyageur” many moons ago).
There are other bloggers who use handles but whose identities aren’t really secret (Whiskey Lima Juliet, Phoenix Rising, parsingreality all come to mind). They all have their reasons for using handles rather than their own name.
IIRC, he’s been around posting under this name before he was outed by some opponent of his. His identity hasn’t really been secret since, but you don’t switch handles in mid-blog. Or you can if you want (Bob Ewegen apparently used to be “Voyageur” many moons ago).
There are other bloggers who use handles but whose identities aren’t really secret (Whiskey Lima Juliet, Phoenix Rising, parsingreality all come to mind). They all have their reasons for using handles rather than their own name.
I have a new mouse that is really cool in most respects but it seems to “double click” if I simply click hard… Resulting in all these stupid double posts… Got to remember to use a gentle touch…
…unless I’m mistaken.
To run for office anonymously is not to run seriously.
and I understand hinting at your identity to people you trust, but running for office is a whole other story. Keep an identity like “Barron X” once you’ve established a reputation with it on a blog, but add in some “mark your ballot this way” when you’re running for office.
My brother, who’s a smart guy, is seriously considering voting for the Constitution Party. Why not try to appeal to those people? If I had just started reading this site as an interested Colorado voter, I’d have no idea WTF Barron X is talking about in this diary.
You are all more interested in his blogging name then his differences with Lamborn.
If I am to understand his post, they both want to criminalize women and deny a woman the right to decide her own fate. The difference is that Lamborn has no problem with justified killings for other political purposes. Candidate X wants to eliminate all forms of justified killing which includes the death penalty and wars. So does that make him/her more qualified to fulfill an ideological purity in the House of Representatives than Lamborn or not? I think that is his claim.
It’s fucking CD-5. Lamborn could rape a baby and still win. Barron X is practically begging people not to vote for him. So their actual views, while abhorrent to you and me, aren’t actually subject to much debate.
I was just curious as to why Barron X doesn’t seem to be taking his campaign as seriously as he thinks he is.
I think Barron X’s views, as expressed in this diary, are significantly superior, while still flawed, but what difference does that make? (Considering CD-5 is 150% in the tank for Lamborn.)
I was just trying to make a point about strategy rather than ideology. If you think you can convince a few people in CD-5 to think more broadly about “pro-life,” why not try a little harder to make that case in public?
I was just trying to get some conversation thread going about the Barron’s positions vis-a-vis Lamborn. It strikes me as splitting hairs over an issue that receives far too much attention and wastes resources that could be better spent on real problems facing our societies and eco-systems.
You want to respect all life and make the world a better place then read this and then tell me that working to improve basic sanitation should take a back seat to criminalizing women.
http://www.slate.com/id/220146…
.
Working on a deadline. I’m contributing to a “Global Strategic Assessment” being put together for Bob Gates at DOD.
He wants to make darn sure the NEXT President doesn’t waltz into the Oval Office without a clue about Waziristan or global flows of capital.
Listening to them talk, Obama and McCain both seem to have advisors who at least know FATA from FANA (administrative units in Pakistan.)
Still, I get paid for completed work, submitted by a deadline.
…..
SXP, my initials are BXS. Do you suppose we’re related ?
I’m not really looking for votes here. I interact here to engage and be challenged. The very few who post here who think they agree with my values and positions are all pretty much committed to supporting Doug Lamborn. And their voting decision is at its core about tribal loyalty, not values.
….
I am not running to best either of my opponents. I’m not running so that I can enjoy the perquisites of the office.
I’m running because I have failed in the mission I was assigned more than 6 years ago to prevent the war in Iraq from ever starting.
I don’t believe that my failure in any way lets me off the hook. I believe it is my sacred duty to work to get the war ended as soon as I can. Right now, I am a voice crying in the wilderness. Golly, even most people at this site don’t hear me. But if I had the power and prestige of the office available as a tool to help with the effort, I believe it may make enough of a difference to permit me to be effective.
If elected, I will camp out in Baghdad.
Remember that “piece of paper” that laid out a structure for governance that had checks and balances between 3 coequal branches of Government ? Well, there is an implicit Constitutional responsibility for the Congress to do oversight. No such thing as oversight on a 6-hour CODEL trip.
If elected, I will embarrass the Congress into doing its job. All it takes is for one Member to get the attention of the others, to break the inertia, and that war will be so over. They have a mutual pact right now: they all ignore the war. They all pretend that its someone else’s job to end it. I will break the chain.
So, isn’t it a waste of time, this half-hearted “campaign ?” No more so than 6 years of coordinating with officials of the Ba’ath government, traveling to the Iraqi Mission to the UN to meet with the Ambassador, meeting with the Syrian Ambassador, originating what was eventually bastardized and plagiarized into the “Anbar Awakening” approach, getting the Secretary of State to question her Iraq “expert,” David Satterfield (not a member of my fan club) to find out why we don’t count Iraqi casualties, suing the Army in Federal court, etc., etc.
This “campaign” isn’t nearly the worst of it. When I occasionally admit that I received this Commission directly from Jesus Christ Himself, I lose all credibility with most people, even Christians. After all, Jesus also supposedly told George Bush to start the War. At least one of us is lying, don’tcha think ?
I don’t know if even my wife believes me.
The only work I get these days is from bidding on contracts where people don’t already know about me. JCC-I, the Army contracting office in Iraq, has canceled 12 contracts that I won in the last year. They would rather go without those services than let me get the work. (Actually, if I win, they use GSA schedule contracts to sole-source the work to someone else.)
Jesus gave me this “opportunity” to serve Him, and I’ve let both of us down. I guess I got on the ballot so He could, if he chose, make it easier for me to do what He asks of me.
Let me be clear: I DO NOT CLAIM that anyone should vote for me out of any sense of obligation, or because they’re afraid of something bad happening to them. I may be a kook, but I’m not that far gone.
Even the clergy in my church have told me that I must have misunderstood Jesus (not a chance.)
One Deacon even told me that, if God wanted me to do something, He would open the doors for me. Wow. So this guy doesn’t think anyone trying to do God’s Will ever fails ? Where in Scripture does that come from ? And what about the travails of Hosea ? The happy ending in Chapter 51 was added centuries later.
Folks in my Congressional District know my name. It’s on the ballot. And if you want to know it, google “mercenary.” I’m the guy fighting the Army to get them to obey the law that prohibits employing them.
p.s.: I’m not anti-war. I’m anti-unjust war.
I served over 10 years in the Army as an SF NCO and as an Infantry Officer. I’d go back in a heartbeat if they would take me, but they won’t. The work of an Infantry leader in wartime is more important than the work of a Congressman.
.
I am thankful that sincere people like you choose to get involved in the public arena. I appreciated you writing such an honest piece.
.
My impression, Hal and Doug are both good men. They both appear to have devoted themselves to their families. Doug is God-fearing, and Hal is true to his faith in science. I don’t think I’d beat either of them if the contest was about integrity or hard work or core goodness. They are each sincere men.
In fact, if these were ordinary times, and if we would be served satisfactorily by someone who was a very good speaker, listener and fund raiser, then I wouldn’t even bother running.
.
God bless you, and keep up the good work of ending this shameful and sinful….unchristian war!
Barron, why don’t you tell everyone your name? You can edit the diary…
My wife and I were just speaking about the inconsistencies of pro life positions.
If you’re pro life, you’re for life in all instances. There shouldn’t be ambiguity about it. I admire the coherence of your values.
And keep fighting for a strong third party. Some day COPols bloggers are going to form the Publicrat party and then you’ll kick Lamborn’s patooty for sure.