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%

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
October 13, 2008 06:08 PM UTC

Monday Open Thread

  • 121 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“I am not part of the problem. I am a Republican.”

– Dan Quayle

Tweet
Share

Comments

121 thoughts on “Monday Open Thread”

  1. Every time this family talks, they exemplify all that is wrong with America.

    Teen pregnancy, High School Drop Out, bad teen age wedding, and lies about who controls your MySpace page.

    If this was Obama’s Black Family, the Repubs would hold them up as a shining example of what is wrong with the Black Community.

    White Trash at its best!

    Not surprisingly, Johnston was a little shocked when he learned about Bristol’s pregnancy.

    Why?  Isn’t that what happens when you have unprotected sex? Oh yeah, you weren’t taught where babies come from.  Brilliant!

    Johnston has dropped out of high school to take a job on the North Slope oil fields as an apprentice electrician.

    That should be a great beginning for a young family, talk about becoming a statistic!

    Johnston, a Wasilla heartthrob, said he wanted to set the record straight.

    This is not the type of heartthrob that my high school appreciated! Broke, High school drop out that calls himself a Fucking Redneck.

    Does anyone with half a brain believe this?

    For starters, he said his much-maligned MySpace page was a joke – the one that claimed he said: “I’m a … redneck,” and “I don’t want kids.” Johnston said his friends created the page a few years ago and he had nothing to do with it.

    1. He get’s his girlfriend pregnant, and decides to take responsibility by getting a job and supporting his family.  Yep, he’s truly an example of how not to handle such a situation, you betcha.  I take it your way of handling this would be for the father to run like hell, and the girl to either get an abortion or go on welfare.

      My brother was in the same boat 20 years ago, had to drop out of college and supported his wife and kids.  He’s now a high school teacher, she’s a gynecologist.  During the time in-between he: worked at a series of convenience  stores, sold insurance over the phone, and was a stay-at-home dad.  But they are probably just “white trash” to your racist mind too, I’ll betcha.

      1. “I am proud to be a Fucking Redneck” His words, not mine.  I would assume that a redneck is the white trash.

        Taking responsibility vs. continuing to make bad decisions (getting married at 17 is properly not a good idea) is two different things.

        And for the record, adoption, abortion or keeping the baby is a personal decision that I would never deny any family to make.  I guess the Palin’s are fortunate to live in society that allows them to make choices that I don’t agree with.

        A shame that Palin herself would deny me and my family the same discretion.

        Hard to take when we are discussing your race, the same way Rush Limbaugh discusses mine. I guess I can thank the Palin crew for showing America that bad judgment is not based on race.

        1. at 17 is properly not a good idea”???

          What are you trying to say here?

          I assume you meant to say “probably” and not “properly”?

          If so, why not? My folks got married when my dad was 19 and my mom was 17. They stayed married until the day they died.

          What is you point?

          I guess I don’t follow your reasoning.

          1. Early marriage is a key predictor of later divorce. Nearly half of people who marry under age 18 and 40 percent under age 20 end up divorced. It’s only 24 percent for people who marry after age 25.

            I know people my age who have been married 20 years, but I know more early marriages that end in divorce including my parents (she was 18 and my dad was 19).

            1. Not a good idea under most circumstances.  Congrats to your parents.

              According to any statistic young women who are pregnant at 17 have it significantly harder and make significantly less money than their peers that did not get pregnant (or chose different measures: adoption or abortion).

              As to marriage at 17, I don’t know how old you are, but I will assume your parents were raised in a very different generation.  Today, marriage at 17 is another statistic that I would dare any parent to say they would like it if their kid choose this option.

              Why are you defending what has been discussed at length as the fall of Black society.  

              Are we actually debating that Bristol and her baby daddy’s situation is a good thing? Good for little White girls, a national issue for little Black girls?

              Are you OK with a self professed Redneck married to the 17 year old daughter of a possible VP?  

              Would you be OK with a self professed Crip Gang Member married to the VPOTUS daughter?

              Double standards are an amazing thing. Let’s get some prospective here.

              And before you jump on me for bringing this up – I didn’t.  Little Mr. Redneck “High School Drop out” did when he decided to give an interview to the AP.  If you want to keep your kids out of the media – stop putting them there!

                1. We got a short segment due to the Dow dropping to about 8200 on that day.

                  The guy I was up against stated that Obama was attacking McCain not the other way around.  According to him, Obama was attacking on McCain’s bailout plan; HMMM I thought that was called campaigning, pointing pout the differences of your plan and the other guy’s plan.  

                  Attacking, IMHO, is calling someone a terrorist.

            2. do not work out, especially if it’s because they think they have to.  Everyone can think of exceptions but the odds are very bad.  

              Teens need decent sex education and need to know enough to use condoms in the age of AIDs. These parents obviously didn’t raise teens who make very smart choices. There is nothing wrong with their getting married as children and keeping the baby if that’s their choice but it is hardly a sign of successful parenting and hardly a promising start in life for any of the kids involved, the marryng pair or their child.

              And most on the right would NOT be saying any such thing if this was a black teenage daughter of a black presidential candidate or even the white teenage daughter of a liberal Dem candidate.  It would be all about how such people are immoral.

        2. “You can’t tell me nothin’ — I’m seventeen!”

          “If I don’t know it by now, how important can it be?”

          “I’ve SEEN New York City!”

          “I like plaid.”

          “Stop signs are for sissies.”

          “Lib’rels are tryin’ to get my gun.”

          “God is a Redneck, too.”

          2. David Allen Coe? One of the best country singers of all time? (Longhaired Redneck)

            There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with being a redneck.

            Besides, it is a well known fact that it is far far better to be a redneck than a sissy f**kin lib’rel yuppie.

            Correct?

            1. And I used to like the term Redneck.  My best Friend of 25 years is from West Virginia and the term Redneck meant “Union Man” going back to the mine wars of the 30’s when they war red bandannas to differentiate themselves from the company men.

              Stopped liking the term when it became associated with all kinds of ignorant behavior.

              1. These asshole rednecks, as opposed to true rednecks, need a historical lesson. God, the culture has found new bottom ground. NAQD is a great example.

            2. And I used to like the term Redneck.  My best Friend of 25 years is from West Virginia and the term Redneck meant “Union Man” going back to the mine wars of the 30’s when they war red bandannas to differentiate themselves from the company men.

              Stopped liking the term when it became associated with all kinds of ignorant behavior.

          3. When Whites think about minorities they go to our most “colorful” people – the gang member, the guy with gold teeth, etc.

            Now that the face of Black America is the accomplished and educated Obama family, you are now forced to defend your “colorful” population.

            Explanations of pride in being a Redneck.

            What young White boys meant by hateful speech isn’t really hateful – it is just how and where they are raised.

            Why women like me shouldn’t be afraid for my safety if I come upon Bristol’s baby daddy and his friends after dark in a parking lot.

            Why young pregnant girls are not so bad.

            Why belonging to fringe separatist groups is OK.

            Why not having a top education is sometimes a plus and why sometimes you have to drop out of school to support your family vs.

            Wow, White is the new Black!  LOL!!

    1. Looking around at various sites I find a slight one or two day uptick in a few polls. That’s no tightening, that’s noise. If the polls continue to bounce around a new median to Wednesday that will be tightening. Right now it’s spin.

        2. I’m a huge nerd. The other day when a friend was watching a sport I asked in all honesty, “There is a team called the Rays?” I know nothing about football except that I pay taxes to support the Bronco habit. But I’m pretty sure I know enough about sports to say that there is no sport anything like politics.

          If politics were a sport the only score that would matter would be the one run up in the last five minutes of a two hour (or longer) game. Before the final score the numbers indicate how things might go, but wouldn’t decisively indicate anything. Especially as they changed from minute to minute since there would always be a degree of uncertainty about the score. They would be shown in hard numbers, but really they should be a range and as such when the score changed after a minute it could mean something or it could be just a statistical variation. And after a play the spectators wouldn’t know if it scored for as much as seven minutes afterwords.

          Around all this the commentators would frequently say things, trying to determine who was winning, and often get it wrong by being too eager to read normal variations in the score as actual movement. When really they should wait five minutes to see if the numbers have settled around a new average.

          The only game that is in any way like this is football. Only instead of a score polls would stand in for yardage gained and lost. Right now Obama has possession of the ball and it looks like he might be pushed back a few yards, but it is still in play. We won’t have a down thingy until sometime on Wednesday.

          The thing is in play no one has lost or gained anything yet! And on Wednesday a whole new play will start with the final debate and we’ll have to try to figure out who’s got possession then.

            1. still be 4 minutes left in the 4th quarter, with McCain down by 10 points

              You know, that’s only really accurate if it’s a 100-point game. McCain’s already gambled his Hail Sarah and is increasingly floundering.

              It’s not over, by any means, but what in the McCain campaign has led you to believe he’s got anything effective up his sleeve? it’s like the Beauprez campaign.

              1. Nothing really. I just remember back to the Republican primaries/caucuses when McCain was done for, and then bounced back.

                Maybe he should suspend his campaign again.

                I’m looking forward to his appearance on Letterman this week. It should be rich.

              2. Actually the score is not the score. It is an average of what the crowd thinks.  And the crowd is of at least three types, 1/3  each for the teams and about 1/3 of the crowd is a group that does not really care about the game or even to be there.

                The number score is based on mysterious and a little bit partisan formula; with polling of the crowd a hit and miss count, so it could be off by several points. But, it is averaged with other mysterious numbers, so only a few people will even try to decipher what it means.

                The actual score can change for no particular reason other than someone wanting to post a different score.

                And, the crowd will change their response at any time, often to just “play” with the pollster.  

                To add to the confusion, a large number of the people will not even be asked what they think because nobody calls them on their cells phones.

                Finally, for a year afterwards there will be deep and pensive thought about what the pools actually were at the end of the game.  If the score was way off and the winner of the polls lost, there will be great whinning about being mislead by everything and anything to justify doing the same thing again.

                 

                    2. I spotted them after hitting the “shoot it into the electron world” button.  One of the problems of not having the capability to edit replies.

                    3. …that I liked much of what you said.  (this admission will not help my well-cultivated reputation as Queen Bitch ’round here).  

                      🙂

  4. Now, in a close race for Presidency and the Senate, we will have Clear Channel-20 hours a week of boyles; 15 hours of Beck a week; Caplis and Silverman (who is a democrat but not an Obama supporter) 15 hours a week; O’Reilly 5 hours a week; KOA 24/7 Republican propaganda which is approximately  120 hours a week which takes into account the sports broadcast…..now 760 does has about 120 hours a week of democratic propaganda…..problem is it does NOT have the range of KOA or KHOW…

    Public airwaves saturation with Republican propaganda….I think it will make a difference….among undecided…who will be tuning in for weather, sports, traffic and what the stock market is doing…

      1. Whatever bias is detectable in the networks, which all acted as patriotic cheerleaders going into Iraq and turned the Swift Boat fabricators into a credible voice, it is nothing compared with the naked right wing propaganda machine that is conservative talk radio.  

        1. Through different eyes.

          The content of the news on the big three seems very much slanted to the left.

          We could get into a pissing match with opposing examples, but it’s easier to agree that we each think the other must be blind to think the way they do.

      2. Right wing radio tells you every day that the networks are liberally biased, and that right wing radio is needed to balance out. No one is allowed to question that assumption by calling right wing radio, because they screen out callers who don’t agree,  Everyday, Rosen begin his radio show with a short indoctrination, telling his audience who is liberal and who is not. Right wing radio does not let you think for yourself.

        Three points:

        1) If the network TVs truly slanted left, whatever that means, then conservatives would be demanding the Fairness Doctrine to eliminate the bias.

        2)  I cited numbers to confirm right wing republican radio saturation. You did not refute or address them, because you have been indoctrinated to believe an assertion, however bizarre, trumps facts.

        3) Radio is unique because it so pervasive.  You have to be near a TV to hear it.  Radio can be everywhere and the repetition of propaganda is all the more powerful., and dangerous.

        1. Tax cuts are an irresponsible gimmick.  The more we spend and the less we take in just means more debt owed to China – and this is what your “fiscal conservatives” have done to us.

          How are we ever going to get back on a sound fiscal footing ?  How are we ever going to pay off our debt? By more tax cuts?  No, we have to spend less and tax a little more.  There is no other solution.  

      1. and ignores sales taxes, FICA taxes as you say, property taxes, and various government fees and such, is being disingenuous. Virtually every other tax in America is regressive, so the extreme right focuses only on income taxes.

        And that’s not even counting Moe’s special FICA.

    1. Though I liked the lady’s sign that said “Back to Alaska, they shouldn’t have asked ya.”

      I can’t wait for this to be over and done with.

      1. I was going to code it so that the post would link to the picture and display it.

        But I didn’t.  I posted a “hyperlink” so people could chose to go there if they wished to read the bad word, but I wouldn’t inflict it on everyone.

  7. I cannot vote for a write-in a candidate for president.  This could be the first time since becoming eligible to vote that I won’t vote for president.  I’m Incredulous.

    I wouldn’t turn my investments over to an inexperienced broker and we are about to turn the world-wide economy over to an inexperienced politician. In addition, we appear to be poised to give him an unstoppable Congress.

    We cannot have only one party making our toward decisions about rebuilding the global economy.  That scares the hell out of me.

    Maybe it is a good thing I can’t write-in a presidential vote.  

    1. one day your concern will ebb.

      Is there really no place to write-in a candidate? I don’t do mail-in ballots so I don’t know, but I thought there were always write-in spots for President and VP.

      You should just cross out someone and write-in your candidate–which, if you were going to write in the candidate I think you were, I wonder how many write-in votes she’ll get.

    2. If I’m not mistaken (where’s Dan Willis when you need him?) they have to register as write-ins in Colorado.  Otherwise, a write-in for a candidate who is not an “official” write-in is the same as an undervote.

      And no, I’m not going to the SOS website to look up how a candidate becomes an “official” write-in.

      From the sound of your post, why don’t you just hold your nose and vote for McCain?  You’re already spewing his campaign’s talking points.

      3. Remember, we’re actually voting to elect slates of electors pledged to support candidates.  If a write in actually carried Colorado, say, Larry Craig, and there was no slate of electors, I’m not sure what would happen. That may be why write-ins have to register with the SOS, to certify who their electors are.

        The constitution does give legislatures the power to choose electors so maybe we’d have to call a special session to name electors for Craig. But legisltures have total power in that decision and if they chose to choose Obama or McCain (or Mickey Mouse) electors, they’d have that power.  Article II, sec. 1 of the U.S. Constitution: “Each state shall appoint, in such manner as the legislature thereof may direct, a number of electors equal to the whole number of senators and representatives to which the state may be entitled in the Congress.”  

    3. serves the same purpose. It’s not as if you are actually trying to get your write in elected.  It’s  just be making a statement to nobody in particular.   Who do you suppose will ever know or care about your write in?  Some clerical worker?

  9. But the meeting of the G-7 finance ministers over the weekend and the guarantee of interbank lending is finally starting to bite and LIBOR maybe about to reverse (a good thing).

    I think the Stock market bounce is overdone (we don’t know what is going to happen to earnings), and I would expect another leg down as people start to look forward to earnings.  I would have preferred a capitualion flattening, but at least the freefall didn’t continue.

  10. Paul Krugman wins the Nobel Prize for his coinage of the phrase “party of stupid” in reference to today’s Republican party.

    Ok, not really, it was for his earlier theories on economies of scale and how they effect trade patterns.  Krugman has been highly critical of the Bush admins mishandling of the economy as well as McCains economic platform.

    http://www.dailycamera.com/new…

    But he did call the pubs the party of stupid.  Really.  Who needs a stinkin’ nobel laureate when you have a mooseburger anyway.  

        1. Funny show, right? Well only after they did 3-4 hours of taping to get 30 minutes of really funny material.

          Do you think they only interviewed 3 people? Doubtful. But they couldn’t put the ones who caught on to the BS line of questioning in the bit–otherwise it wouldn’t be funny.

          Michael Moore could have easily done the same exact thing (substituted Obama’s policies for McCain’s in a GOP-heavy area) and you would have derided it as misleading or fake.

          1. Well, yeah.  Probably if Moore was behind it, but Moore’s a fucking disgrace.

            I know what the score is, and that it’s a big setup.  It’s hard to answer questions like that, and it’s just a soundbite.

            1. my Grandma always said she refused to give quotes to radio, TV, or newspapers. They’ll gladly make you look like a fool if it’ll make them one more penny.

  12. I am surpised at how many people have no idea about this race and yes, a good portion of the electorate is voting based on race.

    I am sure Howard could have done the same thing in the average White nieghborhood and got the same responses.

    1. I know some conservative blacks that have voted Republican before that will vote for Obama this year.

      One, in particular says that proving his grandmother wrong is enough for him – that we would have a black President in his lifetime overrides any policy differences he has (there are many – my friend is pro-life and a small business owner) with Sen. Obama.

      I don’t know directly nor have I heard of one person that is voting for McCain only because he’s white.  

      Obviously, it’s pure anecdote, but I think it’s accurate.

      BTW, I don’t fault my friend one bit.  Obama is an impressive man no matter what his platform is.

      3. These people aren’t voting FOR McCain because he’s white.

        They’re voting AGAINST Obama because he’s black.

        I don’t think there are all that many of those people (at least I hope not) and I know that they don’t represent either the typical Republican or the typical McCain supporter, but enough of them have talked about voting that way in the press that we know they’re out there.

        I don’t think they’ll have an impact on the election, but if we find that McCain wins in November, and by a significantly wider margin than any polls can show, then this “silent racism” thing will be front and center as the most likely explanation.

    2. They may disagree with you from time to time, but for honest reasons.

      Nobody who’s been involved in politics for more than about 10 minutes believes that the public is ignorant, except for the people who are too ignorant themselves to accurately assess what the public is thinking.  The public believes what it believes.  Either you can assess it and tap into it or you can’t.  That’s not the public’s fault.

      1. This country is slipping into the dark ages. Politicians play on and to ignorance. It’s their easy ace up their sleeve.

        The “public”, IMHO, as god has planned it, need to take this life as an opportunity to find grace and enlightenment to meet god’s challenge. How many do that?

        1. Your ideology aside, the American public IS the country.

          The people know what they want.  It may not be what you want or what I want, but that does not make them ignorant.

          I’ve been involved in politics for a long time.  The people always get what they ask for.  It may not be what they want, but that rarely lasts more than one term.

          1. Except when they aren’t asking.

            The National Election Survey, conducted every 4 years since 1952, shows that over a third of the public doesn’t care who wins the Presidential election. And that’s not a recent development, it’s always been the case.

            Of course that group corresponds largely with those who aren’t registered to vote and don’t vote. The rest of them are the pesky undecideds who don’t make up their minds until the last minute and vote for who they want to have a beer with.

            I would suggest that the electorate (defined only as people who actually vote) is by and large intelligent, but the “American Public” includes that 1/3 of people who are willfully ignorant, and as such can’t be classified as intelligent or informed as a whole.

            1. in spite of clear signs of dementia and elected GW twice.  Many still believe Hussein and Iraq were behind 9/11.  If it isn’t stupidity it’s an extreme lack of interest or attention.

              1. It is neither stupity or lack of interest–it is capitulation.

                Most Americans throw up their hands and say “why bother.”  Many of them don’t vote or vote after spending less time than they spend on the most mundane of tasks because they don’t believe they matter.  

                If you don’t think your vote matters why vote, or if you do vote why bother making a choice on anything other than surface issues.

                I once had a friend who chose who to vote by who had the better hair.  She was a stylist and didn’t know anything about politics.  She figured she knew something about hair, her vote didn’t matter much so she made her choice based on something she understood.

                Ridiculous, but not too different than the surface issues that drive most voters–she was at least honest about her ignorance.

            2. the pundits who have regular spots on TV generally believe the public is stupid, which is why they’re much more interested in horse-racey stuff than serious discussion of health care or other proposals. They’ll discuss things like “debate body language” rather than explaining answers (or lack thereof), because that’s what they think the public wants. (And I say this despite the fact that the shallowness this year has benefited my candidate.)

              And the public doesn’t really reject them. I mean, fuck, the public prefers Fox News over anything else. Thereby endorsing their view of them.

  13. I din’t go anywhere near their campaigns.

    The fact that Obama is great AND BLACK – is a major plus.  And if i was conservative, i would move to Barack.  

    A Black President is a great thing for Black people.  Just like a Hillary Presidency would have been a great thing for women as a whole.

    1. back when no one knew much about Obama most Blacks in polls supported HRC. Being Black by itself has clearly NOT been enough.  Just like being a woman by itself isn’t enough or no male would have a chance. On the other hand, there is nothing wrong with taking pride in a potential first or being excited about the historic significance.  

  14. After all of Bush’s first round economic draftees failed in their responsibilities to regulate and oversee banking fled the team after realizing what their long nap did and what was ahead, the Bush team was left with free agents like Paulson and Kashkari.  And when your team is built around free agents who obviously have no clue how to play the game, we end up with press conferences like the Bailout Czar, Kashkari, gave today.  No specifics.  No accountability.  Just, “Our toolkit is being designed”.

    I guess the best that can be said for Kashkari is that he is a AC/DC fan.  Never mind that I was going to AC/DC concerts when Kashkari was drinking from a tippy-cup.  (first being in Wichita, July ’79, with Bon Scott and Cheap Trick–still have a Rick Nielsen bow tie and a Angus Young guitar pic from that concert in a box somewhere.)  Maybe the new Bush Bailout Fantasy League could draft Brian Johnson for a “shout out” to those wanting bailout money:

    “What do you do for money honey?

    How do you get your kicks?

    What do you do for money honey?

    How do you get your licks?”

    If you look at the list of Fantasy players Kashkari has assembled thus far, you see just more jackals guarding the henhouse.   January 20th cannot come too soon.

    1. I think he is just Paulson’s man-Friday. He followed Paulson to Treasury 2006 from Goldman. He is probably a very smart guy (in addition to his wharton MBA he is also an engineer who worked on NASA projects) who has limited experience with handling the press.

      It takes time to develop a control environment for using $700B.  He needs to work on his presentation style, but if he has Paulson’s confidence that may be the most important thing.

    1. Sen. Obama has been a little less than forthcoming regarding a myriad of things from Rev. Wright to ACORN, to Ayers.

      But it’s politics, and I get it. He’s a good man, politics is just disgusting.

      John McCain deserves a lot more respect than you’re giving him, IMO.

  16. Count the Lies #132:

    Four Pinocchios for Palin’s “Cleared of Any Legal Wrongdoing” Claim

    Washington, DC – The Democratic National Committee today updated the Count the Lies counter after the Washington Post’s Fact Checker blog maxed out the Pinnochio scale by giving Four Pinocchios to Sarah Palin’s claim that she was “cleared of any legal wrongdoing, any hint of any kind of unethical activity” in the “Troopergate” scandal. As the Post points, out, the report’s finding that Palin breached the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act is very clear.

    Since John McCain locked up his party’s nomination and promised to run a respectful campaign in February, at least 132 independent, non-partisan fact checks have been published debunking McCain campaign lies.  Visit http://www.democrats.org/CountTheLies to see the updated Count the Lies counter.

    Washington Post: Four Pinocchios for Palin’s “Cleared of Any Legal Wrongdoing” Claim. “Sarah Palin has insisted that a formal investigation into the ‘Troopergate’ controversy in Alaska has exonerated her of ‘unlawful or unethical” activity. The Republican vice-presidential pick has told critics to read the report by an investigator appointed by the State Legislative Council to determine whether she had abused her power as Alaska governor to push for the firing of a state trooper formerly married to her sister. But the report’s finding that Palin breached the Alaska Executive Branch Ethics Act is very clear… But it is the reverse of the truth to claim that she was cleared of ‘any hint of any kind of unethical activity.'”  Washington Post Fact Checker Blog, 10/13/08:

  17. Just saw Jake Jabs’ new pro-47 ad on MSNBC. Dude looks like he was just dragged out of bed with a hangover.

    And riffing off my earlier comment, where I said he looks like one of those parody CEOs who’s just missing the cigar, he actually put a fucking cigar in the mouth of a union boss.

    What a shithead.

  18.    Plumber to Obama: “Your new tax plan is going to tax me more. Isn’t it?”

       Obama: “It’s not that I want to punish your success, I just want to make sure that everybody that is behind you, that they have a chance for success too. I think that when you spread the wealth around, it’s good for everybody.”

    2. I’ll bite.

      Anyone bothered by this?

       

      Plumber to Palin: “How can you say you’re going to clean up Washington when a bipartisan group in your own state voted unanimously that you abused the public trust to carry out a vendetta involving your own family?”

        Palin: “Consumers – and those who were predator lenders also. That’s, you know, that has to be considered also. But again, it’s got to be a comprehensive, long-term solution found … for this problem that America is facing today. As I say, we are getting into crisis mode here. He’s also known as the maverick though, taking shots from his own party, and certainly taking shots from the other party. Trying to get people to understand what he’s been talking about – the need to reform government.”

          1. It was on a video I saw on HotAir.  

            I’m not scowling.  I’m deep into self-examination right now.  Seeing how big the tent really is over here.

            Stuff like that bothers me, though.  It’s not up to Obama to set a $250k ceiling on what you “should” earn without being “greedy”.

            It’s a fundamental with me.  Trying to work on my acceptance of some of Obama’s other stances.  Honestly.

            1. But yes, at some point you have to decide who’s going to pay the taxes in the country. Obama has plans, and you may not like them, but he realizes that mature people have to find a way to pay somehow for the things they want, and some people are going to be unhappy with that. It’s a trade-off.

              The alternative is McCain’s plan, which is to increase defense spending, and cut taxes for everyone, and balance the budget. This is all paid for by magically finding a hundred billion dollars in “waste” that apparently nobody will mind having cut.

              Do you find it annoying that the Republican candidate treats you and us like we’re idiots?

            2. The quote is legit, it comes from some FOX News video that has a pretty obvious edit out of the middle of it to splice together two phrases to make them seem related.

              And they might be related, it was clearly the same conversation with the same guy, but you have no way of knowing which phrase came first or if they changed the subject in between. FOX does a lot of cropping like that.

              And in the clip FOX identifies him as a plumber, but they didn’t play any video of the guy identifying himself as a plumber, so I don’t know how trustworthy that identification is. They guy may have said he was the CEO of a billion dollar plumbing supply company for all I know. I can’t trust FOX to be honest about anything.

              1. But I can’t find one that doesn’t have huge edits, and isn’t from FOX. I would have liked to have seen that whole conversation.

                Obama used an unfortunate phrase, that’s for sure. But what are taxes other than wealth redistribution (spreading the wealth around, whatever you want to call it) in some form?

                Whether the tax dollars are being used to give a credit to oil companies, or to help a family pay their heating bill, it’s wealth redistribution.

                It’s still wealth redistribution when you spend tax dollars on a war, or give it to faith-based initiatives, or give it to teachers for better salaries, or put more cops on the street.

                If there were no taxes, fees, or any other monies paid to government, then that would be a country truly free of wealth redistribution. Nobody is calling for that. Well, except this guy:

                http://weblogs.newsday.com/new…

  19. The pro-59 ad on MSNBC.

    If you haven’t seen it, a teacher asks students in a class what they know about 59. They say various things (and then in unison say “without raising taxes,” which is a little creepy). I can understand why the ad might be convincing to people who have no idea what it’s about, but I think it could have been a little better.

    But then at the end the teacher suggests a “calculus pop-quiz,” which makes all the students groan.

    DO NOT FREAKING BASH CALCULUS, JERKWADS! I WILL MAKE YOU FEEL MILDLY REGRETFUL OVER IT.

    (I cleaned that up in case any of my math students are reading.)

      1. It merely lets you keep the money that existing taxes raise in an expanding economy…basically, a permanent Ref c.

        To me, that’s not a tax increase. 58, by contrast, is a tax increase, obviously, because it eliminates credits to existing taxes.    

          1. I actually think the lion’s share of 58 will be paid by energy companies who in fact have a very limited ability to pass the tax on to consumers. But that doesn’t change the fact that it is absolutely a tax increase, we’re only arguing about who pays that increase.  

            1. Why is A Smarter Colorado not saying that straight out then? I’m sick of the disingenuous manner in which they’ve promoted A-58.

              The anti-58 groups have been just as disingenuous by claiming that the tax will get passed on to the consumers. It’s obvious they’re just looking out for their bottom line by trying to scare people.

              I still have yet to see one good reason to do anything but vote no.  

              1. Amendment 58 will end a $300 million subsidy Colorado gives oil companies every year. Instead of giving a huge tax credit to oil and gas companies, Amendment 58 would allow Colorado to invest in out state. Learn more at http://www.voteyeson58.com.

                “Amendment 58 does not affect your taxes,” A Smarter Colorado spokesman George Merritt said. “It makes oil companies pay theirs. This ad is a deliberate attempt to deceive voters so oil companies can keep their $300 million subsidy in Colorado. It’s a shame.”

                So, yes, they do say just that.  But don’t expect me to make their arguments, I’m still undecided on this one. I’m concerned that packaging the money as  scholarships will starve higher ed of the operating increases it desperately needs.

                1. the ads said “They want you to believe it’s a tax increase, but it’s not.” Remember, we had a huge argument regarding this? I was trying to defend their statement that it’s not a tax increase, but it is most assuredly a tax increase.

                  And your point on the money being for scholarships and not for operating costs is exactly the reason I am so reluctant to vote yes.

                  1. I thought you were saying the 58 folks were not saying the industry would pay the freight.  Apparently, you were asking why they don’t come out flat and say it is an increase. It surely is. Normally, a tax rate that brings in more money because of greater economic activity is not a “tax increase” i.e., our 2.9 pct sales tax raises $29 if you spent $1,000 and $58, if you spent $2,000. Not a tax increase in my book. But if we remove an exemption, without changing the rate — say, we start taxing drugs and groceries , and the result is $58 with no change in either your spending pattern or the top tax rate, of course it’s a tax increase.  Obviously, this is a tax iancrease for hte industry. I think they share my belief that they willk pay most of it, bercause if they could just pass it on to consumers dollar for dollar, they’d have no real reason to fight it.

                    1. and I was thinking that my natural gas rates are negotiated between the Colorado PUC and X-cel Energy, or X-cel energy and some other provider, and I am sure the tax structure of X-cel or any other provider enters nowhere in these negotiations.

                      In that vein, I find it incredibly disengenouos that they run these TV ads about these taxes being passed on to consumers “dollar for dollar”, when there really is no connection. I think it’s bullshit really.

                      I could be wrong about this as I confess I don’t know much about the issue, but thats my two cents.

                    2. of the math, but using Thilly’s links and the

                      report                       mentioned in this

                      diary                      , I can confidently say that the overall tax dollars are not passed on tit for tat.  The cost for gas per thousand cubic feet is lower in almost every category for Colorado when compared to surrounding states, except for Utah.  The problem with believing the claim of dollar for dollar is that the entire gas tax burden in Utah (12.1%) is nearly double Colorado’s (6.2%), the total cost per thousand cubic feet should be less.  That seems right.

                      Clear as mud?  Maybe someone can straighten us out in case I’m talking out of my ass here.

                      One of the problems I’m running into is the lack of firm numbers on 58’s site.  All it says is that the tax here would still be less than other states.  That’s not very helpful.  I did see, for the first time, that not all of it goes to scholarships (I have the same problems with that mentioned above).  The breakdown is: 10% goes to renewable energy projects, 15% to wildlife habitat and 15% to local communities for road and water projects.  I like that.

                      Anybody with time to kill should definitely check out the energy report, very interesting.

                    4. That is evidenced by the very steep climb in rates over the past few years. Here are the new rates, take it or leave it.

                      I guess that is just purely from a business standpoint though – if I were X-cel or some other provider I wouldn’t tie myself down either in some sort of long term contract. I would retain my right to raise rates as the market reflects, maybe even more.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Gabe Evans
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

141 readers online now

Newsletter

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