Hey Everybody! Casper Stockham is Running For Congress!

Casper Stockham, everybody!

Casper Stockham, everybody!

A couple of weeks ago, we were tagged in a Facebook post by one Casper Stockham, whose name we’ll confess we had not heard before that moment:

Colorado Pols, the pillar of all things LEFT WING, has decided to ignore my now 5 month public candidacy for Congress. I wonder why that is? Why are they afraid to list me as running against Diana Degette? Please tell them that they need to practice fair reporting.

Yesterday, Mr. Stockham pinged us again:

I wonder why this top notch new outlet is still ignoring my congressional race here in Denver? What are they afraid of? They have no problem attacking other REP candidates so what am I chopped liver?

Naturally, we’re delighted to be referred to as a “top notch” anything, though we’re quick to point out that we don’t consider ourselves a news site. Just a blog, folks.

Now, on to the chopped liver part.

Casper Stockham is a 2014 graduate of the right-wing Leadership Program of the Rockies, and president of an organization known as the American Conservatives of Color. You might remember the latter group after Rep. Gordon “Dr. Chaps” Klingenschmitt’s interview with David Dorty, another ACC figure who had been removed from a GOP event earlier that year at a public school due to his conviction for sexual assault on a child. Coming just after Klingenschmitt’s remarks about such people being worthy of death, this was needless to say a little embarrassing.

Stockham’s bio on his website–note that we’re linking to his website–describes him as a “Congressional Candidate, President, CEO, LPR Graduate 2014, Author, Speaker, Radio Show Host, Business Trainer, 6 SIGMA Change Agent, Financial Services Specialist, Business Analyst,” and something he calls an “Internet Reputation Specialist.” We admit that at least 30% of those sound really impressive, though he may not be as good at that last one as he thinks (see above).

In the last twelve years, the narrowest share by which incumbent Rep. Diana DeGette has retained her CD-1 seat is over 66%. In 2006 she garnered almost 80% of the vote. This means we don’t generally spend a lot of time on Republican candidates running in this district, just like we don’t spend a lot of time on, say, the Democrat running in arch-conservative CD-5. Because it’s a waste of time.

Nevertheless, we’re going to add Stockham with the sub-1% chance he deserves (for making us chuckle). Give him a warm welcome. He deserves as much just for being so entertaining.

91 Community Comments, Facebook Comments

  1. Conserv. Head Banger says:

    Thanks for sharing this. I'll offer; however; that DeGette probably needs a primary challenge. Comes from having things too easy in prior elections. 

  2. davebarnes says:

    1. American Conservatives of Color has how many members? One?

    2. Casper should run in the Democrat Primary. He would get more votes that way.

    • BlueCat says:

      Not if his policy positions match those of the 21st century GOP. How many Dem women do you suppose would vote for Palin if she kept her views but switched parties? 

    • Curmudgeon says:

      "Democratic Party", not "Democrat Party".

      Unless you mean to sound like a Republican. 

    • 1. ACofC has 1000's of members across the nation of all colors.

      2. I would NEVER run as a Democrat because they do not have a platform that includes God.

      • FrankUnderwood says:

        Wouldn't you be more comfortable running in a theocracy?

      • BlueCat says:

        Neither does the state created by our constitution which is restricted to dealing with temporal matters and to leaving the private religious lives of its citizens up to each individual. It is forbidden for the government to endorse religion, to favor some religious beliefs over others or to impose religious requirements of any kind on those seeking office.

        The state is secular. That's what preserves religious freedom, freedom of conscience and thought, freedom we wouldn't have in a state that was a religious entity. Under our constitution, a Hindu American is just as American as a Christian one. So's an atheist.  

        Views on God are a personal mattter, not a matter for the government. Not because liberals say so but because that's what the Constitution mandates. But those of us who understand that need have no worries in your case because you don't have a snowball's chance in hell.

        Merry Christmas. Happy New Year. Don't bother to measure for drapes in your new office in DC.

      • MapMaker says:

        Welcome. I have several questions. Would you support Article 6 of the Constitution

        This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

         if your god told you not to?

        In other words, If god and the Laws of the United States conflict, which would you choose to enforce?

        Second question. Would you be willing to take your oath of office on the Constitution, rather than the Bible or the Quran?

        Third question. Do think those people who would choose the Constitution's law over any particular flavor of god's law are un or second class citizens?

        Thank you for your attention.

        • Hey Mr. or Mrs. MapMaker great trap questions.

          1) I have yet to deal with a constitutional law that has gone against Gods law but there are many federal and state laws that go against Gods laws.

          2) I will take my oath on the Bible to uphold and defend the Constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic.

          3) I do not know of any other flavor of God laws but my bible tells me to love even my enemies so I would not think any less of anyone for choosing the Constitutional laws of which I agree with anyway.

          In my world being Christian does not make me any better or worse than anyone else. I spend my days working to become the best person I can be not tearing others down for who they are.

          The Christians you maybe thinking about are CINO's, Christians in name only.

          • MapMaker says:

            Casper, thanks for your reply. I know you have a lot of things on your plate, so it's nice of you to take some time for someone who disagrees with you.

            My questions were not intended to be trap questions, but an attempt to find out if you are loyal to the U.S Constitution or to your god first. While I don't want to start enumerating the conflicts between the Decalogue and the Constitution, specifically the First Amendment, you should be able to tell me, when push comes to shove, which you would defend: “I am the Lord thy God, you shall have no other gods before me.” vs. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

            FrankUnderwood asked you if you wouldn't be more comfortable in a theocracy. From my perspective, you dodged the question by saying that you want to defend the American founding system. This is really a non-answer since you can mean anything by “the American founding system”. So a clear cut answer to the above question would help me to decide if you are a true (small d) democrat or just another closet theocrat.

            It would also help if you could expand on your statement that you could never be a Democrat because their platform doesn't include god. Isn't it appropriate for a secular government to have political parties who are also secular? And, by the way, even if this blog contains its share of heathens, it would be nice if you acknowledged that most Democrats profess some sort of god, maybe even your flavor of god.

            Finally, if you call yourself a Christian, you are a Christian. I have no right to be the CINO gatekeeper, and neither do you. And neither do the Bible thumpers who question Obama's Christianity. If you claim to be a Christian and behave badly, then you are a Christian behaving badly.

            Oh, and Happy Holidays!



              Thank you Mr. or Mrs. MapMaker for a civil conversation. I see no conflict with the Constitution and God. You may but that would NOT be my problem. They are in perfect harmony from where I stand. The Constitution is not God but it is a very important document that I have sworn to defend from enemies both foreign and domestic.

              TODAY our POTUS and Congress are going against the Constitution by interfering with our religious freedoms. The 1st Amendment was written to protect us from the Government not the other way around. We are a religious people and the government was NOT founded as a secular government. 

              "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." This was not penned by a secular people.

              I do not know what is in the hearts of people but I can read and the party platform is what I made my decision on. Most DEM's seem to be like most REP's; CINO's. Christian in name only.

              I WOULD NOT be comfortable in a theocracy and I know of NO sane person who is calling for that. I am neither of these (small d) democrat or just another closet theocrat.

              I have read the bible over 5 times now and I study it just about every day. I am no scholar but my Bible tells me to hold my fellow Christians accountable for what they do and what they say. 

              I have no idea what Obama really is but from his actions I see very little Christianity in him. I see far more Muslim in him than anything else. If he wants to be Muslim that's his right but at least be honest with who he is.

              I am easy. I am a Christian Conservative who loves his country; oh yea I happen to be a Black man also.

              • BlueCat says:

                This is very offensive to me as a Jewish American whose father and two uncles fought for our country in WWII. Please remember that being Christian is not in any way connected with being an American.

                Creator, in your quote from the Declaration of Independence, not the constitution, is a very general term, certainly not necessarily a Christian one, and the Constitution itself absolutely forbids the official favoring of any set of religious beliefs.

                It is completely un-American and anti-Constitutional to claim that a person running for office should be Christian, that being a good Christian has anything to do with being a good American or a qualified candidate. Hindus, Jews, Muslims and members of any other religion, bible based or based on any other texts or oral traditions, or those whose belief is that there is no God are just as Amerian as you and, according to our constitution, entirely qualified for office as long as they meet other purely secular requirements.

                Regardless of the religions of the majority our Constitution makes the state itself secular, neutral in religious matters. If you don't understand that, you don't understand the Constitution.

                You're welcome to be a Christian and proud of it, just as you would be welcome to be a Hindu and proud of it or an atheist and proud of it. But when you connect your personal Christian faith with being a good American or claim it as a qualification for office you insult all non-Christian Americans, imply that we're second class citizens and you insult our Constitution.

                Just as well you're basically a joke candidate. Your posts certainly are a joke.

                • MapMaker says:

                  Well, Casper, if you are going to beat your chest about defending the Constitution, you ought to know what's in the Constitution.


                  We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.


                  Is not in the Constitution and was written by a man, Thomas Jefferson, who was a deist, author of the Jefferson Bible, co-author of the Virginia Statute for Religious freedom and author of the famous letter to the Danbury Baptists and coiner of the term “wall of separation between church and state” (a state of affairs that Baptists used to embrace).


                  So, if your quote isn't in the Constitution, this quote is:


                  This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.


                  If you maintain that your religious freedom trumps what is in the Constitution, then you are a theocrat. Relax you have lots of company, Mike Huckabee, Ted Cruz, Bobby Jindal, Rick Santorum and Ben Carson have all made explicit statements that their religious beliefs trump the Constitution. The rest of the Republican candidates, even, laughably, Donald Trump, have osculated the rump of the Christian right.


                  And thank you, Blue Cat, for emphasizing that your religion or race or political party make no difference when it comes to your patriotism as an American citizen.


                  Also, judge not…etc. The only Christianity you are qualified to evaluate is your own. And, as Richard Feynman said, “The easiest person to fool is yourself.”



                  • You guys spend a lot of time tearing apart but very little time actually listening. You are quick to judge and slow to understand. You are masters at twisting words to make them fit your narrative. BUT!

                    Last night as I was reading my Bible I was convicted in the way I have been responding to the comments on this post so I am offering each of you my sincere apologies. 

                    • MapMaker says:

                      Is this reply intended to be a response to one of the posts I've made?
                      Could you be convicted enough (whatever that means) to respond to honest questions honestly? I don't believe I've twisted any of your words, but neither have I accepted your attempts to dodge my questions with facile excerpts from the right-wing Christian playbook.


  3. FrankUnderwood says:

    Let's see….there's Casper Gutman, Casper Weinberger, Casper the Friendly Ghost, and now Casper Stockham.

    He probably won't get the name recognition that the other three managed to get.

  4. vanbarbee says:

    Y'all blogged about Irv Halter a fair amount last cycle. Although I shutter to think there’s any comparison between the good General and this mook.  

    • Not sure what a mook is but I am pretty sure its not a term of endearment. I just looked up the term mook. mook mo͝ok/ noun US informal a stupid or incompetent person.

      I would be curious to know what your level of investigation was to come to that concussion but I would guess you assumed that anyone with an R by their name is a mook.

      The great people in CD1 are coming to a much different conclusion. I have now spoken to over a 1000 of them and my non-mook status is very high! In fact MOST said they would vote for me. Even the people registered as a Democrat. 

      • mamajama55 says:

        Really enjoy your malapropisms, Casper. "level of investigation to come to that concussion". Best laugh I've had today.

        You just keep on going, Mr. Mook Stockham. And don't enlist a proofreader, whatever you do. Spellcheck is good enough!

        But perhaps you can explain this: Why is the Colorado GOP running so many candidates for SD1? 

        Is it a "throw everything at the wall and see what sticks" situation?


        • Well I am not sure who I am addressing here because most of you guys and gals hide your names and faces but I will be more than happy to address your questions and I am also happy to deliver a laugh or two your way during this holiday season.

          I have never claimed to be an English major but I will do my best to converse with you as best I can. Would you like the job as my proofreader?

          The interesting and frustrating thing about the GOP side is they do not gerrymander elections as much as the DEM's do. It does happen just not as much. So there are a lot of viable candidates running in the SD1 race this time and most are friends of mine.

          I am not sure why that is a problem for the Progressive Left but I am sure you will enlighten me. The cool thing is by March there will only be one to go up against Bennett.

          • Diogenesdemar says:

            First of all, welcome to pols Casper. We're always hoping for a sane conservative voice or two to add to the dialogue and pierce our liberal bubble. 

            Secondly, sorry to hear about your John Anderson endorsement — guess we'll just have to keep hoping?  Stick around anyway …


            • Diogenesdemar says:

              s/b John Andrews

            • Hello Mr. or Mrs. Diogensdemar sorry you do not like John A. He is one of the good guys in my book. I am the sanest person you will ever meet on either side of the political isle.

              I hope to have sane conversations with you as well but most of the time I am attacked and called names for my positions on the issues of the day. 

              In fact I have only found 3 or 4 out of hundreds of progressives who can have a sane conversation without SINNING and that list included my father. S-Shift the subject. I-Ignore the facts. N-Name call.

              You see I have been a D, a I and a R so there is NO conversation I have not heard or dealt with.

          • mamajama55 says:

            Casper WTF?

            Do you even know how much gerrymandering Republicans have done? Your friend Cruella (excuse me, Jill Repella) tried her best to make Colorado just like all the other states that get millions more Democratic votes, yet somehow end up with fewer Dems in the legislature… yet she was stymied in her efforts, because Colorado actually had a bipartisan redistricting process which didn't let GOP take it all, and was willing to take it to court to fight for fair representation for all Coloradans.

            So your claim for victimhood that Colorado Democrats gerrymandered so unfairly is pure and unadulterated BS. Do some fact checking before you post claims like that.

            No, please don't ever proofread your stuff. I enjoy your use of the wrong words way too much. I'm certainly not going to volunteer to proofread There is, however, an edit function on Pols – if you read your post, you have 4 minutes to go back in and correct it if you see something wrong.

            As far as why people don't use their own names / pictures on here, well, some do. I don't, because it's not worth me losing my job from exercising my freedom of speech. And that could definitely happen.

            So, yeah, don't be too sanctimonious. You're welcome to post on here, which is more than the conservative websites will do for progressives who want to post  dissenting opinions. Be prepared to be mocked often, and to have your statements challenged and fact-checked. You'll have to grow a thicker skin if you want to post on here consistently..

            That said, Merry Christmas (even we godless heathens can say it), and happy New Year.

            • Thank you Mr. or Mrs. mamajama55. 

              I guess I touched a nerve or two. Both parties gerrymander and I have no idea, nor do I care, who does it the most. All I know is I would not do it because its wrong.

              I have no victim-hood status to claim so not sure what that's all about.

              Mostly criminals and people with stuff to hide HIDE. Because I work for myself I can say what I want when I want.

              The chances of you losing your job for speaking your progressive mind is very low in this upside down world we live in. Now if you speak your Conservative mind that would surly get you fired.

              Adult debate and fact checking is welcomed and encouraged. Mocking and personal attacks are childish. If we can have an adult debate I am ALL FOR IT. If all you have is mocking and attacks save your fingers and your brain cells.

              • mamajama55 says:

                Casper, I notice that none of the conservative blogs, coloradopeakpolitics, completecolorado, or redstate, have given you even a tenth of the space you've gotten here. You're obviously milking the attention. I also notice that you haven't replied to my comment about your bizarre position on abortion, although you're obviously running as the anti-DeGette, with her strong pro-choice stances.

                Urban Spectrum, which has news about people of color in Denver, also has not one line about you. So if you really dislike being challenged and your facts checked, you might want to look up those sites, and see if they'll carry your message. They might run the news that you cancelled last year's Juneteenth appearance – perhaps you're not quite as popular in the Denver African American community as you might wish. I see you challenged DeGette to a "booth-off" at Juneteenth or Cinco de Mayo next year – will you show up next time?  

                You've gotten quite a bit of play on conservative talk radio. I gave you a pretty fair report from the Boyles show, on today's Open Thread. Although, I see now that it is virtually identical to an interview you did with politistick.

                And you know nothing about what might get me fired. Teachers do not have freedom to express political views in Colorado – particularly in conservative districts. We walk a fine line, can encourage students to question and think, but not what to think. That's across the political spectrum, by the way.

                • Dear Mr. or Mrs. MamaJama55

                  I am not the REP party favorite and I knew this going in. I am a wild card who goes against the grain and they do not like that or me.

                  I answered your abortion question before but I do not see the post now. You where in error when you said Mandatory. I never used that word and would never make anything like that mandatory. I have 3 daughters and 3 grand daughters and I can not make them do anything.

                  The fact is 90% of the mothers who see their baby through ultrasound or sonogram do NOT go through with the abortion. So if we are going to pay for these killings at least we should have the morality to give the baby a voice through these procedures.

                  Thanks for the heads up on the Urban Spectrum. I know Bee Harris the publisher so stay tuned to phase 2 of my campaign. Keep in mind I am fighting two fronts here. The blindness of the REP party and the blindness in the community. The community thinks people like Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders are their friend and will help them.

                  Last year ACofC was short handed and needed to make a decision. So since Juneteeth and the Summit where happening very close together we could only do one so we choose to do the Summit.

                  This year is different because I am the candidate and will have my own both unlike the DEM's who have one both for 4 – 6 candidates and NONE of them even bothered to show up. I HAVE PICTURES that prove this. I never said I was popular in the Black Community but I am not afraid to break new ground.

                  When on the campaign trail doing interviews we tend to repeat things over and over. Feel free to ask me a real question instead of just attacking me.

                  If I had school age children in Colorado they would be home schooled to keep them out of the public cesspool we call public education.

                  • mamajama55 says:

                    Just call me mama, you can skip the "Mr or Mrs". I'm pretty secure in my gender identity. FYI, on Pols there is a menu on the right hand side near the top.It has the titles of recent posts. The post where I wrote about your Boyles interview was on the Tuesday Open Thread. Most of your responses are on the "Casper" thread, which may have been bumped down in order so that it's no longer visible.

                    And your "facts" are WRONG, as in false, not correct. I get that this idea that showing women ultrasounds makes them not get abortions is a popular pro-life meme, but it is still false. I posted a link to the Obstetrics and Gynecology study with actual data, but hey, don't let facts get in the way since your mind is made up. Here's another from cbs news.

                    If you had bothered to read this blog before you started carpet-bombing us, you would know that Diana DeGette is somewhat unpopular, and many of us would like to see her primaried – not because of her views on abortion, but because she is rude and unresponsive to her constituents. People have traveled to DC to talk with her, and been unable to schedule an appointment.

                    That is what you should emphasize in your public outreach, and you can have that consultant advice for free.

                    It won't be enough, and I won't wish you good luck, since I don't want you to win, but if you can mount a serious challenge, it might be enough to get Ms. D to bestir herself on behalf of her district.

              • Duke Cox says:

                Both parties gerrymander and I have no idea, nor do I care, who does it the most. 

                really? Then why did you say this?


                 The interesting and frustrating thing about the GOP side is they do not gerrymander elections as much as the DEM's do. 


              • Duke Cox says:

                I'm beginning to get a little annoyed with you, Casper. I am sure you are a nice man, but you are woefully uninformed and arrogant in your assumptions of superiority to the people who regularly post here. Let's have a looksee…

                The chances of you losing your job for speaking your progressive mind is very low in this upside down world we live in. Now if you speak your Conservative mind that would surly get you fired. 

                What a bunch of crap, Casper. You don't live where I live. You don't get to Mesa county much, I'm figuring. This rhetoric is just another unsubstantiated cry of victimhood on your part…want to see some real examples of progressives getting canned by Repubs? Look no further than our dear old Mesa State College (still not a REAL university). Tim Foster makes certain there is no "shared governance" on HIS campus.

                Adult debate and fact checking is welcomed and encouraged. Mocking and personal attacks are childish. If we can have an adult debate I am ALL FOR IT. 

                Thanks for defining adult for us..you obviously haven't taken the time to recognize that we are not children here, but it is not uncommon for the factually challenged to pull the trigger on that worn out meme. It is the adult thing to do, by my humble reckoning, to answer direct questions and respect the person asking them…think you can do that , Casper?


                If all you have is mocking and attacks save your fingers and your brain cells. 

                and if all you have is right wing claptrap and inconsistentcy to offer….you might take your own advice..Have a good day…



                • Well Duke I sense your head is about to exploded because I am not a nice little colored guy who stays in his place. I had the same issue with my liberal father. I wanted to talk to him once about flat tax and his head spun around on his shoulders.

                  This is how it normally goes. Conservative meets Progressive. Progressive attacks Conservative for their beliefs then Progressive head explodes then they run away.

                  For every case of Progressive Liberal discrimination I can show you two chases of Christian Conservative and Black Conservative discrimination personally. SO WHAT!

                  Lets move on to real questions of substance shall we. Can we do that?

                  • Duke Cox says:

                    No, Casper, we cannot do that..I am done with you.

                    Well Duke I sense your head is about to exploded because I am not a nice little colored guy who stays in his place.

                    How dare you? Just where did I say a fucking thing that would lead you to make such a bigoted and racist accusation? The color of your skin has nothing to do with my opinion of you. You don't know me, and it is obvious you have never read my writing.

                    You drop the race card because, to put it simply…you got nothing, Casper. Whoever convinced you that you are smart enough to be a congressman has done you a great disservice..

                    Not only are you not congressional material, you are a despicable, racist, unethical, cry baby..

                    you may disappear with my blessing..don't let the screen door hit you in the Tab key on the way out.

              • mamajama55 says:

                So you would support single transferable vote system as an alternative to gerrymandering, correct? As a Republican in an urban district, you're like me in a conservative rural district – our votes won't elect our preferred representative. You wrote:

                Both parties gerrymander and I have no idea, nor do I care, who does it the most. All I know is I would not do it because its wrong

                Here's how it works, from Fairvote:


              • MapMaker says:

                Hey! I found an example of a Conservative who was punished for what he said. Reportedly this guy lost his job after this was posted.




                So Casper, care to defend this guy, or is he merely a Conservative in name only?

                • MapMaker says:

                  Damn, damn, damn, damn, damn, damn

                  I thought I had the embed figured out

                  Damn, damn, damn, damn , damn



                  • That confused young man has issues. There is nothing about him that I would support or agree with. There are plenty of sick people out there and he appears to be one of them. He has more in common with the DEM KKK then any conservative group.

                    • MapMaker says:

                      I'm glad you noticed the similarities between the 1950's KKK and today's Republicans. Did the Democratic "solid south" suddenly loose it's racism after Nixon's "southern strategy"? (Hint: No, they became the Republican "solid south" with just as much racism.)

                      Are the statements by these prominent Republican politicians https://gopquotes.wordpress.com/category/racism/ enough to get your hands off your ears and stop singing LA LA LA LA, I can't hear you?

                      How about this little montage?

                      Do you actually think that I can't come up with hundreds more? Casper, unless you can up your honesty quotient, it's not worth talking to you.


  5. JeffcoDemo says:

    LPR was behind so much of what was wrong with Jeffco schools (Newkirk, Witt, Pinto, Atwell,  Schuler, the list goes on and on).  It's not the right wing, it's the fall of the side of the mountain on the right wing. Even Jeffco Republican voters couldn't stomach their crazy.  They leave their stain wherever the go.

  6. Curmudgeon says:

    Let's just hope Mr. Stockham doesn't show up at a Trump campaign event.  Well, not without a big name tag or something, so they'll know he's "okay". 

  7. The internet and social media have given people a boldness I have not seen in 50 years. People feel very comfortable today attacking other people they have never met and say things that are down right mean and hateful.

    They hide behind cute little user names, do things in the dark, and are unwilling to show their face. I have found that people of honor do not hide behind social media rocks. They stand out and stand up for what they believe face to face.

    If you have something to say to me directly be a man or woman and say it in the light of truth not in the dark shadows like rats and roaches.

    • Duke Cox says:


      my name is Duke…I am not hiding..your sanctimony is offensive and condescending…if you don't like the way you are treated here, go away…none of us invited you…you came here for your own purposes…you want the publicity this site can afford to you…please be kind enough to spare us the sanctimonious lectures. 

      and please be grown up enough to refrain from pretending otherwise.

      Thank you.
      and …Merry Christmas.

      • notaskinnycook says:

        Well said, Duke. Stick around a while, Casper. We may not all use our names, for whatever reason, but after awhile you'll get to know us and maybe even like some of us. And for those who celebrate it, whether as a religious or a "family" holiday, Merry Christmas, Charlie Brown!

      • Hello Duke its nice to actually meet someone who can say their name. Is there a drinking game you guys are playing with the word sanctimonious that you did not tell me about? If there is I want in! Tanqueray is my drink of choice.

        I am a grown 56 year old man and can not tell you how many times I have been offended as a Black Christian Conservative so welcome to the club. 

        Any time you talk about someone you invite them to defend themselves and that is what I am doing here. Treat me any way you like anonymously online but be prepared to receive it back in SPADES.

        I have NO idea if this site offers anything other than mild entertainment so only time will tell. However, I am not afraid of any questions or conversations and I do not run from conflict so bring it on.

        Merry Christmas to you and yours and may you have a blessed new year!

        • Duke Cox says:

          Hello Casper, thanks for the reply. You will find a number of polsters here are quite testy when you post material that is of questionable veracity. This is not a right wing site and your facts and consistency will undoubtedly be noticed…to wit:

          I have NO idea if this site offers anything other than mild entertainment so only time will tell.  

          I don't believe this to be a true statement. You did not "accidentally" stumble upon this site. As I noted earlier, you came here for the publicity you have already received. This is a purely mercenary exercise on your part. So I will reiterate this request…


          please be grown up enough to refrain from pretending otherwise.  

          and as to this assertion…

          However, I am not afraid of any questions or conversations and I do not run from conflict so bring it on. 

          As you say…time will tell…


  8. mamajama55 says:

     Stockham's position on abortion is pretty mind-boggling:

    My Pro-Voice initiative speaks to this issue directly. A Pro-Voice stance would solve 90% of the abortion issue. In other words, all voices should be heard before an abortion, including the baby’s through ultrasound or sonogram.

    So, you got that? Mandatory ultrasound or sonogram, and if the fetus won't "talk", then the woman who wants an abortion would be S O L.

    Anyone who's ever tried to get a baby to smile on demand appreciates the insanity of this. Any woman who's ever needed to terminate a pregnancy resents the arrogant paternalism which insists she needs to hear a fetal "voice" before she can get a legal healthcare procedure done.

    Congratulations, Casper. You added another layer of absurdity to the "pro-life" side.

  9. Thank you Mr. or Mrs Mamajama55 for reviewing my Pro-Voice position. Thinking of the fetus or tissue mass as human can be a little mind-boggling so let me explain further.

    Your first error is the word "Mandatory" That is NOT my word nor have I ever suggested any mandatory procedures. I do not believe a women should be forced to do anything against her will. I have 3 daughters and 3 grand daughters so I know this fact very well.

    Your second error is talking babies. 🙂 The only way the baby, the human life, can be heard or seen is through the Ultrasound or Sonogram process. It is a proven fact that 90% of the mothers who see an ultrasound or sonogram of their baby DO NOT go through with the abortion that is why Planned Murderhood Inc. does not do them.

    Oh and Mr. or Mrs. BlueCat if the women is the only one involved in the baby making process I would agree with you but for now it takes at least two to make a baby so maybe we should stay out of the families business. Not force but LET!

    • FrankUnderwood says:

      but for now it takes at least two to make a baby so maybe we should stay out of the families business. 

      So you would give a rapist veto power over whether his victim could terminate a pregnancy he forced on her?

      • So you would give a rapist veto power over whether his victim could terminate a pregnancy he forced on her?

        NO the rapist and any other criminal would hopefully be in jail and would forfeit their rights. No one said anything about veto power but what is wrong with families talking about things before the baby is terminated. When did we become a society that defaults to DEATH before LIFE?

        • mamajama55 says:

          Polsters, I'm done responding to Casper. He's not going to post on the rightie blogs, because we're too nice to him here. Enough is enough…

          S cat, what is that ap to make unwanted comments disappear from your feed?

        • ElliotFladen says:

          Well, tumors are alive and have human DNA.  I'm perfectly fine with having a default of destroying them.  They aren't aware and were never aware. 

          The problem you got Casper is you are equating human existence to mere human DNA.  We are more than our DNA. 

        • FrankUnderwood says:

          but what is wrong with families talking about things before the baby is terminated

          So the young woman or the girl who is an incest victim is supposed to sit down with dad (the perpetrator) and mom (the perp's enabler) and have a nice little family discussion and make a decision about what to do about the pregnancy which dad/perp inflicted upon her?

          What planet do you live on? Do you actually believe that every family in this country is some type of cookie-cutter clone of the Waltons or the Cleavers?

          • How about we try to use some common sense here. What percent of rape and incest's cases end in a pregnancy? I would guess VERY little. In that small number the person should be in jail and I would think forfeit their rights to any say in the pregnancy. Bottom line is no ones right would EVER be violated in my Pro-Voice scenario and it's NONE of the Governments business anyway.

            • Socialisticat says:

              Although estimates vary based on different data collection methods and approaches to determining the number of rape victims, a comprehensive study showed that about 5% of women ages 12-45 were impregnated by their attacker(s).  Depending on what numbers are more "accurate" for the number of rapes, that results in a number between about 3,200 and 50,000 women per year, according to this report by PolitiFact.  That same group believes your "90% who see an ultrasound decide not to have an abortion" lacks any evidence of its truth.

              Oh, and the right of the mother not to undergo a medical procedure without her consent is violated by your scenario

            • MapMaker says:

              Darn right, keep the government out of a woman's uterus. Her body is her own.

              A fetus is not a human being until it takes it's first breath (according to your magic book).

              If you want to argue that "ensoulment" happens at the "moment of conception" we'll have to have more evidence than you and your fellow religious authoritarians (Christian Taliban) word. By the way, if ensoulment occurs at the moment of conception, then your god is the busiest abortionist of all.


    • mamajama55 says:

      So you would – what? "Suggest" an ultrasound? Have an ultrasound machine and technician standing by whenever any woman comes to a doctor for a legal procedure, whether it be a D&C or an "abortion pill" appointment?  Would you require that the doctor/health provider read from a script? Have you even thought this through that far?

      Your facts are also backwards – where ultrasounds are either "suggested" or "required", they do not change the minds of women seeking abortion. From the Institute on Obstetrics and Gynecology study of 15,000 women in the Los Angeles area:

      Patients underwent ultrasounds as part of the standard procedure, and 42.5 percent of them opted to see the images. Of those, 98.4 percent terminated their pregnancies; 99 percent of the women who did not look at the photographs ended their pregnancies.

      Contrary to right wing spin, women do not get abortions for light or trivial reasons. Requiring or even just "suggesting" ultrasounds pre-procedure is condescending, assuming that women are not serious or thoughtful about this choice.  Of course, condescension is something you are an expert in.

      But go on ahead and promote your Pro-Voice  abortion policy in Denver. Together with your ideas on ending entitlements such as Medicaid, Social security, food stamps, and unemployment – the "safety net" programs you slam in your right wing radio interviews- you'll be a real hit in Denver.

      Again I suggest that you try out your ideas on the right wing blogs – they never check facts, and they never challenge conservatives. Why do you suppose that they're not taking your candidacy seriously?

      • BlueCat says:

        I know what I'd suggest. I suggest we've had enough of this nonsense. I can't even tell WTF the guy's trying to say most of the time. I suggest we stop humoring him and encouraging him to take up all this space.

      • Your facts are wrong but they are your facts. I strongly dis-agree!

        • mamajama55 says:

          Actually, facts are facts. Observable, measurable, same experiment, same results, the scientific method. You don't get to make up your own.

          • BlueCat says:

            Ready to scream yet? 

            • mamajama55 says:

              Yup. Stickaforkinit-done.  He lost me in the facts = opinions, nothing-is-real swamp. Turning off the tube, too, as it's wall to wall Trump and Cosby show. Can't turn off the computer, as I still have work to do.

              Looking for those instructions to the "Stylish" extension so I won't see Casper's posts on this site.

              Socialisticat, how do you do that again?

              • Socialisticat says:

                I posted the instructions here for Chrome and Firefox.  The one thing that would change would be to add a line for your new friend that looks like

                .comment-author-comment-author-casper4colorado > div > .comment-body {display:none!important}

                • mamajama55 says:

                  Thanks, S-cat, for the "nopolstrolls" style. I had your add-on in Chrome already, just copied it into Firefox and it worked fine. Now I won't see Casper and get sucked into his self-promoting rants.

        • Curmudgeon says:

          Poor Casper. You've managed to alienate the only people that were willing to give your joke of a campaign any attention.  No wonder your own party is pretending you don't exist; you're making them look bad, and acknowledging you would hurt their brand.  So now, we'll have to do what everyone else does, and ignore you.   

  10. FrankUnderwood says:

    So Casper, THIS is your campaign strategy? Waste time on what is essentially a center-left political arguing with people who (with the exception of Moddy and A/C) would never consider voting for you because of your strange views on reproductive rights and affirmative action? Rather than spend your time trying to secure the support of the dozen registered Republicans living in CD 1 and as many indies and moderate Dems as you can possibly indentify and persuade to look at you as an alternative – or more likely, as a protest vote – against DeGette?

    Brilliant strategy!

    • Thanks Frank for your assessment of my campaign strategy. I am very comfortable with the fact that you think I am wasting my time. It also gives my great comfort to know that you are just trying to help a brother out. I will put you down as a maybe for now.

  11. Last night as I was reading my Bible I was convicted in the way I have been responding to the comments on this post so I am offering each of you my sincere apologies. 

    I am sure most of you folks are good people and I have no reason to believe other wise. We may fundamentally disagree on many things but there is NO reason why we should be attacking one another.

    In the future I will try to refrain from any condescending attack on your character or who you are as a person but rather focus on the issues at hand. Whether you choose to do the same is totally up to you.

    Wishing you all the best.

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.