CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump

80%

20%↓

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

90%

CO-02 (Boulder-ish) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Neguse*

90%

CO-03 (West & Southern CO) See Full Big Line

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks

40%

30%

20%

CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado) See Full Big Line

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg

50%↑

15%

10%↓

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank

50%↓

50%↑

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

90%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen

85%↑

 

CO-08 (Northern Colo.) See Full Big Line

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi

60%↑

35%↓

30%↑

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
December 02, 2008 04:27 PM UTC

Tuesday Open Thread

  • 83 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“What a fine persecution–to be kept intrigued without ever quite being enlightened.”

–Tom Stoppard

Comments

83 thoughts on “Tuesday Open Thread

  1. This is what scares me about our government.

    A story from the Washington Post brought my spirits down today after a great weekend. Apparently the U.S. Military is planning on training some 20,000 soldiers to assist local law enforcement in domestic matters like a nuclear attack or other “catastrophes” by 2011.

    http://conservativeforchange.b

    1. Remember the riots after the Rodney King trial? Remember New orleans after Katrina? There are times when local law enforcement is overwhelmed because it cannot be kept staffed to handle those very rare events.

        1. There is a reason we are so fussy about absolutely no domestic role for our miltary.  It’s why we don’t have military coups. The answer to emergencies like Katrina is to go back to using the Guard for it’s intended domestic purpose instead of using it to paper over troop shortages when we go to war without a draft.  And we need to make sure that privately contracted mercenaries are NEVER used in domestic situations.

          1. Maybe the answer is more training for the national guard. Maybe it is using the Army. But what would we do today if an atomic bomb went off in one of our cities?

            Do we have every state build up their National Guard to handle a small nuke in one of their cities?

            Add in the fact that the military has become over the last 30 years a much more technical operation. You don’t have time with the 1 weekend/month and 2 weeks a year to train the National Guard to anything close to the same level of skill.

            I agree that we need to approach this very carefully. But things are different from how they were 30 years ago and I think we need to take that into account.

    2. I read the full story yesterday.

      Maybe the Posse Commitatus Act is outdated, I’m willing to entertain that possibility.  Maybe only the Feds (dang gummint!) are the only ones who can provide the response needed to new threats.

      OTOH, can’t the National Guard be less of an Army backup and more of a locally controlled federal emergency force?  Sort of like the Coast Guard.  

      I guess a lot of the good/bad ratio is how these forces are controlled.

      At this point I am very wary.  

      1. I mean, I’m not the most trusting of the government when it comes to things like this either, but what are they going to do that would be anything but helping people?

        Are they going to lay siege to a city and nobody is going to find out? Are they going to take people from their homes and put them in concentration camps? Maybe they’ll take our guns away and make us become vegetarians?

        Keep in mind the next Commander in Chief has a deep respect for the constitution, unlike the current occupant.

        With the Nat’l Guard stretched too thin, I wish that we could have had something like this when Katrina happened.

            1. Why would a fellow American sworn to uphold the constitution be a threat?

              ok…there’s a little bait in that comment for Bush bashers. Seriously, don’t you trust your sisters and brothers, cause if we are talking conspiracies then today you’d have to have Hollywood involved deeply and a false flag plot to jump start it all.

            2. Posse Comitatus is NOT out-dated.  Just trusting to a future of good intentions in high places is the height of foolishness.  

              Redstateblues, you cite the respect for the constitution of our next Commander in Chief. Do you want to just trust that every subsequent Commander in Chief will share that respect? Even after Bush?  

              And why do we have to accept that the Guard must be stretched too thin in wartime?  During the Vietnam war only a tiny percentage of guard units left their domestic duties.   We beefed up troops with the draft and used the Guard for its intended purpose.  Whether or not you like the idea of a draft, doing away with Posse Comitatus poses too great a threat.

              We are what we are because we trust laws, not individuals in power.  And we have come too close for comfort to losing our way of life and government under the anti-American, anti-constitutional Bush regime already.  We can’t throw any more of it away.

                1. The defense of civil liberties is expensive, and the cost includes vigilance.

                  There might be a need for the kind of response this redeployment explicitly envisions, but to dismiss reservations because the “right people” will be in charge makes  a mockery of the rule of law. There’s a reason both the left and the right hold Posse Comitatus dear, and to propose subverting it because it’s convenient or easy demonstrates how fragile its protections are.

                  After all, there’s nothing wrong with warrantless eavesdropping, so long as Obama is president and we can trust him not to abuse it, right? How about torture, if we’re convinced we’ll only use it when it’s really, really necessary?

        1. has a deep respect for the constitution? So? For one thing, we’re a government of laws, not men, and no men are angels, which is why we have a Constitution. If the proposal requires having a former constitutional law scholar as president to be acceptable, then it’s an unacceptable proposal. If it’s fine no matter who is president, then that’s another thing entirely.

            1. of a 130-year tradition at the heart of how we conceive of the relationship between the civilian and the military in this country. Paranoia might be silly but vigorous skepticism isn’t.

    3. As soon as Obama sets up Camp X-Ray in Broomfield because of a quote-unquote-catastrophe, I’ll grab my guns and join the People’s Militia Expeditionary Force with you.

              1. someone else sent an email to his AOL account (same as DP, but with aol.com) and didn’t get a response.

                He’s apparently fine, just doesn’t like us.

                *I’m tearing up a little*

    1. “The statute allows prosecution for speech “tending to blacken the memory of one who is dead” or to “expose the natural defects of one who is alive, and thereby to expose him to public hatred, contempt or ridicule.” Criminal libel carries a punishment of up to 18 months in prison.”

      I think Wayne Allard could have a case, on both counts.  (Just kidding…don’t arrest me, I look fat in horizontal stripes:)

      1. To sue all of us who have exposed her natural defects and thereby exposed her to public hatred, contempt, or ridicule.

        What is check-in time for the graybar hotel?

          1. But we’ve certainly done our part to blacken the memory of one who is politically dead. The Weld County prosecutors could be trying to serve Polsters as we speak …

            1. skeptism, I decided to link a few more things and then it just turned into a larger question so it’s gone in a different direction.

              By Friday. That’s my promise. I am posting it Friday.  

    2. It’s also a nearly 200-year old law. This should have been brought up as civil libel.

      Definitely makes me cautious of writing certain things here, because if a couple squabbling can create a scenario where this law would be enforced, I can’t imagine what people like Dick Wadhams would do with it.

    3. Would it be libel then?  

      In Canada, the UK, and Australia you CAN be charged with hate speech. You cannot write “I hate Muslims” on your website without legal consequences.  PC’ism amok.

      A recent case had a ten year old boy tell an immigrant women something like “Damn Paki’s, go home.”  She whacked him a stick hard, and HE was charged with a crime!  

      Thank the Goddess and our Founding Fathers for that pesky first amendment.  So far, so good.  

  2. I asked this previously and did not get an answer so I’m trying again.

    Are there limitis on who/what can donate money for initiatives?

    I understand the limits it puts on contributions to candidates, but does this put in limites for groups for and against initiatives?

    Because didn’t Coors have a bunch of company money dumped in to 47?

  3. Where’s our shocking report about backstabbing elitist bloggers? Everybody and their mother’s brother are waiting.

    I realize this won’t get it written any faster, but I’m enjoying the suspense. Maybe some more tidbits? Please? If you knew me you’d know what a charming and persuasive person I am…

    1. God he’s so boring. I need to stay awake today to do some work.

      I still remember when he was a prospective candidate, and his poll numbers were higher than any Republican actually running. I predicted early on that he would immediately tank upon entering the race. Turned out much better than my Mitt Romney prediction.

      Margaret Carlson was being interviewed about him, and she called him “handsome.” My wife and I were shocked, and from that point on we always referred to him as “Handsome Fred.” Little did we know Carlson’s creepy stalker history with him.

      All this is to say, I don’t take Handsome Fred seriously. Can you sum it up without sounding like Foghorn Leghorn on barbiturates?

    2. I left this running while I read another page that made sense, and his voice sounded just like Gregory Peck’s. I heard Atticus Finch saying Fred Thompson drivel, and now I’m scared.

      1. Good to see you in the forum from time to time.  

        Well, the beaches are pretty, but I’ve only been out there a couple of times.  Dipped the treads of my mountain bike into the Gulf, I think it was a lot happier at 12,000 feet.  I know I was.  

          1. I’m in Sarasota, FL, about 50 miles south of Tampa.

            I fear I am stuck here for any number of years.  

            Sometimes, especially before I wake, I have memories of Colorado and I ache.  

            1. and then I remembered the beach at Sarasota.  The sand was like flour it was so soft.  Enjoy your warm winter then come and visit next summer!

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments


Posts about

Donald Trump
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert
SEE MORE

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado House
SEE MORE

Posts about

Colorado Senate
SEE MORE

85 readers online now

Newsletter

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