CO-04 (Special Election) See Full Big Line

(R) Greg Lopez

(R) Trisha Calvarese



President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*


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

(D) Joe Neguse*


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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd

(R) Ron Hanks




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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(R) Deborah Flora

(R) J. Sonnenberg




CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Dave Williams

(R) Jeff Crank



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*


CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) Brittany Pettersen



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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

(R) Janak Joshi




State Senate Majority See Full Big Line





State House Majority See Full Big Line





Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
December 18, 2008 04:44 PM UTC

Thursday Open Thread

  • by: Colorado Pols

“There is no act of treachery or meanness of which a political party is not capable; for in politics there is no honour.”

–Benjamin Disraeli


46 thoughts on “Thursday Open Thread

      1. Hancock and Morrissey.

        I don’t think Linkhart or any other council member really has a shot.

        I know that Penfield Tate has always said that when the seat is open, he would run again and so I am sure he will

        In that scenario, I think Morrissey wins it.

    1. I was hanging with a buddy when Garcia came on and of course thought “penis.”  I said, “Whoa.”  My buddy gave me a funny look and said, “Yeah, that guy needs a shave.”

      I laughed so hard I fell off the couch and hurt my arm.

      BTW, in the interview Garcia is sporting a grizzly look.

        1. …was about a lawyer, one Richard Lee, who loved to bed the women.  One day Dr. Scarborough came home and found his bed already occupied. He grabbed his gun and the lawyer allegedly qualified for the nickname, Dickless Lee.

        1. So make your case, then.  I don’t want to link to your blog.  You’re like the “Dealin’ Doug” ads on the Post and RMN sites – a pop-up ad for your blog with a nonsensical ‘threat of the day’.

          It’s the holidays – use some of your tinfoil hat to keep the turkey fresh in the refrigerator. You’ll feel better.

  1. If you guys want to start doing awesome stuff like this, the wilderness might not be as vast as originally thought for us R’s.

    Congresswoman Anna Eshoo (pictured), D-Palo Alto, said Monday she will work to restore the Fairness Doctrine and have it apply to cable and satellite programming as well as radio and TV.

    “It should and will affect everyone,” she said.

    Ok.  I’ll give you folks three guesses as to what’s wrong with this statement.  

    Not that the Orwellian-ly named “Fairness Doctrine” (also see: “Employee Free Choice Act”) isn’t moronic enough on its own merits, but what important tenet of our economic system has the fabulous Congresswoman Eshoo seemingly missed?

    1. There is almost no political will at a serious level to pursue this. Other things seem to have priority now like the Bush economic train wreck, the Bush environmental protections train wreck,  the Bush consumer protections train wreck, the Bush regulatory train wreck, the Bush strategic train wrecks in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran the middle east, Pakistan, the former Soviet block, the restoration of our Justice system, the rescuing of our constitution, yadayadayada.  Just stop listening to rightie talk radio for a day or two and chill.

  2. Let me explain, LB, about the free market place. See, if we had a Fairness Doctrine…and let me say I believe that the legal basic for Fairness Doctrine applies ONLY to broadcast media using the public airwaves…..political opinion would have to go to pay – to-hear/listen.  Political opinion would be on satellite and cable.  Consumers would have to pay for the poltiical product. If they did not, then the programs would fail. Or, big money would have to pay big money to have their political viewpoints propagated.  It would be a free market place of ideas. What are you so afraid of?????

    Right now, the government controls the public airwaves by deciding whom and under what conditions a license to use the public airwaves will be granted.

    I wouldn’t worry, LB, if I were you…those talking points would come right to your email, unregulated internet.  What would be lost would be the ability of one party to dominate the public airwaves and echo and reinforce those talking points.  And, perhaps that glimmer of soul that appears from time to time in your posting could be cultivated.  You might begin to become confident enough to listen to objective points of view or both sides aired equally…it could be a good thing.

    1. Other than the concept of the government regulating thought, we agree:

      believe that the legal basic for Fairness Doctrine applies ONLY to broadcast media using the public airwaves…

      She wants to regulate privately owned cable and satellite systems.

      I say, go for it!  See what happens, Congresswoman.

      1. access to run cable is regulated by the government and they generally only allow 1 per locale. So I think it falls into the same category as broadcast.

        And I would guess satellite falls into the same thing – the government determines what wavelenghts they can have, if any.

        1. Though that’s not how it’s currently run.

          The satellite companies especially should fall under broadcast jurisdiction since, as you note, they use the public broadcast spectrum.

          The cable companies are a more complicated case; each jurisdiction issues its own monopoly licenses to lay cable and maintain the local cable market.  I don’t know that the Federal government has a technical case for becoming involved with cable, and since it hasn’t been effectively argued, cable’s main competitor – satellite – also remains unregulated to maintain competition.

          I’m interested in hearing rationale for regulating cable companies…

          1. That’s how they, and the satellite radio companies, get away with language and nudity.

            I guess if the local governments that overse the cable companies want to play FCC, they could.

            As to satellite, is that public airwaves? I don’t recall what frequency they run on of if it is auctioned as a public space.  Couldn’t any old person or corporation launch a satellite and beam up the signals from Mexico or Quebec?  That doesn’t give them customers, of course, but that’s not the question.

  3. The Be the Change e-mail asking me to call Governor Ritter’s office or vote for Mike Miles on the on-line poll.

    They helpfully point out that at the bottom of the poll list is a place to enter a write-in vote for Mike.

    Think the Guv’s switchboard is lighting up? Me neither.



    The first of 12 runners cited for streaking on the Pearl Street Mall on Halloween night wearing nothing but pumpkins on their heads has accepted a plea agreement that prosecutors said would likely be offered to the others.

    Natalie Ziemba, 20, of Boulder agreed Thursday to plead guilty to disorderly conduct, a petty offense.

    She agreed to undergo six months of unsupervised probation, eight hours of community service and pay $27 in court fees. She will not be required to register as a sex offender, and her record will be cleared if she doesn’t commit any crimes for at least six months.

    Still seems kind of harsh to me. Especially with this sort of thing, we should be encouraging women to participate. Otherwise it’s just flabby guys running around naked. [/sexist]

      1. and it was REALLY offensive to even float the idea of registering them as sex offenders. But it seems like the actual plea bargain is not all that onerous. Still leaves them free to participate in the naked bike ride in June.

        I certainly don’t think anyone should be prosecuted for streaking as a stunt; deliberately exposing yourself to a particular individual is a totally different thing, and I wish they hadn’t gone this far. But at least they calmed down a bit.

  5. It appears that President-elect Obama’s choice for Secretary of Labor is the most progressive member in his cabinet.

    The AP reports that Congresswoman Hilda Solis is Obama’s choice to fill that role. (story at dKos with background and details…)

    Solis voted for EFCA, against CAFTA and the Peru FTA, and is a solid union supporter.  Additionally, she is an officer in the Progressive Caucus of the House, and a pretty much straight-up “liberal” voter.

      1. So far it looks like you’d have to be a real jackass to seriously disagree with Obama’s cabinet appointments on the whole; he really has tried to make lots of people happy. Anyone who opposes him early on is going to look like a prick.

  6. If Obama is getting Atrios PO’d enough to call him “Wanker of the Day”,… he must be doing something right! 🙂

    I have to admit, for the most part it looks like Obama understands that if he panders to the far left in his governance, it will hurt him in the long run.  He hasn’t loaded his cabinet with extremists, and it appears he is ready to be a center-left president.  He also is sticking to his decision on Rev. Warren, and is obviously reaching out to the evangelicals on the right.  Not what you would expect from a Democrat.  OK, I’m impressed.

    1. but Warren is giving an invocation or whatever…not joining the administration.

      It would have been nice if BO had found a guy who wasn’t so dumbfuck backwards in his support of Prop 8, but if BO wanted a bible thumper at the inauguration, how many options did he have?  If he found a pastor or someone accepting of gays he’d be blasted for not being a “real” christian…or something dumb like that.  And I at least admire the work Warren’s church has done when not caring about what happens in peoples’ private lives.  

      BO’s going to piss off a lot of people over the next few years, this is just another group of them…  Doesn’t make it “right” or “fair”…just the way it is…

    2. having watched the whole interview he did with both Obama and McCain. We were told he was a new type of evangelical, one who actually cared about poverty and disease and other things Christians nominally care about (but not in real life). Instead, he just asked your standard social conservative questions, and showed no indication of being anything better than Pat Robertson on a good day.

      But I found this Daily Kos diary very convincing on the subject. It’s meant to blunt the insane right-wing hatred of Obama that’s almost inevitable eventually. Having Rick Warren give the prayer is not going to help Prop 8 win in the courts, and choosing a gay-friendly pastor wouldn’t overturn Prop 8. So right at this moment, it’s not really relevant for that. But for Obama’s Big Plans, he’s going to need as many people on his side as possible. If Warren gets a few more otherwise hostile right-wingers to take a second look at Obama, it can help us accomplish a lot in the long run.

      Obama’s thinking strategically. Until he actually screws something serious up, I’m going to give him the benefit of the doubt on all this stuff. It’s worked so far.

    3. On items that don’t matter squat in terms of what’s accomplished – reach way across to the other side. Secretary of Labor – very liberal. Person to say a prayer in public – well to the right. Great approach.

      And getting called the Wanker of the day by Atrios – stops the Republicans from claiming Obama is not bi-partisian.

Leave a Comment

Recent Comments

Posts about

Donald Trump

Posts about

Rep. Lauren Boebert

Posts about

Rep. Yadira Caraveo

Posts about

Colorado House

Posts about

Colorado Senate

45 readers online now


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