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
February 03, 2009 02:17 AM UTC

Oy Gevalt, Another Israel Resolution?

  • 64 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

Perennial sound and fury in the Colorado Senate today, signifying…well, as the Rocky Mountain News reports:

A man holding a sign and hollering pro-Palestinian remarks was removed from the Senate gallery today amid the most partisan – and surreal – battle in the Senate so far this session.

Lawmakers voted on two separate resolutions, one promoting peace and one supporting Israel, but eventually the debate linked the two resolutions.

Republicans were furious when Sen. Linda Newell, D-Littleton, who had sponsored the peace and nonviolence resolution, voted against the Israeli resolution. She later explained her vote by saying she wasn’t elected to vote on international issues…

The Senate opened with state troopers posted at the entries to the Senate gallery, where visitors can watch the proceedings one floor below. The officers were on high alert because of protests in the morning outside the Capitol over the Israeli resolution by Sen. Joyce Foster, D-Denver.

It supported Israel and condemned Hamas, but Palestians and Jewish peace groups argued the language was too one sided.

When Foster’s resolution passed on a 32-2 vote, Boulder resident Dan Winters stood up in the gallery and held a sign that read, “Shame on senators for a hate resolution.” He then began yelling, asking about the Palestians’ rights and America’s role in arming groups in the Middle East.

What? Yes, we do have an opinion about what’s going on in the Middle East right now. The thing is, as important as that all may be and as passionately as we may feel about the situation over there, this blog is, at least in some kind of loosely-enforced, unevenly observed way, about Colorado politics. We prefer to focus on things we can control, are relevant to our news-heavy day here in Colorado, or that we at least have sufficient knowledge of to credibly be, if you will, resolved.

Heck, if you think about it, the only reason we have the slightest opening to ask innocent questions like “how many civilians died in Gaza last month again?” or “isn’t white phosphorus not recommended for use on children?” here on Colorado Pols is because they just spent half the day in the state senate one-upping each other’s ignorant posturing on the subject.

And like it or not, Sen. Newell is correct – this is NOT what STATE legislators were elected to do. Can we now get back to stuff that, you know, involves Colorado? Like that huge budget problem, perhaps?

Democrats need to be particularly careful with this kind of non-binding nonsense, because it is exactly the kind of thing that caused Republicans to lose control of the legislature in 2004. Colorado voters elect their legislators to deal with Colorado issues. It’s not complicated. Once you’ve fixed Colorado’s problems, then go ahead and resolution the hell out of the place. But until then…

Helpfully submitted for the next extrajurisidictional itch, Senators.

Tweet
Share

Comments

64 thoughts on “Oy Gevalt, Another Israel Resolution?”

  2. While the Israeli Palestinian issue is of course important, it’s appalling the General Assembly would waste a minute of it’s time on this subject that it can’t do a thing about.

    I attended a meeting this morning with Senator Morgan Carroll (D-Aurora) and the issues facing this state with a near billion dollar deficit in the budget necessitating very difficult choices on what must be cut are frightening. Political grandstanding by either side on the Israeli Palestinian conflict in the General assembly is a waste of precious time.

    Hillary Clinton got sworn in Secretary of State today, its her problem, let her deal with it. Maybe the General assembly will then have time to address state issues, like our crumbling bridges and roads, which are only getting worse because they adjourned last year doing nothing about the problem (while passing a ton of worthless resolutions)

  3. Hamas needs to recognize Israel and stop the shelling.

    Perhaps Colorado pols should apply the same cynicism shown here to pressuring the state’s leaders to demand the cessation of Bush’s Iraq war.  

    2. Tupa and Gordon brought Senate Joint Memorial 2 which called on then President Bush to not implement the Surge in Iraq.

      Everyone debated for hours and hours and hours.  

      Did a lot of good, didn’t it?

      If our elected leaders couldn’t influence our own President why is debating foreign governments’ policy a worthwhile use of time for our elected leaders?

      1. I perceive that the belief in this board under the new regime is that only issues which are isolated to Colorado can be discussed in Colorado, or on this board.

        In my view, this is a clear misunderstanding of political discourse and responsibility as a citizen.

        Raising awareness of internatinal issues has value in our state. The world has intertwined in  neo-liberal globalism to a point that what happens in Iran, Gerogia, Tibet, Gaza, the Sudan, Mexico, Moscow and almost every section of the world has an impact on our lives in Denver.

        If enough people had been educated about international affairs in 2000, this state wouldn’t have voted for Bush/Cheney and we might not need to be talking about nationalizing the banks, or economic stimulii.  

          1. That’s fairly clear.  The topics promoted, and the slant of the discourse have changed dramatically since the last change of editors.  I don’t find it “progressive.”

                  1. the front page posters, who replaced David Thi and Haners. They hardly set the tone for the board, and don’t have anything to do with the majority of the articles — and the site’s ethos —  written by one “Colorado Pols.”

                    Meet the new boss, Ray. Same as the old boss.

                    1. Agent 4, go to Springfield’s house! He’s discovered the fact that I’m the same snarky ass I was before I was given “diary promotion” powers!

                    2. The intolerance has increased since the election. That’s my opinion.

                      Many of the responses to Ken Gordon I found offensive in December , as are some of the statements regarding Joyce Foster.

                      Apparently Laughing Boy feels more comnfortable with expressing off center views as mainstream, and attempts to dictate his point of view to the board.

                      It doesn’t inspire confidence in objective debate.

                    5. This blog is losing credibilty and is turning into nothing more than biased  propaganda.

                      You won’t find support in the Obama Adminstration for this type of journalism.

                    6. This blog is losing credibilty (sic) and is turning into nothing more than biased  propaganda.

                      Ray, if you are interested in ‘unbiased’ journalism, or blog postings, how about you start with providing facts and rational arguments rather than spitting up unsubstantiated talking points, fallacious reasoning, and similar such garbage?

                    7.  I support the US govt position that Hamas is a terrorist organiztion. Israel is justified in defending itself.

                      Before you  suggest that the IDF commits  terrorism, publish some facts.

                      I’d suggest a good start for international history is the National Security Archives at their website. STRATFOR has good intelligence as well.

        2. I think I agree, Ray Springfield. So in the spirit you suggest, here are a couple of questions:

          1. How many civilians died in Gaza last month?

          2. Isn’t white phosphorus not recommended for use on children?

          I don’t think the Pols mind if we discuss this, after all they suggested these questions–but I’m wondering if you really do, since you “fully support” Sen. Foster’s religiously blinded endorsement of anything Israel does…

          1. Civilians die in war.

            I suppose you’d like your home shelled everyday?

            Or if you support the shelling, then perhaps you support suicide bombing?

            I wouldn’t support phosphorus or napalm, but then again, I’d like proof presented to represent that the IDF did that. Propaganda flourishes whenever Israel defends itself.

            The blame for Israeli defense against aggression falls totally on Hamas in this instance.

            I repeat, Hamas needs to recognize Israel, and stop instigating violence.

            1. Or if you support the shelling, then perhaps you support suicide bombing?

              Straw man much?

              Is someone here even ‘supporting shelling’?

              Hyperbole much?

              I suppose you’d like your home shelled everyday?

              1. Gaza soldiers, might as well call them that, were shelling Israel everyday and still are shelling everyday.

                I’m tired of responding with rational statements and being answered by ludicrous responses.

                Israel invaded Gaza to stop the shelling.

                I guess CLubTwitty doesn’t listen or read and just gets news from Colorado pols.

                The site is losing creibility.

                2. argument to:

                  1-crate a straw man (“if you support the shelling” –poster no where said he supports shelling)

                  2-then conflate it with this “…then perhaps you support suicide bombers”

                  3-then engage in hyperbole: (YOUR–as in a singular–HOUSE–as opposed to an empty field…)

                  Then top it off with a personal attack:

                  I guess CLubTwitty doesn’t listen or read and just gets news from Colorado pols.

                  Dude, you wouldn’t know how to frame a rational argument if your life depended on it, which apparently it does not.  Seriously buy a book on informal logic 101, or do the Google on fallacies–I have identified 4 here to get you started.

                    1. How is it ‘clearly ridiculous’ to point out that every statement you made in the post above is a well-known demonstrable fallacy?

                      Fallacious reasoning leads to fallacious conclusions.  

                      Here is your argument reduced to their fallacies.

                      #1 Straw man argument

                      #2 Slippery Slope/Reductio ad absurdum

                      #3 Hyperbole

                      #4 Ad Hominem

                      Argument from fallacy: if an argument for some conclusion is fallacious, then the conclusion must necessarily be false.

                    3. Ray might be part of the Nancy/sjintheknow/skankore Sybil that has been trying in vain to cause a ruckus.

  4. I’m wondering why she would tie up state legislative business with this Gay Marriage type of a resolution?  What is her motivation for such a stunt?

      1. You guys are rediculous.  I’m not the biggest fans of resolutions dealing with foreign policy, but if Sen. Foster or any other legislator wants to declare the sense of the legislature, then so be it.  But how dare you impugn Sen. Foster’s motives that somehow she benefits from her resolution?  You are disgraceful.

        2. It’s topics like this that let me know how truly far to the left and isolated most of my friends on Pols are.

          The Israelis have every right to level Gaza if they want if there are rockets being fired out of it into their territory.  

          The Palestinians have long had the unique ability to make every decision in a way that hurts themselves. I’ve never seen anything like it.

          Now, these resolutions in State houses are posturing and meaningless (like the anti-Iraq war nonsense from the City Council) but it’s their right to waste as much of their time as they want, I guess.

            1. Although with a caveat that anything Jimmy Carter certifies is tainted by his total lack of judgment and character.

              I said the Palestinans chose this. Elections as we know, have consequences. If the party you choose to lead you wants to launch rockets from populated areas, you’re going to have problems.

              The Israelis left a functioning, modern city to the Palestinians when they pulled out and gave them property in hopes of generating peace. Lesson learned. Cavemen on power have turned Gaza into a refugee camp, incapable of self-sufficiency that attacks its neighbor whenever and however possible.  

              1. I don’t support either side in the current conflict, I think there is blame to go around.  It is possible to find fault with both sides…  

                Still not sure how you get to ‘Israel has a right to level Gaza.’  Please articulate from where that right derives citing law, international convention,e tc.

                1. I say that to show you that even the far end is acceptable if necessary for Israel to defend its existence.

                  Now, contrast that with the actual battle –

                  Israel takes care to film most of their attacks against an enemy that’s intent on generating as many of their own civilian casualties as possible to gain world sympathy.

                  Hamas and Hizbollah have both intentionally launched attacks from inside schools and worse to try to provoke a response from Israel that creates a tragedy.  

                  The sooner we’re honest about this piece of militant Islam and the threat it poses far beyond Israel, the better the world will be for it.

                  1. something independent for this:

                    Hamas and Hizbollah have both intentionally launched attacks from inside schools and worse to try to provoke a response from Israel that creates a tragedy.  

                    I remain unconvinced thus far that the bombings of UN schools, for instance, was due to rockets/mortars being fired from inside those compounds.  

                    I am had pressed to find where international law–from which ‘rights’ in war derive, allows Israel to level Gaza.  So while you’re digging up some credible sources to support your assertion of Israel’s ‘right’ to level Gaza.  Please cite law, convention etc. that shows I am wrong.  

                    2. International laws be damned.  If your tiny country is threatened with destruction by the charter of the government of a neighboring country, you have every right to do anything in your power to protect your citizens, even if that means civilian casualties.

                      Screw Hamas, ans screw the Palestinians if they elect those animals to lead them.

                  2. The fact that in this latest adventure at least 200 (at least half of about 1300) Palestinian civilians died for every one of the three Israeli civilian casualties is not something made up by an unfair international press. If that sounds like overkill to most it’s because it so clearly is. The  majority of the other ten casualties, Israeli soldiers, were killed by friendly fire. That’s not according to anti-anythings but to the Israelis themselves.

                    Regardless of legitimate arguments about blame, these numbers make it very hard to see Israel as the poor victim here or as caring much about “collateral” damage. Looks to me like both the Israeli government and Hamas have a remarkably callous lack of concern for Palestinian civilians who are trapped in one of the most densely populated strips of land on earth with the exists blocked.

                    Don’t see this leading anywhere Israel needs to go for any long term benefit.  

                    1. Don’t fucking launch rockets into civilian areas in Israel (during a supposed ‘cease fire’, or vote for a government that will, or your people will suffer horribly.

                      The Palestinians can make lemons out of lemonade.

              2. Well, I’m glad to see that you are talking about reality rather than

                “Heck, if you think about it, the only reason we have the slightest opening to ask innocent questions like “how many civilians died in Gaza last month again?” or “isn’t white phosphorus not recommended for use on children?” here on Colorado Pols is because they just spent half the day in the state senate one-upping each other’s ignorant posturing on the subject. ”

                I don’t belive that Joyce Foster is ignorant about Israel.

          2. The Israelis have every right to level Gaza if they want if there are rockets being fired out of it into their territory.  

            It is my understanding that ‘rights’ such as they exist in war and self-defense derive from international law and conventions.  Please show me how ‘leveling Gaza’ is consistent with minimizing civilian casualties, targeting military installations, and proportionality.

            Thanks

    3. Her husband is Rabbi Stephen Foster.  This is a deeply felt issue for her.  And in her position as Senator, she has the perogative to take just this sort of action.

      As long as we elect passionate human beings to office, we will see “messages” such as this sent around the world.

      I’ll leave it to others to judge if it was biased, a waste of a taxpayer money, etc.  But discussion of the issue is really the purpose anyway.  In that she probably succeeded.

      1. Or at least across Colfax.

        Listen, I agree with your general sentiments, if not the singular thrust of this resolution — Foster has a right to bring this up and if the leadership doesn’t gavel it into silence, go ahead and vote on it. But it’s ludicrous to suggest she succeeded in spurring discussion of the issue. We had some “go Israel!” platitudes and that was about it.  

        1. … and blogs around the world, not so much inside our Senate chambers.  It gets people thinking, and might shift some attitudes.

          Both sides need a fair hearing, and in a venue that probably won’t include any state’s legislature (it’s not their job).

          Hillary Clinton is the one who is going to have to lead the discussion that is fair to all parties.


  5. Republicans were furious when Sen. Linda Newell, D-Littleton, who had sponsored the peace and nonviolence resolution, voted against the Israeli resolution. She later explained her vote by saying she wasn’t elected to vote on international issues…

    On the one hand, she sponsored the peace/nonviolence resolution.  On the other hand, she declined to vote about Israel because she wasn’t elected to vote on “international issues”.  Was the first resolution, sponsored by her, merely about peace among the US states?  Was it an anti-Civil War position?

        1. The more I think about it, the more I see the upside of Alaska seceding from the union. Palin couldn’t run for pres in 2012, cause she wouldn’t even be a citizen of the U.S. She could run for pres of Alaska instead.  

    1. Don’t doubt Foster’s sincere concern over this issue but Sen. Newell is right.  Don’t they have enough Colorado business to take care of in the next few months? State legislators ought to refrain from using their time in the legislature to grandstand on international or other non-state business related issues.  

  7. Suffering is not a feeling that is constricted to one group

    Innocent Palestinians and Israelis, both, have died — picking one side only trivializes the problem further, making peace more difficult

    Of course, I’m now going to get bombarded for being a Republican and supporting my Party, but my support for wars in Iraq and Afghanistan was based on taking out dictators that kill innocent people — more importantly, I’ll always applaud George W Bush for recognizing Palestine, sending them millions in aide, and facilitating the pull-out of Gaza — wonderful steps in a difficult process towards peace

    At the end of the day, no Party or politician is perfect, and I would like to believe that everyone is working towards the good goal of peace

    Sadly, the lopsided bill that was introduced in our Colorado Senate is not a positive step towards peace, but rather, a step towards isolating one side — and I think a lot of our State Senators know that

    If there’s one lesson that Nazism and Fidel Castro have taught us, it is that isolationism is a losing tactic

    Thank you Pols for writing the above editorial and facilitating this discussion

    Peace and love to you all!

    1. Sir, there’s too much to comment on, but please be advised that Pres. Bush did not recognize “Palestine”, which is not now nor ever was a country.

    2. We’re not trying to debate who is or isn’t right in this conflict. Our point is that it is completely ridiculous for the STATE legislature to spend an entire day arguing about a meaningless resolution that will do nothing to help Coloradans. We’re facing a SERIOUS budget problem in Colorado. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is certainly a serious issue, but the time and the place was not here and not in the Colorado legislature.

      1. this is ridiculous for our state legislators to be discussing…after all they could be bashing gays or something…

        snark, really I agree. Apologies for engaging LB on the matter…

      2. Thank you Colorado Pols, I did mention in my earlier posting that I don’t think the legislature should be in the foreign policy business.  BUT, if a legislator does do it, he/she has every right to, and bloggers on this site should not impugn his/her motives that somehow he/she will personally benefit from it.

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

50 readers online now

Newsletter

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