President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Joe Biden*

(R) Donald Trump



CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta



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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson



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

(D) Adam Frisch

(R) Jeff Hurd



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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese



CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen



CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore



CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk



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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans



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
February 21, 2017 12:59 PM UTC

Get More Smarter on Tuesday (February 21)

  • by: Colorado Pols

You have only one shopping day left until George Washington’s birthday. Now, let’s see if we can’t Get More Smarter. If you think we missed something important, please include the link in the comments below (here’s a good example). If you are more of a visual learner, check out The Get More Smarter Show.


► Congress is taking a break for its annual President’s Day Recess, but that doesn’t necessarily mean elected officials such as Sen. Cory Gardner (R-Yuma) are likely to make themselves available to constituents. As the Fort Collins Coloradoan reports, local residents are so incensed with Gardner’s inaccessibility that they are planning their own town hall meeting as protest. The Denver Post has more on Friday’s town hall meeting (sans Gardner):

Organizers invited U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner, who declined, but Farnan said it’s important to hold it anyway so that residents can share their ideas and demonstrate that town halls still matter.

“You should be standing in front of your constituents and hear what they have to say as long as it’s civil and respectful,” Farnan said.

Aides to Gardner said the Republican senator has meetings this week with the Colorado Space Coalition, the National Association of Manufacturers and the Colorado Health Care Association — to name a few — but no public forums. [Pols emphasis]

But they defended his outreach efforts and noted his past use of telephone town halls, a tool that has become an increasingly popular substitute on Capitol Hill.

You may not have any real access to your own U.S. Senator, but if you’re lucky, you might get invited to listen to him talk on the telephone! That’s pretty much the same, right?

Unfortunately for Sen. Gardner, this routine is wearing thin across the state. In the meantime, Colorado residents show no sign of letting up on demonstrations and protests.


► Before leaving Washington D.C. last week, House Republicans released a vague outline of a proposal about what to do with Obamacare if they end up repealing the health care law. On Monday, former South Carolina governor and current Rep. Mark Sanford admitted in a television interview that he could not guarantee that the Republican health care plan would allow all Americans to keep their current health insurance coverage.

As The Hill explains, Republicans may have a hard time convincing constituents that this vague new plan is even half-baked.


► We all know that campaign finance loopholes are big enough to accommodate whatever metaphor you prefer, but some paid campaigns are so brazenly sketchy that it’s hard to believe they could exist. For example, this barrage of advertisements promoting Walker Stapleton’s campaign for Governor apparent interest in term limits. The intent is so obvious that even Republican-aligned groups like Compass Colorado can’t help but applaud the name recognition boost for Stapleton.


Get even more smarter after the jump…



► Apparently Heaven has a policy in place for immigrants, or something. Bob Beauprez is involved…naturally.


Graphic via Washington Post

► President Trump is averaging about four false claims for every day he has been in the White House. As “The Fix” explains:

Donald Trump has been president for all or part of 33 days. He has averaged four falsehoods or misleading statements a day(!) during that time. There hasn’t been a single day of Trump’s presidency where he has said nothing false or misleading.

That data, which comes from a terrific new project from the Post’s Fact Checker documenting Trump’s statements over his 100 days, is stunning.


► Senator Cory Gardner (R-Yuma) says he has had a number of “great conversations” with President Trump. Uh, okay.


► Where is Rep. Mike Coffman (R-Aurora)? Who knows! But we can tell you who he isn’t meeting with this week…


► According to a new poll, 3 in 10 Republicans in the U.S. have a favorable view of Russian President Vladimir Putin. The poll does not indicate what percentage of these respondents were told that they were supposed to answer favorably.


► Huge crowds turn out in Denver in support of an immigrant woman who is taking sanctuary in a Denver-area church in order to avoid deportation. The Trump administration, meanwhile, says it would sure like to prevent people from panicking about new immigration policies.


► President Trump announced his newest selection to become his National Security Adviser; Army. Lt. Gen. H.R. McMaster has some ties to Colorado Springs.


President Trump likes to say that “nobody” cares about seeing his tax returns. People in Pueblo apparently care very much, however.


► Anti-semitic behavior is very bad, says President Trump.


► If you think the White House is dysfunctional, you should visit Breitbart headquarters.



► If people in Yuma, Colorado (the hometown of Sen. Cory Gardner) are worried about President Trump, they aren’t going to admit to anything.


► In which Congressman Mike Coffman (R-Aurora) completely inaccurately compares David Petraeus and Hillary Clinton.



► “Eminent domain.” Two words that may make it impossible to actually construct a border wall with Mexico.

Don’t forget to check out The Get More Smarter Show. You can also Get More Smarter by liking Colorado Pols on Facebook!


22 thoughts on “Get More Smarter on Tuesday (February 21)

  1. Military-style weapons are not protected by the Second Amendment, Maryland appeals court rules.


    “Put simply,” King wrote, “we have no power to extend Second Amendment protection to the weapons of war that the Heller decision explicitly excluded from such coverage.”

    On tap: More false victimhood. More whining that denying the ability to spray a crowd with 100+ bullets a minute is just like rounding up someone without due process guaranteed by the 5th Amendment's due process clause.

    1. Yeah, I'm a fan of the Second Amendment, as far as personal rights go.  If someone needs 50 handguns to feel safe in their own home, or 45 hunting rifles to feed their family or protect their livestock from predators, I'm all for it.    

      If they need military grade assault weapons to feel safe in their own home, then they bloody well need to learn to shoot.  

      1. Yeah, me too, as far as personal rights go. It's kinda a bummer that nobody cares about gun restrictions anymore. Too busy spouting about all those other stupid rights they feel they somehow need  makes concern trolling really dull.  

        Perhaps after the legalization of silencers or the lifting of assault weapons importation ban you guys may spas out again, but it appears you have your hands full just keeping your ability to  exercise that one Amendment before the 2nd or that other right you speak of that I did not see reference to in the Constitution (I totally <cntrl>F'ed it and everything)

        Booooring.  If you guys need to boost posts on the site you gotta post something meaty – controversial – debatable at least….a 2013 assault weapons ban in a Dem state is akin to the 2013 mag ban here in CO. Nobody cares or complies. Yawn man. Yawn. 

        Y'all should start some shit in the CO legislature. I stockpiled waaay too many guns to profit from Hillary and I need a liberal expansion effort to promote some internet sales. 

        I also have a pile of arguments, catch phrases, statistics and general evidence of logic and reason concerning gun rights sitting around here somewhere collecting dust that may be helpful defending other rights- I would be more than willing to send over….you may need to counter many of the arguments you made with me in the past in the near future for those other protections you seem to value….you silly patriots….


        1. No one gives a shit about your guns, Negev.  Nobody wants to take them away from you, and no one is intimidated by your pathological need to hoard as many as you can.  

          The rights you claim your drooling, jibbering defenses of gun rights would help are human rights, and you, as you've admitted, don't have the same ideas about what rights other humans should have.  Just guns.  So your help isn't needed.  

          Again….you go run along and play patriot.  The grownups will handle this.    

          1. Dude, you bait easy.

            It must be extremely inconvenient to have all those human rights protected by the same standards as gun rights. Its gotta hurt to think your humanity is equally balanced in protection to my AR15. Perhaps you can go exercise your 1st to deny the 2nd, and try to get them separated somehow so you don't look like such a hypocrite.

            Ammosexuals may become protected from discrimination by the Equal Protection Clause. Oh the humanity! Careful what you wish for…

            1. It must be extremely inconvenient to have all those human rights protected by the same standards as gun rights.   No, because they're not.

              Its gotta hurt to think your humanity is equally balanced in protection to my AR15.  No, because it's not. 

              Your AR-15 (piece of crap weapon that it is) is not an aspect of your humanity, no matter how many times you fondle it.   

              Again…and I'll go slowly;  there…is…nothing… about you that gets to me, intimidates me, or threatens me in any way.  You're comically pathetic. It would be sad, but that would require you to show some modicum of humanity in order to create pathos.  Luckily, that's not happening.

              You can go on living in your own sad little world, but unless dyslexia is yet one more of your mental problems, you didn't read what MJ55 wrote.  Courts are finding that your spray-n-pray weapons are not protected under the 2nd Amendment, But you're safe here in Colorado.  We're big on hunting and stuff, and people live in places where they legitimately need weapons for their own safety. No one is taking your guns away.  So, your fear of losing them is the same as your revolution, and your badass posing.

              Fake and Useless. 



              1. I see. Where are these so-called human rights you speak of protected? 

                How are they categorized? I mean, are they numbered by level of importance or just bundled into a group?

                Are you allowed to "cherry pick" the ones you find virtuous and shun others you don't? Or are they, whats that word….

                Inalienable. That's it.

                To to sit here and pester me for standing up for (insert any right you see fit) while defending your self-righteous fight for humanity is, by definition, hypocritical, and defies the sanctimonious equal protection you so righteously espouse.

                You are far to arrogant to see the truth in my statement and you find anyone who disagrees with you target for ridicule, which only supports the hypocrisy of your attitude. I support all the rights granted to us, with many (actually not many) I do not agree with. You should too. 

                Furthermore the fact that you find  anything at all I have said an attempt to intimidate you is nothing more than paranoia in which you have lost touch with reality, but we all knew that already.  

                Seriously, you're just a troll hunter. I'm a troll. I get it. Represent your faction with clarity and consistency or pass the baton to someone who will. I'll wait…..

                1. Oh, I admit that I was trolling (baiting, poking, jerking the chain of) Negev with my original comment about the Maryland court finding no protection for possession of  military weapons under the 2nd amendment.

                  And Negev responded, predictably, that the 2nd amendment rights he favors should be considered of equal weight and importance to all the other rights in the Bill of Rights.
                  We agree on that, I think.  No more and no less important than.

                  I'm personally more concerned with eroding of the first (attacks on press and religion, and freedoms of speech and assembly) and fifth (due process denied immigrants rounded up and detained indefinitely).  And yes, I personally think that detention without trial and Christian preference are way more serious infringements than whether or not John Doe gets to keep 1 or 20 guns of whatever flavor.

                  I get the connection of resistance to a tyrannical government – but your side blathering on about how you all needed a home arsenal to protect from Obama? Or Hillary? against all objective evidence to the contrary, deeply undercuts that argument.

                  However, the Maryland court has found that restrictions on possession and use of military weapons are not considered "infringement" of 2nd amendment rights to keep and bear arms. That's newsworthy, since it will probably escalate the culture wars and ratchet up to the Supreme Court under Trump. Hence, I brought it up to "poke" you.

                  Other than that, I can't decode your railings against each other. As far as I can tell, you don't actually disagree with enforcement of any of the first 10 amendments to the Constitution, aka "Bill of Rights".

                  The Bill of Rights

                  Rights and Protections Guaranteed in the Bill of Rights

                  Amendment Rights and Protections – First

                  • Freedom of speech
                  • Freedom of the press
                  • Freedom of religion
                  • Freedom of assembly
                  • Right to petition the government


                  • Right to bear arms


                  • Protection against housing soldiers in civilian homes


                  • Protection against unreasonable search and seizure
                  • Protection against the issuing of warrants without probable cause


                  • Protection against
                    • trial without indictment
                    • double jeopardy
                    • self-incrimination
                    • property seizure


                  • Right to a speedy trial
                  • Right to be informed of charges
                  • Right to be confronted by witnesses
                  • Right to call witnesses
                  • Right to a legal counsel


                  • Right to trial by jury


                  • Protection against
                    • excessive bail
                    • excessive fines
                    • cruel and unusual punishment


                  • Rights granted in the Constitution shall not infringe on other rights.


                  • Powers not granted to the Federal Government in the Constitution belong to the states or the people.
                  1. Thank you mama! You speak reason. I know you were trolling me but it's a pleasure. I am sure once the courts find required medical admission privileges for abortion providers constitutional and  Trump's new, Constitutionally sound immigration bill passes we can both agree that unnecessary restrictions, on ANY rights, are bad news. 

                    So it's amusing when gun opposition gets all giddy to see gun rights systematically eroded while under the current administration their preferred or favored rights are more at risk than mine.  

                    But you are awesome. Are you sure you are a Democrat? We could use thinkers like you on the dark side, ever consider?devil

                    1. Medical admission privileges constitutional? To WTF are you referring?

                      I'm not "giddy" about the Maryland appeals court decision. But I do agree with it.

                      I still have a raffle ticket for a Glock to help pay for seats at my community theater. I suppose if I win it, I'll go practice with it. And keep it locked up the rest of the time.

                      But nonviolence goes clear to my bones. I can't even imagine turning that Glock on a living being. I've practiced a couple styles of martial arts, and I get self-defense. I'm not sure that a weapon capable of killing hundreds in a minute of fire qualifies as "self defense". I had an old single shot shotgun that seemed adequate to me.

                      I'd much rather defend from a tyrannical government by what we're doing now – writing, marching, protesting, voting, running for office, legislating, boycotting, etc.

                      We are not yet at that time, and goddess keep us from that time, when the last resort becomes the first choice.

                      Thinking is thinking. Reasoning is reasoning. Not a partisan exercise, or at least it never was before. But yes, I'm a Democrat.

                2. Negev, you've made it clear that you are all about two issues; your guns, and other people's reproductive systems.  You see the massive protests that people are mounting in defense of other people's rights, and it makes you jealous.  You wish your causes had the kind of support that human rights do, so you keep trying to co-opt the wave of action and public sentiment as something connected to your obsession with guns and with exerting your will over a woman's body.    It's not going to happen, because there's nothing righteous about crying over not having a 100-round magazine, or not being able to tell a woman what to do with her own body.  

                  In our current political climate, your guns are safe, and your right to own them is not threatened in any way outside of your own insecurity.  Other people, human beings, are being threatened by this political climate, and you are one of those people supporting those threats.  

                  So…no.  You can't join this party, and it doesn't need your help.  While we agree that the Bill of Rights is sacred, we are not on the same side. 

                  1. Once again assumptions have made you an ass. Your failure to recognize that human rights protection includes the right to bear arms, and abortion restrictions mirror gun restrictions in scope and ineffectiveness, thereby allowing the most similar comparison to illustrate just how artificial your support of equal rights seems to be. Your unrelenting effort to deflect that into fringe gun nut and misogyny rhetoric makes you a Constitutional sellout.    

                    Make no mistake – I do not want to join this party of yours. You are a poor gatekeeper. You certainly don't need my help, but man, you need help. 




                    1. Whether it's willful or not, you misunderstand.  I fully support your right to bear arms under the Second Amendment, even your piece of crap AR-15, because that right comes from a document I hold dear.  Period. 

                      I laugh at the notion that you're not safe unless you have a fully automatic weapon with 100+ round magazines, because that notion comes from your own jittery, sweaty fantasies, and those are quite funny.  

                      Your desperate attempts to link reproductive rights, which are the rights people have over their own bodies, with gun rights, which are the rights to own inanimate objects, are also laughable.  And, yes, misogynistic.  Go figure. 


          1. He's a complete tool, but his family look like nice people, so, points in his favor.  

            P.S. I can’t make fun of a guy because wife is taller and much better looking; that would make me a complete hypocrite.

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

46 readers online now


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