President (To Win Colorado) See Full Big Line

(D) Kamala Harris

(R) Donald Trump

80%↑

20%

CO-01 (Denver) See Full Big Line

(D) Diana DeGette*

(R) V. Archuleta

98%

2%

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

(D) Joe Neguse*

(R) Marshall Dawson

95%

5%

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

(R) Jeff Hurd

(D) Adam Frisch

52%↑

48%

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

(R) Lauren Boebert

(D) Trisha Calvarese

90%

10%

CO-05 (Colorado Springs) See Full Big Line

(R) Jeff Crank

(D) River Gassen

80%

20%

CO-06 (Aurora) See Full Big Line

(D) Jason Crow*

(R) John Fabbricatore

90%

10%

CO-07 (Jefferson County) See Full Big Line

(D) B. Pettersen

(R) Sergei Matveyuk

90%

10%

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

(D) Yadira Caraveo

(R) Gabe Evans

60%

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
April 21, 2009 03:30 PM UTC

Tuesday Open Thread

  • 69 Comments
  • by: Colorado Pols

“He only employs his passion who can make no use of his reason.”

–Marcus Tullius Cicero

Tweet
Share

Comments

69 thoughts on “Tuesday Open Thread”

  1. I’ll kick it off.

    It’s cool and breezy on the bayou. Pelicans are diving for breakfast. A few clouds in the sunny sky.

    Forty eight hours from now I will wending my way west and north for a very much deserved vacation.  Houston and Austin to see the kids and their tadpoles, Del Rio/Cd. Acuna to see my Mexican dentist, Denver to see friends and get a mountain fix.  Then a long slog home.  

    1. you have earned it….

      But it is off to work I go…where a playpen of very smart kiddles will boss me around and tell me what to do….In turn, I tell them stories of the olden days…like when Clinton was President.

  2. …or perhaps the modern equivalent, applicable to the Volk at Fox:

    His employment is passion only whose audience can make no use of reason.

  3. It was interesting to read environmental activist who sometimes writes columns (can’t bring myself to call him a columnist) Bill Grant’s piece in this morning’s Sentinel.  I’m surprised that his ilk are already admitting defeat in the 2010 election before it even gets kicked off.  

    I would have included the link but the Sentinel doesn’t have it up yet…

    1. I’m surprised that his ilk are already admitting defeat in the 2010 election before it even gets kicked off.

      But please elaborate on the relevancy of a single column (that may or may not say what you claim) by a single columnist in the GJ Sentinel with ‘his ilk.’  Whom exactly are Bill Grant’s ilk?  And what poles exactly do your moderate between?  

    2. Here is the link to Mr.Grant’s column.  Not the white flag you claimed but I do understand that you desperately need something to cling to.  Pardon my Scottish, but are you really that thick of a brick?

      “Really don’t mind if you sit this one out. My words but a whisper — your deafness a shout.  I may make you feel but I can’t make you think.”  -Jethro Tull

  4. Who can come closest to the date that ColoradoPols will put Dan Caplis in the Senate Line?  

    I take July 8th.  I am sounding the alarm.  IMHO, he is one sick puppy and he is heading straight for the GOP nomination….

    1. For six years for various offices, and this is the third time for Senate. He never actually runs, or even comes close to running. We’ll believe it when we see it.

      2. He gets 15 hours a week to spout his crap. If and when he announces he would have to give up the show; all that free exposure and all that money.

  6. How do others see this? Has this site become just another liberal blog?

    We do have to keep in mind that we Dems control the elected branches in the federal government and all 3 branches here in Colorado. So a general political blog is going to lean Democratic in these times.

    But with that said…

    I think the “news” articles on the front page from Pols take a very leftward tilt. The most recent one takes joy in saying there were more people at 4/20 smokes teabagging. Yet the article asks which had more people. Definitely not evenhanded.

    And we’ve pretty much driven off the thoughtful reasoned voices from the right. And I think part of that is people here who take the view that if you disagree with someone then by definition they are wrong (and possibly evil). That does not make for reasoned discourse.

    I want to go back to the time when I would get made at the Pols slant on some articles. I want to go back to the time where NEWSMAN would post something where I really disagreed with him – but couldn’t come up with a logical reason for why.

    (I don’t however want to go back to G.W. Bush as president.)

    1. Pols is non-partisan, however with the number of Repub shills and trolls showing up to spread their rants and raves the Pols members tend to look more liberal than it is.

      Saying the conservatives have been driven off is not correct.  Those with good reasoned posts are welcome.  I look forward to good diaries and responses.  That is one way of understanding what many of my voters think.  Unfortunately, it seems many from freepers and redstate believe Pols is their playground, making it difficult for our thinking bretheren.

    2. The right-wingers have cut back on posting for a variety of reasons, some of them having nothing to do with politics. Those who stick around tend not to be interested in debate, but rather in scoring a few points for their side. That’s not how it’s always been, and that’s not how it’s always going to be, but it is a somewhat natural consequence of them not having any power in this state or nationally.

      I don’t think you’re going to get what you want without electing Republicans back into office. The right-wingers have retreated to Red State and the like, not because we’re mean to them (some of us are, but no more than we were last year) but because it really wears you out when you’re in the minority. A general blog like this is going to reflect conventional wisdom, and right now, like it or not, the CW is center-left.

      1. Go back and search on this topic and you’ll see that this debate has gone back and forth since Pols was started in 2004. We’re a Democratic site. No wait, we’re secretly run by Marc Holtzman. No – it’s Margaret Thatcher’s ghost!

        The other main point is one we’ve talked about in reference to a lot of stories, particularly Josh Penry. People asked why we wrote so much about Penry. Well, he was the ONLY Republican spokesman on most major issues. What do you want us to do? People ask why we don’t write more lately about positive Republican stories. Okay – where are they?

        We don’t invent the news. Don’t blame us if the GOP has little good news to impart.  

        1. how political is the 420 thing? Any prominent politicians attend either event? Or prominent columnists? Seems like a gratuitous swipe at the teabaggers.

          There’s a tone to your posts that goes beyond mere interpretation. We expect pithy analysis but you guys are getting ridiculous.

          I’m not going to ask for equal opportunity reporting on the news in the name of balance. But how many times will you post that picture of Obama Nazi guy?

            1. It could also have been written that conservatives met to discuss major concenrs with the gigantic deficits we are taking on while liberals go get stoned. Yes we see ourselves as righteous and the conservatives as doofuses. But that is not the only way to frame it.

              1. Let’s be clear, lefties really aren’t protesting anymore. When they did, most people made fun of them.

                Let me splain it to you:

                People make fun of protesters.

                It’s a risk you take when you protest. People make fun of the 420 protesters too, except all the jokes are old and therefore less funny.

                Don’t know if you went out protesting when the Iraq war started (I’m guessing not) or against the WTO/IMF, but we got a ton of shit for it. The only media coverage we’d get is for the giant stupid puppets, or the occasional anti-Semite, or the boobies on the hippies, or the douchebags who broke a window.

                That’s how people report on protests.

                The only new thing is that it’s the first time right-wingers have been involves in an old-fashioned protest.

                So yeah, normal unbiased people are going to make fun of right-wingers in a climate like this.

          3. not to our liking, we’d just be left with sterile milque-toast.

            “Aristotle maintained that women have fewer teeth than men, although he was twice married, it never occurred to him to verify this statement by examining his wives’ mouths.” -Bertrand Russell

            1. After all, I can’t “ban” anything. And I’m free to judge it any way I want. In my case, it’s as a long time poster (3 years this month!),*  and as a liberal who really has no use for liberal blogs like DailyKos or Square State.

              Now, this hasn’t become some gratuitous “dems good ‘pubs bad” echo chamber like a few less reasonable conservatives have, but I feel like Pols has crossed a line dividing “left leaning” from full-on “liberal.” Time will tell if my impression is correct; we’ll see how some Dem slip-ups get covered when they happen in the future, or how they report good news for the GOP.

              * I don’t say that to lord it over newer posters, or to be some yammering “it was better back in the day” stooge; it’s just to show that I’ve got a little perspective on how things have gradually changed.

              1. Trust me.  I’ve been around almost as long as you’ve been, throw in my year of lurking, maybe longer.  Situations change.  Whatever extra exposure R’s have gotten lately is well deserved.  When our state is in dire economics times and the far right control of the R Party has decided to do absolutely nothing about it, then it needs to be reported.  Penry’s recurring blunders are just a small part of it.  

        1. but what else can you do? Aside from paying conservatives to post on ColoradoPols, people come here because they want to.

          You and I are theoretically on the same side and have argued plenty, sometimes even disrespectfully. (gasp) But we can take it, even if it gets annoying.

          Most right-wingers can’t take it in this environment. I’ve tried to explain that in other posts, so I won’t repeat it. But a blog like this that doesn’t intend to be partisan will still end up reflecting conventional wisdom if it becomes overwhelming (as I think it has).  

          1. some uber-cons just hate the idea of being out-thunk. When their fallacious arguments are shown for what they are, it is easier to just bail than to admit you are wrong.  Hell, maybe Haners grew a few neuron connections and will come back as a liberal.  Isn’t that what the power of persuasion is about?

            1. though some of them clearly are (see “Skeptic, Another” and “Tad, Liber”).

              In general I think they’re stubborn. Actually, my secret theory was that they all had successful and somewhat pompous liberal brothers-in-law and were conservative just to piss that guy off.

            2. Haners seemed to me more moderate and open-minded when I first started posting a couple of years ago as “yevrahnevets.” When I came back in reverse, he seemed to have dug in more to his conservative self-identification. Maybe that is one of the effects of the combination of being outnumbered and outgunned: Entrenchment, rather than making concessions.

              A professor of mine recently mentioned research that comes as no surprise to any casual observer of human tendencies: People faced with evidence that contradicts their beliefs manage to insulate their beliefs from the evidence, by reinterpreting the evidence in strained ways that make it either support or remain neutral to their beliefs, or simply by disregarding the evidence and rationalizing why they have disregarded it. Maybe a barrage of such evidence and argumentation simply has the counterintuitive effect of strengthening the beliefs that the evidence and argumentation are challenging.

              1. When I find myself digging in strong with an opinion I try to stop and think it through carefully. And when someone else was pushing me in another direction I then tell them they were right.

                That step back has been one of the most valuable things I have ever learned in life. The other really valuable thing is the power of the pharse “I’m sorry, I was wrong.”

              2. If a man is offered a fact which goes against his instincts, he will scrutinize it closely, and unless the evidence is overwhelming, he will refuse to believe it. If, on the other hand, he is offered something which affords a reason for acting in accordance to his instincts, he will accept it even on the slightest evidence. The origin of myths is explained in this way. -Bertrand Russell

    3. Pols? BIASED? Hahahaha!

      OF COURSE Pols is biased. We knew Pols was biased in 2005 when Holtzy’s people infiltrated the blog. Holtzy knew it too, but was perfectly willing to use the access. Reporters do read this propaganda site and that’s not going to change.

      There are those who want Republicans to stop coming here and are telling people to stay away. I say screw that! I created an account and decided to stop lurking. The only reason Pols gets away with their OBVIOUS PRO-DEMOCRAT AGENDA is because good conservatives let them do it. What are you going to do, run away to safety at a blog that gets no comments? Build a blog that gets nothing but sycophants like Daily Kos? Sorry. I have NEVER feared debate, even with dozens of liberals all ganged up, because if I’m right I will win.

      I’ll start–Republicans WILL WIN THE GOVERNOR’S RACE next year with either Penry or McInnis, and will likely retake the Senate. I think Pols knows it and that’s why they’ve shifted so hard left lately. Anybody wanna tell me I’m wrong?

          1. You registered today.  Why not read posts for a week before you shoot off your mouth.

            Oh.  Sorry.  Shills don’t do that.

            Hope you’re making more as a shill than you could make at McDonald’s, which is the only other thing you might be qualified to do.

          3. but the dems will hold onto the Gov and Senate seats. Repubs have lost all their live and let live appeal. Democrats hold all the high ground. Please do not be offended. This is true. Democrats have the majority of unaffiliated voters because dems are percieved as being the ones working to find solutions to today’s problems like the economy. Republican’s are the party of NO right now.

             Do you remember Ronald Reagan winning over the unaffiliated’s in 1980? How did he do that?

            – Charming

            – great communicator

            – full of ideas and possible solutions to problems (although we now know his trickle down does not work for working class and middle class folks)

            Many percieved Reagan as a hero. We were down as a country and he tapped into our willingness to fight for solutions that would make us feel good about ourselves. The fall of Saigon was in 75, we had long lines at the pump and helicopters stuck in the sand in the middle east in the late 70’s and here came Reagan riding on his John Wayne like horse to save us. I don’t see any republicans like this right now. Do you?

            I have not seen a Republican nationally or here in Colorado that can overcome the obvious negative slope the R’s are in right now.

            The only way I see an R winning one of the big races is if:

            1) the economy does not improve

            2) one of the R’s for Senate or Gov. races is suddenly percieved with all 3 Reagan like qualities mentioned above.

            I just don’t see it right now. Obviously from my handle you know I am a dem, but, I truly believe this is solid analysis of the political climate right now.

      2. although, in all honesty, I’m not a mortician.

        “Since the New Deal, Republicans have been on the wrong side of every issue of concern to ordinary Americans; Social Security, the war in Vietnam, equal rights, civil liberties, church- state separation, consumer issues, public education, reproductive freedom, national health care, labor issues, gun policy, campaign-finance reform, the environment and tax fairness. No political party could remain so consistently wrong by accident.

        The only rational conclusion is that, despite their cynical “family values” propaganda, the Republican Party is a criminal conspiracy to betray the interests of the American people in favor of plutocratic and corporate interests, and absolutist religious groups.”

        Here, FDR responds with good humor at Republican attempts to lay blame for the Great Depression at his doorstep. The president however takes exception to those who would assail his scotch terrier Fala


      3. another over militarized, bigoted, ditto-head.

        Look, America steadily moving towards environmental awareness, economic fairness, racial tolerance, and yet the GOP is still resisting with every weapon at it’s disposal (i.e., fear and anger) and attempting to move the country in the opposite direction.  Unfortunately, fear and anger are effective tools, but are losing that effectiveness. The sane, moderate Republicans are marginalized, while the right wing extremists are kept fron and center, for entertainment purposes, by the “liberal press”.  These “wingers” tell themselves that it’s only us crazy progressives who are turned away by their hatemongering….and that delusion is their downfall.

    4. and no more in need of executive oversight than the evolution of a species. After all, Pols is little more than just another Poster, and anyone who creates a diary on anything interesting of any ideology has a more-or-less equal chance of getting their diary promoted. And everyone can comment on that diary at will, as well as on what Pols reports.

      If conservatives want to post here and engage in debate, that’s wonderful. If they don’t, that’s our collective loss, but not one that requires any intervention.

      And let’s not forget that, in the end, political debate shouldn’t be conceived of as a mere shouting match between arbitrary and opposed ideologies, but rather the mobilization of arguments in competition with one another in a mutually-refining discipline of using our minds to address our shared social and political challenges.

      It is not “us” against “them,” but rather thought against thought, reason against reason, evidence against evidence, with the argument that uses more of each having an edge, and the argument using less diminishing in strength.

      I am no less inclined to argue with Democrats than with Republicans, if the argument that a given Democrat is making is one that I think I can improve on. And I have no hesitation to agree with a Republican if that Republican makes an argument that I think is a strong one. I do not tend to favor Democratic policies because I am a Democrat, but rather am a Democrat because I tend to favor Democratic poliicies. And I tend to favor Democratic policies because I believe that reason and evidence in service to the pursuit of an ever-more robust, fair, and sustainable society tend to argue in their favor.

      But I disagree with protectionism, a popular Democratic position, and favor Faith-based initiatives. and a moment of silence in school in which students can pray or meditate or reflect, and “school choice,” all closely associated with the Republican Party.

      Let people argue positions rather than cling to ideologies, and the question of whether there are more Democrats/liberals than Republicans/conservatives will be moot. There will be plenty of thoughtful people willing to engage in robust debates about the issues of the day.

      Maybe, just maybe, one of the reasons this site has become more liberal is because it has become more analytical, and the one thing more demoralizing than being outnumbered is being outgunned.

      Let the crucible of robust debate accept all contributers, respond to all arguments, and separate the wheat from the chaff, regardless of what bias that process does or does not produce.

  7. I’m on a bunch of email lists and over the last week I’ve gotten emails from all these interest groups about how cuts in the budget on the part they care about means the end of civilization here in Colorado.

    Yes that’s how the game is played, everyone screams over their budget because it should be left alone regardless of economic circumstances. And yes, these budget cuts do hurt programs and the people they serve. And yes, in an economic downturn many of these services need more resources, not less.

    But the tax revhue is what the tax revnue is. The economy is what the economy is. Wouldn’t it be lovely to see some group say yes this is hurting us, yes this impacts the state, but like everyone else we have to figure out how to do more with less and we understand that like everyone else, we need to live on a bit less.

    1. To be trite about it, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. Nobody particularly appreciates a group’s unilateral sacrifice; in difficult times, graciousness is weakness or even uselessness.

      Lots of groups would agree to cuts if they were convinced that they were necessary and that everyone was giving up their fair share. That can certainly be done: look at union workers at factories who took pay cuts in hard times.

      Yes, it would be nice if this or that agency or interest group would put their necks on the guillotine and tell us, “Cut here.” It would keep us from having to make difficult choices.

    2. In a perfect business world, yes. But unfortunately when the economy goes to hell in a handbasket, the government is on the hook for all of the larger social needs. Same with nonprofits providing social services–they’re raising fewer dollars but the demand for their services are through the roof. Screaming is a natural competitive response. Don’t have the answer, but I don’t think any of us wants to see families starving in the streets or children going without vaccinations.

  8. Ex-Florida Speaker of the House, Ray Sansom has bee indicted for a number of corruption matters.

    In brief, while SOTH, he directed something like 25 times the funds that other schools got to a small panhandle college.  There was an airplane hangar built which coincidentally, a big backer of his uses.  Then, he was appointed president of the college without competition (Hello, CU)while being SOTH.  He saw no problem with that.

    Well, many did, even some Republicans, so he stepped down as the session was starting.

    Now’s he’s indicted.  

  9. He’ll never run, but you can’t help but think about how much fun a race with him involved as a candidate would be.

    Caplis is crazy like a fox. I highly doubt he’s any where near as nuts as he passes himself off as. His over the top rants about how the catholic clergy are unjustly  persecuted, “sanctity of marraige”, the whole “pro-life/life begins at conception/pro choice proponents are murderers” routine, “Obama’s been indoctrinated by radical Islamic terrorists at the Indonesian madrassa, etc. are no doubt hurled on a daily basis for reasons other than sincerity.

    He’s first and foremost a salesman, and his passion for his “causes” is for hire.

    Any self promotion concerning running for office is, I suspect, more advertising for his law firm or talk show. But we can allways joke about how much fun a race with him running would be. The soundbytes, the outrageous accusations, the posturing “Il Duce” style, and the debates….that would be priceless!

  10. from the Denver Post

    He co-authored an article published in the European Physical Journal and won a prestigious $250,000 Hertz Fellowship that he will use to earn a doctorate at Stanford University in condensed matter physics.

    Yet when the University of Colorado prodigy graduates in May in applied math and physics, he will have just turned 18.

    1. .

      we will win their hears and minds,

      and the Pashtun Afghanis will come to see that our lifestyle and values are better than theirs.  

      That, after all, is what this war is about.  

      Helping them modernize.  

      What else could it be ?

      Bin Laden died years ago; Mullah Omar now lives in Somalia.  This no longer is about getting revenge for the 9/11 attacks.  

      I say, let’s nuke ’em back into the Stone Age.  That will teach them a lesson.  It will also cut the cost of this war.  And, in the long run, if we declare victory and leave after blasting the country with 100-200 nuclear weapons, we’ll probably do less damage to them and to us.

      .

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

34 readers online now

Newsletter

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