AZ Assassination is not “isolated”

Sarah Palin is not responsible for the AZ murders. Neither is Glann Beck, Sharon Angle, or the ACORN reporter.  There’s a lot of bs in the media – putting scoped crosshairs on a map and naming your political targets under the crosshairs is bs.  Calling for “Second Amendment solutions” at events where people are reminding each other that “the tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants” is bs.

But Loughner is responsible for the murders he committed and the political assassination he attempted.

Yes, he seems to be a loon. But yes, it was political. With political motivations and results.

And in the political rhetoric storm now going on, the right and their talkers are calling it in an isolated event by a lone guy. (Except our own Pete Boyles who has it all figured out why the responsibility lies with the Pima County sheriff.)

It is not an “isolated incident’, except that Loughner appeared to have not been involved in anything like before, and nothing else happened like it last Saturday.


from David Neiwert at crooksandliars.com

http://crooksandliars.com/davi…

Just in the past two and a half years, here’s the record of “isolated incidents” amassed so far:

— July 2008: A gunman named Jim David Adkisson, agitated at how “liberals” are “destroying America,” walks into a Unitarian Church and opens fire, killing two churchgoers and wounding four others.

— October 2008: Two neo-Nazis are arrested in Tennessee in a plot to murder dozens of African-Americans, culminating in the assassination of President Obama.

— December 2008: A pair of “Patriot” movement radicals — the father-son team of Bruce and Joshua Turnidge, who wanted “to attack the political infrastructure” — threaten a bank in Woodburn, Oregon, with a bomb in the hopes of extorting money that would end their financial difficulties, for which they blamed the government. Instead, the bomb goes off and kills two police officers. The men eventually are convicted and sentenced to death for the crime.

— December 2008: In Belfast, Maine, police discover the makings of a nuclear “dirty bomb” in the basement of a white supremacist shot dead by his wife. The man, who was independently wealthy, reportedly was agitated about the election of President Obama and was crafting a plan to set off the bomb.

— January 2009: A white supremacist named Keith Luke embarks on a killing rampage in Brockton, Mass., raping and wounding a black woman and killing her sister, then killing a homeless man before being captured by police as he is en route to a Jewish community center.

— February 2009: A Marine named Kody Brittingham is arrested and charged with plotting to assassinate President Obama. Brittingham also collected white-supremacist material.

— April 2009: A white supremacist named Richard Poplawski opens fire on three Pittsburgh police officers who come to his house on a domestic-violence call and kills all three, because he believed President Obama intended to take away the guns of white citizens like himself. Poplawski is currently awaiting trial.

— April 2009: Another gunman in Okaloosa County, Florida, similarly fearful of Obama’s purported gun-grabbing plans, kills two deputies when they come to arrest him in a domestic-violence matter, then is killed himself in a shootout with police.

— May 2009: A “sovereign citizen” named Scott Roeder walks into a church in Wichita, Kansas, and assassinates abortion provider Dr. George Tiller.

— June 2009: A Holocaust denier and right-wing tax protester named James Von Brunn opens fire at the Holocaust Museum, killing a security guard.

— February 2010: An angry tax protester named Joseph Ray Stack flies an airplane into the building housing IRS offices in Austin, Texas. (Media are reluctant to label this one “domestic terrorism” too.)

— March 2010: Seven militiamen from the Hutaree Militia in Michigan and Ohio are arrested and charged with plotting to assassinate local police officers with the intent of sparking a new civil war.

— March 2010: An anti-government extremist named John Patrick Bedell walks into the Pentagon and opens fire, wounding two officers before he is himself shot dead.

— May 2010: A “sovereign citizen” from Georgia is arrested in Tennessee and charged with plotting the violent takeover of a local county courthouse.

— May 2010: A still-unidentified white man walks into a Jacksonville, Fla., mosque and sets it afire, simultaneously setting off a pipe bomb.

— May 2010: Two “sovereign citizens” named Jerry and Joe Kane gun down two police officers who pull them over for a traffic violation, and then wound two more officers in a shootout in which both of them are eventually killed.

— July 2010: An agitated right-winger and convict named Byron Williams loads up on weapons and drives to the Bay Area intent on attacking the offices of the Tides Foundation and the ACLU, but is intercepted by state patrolmen and engages them in a shootout and armed standoff in which two officers and Williams are wounded.

— September 2010: A Concord, N.C., man is arrested and charged with plotting to blow up a North Carolina abortion clinic. The man, 26-year–old Justin Carl Moose, referred to himself as the “Christian counterpart to (Osama) bin Laden” in a taped undercover meeting with a federal informant.

All articles are sourced and linked at the story.

What’s Going To Happen in 2011 Colorado Politics

End of year

Last year at year end I made some predictions   What’s Going To Happen in 2010  Colorado Politics

I missed a few – but I also got some right.

So let’s do it again.

2011

The script is already written for the biggest local political story, whether it’s treated as such or not.  redistricting will start with polite bi-partisan baloney.  It won’t be sincere, but I don’t think the D’s will fall for the R’s let’s compromise by giving us everything we want  So it will be partisan and somewhat rancorous. The lines will move, but not that much.  CDs 1, 2 5, and 6 will remain safe and none of the incumbents there will be seriously primaried, nor challenged (as long as there’s no Appalachian Trail hiking)

The state budget will be balanced. There will be cuts in education spending.

Colorado oil and gas production will follow the prices.  Retail gasoline prices will go up, gas taxes will not.

RefC expires.  There will be a TABOR law suit in Colorado. The basic gist will be that TABOR is unconstitutional  because the net effect is that Colorado does not have a “republican form of gov’t” as guaranteed by Article 4, Section 4 of the US Constitution because the elected legislators cannot raise taxes.  And because of Amendment 23, the Gallagher Amendment and one or two others, in fact, the elected Legislature cannot follow all the Colorado Constitutional requirements when budgeting.  

The public arguments about TABOR will boil down to -“less filling – tastes great”- higher taxes or lower taxes, but there is no denying TABOR gives the Colorado voters of  1992 more say in our budget than we had on theirs. No other states will adopt TABOR in 2011, though some will continue to talk about it.

Dave Schulteis will say some outlandish things, though perhaps not as insane as claiming that babies of unwed mothers should be born with AIDS. Perhaps.   So will Laura Boggs, though perhaps not as harsh as schools are stupid. Perhaps.

Doug Bruce will not pay the fine just levied. The SOS will not be serious about collecting. Jose Silva will continue to owe for similar violations. As will some of Gessler’s former clients.

At least one Colorado legislator will claim that Colorado should start stockpiling gold and silver.  At least one Colorado legislator will claim that Colorado should bid   on the next available Olympics.

The “Consumer Finance Protection Agency (CFPA)” will continue to come to life. As deadlines for CFPA’s progress approach, the banks and sympathetic politicos will demonize Elizabeth Warren as an overreaching liberal hack out to destroy the best banking system in the world.  

Despite campaign rhetoric about 50%, an end to earmarks, and other hoopla about less spending, the Obama tax cuts will drive up the deficit.  

The 2009 healthcare reform will not be repealed.  (Well, except for the death panels and the 16,500 new IRS agents.)

The end of DADT will be forgotten so fast that by the end of next year people will mistakenly  believe that it was ended years earlier.

The 2012 presidential election cycle will start in earnest any minute now.  There will be no serious D challenger to the President.  There will be a large, cacophonous R field.  (2012 – Iowa and New Hampshire will go first. Palin will not win the Colorado caucus and the eventual R nominee will not have won   Colorado.)  Birthers will get local media through 2011.

The Av’s will not win the Cup (nor will the Blackhawks repeat).  The Broncos will draft for offense.  The Nuggets will go out no later than round 2.  The Rockies will be fun to watch – if they stay healthy, they will win 88+ and contend. Colorado will suck in the Pac 10 12,  worse than Washington State and worse than Utah in football. (Dan Caplis will not criticize da Buffs, unless he can blame a D.)

H-Man will continue to owe me $50.  

MADCO as CoPols Editor

For

I can use spellcheck.

I respect the written word.

I am perfectly willing to acknowledge and promote well written or even not poorly written diaries that I do not agree with ideologically.

I am not triguardian.

I am not a paid politico.

I have no dog in the Denver mayoral election.

I have been continuously registered and attentive since I could be, though not always the same party.

Against

I will not likely diary much in the next six months.

I have too many sock puppets.

I will likely continue to remind the world that H-Man and GOP warrior owe me $50.

My humor is not always funny. Or kind.

There’s that whole thing with Plutarch.

I don’t have enough sock puppets.

I am not a paid politico.

In CoPols-land I am neither a real D, a real Coloradan, nor a real person.

H-Man! Oh, H-Man!

hman

GOP Warrior has resurfaced, acknowledged his debt and retains his honor.

You, on the other hand…. ?

Friday Jams – I just can’t wait

(Who are we to stand in MADCO’s way? – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Dick Dale, SR Vaughn, Jerry Mathers, Tony Dow, Frankie Avalon, Bob Denver, Annette, Pee Wee, chicks in swim suits dancing,   What’s not to like?

(UPDATE) Housekeeping – bets

24 hours: nothing.

I’ll give it until Monday, and then the justice begins.

By my count, here on CoPols, I won two different bets.

GOPWarrior and H-Man owe me.

GOPW – Perlmutter beat Frazier.  $50

H-Man  Bennet beat Buck   $50

1)

http://www.coloradopols.com/sh…

Buck v Bennet straight up?

We already know Bennet bought his win – that ability to raise more money is part of why many in our party love him. -DavidThi808

Michael Bennet – ineffective, dishonest and immoral – Democrat for US Senate  

by: H-man @ Wed Sep 01, 2010 at 10:27:58 AM MDT

[ Parent | | Reply ]

yep

I say Bennet is sworn in Jan 2011 and Buck is not.

by: MADCO @ Wed Sep 01, 2010 at 14:50:29 PM MDT

[ Parent | | Reply ]

Cool, now what we need to do is figure out what we do with the $50.

I win you give $50 to the cause of my choice, you win I give $50 to the cause of your choice.  Sound fair?

We already know Bennet bought his win – that ability to raise more money is part of why many in our party love him. -DavidThi808

Michael Bennet – ineffective, dishonest and immoral – Democrat for US Senate  

by: H-man @ Wed Sep 01, 2010 at 16:22:03 PM MDT

[ Parent | | Reply ]

Bennet wins, you give me $50 to give to the cause of my choice.

Buck wins, I give you $50.

Done.

by: MADCO @ Wed Sep 01, 2010 at 16:34:54 PM MDT

[ Parent | | Reply ]

-_--_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-

2)

http://www.coloradopols.com/sh…

A beer?

How about 50 big ones? Ryan Frazier wins. No spread, he just wins.

Takers?

“The Democratic Party is going to experience a bloodbath in November.” — Colorado Pols editor MotR

by: GOPwarrior @ Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 14:16:42 PM MDT

[ Parent | | Reply ]

Fuck betting money.

That’s for idiots. Just a nice cold one.

“No question about it. Ken [Buck] is here to stay.” bjwilson83.

by: Aristotle @ Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 14:17:31 PM MDT

[ Parent | | Reply ]

Okay, fine.

I’m not worried about collecting. I prefer Sam Adams, of course.

“The Democratic Party is going to experience a bloodbath in November.” — Colorado Pols editor MotR

by: GOPwarrior @ Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 14:18:44 PM MDT

[ Parent | | Reply ]

You can have a $9 Chimay for all I care.

But I’ll take your “I’m not worried about collecting” comment to mean that you have no intention of honoring the bet. I’ll take it anyway, but I don’t believe you’ll show up either way.

“No question about it. Ken [Buck] is here to stay.” bjwilson83.

by: Aristotle @ Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 14:20:43 PM MDT

[ Parent | | Reply ]

I’ll take that.

by: MADCO @ Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 14:43:21 PM MDT

[ Parent | | Reply ]

The $50 bet?

It’s On!

“The Democratic Party is going to experience a bloodbath in November.” — Colorado Pols editor MotR

by: GOPwarrior @ Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 15:00:42 PM MDT

[ Parent | | Reply ]

Frazier wins CD7 2010, straight up.

by: MADCO @ Mon Sep 13, 2010 at 16:21:14 PM MDT

[ Parent | | Reply ]

Don’t Vote?

(This is, in a word, disgusting – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Here’s an ad getting serious air time in Nevada.

And here’s the guy running this air war against Reid and D’s.

I’m with Lawrence O’Donnell. And the others who find this disgusting.

Vote.  Decide which candidate is the best one for you.  Vote.

Vote.  Decide which issues are important to you. Vote.

Vote.  If neither of the candidates you have to choose from agree with you on everything (they never do), figure out a way to choose. Vote.

Don’t let your anger or frustration or the weather or your neighbor or the mind numbing media or the World Series or your health or anything else get in your way. VOTE.

If instead you choose not to – watch some people going to the polls:

I choose this one because one of my uncles spent the summer of of 1963 in Birmingham registering voters.

What is A Shunning?

And when is appropriate?

As with many words in the English language, the dictionary definition is just the start.

Merriam Webster online

SHUN: to avoid deliberately and especially habitually

The Wikipedia gives a little more context

shunning:  the act of deliberately avoiding association with, and habitually keeping away from, an individual or group. It is a sanction against association, often associated with religious groups and other tightly knit organizations and communities.

ColoradoPols.com as a site is certainly a community.

And while  ColoradoPols the poster, moderator or community member created and enforces rules  of behavior that sometimes result in editing or banning, and a recent suspension, there appears not to be specific rules about when and if shunning may be appropriate.

There are posters and post types to which  I have avoided responding which is a kind of shunning,  But when it’s just one, the significance is typically trivial.

And while I’d be reluctant to adopt a “shunning policy”, I think as a community we get to choose how we want our community to be.

In schools, kids are taught inclusion. Exclusion, like shunning, can even be considered a form of bullying.

Here on CoPols.com, it would seem almost impossible for avoidance to be anything like bullying.  Sure, anyone can post almost anything.  But no one has to read it or respond.

But a discussion would be useful.

Safe, Legal and Rare

.. Buck said during Tuesday’s gubernatorial debate was the most bizarre thing yet.  He said he agreed with Clinton that abortion should be safe, legal and rare.  He said he supported the pro-choice position, but he was against people who were “pro-abortion”….people who promoted abortion….he neglected to name who these mythical people are because they don’t exist….

dwyer, coloradopols.com, Fri Oct 15, 2010

I demand a source.

This is an affront to common sense voters everywhere in Colorado and there is no way Buck said abortion should be safe legal and rare

No way.

“safe legal and rare” on google yields 14, 800 results – and none of them mention Buck except Dwyer, which doesn’t appear on the google yet.

“safe legal and rare” is exactly what I believe.

IN fact, as a pragmatist, I believe incremental legislation that makes abortion more rare is a good thing and do not understand when the so called “pro life” anti-abortion exrtremists are so all or nothing about it.  

To them it should be safe, illegal and nonexistent.   I would think that when legislation is proposed, or research or advanced medical procedure and technology, could make abortions less common, they do no support it.  It’s all or nothing in their view and incremental elimination is just useless.

I don’t understand that.

Incremental improvement should be welcomed and encouraged.  If the incremental improvement does not prevent the eventual goal of zero abortions, it should be encouraged.  Surely 50% opf last year’s number is better than whatever the number was last year. And 50% of that would be better the next year.

But I refuse to believe Buck,Mr.  I-still-support-personhood-in-concept-no-exception-for-rape-no-comment-on-62 Buck, would be so practical and fair as to acknowledge safe, legal and rare is a good way to think of the subject.

Notes From Canvassing this week

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

I lost count sometime yesterday, and I’m a little doped up on cold meds right now so I can’t get it back.

But through Thursday I had knocked on 520+ doors.   So, say 600+ doors this week.  Not every one was home, and of those who were not everyone opens the door.  But plenty did.

update – I forgot one that I really wanted to share.

I was in one neighborhood where all the neighbors knew each other, if not by nickname and birthday, by sight. And the ones with like aged kids, or shared interests tended to hang together.

But the voter who answered the door was very nervous, looking past me and around me, and so agitated I had to ask if everything was ok.  He/she explained he was looking for the obvious signs of other doors I’d visited but weren’t home- left Bennet lit. I asked if she thought it would be better if I didn’t leave anything – he said yes, because while the U & D neighbors were ok with each other, they realized they were outnumbered by the R neighbors and the R’s were wayyy more vocal and ….energetic. I retrieved everything (or hid it) and came back to her door. He was so glad – and a little embarrassed.  I asked what would happen if, and she explained that one of the neighbors was only just getting invites again to the card games and bbq’s and stuff since 04 when  the car had a Kerry sticker.  An actual, no-kidding, modern day shunning that lasted 5+ years.  In suburban Denver.

See, I grew up in Cook County, Illinois. I knew people who not only didn’t get garbage pick up for a month to six weeks, they got “extra” garbage added. I know people whose cars got frozen into a giant block of ice.  I saw how some streets got their road resurfaced year after year, and others just went to hell.  I was gifted a job guarding park district garbage trucks at night (we shot the rats) in exchange for having 35 “roommates” register at my address.

So I get the ferocity – I just was surprised to see an actual, overt shunning here.  (The neighbor in question got a new car, and registered R- problem solved.  Years later.)    And it got me thinking about CoPols as a community.  CoPols has banned posters. And now, at least once, suspended one. But though we posters sometimes mention ignoring this poster or that, I’ve never seen an organized avoidance.   I think as a community we may benefit.  Perhaps not.

I walked neighborhoods in the suburbs – north side, east side and south side.  Some things were the same everywhere, some not.

I met one CoPols poster for sure – he/she said something that was a clue, and confirmed it later with a post.  

Be polite to the canvasser.  I don’t really personally care when people are rude and obnoxious to me. It happens.  But it discourages others from canvassing and getting involved. And I think that kind of involvement is a good thing.  

Update your registration.  I tried to find you to remind you to vote, to confirm you knew where and how, and you moved but did not update your registration.  So you can’t vote at all.

Yes, I knocked on your door. Yes, I understand that the election is not your highest priority right now, and I apologized for interrupting your nap/tv show/food/day.  I do value your time.  But do you know why campaigns go door to door?  It works. PS – your “no soliciting” sign is fine – but it doesn’t apply to political campaigns.

Yes, I do understand that it’s none of my business who you voted for, or whom you are supporting.  I’m still asking.   Politely.  And on behalf of my candidate, I am going to ask you to consider him and give him your vote.

Some of the oldest poorest suburban neighborhoods have the biggest, oldest and best trees.  

As a campaigner Bennet may have benefitted from a tough primary that bloodied him up.  As a candidate he lost some life long registered D’s to false claims that now planted are tough to shake.  Because one block was very specific citing their source – I cite Christopher Scott specifically.  Your dislike of Michael Bennet convinced that block of several untruths.  If we lose by those nine votes,  you gave us Senator Buck.

When I ask you why, I really want to know.  I am not offended that you have decided not to vote for Bennet, but I really want to know why.  Of course you don’t have to tell me.  Just tell me you don’t want to talk about it.

No I don’t have a phone you can borrow, I can’t watch your kid for a minute, I can’t come in, I can’t get your mail, I don’t know your neighbor, and I don’t have tv so I can’t comment on any of the ads except I agree they are tiresome (turn off the tv)

I killed the cable tv earlier this year.  I miss channel surfing and the Yankees finding a way to win again and again. But I don’t get the full barrage of the tv campaign.  I gather it’s a “bad” year.  

First- campaigns use scary negative advertising because it works.  I know you say you hate it, but it works. In fact, your neighbor was thinking she would support Buck because  Michael Bennet wanted to privatize Social Security and Ken Buck was supporting President Obama. (I corrected her)  Your other neighbor thought it was insane that Ken Buck for was amnesty for immigrants. (I had no comment.)  So- short of turning off the tv – just ignore it: you and I can agree that the advertising is dumb and doesn’t work.   But it works.

Sure, you can not open the door. You can tell me you’re “undecided”. We’ll be back. We need you to vote because we think when you do, you are more likely to vote for our guy.

The lowest of the low information, most misinformed voter out there gets one vote. Just like the most well informed, high information voter. And there’s way more of the one the one flavor than the other.

Yes, the local paper gave a critical endorsement of Bennet.  But think about this- if they like Bennet so little to write a weak and critical endorsement, what must they think of Buck?  

I canvassed with some non-political, just moved here from somewhere else and don’t know anyone folks.  I have canvassed with former legislators and party officials.  It’s the same routine.

I’ve canvassed neighborhoods just like mine, and even where I know a bunch of the people on my list. And I’ve canvassed neighborhoods so different from mine in every observable way – it’s still the same routine. Rich, poor, working retired, men, women, old, young, whatever religion, whatever ethnicity, whatever race, whatever whatever – same routine.

Vote.

It’s the only way the system works.

Organize and energize and get your neighbors and theirs to vote.    

Another Buckpedal; Could there be any more in 22 days?

Election day is 22 days away.

And Michael Booth, recently discussed reporter for the newspaper of record in  Denver, reports that there is another issue that Ken Buck has “clarified” or reversed position  since the primary.

Ag subsidies to farmers.

Federally funded, taxpayer funded payments to farmers; wealth transfer to farmers to stabilize agriculture prices.

Link text

I’m not saying ag subsidies are good or bad. This is a complicated subject with a complex history.  

They used to be loans, now they are grants.

(I will acknowledge that when people who defend them discuss it, the picture is Ma & Pa farmer huddled in the meager farm house, trying to fight off the winter and worried about taxes but most of the money goes to mega corps like Monsanto, Cargill, etc.)

The point is here is another legislative issue where Primary Buck (PBuck) said one thing, and General Election Buck (GEBuck) says something else.   His campaign, and most ardent shills here on CoPols have taken to describing this  as “clarifying.” Sort of a traditional euphemism.   The rest of us have been describing this a little more creatively as Buckpedalling.  The most careful outside observers (MSNBC, NYT, Colorado print and tv media) have been calling it reversing himself, or more gently, “running to the middle.”

PBuck

“I’m against price supports generally,” Buck said, “and I think that’s basically what they’re talking about in the dairy industry.”

An audience member noted, “Dairy’s been price-supported for decades.”

Buck responded: “No doubt. And I’m against price supports generally.”

GEBuck

“…it’s important that our country have domestic sources of energy and food,… (Buck) supports working with farmers to reform the system to help both farmers and taxpayers.”

It’s perhaps the best example yet of the PBuck vs. GEBuck dissonance where the voters just shoose to hear what they like and ignore the statement they don’t like.

From the same Booth article linked above

Eastern Plains Republicans echo Bennet’s words even while supporting Buck.

Out on the eastern plains, and other farming communities in Colorado 15 of 20 voters vote R.  And a like number get direct payments and 19 of 20 households understand the value of ag subsidies to their communities and don’t want them cut.

Also can’t cut fuel subsidies, it takes energy to run the modern farm and it’s expensive enough in rural Colorado. Can’t cut transportation spending cause rural Colorado needs roads and bridges and they gotta be maintained.  

So PBuck says price supports are a bad idea and need to go. GE Buck says yeah, but not for the hardworking farm communities in Colorado , And once again votes are left to wonder what would IOBuck (in office Buck) do.

Would he stick to his primary ideology, allow the market to do what it does best? Or would it be his general election conversion the gov’t shouldn’t pick winners and losers unless we’re picking my voters to win?  Or a third option?

The only thing we know for sure so far is Buck has said  whatever  it appears the audience in the room wants to hear when they are in the room.  Deny the past (“I never said a consumption tax was a good idea” vs. the recording of him  saying it was a good idea;  alter the past What I meant to say was …..up is down or flat out run from his past statements I support the Personhood amendment  vs  I’m not commenting  on the local issues

Mr. Buck, just tell us what you think  and let the voters decide if we agree with you.

This say anything approach and let the voters believe whatever they want is offensive and dishonest.

I know your boots are full of bullshit.  But that doesn’t mean you have to be.

Buck Campaign Manager Attacks Buck

Weird, weird, weird. But true.

Yesterday the Buck campaign  put out a press release attempting to criticize Senator Bennet for owning stocks in specific companies which, according to the Buck campaign, are companies  “…with  ties to tyrannical regimes and genocide should be of great concern the people of Colorado.”  

But, the harsh reality is all the investments mentioned by Buck have not been held by Senator Bennet since before he was a senator. In other words, Bennet divested several investments prior to January 2009, including any and all that are referenced by John Swartout, Buck’s campaign manager.

However, several of those same companies are investments held by Buck.

According to the Personal Financial Disclosure Buck filed, he holds investments in all of these companies:

CNOOC [Vanguard International Growth Fund Annual Fund, 8/31/09]

CGazprom [Vanguard International Growth Fund Annual Fund, 8/31/09]

PetroChina [Vanguard Emerging Markets Stock Index Fund Annual Fund, 10/31/09]

Huaneng Power International [Vanguard Emerging Markets Stock Index Fund Annual Fund, 10/31/09]

Some of the Other Companies Operating In Iran Which Buck Invests in and His Own Criticisms Would Also Apply to:

Total [Vanguard International Growth Fund Annual Fund, 8/31/09]

Statoil [Vanguard International Growth Fund Annual Fund, 8/31/09]

Royal Dutch Shell [Vanguard Emerging Markets Stock Index Fund Annual Fund, 10/31/09]

Lukoil [Vanguard Emerging Markets Stock Index Fund Annual Fund, 10/31/09]

PTT Public Company Limited [Vanguard Emerging Markets Stock Index Fund Annual Fund, 10/31/09]

SinoPec [Vanguard Emerging Markets Stock Index Fund Annual Fund, 10/31/09]

PetroBras [Vanguard International Growth Fund Annual Fund, 8/31/09]

Buck and Crossroads GPS

So Buck promised he would stay positive. He didn’t, but it always felt like an empty promise because of the presence of so much “outside’ money supporting his campaign and it was clear after how they treated Norton in the primary they would be as negative as could be.

And in recent  days it has been reported  that the  US Chamber of Commerce, which has foreign contributors, is spending on attack ads against Bennet.

Also recently reported is that American Crossroads, over 90% funded by four billionaires, will be spending big media dollars in Colorado to help Buck by attacking Bennet.

And also that American Crossroads affiliate, Crossroads GPS, is not required to reveal contributors or expenses.   Will they too be spending on behalf of Buck? Have they already? How much? Who funds Crossroads GPS?   We will only know if CGPS ever voluntarily decides to tell us.  (Though a complaint has been filed with the IRS that could void CGPS’s corporate status and if it is determined that they are a political organization, then they may be required to report.)

And in today’s snail mail come two large campaign mailers.  One, “Paid for by the Colorado Republican Committee,”  is multi colored with smiling pictures of the Buck family smiling, and a backdrop of mountains and trees, some green, some gold.  Attractive.   The text is friendly and inviting Join the Buck Family.

The other, funded by Crossroads GPS,  is all attacks on Bennet and Obama.   It says, truthfully, that Bennet voted for the stimulus and that Bennet voted for the 2010 budget and cites sources that are verifiable.

Then it beams off into lies and cites a partisan source with no facts – Grover Norquist and the Americans for Tax Reform, another 501 (c) 4 that does not have to reveal contributors or independent expenses.

The echo chamber is getting really loud. So Crossroads GPS is attacking Bennet (and presumably other D’s in other states)  for raising taxes, which is really the Bush tax cuts expiring. Tax cuts which contributed hugely to our debt, for which CGPS also attacks Bennet, based on ATP’s claims.

Why did the Bush tax cuts expire in 2010?  If they were so great and so affordable why didn’t Bush and the then R Congress  just enact them?

Pay attention class, I’m almost to the punch line.

To get the tax bills to pass and to maximize the size of the tax cuts, Republicans had to run the bill through the reconciliation to avoid a Senate filibuster. (OMG- but in 2009 R’s claimed reconciliation is evil!)  But this was a problem because “reconciliation” exists to decrease the deficit, not to increase it by lowering taxes “outside the budget window,”  10 years. So if the tax cuts expired in 10 years, CBO could score it as if it did not increase the deficit “outside the budget window.”  

Which brings me back to Buck.

In his colorful, upbeat smiling mailer, his only policy claim is that he will sponsor a balanced budget amendment.  No explanation for how he would get that work, let alone pass.  Will spending be cut dramatically? Which?  Will taxes be increased? How?

My 61+ year old neighbor opened his mailbox moments before I got to mine and his observation was that the only way to balance the budget now was to raise taxes or cut Social Security, Medicare or defense, or all three. He’s a U that leans R McCain voter but he’s voting for Bennet because he understands that Buck wants to take us back.   He wants the Bush tax cuts to continue, but the deficit and national security are bigger issues for him and he always felt it was wrong to cut taxes while fghting two wars without corresponding spending cuts.

So what we have here is failure to communicate honestly or transparently.  We have print and media (I don’t have tv) advertising that make all manner of claims, with hard to source data and even harder to source funding.  

Buck says whatever he thinks will help most with the audience of the moment, and when he has to buckpedal or even deny he said one thing to say something else, he just doesn’t care.  He’s relying on the natural tendency for voters faced with dissonant messages to magically forget the less preferable one.

And it’s not that he’s a practiced and increasingly polished political bull shit artist.   He was a trial lawyer first so I expect that.  It’s that we as voters have no idea who is funding his “outside” support or the “outside” attacks on Bennet. It’s a mystery, wrapped in a blank check from unknown sources, wrapped in lies and mistruths.  

Who Are These Guys and What do They Want from Ken Buck?

Or why are they afraid of Michael Bennet?

American Crossroads , aka “Karl Rove’s Superpac”

is a Political Action Committee incorporated as a 527.  

The reference to Karl Rove is accurate, but he is just the most recognizable of many advisors and officers,  (Mike Duncan, Chairman,  Steven J. Law, President, Jo Ann Davidson,  Jim Dyke,

Carl Forti, Karl Rove, Ed Gillespie)

As a 527, America Crossroads may spend as much as they want on behalf of any candidate they choose.  So who are the funders? It’s not exactly transparent, though the past two months a pattern is beginning to emerge.  

It is useful to also understand that America Crossroads is affiliated with Crossroads GPS  which is incorporated as a non-profit and is not required to disclose donors.

Now that America Crossroads is putting up nearly another million dollars in the CO Senate campaign on behalf of Senator Buck or against Senator Bennet, depending on how you look at it, it would be helpful to know who the money comes from and what they want from Ken Buck.

So, as reported in by Justin Elliot in Salon and Rachel Maddow, the past two months America Crossroads has received more than 91% of it’s funding form just a few billionaires.

Trevor Rees-Jones – Dallas oil and gas lawyer/investor (not the body guard)

Robert Rowling – Texas lawyer whose family fortune started with oil and gas and who has since acquired Omni Hotelsand Gold’s Gyms

Carl Linder – Ohio billionaire and Chairman of AMerican Financial Group (AFG)

Jerry Perenchio – tv, movie and entertainment executive who really hit the big money when he sold Univision in 2006.

Who?

Yes, these guys have a track record of donating to R candidates. Yes, there is no law against it.  Though there ought to be a more transparent  disclosure requirement about who they are, and how much they spend on behalf of candidates.

Oh, btw, recall the America Crossroads affiliate, Crossroads GPS?  AP is reporting that a complaint has been filed with the IRS claiming that Crossroads GPS has violated their non-profit incorporation by criticizing political candidates and making donations that would void their incorporated status.

So, despite shills here on CoPols claiming otherwise,  it is incumbent Republic  Buck’s campaign receiving millions in support and media from a few individuals, who don’t live in Colorado. What do they want form him?

Bennet & Udall: Beetle Kill and Fires sh/be Emergency; Buck ?

The Colorado Independent

is reporting that Senators Bennet and Udall are leading a bi-partisan effort to get the US Dept of Ag to increase funding for clearing dead  trees and  other fire mitigation and prevention work.

Incumbent Republican Ken Buck has said nothing.

Link text

Buck’s previous comments on Social Security, VA health care services, and other government funded services have demonstrated a preference for private,  market based solutions.

I am skeptical about “market based firefighting solutions”, as I suspect the Cranicks are now as well. (And we can all be thankful no person was in their house.)

What would a market solution look like in the case of the bark beetle epidemic in the Rocky Mountain region?

Well, first the good news. There is a market for the dead trees. Denver metro homeowners are paying $200+ per cord for firewood. So it’s possible that an entrepreneur could buy the wood, remove it, cut it, deliver it to Denver homes. Not to other states, however, many of whom have laws against the importation of firewood in an effort to avoid infestations.

But it hasn’t happened yet, despite the bark beetle killing millions of acres of trees. Or if it has, it has not happened quickly enough to be a notably effective fire avoidance technique.

On the down side, we let the bark beetle kill all the lodgepole pines in CO and the region because no private investor emerges to fund an eradication effort.  The destabilized hillsides will clog the watersheds with runoff, perhaps slowing the movement of our water to downstream “owners.”  At that point the local water managers will be forced to mitigate the damage to the waterways, and local solutions are better funded locally.

And until they get wet, there’s another word for all those dead trees: fuel.  If fires are caused by lightning strikes, make it a federal funding priority then.  But if (when) fires are started by human events, charge it back to the people involved. This will create a voluntary insurance market for responsible Coloradans.

Bennet and Udall – leading a bipartisan effort to make this a federal priority.

Buck?

Silent on this specifically and apparently in favor of private market solutions in general.  

Speaking of New Advertisers on Pols – AARP

The ads on Pols appear to be more plentiful and somewhat more colorful.  Aside from Allstate, Vonage, and other corporate giants, the ones that stand out most to me are the ones for out of state candidates like Angle and Paul.  Why advertise here?

But I also have been struck by the AARP click through add “Find out where the candidates stand.”  

I am not a member of AARP. But the limited experience I have with their political analysis is that they do not actually endorse, they explain various issues and current candidate positions and the impact to their membership on the key issues.

I clicked through and experimented with several addresses around the country to see what AARP had to say about the various candidates.

Here’s what they had to say about Bennet & Buck.

Social Security Solvency

Bennet: working to keep SS solvent, opposed to privatization

Buck:  SS is a promise to seniors, but eligibility age must increase

Me: No mention of Buck’s prior statements about his preference for privatization nor his questioning SS’s constitutionality.

Deficit Reduction and Social Security

Bennet: “An important component for guaranteeing the long-term viability of Social Security is to get our nation’s fiscal house in order, without raiding Social Security to do it. ”

Buck: nothing

Me:  Being serious about deficit reduction means understanding that SS, Medicare and defense spending are and will be the long poles in the tent.  Affirms for me that Buck wants to campaign on assumption and impression, not facts or clear policy expressions.

Access to Physicians for Medicare Beneficiaries

Bennet: “Medicare currently reimburses health care providers on the basis of the volume of care they provide rather than the value of care. For each test, scan or procedure conducted, Medicare provides a separate payment, rewarding more tests instead of better outcomes. Health reform moves our system toward paying for quality and value and reducing costs to Colorado’s seniors. ”

Buck: Nothing

Me: Because Tricare is related to Medicare, the Medicare improvements improve Tricare too.

…plan to help older workers get back to work and to improve economic security for people of all generations?

Bennet: “We closed the prescription drug donut hole, helping seniors afford the rising cost of prescription drugs. Moving forward, we must get credit flowing to Colorado’s small businesses, allowing entrepreneurs to hire new workers. And we must provide Coloradans re-entering the workforce with the training and skills they need to compete in the 21st century. In the long term, we must retool our economy to promote innovation and imagination. We must break our reliance on foreign oil and build a new energy economy that creates clean energy jobs. We absolutely must rein in rising debts that threaten our children’s choices. And we must do so while protecting and preserving critical programs like Social Security and Medicare that keep millions of older Americans out of poverty.”

Buck: “Candidate did not respond.”

Me: Bennet’s answers are too long to be good sound bites or simple one liners, though I agree that policy can be nuanced. And one-liners are often so overly simplistic as to be useless, but I question voters’ willingness to deal with the long answer.

OTOH, it appears that Buck would like to run his general election campaign with one loud if vague message: There’s an R after my name.

Anecdotal canvassing – I showed the AARP summary to some U neighbors this weekend.  The one who said he’s going to support Buck anyway (because of that R) said he didn’t think Buck or the rest of the teapartiers would be effective doing anything to SS. (His vote for Obama 08 was the first D prez vote since 1964)

The Buck Campaign is Offensive (edited*)

Of course, so are  the 2010 CO R top of the line up.

Maes, Buck and Tancredo: This is the Colorado Republican 2010 all star team?  Really?

Maes is a delusional psychotic with narcissistic tendencies and reoccurring paranoia.  Tancredo is running to save the R party by destroying it.

So Buck cannot compete with these two in some ways.  But in others, he’s the clear champ.

Buck has changed more claimed positions since the primary than any candidate I’ve ever seen.  Until recently I thought he would at least to stick to tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts, and never raise taxes.  But we now know even that was only temporary.

I have no idea what the guy believes except that he should be a US Senator, he should not have been disciplined for blowing the prosecution’s case when he was an AUSA, and that he has real no shit, bullshit on his boots.

I was not a George W Bush fan. But at least he was who he was almost all the time.  Likewise, I was not a huge Bill Clinton fan. But he was who he was.

Obama is governing as he ran, a left leaning moderate.  Bennet is a running as who he is – his answers are too long, he has not even attempted the kolaraaduh accent, and his hair cuts and open collars are questionable.  But it’s 100% Bennet.

Who is Ken Buck?  What are his most firmly held policy positions?  

Does he really want to privatize Social Security? Medicare?  VA heath care?

Will he sponsor a Constitutional amendment to prohibit abortion?  

Will he sponsor a Constitutional amendment to impose term limits?

Does he really want to repeal the 17th Amendment?

Does he propose to fix the deficit by cutting spending or raising taxes or both?   Which spending? Which taxes?

Does he support a progressive income tax? a regressive consumption tax?  The FAIR tax?  The flat tax?  Elimination of all federal tax deductions?

Does he really want to eliminate federal guaranteed student loans? Or just go back to privatized gains and socialized losses?

Which part of health care reform does he want to repeal? The Medicare fix that added ten (10) years to Medicare’s actuarial solvency? The requirement to insure kids with pre-existing conditions? The insurance exchange?  Or is it just the fake but still alarming death panels and 16,500 new IRS agents?

Does he stlll agree with Tancredo that President Obama is the greatest risk to the USA?

Speaking of Tom Tancredo, he once advocated for the elimination of all publicly funded education (as has  John Andrews).  Does Buck agree?

Is there a single significant policy position, stated in the positive, (i.e, what Buck is for, not as something he’s against) that has not changed from the primary to the general election?  Bonus for finding one hat won’t change again after Nov 3.

Does he really believe we’ll believe it’s all nuance and gotcha politics and not just him pandering to whomever he thinks is in the room and whatever he thinks they want to hear?

Of course, it may be the most brilliant political strategery executed in recent memory.  Tell the camera man that the teapartiers are idiots who need to shut up, tell the teapartiers that they are right.    Everyone hears what they want to hear, and ignores the dissonant statements.  It’s even better than dog whistle politics in that it relies on the fact that when faced with conflicting information voters rely on emotion, allowing themselves to forget that their favorite R “conservative” raised taxes, or fought a war of foreign intervention and nation building.  

Either way, dishonest pandering or brilliant political tactic, Ken Buck’s 2010 campaign is offensive.

*I first posted this several days ago but it was threadjacked into oblivion and foolishness about something unrelated to Buck’s campaign strategy of relying on voters’ cognitive dissonance.

Rahm Emanuel is Leaving the WH to run for Mayor


Emanuel will leave his White House job Friday, and aides say he plans a “listening tour” in Chicago while he considers a run for mayor. Sources say he has already decided he’ll be a candidate to succeed the city’s mayor for the past 21 years, Richard Daley.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/…

The Tribune makes mistakes once in awhile, notably they got that front page about President Dewey put to press a little early.  But they usually get it right about the Mayor.

So who cares?

Well, I’ve more complaining and spinning about POTUS Chief of Staff and his “Chicago style” in the past 21 months than I heard the previous….. well ever.

First, no one from Chicago would call anything we’ve seen “Chicago style.” I wish.  Not once did I hear about Senator McConnell’s car being frozen into a block of ice.  Never did I hear about the Park Police towing anyone. Nor did I hear about any DC office buildings going without garbage pick up.  

There is a Chicago way for politics- the Obama admiistration hasn’t been doing it.

I wish Mayor Emanuel well.  He should be getting to town just in time to really start campaigning, the early evenings and chilly winds off the Lake, and the Blackhawks to attempt the impossible.  Do I think he’ll be a good mayor?  Sure, the city that could hire a college kid to guard Park District garbage trucks over night from rats (issued a .38) needs a tough guy mayor with big brass ones.  The outgoing guy had them – I think the new guy will too.

Maes Has an Ad

($30k media buy? Please. Direct to Youtube for VICTORY! – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Though it’s unclear what kind of media buy he can budget.  

It has some serious flaws.

One or two of the pictures are wrong choices.  

Having the candidate look into a bright sun makes him squint and scowl.  Maybe he’s always like that.

When he references “my opponent” which one does he mean?  

And then there’s the standard omg boring let’s have better government hooey.  He should have just said he’d eliminate waste and increase road and bridges spending, solving I70 while cutting taxes and restoring the O&G industry and getting the Broncos back on track.

Ken Buck’s Campaign is Offensive (with poll)

Of course, so are  the 2010 CO R top of the line up.

Maes, Buck and Tancredo.: This is the Colorado Republican 2010 all star team?  Really?

¡Mein gött in himmel!

Maes is a delusional psychotic with narcissistic tendencies and reoccurring paranoia.  Tancredo is running to save the R party by destroying it.

So Buck cannot compete with these two in some ways.  But in others, he’s the clear champ.

Buck has changed more claimed positions since the primary than any candidate I’ve ever seen.  Until recently I thought he would at least to stick to tax cuts, tax cuts, tax cuts, and never raise taxes.  But we now know even that was only temporary.

I have no idea what the guy believes except that he should be a US Senator, he should not have been disciplined for blowing the prosecution’s case when he was an AUSA, and that he has real no shit, bullshit on his boots.

I was not a George W Bush fan. But at least he never waffled. He was who he was almost all the time.  Likewise, I was not a huge Bill Clinton fan. But he was who he was.

Obama is governing as he ran, a left leaning moderate.  Bennet is a running as who he is – his answers are too long, he has not even attempted the kolaraaduh accent, and his hair cuts and open collars are questionable.  But it’s 100% Bennet.

Who is Ken Buck?  What are his most firmly held policy positions?  Does he really want to privatize Social Security? Medicare?  VA heath care?

Will he sponsor a Constitutional amendment to prohibit abortion?  

Will he sponsor a Constitutional amendment to impose term limits?

Does he really want to repeal the 17th Amendment?

Does he propose to fix the deficit by cutting spending or raising taxes or both?  

Which spending? Which taxes?

Does he support a progressive income tax? a regressive consumption tax?  The FAIR tax?  The flat tax?  Elimination of all federal tax deductions?

Does he really want to eliminate federal guaranteed student loans? Or just go back to privatized gains and socialized losses?

Which part of health care reform does he want to repeal? The Medicare fix that added ten (10) years to Medicare’s actuarial solvency? The requirement to insure kids with pre-existing conditions? The insurance exchange?  Or is it just the death panels and 16,500 new IRS agents?

Does he stlll agree with Tancredo that President Obama is the greatest risk to the USA?

Speaking of Tom Tancredo, he once advocated for the elimination of all publicly funded education (as has  John Andrews).  Does Buck agree?

Is there a single significant policy position, stated in the positive, (i.e, what Buck is for, not as something he’s against) that has not changed from the primary to the general election?  Bonus for finding one hat won’t change again after Nov 3.

Does he really believe we’ll believe it’s all nuance and gotcha politics and not just him pandering to whomever he thinks is in the room and whatever he thinks they want to hear?

Of course, it may be the most brilliant political strategery executed in recent memory.  Tell the camera man that the teapartiers are idiots who need to shut up, tell the teapartiers that they are right.    Everyone hears what they want to hear, and ignores the dissonant statements.  It’s even better than dog whistle politics in that it relies on the fact that when faced with conflicting information voters rely on emotion, allowing themselves to forget that their favorite R “conservative” raised taxes, or fought a war of foreign intervention and nation building.  

Either way, dishonest pandering or brilliant political tactic, Ken Buck’s 2010 campaign is offensive.

Which 2010 CO R candidate is running the most offensive campaign?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

The “Recession” is Over

Gotta admit the sources here are left leaning commie rags clearly in the tank for Obama

Wall Street Journal  

Slump Over, Pain Persist

Secondary Sources: Recession End, Hard Times, Individualism

Bloomberg

Recovery Deniers Just Got Mugged by Reality: Caroline Baum

City Wire

NBER: U.S. recession ended June 2009

I could go on sourcing analyses and headlines from right leaning sources, but why bother?  Even neutral sources. Of course, the Times (Financail, NY & LA) are all over it. The WaPost, the Tribune (Chicago and International Herald) ,  and others are reporting it and chewing about what it means for jobs.  Employment recovery has always lagged GDP recovery, but sometimes shorter sometimes longer.

The point is that the Bush administration did the right thing by saving the banks and the financial system (AIG isn’t a bank). And the Obama administration did the right thing by providing the stimulus.  Bank failures have slowed down. Job losses have slowed down.  US GDP is a small and positive number.

It worked.  Keynes is alive, so to speak.

BUT

We are in election season.

The right cannot let go of the Obama-bad, policies ruined economy story. And the left while correct that it was Bush who tanked us,  is not prepared to talk about recovery, and to acknowledge that the imbalances in the US and global economic distribution are not a verfiable sign of end times.

The left should be screaming about how the R-gument  that we just can’t let the Bush tax cuts on the über rich expire in a recession has no merit now.  And how the left favors a progressive income tax and why.

And the right should focus on describing for us what the US tax code should look like:  FAIR tax, regressive consumption tax, flat tax (at 24%) with no deductions, budget unicorns or budget fairies, etc and so on. Or which meaningfull spending reductions they would advocate.  Sure you can eliminate the NEA and even the Department of Ed, but the long poles in the tent are Defense, Medicare, and Social Security. So start there.

While you are at it, Mr. Buck, explain how a balanced budget amendment would work in a 9/12 environment, i.e., how would Bush have funded the Iraq invasion and subsequent eight (8) years of operations and occupation.  A balanced budget?  Oh, yeah “accounting tricks” (lies) where we keep the war off the books.  

Or better to just look at the polls, and other numbers and conclude that the bs that has passed for campaigning till now in this cycle is working so just hold on to it for a few more days. (ballots in the mail soon, election day only 5 weeks away. So instead we’ll argue about gay rights and abortion and cutting taxes and false claims about what caused the recession and unicorns and fairies.

But the recession is over.

Buck is a Lying Liar Who Cannot be Trusted

Perhaps he has been a good prosecutor. (Though certainly his performance and attention to his gov’t job the past 12 months has been negatively impacted by his campaigning.)

Perhaps he is a good husband and father. Maybe he gave a hungry family some elk meat.

But he has demonstrated that he is a lying liar.  

And even the Denver news paper that shall not be named has realized it and written about it today.

Recently, in response to another diary about Buck making some wacky claims to a veteran’s group, I wrote that either was lying or he’s stoopid. Or both.

I am not convinced about his relative intelligence, but I am convinced he is lying.

from Merriam Webster

1 to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive

2 to create a false or misleading impression

Buck not long ago: I support the Personhood Amendment

Buck now: What I meant to say was, no I don’t.

Buck not long ago: I will introduce a Constituional Amendment to ban abortion.

Buck now: Well, not really, though if I could support one I might.

Buck not long ago: I would never vote to confirm pro-choice judges.

Buck now: Uhhh, I have no litmus test. Really.

Buck not long ago: I think the FAIR tax is a good idea, and a consumption tax would be better than our income tax.

Buck now: Uh, well, I never said that.

Buck not long ago: We should repeal healthcare reform

Buck now: Well, except for the part about pre-existing conditions and kids. And that exchange thingy.  But we should definitely repeal the death panels and the armed IRS agents.

Buck not long ago: “I support all your issues” (to a CO vets group with a long and important list of specific positions on vets’ issues)

Buck now: ???

Does he support concurrent receipt?  (yeah, sure he does)

Does he support the new GI bill?  (uh-huh)

I could go on, but it’s your turn.

Buck not long ago:

Buck now

Buck not long ago:

Buck now

Buck not long ago:

Buck now

What would be awesome is if the CO R’s were executing the biggest, most complicated prank in the history of Colorado.  See we nominated Amaesin’ Dan Maes to be gov, and Mr. Opposite Man, Mr I Never Said What I Said, or if I DId I Meant Something Exactly The Opposite,.

But what we really meant was …. D’s Win!!

I would acknowledge the quality of such a prank.

But I feel confident predicting there’s nothing funny about it. Nothing at all.  

In fact, the biggest problem is not  that Buck said one thing not long ago, and said the exact opposite even more recently. Politically it’s not all that uncommon as a campaign strategy.

The biggest problem is that I left the key component of the then/now diagram out.

Buck not long ago:   Yes!

Buck now:  No!

Buck as a Senator:  ??

– reproductive rights: should be up to the government

– health care is a privilege not a right

– Dept of Education – buh-bye

– Burn more Coal!!!

– Solar and WInd? Pffft – drill, baby.

– AGW/CO2 emissions: it’s cold outside, no problem

– President – sure, let’s investigate and impeach over something made up

– Taxes: who needs ’em? Cut cut cut

– National Security: Safe, ’cause my son is manning up

– Federal Budget: Austerity Now!  A Great Depression  Was Good Enough for Our Grandparents, It’s Good Enough for You.  

Budget Deficit in U.S. Narrows 13%

( – promoted by ClubTwitty)

Deficit reduction,  With a D president and D Congressional Majority?!

That cannot possibly be true.  That headline must be from some left leaning, socialist commie street sheet rag.

Oh yeah, Bloomberg.

After eight (8) years of Bush budgets that increased the deficit year after year, and that kept the Iraq and Afghanistan expenditures off the books, President Obama’s first budget is shrinking the budget.

Last month, the Treasury lowered its estimate for government borrowing from July through September, reflecting a reduction in federal spending.

What? A D President and D Congress reducing the US borrowing?  I cannot believe more so called “fiscally conservative” R’s haven’t been making a big deal out of this.

More to the point, how about even one R official or candidate pointing it out?    crickets

In the second half of 2009, the economy began to recover from the recession that started in December 2007. So far this year, payrolls have grown by 723,000 workers compared with the 8.4 million jobs lost during the recession, indicating it will take years for employment to recover.

What?! A net gain of jobs in 2010?  How can that be possible?  If that was true I’m sure ElRushbo and Beck and even the R posters here on CoPols would have acknowledged it.  RIght?

I wonder if any other media reported on this.

Wash Post.

SF Chronicle

Business Week

Daily Finance

FInancial Times

The Economist

I know President Reagan is dead.  But I wonder if perhaps there isn’t at least one Reagan republican who might think now is the time to raise taxes to reduce the deficit.

How about Alan Greenspan.

“I am in favor for the first time in my memory of raising taxes,” he said. He had previously called for the George W. Bush tax cuts to expire at the end of this year, which would raise taxes for most Americans. But keeping the cuts in place would add hundreds of billions of dollars to the national deficit, he told the Council on Foreign Relations audience.”

Sheesh. Some liberal media rag must have gotten to him.  Oh- Kiplingers.

Ok, but he’s just one guy.  Surely if he was not just some loon off the reservation  there would be some other Reagan Republican

agreeing with him.

Oh- David Stockman.

Sort of defined “Reagan fiscal conservatism”

Greenspan isn’t the only laissez-faire economic conservative to come out in favor of higher taxes. In an August op-ed piece for the New York Times, President Ronald Reagan’s budget director, David Stockman, noted that the nation’s debt is 40 times larger than it was 40 years ago – because of “the insidious doctrine that deficits don’t matter if they result from tax cuts.”

Boy, I tell ya – that Kiplinger’s and Bloomberg are about as liberal a media as you can get.   I wonder if World Net Daily or Red State have any real information to add.

Maes Has Zero Understanding of Water

(This is a surprise because…? – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Gubernatorial candidate Dan Maes (R) is either seriously math challenged, crazy or a big fat liar.

Recently he spoke to the Colorado Water Congress and said:

He would support new reservoirs to keep Colorado water in state.

and

“I have a pretty simple policy on water so far: If it starts in Colorado, it’s our water,” Maes said.

http://www.cortezjournal.com/M…

He wants to cut taxes and the state is already facing budget shortfalls that require cuts, and yet Maes has a magic source of funding to build “new reservoirs.”

It does not add up.

Further, he is flat wrong on the law. Water that starts here is sometimes Colorado’s, sometimes it’s committed to our downstream neighbors.

So which is it? Is he lying, crazy or just so math challenged that he cannot see that adding expense and cutting revenues does not work?

And other than being flat out, idiotically wrong, how does he propose to change the water agreements in place and federal so that water that starts in Colroado is our water.?

 

Poundstone: Maes is a Con Man

(A con man? No way (ahem). – promoted by Colorado Pols)

I was waiting to post this until KHOW got the podcast posted.

Friday morning past, Boyles interviewed Freda Poundstone, well known Republican former mayor of Greenwood Village.

Politically she and I probably will not agree on a lot of things.  But I’ve never gotten the sense that she MSU.  She is who and what she is.

And Friday she told the story of how and why she gave money to Dan Maes. And then calls him a con man.

She did not call him a criminal.  Though he’s a big fat liar if Poundstone is telling the truth.

She did not call him unfit for office, though she alluded to it.

Listen to the whole thing – he got fired as policeman, she assumed he had money because of the claims of business success, Maes hit her up.

http://www.khow.com/cc-common/…