On the radio Monday, State Sen. Greg Brophy said there’s an “element” of “folks who just don’t like Christians” in Colorado, and “they are well represented at the State Capital right now.”
Citing Obama’s victory, as well as the passage of a measure legalizing and taxing marijuana, Brophy said on the radio:
BROPHY: “That’s what leads me to say that we’re kind of a Libertarian/Left state. You know, and geez, I hate to say this, but it sure seems like there is an element of an anti-Christian bent in Colorado which probably does also play into that Libertarian/Left side of things…and they’re well represented at the State Capital right now.”
KFKA radio’s guest host Krista Kafer didn’t ask Brophy to reveal his list of anti-Christian folk up at the State Capitol. So I called him to find out whom he was thinking of.
Brophy referred me to an opinion piece he wrote arguing that Senate Democrats were attacking hospitals for their religious convictions. They passed a bill, which did not clear the House, that would have required hospitals to post services that they elect not to provide due to religious, not medical considerations (e.g., abortion and some contraception services), but Senate Democrats rejected an amendment requiring all hospitals to list services they don’t provide, Brophy wrote.
“If you remember,” Brophy told me, “when I was [on the radio], I said I don’t want to say this because it’s kind of a harsh thing to say, but I think it’s an accurate observation.
So it’s based on that? Or are there other things?
“That’s a very public observation that’s been out there,” Brophy said. “Other stuff is certainly more subtle. You never can tell for sure, Jason, what someone’s thinking or what motivates them. You can only tell what they do. And when I wrote that op-ed I specifically went into what they did.”
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper, a Democrat, ranks as one of the safest governors facing reelection in 2014, according to an early survey by Public Policy Polling released Monday.
Hickenlooper, whose political skills may be tested over the next two years now that Democrats control both the state House and Senate and will be free to send more partisan legislation to his desk, leads a generic Republican by a 54-33 margin…
Two Colorado Republicans whose names are being tossed around as potential 2014 gubernatorial candidates are state Sen. Greg Brophy of Wray and Bob Schaffer, who lost four years ago to Sen. Mark Udall in a fight for a vacant U.S. Senate seat.
To be honest, given Gov. John Hickenlooper’s famously stellar approval ratings, we would expect his re-elect number to be higher than 54%. That said, 54% isn’t a horrible place to start from, and candidates like shellacked 2008 Senate candidate Bob Schaffer don’t exactly inspire confidence that the GOP can make a fight of it. And seriously, Greg Brophy? If he gets the nod, you can be sure the GOP has written the race off Rollie Heath style.
One top Colorado Republican admitted to FOX31 Denver last week that the GOP’s best, and perhaps only, shot of winning the governor’s race would be if Hickenlooper set his sights higher and opted against a run at reelection.
“If Hickenlooper runs again, we’ll end up with a gadfly candidate, someone who might be smart enough to know they’re going to get trounced, but willing to do it for the experience and the fun of it,” said that Republican, who asked not to be identified.
A “gadfly” candidate? If not Schaffer, or Brophy, then who might that be? And in the event Gov. Hickenlooper pulls a Bill Ritter and opts not to run again, or for whatever reason were to become politically vulnerable by 2014…who might a serious candidate be?
By now, you’ve probably seen this clip of conservative strategist David Frum, commenting on NBC News Friday on last week’s defeat of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney:
“Republicans have been fleeced and exploited, and lied to by a conservative entertainment complex,” Daily Beast and Newsweek contributing editor David Frum told Friday’s Morning Joe panel in a discussion on the outcome of the 2012 election.
Frum, who is a Republican and once served as a speechwriter for President George W. Bush, has criticized conservative media outlets in the past for “immers[ing] their audience in a total environment of pseudo-facts and pretend information.” Frum joined Morning Joe on Friday, in part, to discuss his new e-book “Why Romney Lost: And What the GOP Can Do About It.”
Politico’sJonathan Martin explores the subject of an intellectually “closed” GOP, and self-reinforcing message environment further in a story today titled “The GOP’s media cocoon.”
Even this past weekend, days after a convincing Obama win, it wasn’t hard to find fringes of the right who are convinced he did so only because of mass voter fraud and mysteriously missing military ballots. Like a political version of “Thelma and Louise,” some far-right conservatives are in such denial that they’d just as soon keep on driving off the cliff than face up to a reality they’d rather not confront.
But if the Fox News-talk radio-Drudge Report axis is the most powerful force in the conservative cocoon, technology has rendered even those outlets as merely the most popular destinations in the choose-your-own-adventure news world in which consumers are more empowered than ever.
Facebook and Twitter feeds along with email in-boxes have taken the place of the old newspaper front page, except that the consumer is now entirely in charge of what he or she sees each day and can largely shut out dissenting voices. It’s the great irony of the Internet era: People have more access than ever to an array of viewpoints, but also the technological ability to screen out anything that doesn’t reinforce their views.
Here in Colorado, the 2012 election season saw the biggest explosion of “alternative” right wing media outlets we’ve ever seen. In previous elections, we’ve seen various blogs and “news” sites set up by Colorado conservatives come and go, never making much difference. In 2012, though, the local online punditry space was positively flooded by conservative sites like the Colorado Observer, Colorado Media Trackers, the Colorado News Agency, the Colorado Public Advocate, and My Colorado View–in addition to existing sites such as WhoSaidYouSaid, the People’s Press Collective, Complete Colorado and Colorado Peak Politics. That’s not even a full list.
In short, folks, the “conservative entertainment complex” was absolutely a major part of Colorado’s elections in 2012, and not just via the influence of national talking heads like Rush Limbaugh. As a critical swing state, a battery of local right wing “news” sites was set up to locally reinforce the platform and candidates the GOP fielded here and nationally.
These fake news sites served several important purposes for Republicans: some were used to provide “citations” for attack mailers, or to float attacks on Democrats that Republicans were unable to convince mainstream reporters to run with. Those were then picked up and distributed through more conventional distribution channels like local conservative AM talk radio, or fed up the chain into national conservative news giants like the Fox News Channel. In addition, these outlets “worked the refs,” shrilly attacking mainstream reporters via social media over stories they didn’t like. In October, they became ardent champions of Rasmussen’s increasingly unreal tracking polls. This model more or less depended on a weakened local mainstream media, unable to debunk the volume of material emanating from so many outlets.
And as you know, until Election Day, the confidence projected by the Republicans in Colorado was bulletproof. Not only would the GOP win, but they would win big.
David Frum continues:
“The problem with GOP leaders is they’re cowards, not that they’re fundamentally mistaken,” Frum said. “The real locus of the problem is the GOP activist base and the GOP donor base. They went apocalyptic over the past four years and that was exploited by a lot of people in the conservative world.”
“Apocalyptic” sums it up very well. Remember when Jon Caldara told “Tea Party” rallygoers that Obamacare would result, as in definitely, in Caldara “losing another child?” The kinds of irrational and apocalyptic arguments made by the right wing against Democrats in general, and Barack Obama in particular, have been so over the top that a self-reinforcing conservative media echo chamber environment was required in order to hold it all together. On Election Day, of course, it all came crashing down–but failure doesn’t change the fact that the extreme campaign of character assassination against Democrats in the last four years, reinforced in 2010 and not effectively repudiated until last Tuesday, was part of a very deliberate strategy.
But if you believe it, if you believe that Obamacare is going to kill Jon Caldara’s child, or that the President of the United States is “not an American,” or that the U.N. is coming to take your guns…well, it doesn’t matter if this indicates you are psychologically unbalanced. Because the people who fed you that nonsense only cared how you were going to vote.
It’s possible, given the apparently broad recognition after the election that journalistic information delivery was supplanted on the right with, essentially, a propaganda machine willingly embraced by those it sought to deceive, that we are in the last days of a long assault on objective truth for political purposes. But the true nature and failure of that campaign should never be forgotten by either party–especially Republicans, now brought to ruin, and these ugly truths on display.
Yes, the GOP must change, and their reality bubble is where we would begin.
Overall, it is the “free money” policies that are bankrupting the nation, especially giving pensions and health care to folks who didn’t save for these things.
I get it: these giveaways are here to stay.
Something like 3/4 of the entire federal budget, even though they are not included in most accounts of the totality of the federal government’s economic activities.
We are willing, in the aggregate, to go down with this ship.
But the part of the budget that we could axe tomorrow and not suffer any adverse consequences from is the pornographic transfer of wealth to the militarization of our society.
This is why I love Sequestration.
It might force Doug Lamborn to defend the employment of Mercenaries.
It might force Prez Obama to explain why he enjoys killing brown people in distant lands (what appears to be the reason for our most recent and coming wars.)
In theory, it has a remote chance of actually reducing the amounts spent on unneeded aircraft, ships, nuclear weapons in space, campaigns to force democracy on people living on top of resources we covet, &tc.
ABC News follows up on the passage of Amendment 64, legalizing marijuana in Colorado:
Voters in Colorado and Washington pushed the limits even further when they approved ballot measures Tuesday allowing adults over 21 to possess small amounts of marijuana under state regulation and taxation.
Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper has said Colorado will respect the will of voters but added that he was awaiting word from the U.S. Department of Justice on how to proceed.
“In a situation like this, where our law is at loggerheads with federal law, my primary job is to listen first,” the governor said.
Hickenlooper opposed the ballot measure and has downplayed the likelihood of a commercial marijuana market materializing in Colorado.
“Based on federal law, if it’s still illegal under federal law, I can’t imagine that 7-Eleven is ever going to sell it,” he said.
In a Denver paper editorial today, we’re told of a new amendment to the federal Controlled Substances Act proposed by Rep. Diana DeGette that would simply exempt state laws regarding pot. It’s odd to learn of such a thing from an editorial as opposed to a news story, but we expect advocates for Amendment 64 will be happy to see it nonetheless.
So where does that leave Gov. Hickenlooper? Considerably less proactive, folks.
Hickenlooper’s first response to the passage of Amendment 64 was to warn proponents “don’t break out the Cheetos and gold fish too quickly.” Hickenlooper probably thought he was being cute, but doesn’t that seem a little insulting to the 53% of Colorado voters who approved this? Certainly not all of those voters were pot smokers with the munchies–they had other, more serious reasons for voting to legalize marijuana.
Like ending a failed policy that has needlessly criminalized millions of people.
On Friday, Gov. Hickenlooper and state Attorney General John Suthers, who has pledged to implement Amendment 64, had an inconclusive phone call with U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder. Again, Amendment 64’s advocates are showing restraint in their public comments, but there is a sense that Hickenlooper is almost hoping the feds will put the kibosh on Amendment 64, and is purposefully not doing enough to support the will of the voters here.
With all of that in mind, and especially given Gov. Hickenlooper’s charge to uphold the will of Colorado voters–more directly his responsibility than DeGette’s–we think he should strongly consider adopting a more aggressive stand. We certainly aren’t downplaying the conflict between state and federal law, obviously that’s the 800-pound gorilla in the room.
But for Gov. Hickenlooper to more or less insult an electoral majority, while meekly awaiting the edict of federal law enforcement on Amendment 64, makes him appear feckless and contemptuous of the same Colorado voters who elected him–even more of whom, we are obliged to point out, voted to legalize marijuana than voted for John Hickenlooper in 2010.
Bottom line: on this issue, like marriage equality for gay and lesbian people, reproductive rights for women, and sane immigration reform, we see a new majority consensus emerging with generational change. The issues aren’t related except in the respect that the voters are really beginning now to act against what they see as wrong–and reject politicians who don’t.
Which side do you think Hickenlooper should be on?
During a panel discussion today on local coverage of the 2012 election, journalists said the presidential election, as it played out in Colorado, consumed so much of their time that they were unable to give proper attention to other important Colorado races, including congressional campaigns.
“The presidential just drowns out everything else,” said CBS4 Political Specialist Shaun Boyd. “I did cover the local stuff, but it’s hard to do that when you’ve got so much going on with the presidential race, and that’s what so many people are focused on.”
“TV is broadcasting, and the word ‘broad’ is real, ” added Fox 31 Political Reporter Eli Stokols. “If we think about what people are most interested in, it’s what they’re already hearing about, the presidential stuff. It’s hard for us to cover congressional races in much detail.
Colorado Public Radio reporter Megan Verlee told the audience of about 30 people at the Independence Institute that her station tries to explain why other races matter.
“If you’re covering the CD-7 race, most of your listeners aren’t in CD-7 , they’re wondering, ‘Why do I care about Coors and Perlmutter?'” Verlee said. “And then if you’re covering a State House race, the vast, vast majority of your listeners are not in that area. We were running stories reminding people why it matters who controls the Legislature next time. So if you’re uncomfortable with legal recognition for gay unions, and you’re Republican, you might want to get out and help your candidate. If you want civil unions, and you’re a Democrat, you might want to go out and help your candidate. There were things we could say–‘This is why you need to pay attention to your local races.’ And we actually interviewed Ernest Luning from the Statesman who was doing really great coverage of the State House races and we linked to his website.”
After a few days of reflection, here is our list of losers from the 2012 election cycle in Colorado. Find our list of winners here.
1. Mitt Romney and Colorado Advisors
Mitt Romney’s campaign efforts in Colorado never made much sense to us. Romney spent far too long early in the campaign visiting traditionally beet-red, but more importantly under-populated areas of the state, allowing the battle for suburban votes to shift toward President Barack Obama. Some 85% of Colorado voters live along the Front Range between Ft. Collins and Pueblo, which we would think is fairly common knowledge at this point. At one point at the end of the summer, Romney had gone more than 30 days between visits to our state.
Later, Romney made a disastrous mistake by declaring himself opposed to the wind power production tax credit, which is tied to thousands of manufacturing jobs in Colorado–even though almost all Republicans in the state supported it. By the time Romney began to “Etch-a-Sketch” himself into a moderate candidate for the general election, he had already radicalized himself in the eyes of too many Colorado voters. Once that was done, his attempts to walk back from the hard-right positions he took in the primary looked disingenuous and fed distrust.
But above all, Republican supporters of Romney in Colorado disastrously internalized their own spin, and convinced themselves that polls showing Obama steadily regaining, then holding his lead in Colorado from mid-October onward were “skewed.” This false sense of security, combined with the Obama campaign’s world-beating field campaign, yanked the rug out from under Romney’s feet in a state that consistently ranked as one of the most competitive.
2. Frank McNulty
Outgoing Colorado House Speaker Frank McNulty will go down in history as one of the most divisive, Machiavellian, and ultimately self-destructive leaders in the history of the state. Taking a one-seat majority in 2010 by the barest of electoral margins, McNulty acted as if this was a mandate for the “Tea Party.” Abusing and manipulating legislative rules to an extent nobody we know can remember a match for, McNulty ruthlessly carried out a partisan, obstructionist game plan in the House against the Democratic Senate and Governor’s office.
But McNulty’s arrogance was his own undoing. McNulty lost control of the legislative reapportionment process through his own bad faith, resulting in maps that dramatically reduced the number of “safe” seats for either party. Then McNulty turned the 2012 legislative session into a nationwide controversy when he shut down debate just before civil unions legislation would have passed his chamber with bipartisan support.
As a result, outside money poured into key legislative races, and Democrats used the story of the shutdown of the legislature against Republican House candidates all over the state. Today, not even a candidate for GOP House minority leadership, the implosion of Frank McNulty’s political career is pretty much complete.
Friends, two years ago, as we watched the GOP storm Washington with electoral gains, we shuddered in fear. Tea Party bigotry seemed to have become the new political norm. I am going to self-aggrandize now, but two years ago, on this day, I boldly wrote an editorial outlining why the GOP’s bigotry would ultimately lead to their extinction, not their vindication.
I am relinking my article from two years ago, as a celebratory rerun. All of us ‘liberals’ and ‘progressives’ (even fiscal conservative ones, like me) should stand proud today that we did not give up. Well done, friends.
In 2012, voters were generally more progressive than their elected representatives. Two states legalized recreational use of marijuana. Four states voted in favor of marriage equality. The list goes on. Around the country, voters took matters into their own hands, often over the objections of elected officials.
Simultaneously, right-wing Republicans’ years-long campaign of Islamophobic fear-mongering failed spectacularly at the polls. Around the country, candidates bet on turning out the Republican base with threats of “Sharia law” and “radical Islam.” Voters turned out, but they delivered a resounding rebuke to candidates known for their vituperative anti-Muslim rhetoric.
Underdog challenger Patrick Murphytoppled Allen West by less than 2,500 votes. Congressman West is an Islamophobe so vicious that he stooped to attack the country’s only Muslim Congressman:
West used his time in Congress to press his case that Islam is “not a religion” but a “totalitarian theocratic political ideology,” and that terrorism is inherent to the faith-not radical Islam, but Islam, writ large. He’s accused a fellow Member of Congress, Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), a Muslim, of “represent(ing) the antithesis of the principles upon which this country was established.”
Kicking off coverage of the passage of Amendment 64yesterday, the constitutional amendment legalizing marijuana for recreational purposes in this state, naturally we begin with Westword:
Proponent Mason Tvert, speaking amid a boisterous celebration at the measure’s victory party, puts the historic achievement in perspective.
“This shows that Coloradans are ready to move beyond marijuana prohibition,” he says. “They demonstrated it tonight by approving Amendment 64.
“Eighty years ago, Colorado voters approved a repeal of alcohol prohibition, demonstrating a desire to take a more sensible approach to how we treat alcohol,” he continues. “It doesn’t come as a surprise that they’re now taking sensible steps when it comes to the way we treat marijuana.”
…Implementing Amendment 64 will be a challenge, given that Colorado’s law, as altered by the act, will directly contradict with federal policy, which continues to treat marijuana as illegal. However, he says, “we look forward to discussions with state and federal officials. We’re looking forward to working with them — and looking forward to seeing that marijuana is regulated and treated in a sensible fashion.”
In a statement that was also issued last night, Governor John Hickenlooper explained how the transition will not be an easy one saying, “don’t break out the Cheetos and gold fish too quickly.”
Colorado’s Attorney General John Suthers also issued a response to the new legislation on Wednesday morning.
“Despite my strongly held belief that the ‘legalization’ of marijuana on a state level is very bad public policy, voters can be assured that the Attorney General’s Office will move forward in assisting the pertinent executive branch agencies to implement this new provision in the Colorado Constitution,” Suthers wrote.
KRDO-TV reports, there are still many unresolved questions:
Attorney General John Suthers released the following statement regarding taxation of the drug:
“The proponents of Amendment 64 told voters that it imposed a surtax of up to 15 % on marijuana sale that would result in up to $40 million each year going to K-12 schools in the state. In fact Amendment 64 did not comply with required language under the Taxpayers Bill of Rights and no such tax will be imposed. Instead it will be up to the Colorado Legislature whether to refer such a tax to the voters and up to the voters of Colorado whether to actually impose the tax. Therefore, such revenue is speculative and will not be forthcoming when Amendment 64 begins to be implemented.”
When state and federal laws conflict, federal law takes precedence. Federal authorities could sue in an attempt to block the measures in Colorado and Washington from taking effect.
It’s anybody’s guess what the federal government will do about Amendment 64, though many we’ve talked to do expect a suit by the feds attempting to block all or part of the amendment from taking effect. Depending on what happens with that, as FOX 31 reports, the Colorado General Assembly will be responsible for passing implementing legislation regulating the recreational sale of marijuana–and as Attorney General John Suthers asserts above, it may be necessary to refer a tax measure to voters to fulfill the fiscal part of Amendment 64’s promise.
It’s likely that the provisions for the sale and taxation of marijuana will prove more difficult to work out than the heart of the amendment, legalizing personal possession of up to one ounce or six plants. The state already has some experience with commercial sale of marijuana in the form of dispensaries for medical marijuana patients, experience that could help develop the model.
Whatever happens, we’re definitely in uncharted territory. A poll follows.
FOX 31’s Eli Stokols is out this morning with his list of winners and losers from last night’s election–we’re working on our own as well, and hope to have it up soon. In the meantime, we wanted to call attention to the final “loser” on Stokols’ list, which we think contains a vital lesson for Republicans attempting to process and rationalize yesterday’s many defeats:
Conservative media: Conservatives have grown so distrustful of everything they are told by the mainstream media, it becomes easy for them to fall into the trap of assuming that polls showing Obama winning are inherently flawed. Even last night, when any political novice could tell that the president was on his way to reelection based solely on the early indications from a number of eastern states, Karl Rove, sitting on the Fox News Channel set, refused to accept the network’s conclusion that Obama had won Ohio. His on-air tantrum became an instant YouTube sensation, a flashpoint of conservative anger that encapsulated the ugly truth that conservatives had long been living inside a Fox News Channel/Rush Limbaugh bubble, failing to acknowledge any events or viewpoints that didn’t mesh with their own conservative ideology and political fantasies.
Viewers and listeners so wrapped up inside that bubble with obsessive coverage of Benghazi didn’t realize how out of line they were with the rest of the country. In Colorado, conservatives dismissing the work of pollster Chris Keating on the grounds that he’s worked for Hickenlooper and Udall, overlooked a series of polls that were spot-on. A day before the election, Keating had Obama leading Romney 50-46; it was a four-point win for Obama, 52-48, in the end. [Pols emphasis]
Living within that conservative echo chamber doesn’t seem to serve viewers all that well, given that insulating oneself from reality only works for so long. Feigning confidence, hoping it’ll become a self-fulfilling prophecy, while ignoring or dismissing massive amounts of polling data because it doesn’t add up to a positive outcome – none of it seems to serve viewers all that well in the end, much less American democracy. Even the Romney campaign was drinking the conservative media Kool-Aid, with aides acknowledging Wednesday what was plainly evident from the candidate’s halfhearted, hastily thrown together concession speech – that they truly expected they would win.
Registration always favored Democrat Max Tyler in HD-23, and withering late-game attacks on Rick Enstrom’s criminal history from all angles only widened Tyler’s path to re-election.
Little surprise, then that as of an e-mail sent at 7:52, Tyler is officially claiming victory:
We won!
I wanted to give everyone a quick update. The JeffCO voting results online show us winning with 50.04% of the vote to Republican Rick Enstrom with 44.39% and Libertarian Michael Beckerman with 5.56%. This is very, very close to the final result.
For all Jefferson County results click here.
Thank you so much to all my supporters, volunteers, friends, family, new and old constituents for giving me the honor and opportunity to continuing representing House District 23 down at the State Capitol.
KOA’s Mike Rosen began his radio show this morning in Denver by saying the left is unconcerned about “unethical, illegal, immoral behavior” and therefore willing to commit election fraud.
Then, in the next hour, Rosen suggested that a caller, who admitted forging the name of his son on a mail-in ballot, lie to authorities in order to avoid penalties.
To Rosen’s credit, he told the caller he did the wrong thing, and he should probably report the fraud, which allegedly resulted in his son’s voting twice for Romney.
But Rosen apparently forgot what he said earlier about conservatives being all law-abiding and the left being a bunch of liars.
So, Rosen actually did what he accused the left of doing, by suggesting the caller lie to authorities to avoid being charged with election fraud, most likely a felony.
It’s funny to think that the marquee legislative race in Jefferson County this year almost never happened. Just one year ago, after all, Rep. Andy Kerr had a perplexing primary challenge for his HD-26 seat on his hands and and Rep. Ken Summers was expected to sail through to another term in the House. The two were then drawn into the same district alongside Rep. Max Tyler, of course, and what was next was anybody’s guess until, through a surprise reapportionment quirk, incumbent SD-22 Senator Tim Neville was rendered unable to run for his current seat.
Kerr then announced his bid for Neville’s seat, followed unsurprisingly by a similar announcement from Summers’ camp. Since December, then, this race has pitted two equally-experienced state representatives from the same area against each other in a campaign for a seat in which neither has the numerical advantage.
Summers initially led Kerr in fundraising and cash-on-hand — by dint of the fact that the Democrat had in 2010 raised money for other candidates when he was in House leadership — although Kerr quickly caught up and overtook Summers by mid-August. Kerr maintained that fundraising lead throughout the fall, leading Summers by over $60,000 as of October 29th. And, unlike the Republican, Kerr has spent his money actively campaigning — Summers has been mostly invisible on the campaign trail all year, aside from a few drastic jumps off the deep end.
Both candidates have faced scathing, non-stop attacks from outside groups, and each have their vulnerabilities. Summers has been painted as too ideologically extreme for the swing district while Kerr has been dogged by his legal challenge to TABOR.
This campaign will be heavily influenced by the presidential race at the top of the ticket. With dark blue pockets in Edgewater and parts of Lakewood and torch red swaths in Ken Caryl, the candidate who does a better job of turning out his base without appearing too extreme will likely be proclaimed the winner tomorrow evening. While Kerr’s field effort should give him the lead, Summers’ base may be more likely to vote straight-ticket after casting their ballots for president.
Neither candidate has ever had a clear edge in this hotly-contested seat and that hasn’t changed in the final hours of this election. With that in mind, we want to know: Who do you think will win in SD-22, Andy Kerr or Ken Summers? Remember, vote for the candidate you sincerely believe will win, no matter how much that may pain you ideologically.
State Senator Michael Johnston just keeps adding to his profile as something of a legislative wunderkind, yesterday earning the loftiest of encomiums from Forbes magazine.
Every now and then a speech comes along that reminds me why public speaking is still essential and why I said back in 2003 that the only reason to give a speech is to change the world.
I had tears in my eyes by the end of the speech, and you will too. Johnston’s dedication to education and the real progress he has been able to make deserve to be celebrated. Watch the speech and reaffirm your faith in teaching and teachers – and most of all students.
[T]his speech will have you standing up and cheering for education by the end. It’s 21 minutes that are worth spending on the future of our children. Watch it, and tell everyone you know about it. And thanks, Mike, for your service to education.
It would, of course, be more surprising if Johnston didn’t give a good speech. After years as a state senator, high school principal, and three Ivy League degrees, he should know exactly what to say and how to say it.
Still, this particular Forbes write-up, alongside a 2010 column by Waiting for Superman director Davis Guggenheim proclaiming him one of the “world’s most powerful educators,” only underscores the fact that Johnston’s political star is rising faster than almost anyone else in Colorado state government.
Where it shoots to next is anybody’s guess. His close ties in the Obama administration offer Johnston the opportunity to shape national education policy if the president scores a second term, but Johnston may just opt to stay in office here in Colorado.
Doing so puts him on the short list for CD-1 — although incumbent Diana DeGette probably has at least a decade left on the hill — and gives him the chance to keep pushing for reforms in Colorado.
JEFFERSON COUNTY, Colo. (CBS4)- The woman named “Democrat of The Year” this year by the Jefferson County Democratic Party has been convicted of felony theft by a Jefferson County jury for stealing from a developmentally disabled 71-year-old woman.
It’s standard practice, of course, for political parties to award “people of the year” honors to volunteers who have given time to the party. It makes volunteers feel appreciated and, better yet, the party can fundraise by selling tickets to awards dinners.
There’s never any reason for the parties handing out these awards to suspect one of their volunteers is involved in something shady, either. Honoring someone with a cheap plaque and some second-rate spaghetti doesn’t warrant a criminal background check. If criminal allegations — or any other unsavory pieces of information — come out after someone is named an “x of the year” the best course of action is to probably cut off all ties and, perhaps, revoke the award. There’s not much more you could do.
It’s a totally different story, however, to give an award to someone after you know they’re under criminal investigation. Unfortunately, in the case of this “Democrat of the Year,” that’s a lesson the Jefferson County Democratic Party has to learn the hard way.
More from CBS:
[T]hree days before the January 8 gala, advocates for the victim contacted the party via email and phone informing them of the criminal investigation.
But Chris Kennedy, chairman of the Jefferson County Democratic party, dismissed the concerns saying there was not a conviction and bestowed the “Democrat Of The Year” honor on Carson.
In an email following the event, Kennedy wrote, “After much consideration, my decision was that the award being presented by my organization and the alleged financial exploitation need to be compartmentalized, one having no bearing on the other. Thus I decided to present the award to Estelle.”
Seriously? The “alleged financial exploitation” needs to be compartmentalized? This is an award for “Democrat of the Year.” As much as the title is a commonplace honorific, the award itself is a bold declaration that its recipient is one of the party’s all-around most valuable members. If someone is accused of a crime, there’s no question that lessens the value of their profile and contributions as a Democrat.
Kennedy defended his decision to CBS by saying that the woman in question had been “accused, not convicted” and that he “did not have reason to believe it was true.” That shouldn’t have mattered. As the county’s Democratic chair, Kennedy has the responsibility to earn his party the best possible optics and, more importantly, to make sure it avoids embarrassing stories like these. That there was even an investigation was cause to cancel the presentation of the award — in case things turned out exactly like they did here.
Had Kennedy resisted presenting the award, the volunteer-in-question’s feelings would’ve been hurt and others, perhaps, would’ve been offended. But, had she been exonerated, the award could’ve been given at a later date. Instead, the Jefferson County Democratic Party is now plagued by headlines directly showcasing its official approval of a someone who stole from a developmentally disabled septuagenerian.
This is a major lapse in judgement at best and incompetence at worst.
JEFFERSON COUNTY, Colo. (CBS4)- The woman named “Democrat of The Year” this year by the Jefferson County Democratic Party has been convicted of felony theft by a Jefferson County jury for stealing from a developmentally disabled 71-year-old woman.
It’s standard practice, of course, for political parties to award “people of the year” honors to members who have given time or money. It makes volunteers feel appreciated and, better yet, the party can fundraise by selling tickets to awards dinners.
There’s never any reason for the parties handing out these awards to suspect one of their volunteers is involved in something shady, either. Honoring someone with a cheap plaque and some second-rate spaghetti doesn’t warrant a criminal background check. If criminal allegations — or any other unsavory pieces of information — come out after someone is named an “x of the year,” the best course of action is cut off all ties and, perhaps, revoke the award. There’s not much more you can do.
It’s a totally different story, however, to give an award to someone after you know they’re under criminal investigation. Unfortunately, in the case of this “Democrat of the Year,” that’s a lesson the Jefferson County Democratic Party has to learn the hard way.
More from CBS:
[T]hree days before the January 8 gala, advocates for the victim contacted the party via email and phone informing them of the criminal investigation.
But Chris Kennedy, chairman of the Jefferson County Democratic party, dismissed the concerns saying there was not a conviction and bestowed the “Democrat Of The Year” honor on Carson.
In an email following the event, Kennedy wrote, “After much consideration, my decision was that the award being presented by my organization and the alleged financial exploitation need to be compartmentalized, one having no bearing on the other. Thus I decided to present the award…”
Seriously? The “alleged financial exploitation” needs to be compartmentalized? This is an award for “Democrat of the Year.” As much as the title is a commonplace honorific, the award itself is a bold declaration that its recipient is one of the party’s all-around most valuable members. Being accused of a crime lessens the value of a person’s profile and contributions as a Democrat. Unless, of course, you’re trying to send the message that your organization welcomes and even celebrates those who steal from the elderly.
Kennedy defended his decision to CBS by saying that the woman in question had been “accused, not convicted” and that he “did not have reason to believe it was true.” That shouldn’t have mattered. As the county’s Democratic chair, Kennedy has a responsibility to earn his party the best possible optics and, more importantly, to make sure it avoids embarrassing stories like these. That there was even an investigation was cause to cancel the presentation of the award — just in case that investigation led to a conviction, as it did here.
Why Kennedy failed to realize the potential implications of offering this award to someone accused of a crime is perplexing. Perhaps he didn’t want to upset a loyal volunteer or hurt anybody’s feelings. Still, hurt feelings can’t justify the mess he’s created as a result. Kennedy should’ve canceled the presentation of this award the very second he was informed of the criminal charges. Sure, he might’ve stepped on some toes, but the honors could’ve been offered anew if the volunteer in question was exonerated.
Because Kennedy didn’t think this through, however, the Jefferson County Democratic Party is now plagued by headlines showcasing its official approval of a someone who stole from a developmentally disabled septuagenerian.
This is a serious lapse in judgement at best and incompetence at worst.
Poor Robert Ramirez. The Republican legislator running for re-election in HD-29 has had troubles with his own campaign materials. Now outside political groups trying to help Ramirez aren’t doing him any favors. A recent mail piece sent out by the “Colorado Leadership Fund” doesn’t make it clear whether you are supposed to like or dislike Ramirez at first glance.
Ramirez was less than pleased with the mail piece when contacted by the Denver newspaper, and we don’t blame him. The other side of the mailer does try to paint Ramirez as a strong supporter of public schools, but given that most people only take a passing look at direct mail this time of year, the message needs to be a lot more obvious. If you only saw this side of the mailer, would you assume that it was a positive piece?
We were just forwarded a video clip of GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney speaking informally at an Aurora bar last June. This video has never been seen publicly before, and it could shake up the national debate considerably over what Romney would do with health care policy as President–a debate driven by unanswered questions. First […]
(Students who DON’T want to complain?! – promoted by ProgressiveCowgirl) Westword’s uber blogger Michael Roberts reported Sept. 19 that Tom Tancredo, a former Republican Congressman from Colorado, had placed ads in Metro State University’s student newspaper seeking plaintiffs for a lawsuit seeking damages resulting from the University’s decision to offer undocumented students a reduced tuition […]
If there’s any takeaway from the controversy surrounding the proposed Wal-Mart development at 9th and Colorado, it’s that democracy works. Weeks of sustained and organized opposition from Congress Park residents, after all, has led the developer to pull the plug on the project.
After several heated meetings where residents near E. 9th Ave. and Colorado Blvd were very vocal about their displeasure with a proposed Walmart in the area, Tuesday was a different story.
Cheers filled a room at Palmer Elementary School where residents gathered for a meeting in which Mayor Hancock confirmed the store withdrew from consideration for the site.
Walmart released this statement:
“While Walmart will not be part of the planned redevelopment of the former University of Colorado Health Sciences campus, we will continue to evaluate other opportunities to serve Denver area customers and expand access to affordable groceries.
With Wal-Mart’s withdrawal, the issue then shifts to an inquiry in what will instead be developed in its place. The developer still pledges to transform the space into a mixed-use shopping center, but given the difficulties one big-box retailer encountered, it’s unclear whether any other national chain would be willing to subject itself to the same community scrutiny.
Which raises yet another question. If any major chain development raises this level of acrimony, is there any incentive to occupy the space at all? Wal-Mart may stir a special breed of ill-will, but there needs to be some sort of anchor store — most likely a national chain — on the expansive site in order to make development worthwhile.
If Wal-Mart isn’t acceptable, what is? Is a derelict hospital better than a store whose values are at odd with the neighborhood?
After the Fort Collins Coloradoan’s Patrick Malone broke the story Tuesday night, Tim Hoover of the Denver paper follows up today with more details from Colorado Secretary of State Scott Gessler’s spokesman about two taxpayer-funded trips he took last summer: one to Washington, D.C. to speak at a Heritage Foundation press conference for the True […]
A heartburn inspiring poll for Democrats to add to the post-debate pile, The Hill: [I]n Colorado, likely voters went for Romney 50 to 46 over Obama, in ARG’s poll. Romney soundly outpaced Obama among female voters in the state, taking 51 percent support against Obama at 45. Obama led by 3 in Colorado heading into […]
Poor Robert Ramirez. The Republican legislator running for re-election in HD-29 has had 
