Below is a post we wrote in 2013 about Douglas County. The reason we are reposting it is because it is actually a story that could be written today about Jeffco Schools (and was by Nelson Garcia at 9News), which might be due to the fact that the same slingers of smut, Strategies 360, handle both unions in Jeffco and Dougco. Did Nelson Garcia literally take the same story and copy and paste it with a new date and new names?
U.S. Senate Democratic Leader Harry Reid is demanding Congress pass new gun control laws to stop felons and the mentally ill from purchasing guns.
Yes, we know that felony checks are already part of the National Instant Criminal Background Check System used by firearms dealers. So are checks to insure that guns are not sold to individuals involuntarily committed to a mental institution, those convicted of domestic violence or drug use.
However, Democrats and the Obama administration want anyone who has sought treatment for depression or other mental issues to be reported to the national criminal-check system. Standing in their way are health officials who fear such reporting requirements might discourage some from actually seeking treatment.
Reid even admitted that Democrats’ efforts to require this and other gun control laws have consistently failed, including the measures he called for Tuesday. But Reid was on a roll — let’s not interrupt him:
“I understand the definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result, and that’s what we’re doing.”
Finally, Democrats admit they are insane for repeatedly trying and failing to politicize gun control in the face of every tragedy, especially during the presidential primary season.
However, the national party should take a lesson from Colorado — capitalizing on heartbreak to pass gun control measures can also backfire politically. Just ask former State Senate President John Morse and former State Senator Angela Giron.
A federal judge in Wyoming ruled in favor of Colorado and other Western states and organizations and has suspended the new fracking rules until lawsuits against the federal government are resolved.
The rules were set to take effect Wednesday.
Can we get an Amen from the choir?
Here’s the announcement from Attorney General Cynthia Coffman’s office:
“We are pleased the court agreed that the new BLM regulations present serious and difficult questions that justified a stay of these rules’ effective date,” said Colorado Attorney General Cynthia H. Coffman. “We believe these rules intrude on Colorado’s sovereign right to responsibly and safely regulate the oil and gas industry within our borders.”
The states’ lawsuit raises a straightforward legal question: whether BLM can impose its own regulations on hydraulic fracturing, even though federal law does not give it that power, and instead, allows states to regulate in this area.
This is a significant victory for state authority versus federal intrusion. It’s too bad Gov. Hickenlooper and his Department of Natural Resources were on the wrong side of this issue.
First, U.S. Rep. Jared Polis tried a ballot initiative that would have granted local control to cities and counties who hoped to ban fracking. That failed after his own political party punished him again for being a baby about a fracking rig on his neighbor’s property. In a compromise, Polis and his fractivists attempted to stack the deck on the oil and gas task force with fractivists, only to later declare the oil and gas task force an utter failure after the task force didn’t recommend what Polis wanted it to recommend. Now, fractivists (and we have to assume Polis) are trying a third time to enact local control through the rulemaking process, according to the Denver Business Journal. Here’s what the DBJ reported:
“Those two recommendations were hailed by some on the oil and gas task force for requiring more communication between companies and local officials, and hopefully avoid controversy over new wells near homes and schools. But others on the task force said the recommendations didn’t go far enough because the final decision on where to put a well or support facility still rests with the state — not the local officials.”
So far, there are no dates, but the regulatory body that oversees oil and gas development for the state, the COGCC, named a few locations – Brighton, Broomfield, somewhere in Weld County, Western Slope and LaPlata County. It should be no surprise that the meetings will be held in fractivist hot zones like Broomfield where fractivists can turn out their activists.
While some have described the appetite for a 2016 ballot initiative as subsided, a renewed effort to enact “local control” could be just the opening act for a 2016 ballot.
Political outlets have been quick to report on the enormous crowd that gathered to welcome self-described socialist (yes, literally) Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders to Colorado over the weekend. According to reports, approximately 5,000 braved the heat to see their patron saint of the common man, who may or may not be as salt of the earth as he would like to portray. Nonetheless, Sanders populism stands in stark contrast to Hillary’s elitism and his socialism is far to the left of Hillary.
Which way will the Democratic Party sway?
If attendance was votes, Sanders would win by a mile. PeakNation™, you may remember Hillary’s ill-fated trip out here about a year ago in which she tried to sell tickets to hear her speak for $175 per person. In the end, she had to sell them on Living Social for $59.
And, there’s another difference between Hillary and Sanders. While Sanders welcomed all who could fit in the Denver gymnasium, Hillary came to Colorado with a big fat price tag. Again, man of the people vs. woman of the purse.
But, according the Washington Post, the Denver crowd is no anomaly:
“And as the story notes, while this crowd was the largest for Sanders since he began running for president last month, it’s far from the only big crowd he has drawn. More than 3,000 people were at a Sanders event in Minneapolis at the end of May. Earlier this month, more than 700 people were at a Sanders rally at Drake University in Iowa. In early June, an overflow crowd turned out to hear Sanders in Keene, New Hampshire.”
Ultimately, neither of these candidates are ideal representatives for Colorado. Sanders is more apt to represent Cold War Russia with his socialist policies and Hillary is more crooked than than a plate of spaghetti noodles.
But, Democrats must choose the direction of the party. Is there room in the Democratic Party for people who aspire to achieve the American Dream? Or, is the Democratic Party just a pretty face for socialism these days? Will the Democratic Party stand for rampant corruption and shady financial deals? These are questions Democrats must ask themselves when voting for its presidential candidate in the primary. The future of the Democratic Party is at stake and, at some point, Democrats must choose their adventure.
The Forest Service has officially abandoned its despotic “groundwater directive” that would have allowed them to seize private water rights on property adjacent to public lands.
In Colorado and throughout the West, there was much rejoicing.
U.S. Rep. Scott Tipton, vice chairman of the Western Caucus, said the directive would have been especially harmful to the countless farmers and ranchers who rely on access to their private water rights to feed the nation and earn a living.
This battle may be won, but Tipton says the war is not over:
“This is a win for all private water rights users, but short of a legislative solution such as the Water Rights Protection Act to provide permanent protections. We will continue to see similar attempts by the administration to exert control over private water rights.”
Added U.S. Sen. Cory Gardner:
“I appreciate the Forest Service withdrawing its proposed directive. The directive was developed without sufficient input from Western states and stakeholders, and would have infringed on the water rights of states, agriculture, and private citizens.”
Looks like the Forest Service acknowledged as much when it pledged not to infringe on state authority or impose new requirements on private landowners in future directives.
Historically speaking, that means it is exactly what the feds will try again in the future, just not during the presidential election season.
Here’s a story to get your blood pumping. If you hated bridges to nowhere, you’ll really hate walks to nowhere. Apparently, the Colorado Department of Health Care Policy and Financing, recently spent $12,000 on treadmill work stations, raising the ire of Republican Colorado State House Rep. JoAnn Windholz…and, likely, Coloradans everywhere.
From Windholz’s comments to the Denver Post:
“…I wonder if you asked the taxpayers, if they would approve. If employees are concerned about their health, they can go to a club or a community center.”
The department justified its actions by saying that the department was under budget on a grant for efficiencies (clearly not financial):
“Williams said the five work stations will be in a communal setting and shared by 500 employees, rather than assigned to individual workers. The equipment will be paid for out of a grant the department received for coming up with efficiencies. With the $12,000 or so left in the account, the workers wanted to buy the work stations, he said.”
Has anyone ever worked in a place with treadmill workstations? Likely not. If the department was under budget, it should have returned the money to taxpayers instead of buying extravagant work stations. Windholz is justifiably irritated.
The Southern Utes have filed a legal challenge against the federal fracking rules set to take effect on Wednesday arguing that the government’s interference would trump the tribe’s authority over its own lands.
Attorney Sam Maynes is representing the tribe, and told the Durango Herald they have requested a hearing Tuesday for a temporary restraining order to block the rule, which they say conflicts with the Indian Mineral Leasing Act.
“The BLM was overreaching when it enacted this rule for tribal lands,” said Southern Ute Chairman Clement Frost. “Tribal lands should be treated differently than federal lands. Some of the provisions in this new rule are just burdensome regulations that are not tied to an environmental benefit.”
More to the point, the tribe already has their own rules that are compatible to Colorado’s regulations to oversee fracking, protect the aquifers, and disclose chemicals — all without the “bureaucratic morass” and delays imposed by the new federal rules, said Bob Zahradnik, operating director of the Southern Ute Growth Fund.
But that doesn’t matter to lawyers at EarthJustice, who are leading the fight for Big Green in support of the new rules that they see as a means of crippling the industry in bureaucratic red tape.
“Our public lands belong to all Americans,” said EarthJustice staff attorney Michael Freeman, who is representing the group, which includes the Sierra Club and Conservation Colorado Education Fund.
We can’t wait to see Maynes set Freeman straight on public versus tribal lands.
Colorado, Wyoming and North Dakota have also filed suits against the federal government seeking to block the rule.
Presidential wannabe Sen. Bernie Sanders delivered a blistering stump speech at the University of Denver this weekend condemning rich folks and businesses.
It always strikes us as a bit hypocritical when wealthy politicians who make $167,000 a year and raise millions of dollars from rich people for a living pretend to hate the upper class in order to keep making their six-figure salary.
However, Bernie openly admits his socialist politics, so it’s probably okay for him to earn a big paycheck so long as taxpayers, and not private industry pay it.
We checked his personal finance disclosure report and it turns out Sanders does not hide corporate investments through mutual funds, because these belong to his wife.
That’s a nice chunk of change they have invested in large capitol funds.
Sanders’s own personal wealth jumped dramatically after he was elected to the Senate in 2004 when his average net worth was $140,000. Now it’s just under $500,000.
That’s an annual growth rate of 29 percent, compared to average Americans who have seen a one percent decline in their yearly net worth in the same time period.
As for his campaign contributions, Sanders raised $7 million for his 2012 Senate campaign. Before he announced his presidential bid, he had $4 million in the bank.
Here are the top industries that donate to Sanders:
During his speech here, Bernie vowed to replace all of this messy campaign fundraising with public election financing, meaning taxpayers should pay for politicians to run for office so they don’t have to do the work themselves.
Sanders danced the line on our hypocrite scale. With the exception of barely mentioned stints as a carpenter, filmmaker, and journalist, he has spent a career in politics that began in the ‘70s so he has lived on the government teat for decades.
That he thinks everyone else should is not surprising. His plans to get rid of Obamacare in favor of all government-paid health care, sounds about right. Breaking the banking system, that figures.
His calls for income equality – let’s be honest, if we could only be equal to Bernie’s wealthy political career finances, that would be awesome. But we suspect that in Bernie’s perfect socialist world of equal wealth distribution, some animals on the farm would still be more equal than others.
Senate District 19 has always been one of the most interesting and dramatic in the state legislature. It has a long history of electing union cronies, the match-ups are notoriously vicious, and there is a strong Libertarian element that’s been known to pull votes from the GOP.
It is always an entertaining district to watch during the election, and for years Democrats held onto SD 19 by skin of their teeth. Until finally last year, Republican Laura Woods ousted Democrat Sen. Rachel Zenzinger 47.8 to 46.4, with the Libertarian candidate pulling 5.7 percent of the vote – a substantial margin for a third party.
Voters rejected Zenzinger because of her bad policies, and (largely) because she was the handpicked successor of former Sen. Evie Hudak, who resigned rather than face a recall effort over her anti-2nd Amendment votes. Zenzinger’s loss flipped control of the state Senate to favor Republicans for the first time in a decade and was a huge blow to her party.
So, when The Colorado Statesman reported last week that Zenzinger is “seriously considering” a rematch, we had to question her judgment. The operatives on the Dem side are likely telling Zenzinger that she has a chance at winning back her seat in a presidential year because turnout is higher. However, for such an important and competitive district, why would you risk running a candidate who couldn’t do the job right the first time?
Bringing Zenzinger back is like a big F U to the voters of the SD 19, and just pure laziness on behalf of the Dem Party. You’d think they would prefer someone with less baggage.