ACLU Wants Change In Nudity Laws In Colorado For Naked Protesting

by elpresidente | 1:53 pm, April 26, 2009

Even a stopped clock is correct twice a day, the old saw goes.

The ACLU may be on to something here, as another form of automatic/zero-tolerance comes under fire:

The American Civil Liberties Union plans to lobby for changes to Colorado laws that require nude offenders to register as sex offenders, claiming the laws are unusually harsh.

“We are very concerned about the way in which the Colorado sex-offender registry is set up, resulting in sex-offender status for these kinds of activities,” Judd Golden, who chairs the Boulder County chapter of the ACLU, told the Boulder Daily Camera.

The ACLU will host a public forum Tuesday called “Naked in Boulder.” The forum will discuss whether nude offenders should be treated as “pranksters and protesters, or criminals and sex offenders.”

Protesting in the nude is not something that Tea Party-goers will be doing anytime soon, as this remains exclusively within the domain of left-leaning organizations. But naked bike rides are hardly worthy of sex-offender registry punishments–eye bleach yes, but nothing more.

Boulder’s DA provides the highlight of the article–when dealing with the issue of nudity in public, word choice is always important:

“We’re dealing with a square peg in a round hole,” Stan Garnett, who became Boulder County’s district attorney shortly after the pumpkin running incident, told the Camera. “Most people would say people running down the mall with pumpkins on their heads may not be somebody who is at risk of becoming a sex offender in the future.”

Heh.

Last year’s Naked Bike Ride in Denver (NSFW, eye bleach warning).

Xcel “Smart Meters” in Boulder: More Information for Better Consumer Choices?

by T.L. James | 9:32 pm, April 25, 2009

Complete Colorado points to an article in the Daily Camera on Xcel’s efforts to install “smart grid” technology in (where else?) Boulder.
I definitely don’t like the idea of the power company (or envirokook do-gooders in the local government) having the authority to turn down my air conditioning or water heater whenever they find it “necessary”, [...]

A ‘Nonpartisan’ Reason to Challenge California Anti-Taxpayer Media Bias

by Ben DeGrow | 1:12 pm, April 25, 2009

It’s quite often the subtle bias in the dominant liberal media that can make a significant difference. Witness yesterday’s San Francisco Chronicle piece on a California ballot initiative to impose tax-and-spending limitations on state government.
Writer John Wildermuth quotes from two Colorado sources to establish views on our own state’s experience with the stronger Taxpayer’s [...]

Denver Police: Too many cops, too much money.

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 8:53 am, April 25, 2009

Ricardo Baca, Pop Music Critic for the Denver Post, was visited by three Denver police officers at 3:00 a.m. recently. He was sound asleep, like most people, at that hour.

KRCX Seng Center 4/23 – Part II

by Jimmy Sengenberger | 11:05 pm, April 24, 2009

The following is Part Two of Seng Center’s 4/23 Regis University radio show, featuring our discussions on the controversy surrounding President Barack Obama’s recent speech at Georgetown University, another Jesuit Catholic institution, and whether or not marijuana should be legalized.  Our guest on the latter issue is Stephen from CU-Boulder.

34.5 MB download

KRCX Seng Center 4/23 – Part I

by Jimmy Sengenberger | 11:05 pm, April 24, 2009

The following is Part One of Seng Center’s 4/23 Regis University
radio show, featuring our exclusive interview with Colorado State Board of Education Chairman Bob Schaffer.  Schaffer served as U.S. Congressman representing the 4th Congressional District from 1997 to 2003 and ran for U.S. Senate in both 2004 and 2008.  He talks with Jimmy about the Board’s role and responsibilities, President Obama’s volunteer for college aid plan, Obama’s job so far, and much more.

62.4 MB download

“Your Town”: A Defense of Capitalism

by T.L. James | 10:24 pm, April 24, 2009

Here’s a golden oldie, from back in the day when industry associations stood up for capitalism and the positive social by-products of productive enterprises, instead of apologizing for their existence and bending over backwards to appease environmentalist bullies, corrupt incumbents, and union thugs.

While it veers into the de rigeur hip-deep patriotic cheese near the end [...]

“Your Town”: A Defense of Capitalism

by T.L. James | 9:54 pm, April 24, 2009

Here’s a golden oldie, from back in the day when industry associations stood up for capitalism and the positive social by-products of productive enterprises, instead of apologizing for their existence and bending over backwards to appease environmentalist bullies, corrupt incumbents, and union thugs. While it veers into the de rigeur hip-deep patriotic cheese near the [...]

Clear The Bench Colorado Director at Lincoln Club lunch 29 April

by CTBC Director | 8:00 pm, April 24, 2009

Appearing as the guest speaker at the next Lincoln Club luncheon on Wednesday April 29th at the Denver Athletic Club, Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold will discuss the grassroots movement to vote “NO” on retaining the four Colorado Supreme Court justices facing voters in 2010…

News of CO secret sick tax gets attention

by Amy Oliver | 11:34 am, April 24, 2009

Westby G. Fisher, MD of Illinois, known as Dr. Wes on his blog, picks up on Linda Gorman’s irony when she wrote about HB 1293 the “health care affordability act” in her most recent Issue Backgrounder.  In his post “The Ultimate Irony: A Sick Tax to Make Health Care Affordable,” he writes:
[L]ook for cash-strapped legislatures across the [...]

Colorado “Zero Tolerance” Policy On Fake Guns Lifted, Discretion Left To Schools

by elpresidente | 9:51 am, April 24, 2009

You may remember the story of Marie Morrow, a student who faced automatic expulsion from Cherry Creek schools for having drill team rifles props in her SUV on campus.

Thankfully, after the adults stepped in back in February, Morrow avoided expulsion.

But the “zero tolerance” policy that forced the hand of the school remained in place until this week:

When Marie Morrow was suspended from school for bringing in drill team rifle props, she used her days off to lobby state legislators to change the law.

Her story, first reported by 9NEWS, drew national attention.

On Tuesday, Morrow was watching as Gov. Bill Ritter signed a law giving schools discretion when it comes to fake guns on campus. They no longer will mean an automatic expulsion. Each school can decide what punishment fits the situation.

Cherry Creek Schools counted Morrow’s six-day suspension as the required expulsion. She had the fake guns in her car for a young Marines drill team practice after school.

The incident won’t affect her plans to attend the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy.

Thankfully, a little bit of sanity and common sense has been restored to Colorado’s schools following the knee-jerk reactions that stemmed from the Columbine tragedy 10 years ago this week. This legislation gives the discretion to the proper level of action–the local schools. The mindset that prompted the zero-tolerance policy has, however, not gone away:

Morrow’s case isn’t the first nor will it be the last where unintended consequences precipitated by poorly written, knee-jerk, zero-tolerance legislation affect the lives of those the law should actually protect.

Just remember this the next time someone says “there should be a law.” The “cult of action” embraced by those who wish to protect people from themselves and deny others their liberty tend to produce half-baked, “feel-good” laws that legislators tout as “helping the situation.”

Most of the time, they end up doing precisely the opposite.

Steven Crowder Video of the Week – Perez Hilton

by Mr. Bob | 8:53 am, April 24, 2009

yikes!….el slammo…and quite hilarious once again.

Good thing we didn’t execute this guy

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 7:55 am, April 24, 2009

According to the Denver Post:

Open Carry in Milwaukee

by zombiehunter | 5:24 pm, April 23, 2009

Heh.  Nice to see I’ve got your attention… And yes, she’s openly carrying.  So, I’ve been mulling this over for a couple days and I think I’ve concluded that I’m not going to be visiting Milwaukee.  Perhaps ever.  Let me put that in context.  Wisconsin does not have a concealed carry license for handgun owners.  [...]

On Socialism and Ron Paul: Two Timely Essays for Lovers of Liberty

by Ben DeGrow | 3:46 pm, April 23, 2009

A quick-hit double-link in the form of two recent essays I recommend as timely and relevant reading for thoughtful lovers of liberty:

“The Welfare State and the Meaning of Life” by Greg Forster, whose work I have come to know through his excellent research and analysis of school choice issues, but in this case makes a [...]

CEA opposes state transparency too

by Amy Oliver | 3:17 pm, April 23, 2009

If it has to do with showing taxpayers how their money is spent, then the teachers’ union doesn’t like it.
According to the Colorado Secretary of State Web site, the Colorado Education Association, a taxpayer-funded lobbying organization, has taken a stance against HB 1288 the Colorado Taxpayer Transparency Act.  It seems odd that a lobbying organization that exists [...]

PPP: McInnis leads Ritter by 7-points, Penry in statistical dead-heat

by RMR | 12:45 pm, April 23, 2009

Public Policy Polling gave Michael Bennet some bad news yesterday. Today they are giving Gov. Bill Ritter even worse news. Here are the highlights of their gubernatorial poll:

He trails former Congressman Scott McInnis 48-41 in a possible contest. McInnis is viewed favorably by 32% of voters in the state, the same number we found when we polled on him as a possible Senate candidate back in January.

McInnis leads the hypothetical match largely because he has his party more unified around him than Ritter does. While 81% of Republicans say they would vote for McInnis just 73% of Democrats commit to Ritter. Independents are basically a wash.

Ritter does lead another potential GOP candidate, Josh Penry, 42-40.

McInnis has higher name ID than Penry, which means his match-up is probably a pretty accurate picture of where Ritter would be at in a contest against either of them. Penry is still unknown to a large part of the electorate so you can expect his numbers to increase; just as Ryan Frazier and Ken Buck’s will increase against Bennet as they gain more exposure.

Ritter, Legislators Assault Constitutional Spending Limits… Again

by CTBC Director | 11:59 am, April 23, 2009

“Gov. Bill Ritter and lawmakers Wednesday unveiled a deal to remove a key restraint on future state budgets…”
That “key restraint”, otherwise known as the Arveshoug-Bird provision, limits growth in the state’s general fund to 6% per year.  Any funds collected in excess of that limit are allocated to transportation and other construction or maintenance needs.  [...]

Democratic polling outfit defends itself from hysterical left-wing outrage

by RMR | 10:52 am, April 23, 2009

Left-wing blog ColoradoPols is apparently filling the gap left by the demise of Colorado Media Matters in the "Righteous Outrage Over Inconvenient Facts" Department. Since the release of yesterday’s poll showing Michael Bennet in a weak position ColoradoPols has seen fit to publish not one, but two rather lenghty front page posts outraged that Public Policy Polling would adjust their methodology to fit mid-term election turnouts when polling a mid-term election. Public Policy Polling felt the need to respond:

Some blogger in Colorado whacks our poll today, saying there’s no way 75% of voters in the state really have an opinion about Michael Bennet.

I think that’s probably true, but it doesn’t mean there’s anything wrong with our poll. We choose to include party labels whenever we do approval or favorability ratings on pretty much any politician. That’s because for a lot of voters party labels go a lot further toward their perceptions of elected officials than anything specific to the individuals themselves. So there were probably a lot of Republicans in this poll who don’t know much about Bennet but disapprove of him because he’s a Democrat and a lot of Democrats who don’t know much about him but said they approved of his work for the same reason. If you don’t include party label you probably get more than 50% with no opinion, but since voters making their decisions based solely on party labels and little else is a real fact in politics we give them when we’re polling.

As for all the other nasty stuff this particular blogger says about us, the truth is we’ve released nine or ten public polls in Colorado over the last year and I don’t remember them expressing all these concerns about us the other times so it’s pretty clearly just complaining when you don’t like the results rather than a true issue with PPP. Somebody in Colorado came into our site last night googling for negative information about us and I guess this was probably the culprit. Just goes with the business. Our final pre-election poll last year there showed Obama winning by ten points, pretty much right on the mark.

The outraged ColoradoPols denizens also pile on the alleged inaccuaracy of "robo-polling outfits." This is a somewhat odd meme that has been spreading lately on political insider blogs and publications and was doubtless started by "legacy" polling outfits feeling threatened by pollsters using automated systems. The fact is that a Fordham University analysis (PDF) rated "robo-polling" outfit Rasmussen as the most accurate polling outfit in the 2008 election. It’s hard to believe that the continued questioning of automated polls wasn’t planted as part of a stealth marketing campaign by some traditional polling company (perhaps Zogby distracting from their awful record) to undermine competitors able to conduct polls at a fraction of the cost.

In any event, it appears that Colorado Media Matters has finally gotten a successor. Expect the howls of outrage to continue when Bill Ritter’s numbers are released soon.

Pucker up

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 8:02 am, April 23, 2009

The Washington Post’s David Broder wrote a truly amazing column today. 

Earth Day Hysteria Ignores Progress

by Ben DeGrow | 6:44 am, April 23, 2009

Update, 3:00 PM: Michelle Malkin has a great video and some informative links about the eco-indoctrination so many American children have to bear.
Yesterday was Earth Day. Where were all the Green folks celebrating four decades of remarkable progress in reducing air pollution (for example)? Yes, that’s the sound of clean air-breathing crickets chirping.
Taking a day [...]

Say no to hands-free cell phone requirement for several reasons

by Rossputin | 1:26 am, April 23, 2009

Today, the Colorado State Senate’s Finance Committee will vote on a bill by State House member, Claire Levy, my representative in the General Assembly, which would require the use of a hands-free device like speakerphone or earpiece while using a cell phone in a car.

While one might correctly expect me to oppose Claire Levy’s nanny state bill on the basis that it’s, well, a nanny state bill, you’d be correct. We don’t need government protecting us from every risk on the planet. But that may not actually be the best reason to oppose it – or at least not the best argument, given that it’s Democrats we’ll need to convince that the bill should be voted against.

Rep. Levy’s bill is stupid, even by the standards of the Nanny State she espouses because at best it’s likely to have no impact on driver safety. More likely, it will make the roads less safe.

Multiple articles and studies have reached the same conclusion: Cell phone usage increases the likelihood of a car accident because a person’s brain is distracted, not because a person is driving with one hand.

In fact, studies have shown that hands-free devices are:
* Generally no less distracting to use than holding the phone to one’s ear
* Likely to cause a false sense of security, thereby lowering the chance that a person will realize he or she is distracted, so lowering his or her likelihood of trying harder to focus on driving
* Likely to cause people to stay on the phone for longer, increasing the risk to themselves or others to a far greater extent than even the theoretical decrease in distraction due to using a hands-free device…a theoretical decrease because as I mentioned, even though it’s not intuitive, hands-free devices have been shown repeatedly not to be less distracting than a hand-held phone.

Personally, I know my cell phone calls from the car are shorter when I’m holding a phone to my ear because (1) I know that I’m distracted and I don’t want to be, and (2) my arm gets tired of being in one position after a while. I also know that many, if not most, of my calls made from the car are very short (such as asking my wife if she needs anything at the supermarket) and that setting up a hands-free device would take longer than the call itself and be far more distracting.

If we really wanted a Nanny State law regarding hands-free devices for cell phone use in cars, that law should ban them, not require them. Of course, I don’t suggest such a thing, just as I don’t suggest laws banning grooming or eating in cars, both of which appear to add as much driving risk as cell phone use. And don’t even get me started on those reckless people who use their car CD players while driving…a practice that clearly only sociopaths would engage in since it increases driving risk more than cell phones, combs, or Big Macs.

References:

First, I recommend this, from that far-right wing think tank (not), the National Highway Transportation Safety Administration:
http://www.nhtsa.gov/people/injury/research/wireless/

And a few other articles for your case of intellectual ammunition:

http://www.cars.com/go/news/Story.jsp?section=news&story=060905storyaDN&subject=recent&referer=&aff=national
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2003/01/030129080944.htm
http://news.illinois.edu/news/04/1112cellphones.htmL
http://www.latimes.com/business/la-he-cells30-2008jun30,0,2119996.story

Clearly some people will use the information from the various studies to argue for a complete ban on cell phone use while driving. And even though we know that Claire Levy thinks our lives are made just a little too “convenient” by cell phone usage, I don’t think it’s likely that politicians will move to an outright ban. Therefore, I’m not afraid of the use of this information to kill Levy’s ill-conceived bill which would not only decrease our freedom and give police one more way to take our money for essentially harmless activities, but it would do so while actually making us less safe on the road.

The myth of “federal funds”

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 9:49 pm, April 22, 2009

The Denver Post has a story on a new Colorado law, signed by Governor Bill Ritter on Tuesday, that puts a fee on hospitals in an effort to comply with a federal program that provides matching funds for “Medicaid coverage and other health coverage.”

“Death penalty dealt blow”

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 9:42 pm, April 22, 2009

The headline on today’s Denver Post was about the state House voting to abolish the death penalty in Colorado. The bill still has to pass the Senate before it becomes law.

Democrat Numbers Show Door Wide Open for Challenge to Michael Bennet

by Ben DeGrow | 9:12 pm, April 22, 2009

The results are out: newly selected U.S. Senator Michael Bennet is not doing so great. That’s the message from the Democratic firm Public Policy Polling (PPP) — which commissioned the survey. Politico says Bennet is “off to a slow start”.
And apparently dissatisfied with the results, the Democrat Dead Governors’ blog for the first time [...]

Colorado Electoral College Debate–Democracy Vs. Republicanism: Popular Vote, Founding Fathers, And Fraud

by elpresidente | 2:57 pm, April 22, 2009

Ignoring the U.S. Constitution by doing an end-run around it (you know, by amendment), coming soon to a state near you–Maryland, New Jersey, Illinois, and Hawaii have already passed this legislation.

The Independence Institute’s “Independent Thinking” program delved into the controversial electoral college debate centered upon HB 1299, the National Popular Vote Interstate Compact, strongly opposed not only by bloggers and pundits but also The Denver Post and InDenverTimes.com (successor to the Rocky Mountain News):

Wednesday Wrap-Up

by Jon Caldara | 11:56 am, April 22, 2009

Until yesterday’s epic blog post on Republican atonement, I had been fairly quiet here on the Cauldron, and for that, I apologize.  But you’ve got to understand.  My life is a whirlwind of paparazzi, adoring fans, autograph sessions, and women sitting in the trees around my house “trying to get a good look.”  After the [...]

Sen. Michael Bennet’s First Reviews–A Mixed Bag

by elpresidente | 10:39 am, April 22, 2009

Coloradans’ support for President Barack Obama and Sen. Mark Udall may be slipping, but neither will face voters in 2010.

Sen. Michael Bennet, on the other hand, faces his first election test after having been appointed by Gov. Bill Ritter to fill a vacant Senate seat. Public Policy Polling’s April 17-19 phone poll results are not that encouraging (pdf):

Three months into his appointment as a Senator, Michael Bennet isn’t making a strong positive impression on Colorado voters.

41% say they disapprove of his job performance so far, with 34% approving. 25% don’t have an opinion one way or the other. He is meeting with approval from 59% of Democrats but only 11% of Republicans, and his overall reviews from independents are negative as well, with 32% approving but 43% disapproving.

Bennet does lead three of his most mentioned possible Republican opponents next year in hypothetical match ups. He’s up 39-35 on Ryan Frazier, 40-34 on Ken Buck, and 41-34 on Josh Penry. He trails former Congressman Bob Beauprez 43-42.

There’s still some indication within the numbers that Hispanic voters might be angry that one of them was not appointed to replace Ken Salazar. Bennet’s spread with Hispanics is 36/45, much worse than Barack Obama’s 58/36 and one he’ll have to improve with that Democratic leaning demographic if he’s going to be reelected.

“These numbers for Michael Bennet are not very good,” said Dean Debnam, President of Public Policy Polling. “The good news for him is that he still hasn’t had the opportunity to define himself the way he wants to the voters in a campaign, and when he has the opportunity to do that next year he may fare better than he is now.”

The Rothenberg Political Report, on the other hand, moved Sen. Bennet into a “Clear Advantage for Incumbent Party” in a report updated on April 21.

FiveThirtyEight.com puts Bennet’s seat in 10th place in likeliness to change hands in 2010 in its April update, and Chris Cillizza’s “The Fix” at The Washington Post had nearly the same positioning in March’s update (at #9).

Not a great start, but certainly not horrible either–and the eventual winner of the emerging GOP field will have his work cut out for him, given Bennet’s early fundraising prowess.

Big questions remain for Bennet, however:
**Can he maintain his early fundraising juggernaut?

**Will continuing to waffle on major issues–ones like EFCA, cited consistently in the analsyses above–not only anger some segment of the potential power structure (labor unions vs. businesses), but prove accusations that Bennet, like his appointer Ritter, is ultimately indecisive?

**Will he able to build name recognition without also elevating his negatives (see previous question)?

**And will Bennet prove to be an effective campaigner and stump speaker, not only on the rubber chicken dinner circuit and $1000-a-plate galas but also on the campaign trail throughout the state?

Bennet’s potential reelection hinges on a couple factors–how the state perceives him as an appointment (effectively a referendum on Ritter and Bennet simultaneously) and how well he has distinguished himself in office between this January and next November. While the Democrats want to push the idea that the Senate race is over as early as possible for fundraising/recruiting/turnout purposes while citing a “weak” GOP field, they have a long way to go before the next election in proving that Sen. Bennet is the best choice of the people for the state of Colorado.

Quote of the morning

by Mr. Bob | 8:45 am, April 22, 2009

#tcot #gop #teaparty “Proponents of leftist ideologies around the world share one common trait: they always demand to be included, but once you let them in, they force everybody else out, while refusing to leave themselves.”
Oleg Atbashian

Miss California this week learned that the hard way.

I apologize for not blogging much lately, life has gotten very busy with more important things. I am even contemplating quitting the Daily Blogster for a while or permanently to pursue less political thought. There is only so much room in my life and brain for activity, new endeavors both on the spiritual front and on the business front are now UP front.

If the lack of blogging continues, I’ll pass it along to a deserving blogger.

How Many Coloradans Know about Michael Bennet – and Which Republican Should Challenge Him?

by Ben DeGrow | 8:23 am, April 22, 2009

Politics West points out a newly-released survey from a Democratic polling firm finds that support among Coloradans for both Barack Obama and “senior” U.S. Senator Mark Udall is slipping. The Public Policy Polling firm is slated to release results today for newly selected Senator Michael Bennet, up for re-election in 2010.
What I’ll be looking for [...]

« go back — keep looking »

Featured Posts

• Judge Rules Americans Can Be Forced to Testify Against Themselves

  In order to protect our rights, our security must be protected. In order to protect our security, our rights must be invaded. Nothing wrong with that, is there?

• World Economic Forum in Switzerland: Global Elites Celebrating Hypocrisy
• SCOTUS decision on warrantless GPS surveillance produces an expected friend of privacy
• You didn’t want your Fifth Amendment rights, anyway, did you?
• Keynesian Economists Finally Catch Up and Agree: China to Have Hard Landing
• The Beauty of Private Property—from China?
• Regime Uncertainty, Regulatory Surge, and Unemployment Numbers