Longmont Times-Call: Real Story is Writer Greg Burt, Not Benker’s Possible Corruption

by T.L. James | 10:31 pm, July 31, 2009

Former Musgrave staffer turned investigative journalist Greg Burt writes a story detailing a possible conflict of interest on the part of Longmont city councilwoman Karen Benker, and what does Benker’s hometown fishwrap do? The Times-Call spins the story around into a faux-outrage story about Burt’s actions in bringing the details of Benker’s alleged actions to the attention of [...]

Join Steamboat Institute for Big Event with Grover Norquist, Michael Reagan

by Ben DeGrow | 3:43 pm, July 31, 2009

You haven’t heard of the Steamboat Institute? Well, neither had I, until recently. But it’s an organization co-founded by my Leadership Program of the Rockies classmate Jennifer Schubert-Akin, and it’s dedicated to five principles:

Limited Government
Lower Taxes
Free Markets
Strong National Defense
Individual Rights and Responsibilities

The group is getting off to a strong start by hosting a conference on [...]

Quick Hits: Clear the Bench, Crumbling Bridges and Dem Polls, Cool July

by Ben DeGrow | 8:17 am, July 31, 2009

Rather than take the time to write a substantial, coherent post on any one topic on this Friday, July 31 — the birthday of the late, great Milton Friedman — I offer you four quick hits to amuse, inspire, frustrate, and activate. Without further ado:

What’s the deal with a 63 degree high in July? Newly [...]

Cash for clunkers crashes as people get their money for nothing

by Rossputin | 2:08 am, July 31, 2009

[Update: On Friday, the House passed a measure to divert $2 billion from the Energy Department to the “Cash for Clunkers” program. It faces more of an uphill battle in the Senate. The only way the response to a program would be this big is if it is “mispriced". In other words, the government is giving away far too much money. Trade in your POS vehicle and it rains money – other people’s money – on your head, thanks to The One.]

Yesterday afternoon, the government suspended the “Cash for Clunkers” program as its tremendous popularity caused it to blow through the $1 billion allocated to it in the program’s first week.

“Much faster than who expected?” you might ask. Not me.

When you offer people far more money for something than that something is worth, of course they’ll come in droves to take it. And in that sense the “success” of the program is really a disaster.

It means that our government has, in one week, funneled $1 billion from taxpayers to people who owned old inefficient “clunkers.” It’s not extremely unreasonable to believe that the average “clunker” owner is not in the top few percent of taxpayers – the people who pay most of the income tax. Therefore, Cash for Clunkers is simply a $1 billion welfare program designed to funnel net another massive slug of taxpayer money to Government Motors. Is it any wonder that Michigan Senator Debbie Stabenow is asking Congress for more money for the program?

Let’s do a little math on this. If someone turned in a 16-mpg car and bought a 24-mpg car, he’d have to drive 12,800 miles using $2.50/gallon gas to save $4,000. That wouldn’t be too bad a payback – if only the driver were spending his own money. But no matter how you slice it, it’s a raw deal for taxpayers. If the driver did drive the 12,800 per year, that driver would annually pay $300 less in federal fuel tax and (based on the national average) and $435 less in state fuel tax, adding another $735 to the cost to taxpayers and specifically depriving our transportation infrastructure of necessary funding. (Not to mention that the more efficient car will likely encourage its owner to drive more, offsetting the pollution benefits which some proponents of this program claim and causing more wear and tear on the roads.)

The other idiocy of Cash for Clunkers parallels liberals’ belief in Keynesian economics: The idea of a “shot in the arm” for the car industry simply means that demand that would have been spread out over several years is instead front-loaded. Sure, it will make the sales and earnings look good for a quarter, but it will make future sales and earnings look worse than they otherwise would have.

“Cash for Clunkers” was a terrible, obviously redistributionist program from the start. It’s screaming “success” should frighten anyone who pays taxes as it means nothing more than piling more debt on to future generations in order to pad the UAW’s coffers today.

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

Arguing for free-market health care

by Brian Schwartz | 1:30 am, July 31, 2009

Yaron Brook of the Ayn Rand Institute summarizes the case for free-market health care. He concludes:
The solution to this ongoing crisis is to recognize that the very idea of a “right” to health care is a perversion. There can be no such thing as a “right” to products or services created by the effort of [...]

Stimulus money not going to needed infrastructure repairs

by Rossputin | 12:58 am, July 31, 2009

The AP is reporting that many or most bridges which are receiving federal “stimulus” money are not the bridges most in need of repair.

The issue is that states want to spend money on the easiest projects which also tend to be in the richer areas. Meanwhile, dilapidated dangerous bridges, disproportionately in more “needy” areas, are being ignored, meaning that the only part of the stimulus spending which one could have argued was a legitimate government function, i.e. fixing transportation infrastructure that really needs fixing, is not happening.

This isn’t a big surprise, given that states are using stimulus money for all kinds of things, such as simply using the money to plug their budget deficits or to pay for signs advertising the wonder of stimulus.

The effect of the whole mess is to punish taxpayers while allowing states (and their politicians) to avoid the criticism (and resulting punishment at the polls) which come along with their profligacy of recent years.

We might have been better off burning our money rather than letting government waste it in the way they are.

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

How Many U.S. Senate Candidates Can Fit in a Phone Booth? … A What?

by Ben DeGrow | 5:40 pm, July 30, 2009

If things keep up, we soon may be unable to fit all of Colorado’s Republican candidates for U.S. Senate in a phone booth. (How long before the phone booth loses broad cultural recognition? Where does Clark Kent go to change his identity? But I digress….)
Already in the race are Ryan Frazier, Ken Buck, and Cleve [...]

As with everything Obama does it’s about “social justice”

by Mr. Bob | 3:42 pm, July 30, 2009

#tcot #healthcare #obamacare
What do Obama’s health care adviser’s believe? They believe that older folks will just have to give up on some quality care so that younger folks can have it. They believe that social justice will require you to make sacrifices and you are going to have to give up the service and quality you are used to.

A Return to Values — A Good Read Irrespective of Your “Brand”

by redrocks | 10:17 am, July 30, 2009

There are frequent discussions these days about political labels. There is also value in putting the “brand” aside, and considering “generically” the issues of limited government, free markets and individual rights.

Our recent guest speaker, former Congressman Bob Beauprez, unabashedly carries the Republican banner, but it certainly doesn’t diminish his experience, views and perspective on those [...]

Beneath the Surface of Survey Results: A 2010 GOP Youth Ticket Emerging?

by Ben DeGrow | 8:01 am, July 30, 2009

Last week we released the results from our mid-summer survey of Colorado’s political temperature. In the meantime we’ve added some more analysis that suggests profiles of support for certain candidates. Without further ado, here’s our amateur cross-tab analysis that raises the question … Is there a 2010 Republican “youth” ticket emerging here in Colorado, and [...]

When is a choice not a choice? In ObamaCare.

by Rossputin | 6:49 am, July 30, 2009

The National Taxpayers Union has done an interesting analysis of the language of the Democrats’ proposed health care “reform” bill, the title of which emphasize “Choices”. But the reality is that the bill represents only choices for how government can limit your freedom and take your money.

Read more at “House Democrats’ Health Plan Contains Words of Coercion – not Choice – Text Analysis Shows”, National Taxpayers Union, 7/21/09
http://www.ntu.org/main/press.php?PressID=1108&org_name=NTUF

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

Ben Stein drifts toward the right answer

by Rossputin | 12:59 am, July 30, 2009

For a guy who was a Republican speech writer and studied economics in both college (Columbia) and graduate school (Yale), Ben Stein has some unfortunate left-leaning tendencies.

For example, he has argued that health care is a right. But Mr. Stein has, after further reflection, changed his view on the subject. It’s the sort of admission of prior intellectual error that one rarely sees in public from a well-known figure and I’m quite impressed by Mr. Stein’s willingness to say “Maybe I was wrong”.

The key line in Mr. Stein’s public realization of the risks involved in calling health care a “right” is this: “Maybe as important as health care is, individual freedom and private property are indispensable, too.”

Stein’s entire article, entitled “These Rights Don’t Come for Free“, is worth a read, in part because it probably represents the leading edge of the thought process that many Americans will go through in coming weeks – a thought process that many readers of these pages either went through long ago or never needed to go through because the answer is obvious: Health care is NOT a right.

And while Stein uses a few too many “maybe”s, showing something less than a full acceptance of his own realization, at least he got to the right answer. And his path to that answer is one that those of us who believe that liberty needs defense might look at and incorporate part of (for those who don’t already made similar arguments) when discussing not just health care but anything that people want to claim as a “right” but which requires other people to pay for it.

Don’t forget: For something which is not free and which requires the use of resources (unlike, for example, the right to free speech) any “right” given to one person means a responsibility given to another to ensure that “right” is provided. One man’s “right” to health care is another man’s slavery.

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

Wrapping Up Colorado’s Well-Attended Rallies Against Obama Care Takeover

by Ben DeGrow | 12:34 am, July 30, 2009

El Presidente at Slapstick Politics followed up Tuesday’s top-notch coverage of the anti-Obama Care rally in Denver with links to Wednesday’s action further north and south along Colorado’s Front Range.
Andrew Boucher has the lowdown on the Fort Collins showdown that saw more than three times as many activists out in opposition to the government health [...]

Are Colorado Democrats Prepping for Another Raid on Pinnacol Assurance?

by Ben DeGrow | 12:27 am, July 30, 2009

Back from technology-imposed blogging exile, Joshua has christened the new-look View from a Height with a terrific catch of Democrat state senator Morgan Carroll on a “fact-finding” expedition to prep the next round of attacks on the state’s privately-funded Pinnacol Assurance. Both he and I find Carroll’s response less than persuasive. What say you?

**Update: 1200 In Colorado Springs; Fort Collins, Colorado Springs See Hundreds Rally Against ObamaCare, Outnumber Pro-Obama Factions

by elpresidente | 11:55 pm, July 29, 2009

**Update 3–Media bias? Colorado Springs Gazette ignores the anti-ObamaCare rally completely**Update 2–Americans for Prosperity has video and several more photos up from the Colorado Springs rally**Update 1–Approximately 1000-1200 anti-ObamaCare rall…

Hey There Obama (Drink the Kool Aid)

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 3:43 pm, July 29, 2009

Anti-Obama Health Reform Rally in Denver

by Derec | 3:20 pm, July 29, 2009

I made it out to the anti-Obama health care reform rally at the Colorado capitol this week on July 28, 2009 to show my support for health choice and the Constitution.
It’s great seeing a Coloradans young and old come out to make their voices heard and engaging in the political process since we currently have [...]

Returning to the enumerated powers…

by Mr. Bob | 2:40 pm, July 29, 2009

#tcot #billofrights
This is my dream, but since the “second bill of rights” articulated by Franklin D. Roosevelt who felt the first one didn’t go far enough we’ve come a long way. People expect the government to provide happiness, not just the right to pursue it. The further we go towards these goals, the further away from what our founders intended this country to be. Perhaps that is OK with you. It is not with me.

I heard Dennis Prager say yesterday that socialist programs only benefit people for 20 to 30 years, then they become unmanageable. Europe has discovered this, rather than learning from their mistakes, we lurch headlong over the cliff. The young people who are supporting these socialist programs are hurting themselves most of all. By the time they are my age, there won’t be any money left.

The video below is a knowledgeable soldier challenging the status quo.

Hundreds Attend Anti-Obama Care Rally In Denver

by elpresidente | 1:51 pm, July 29, 2009

Hundreds (500-700) attended yesterday’s anti-ObamaCare rally in Denver during the lunch hour.

**Update 8–Hundreds more in Colorado Springs rallying against government-run health care, where only a “handful” of ObamaCare supporters showed up

**Update 7–Hundreds attend rally against government-run health care in Fort Collins, outnumber pro-Obama supporters 3-1; slideshow of the rally is up

**Update 6–speaker highlights:

**Update 5–Joshua Sharf captured revealing pics of the decidedly underwhelmingly attended pro-Obama rally later in the day, featuring supporters sporting union-made signs and t-shirts; Face the State has an update on Michael the Hutt of ProgressNow doing a little projection of his own, Kim Jong-Il style; the geniuses at ColoradoPols can’t count.

**Update 4–Instalanche, sweet! Thanks Glenn.

**Update 3–Face the State has a comprehensive report and a slideshow of the rally, and estimates that upwards of 700 attended.

**Update 2–Obama’s supporters are staging their own rally at 6pm in Denver, and there is already a planned counterprotest:

What: Socialized Healthcare Counter-Protest

When: July 28, 2009 6:00 PM

Where: Colorado State Capitol Building
Colfax & Lincoln West Steps of the Capitol Bldg
Denver, CO 80203

The White House’s own activist group “Organizing for America” is holding a rally in support of nationalized health care at the Colorado State Capitol this evening, July 28th. A coalition of 9/12 and Tea Party groups is banding together to form a counter-protest from 6pm to 7pm!

If you were unable to make the rally against socialized medicine at lunch today, this counter-protest is a way to make your voice heard and to let the politicians and the anti-liberty groups know we oppose what they are trying to do.

Because anti-liberty activists may very well try insult us or force confrontations with us, it is VERY important that we remain civil and professional – don’t sink to their level!

Obama’s astroturfers (unions/SEIU) vs. true grassroots, should be fun! Obama’s ~~union thugs~~ supporters better hope for a larger turnout than their own counterprotest earlier today:

The large contingent of Obama Care supporters rally across the street.

**Update 1–Democrat Rep. Diana DeGette (CD 1), who represents Denver, puts forth the ObamaCare line:

Perhaps DeGette should take the time to listen to her constituents. And read the bill . . .

Denver Post:

“This is not the kind of health care change we want!” shouted Jeff Crank with Americans for Prosperity, which organized the rally. “We demand something different.”

Instead, protestors advocated for tort reform to cut down on malpractice costs and making health insurance “portable” from job to job.

Crank said national health care reform proposals being debated in Congress call for rationing care. He told those at the rally to think of the hot dogs and T-shirts as liver transplants — “if we run out, we run out.”

CBS4Denver had pre-rally coverage (video).

Photos are up (click to enlarge)–

Co-sponsored by the Independence Institute and Americans for Prosperity.

Sentiment was strongly against President Barack Obama’s plan.

Ominous.

Rationing is a primary concern.

The posters were creative and not mass-produced.

Just a portion of the large crowd gathered, probably 500 or so.

Major media outlets were there as well.

Ari Armstrong of FreeColorado.com argued that government is responsible for getting health care into this mess in the first place.

Health care choice vs. government control.

But but but . . .

Where there are cameras, ProgressNow’s paid hack Michael Huttner is sure to be weaseling his way through the crowd.

Jon Caldara, President of the Independence Institute, demands that elected officials, you know, actually read the bills they are expected to vote on.

The large contingent of Obama Care supporters rally across the street.

Winner for best use of props and allusion to pop culture of the day!

The rally wraps up and the crowd enjoys complimentary food.

Sums up the mood and message of the day.

Wednesday Wrap-Up

by Jon Caldara | 1:48 pm, July 29, 2009

***In our latest edition of Dave Kopel goes to Washington, this time Dave is asked to testify in front of the Senate Judiciary Committee on Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor. Here’s me sitting down with Dave to discuss the experience and whether she’ll fly through the confirmation anyway – despite Dave’s best efforts.
***Dave also [...]

Political Time Out

by elpresidente | 11:49 am, July 29, 2009

A note of personal privilege for a personal friend, favorite blogger, and PPC contributor and ally. Gateway Pundit’s Jim Hoft lost his mother, who died in his arms. Nothing I can say will assuage his grief, but his reflections and memorial tribute to his mom remind us of what is truly important in life, outside [...]

Obama’s Affordable Health Choices Act of 2009: What You Don’t Know May Kill You

by Julian Dunraven | 8:30 am, July 29, 2009

By Julian Dunraven, J.D., M.P.A.

Honorable Friends:

Yesterday, the people of Denver demonstrated that they have far more sense than their Congresswoman does when 700 of them rallied on the State Capitol steps to voice their opposition to President Obama’s health care bill.

The President has been working hard in recent weeks to persuade us that such opposition is unfounded. In his recent prime time press conference, he soothingly told us that this legislation would help reduce the costs of health care. He went on to assure us that we would all be able to keep our current health care plans and would not be forced onto government programs. In conclusion, he promised that health policy would be free from congressional meddling, as it would be overseen by a nonpartisan committee of medical experts whose recommendations would have to be accepted or rejected in their entirety by Congress. He said all of this with a straight face. None of it is true.

As a former Constitutional Law instructor, Mr. Obama knows that Congress’s legislative authority cannot be limited in such a way. Had Mr. Obama actually read the text of the bill, he also would have known that it allows people to keep their own health care plans only so long as they stay with their current plans. If they try to change their plans, they are indeed forced onto the government’s program. He certainly knew, though, that the Director of the Congressional Budget Office, Douglas Elmendorf, estimated that the bill actually increases costs of health care and enlarges the federal deficit by billions of dollars.

Denver Representative Diana DeGette, apparently a very credulous person and far too busy to read the 1000+ pages of the bill for herself, has taken the President at his word and maintains that there is a need to pass the bill immediately. Unfortunately, the arguments she uses to support the urgent need for legislation are rooted almost entirely in myths about our health care system; myths Dr. Clifford S. Asness easily and entertainingly debunks in his essay, “Health Care Mythology.” Fortunately, the American people are not so easily duped.

Money Morning and Stephen Hyde both point out some of the most egregious financial problems with this bill. As Hyde asserts, “The bill requires virtually all employers to offer minimum health benefit plans that far exceed anything most of them offer today.” This will necessarily increase insurance costs. As Money Morning shows, it also has a more devastating aspect. Under the legislation, any business that cannot afford to provide the extensive coverage the bill requires will be taxed up to 8% of its payroll. This will almost immediately result in severe wage reductions and layoffs as businesses attempt to defray that cost. This hardly seems like the best idea as the nation struggles for economic recovery. Yet, this is not the worst the bill has to offer.

Peter Fleckstein (aka Fleckman), has diligently combed through the legislation and assembled a brief, line-by-line cheat sheet. His full analysis, “The HC Monstrosity-All 1,018 Pages,” can be found at his blog. While somewhat cursory, Mr. Fleckstein successfully highlights some alarming details in the legislation. To list just a few, the bill provides for:

Nationwide government access to our private healthcare and financial records, as well as our bank accounts.
Exemption from judicial review of the prices government sets on health care.
Government wage controls over physicians, as well as limitations on physician ownership of hospitals and other health care providers.
Mandates for end of life care and consultations without benefit of legal counsel.
Government interference in marriage counseling and childcare.
Government appointed standards and rationing for what treatments we may receive.
No private option if you leave your current insurance carrier.

These are just a few of the many devilish details hidden within Mr. Obama’s Affordable Health Choices Act. It seems unlikely that any sane person, after reading this bill, could support its passage. That may be exactly why Mr. Obama and the Democratic leadership in the House and Senate wanted to push it through so quickly.

The American people need to know the horrors contained within this bill. Health care represents 20% of our economy. That economy is now suffering a soft depression. If we truly desire health care reform, we deserve much better than what Mr. Obama is offering. This bill’s financial aspects alone have the potential to drive us into an unbearably hard depression, to say nothing of the damage it does to personal liberties. We cannot afford to make such massive changes to such a large portion of our economy with so little knowledge or time to review. All concerned Americans should contact their congress people and demand an end to this abominable and irresponsible legislation.

Dead Guvs’ Anti-TABOR Crusade Exposes Ignorance, Anti-South Bigotry

by Ben DeGrow | 8:10 am, July 29, 2009

Talk about betraying your ignorance in service of political posturing. Looking for a way to cling to the idea that Colorado ranks 49th in something and bash the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights over the head, the Dead Guvs jumped on one particular set of rankings in the latest U.S. Census Bureau school funding data — [...]

Democrats fascism on the march; House committee votes to regulate executive pay

by Rossputin | 1:06 am, July 29, 2009

I don’t recall on which of the blogs I contribute to it was where I got a comment that the Administration does not want to broadly regulate executive pay. I said something like “Geithner has said it before and even though he’s slightly backed away from it recently, you just watch…”

Not that I want to pat myself on the back, but unfortunately I was on target with that prediction with the slight caveat that it’s House Democrats carrying Obama’s water rather than the Administration proposing it directly.

On Tuesday, the House Financial Services Committee, by a 40-28 vote, approved a measure which would give the government the ability to regulate compensation for every “executive” of every American financial firm with assets over $1 billion.

The provision is part of a larger measure, HR 3269, sponsored by none other than Barney Frank, which is likely to be voted on by the House of Representatives this week and which would require annual shareholder votes on executive compensation at every public company.

The most offensive section of HR 3269 is Section 4, entitled “ENHANCED COMPENSATION STRUCTURE REPORTING TO REDUCE PERVERSE INCENTIVES”. (Between his involvement with Fannie Mae and his involvement with gay prostitution, I suppose Frank knows a lot about perverse incentives…pun intended.)

Section 4 calls on federal regulators to prescribe compensation regulations for financial institutions which are “aligned with sound risk management”, as if a federal regulator has the slightest concept what that means. The regulations are also meant to prevent the financial institutions taking “undue risks” which threaten the financial institution, the banking system, or the economy.

The solution to the problem of undue risk is to have those who take the risk share the pain of loss. It’s to say there will never be another government bailout of a bank. But it is most certainly not to have government interfere in the most basic of private contracts.

Besides being the epitome of fascism, where the government runs private institutions “for the good of the state”, these regulations will have massive negative unintended consequences as foreign companies pick off the best US talent.

Yes, it’s easy to be angry at highly paid people during a time of recession, but most of the anger is due to the fact that many were bailed out with taxpayer money. Without that inconvenient truth, the public would hardly care how much the CEO of Citigroup makes.

I like the idea of shareholders getting interested in the compensation of executives at companies they’ve invested in. But you can’t legislate someone taking interest and you most certainly shouldn’t create the true “perverse incentives” of having government bureaucrats have tremendous power over individual corporations. Anyone want to bet how Goldman Sachs and friends get treated in this model, versus how banks with less political clout get treated?

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

Josh Penry unveils new campaign ad

by Rossputin | 6:16 pm, July 28, 2009

Josh Penry, the Colorado State Senate Minority Leader and announced candidate for Governor of Colorado, has unveiled a new campaign commercial (just over 2 minutes long) with a focus on avoiding more tax hikes, getting Coloradoans “back to work”, and emphasis on the importance of the 2010 elections.

One can see in the ad what I believe is a smart tactic, namely to be willing and able to criticize the Republican Party where it has fallen off the path of fiscal responsibility.

Penry’s message is both aggressive and optimistic, something he carries off well in part due to his relative youth – for me a winning tone, but we’ll see how it plays to a broader audience, especially for the GOP primary race.

A note on Penry’s being young: While some voters may equate youth with inexperience, I think Penry can show a substantial and impressive record of leadership and I would not be surprised if any possible negative view of people who believe he’s not old enough will be more than offset by people who understand that the GOP can not survive by remaining the party of “old white men.”

I was pleased to see that Penry’s message was essentially positive, about what he wants to get done, rather than dwelling on the many obvious faults of Bill Ritter.

I’ll be quite interested to see how Scott McInnis and Bill Ritter respond to Penry’s salvo (actually, I don’t think Ritter will respond at all at this time, but you never know…)

Link to Original post at Rossputin.com.

Peeping Tom Spotted at anti-Obama Care Rally

by Jon Caldara | 4:01 pm, July 28, 2009

Subhead: Michael Huttner, Swastika Hunter
Every once in awhile the center-right gets ticked off enough about a certain issue that we take to the streets and rally for individual rights, liberty, and less government interference. Take for example the pork roast stimulus rally, the Betsey Markey health care rally, and all the tea parties. This [...]

Pro-Liberty Health Rally Draws Hundreds

by Ari Armstrong | 3:46 pm, July 28, 2009

Hundreds of people came to the state capitol in Denver today to protest the political takeover of medicine endorsed by Barack Obama. Slapstick has posted numerous photos and commentary. [Update: See also Slapstick's coverage of the Wednesday rallies in Fort Collins and Colorado Springs.] The Denver Post also published a decent story with photographs.

Face the State has added its collection of photos along with summaries of the talks.

The Denver Business Journal nicely summarizes Jon Caldara’s remarks. It also quotes a press release from Regress Now’s Michael Huttner, who, because he can’t sustain any arguments for his side, resorts to projecting his astroturf green onto a large and obviously grass-roots movement.

The Colorado Springs Gazette summarizes the messages of the daytime rally as well as a smaller, leftist rally the same evening.

On Tuesday evening I joined Bob Glass’s radio show to discuss the rally (during the second half of the first hour).

Interviews:

Speaker highlights:

My speech:

“A Week in the Life” for CTBC – Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold makes the rounds (upcoming appearances)

by CTBC Director | 11:55 am, July 28, 2009

Clear The Bench Colorado is spreading the word (NOT spreading the wealth) around the state, with speaking engagements, press interviews, radio appearances, and a television debut (see below). This week is even busier than most, with Director Matt Arnold attending at least one event every day.
Tuesday, July 28th: Appearing in Fremont County (621 Main Street, Canon City, CO) [...]

Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold interviewed by Law Week Colorado

by CTBC Director | 9:45 am, July 28, 2009

A few weeks ago, Clear The Bench Colorado Director Matt Arnold met with Law Week Colorado’s Don Knox (formerly of the late, lamented Rocky Mountain News) for an interview discussing the grassroots movement to restore accountability to Colorado’s Judiciary. That interview was published online this Sunday (26 July 2009) on the State Bill Colorado website.
A [...]