Crowder Comedy – Thank you US Military

by Mr. Bob | 10:10 am, January 26, 2010

#tcot #usarmy #usnavy #ppc #marines #usairforce #redco
All I can say is Steven…thank you from all of us. As much as we get pounded by the media and the leftwing hollyweirds with their multi billions in propaganda, its nice to see the other side come out. I hope this gets wide play.

Will Colorado Dems Ram Through Dirty Dozen Business Tax Hike Bills?

by Ben DeGrow | 9:06 am, January 26, 2010

Word on the street is that the majority Democrats at the State Capitol are preparing to ram through a package of bills repealing tax breaks — not only without a vote of the people as the state constitution’s TABOR would require, but also pushed through the process quickly to minimize public scrutiny and apparent outrage. [...]

House may pass the Senate health bill as is

by Brian Schwartz | 1:30 am, January 26, 2010

The Institute for Health Freedom invites you to contact your representative in DC about the Senate health care bill:
Congress Is Trying to Bypass Filibuster-Proof Senate to Pass Insurance Mandate
If House Approves Senate Bill (Verbatim), It Bypasses Filibuster-Proof Senate and Goes Directly to Oval Office
Contact Your Representatives ASAP and Tell Them to “Vote [...]

First private pharmacy since 1971 opened in Sweden

by Brian Schwartz | 1:30 am, January 26, 2010

Some free-market health reform, in Sweden. From AFP:
Swedish Health and Social Affairs minister Goeran Haegglund inaugurated the country’s first private pharmacy since 1971 in front of reporters and a small crowd in Stockholm on Sunday.
“After hard work for a long time, we are now ready to open the first pharmacy in Sweden which is privately [...]

Supreme Court hands us a victory

by Al Maurer | 9:29 pm, January 25, 2010

The left fears free speech

Keynes Versus Hayek, In Rap

by Ari Armstrong | 6:03 pm, January 25, 2010

This video is brilliant. I’m blown away. “I want to steer markets.” “I want them set free.”

Yet another partisan spin on recent statement by AG Suthers that he will vote “NO” on 3 Colorado Supreme Court justices

by CTBC Director | 5:15 pm, January 25, 2010

Just when it appeared that the attempts to spin the recent statement by Attorney General John Suthers that he would vote “NO” on retaining 3 of the 4 Colorado Supreme Court justices on the ballot this year (Justices Michael Bender, Alex Martinez, and Chief Justice Mary Mullarkey) had finally run their course, yet another left-wing blog (titled, appropriately, Left [...]

Palin Crushes Huckabee in Righty Blogger Poll: Whom Did I Vote For?

by Ben DeGrow | 5:12 pm, January 25, 2010

Update, 1/26: The correct answer is Mitch Daniels. Sadly, no one guessed the correct answer by 6:00 PM. “Why did I pick Daniels?” you might ask. At this point in the game, all I can say is: “Why not?”
John Hawkins at Right Wing News earlier today released the results of his conservative blogger survey “on [...]

Must See TV – RTD Waste – Obama Care and Colorado – Caldera on 9news

by Mr. Bob | 3:38 pm, January 25, 2010

#tcot #redco #rtd #tii
Must see TV. John Caldera interviewed on 9news about Obamacare and RTD.

“Vaaat…you don’t like health care?”

by Chuck Moe | 3:03 pm, January 25, 2010

I’ve just returned from a trip overseas in Holland and rode in many taxis. As most soon discover, Dutch taxi drivers have immense knowledge of most areas of any interest. The Dutch are also known for their efficiency and as such, have been very kind as to lend their opinion on the matter regarding “Obamacare” [...]

Colorado Legislators Advance Modest School Spending Transparency Bill

by Ben DeGrow | 2:49 pm, January 25, 2010

Last Thursday afternoon I testified before the House Education Committee at the State Capitol on House Bill 1036 and what effective public school financial transparency should look like. The best coverage came from the Colorado News Agency:

HB 1036, called the Public School Financial Transparency Act, contains many of the same provisions as last year’s all-GOP [...]

Bury the Dead, Feed the Living. Shoot the Experts and Put the Kids in Charge.

by Eileen McGuire-Mahony | 1:24 pm, January 25, 2010

We don’t need government and idiotic herds of ‘international actors’ to direct our compassion for us. While they compete for air time and talk as if decency only exists as some aggregate function of mobs, the truth is that our best is within us as individual creatures. The seven-year old who figured this out has shamed the pros.

9News Interviewed Me

by Jon Caldara | 12:47 pm, January 25, 2010

Adam Schrager from 9News sat down with me the other day to discuss our initiative to opt Colorado out of Obama Care. In addition to answering his questions, I also had the opportunity to answer questions from viewers. Watch the video, courtesy of Channel 9 here.

Reject the myth.

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 11:30 am, January 25, 2010

“It’s NOT Left vs Right,

It’s the State vs You!”

This is my new favorite bumper sticker. It sums up all that is wrong with the political dialogue in this country.

All too often, even libertarians* fall into this trap. I routinely mock statists, and I do not care where the statists fall on the traditional “left/right” or “Republican/Democrat” line. Recently, I mocked statists Keith Olberman and Rachel Maddow for their reactions to the election of statist Scott Brown as the new senator from Massachusetts.

Immediately, I was accused of being “pro-Republican” because I mocked two leftists. That criticism is a complete non-sequitur and is total tripe.

Worse than that, however, it shows how entrenched the “left vs. right” falsehood really is. Those that believe in the “left vs. right” myth honestly think that if someone mocks the “left” then they must be on the “right.”

It is our job as libertarians to destroy this myth.

To that end, I no longer use the words “left” and “right.” Using the words perpetuates the myth and gives the lie credence. I use the words “statist” and “libertarian.” (Of course, the Nolan Chart graphically demonstrates the distinction.)

We, as believers in freedom and liberty, understand that both the “left” and “right” are statist. Therefore there is no need to distinguish the two. They are statist. We are libertarian.

Statists believe in the initiation of force to achieve political ends. Libertarians do not.

Statists believe in the power of the government over the individual. Libertarians believe in the power of the individual over the state.

Statists are wrong. Libertarians are correct.

I ask you all to join me in this mission. Refuse to acknowledge any important difference between the “left” and the “right.” There is none.

Do not even use the words “left” and “right.” Reject the lie.

Embrace the truth. Embrace liberty. Fight the expansion of statism, no matter what purported “direction” it comes from.

And let freedom ring.

*To my Republican friends on the PPC, in this article, the term “libertarian” could very well be read as a reference to the philosophy. I add this footnote in an attempt to head off the otherwise anticipated criticism of being “partisan.” Of course, there is no place for partisanship on the PPC.

Could Republicans Really Gain Eight U.S. Senate Seats this November?

by Ben DeGrow | 9:09 am, January 25, 2010

Take a careful look at Friday’s detailed analysis by liberal Nate Silver. Then add in news that Democrat Beau Biden won’t run in Delaware and new data from Rasmussen showing conservative Mike Pence beating incumbent Evan Bayh in Indiana, and it sure looks like an eight-seat pickup is well within reach.
Of course, politics remains a [...]

Republican Primary Revs Up as Tom Lucero Releases TV Ad

by wesley | 7:54 am, January 25, 2010

University of Colorado Regent and CD4 Congressional Candidate Tom Lucero has released a TV spot aimed at engaging the voters of Colorado’s Fourth Congressional District well in advance of the coming primary. Lucero noted that in what has become a crowded, four-way primary (including State Representative Cory Gardner, Diggs Brown, and Dean Madere) in a [...]

Dan Maes: Colorado 2010 Candidate Survey

by Ari Armstrong | 12:25 am, January 25, 2010

Following are the unedited answers of Curtis Harris to the Colorado 2010 Candidate Survey. Questions are in bold.

SUMMARY

In a Twitter-length reply (140 characters maximum), please state why you are running for political office.

Colorado is heading down the same path as Washington and it must be stopped and turned around. I have the skills and conservative values to do it.

ECONOMIC ISSUES

* Should the federal or state government spend money in an attempt to “stimulate” the economy? If so, on what sorts of projects?

No. It should cut spending, increase energy income, and taxes

[January 25 Update: Maes sent in the following clarification: "Please correct/modify delete 'and taxes' as it looks like I want to increase taxes. The message was to increase energy income and energy severance taxes to the state."]

* Should tax dollars be directed toward energy projects, tourism, or any other form of business subsidies?

Only if the voters approve doing it.

* (State-Level Candidates:) Should the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights be kept completely intact? If not, how should it be altered?

Yes.

* (State-Level Candidates:) Should Amendment 23 be repealed, maintained, or modified?

Repealed as first choice. Suspended in Ref. C fashion as a second.

* (State-Level Candidates:) Should any particular state taxes or fees (such as the state corporate income tax or the subjects of the tax-cutting initiatives) be repealed or reduced? Should any be added or increased?

FASTER should be repealed.

* Should state or federal spending (depending on which office you seek) be higher or lower than it is currently?

State should be lower.

* Should the state or federal minimum wage (depending on which office you seek) be repealed, maintained, or increased?

Maintained and re-examined based on economic realities.

* Should college education be subsidized by tax dollars?

Yes.

* Should antitrust law or its enforcement be changed?

Need more clarification.

SOCIAL AND CHURCH/STATE ISSUES

* What do you believe is meant by the “separation of church and state,” and do you endorse it?

The federal government is not to create or endorse a national religion/church. I would enforce that.

* Should religious institutions receive tax dollars for providing welfare or other faith-based services?

NO

* Should the teaching of creationism or Intelligent Design be subsidized by tax dollars?

All public education is paid for by tax dollars. Thus, if the above were part of a school’s curriculum it would be.

* Should tax-funded schools establish a period of permitted or required prayer?

I support prayer in schools but no specific period of time should be required or encouraged. There is enough spare time in public school schedules already w/o crating more.

* Should government officials promote religiously oriented displays and comments on government property and at government events?

It already does as part of our historic architecture which reflects the reality that our country was founded not on the principles of men, but on those God given principles captured in our founding documents by men.

* Do you support gay marriage?

No.

* If you answered no to the question above, do you support domestic partnerships, civil unions, or comparable legal recognition of gay couples?

I would be willing to discuss civil remedies in areas that gays feel they are not equally protected.

* Should gay couples be allowed to adopt children by the same standards as heterosexual couples?

NO

* Should government never, always, or sometimes mandate parental notification and consent before a minor may legally obtain an abortion, and, if sometimes, under what conditions?

Always.

* Should government mandate waiting periods or ultrasounds before a woman may legally obtain an abortion?

Yes/no.

* Do you endorse the “personhood” measure that may appear on the 2010 ballot?

Yes.

* Should abortion be legal in cases of fetal deformity?

It already is.

* Should abortion be legal in cases of rape or incest?

It already is.

* Should abortion be legal in cases of risk to the woman’s life, as determined by the health professional selected by that woman?

It already is.

* Should elective abortion be legal?

It already is.

* If you believe that abortion should be legally restricted, what criminal penalties do you advocate for a woman and her doctor for obtaining or facilitating an illegal abortion?

No comment.

* Would execution ever be an appropriate penalty for obtaining or facilitating illegal abortions?

No.

* Should types of birth control be legal that may prevent a fertilized egg or zygote from implanting in the uterus?

I support the laws as they stand.

* Should fertility treatments be legal that may result in the freezing or destruction of a fertilized egg or zygote?

You ask way to many questions about an issue that is just not a priority at this time.

* Should research involving the use of embryonic stem cells be legal?

Not if there are other viable solutions.

* Should abortions or embryonic stem cell research be subsidized by tax dollars?

No and no.

IMMIGRATION

* (State-Level Candidates:) Should Colorado government force employers to verify with the federal government the legal status of potential employees, and, if so, what penalties should apply for failure to do so?

Yes and 10,000.00 per incident.

* Should federal or state tax-funded benefits (depending on which office you seek), including K-12 education, be extended only to U.S. citizens, to legal immigrants and guest workers, or to everyone in the U.S. including illegal immigrants?

They already are per federal law. It should stop at all levels.

PROPERTY RIGHTS

* What restrictions, if any, should be placed on the use of eminent domain?

It should be limited to cases where exercising it is indisputably for public use only. I use the word “use” versus interest or benefit.

* Do you endorse the use of eminent domain in the case of the Pinon Canyon military expansion? Do you support the military expansion if it does not involve eminent domain?

I do not “endorse” the use of it anywhere. I would support it reluctantly only if the Army can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that they have no other options but to do so. I support a mutual agreement between willing sellers and leasers, and the Army as a first option.

* Should the Endangered Species Act be altered or differently enforced?

No opinion.

* (State-Level Candidates:) Should the smoking ban be maintained, expanded, or repealed? Should it apply to on-stage performances?

No opinion.

BILL OF RIGHTS

* Should McCain-Feingold and state campaign finance restrictions be repealed, maintained, or expanded?

Maintained. Moot now, isn’t it?

* Should the federal government control what radio or television stations may broadcast?

They already do via the FTC.

* Should the FTC’s rules regarding blogger endorsements be rescinded?

?

* Should students with licenses be legally permitted to carry concealed handguns on the property of tax-subsidized colleges?

Yes

* Should additional restrictions be added (or repealed) on gun ownership? Please specify.

No

* Do you believe that desecration of the U.S. flag should be outlawed by Constitutional amendment?

Yes

* Do you believe that pornography or obscene materials involving consenting adults should be legally restricted?

It already is.

OTHER

* Should state or federal laws (depending on which office you seek) pertaining to marijuana be altered, and, if so, how?

Yes. Med. mar. is a disaster and must be regulated like a pharmaceutical.

* (State-Level Candidates:) Should rules pertaining to petitioners be altered, and, if so, how?

No.

* If there is any important issue that you believe we have missed, please state what it is and state your position on it.

Candidates Should Giddy Up and Answer Survey

by Ari Armstrong | 12:16 am, January 25, 2010

Grand Junction’s Free Press published the following article on January 18, 2010.

Candidates should giddy up and answer our survey

by Linn and Ari Armstrong

Shucks, mayor; you done warmed our Western hearts with your down-home talkin’ and dusty cowboy hat.

While announcing his candidacy for governor, Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper, a.k.a. “Hickenritter” (if you listen to GOP Chair Dick Wadhams), a.k.a. “Hick,” said it’s “Giddy up time in Colorado.” Yippie ki-yay. Now all he needs is a running mate named Tonto.

What we want to know is whether Hickenlooper’s campaign is more Lone Ranger or more Woody from Toy Story. To help us out, the mayor can answer the survey we sent to him the day he announced. We’d be much obliged.

We sent the survey to all the major-party candidates for governor and U.S. Senate. All Colorado candidates are welcome to respond, and answers will be published unedited at FreeColorado.com. We hope voters and other journalists encourage candidates to answer the survey. Voters have a right to know where the candidates stand on the issues. You can find the survey at http://tinyurl.com/cosurvey10.

Before we describe the survey, we offer an important elections announcement [that is now dated]. Tomorrow, January 19, is the final day to affiliate with a party if you wish to be involved in the caucus process. While Hickenlooper scared away his competition, many candidates face preliminary party votes.

To affiliate with a party, first you need to get a Colorado voter registration form, available at http://tinyurl.com/mesavote. You can scan in the form and email it to voter.info@mesacounty.us; deliver it in person to 544 Rood Avenue, Suite 301A; or mail it to P.O. Box 20,000, Grand Junction, 81502, postmarked by January 19. We thank the Mesa County Elections office for helping us with this information.

Now back to the survey. We have this crazy idea that elections should be about more than hair color, fancy slogans, and name-calling. We believe that elections should mostly be about the issues. Ideas matter. Where do the candidates stand? What do they believe?

Obviously any survey will reveal only so much about a candidate. For example, our survey doesn’t include questions about the Democratic health bill. Most candidates are already talking about this issue, and we hope they clearly articulate their views on their web pages and elsewhere.

Our survey was more intended to reveal positions that candidates aren’t talking about as much. We want to know whether candidates endorse corporate welfare. We want to know where they stand on key business controls, such as antitrust and Sarbanes-Oxley.

We also want candidates to quit obscuring their views. For example, while Scott McInnis used to be “pro-choice,” he now calls himself “100 percent pro-life.” But what does that mean? Does he want to ban absolutely all abortions? If not, what exceptions would he allow? The matter of abortion (and related issues such as birth control) will be particularly important this election, given a measure may again be on the ballot to define a fertilized egg as a person.

We want to know where candidates stand on immigration issues. Should a guest worker program be expanded? Should the Colorado legislature force businesses to verify with the federal government the legal status of potential employees? Should businesses be fined for failure to do so? Should tax-funded benefits ever be extended to non-citizen immigrants?

What about property rights? Do candidates endorse eminent domain, the forcible taking of private property? Under what circumstances? Do candidates endorse the smoking ban, even for on-stage performances?

Regarding the Bill of Rights, where do candidates stand with respect to free expression and the right to bear arms? For example, should adults with a concealed-carry permit be able to carry a handgun on tax-funded campuses?

Medical marijuana will be a huge issue this legislative session; where do candidates stand on that matter and on marijuana laws generally? What about rules governing petitioners? What about the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights?

Whether you’re Republican, Democrat, unaffiliated, or other, you should care about candidates’ positions. We hope that, in 2010, voters make a stand and demand that candidates state their views clearly, openly, and for the record.

Here’s what you can do to help. Please contact your federal, state, and local candidates and encourage them to answer our survey and explain their views elsewhere. If you’re a Republican, you can find a list of federal and state-wide candidates at http://tinyurl.com/2010gop. We called the Colorado Democrats, and a representative said that hopefully a list of candidates will be made available at ColoradoDems.org. Otherwise you may need to poke around on the internet or call a party office.

Candidates have a responsibility to reveal their views, and voters have a responsibility to critically and fairly evaluate candidates’ positions. It won’t do to take comments out of context or otherwise misrepresent what a candidate is about.

We will get the government we deserve. It’s time for candidates to cowboy up. And it’s time for us voters to earn our spurs.

Update: As of January 24, we’ve received a reply from one candidate running for governor or U.S. Senate: Dan Maes.

Theater Smoking Ban Violates Free Expression

by Ari Armstrong | 12:05 am, January 25, 2010

The January 10 Denver Post published my letter under the title, “Why smoking ban shouldn’t apply on stage.” The letter replied to a January 4 editorial.

The Post argues that, because actors can use fake cigarettes on stage, the state smoking ban should apply. But just because The Post is capable of publishing fake news and commentary doesn’t mean it should be forbidden from publishing the real thing. The owners should decide policy, and patrons should decide which plays to see. It is a matter of property rights as well as free expression. By inviting politicians to set policy in the playhouse, The Post invites them to do the same in the newsroom.

Free association is also a critical right under assault by the smoking ban, in the theater as well as other private establishments. Actors too have a right to reach mutually agreeable terms for working. A play properly involves the mutual consent of theater owners, actors, and patrons. Politicians violate the rights of all those parties by interfering.

The Post is schizophrenic regarding the First Amendment (which is odd given that free expression is what enables newspapers to do business). Thankfully on January 22 the Post stood with free speech by declaring that individuals retain their rights when they join an association to promote ideas with their financial resources.

Did the Colorado Supreme Court declare “open season” on Colorado ranchers and farmers, too?

by CTBC Director | 11:45 pm, January 24, 2010

As the National Western Stock Show drew to a close today, many of Colorado’s ranchers and farmers in attendance were unaware that one of the guests of honor (Governor Bill Ritter), along with many in the Colorado legislature, was taking pot shots at their livelihood – aided and abetted by what amounted to a declaration of “open season” by [...]

Ritter and Obama: Same lack of respect for taxpayers

by Amy Oliver | 9:21 pm, January 24, 2010

Another aspect of transparency allows the public enough time to review and comment on legislation.  Both Governor Bill Ritter and President Barack Obama show the same lack of respect for those paying the bills.  We don’t even get to review the bills that affect our lives and wallets.
Candidate Obama promised that the public would be [...]

Colorado Supreme Court declared “open season” for Governor, Legislature to target tax credits and exemptions

by CTBC Director | 10:01 am, January 24, 2010

A recent Denver Post article noted that leading Colorado business groups oppose the Governor’s and Legislature’s latest proposals to “balance the budget” by targeting several long-standing tax credits and exemptions for “suspension or elimination.”
The article cited a letter from a coalition of groups expressing concern that increasing the tax burden on business would delay economic recovery and [...]

Land of the mostly free?

by Rob Natelson | 7:35 am, January 24, 2010

The Index of Economic Freedom, 2010 edition, is now available.  The U.S. ranks 8th in the world, but has slipped into the “mostly free” from the “free” category.  As usual, Hong Kong and Singapore lead the pack.  Also in front of the U.S. are Switzerland and four other “Anglosphere” countries — Australia, New Zealand, Ireland, [...]

Politico: Supreme Court ruling “not so bad”

by Rossputin | 5:36 am, January 24, 2010

In case Politico.com’s recent spate of apparently even-handed coverage of the Brown election and its impact on the Democrats’ agenda made you think that the site were moving away from its subtle but certain liberal bias, today’s headline article should remind you of reality…

Who is Ellie Light?

by Eileen McGuire-Mahony | 10:33 pm, January 23, 2010

Mr. Obama may draw many supporters from among society’s wealthiest , but one fan seems to be raking it in big time. If we are to believe a series of letters to the editor published in newspapers all over this land of ours, Ellie Light owns no fewer than two dozen homes, including multiple residences in at [...]

Colorado 2010 State Senate Showdown: First Quarter Look at Hot Races

by Ben DeGrow | 10:28 pm, January 23, 2010

Sometime late in the last decade, the good old Aughts, I set up the state of play as Colorado Republicans (currently 21-14 in the minority) seek to take back the state senate. Following the release of fourth quarter reports on the Secretary of State’s campaign finance site, I have ranked in order an updated list [...]

Westword weighs in on Colorado Supreme Court non-retention movement spearheaded by Clear The Bench Colorado

by CTBC Director | 8:40 am, January 23, 2010

The widely circulated alternative weekly Westword weighed in Friday with an article about the grassroots movement to hold the Colorado judiciary (particularly, the Colorado Supreme Court) accountable – and bring back balance to the bench – spearheaded by Clear The Bench Colorado.
Aside from not actually having used the word “bums” to describe the current majority on the [...]

Government Flow Chart

by Rossputin | 4:40 am, January 23, 2010

Thanks to Neil R. for sending along this accurate depiction of the way our government works…and one which gives a new vivid depiction of the definition of “flow” chart…

Update: Commenter “Catalina” makes the on-target point that what’s missing is The Constitution and the Bill of Rights which in this diagram would, sadly, be on a new rung of the ladder, below all the rest.

Colorado Tea Parties & 9/12 Groups Challenge GOP

by elpresidente | 11:44 pm, January 22, 2010

And are now appearing on page A1 of the New York Times: Across the country, many Tea Party activists believe that they have to work within the Republican Party if they want to elect fiscally conservative candidates. But they want the party to work for them — not, they argue, the other way around. For [...]

Colorado 7th CD Candidates Sound Off Saturday at Aurora Republican Forum

by Ben DeGrow | 6:06 pm, January 22, 2010

Do you live in Colorado’s 7th Congressional District, but are undecided about whom to support? Interested in hearing more from the candidates directly? Well, a forum is scheduled for tomorrow that might appeal to you — details below the fold:

Aurora Republican Forum
7th Congressional Candidates Forum
Saturday, January 23 at 8:30 a.m.
Aurora Association of Realtors
14201 E. Evans [...]

« 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