Obama and the mosque

by Rossputin | 6:50 am, August 17, 2010

At the risk of coming late to the party on this story, I’d like to offer a few brief thoughts on Barack Obama’s getting involved in the issue of the proposed Ground Zero mosque:

While Obama (and other Democrats and jihad apologists like Michael Bloomberg) are wrong to pose the question as one of First Amendment rights or property rights, doing so was not Barack Obama’s biggest mistake at the Friday evening White House Iftar (Ramadan) dinner at which he expressed support for the Cordoba House project.

Obama’s biggest mistake was getting involved at all, but of course nobody thought he’d be able to restrain himself from this obvious continuation of his Muslim Apology Tour…which has been fabulously unsuccessful in improving the popularity of the US in the Muslim world – or the important parts of the world.

By saying that he supports this project, which me most certainly did, the man-child who thinks he’s still involved in Chicago machine politics left himself in a position where his wiser political advisers would have made it clear to him that he’d need to try to back away from those words. And so he did, with Obama himself walking back his support slightly and then an Administration spokesman walking back the walk-back.  From a Fox News article on the subject:

On Saturday, while spending the day in the Gulf, the president clarified, “I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That’s what our country is about.”

Later in the day, spokesman Bill Burton issued a statement saying “the president is not backing off in any way from the comments he made last night.

Obama’s political risks from his support of the mosque are several and not small. In no particular order:

• Reinforcing the perception of him as a man who approaches issues in a way which is distinctly out of touch with the way Americans think and feel.  Obama is cementing the view in the minds of some (many? most?) as a guy who is far more interested in being a “citizen of the world” and in apologizing for America than in understanding the nation’s history and its people.  Something about Barack Obama has always struck me as foreign in character, by which I do not mean a xenophobic comment nor a question about his place of birth, but rather that his mind operates on a wavelength distinctly incompatible with the average American.
• Damaging the already faltering support for him, and perhaps for other Democrats, among the almost insanely loyal Jewish population in America, a particular problem for the Florida Senate election where Charlie “Tanning Booth” Crist has already piped up saying “I think (Obama) is right.” Republican candidate Marco Rubio offered a different take: “It is divisive and disrespectful to build a mosque next to the site where 3,000 innocent people were murdered at the hands of Islamic extremism. I strongly disagree with President Obama and Charlie Crist.”  It’s hard to imagine the Obama/Crist position playing well with Florida’s large Jewish voting population going into a Senate race which, esp. if Sharron Angle can get back on track in Nevada, could spell the difference between a Democrat-controlled Senate and a Republican takeover of that body.
• Broadly giving Republicans yet another issue to use to campaign against him in 2010 even though Obama is not on the ticket.  By that I mean the more unpopular they can make Obama – who is by far the most popular Democrat (at least among Democrats) – the more they can drive a wedge between him and candidates who might otherwise be able to use Obama for fund-raising help even if they’d do so in a way which minimizes Obama’s visibility in the local district.  To the extent that the GOP can make Democrat candidates have to run against Barack Obama, they weaken Democrat chances in 2010 and Obama’s chances of winning re-election in 2012.

A couple other small points I’d like to make:

First, as Backbone Radio producer Joshua Sharf noted dryly last night after Obama mentioned property rights as a justification for the mosque, “since when has Barack Obama cared about private property?”  GM and Chrysler bond holders certainly have that same question…

Next: Rep. Jerrold Nadler (one of the most ridiculous members of the House) argues that when thinking about the 9/11 attacks, it is “insensitive if you regard Islam as the culprit, as opposed to Al Qaeda as the culprit.”  I disagree.  As I mentioned on Backbone Radio last night, just because we weren’t attacked by “all Muslims” does not mean we were not attacked by Islam.  We were.  Let me put it another way: When Crusaders went to Jerusalem to take that city back from Muslim domination, do you think the Muslims said “We’re not being attacked by all Christians or by Christianity. It’s just a bunch of soldiers who happen to be Christian”?  I think not.

And they would be right to think they were essentially being invaded by the religion.  9/11 was the same.  It was an attack in the name of Islam by terrorists who represent what the Muslim holy book, the Koran, arguably calls for.  As I’ve said before, “extreme Islam” or “radical Islam” is redundant.  It is an inherently extreme religion, actually a system of political domination disguised as a religion. This is absolutely not to say that all Muslims, especially American Muslims, are interested in the destruction of our republic or the institution of sharia law. It is to say that they are fighting against, and not with the fundamental current of, their own religion.  I applaud “moderate” Muslims but fear they are fighting a losing battle.

It is absolutely reasonable to consider the Cordoba House project – as implied by its very name – to be intended as a symbol of Muslim conquest, just as they built a mosque on the Jewish temple in Jerusalem or converted the Hagia Sophia cathedral of Constantinople (now Istanbul) into a mosque in 1453 after it had been a Christian church for more than 1000 years.  (No, I did not accidentally type an extra zero in that number.)  The very name of the project hearkens back to the Cordoba caliphate when Muslims ruled most of Spain for about a century roughly straddling the year 1000.  That time is known as one of the high points in Muslim history, perhaps another interesting point about a religion which claims greatness but has done almost nothing to advance the intellectual growth of the human race in at least 5 centuries.  (It must just annoy the Muslims to no end to think about there being about 1.6 billion Mulsims and about 13 million Jews in the world but there have been around 170 Jewish (or at least half-Jewish) Nobel prize recipients and only 5 or 6 Muslim recipients, of whom one was the repugnant terrorist Yasser Arafat.)

Let me repeat, in case I haven’t been clear: We were attacked by Islam and we are at war with Islam, even if we are not at war with all Muslims.  The politically correct garbage spewed by Nadler, Obama, Bloomberg, and others is not just intellectually pathetic, but it is dangerous to our national security. How can we fight an enemy we refuse to recognize or name?  The fact that Obama is so deeply committed to neither recognizing nor naming the evil inherent in Islam is what allows him to make statements as poorly considered as his support, then semi-support, then support-by-proxy for a gloating monument to the successful murder of 3,000 Americans by Muslim soldiers.

Health care innovation: good and bad

by Brian Schwartz | 6:00 am, August 17, 2010

John Goodman of the National Center for Policy Analysis has an excellent column abut health care innovation. He summarizes: Wherever there is third-party payment [insurance, a health plan, Medicare, Medicaid], the goal of innovation is to produce more products that qualify for reimbursement, even if the effects on patient outcomes are only marginal. Wherever there [...]

Let’s Talk Primaries – Winners and Losers

by Jon Caldara | 9:00 pm, August 16, 2010

Dan Maes Racks Up Key Support; Tambor Williams as Running Mate?

by Ben DeGrow | 5:41 pm, August 16, 2010

News this afternoon from the Dan Maes for Governor camp brings news of the Party core growing more united around his candidacy, with a couple of giant endorsements reported on Facebook: But all the speculation now is around tomorrow’s deadline for Maes to announce who his running mate will be. As Amy Oliver ably speculates, [...]

‘Both Ways Betsy’

by Amy Oliver | 5:10 pm, August 16, 2010

That’s the nickname that my friends at Complete Colorado have hung on freshman Democrat Congresswoman Betsy Markey.  And it seems appropriate. An article from The Hill and featured on Complete Colorado describes Markey’s new ad campaign where she pretends to be offended with congressional approval of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act, a.k.a. TARP.  In fact [...]

Your tax dollars to hawk government programs

by Amy Oliver | 4:07 pm, August 16, 2010

Why does state government spend our tax dollars to advertise? Is it in competition with the private sector for customers? Worse than using our money to advertise programs that cost us money, is the fact that it is way too difficult to find out details about how and why the money was spent.
Channel 7 and [...]

Tambor Williams for Lt. Gov?

by Amy Oliver | 3:36 pm, August 16, 2010

On my radio show today GOP gubernatorial candidate Dan Maes said his “short list” for Lt. Governor includes someone from Weld County with both executive experience in the Governor’s mansion and legislative experience as an elected member of the Colorado General Assembly.  Face the State has speculated that it might be either Senator Kevin Lundberg [...]

BLM Memo Sets Vision For 21st Century Land Grab

by Chuck Moe | 3:32 pm, August 16, 2010

A Bureau of Land Management internal draft memo (“Treasured Landscapes — Our Vision, Our Values”) sets a vision for the 21st century. In this vision, an additional 130-140 million acres of land will be designated treasure land. This is “roughly equivalent in size to Colorado and Wyoming combined.” Some of this land is in Colorado.

Maes pledges transparency

by Amy Oliver | 2:56 pm, August 16, 2010

Republican gubernatorial candidate Dan Maes promised that if elected he would post online all his state credit card transactions down to the penny. He went further than that. During his appearance on Transparency Czarina Amy Oliver’s radio show, Maes pledged to post all state credit card transactions.
Maes pledge was a response to Amy’s question about [...]

Colorado Unions Abuse Non-Union School Employee Paychecks

by Ben DeGrow | 2:06 pm, August 16, 2010

This is a sticky post. Please scroll down for newer content. I know I’m biased, but watching this video is 4 minutes well spent if you want to understand how some Colorado unions representing teachers and other school employees put money and power before common decency. Watch non-union Pueblo school employee Becky Robertson tell about [...]

Electoral College Follow-up

by Al Maurer | 11:38 am, August 16, 2010

My post last week about the Electoral College generated quite a bit of interest–from the National Popular Vote people, apparently. Within two hours of my post appearing, I received five very long rebuttals from the same untraceable hotmail account “mvymvy@hotmail.com” They arrived 1 minute apart. Overwhelm the opposition: typical leftist tactic. I moderate this blog [...]

Ben DeGrow Takes Heat for Tackling $10 Billion Edujobs Bailout in Denver Post

by Eddie | 11:05 am, August 16, 2010

My Education Policy Center friend Ben DeGrow made the opinion page of today’s Denver Post with a featured guest column titled “Education jobs bailout can’t be justified”:
Last week, the House of Representatives passed legislation that included a $10 billion payout to states to preserve K-12 school jobs. Retaining or adding school employees may be a [...]

Tea Party Candidates Connect with Independent Voters

by Lesley Hollywood | 10:59 am, August 16, 2010

Last Thursday, Rasmussen Reports released the results of a poll on the US Senate Race.  On Friday, another poll was released showing surprising numbers in Colorado’s Governors race.  And just this past weekend, yet another poll was released by Innovative Data Solutions with more stunning numbers.  Here is the synopsis: Ken Buck versus Michael Bennet Rasmussen: Buck [...]

A confusing “recovery”

by Amy Oliver | 7:42 am, August 16, 2010

The term “jobless recovery” always has left me confused.  In fact, I’ve pondered the term on my show on more than one occasion. I don’t claim to be an economist but words should mean something.  So, exactly how can we be in a “recovery” when unemployment remains high — especially considering how much of our [...]

Done beating up Dan Maes

by Rossputin | 6:45 am, August 16, 2010

Everyone knows what I think of Dan Maes.

But unless they find him in bed with a live boy or a dead girl, or some truly huge campaign self-destruction, I’m done talking about his faults.

The Denver Post, with fully three members of its editorial board who theoretically lean from moderate to conservative to libertarian seem to have made it their mission in life to go after Maes and at this point I’d just be piling on.

I’ve been asked by a few people whether I’d vote for Maes or Hickenlooper if those were my only choices.  While I’d like to say I’m not sure, the truth is that I’d certainly vote for Maes if those were indeed my only options, knowing what I know now.  While I don’t think much of Maes’ competence, I do think that as a guy who has had involvement in business (putting aside the level of financial success) he understands the importance of getting the best possible help and advice.  I hope that he knows he’s not the sharpest knife in the drawer and is willing to get a really really good knife sharpener.

I think he has free-market instincts and would get good advice from people I could respect, whereas neither would be true of John Hickenlooper, a Van Jones-loving, Obama fawning, radical environmentalist leftist in moderate clothing – that is to say Colorado’s very own Barack Obama without the tan.

Thinking about the election, I think that short of a serious scandal, not the petty ones we’ve seen so far (which are more about competence than moral turpitude), Dan Maes doesn’t get less than 1/3 of the vote.  I also think that it’s extremely unlikely that Tom Tancredo will get 30% of the vote or more, and probably more like 20%-25%.  This means that John Hickenlooper is extremely likely to be our next governor, winning by something like 43% to 35% for Maes to 22% for Tancredo.

If Maes gets out, could Tancredo win?  Maybe, but probably not.  If Tancredo gets out, could Maes win?  Maybe, but probably not.  As surprised as I am to say it, Maes probably has a better chance than Tancredo in a head-to-head match-up if he can get professional campaign staff and stop putting his foot in his mouth and stop having former supporters come out bashing him and supporting someone else.

I am not a big Dan Maes fan, but I am not repulsed by him the way I was by John McCain who I not only didn’t vote for but also argued on the air against him.

I wish Maes and Tancredo would both get out.  But I also wish for hundred dollar bills to start falling from the branches of my trees and that’s not exactly happening for me.

Beating John Hickenlooper should be our first priority and at this point I’m willing to do it with any candidate who seems to be of at-least-reasonably sound character and not completely incompetent.  I’m not entirely certain about Maes on these scores yet, but he’s not disqualified the way Scott McInnis was.  I still can’t believe that this is who the GOP ends up with; and I can’t believe how staunchly some of his supporters defend him, as if we’ve got the next Ronald Reagan in our midst when what we clearly have is a wannabe who’s bitten off way more than he can chew.  Still, we have so much to lose with a Governor Hickenlooper that I may be forced into a very uncomfortable decision:

Support an unqualified and minimally competent person with decent fundamental principles or a clearly qualified and mostly competent person with horrible fundamental principles.  I’ll go with the former, but not if the comparison gets any worse.  I’m still angry with the Tea Partiers who are supporting their guy to the bitter end because they can’t admit they made a mistake in their collective rookie enthusiasm.

I’m willing to give Dan Maes a chance to convince me, even though I think he personally does not have the skill set to give me great comfort in his being in charge, that he’d surround himself by people who could give me such comfort.

I would not take such a “soft” position most of the time; normally I would, and would expect most of you, to demand a much higher quality candidate than we have in front of us today.  But these are not normal times with upcoming redistricting and possibly replacing State Supreme Court Justices.

I am definitely not ruling out voting Libertarian; in fact that remains my most likely vote.

But, as we learn of Dan Maes’ Lt. Governor selection, his likely Chief of Staff, and other senior advisors, and as we hear him discuss policies and principles, when it comes to his fitness and electability for the highest elected position in Colorado I will keep an open mind.  But not so open that my brain falls out.

Tea Partiers Ask: “Should Tancredo Get a ‘Free Pass’?”

by Elliot | 6:16 am, August 16, 2010

This analysis is a must read for anybody who automatically believes that Tancredo is a principled conservative.  He seems to have been trending left/statist the past few years…..

Absurd Accusation Against Candidate Owen Hill Shines Light on Shoddy Journalism, Political Hackery

by Ben DeGrow | 9:25 pm, August 15, 2010

Republican state senate candidate Owen Hill was blindsided yesterday by a Colorado Springs Gazette story with fabricated claims that Hill plagiarized statements off his Libertarian opponent’s website. A friend of mine, quoted in the story, does his job of defending his Party’s position and candidate, but issued his quote carefully: “My understanding is, from Doug, [...]

New Innovative Data Colorado Poll Gives Reason for GOP Optimism

by Ben DeGrow | 3:40 pm, August 15, 2010

Update, 8/19: Interestingly, party identification for the poll fits very closely with what would be expected based on national trends and turnout in the recent primary election: Republican (39%), Democrat (36%), Unaffiliated (25%). Since not all respondents answered every question, the actual percentages for individual questions may vary slightly. Thanks to Jim Pfaff for supplying [...]

Cosmetic changes aren’t enough. Structural change is needed.

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 11:53 am, August 15, 2010

I have heard that the Tea Party movement is against the status quo. Good.The two party system is part of the status quo.Plurality voting is part of the status quo.I ask: Is the Tea Party really against the status quo, or does it just want different peo…

Tancredo isn’t "stealing" any votes from anyone.

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 11:36 am, August 15, 2010

According to the Denver Post’s Christopher Osher, who wrote a feature on GOP candidate for Governor Dan Maes,Maes must work to beat Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper on the Democratic side as Tom Tancredo steals votes that would normally go to the Republi…

Paul Bunyan. Loch Ness Monster. Small government GOP.

by David K. Williams, Jr. | 10:38 am, August 15, 2010

In today’s Denver Post, conservative columnist Vincent Carroll notes:Funny thing, though: Entitlement programs seem to grow almost as fast when Republicans are in charge as when Democrats rule the roost. Go figure.(See “Fueling fear of Buck.”)Let’s put…

Lightening the mood: Senators on airplanes; Obama sued for identity theft

by Rossputin | 8:42 am, August 15, 2010

From the rather amusing blog Wine and Excrement comes this important potential policy change regarding general aviation (private airplanes) regulation in America:

See “NTSB to recommend installation of U.S. senators on every GA aircraft“, by “Sisyphus”, Wine and Excrement blog, 8/13/10
http://wineandexcrement.com/ntsb-to-recommend-installation-of-u-s-senators-on-every-ga-aircraft/2370/

Separately, from the same source, comes information about a lawsuit filed by former President Jimmy Carter against current President Barack Obama for identity theft. The note includes this gem:

When asked how trademark of a “character” could apply to Mr. Carter, a real person, Nortel replied, “Please. No one thinks Mr. Carter is for real.”

See “Former Pres. Carter sues Obama under theories of identity theft“, by “Zelos”, Wine and Excrement blog, 8/12/10
http://wineandexcrement.com/former-pres-carter-sues-obama-under-theories-of-identity-theft/2355/

Tax breaks are not tax subsidies

by Brian T. Schwartz | 10:45 pm, August 14, 2010

Too often I’ve heard people refer to tax breaks or tax exemptions as “subsidies.” Freeman Editor  Sheldon Richman does a great job explaining the difference.  Some excerpts: A subsidy is a cash grant from the government. … government intervention enables people to obtain money they were not entitled to; the flip side is that someone [...]

Scott Gessler for Secretary of State

by Ben DeGrow | 10:39 pm, August 14, 2010

Best 90-second candidate ad with clean elections as the theme — Scott Gessler for Colorado Secretary of State. Check it out:

Flawed voting system creates Maes & Tancredo conflict

by Brian T. Schwartz | 1:38 pm, August 14, 2010

Colorado’s 2010 gubernatorial race reveals a major flaw in our plurality-based elections: vote splitting. It’s well-known that Dan Maes and Tom Tancredo will split the Republican vote. This makes it much easier for Democrat John Hickenlooper to win compared to if one candidate withdrew. In an August 11 Rasmussen poll, the combined Maes/Tancredo votes exceeded Hickenlooper [...]

Denver Post’s Snarky Fact Check Fails: Ken Buck and Social Security

by Ari Armstrong | 8:56 am, August 14, 2010

Note to Elizabeth Miller of the Denver Post: when writing a “fact check” about political candidates, you should probably try to make sure that your own statements are correct.Consider Miller’s snarky — and obviously false — statement about the founde…

Will Ken Buck’s extremism beat Barack Obama’s?

by Donald E. L. Johnson | 8:29 am, August 14, 2010

Ken Buck is going be a big target for the Dems, especially on social issues. That could scare away the independents’ votes for Buck. In the eyes of independents, moderates and Democrats, Buck is an extremist on social issues. Indeed, that is how I see him, but i”m willing to put that asside because I’m more worried about Obama’s extremism than Buck’s.

Voters are very unhappy with everything Obama’s doing, and outside groups will hammer Bennet on that.

At this point Buck has the anti-Obama tide at his back. But Bennet has more money and better name recognition as well as the Obama organization behind him.

As I’ve said before, outside groups will make the campaign vicious and nasty. While that will turn off the non confrontational know nothings in the electorate, it will ensure that most voters will know more about the candidates, including a lot of lies, than they ever wanted to know.

This election will be about values, goals and the future of Colorado and America. It will be decided not by traditional Colorado Democrats and Republicans but by the more than a million of us who’ve moved to the state over the last 20 to 25 years. 

You might think of this year’s senate race as a battle between Midwestern Republicans and California Democrats, although it’s probably not as black and white as that. 
Ken Buck is going be a big target for the Democrats, especially on social issues. That could scare away the independents’ votes for Buck. In the eyes of independents, moderates and Democrats, Buck is an extremist on social issues. Indeed, that is how I see him, but I’m willing to put that asside for now because I’m more worried about President Barack Obama’s extremism than Buck’s. The Tea Party didn’t made the difference in the GOP primary. The social issues Republicans did. But nobody but the Democrats want to talk about that. And they already are making it an issue by calling Buck an extremist.
Most Colorado voters are very unhappy with everything Obama’s doing, and outside groups will hammer appointed Obama Democrat Senator Michael Bennet (D-Washington, DC) on that. Obama and Bennet are doing all they can to give the federal government the power to micromanage our lives and limit our liberties, and that should cost them big in the November elections.
At this point Buck has the anti-Obama tide at his back. But Bennet has more money and better name recognition as well as the well-organized and well-funded Obama campaign organization behind him. 
This will be a fight between Buck’s believers and the government employes and unions who want to use Bennet to control the federal government.
Buck’s supporters want to take our country back.
Bennet’s supporters have strong financial incentives to work for them. Indeed, the federal government is paying them to vote for him.
Government employes and unions want to be their own bosses, and they can do that at the expense of taxpayers by electing Obama Democrats like Bennet. If government employes and unions control the Democrats and the government, they write their own rich tickets at the negotiating tables when union contracts with the federal government come up. No wonder federal employes on average make nearly twice as much as the taxpayers they work for.
They negotiate with themselves and give themselves rich salaries and benefits.
As I’ve said before, outside groups will make the campaign vicious and nasty. While that will turn off the non confrontational know nothings in the electorate, it will ensure that most voters will know more about the candidates—including a lot of lies—than they ever wanted to know.
The Buck versus Bennet election will be about values, goals and the future of Colorado and America. It will be decided not by traditional Colorado Democrats and Republicans but by the more than a million of us who’ve moved to the state over the last 20 to 25 years. We’re a Blue, hard left state until the voters change their minds and turn Colorado Red again.
It is in no way a sure thing that Colorado will turn red in 2010. Buck’s extremism on social issues might keep Colorado Blue. And he can’t move to the center on social issues because he doesn’t want to be called “Both ways Ken.”
Republicans’ only hope is that Bennet’s rubber stamping of Obama’s job-killing extremist positions on spending, taxes, health insurance, energy, climate change and union card checks will help Republicans turn Colorado Red.
Bennet is trying to move to the center, but his hard left record is there for all to see. It’s the record of a senator who represents government workers and his home town of Washington, DC, not Colorado values. It’s the record of a shameless Obama rubber stamp.
If Buck’s supporters want me to elaborate on his extremism, I’ll be glad to. If they’re smart, they won’t ask.
 

Real or fake: where is your tax money going?

by Kelly Maher | 8:29 am, August 14, 2010

Check out this video from a website called Bankrupting America, “a project of Public Notice, a nonpartisan nonprofit organization 100 percent focused on arming people with the economic facts and figures needed to evaluate the policies our leaders are proposing.” That sounds serious. The video is funny, is a stomach-churning kind of way…

Backbone Radio, August 15, 2010: Birthright citizenship, busting job-killing legislation, and balanced budgets

by Rossputin | 7:35 am, August 14, 2010

We have a wide-ranging show on tap this week’s edition of Backbone Radio.

After spending a blissfully short few minutes recapping some Colorado politics – which I and most listeners could probably use a short break from, we’re going to jump into the issue of birthright citizenship, the current interpretation of US law under which anybody born on US soil is automatically a citizen of the United States.

It’s been an issue coming slowly but surely to the forefront of political discussion lately, especially with news such as this week’s revelation that 60,000 “anchor babies”, namely children of illegal aliens born in the US, are delivered in Texas hospitals each year. Last year, one big hospital, Parkland Memorial, delivered over 11,000 babies of non-citizen women, ¾ of all their deliveries.

Even such immigration “doves” as Lindsey Graham are now at least wondering aloud whether these children automatically becoming citizens is really the intent and proper use of the Fourteenth Amendment, the relevant portion of which says “All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.”

The questions include not just what our policy should be, but also whether it’s feasible or politically wise or dangerous to try to modify the policy and whether such modification would require a constitutional amendment or simply a reinterpretation of the existing text.

We’ll be joined by people on both sides of the issue. Supporting changing our current policy will be Roy Beck, President and Founder of Numbers USA, an “immigration reduction organization with more than one million members nationwide.” Opposing changing the current policy will be former US Department of Justice attorney Elliot Fladen.

In our second hour, we’ll talk about national politics, including the prospects for Republican takeovers of federal and state legislative bodies before jumping into a discussion with Sandra Solin, State Director of the Coalition for Colorado Jobs. We’ll speak with Ms. Solin about her organization’s mission to “stand up for the small businesses and workers in the state who grow the economy and create opportunities”, and particularly the group’s efforts to stop the Orwellian-titled “Employee Free Choice Act” – more appropriately the “Employee Forced Choice Act” – which aims to remove the need for a secret ballot to unionize a workplace.

And at 7 PM, we’ll be joined by Chris Davis, President of Americans for Budget Reform, to discuss a federal Balanced Budget Amendment, as is being supported by Colorado’s own Congressman Mike Coffman. We’ll talk about why such an amendment to the constitution would be valuable – and what its potential downsides might be. During these times of mind-numbing and child-bankrupting debts and deficits, a discussion of bringing, even forcing, our federal budget back to sanity is both timely and important.

Please join me by listening to (and calling in to) this week’s Backbone Radio program from 5 PM to 8 PM on 710 AM KNUS in Denver and 1460 AM KZNT in Colorado Springs.

If you’re not in range of the radio waves, you should be able to listen to the show online by clicking HERE.

I hope you’ll actively participate in the conversation with me: Call the studio at 303 696 1971, e-mail me at ross(at)710knus.com, or instant message from my site at http://rossputin.com or through AOL Instant messenger to screen name Rossputin.

 

Treasurer Kennedy’s take on Sen. Michael Bennet doesn’t add up

by Kelly Maher | 4:26 pm, August 13, 2010

At the Colorado Democrats “Unity Rally,” state Treasurer Cary Kennedy told the crowd that U.S. Sen Michael Bennet “will work to solve our nation’s most pressing problem, including bringing down the national debt.” We don’t see it…

« 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