How Colorado Republicans Hurt Themselves in 2010 and Beyond

Colorado is not a pro-choice state. It is a conservative state where Ken Buck will do well, very well, along with most other Republicans in the state.

Chris of CO 4:56PM August 16, 2010

Nudist? why not try NudistLover.com?

monica of IL 6:28AM August 14, 2010

Bill, you're wrong again. Just what does popular opinion have to do with GOP obstruction of comprehensive immigration reform in the US Congress? If SB1070 went to the US Supreme Court it would probably be struck down. In addition, it is obvious that the GOP has been stonewalling ANY bill on immigration reform in order to deny a legislative success to Democrats on this issue before November while using the lack of movement on the issue to stoke racist hate and promote more state level 1070 bills despite the fact that the US Constitution clearly states that making immigration policy is responsibility of the Federal Government. The GOP is clearly benefiting from racist hysteria on this and other issues.

Most importantly, you haven't disproved my first paragraph because a judge has in fact gotten a temporary injunction against the core provisions of the law. This is far from not striking it down. The law is not "in effect" as it was originally passed and will probably be struck down by another court. Bill, you either lie or willfully deceive. According to the LA Times;

"In a victory for the federal government and civil rights advocates, District Court Judge Susan Bolton put a temporary hold on Arizona's harsh immigration law Wednesday, forbidding the most controversial parts of it from taking effect Thursday as scheduled. Her temporary injunction invalidates the portions of the law, among others, that required police officers to check the immigration status of people they stop and that required immigrants to carry their papers at all times."

http://articles.latimes.com/2010/jul/29/opinion/la-ed-arizona-20100729

Apparently, federal district court judge Susan Bolton ruling to enjoin parts of SB1070 was so effective in altering the law's impact that it provoked death threats from many supporters. This also indicates that the law doesn't "stand" in your misleading words.

The WSJ's Law Blog cites professional legal criticism of 1070's constitutionality;

The Arizona law appears to be “facially unconstitutional,” [Karl] Manheim said. “States have no power to pass immigration laws because it’s an attribute of foreign affairs. Just as states can’t have their own foreign policies or enter into treaties, they can’t have their own immigration laws either.”

http://blogs.wsj.com/law/2010/04/23/law-profs-on-arizona-immigration-bill-its-unconstitutional/

The US Department of Justice lawsuit is based on the law's clear unconstitutionality, not politics. The GOP supporters of the law also know it's unconstitutional; they just don't care and are violating the very Constitution they claim to support in the interest of their warped political agenda.

Bill, I know you think popular opinion should trump the US constitution; you believed this regarding the overturning of Prop. 8 in California and with the recent injunction against parts of SB1070 in Arizona. But we are a country of laws, not popular opinion. The law, not mob rule, is what makes the US a democracy.

steve of IL 9:51PM August 13, 2010

1. “Alienating Latino voters (20 percent of the electorate) in both the senate and gubernatorial contests? Check.”

In NV Harry Reid’s son is doing poorly in all categories but Democrats. Granted his opponent is a Republican Hispanic.

Didn’t notice reason for taking Latino vote for granted. You wish to check it off do so at your own peril. Be my guess. I remember MA.

2. “Alienating women voters with senatorial nominee Ken Buck's condescending attitude ("Why should you vote for me? Because I do not wear high heels.")? Check.”

Wait a minute.

What about her initial remark about his “manhood”. Author you left that out. Wonder why ???

My link says:

“Buck spokesman Owen Loftus said, "Obviously, the comment was made in jest after Jane questioned Ken's 'manhood' in her new ad. The Norton campaign has routinely commented about her being a good choice because she is a woman, and [on] her choice of shoes."

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20011333-503544.html

Appears both side were getting nasty.

3. “Alienating rational voters with gubernatorial nominee Dan Maes's bicycles-as-U.N.-conspiracy plot (arguing that Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper's efforts to promote bike-riding were "well-disguised" strategies aimed at "converting Denver into a United Nations community," which could "threaten our personal freedoms")? Check.”

Referring to Green agreement many signed that UN is pushing. Many don‘t cotton to GREEN.

Link says

“These are very specific strategies that are dictated to us by this United Nations program that mayors have signed on to."

http://www.denverpost.com/election2010/ci_15673894

4. “Alienating moderate voters, regardless of party, by having GOPer-turned-independent Tom Tancredo on the ballot anywhere? Check.”

Most anything alienates some voters.

Polls are looking good for Democrat in CO. Our new Senator in MA came from behind.

As always proof comes in November and not with a check mark…

Bill Hedges of MO 1:06PM August 13, 2010