I was planning to post a notice today about the need to take action against the Pelosi version of Obama Care. And today is the time to do it! But being busy, I got permission to paste this email (with a couple slight tweaks) from a friend:

Hello to all!

If you want tax dollars funding abortions and for medical coverage to become less available, now is the time to do nothing! The house version of the health care “reform” bill will come up for a vote tomorrow (Saturday). (more…)

Everyone and his brother (a particularly strange piece of slang I picked up from my childhood) has been offering spin to explain why on an election night so good for Republicans and conservatives, insurgent Conservative Doug Hoffman came up short against Democrat Bill Owens. I think that’s looking at it the wrong way: given the facts and observations provided by Michael Patrick Leahy, it’s fairly remarkable Hoffman came as close as he did.

I spot three major factors Leahy cites that determined the outcome. First: (more…)

From CBS4 Denver, foot-in-mouth State Senator David Schultheis (R-Colorado Springs) has pulled a surprise and announced he’s not running for re-election in 2010.

Does this make former blogger and self-proclaimed “big tent” Republican candidate Tom McDowell the frontrunner in Senate District 9?

It’s no secret that Tom once was a frequent visitor to this blog, and has left his share of comments that speak for themselves. All I can say is he seems to like to pick fights over imagined disputes. If nominated and elected, I hope he shows more tact than his predecessor.

I’ve spent the past several days trying to reach a coherent synthesis from these two poll results taken by Rasmussen:

• 73 percent of Republican voters say Republicans in Congress have lost touch with their base — men and older voters are more likely to share these sentiments; and (unsurprisingly) far more voters obviously are concerned about economic, fiscal, and national security issues than domestic or cultural issues
• General election voters trust Republicans more than Democrats on all 10 key electoral issues — with double-digit advantages in national security, Iraq, taxes, economy and abortion

So what should Republican politicians and candidates learn from these results? I mean, besides the fact that it’s hard to make too much sense out of what a wide sample of voters are thinking. Rather than come up with a cogent analysis, I decided to throw out some quick hits: (more…)

Reason #2,637 why Democrat one-party rule in Washington has proven itself a travesty: sneaking an unconstitutional, politically-correct hate crimes legislation into the military appropriations bill.

Opposition to the hate-crimes bill is by no means a socially conservative preoccupation — it’s common sense and good policy all around. Tim Lynch from the libertarian Cato Institute explains the problems with it.

Republicans may be doing well now at starting to make the case why they would be less of a travesty in Congress, but many of us out here long for something better — and are willing to work and sacrifice to make it happen. I’m talking about a large cadre of truly fiscally responsible reformers, devotees of liberty and limited government, principled leaders to guide a governing majority.

Hey … I can dream, can’t I?

With the nearly never-ending election cycle, those of us here in the trenches can sometimes too easily lapse into the day-to-day tussles of the news without enough time spent in more serious reflection. (Or maybe it’s just those of us with small children whose attention spans are so easily distracted.)

Earlier this year I wrote several more reflective essays, most of which have ended up ignored by now. But while I still plan to write about the immediate issues of the day and follow events leading up to the 2010 election, I am also interested in engaging once more in deeper discussions about the status and future of the conservative movement — albeit, as dictated by the limits of my own time, occasionally.

What (besides the approaching end of baseball season) prompted me to do so? A recent essay published in the Washington Post by AEI’s Steven Hayward titled “Is Conservatism Brain-Dead?” (H/T The Next Right) ( I commend it to you — if you haven’t checked it out already.

Consider this post a teaser, and notice of a small course correction. There still will be plenty of political junk food to snack on here, but soon you also may have the opportunity to dine on something a little more substantive, too.

Five weeks ago the Sunday Denver Post editorial page featured a piece by columnist Vince Carroll that made short shrift of the U.S. Senate candidacies of Ryan Frazier and Ken Buck, while making the pitch for Bob Beauprez. The Post‘s management clearly was using its editorial heft to tout Beauprez as the GOP’s great hope to defeat Ritter-appointed incumbent Michael Bennet.

Well, two weeks later Bob Beauprez officially announced he was NOT tossing his hat in the ring. So now the Post is rolling out the red carpet for Jane Norton. Witness today’s column by editorial page editor Dan Haley straining the bounds of credibility to tout Norton’s virtues and dismiss her opponents. (more…)

We’re back at it again. After the results and analysis from the July 2009 survey in which we are grateful that more than 600 of you participated, we’re at it again.

Yes, El Presidente and I have commissioned and fashioned another survey that we hope you will take 10 minutes or so to complete — especially if you’re from Colorado.

These aren’t your run-of-the-mill quick-hit polls. Once again we’ve gone a little more in-depth. Some of the questions are the same. Some are new. One interesting added follow-up is asking what the most important factor is for you in choosing to support a Republican primary candidate for governor and U.S. Senate.

Click here to take the September 2009 Colorado online political survey

Your opinion counts. Take a few moments to make it happen. Not only show your support for candidates, but also let us know where you stand on key issues and give us some honest prognostication about the 2010 elections. The survey won’t be there forever, only until next Thursday, September 17, 5 PM local Mountain time … Thanks for participating! We’ll get back to you with the results soon. Stay tuned.

Below the fold is the “official” release announcing the survey: (more…)

Getting caught up in the intense, day-to-day political and policy battles over the health care reform debate, it can be helpful from time to time to step back and take a look at the big picture. Not that I have time myself, but I can point you to two excellent pieces that do just that.

First, National Review’s Ivan Kenneally identifies evidence of a disturbing trend emerging in the current political showdown. Key quote to whet your appetite:

Unfortunately, the contempt for public debate is one of the hallmarks of Obama’s technocratic approach to politics — in place of a healthy and democratic deference to public opinion, we get the assurance of expertise that comes with a bevy of special-issue czars.

Meanwhile, the always insightful Michael Barone writes in the Washington Examiner that the national political fault-line is shifting right before our eyes — economic issues and debates over the size and scope of government are trumping old cultural divides.

Check them out. Of course, if you still want to be engaged in the day-to-day debates in an entertaining way, check out the Independence Institute’s popular new health reform video.

Update, 10:30 PM: People’s Press Collective has released its first coverage (with plenty of telling photos) of the meeting in Brighton: Perlmutter “immediately went into a roped-off area of the portico, announced he’d be there for two hours, and then retreated to the even more isolated alcove with a half-dozen (apparent) constituents and bodyguards. At which point he was taunted by the non-Democrats in the crowd for being a coward for hiding in the portico — and yes, it was blatantly obvious that that is what he was doing: isolating himself in a controllable space so as to avoid having to interact with the crowd directly. While the crowd was vocal (on both sides) for the first 45 minutes or so, there were no obvious altercations, nor was there anything that even remotely approached the “intimidation” or “mob scenes” or “riots” the media and Nancy Pelosi and the like have been wringing their hands over this past week. The only danger Perlmutter was in was the danger of having his delicate ears stung by the contemptuous shouts of certain of his constituents.

For all the talk on the left about the opposition to the collectivization of healthcare being an “astroturf” campaign orchestrated through and bought and paid for by greedy insurance corporations and the GOP, the evidence was overwhelmingly in favor of the opposite being the case: the left at this rally was clearly orchestrated and provided resources to support the effort….” (Go here to read and view the rest) — From an event earlier this week in Longmont, Ari Armstrong introduces us to the organized “mob” who want more freedom, and not more government, in their health care. Great videos. Check them out.

It looks like the unions got the “right-wing mob” they were hoping for at Ed Perlmutter’s Brighton townhall meeting today. Complete Colorado has pictures of what is reported as 200-300 people in attendance. Pro- and anti-Obama Care forces both appeared to be out in significant numbers. Hopefully, there will be more coverage to come.

(H/T Vodkapundit) The Daily Mail reports on a study that says women are getting more attractive. Ain’t nothing wrong with that! But then it contains this gem:

Researchers demonstrated that beautiful people are 36 per cent more likely to have a daughter than a son as their first born child.

That’s the lovely Mrs. Virtus I’m talking about.

A couple of the questions on our survey of Colorado’s political temperature (still open through Friday, July 17, at 5 PM) relate to the concept of hate crimes legislation currently before Congress. Well, I guess it’s not a mystery where I stand on the issue.

With the Sotomayor confirmation hearings eating up what little media oxygen exists for national political issues, these days, S.909 can be easily overlooked. But as Carter Clews explains at Net Right Nation, it shouldn’t be:

That’s right, S. 909 — aka, the “hate crimes bill” — being pushed through by the Obama Administration as one of its highest legislative priorities would make it a federal crime to commit a violent act against anyone based on race or gender orientation — unless the race was Caucasian and the orientation was towards the opposite sex.

So much for equal justice under the law. Since the legislation is currently before the U.S. Senate, I urge my fellow Coloradans to contact Mark Udall and to contact Michael Bennet (or call 202-224-5852) regarding this issue.

For anyone living inside or outside Colorado, you can call the Senate switchboard at 202-225-3121 to reach your elected Senators and share your opinion about the evils of descending down the slippery slope of “hate crime” legislation.

Earlier this evening I got the opportunity briefly to attend a Josh Penry for Governor meet-and-greet session in Broomfield. The campaign is just out of the gate, and the Grand Junction native is busily plowing his way around Colorado. No doubt he’s been on a hectic schedule, but Penry demonstrated a good stump speech delivery, staying on message.

I am pleased to see him make no bones about the national Republican Party’s failure to govern according to fiscally conservative principles, and his clear decision to run against that failing as well as against incumbent Bill Ritter’s weak leadership, misguided philosophy, and misplaced priorities. (more…)

Gallup yesterday posted the results of a very interesting poll that shows far more Americans self-identifying in a conservative direction than in a liberal direction. Brian Faughnan at Red State has it about right concerning the broad message of the poll:

I think it’s a growing distrust of what they view as the liberal agenda of this Congress and this president.

At the same time, when you break down the poll on an issue-by-issue basis, Rossputin makes a great case that on most issues Americans are tending to move in a libertarian direction. It’s hard to say how much the broad shift against environmental policies that harm the economy and against restrictive immigration policies are the result of our current economic situation versus a genuine ideological awakening, but there is reason for optimism. (more…)

Congratulations appear to be in order for Jeremy Pelzer, who has landed some sort of gig at the new online Rocky Mountain Independent. Jeremy’s fairly long feature today is the latest Colorado GOP postmortem piece, with the standard news hook of a lifelong moderate Republican switching parties in disgust:

The Colorado Republican Party has had few supporters more loyal than Brandon Curtis.

The 32-year-old sales marketer from Denver had voted straight Republican in every election since he first cast a ballot in 1996. Last year, he was a delegate for John McCain in the Republican presidential caucus.

But in the general election last November, Curtis voted Democratic for the first time in his life, picking Barack Obama and Mark Udall for president and U.S. Senate, respectively.

And he says he’ll do it again next election.

“I feel like the current state of the Republican Party would lead me away and have me vote Democratic,” Curtis said. “It’s a situation where moderates like myself — the (Republican) party just doesn’t want us right now. . . . There’re still a lot of principles that I agree with, but I think there’s too much focus on the social issues.”

Having read that, I don’t doubt its veracity or Mr. Curtis’ sincerity. I’m not exactly thrilled with the state of the Republican Party myself. But as usual when reading this sort of story — especially with someone of the same age and especially of the ambiguity of the term “moderate” — I’m left with a series of questions for the person highlighted. For the purposes of drawing the most meaningful lessons from his example, I’d be curious to know the following answers: (more…)

More important than the fact that Obama Supreme Court nominee Sonia Sotomayor’s appellate ruling simply was overturned yesterday was that her ruling was that she treated the meritorious (and ultimately victorious) claims of the New Haven fire fighters so dismissively.

It seems that in Sotomayor’s world race-neutral, merit-based promotion systems are scarcely even worthy of consideration as legal and legitimate. For her, a subjective standard of judicial “empathy” trumps not only basic fairness but also the need to give basic fairness any serious consideration.

Below the fold is a video response from the Colorado Judicial Network: (more…)

With his usual eloquence and wit, the venerable Mark Steyn on National Review Online makes a terrific point about the connection between centralized state spending & power and bizarre behavior by politicians:

The real bubble is a consequence of big government. The more the citizenry expect from the state, the more our political class will depend on ever more swollen Gulf Emir–sized retinues of staffers hovering at the elbow to steer you from one corner of the fishbowl to another 24/7. “Why are politicians so weird?” a reader asked me after the Sanford press conference. But the majority of people willing to live like this will, almost by definition, be deeply weird. So big government more or less guarantees rule by creeps and misfits. It’s just a question of how well they disguise it. Writing about Michael Jackson a few years ago, I suggested that today’s A-list celebs were the equivalent of Mad King Ludwig of Bavaria or the loopier Ottoman sultans, the ones it wasn’t safe to leave alone with sharp implements. But, as Christopher Hitchens says, politics is showbusiness for ugly people. And a celebrified political culture will inevitably throw up its share of tatty karaoke versions of Britney and Jacko.

After this past week, it’s easy to be reminded that Americans have gotten a raw deal, one they unfortunately all too often continue to enable. I like Steyn’s solution: “Burst the Bubble” of big government.

Susan Rice, the US Ambassador to the United Nations, declared last week that the Obama administration is looking for ways to ratify the UNCRC (United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child).

The Obama administration’s operational strategy is to appeal to peer pressure.  We are embarrassed to be the only nation besides Somalia that hasn’t ratified the treaty, aren’t we?  No.

The mistaken focus is on the means, rather than the end.  If there are facts about how American and Somalian children are poorly treated due to the countries not ratifying this treaty, please come out with them. Otherwise, this argument doesn’t explain why we should ratify this treaty.  (And by the way, ParentalRights.org explains that Somalia doesn’t really have a formal government that can ratify the treaty anyway).

Why should we ratify? Has the treaty made a difference elsewhere? (more…)

Update, 6/4: Thanks to a comment left by Politically Correct Death author Francis Beckwith, I refer you to his newer and more relevant book Defending Life. I’ll have to check it out myself very soon.

Update, 9:30 PM: My final thought (for now) on the matter, from Doug Wilson: “The question is whether you would be willing to reduce a society to anarchy for the sake of saving that kid, when you (should) know that the anarchy you introduce is going to be responsible for the deaths of far more children than you managed to save.” And for further edification, I will commend the thoughts of Dr. Albert Mohler as being squarely right on the matter.

Thanks to one of the more thoughtful liberals I know, David Thielen, a link to this morning’s post about Dr. George Tiller and Private William Long was added in a ColoradoPols diary. Here are some of the more colorful comments it generated, along with my replies. (more…)

No two events are perfectly parallel, but seldom are two such similar and terrible stories juxtaposed for our edification. Within 24 hours and within 500 miles from each other, two notable murders occurred — both evil acts perpetrated in public by two different men, but both for apparent ideological reasons, both sudden and horribly unexpected events for the families and loved ones of the victims, both suspects quickly brought into custody.

That’s where the parallels end. What’s most informative is some of the prominent responses to the two incidents: (more…)