December 19, 2008

How Bernanke Stole Christmas

By Julian Dunraven, J.D., M.P.A. (With Apologies to Dr. Seuss)
December 2008


Every Who Down in Who-ville Liked Christmas a lot
But Bernanke, who lived just north of Who-ville, thought it might be for naught.

Bernanke feared for Christmas, and the whole shopping season.
Now, please don’t ask why. No one quite knows the reason.
It could be that interest rates weren’t adjusted just right.
It could be, perhaps, that banks were leveraged too tight.
But I think that the most likely reason of all,
May have been that his brain was under Keynesian thrall.

But whichever of these reasons you may choose,
He stood there on Christmas Eve, fretting for Whos,
Staring down from the Fed with a sour, Bernanke frown,
At the warm lighted windows below in their town.
For he knew every Who down in Who-ville beneath,
Was busy now, hanging a mistletoe wreath.

“And they’re hanging their stockings! He snarled with a sneer,
“Tomorrow is Christmas! It’s practically here!”
Then he growled, with his Fed fingers nervously drumming,
“I MUST find some way to keep Christmas cash coming!”

For tomorrow, he knew, all the Who girls and boys,
Would wake bright and early and rush for their toys!
And finding none there—Oh the Noise! Noise! Noise! Noise!
That’s one thing he hated! The Noise! Noise! Noise! Noise!

Then the Whos, young and old, would expect a great feast.
And they’d feast! And they’d feast!
And they’d feast! Feast! Feast! Feast!
But this year there would be no Who-pudding, and no rare Who-roast beast.
Which was a thought poor Bernanke couldn’t stand in the least!

And then they’d do something he liked least of all!
Every Who down in Who-ville, the tall and the small,
Would stand close together, with Christmas bells tinkling
They’d stand hand-in-hand. And the Whos would start thinking.

They’d march and they’d protest!
And they’d chant! Chant! Chant! Chant!
And the more Bernanke thought of this Who Christmas Chanting
The more Bernanke thought, “I must stop this Who ranting!
“Why for 45 years we’ve made fiat work now!
I Must keep Christmas cash flowing!
. . . But how?

Then he got an idea!
An awful idea!
Bernanke
Got a wonderful, awful idea!

“I know just what to do!” Bernanke laughed in his throat.
And he made a quick Santy Claus hat and a coat.
And he chuckled, and clucked, “What a great Fed-ish trick!
“With this coat and this hat, I’ll look just like Saint Nick!”

“All I need is a reindeer . . .”
Bernanke looked around.
But since reindeer are scarce, there was none to be found.
Did that stop old Ben?
No! Bernanke simply said,
“If I can’t find a reindeer, I’ll make one instead!”
So he called his friend Hank. Then he took some red thread
And he tied a big horn on top of his head.

Then he fired up the printing presses.
He had lots of money to make,
Loaded the sleigh with excesses
And he hitched up old Hank.

Then Bernanke said, “Giddyap!”
And the sleigh started down
Toward the homes where the Whos
Lay a-snooze in their town.

All their windows were dark. Quiet snow filled the air.
The Whos were all dreaming sweet dreams without care
When he came to the first failing bank in the square.
“This is stop number one,” The old Bernanke Claus hissed
And he climbed to the roof, bloated bags in his fist.

Then he slid down the chimney. It looked rather grimy.
But if Santa could do it, then so could Bernanke.
He got stuck only once, for a moment or two.
Then he stuck his head out of the fireplace flue
Where bad mortgage backed debt all sat in a row.
“These derivatives,” he grinned, “are the first things to go!”

Then he slithered and slunk, with a smile most like a snake,
Around the whole town, and financed each big bank’s mistakes.
Fannie and Freddie, Bear Sterns, and Citi
TARP, AIG, GE and more Citi.
To bad business he gave billions, oh very nimbly,
But as for good business, they didn’t get any.

To get the money flowing he was bound to inflate,
So he even brought treasuries down to negative interest rates.
Printing money by trillions he nearly doubled the cash.
Just think of Zimbabwe; it wouldn’t be rash.

Then he stuffed all the money down the chimneys with gusto
“And NOW!” grinned Bernanke, “I’ll fix up the Autos.”

And then Bernanke flew to Detroit, with more money to drop
When he heard a small sound say “The Senate said ‘Stop.’”
He turned around fast, and he saw to his gall
Congressman Ron Paul, who was ready to brawl.

Bernanke had been caught by this noble Who master
Who’d got out of bed to see what was the clatter.
He stared at Bernanke and said, “Santy Claus, why,
“Why are you devaluing our dollar and savings? Why?”

But, you know that Bernanke was so smart and so slick
He thought up a lie, and he thought it up quick!
“Inflation’s not bad,” the fake Santy Claus lied,
“It’s just that this level has never been tried.
“So I’ll inflate until we can create a new bubble.
“Then our economy will be back to boom on the double.”

But his fib fooled no one. Then he grabbed Paul by the head
And he trussed him and gagged him and tossed him back in bed.
And when Paul was disposed of, with his Constitution too,
He turned back to Detroit and forced the money through.

But inflation burned through the Whos’ savings like fire.
They were poorer, not richer, as he left, the old liar.
Working longer and harder before they could retire.

And the only speck of money
Left to the average Who house
Were accounts that were even too small to buy food for a mouse.

Then the same thing befell all the Whos’ houses
Leaving accounts much too small to feed the other Whos’ mouses.

It was a quarter past dawn . . .
All the Whos, still a-bed
All the Whos, still a-snooze
When he packed up his sled,
Packed it up with their final stimulus package! The checks! All indebting!
For the poor! And the Middle Class! For Change! What trappings!

80 trillion feet up! Up the side of Mount Debt-it,
He rode to overlook Who-ville, on their heads to dump it.
“Hal-loo to the Whos!” he was Fed-ishly humming.
“They’re finding out now that Christmas cash is coming!
“They’re just waking up! I know just what they’ll do!
“Their mouth will hang open a minute or two
“Then all the Whos down in Who-vill will all cry YOO-HOO!”

“That’s a noise,” grinned Bernanke,
“That I simply must hear!”
So he paused. And Bernanke put a hand to his ear.
And he did hear a sound rising over the snow.
It started in low. Then it started to grow . . .

But the sound wasn’t happy!
Why, this sound sounded angry!
It couldn’t be so!
But it WAS angry, VERY!

He stared down at Who-ville!
Bernanke popped his eyes!
Then he shook!
What he saw was a shocking surprise!

Every Who down in Who-ville, through distortions great and small,
Was chanting! Not one had any presents at all!
He HADN’T kept Christmas cash flowing!
IT FROZE
Somehow or other, it froze, though how, he did not know.

And Bernanke, with his Fed-feet ice-cold in the snow,
Stood puzzling and puzzling: “How could it be so?
“It froze despite nationalizing! It froze despite rate cutting!
“It froze despite bailouts, quantitative easing, and printing!”
And he puzzled for hours, ‘till his puzzler was sore.
Then Bernanke thought of something he hadn’t before!
“Maybe our economy,” he thought, “doesn’t come from just a store.
“Maybe the economy . . . perhaps . . . means a little bit more!”

And what happened then?
Well, in Who-ville they say
That Bernanke read von Misses and Hayek that day!
And the minute he saw true capitalism’s light,
He whizzed back to town to set all to right.
He stopped all the bailouts and ended fiat money!
And he, he himself, Bernanke, restored a land of milk and honey.

Labels: , , , ,

|

September 25, 2008

Stop The Bailout! It Is Time To Demand Inaction

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

Dear friends,

We are facing economic calamity. We stand upon the very brink of destruction yet, even now, we have the capacity to save ourselves from utter ruin and escape to heal our wounds. We must act quickly though, for the U.S. Congress, in its unerring stupidity, is poised to push us into the gaping maw of doom in a matter of days. It is now incumbent upon every citizen to defend this country by contacting their congress people and begging them NOT to pass this ghastly bailout.

Our choice is simple. We can choose not to pass this bailout, in which case the market will stumble a bit before correcting itself. Some companies will fail, jobs will be lost, and times will be hard. Then the good companies, who have managed to run themselves well, will begin to fill in the gaps left by the failures. Other, dynamic businesses will also grow into the market space, and we will recover.

The other option is to pass this bailout. Thus, we spend more than $700 billion we do not have for a result that is not guaranteed. In doing so, we prop up failed enterprises and create an unending dependence on the government that may require many billions of dollars more to sustain. We have none of this money. To do this, we either need to borrow more money and virtually double our national debt or print more money. Either way, inflation will skyrocket and the value of the dollar will be obliterated. What was a bad economic situation will become full economic ruin. In this case, the whole of the world's economy will face depression and we will not recover for a very long time.

Thus, we can restrain ourselves now, suffer through our hardships and recover as quickly as we can, or congress can pass this bailout and we can suffer terribly for a very long time in full economic ruin.

That is our choice. Congress does not see it because they are too busy looking at elections and think they must be seen to do something--something they do not understand. They are more afraid of losing an election than losing the country. In this case, though, they must do nothing. Only if they refrain from acting will we be saved. We all must write to our congress people immediately, before it is too late, and demand that they do not do this thing--that they do not sacrifice this nation to their ambitions-- and that they do not pass this bailout! Time is running out.

P.S. Ron Paul has issued a similar call.

Labels: , , , , ,

|

February 06, 2008

Super Tuesday Postmortem: Colorado Caucus Results

Update (1:30 pm)--Note to Sen. McCain-telling conservatives to "calm down" is no way to build bridges with GOPers like those in Colorado ready to bolt from the party or simply sit on their hands

Update (1:00 pm)--Eye-rolling "Dems are nonpartisan, Republicans are conservative" caucus analysis of the day:
"Obama's that creative-society, nonpartisan, new-advocate-for-change Democrat that we like here," said Denver pollster Floyd Ciruli, pointing to former Colorado Sen. Gary Hart, Sen. Ken Salazar and Denver Mayor John Hickenlooper.

Mitt Romney's win over John McCain, on the other hand, showed that Republicans were backing conservative, core-party values over more moderate views.
Update (12:00 pm)--Ben DeGrow links to the "trust but verify" scenarios that will offer McCain perhaps his only chance at mending fences with conservatives; more observations of "barely organized chaos" from Roger Fraley; Dem blogger Wash Park Prophet sees Democrat enthusiasm as providing coattails for Mark Udall and other Dem candidates this fall

Update (7:00 am)--voter turnout percentage, based on voter registration for each party and the closed caucus rules-13.6% of Democrats caucused vs. 6.4% of Republicans

Update (3:30 am)--record turnout in Colorado-8x for Democrats (120,000 in 2008 vs. 15,000 in 2004) and 65,000 Republicans

Initial thoughts--despite his Super Tuesday success, here are the image problems in a nutshell John McCain will face in the coming months in his quest to court conservatives in the GOP base (via the awesome Michael Ramirez):



Labels: , , , , , , , ,

|

Super Tuesday Colorado Caucus Results

**Update 2--Super Tuesday Postmortem: Colorado Caucus Results

**Update--welcome Michelle Malkin readers, scroll for Colorado results and plenty of background links below . . .

MSM coverage: 9NEWS--7NEWS--CBS4--Rocky Mountain News--Denver Post

Update (12:45 am)--Colorado election fundraising numbers for Dems, GOP

Update (11:45 pm)--The Drunkablog provides tonight's (only?) LOL caucus moment
Joshua Sharf--Denver GOP misses a chance to educate and engage Republicans with caucus disorganization

Update (10:45 pm)--Romney, Obama declared winners
Final look at the unofficial numbers:
Obama 66%-Clinton 33% (98% reporting)
Romney 60%-McCain 19%-Huckabee 13% (68% reporting)

Update (10:30 pm)--videos from around the state-Dem/GOP HQ, Bob Schaffer/Mark Udall

Update (10:15 pm)--Ben DeGrow and Steven Nielson report from their caucuses on turnout, votes

Update (10:00 pm)--complete county-by-county results for Colorado

Update (9:45 pm)--Romney looking to the Mountain West for help

Update (9:40 pm)--CNN:
D--Obama declared winner with 64% (45% reporting)
R--Romney leads McCain 54-22% (20% reporting), should be declared winner soon

Update (9:15 pm)--CNN:
Democrats--Obama 65%-Clinton 34% (29% reporting)
Republicans--Romney 49%, McCain 25%, Huckabee 18%, Paul 7% (8% reporting)

Update (8:45 pm)--CNN has a running tab of returns for Colorado
Colorado GOP is also updating numbers by county
Hot Air has state-by-state winners

Update (8:40 pm)--
First numbers from the parties are in
:
Early numbers from the Colorado Democratic Party showed Obama with a 2 to 1 margin over Sen. Hillary Clinton with less than 10 percent of precincts reporting.

Numbers from the Colorado Republican Party showed Romney had a 10 percent lead over Sen. John McCain and former Gov. Mike Huckabee with only a fraction of precincts reporting.
Update (7:30 pm)--precinct voted 5-1 Romney over McCain.

Candidate speeches were short but heated; Ron Paul supporters vociferous, attack Iraq War to much derision; elected delegate for precinct 409 to Denver County assembly; general mood subdued

9NEWS--overwhelming, overflow crowds at most Denver-area locations

Caucus update from Denver County GOP District 4 (6:42 pm)--
Arrived at Lake Middle School--home to both Republican and Democrat
caucuses. So far only Dem signs directing voters--GOP voter
suppression? (j/k)

Many, many more people (probably 4x at least 6 or 7x) than in 2006, and still 20
minutes to caucus kickoff.

Lots of Ron Paul supporters . . . stay tuned . . .



Even as results from the East coast and Midwest roll in, Coloradans are waiting to contribute their two cents in the Super Tuesday caucus.

Some thoughts going into tonight:
With other states having already completed their caucus/primaries, or with exit polling data available, how does an Obama victory in Georgia or an unexpected Huckabee win in West Virginia influence Colorado voters, who haven't even left their houses yet?

How does Colorado's Latino vote influence the Clinton/Obama battle?

And for those who are disaffected/disillusioned by the current GOP field, here's what the Colorado Democrats have in store for their caucus platforms.

An update on a story posted earlier
--looks like Denver Post and Rocky Mountain News journalists will be allowed to participate in their caucuses after all (and as a result of some legal questioning), but will be limited in their election coverage so as to maintain some semblance of journalistic "objectivity".

Note--Colorado's caucuses are non-binding:
At stake in Colorado are 43 Republican and 55 Democratic delegates selected through the caucuses. The caucuses are nonbinding and Colorado voters won't select the delegates until the major parties have their conventions in May.

However, Tuesday's straw polls in Colorado were considered crucial because the final delegates will be selected through that process and it gives political momentum to the winners.
Look for updates as the evening rolls on . . .


Complete coverage of Colorado's caucus:

Super Tuesday Colorado Caucus Results

Super Tuesday Predictions And Blog Roundup: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John McCain, Mitt Romney

Colorado Caucus Open Thread; Update: Endorsing Mitt Romney

Colorado Caucus: Unaffiliated Vote Growing


Colorado Caucus: Colorado Conservative Bloggers Pick GOP Favorites For Super Tuesday

Colorado Caucus: Record Turnout Expected


Colorado Caucus: Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News Issue Caucus Policies For Journalists

Colorado Caucus: Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul Answer Your Questions


Mitt Romney Visits Colorado In Advance Of Super Tuesday

Super Tuesday Colorado Caucus Party Registration Numbers


Colorado Buried In Avalanche Of Political Visits: Obama, Hillary, Romney, And Even Bush

Colorado Caucus Gains Importance; **Update: Super Tuesday

Labels: , , , , , , ,

|

February 05, 2008

Super Tuesday Predictions And Blog Roundup: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John McCain, Mitt Romney

Around the blogosphere:

Michelle Malkin has an extensive, excellent roundup.

The Anchoress is keeping her vote private, and has a roundup as well.

Election Projection is doing, well, projections for both parties, as well as another roundup.

Real Clear Politics has a clear chart of the GOP delegate count and extensive columns, polls, and coverage of Super Tuesday.

Jay is serving up some links at Stop the ACLU.

Hot Air predictions
.

Gateway Pundit is covering today's events at his blog and at Pajamas Media.

Previous coverage:

Super Tuesday Colorado Caucus Results

Super Tuesday Predictions And Blog Roundup: Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, John McCain, Mitt Romney

Colorado Caucus Open Thread; Update: Endorsing Mitt Romney

Colorado Caucus: Unaffiliated Vote Growing


Colorado Caucus: Colorado Conservative Bloggers Pick GOP Favorites For Super Tuesday

Colorado Caucus: Record Turnout Expected


Colorado Caucus: Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News Issue Caucus Policies For Journalists

Colorado Caucus: Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul Answer Your Questions


Mitt Romney Visits Colorado In Advance Of Super Tuesday

Super Tuesday Colorado Caucus Party Registration Numbers


Colorado Buried In Avalanche Of Political Visits: Obama, Hillary, Romney, And Even Bush

Colorado Caucus Gains Importance; **Update: Super Tuesday

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

|

Colorado Caucus Open Thread; Update: Endorsing Mitt Romney

Comments, predictions, links, and anything else caucus related--here's an open thread.

Ben DeGrow has a Super Tuesday post, and can't wait for some primary season resolution.

David Harsanyi sums up my sentiments succinctly:
Why do so many conservatives detest — and yes, "detest" is the most accurate word — John McCain?

Why are radio talk show hosts like Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Laura Ingraham and Hugh Hewitt abandoning their customary stance on Republican unity by endorsing or supporting Mitt Romney?

Why would the right-wing queen of provocation, Ann Coulter, claim that she would rather campaign for Hillary Clinton than the longtime Republican senator from Arizona?

Why, many talking heads marvel, are conservatives ambushing their only real shot at a general election victory in November?

Well, just maybe, to conservatives, the principle is worth more than the victory.
This explanation squares with my own motto, the one that appears at the top of this blog:
"Supporting party above principle does a disservice to both"
Before registering as a Republican for the 2004 primary election, I had been an "unaffiliated" voter--though certainly not in the "independent" or "moderate" or flip-flopping fence-sitter mode. I was a conservative--fiscally, socially, in foreign policy and in temperament. None of these positions were in the absolutist, ideologue sense--a healthy blend of small-l libertarianism influenced all of my positions, creating the need to balance my views on personal morality and public policy. As these were not always coterminous, a certain tension existed--not one that drew me toward the mushy middle, but one that made it difficult to pigeonhole me ideologically. I'm sure many of you have had the same feelings.

Generally, the problems of this country could not and should not be solved primarily or even substantially by the government. Nanny-state totalitarians masquerading as government do-gooders and demagogues spouting economic populism while excoriating the "evil" business sector--these were the main adversaries, and sometimes even found a home in the GOP. This says nothing of the anti-American, pro-socialist moonbats on the left, or the tinfoil-hat wearing, black helicopter spying, conspiracy theorists.

Government, however, does have a role (and this is why I'm not a big-L Libertarian) in playing the third-party arbiter, law enforcement, and foreign policy roles. One of the failures in this area has been the inability and lack of will regarding enforcing immigration laws. Any regular reader here knows my position on illegal immigration.

McCain-Feingold and McCain-Kennedy violate both of these positions. I'm supposed to "take one for the party" and simply prostrate myself before the failure-turned-juggernaut John McCain campaign? His "bipartisanship" and "maverick" designations generally mean kicking any principled conservative position to the curb, all the while scolding those who dare to disagree.

None of these problems with McCain's policy positions denigrates his service in our military. A casual glance at this blog will disabuse anyone of the notion that I have nothing but respect for McCain on this aspect, and would certainly find him a strong defender of this nation in the foreign policy arena. But one's military service does not mean a default vote for a candidate, much as one's gender or race should not bring an automatic vote either.

Mike Huckabee presents a similar problem. His social conservatism is admirable, but tends toward the evangelical (I'm Catholic, there is some disconnect there). Huck's main shortcomings, in my view, stem from his willingness to view the government as the source of the correctives for any issue that comes before him. A strong dose of economic populism also does much to dissuade.

Ron Paul. Good on domestic policy, atrocious on foreign policy. While he himself may not be a nut, some of his followers are, and tend to be disaffected cranks and conspiracy moonbats. That he has not distanced himself or his campaign from their antics or their contributions doesn't speak well to him as a candidate.

Mitt Romney isn't perfect. He has been accused of "flip-flopping" on any number of core issues that conservatives find important. But at this point, and given the candidate pool that the GOP has been left with, Romney is the only candidate whose professed positions come closer to my own, without the accompanying ideological (Huckabee) or historical (McCain) baggage. We know how McCain would treat conservatives, and I'd rather not be roadkill for "maverick" John McCain.

That being said, I can't see myself pulling the lever for a Democrat or any third party option come November should McCain earn the nomination. An extremely reluctant vote for a Republican will (hopefully) help ensure that either Democrat--and the variance between positions is quite clear to all those who have been paying attention--will not be successful. It will also increase the likelihood that potential Supreme Court nominees--to my mind the most important spoils of victory as evidenced by the 2004 results--will remain at best strict constructionists and at worst, moderates. A Democrat victory will only bring moonbattery and leftist "living document" disaster to the highest court in the land.

However, my enthusiasm remains undaunted for state and local GOP candidates, especially for former Representative Bob Schaffer in Colorado's Senate race. We must not forget down-ticket ramifications and remain on the sidelines by sitting on our hands and refusing to vote. Just because we don't like the candidate--no candidate is perfect or even ideal--doesn't mean we should eschew our responsibility--our right--to vote. Don't like McCain? Great! Now get out there and pour your time and money into the other races at the state and local level, and work to prevent a Democrat-dominated Congressional delegation and Colorado legislature move no further to the left. We need to begin chipping away at their advantages now, and begin identifying prospects for challenging them in 2010. Disdain for McCain is no excuse for failing to support the GOP and conservative principles elsewhere.

Final point. The primary season is the time to air differences, argue positions, and strengthen resolve. Any criticism of McCain now will remain even if he ends up the GOP nominee. But I'd rather work to sway McCain back to conservatism (forcing the death of the McCain-Kennedy amnesty bill) than have to fight a Democrat President and likely House and Senate tooth-and-nail to stop the country from going into a tailspin.

Soapbox/endorsement off.

Labels: , , , , , , , , ,

|

Colorado Caucus: Colorado Conservative Bloggers Pick GOP Favorites For Super Tuesday

Poring over my fellow Colorado conservatives' blogs these past few weeks, I pulled together a rough list of their picks for the GOP nomination in no particular order (if you would like to add your endorsement to this list, leave a comment and link below):

The Daily Blogster--"Go Mitt!"

Clay Calhoun--"If the GWOT is the #1 issue, and I believe it is, then McCain is who I want leading the charge"

The New Conservative--Huckabee or McCain, anyone but that sleazy Romney

Best Destiny--"I will be enthusiastically caucusing for Mitt Romney on Tuesday night"

Ben DeGrow--Mitt for President

ThinkingRight--"Mitt Romney is the only clear conservative candidate"

The Drum and Cannon--"It is time for conservative Republicans to bury our differences and let our voices be heard, loud and clear. It is time to come together and support Mitt Romney for President of the United States"

Rossputin--"If John McCain is the GOP nominee, I'll vote Libertarian"

ClearCommentary--"There's much about McCain we don't like, but if he's our fate, let's sharpen him to a razor's edge and prepare for November"

The Colorado Index--(no official endorsement) "The conservatives who are always in search of the perfect conservative candidate with the threat that they will sit on their hands if he doesn't materialize have handed us Ken Salazar and Bill Ritter"

FWIW, here's how the SP GOP poll turned out:

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , ,

|

February 04, 2008

Colorado Caucus: Record Turnout Expected

Get there early to grab a seat (more info here, arrive by 6:30pm for 7:00pm start times):
Democrats and Republicans often have different takes on any given issue. However, on the eve of Super Tuesday, workers at the local headquarters of the respective parties were busy doing the same thing: answering phones.

"A lot of phone calls, a lot of e-mails, a lot of folks have never attended a precinct caucus," said Dick Wadhams, the head of Colorado's Republican Party.

"We actually put in nine new phone lines, there's not a line that's free," said Pat Waak, the head of Colorado's Democratic Party.

9NEWS political analyst Fred Brown says the buzz surrounding the caucus can be partly attributed to the fact that this year's caucus is being held earlier than in the past. Colorado traditionally took part in the process of selecting presidential nominees in March. By then, decisions on nominees were usually already made due to the previous caucuses and primaries. Brown says that made the Colorado caucus a moot point and a lackluster event.

"Now it's early enough in the process that Colorado could have an impact, along with all the other states of course. Everyone will be paying attention to California and New York, but Colorado is right there playing its part," said Brown.

Pollster Floyd Ciruli said caucuses typically attract less than 5 percent of registered partisan voters. Even with the poorly understood system this year, at least double the historic numbers of voters are expected, or more than 200,000 partisans.
CBS4 has a more detailed primeron Colorado's caucus for those who would like more detailed information, including a rough explanation of what will go down tomorrow night.

A flyover state no longer?
Last year the state legislature and the state parties agreed to move up the caucus date to Feb. 5. Other states did the same and now 24 states are participating in Super Tuesday.

"No one wants to be a flyover state, and Colorado was a flyover state," said House Majority Leader Alice Madden, D-Boulder. "People would pop in and do a fundraiser in Aspen. Now we have substantial debate in Denver and Broomfield and Boulder."

Democratic and Republican presidential candidates and their surrogates descended on Colorado last week and Monday to drum up caucus support, and Ciruli expects the visits to last throughout the campaign.

"We are going to be in play in November," he said.

That's because Colorado's unaffiliated voters - the second- largest voting block behind Republicans - help call the shots. Both parties will be trying to woo the unaffiliated and undecided voters, as well as proving they care about Western issues, Ciruli and Madden said.

"Every state matters, but in the long run the electoral votes in the West are going to help decide who is the next president of the United States and everybody knows that," Madden said.

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

|

February 02, 2008

Colorado Caucus: Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, Ron Paul Answer Your Questions

Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton, Mitt Romney, and Ron Paul answered questions on 9NEWS' Your Show.

Labels: , , , ,

|

January 31, 2008

Colorado Buried In Avalanche Of Political Visits: Obama, Hillary, Romney, And Even Bush

In no particular order:

Chelsea Clinton campaigned for her mother at CU-Boulder early Thursday, touting Hillary's "more visionary" (more costly and totalitarian?) platform. Oh, and for those still sitting on the fence, Chelsea says her mom bakes "killer" banana bread.

That doesn't seem to be enough for the 18000+ favoring Barack Obama, including those who attended Obama's rally yesterday at DU (video). Not much more than the usual "excitement" and "change" platitudes. Audio and transcript of Obama's speech:
It is time for a new generation of leadership because the old politics just won't do. I am running for president right now because I have met Americans all across this country that cannot afford to wait another day. They understand what Dr. King meant when he said that we had to recognize the "fierce urgency of now." That is why the real choice in this campaign is not between regions, or religions, or genders. It is not about rich versus poor, young versus old, it's certainly not about black versus white. It is about the past versus the future.
Obama--all talk, no substance. Beware candidates whose appeal is primarily emotional.

Mitt Romney will be in Thornton tomorrow:
The Republican presidential hopeful has scheduled a "Change Begins With Us" stop at Freeway Ford, 4471 East Evans Ave. The hourlong event starts at 2 p.m.
Ron Paul will be at the Colorado Convention Center from 6-8pm, you can just follow the Ronulans (the ones with the tinfoil hats).

President Bush, in a fundraising visit for Senate candidate Bob Schaffer, stopped to meet and praise Jeanne Assam, who brought to a halt the fatal shootings at Christian centers last December.

This will probably represent the high point of attention for Colorado's voters until after the conventions.

Now with the caucus just a few days away, here are some of the thoughts of other conservative bloggers:

Joshua Sharf:
When you've been running for President for over four years, if you run out of money, money wasn't your problem.
He has more on the coming smears of John McCain should he be the GOP nominee, and his inability to deal with an unfavorable press.

Ben DeGrow asks, "have too many conservatives in the party gone mad?"

Labels: , , , , , ,

|

January 29, 2008

Colorado Caucus Gains Importance; **Update: Super Tuesday

**Updated and bumped to the top through Super Tuesday--scroll for caucus info**

<---Please take a moment to vote in SP's GOP poll, located to the left in the sidebar. Democrat caucus info/Republican caucus info

9NEWS has a short primer on caucus procedures for Democrats and Republicans


With the Super Duper Tsunami Tuesday Caucus/Primary Electionpalooza (or whatever the MSM is calling it) only 26 days away (thanks Ben for the reminder!), Colorado's relatively obscure caucus should garner not only record turnout with both parties lacking a clear frontrunner, but also increased attention from the candidates:
Colorado is bracing for possible record turnouts in the Feb. 5 presidential caucuses, as state voters get swept up in the country's election fever.

Massive turnouts at the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary indicate that voters want to play a pivotal role in the country's most open presidential seat in more than 50 years. And Colorado voters — on both sides of the aisle — are no different.
. . .
GOP and Democratic Party officials say they are expecting much higher participation at the caucuses than they have had in years. State GOP head Dick Wadhams said the intensity of the race was certain to bring out new attendees.

State Democrats have told their county precincts "to prepare for record turnout," said spokesman Matt Sugar, who noted that his party is involved in numerous caucus trainings.
. . .
Unlike Iowa and New Hampshire, Colorado does not have so-called open caucuses. Only those who registered as a Democrat or Republican by the first week in December can attend the caucuses. Unaffiliateds — the state's second-largest registered group — cannot show up and vote.

The state currently boasts just over 1 million Republicans, 994,575 unaffiliateds and 875,650 Democrats. Unaffiliateds have increased by about 50,000 since March, while Democrats went up about 25,000 and Republicans 12,000.

Colorado is one of more than 20 states taking part in what's known as Super Tuesday. The front-loaded nomination schedule has accelerated the process, which may potentially result in both parties producing a nominee by dawn on Feb. 6.

The country would then have a two-candidate race for nine months — a historical first.
Having a closed caucus will prevent unaffiliateds from skewing either party's selection--giving a clearer picture of what rank-and-file Colorado Democrats and Republicans view as their ideal candidate, while leaving pollsters and bloggers to speculate on just how the 2nd largest voting bloc in Colorado will break come November.

Ben DeGrow has a good roundup of Colorado caucus information
, including Jefferson and Douglas County GOP caucus gathering information and links. More from Colorado GOP Chairman Dick Wadhams.

Denver County GOP caucuses are arranged geographically, centered in the 9 State House districts that comprise the county:


District 1 - Kennedy High School
District 2 - Colorado Automobile Dealers Association offices
District 3 - Harvard Gulch Recreation Center, 550 East Iliff (Logan & Iliff)
District 4 - Lake Middle School
District 5 - Tivoli Auditorium, Auraria Campus
District 6 - Location 1: Windsor Gardens, 595 S. Clinton Street (Clinton & Alameda)
Location 2: Central Christian Church, 3690 Cherry Creek Drive South (Garfield & Cherry Creek Drive South)
District 7 - location TBD
District 8 - Park Hill Methodist Church, 5209 Montview Boulevard
District 9 - Hamilton Middle School, 8600 Dartmouth
DemNotes captures the excitement felt on the other side. Not every Democrat, however, knows which lever they will pull in the upcoming election:
Cory Madden, a student at the University of Denver, said part of his class is engaged in a youth voting project to get people involved in the presidential race.

He hasn't registered yet but plans to as a Democrat. However, he doesn't know which Democrat will get his vote.

"[Dude--ed.] I'm just not getting a huge political vibe yet," said Madden, 19, who is originally from Ohio.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

|

January 07, 2008

Election '08--Colorado's Bloggers Analyze Iowa, Critique The Debates, And Back Their Favorite GOP Candidates

For the first week of 2008, the conservative blogosphere in Colorado has issued prognostications, offered analysis, and revealed who they think the frontrunners are (or should be). A few have even endorsed their primary candidate, or more importantly, detailed who they won't be voting for should that candidate receive the GOP nomination.

Michael at Best Destiny insightfully details more ground that ALL of the GOP candidates should be steadfast in not ceding to the Democrats this election cycle.

Mr. Bob at the Daily Blogster explains
his (well-reasoned, IMO) to back Mitt Romney, and also his distaste for the over-the-top antics of radio personality Hugh Hewitt.

Jim at ThinkingRight also believes that Romney is the best of the leading candidates, and has analysis as well.

Meanwhile, Ben DeGrow remains a FredHead for as long as he sticks in the race.

Clay Calhoun, after an extended blog hiatus, offers his rundown of the marathon two-party debate Saturday evening--he likes Fred and Huck, can't stand Romney or Giuliani, and thinks McCain will get the GOP nod.

Phil Mella at ClearCommentary takes Barack Obama's foreign policy philosophy to task--would we be safe (from external threats/attacks) with Obama in the White House?

Labels: , , , , , , , , , ,

|

January 03, 2008

Iowa Caucus Roundup

**Update (via Drudge)
Obama 37.36; Edwards 29.97; Clinton 29.45
Huckabee 34; Romney 25; Thompson 14; McCain 13%; Paul 10%
Initial thoughts--nice finish for Fred Thompson

Michelle Malkin has a roundup, liveblogging


This post will be updated and amended as the results from the Iowa Caucus--the official start to this year's Presidential battle--come in this evening.

First, a comprehensive PJM roundup on all things Iowa.

Ben DeGrow has been following Fred Thompson's campaign, and did a little bit of results blognostication himself.

Michael at Best Destiny has a few thoughts as well.

Of course, 2008 will not only just be about electing a new commander-in-chief. Colorado's GOP has set its sights on reclaiming both houses of Colorado's legislature, by laying the groundwork for in this election and the mid-term 2010 election, targeting the Democrat-held Senate seat and the governor's mansion. Political cycles are no longer confined to the election year itself or even the normal two-year pattern (off year elections notwithstanding). The campaign for '08 began as soon as John Kerry conceded in November 2004. Republicans, having learned that their vaunted GOTV campaigns can not rescue hapless candidates in a poor political climate, must set to work building, or in some cases, re-building the grassroots elements of the party, and move away from the intraparty bickering and recriminations that have come to define recent primary campaigns, on both a local and national level. This will be put to the clearest test this year in the Presidential campaign, but will also have ramifications for GOP candidates on all levels. A permanent fracture would leave the GOP in permanent minority status, giving Democrats the keys to our government--and our future--not by losing the battle of ideas, but simply by default.

Wash Park Prophet has a post on the "irrational" voters--often those self-proclaimed "unaffiliateds" or "independents"--which might explain the rise of Ron Paul.

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

|

December 17, 2007

Thoughts On The Primary--Fred! Not Huckabee

**Update 2--another Fred! endorsement

**Update--Iowa Rep. Steve King endorses Fred Thompson, in clear and forceful terms (via Michelle Malkin)
Haven't had too much time finishing up this semester's work to keep up with the GOP primary--and since the first votes are literally just weeks away, the importance cannot be understated.

Ben at Mount Virtus has done a little looking, and his post on Fred Thompson (and his primary endorsement of Fred!) are certainly echoed here.

More primary thoughts over the next few weeks.

Labels: , , , , , , ,

|

October 29, 2007

Peace Rally In Denver; Moonbats At The World Series



This past Saturday I joined Drunkablog at the state capitol (excellent pictures at the link--including more Mercedes owners for peace) to soak in more liberal moonbattery and here are some highlights of the anti-war shindig (and hey, they managed to attract more than a couple dozen this time!):

Some video captured by the moonbats:



Photos from the rally (scroll for moonbat pics from World Series Game 3 at Coors Field):


Ron Paul's supporters seem to be everywhere these days


Flags of fury


Continuing the non-viable candidate theme, there was a smattering of Kucinich supporters as well


Democrats were under attack


Some moonbat anti-war profiteering


I'm sure every rally participant walked or biked to the event


That's so 2002!


Ward Churchill makes a literary appearance


Follow the incoherence, Democrats!


I'm sure they'd love us back . . . just like 9/11!


Everyone's a fascist according to the totalitarian moonbats


Progressivism isn't healthy, or hygienic


Some brave souls who wouldn't let the moonbats go unanswered



Denver was the center of the baseball universe this weekend, and the moonbats are like moths to the flame wherever cameras are found


Boston's sweep was an inside job!


The Paulians were at Coors Field for all the postseason games

Labels: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

|