Skip to main content

Asshat Congressman accuses Colorado Governor of ... treason?

Governor Bill Ritter (D) recently signed a bill that stymies the US Army's attempt to expand training areas into Colorado ranchland. I have absolutely no idea whether or not this is a good bill, but I hardly think it merits this response from Representative Mike Coffman (R):

“The Governor clearly has no concept about the training and readiness needs of our combat forces. By signing H.B. 1317, a bill that blocks the Army’s ability to expand training areas, the Governor has sent a very clear message that the men and women who serve our nation in uniform are not welcome here.

I think he would be more sympathetic if the U.S. Army were to declare itself a terrorist organization - since he is going out of his way to block the Army while at the same time laying out a welcome mat to house terrorists from Guantanamo Bay.”


The Colorado Independent points out a bizarre twist to this story: the MSM is apparently refusing to cover it:

Equally curious to Coffman’s over-the-top rant is the selective editing by the Denver Post and Associated Press who excised the Aurora Republican’s acrimonious charges from their stories.

Neither outlet printed the full statement nor apparently asked the congressman to expand on his invective over the new law that bars the state from selling or leasing land to the Army to expand the Piñon Canyon Maneuver Site near La Junta. The plan is largely opposed by local ranchers and residents who filed a lawsuit in federal court to stop what they characterize as a land grab by the Army.


Free political speech? Absolutely.

Moronic political speech? Unquestionably.
Labels:

Comments

Miko said…
I suspect that military consideration had very little importance in the decision. Coloradoans tend to resist the expansion of just about everything in an effort to preserve open space (partly for environmental reasons and partly to force property values up to artificially high levels).
June 5, 2009 at 2:36 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...
44 comments
Read more

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...
70 comments
Read more

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...
31 comments
Read more