The Colorado Democrat Star Chamber!

The Colorado Democrat Star Chamber!

What is up with all those negative political ads in my mail box?

Is it possible for a small number of very wealthy people to manipulate all the voters of a single state? Can as few as four individuals control all the politics/Voters in the Great State of Colorado?

Saul Alinsky believed and taught some people (the “Haves”) can direct their money to be politically advantaged, while others (the “Have-Nots”) can organize or create the illusion of a greater number of people, creating a populist movement.

Guess what…? Colorado has four “Haves”!

In 2004, or prior, the Colorado Gang of Four (Samuel “Rutt” Bridges, Patricia “Pat” Stryker, Timothy “Tim” Gill and Rep Jared Polis Schultz CO-2) got together to push their political agenda. They put a lot of money into political races to get their democrat friends elected. They got noticed for their political “philanthropy”. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pat_Stryker (They are philanthropists just like John Hickenlooper! Scary, Scary, Scary)

Four, more or less, “Progressives” moved politics in Colorado hard to the left. Now emboldened in 2006 they directed more money and used additional tactics (directing their funds to 527 and 501 c 4’s) to destroy opposition candidates. Their minions, like Colorado’s long time liberal pollster/political analyst Floyd Ciruli, present their agenda as the people’s movement, and in 2010 decry the Supreme Court’s decision in Citizens United v FEC (Federal Election Commission) as the reason for an increase in the 527 attack ads (those ads are being fueled by “Karl Rove and Big Corporations”, but there is no proof of that.).

What would happen if a group of “Haves” and some democrat politicians, community organizers and political operatives met for a strategy meeting with 527 and 501 c4 groups? I have found proof, from the 2008/2009/2010 election seasons that a number of the gang of four and some respected Colorado Democrat Politicians are involved with a Colorado Democrat “STRAGETY GROUP & 527 Coordinating Operatives”. http://www.freespeech.com/images/strategygroup.pdf

Looking at the above linked document we see some very interesting information. The names, Rutt Bridges, Tim Gil, Pat Stryker, Andrew Romanoff, Joan Fitz-Gerald, Ken Gordon, Julie Wells, etc. Some of these names are multimillionaires, some are/were at the time elected officials, and others are mostly unknown individuals/political operatives. Let’s look at some of the names who made up the Colorado Democrat strategy group.

Rutt Bridges – one of the “Gang of Four” multimillionaire, Board Chair of Colorado Democracy Alliance (CoDA) remember this group.
Tim Gill – member of the (Gang of Four) multimillionaire, “Money Man” Board Member of CoDA,.
Al Yates – Interim Director of CoDA, Pat Stryker’s (Gang of Four) political advisor. Seeing a trend?

Brownstein, Hyatt, Farber, Schreck et.al. (BHFS) Law Firm Employees - BHFS has been known in Colorado for many years as the home for democrat politicians and progressive lobbyists… (Hey, you are a prominent Dem and just lost your race or are term limited… come work for us; we need your name and influence, i.e. Federico Pena, etc.) Could coordination be going on through this law firm? http://thepodunkblog.blogspot.com/2008/08/brownsteinhyattfarberschreck.html

Ted Trimpa – Tim Gill’s (Gang of Four) political advisor and lobbyist at BHFS
Tim Gillmore – Legislative assistant at BHFS
Jennifer Brandenberry – Lobbyist Colorado Trial Lawyers Association

Politicians and Campaign Personnel/Operatives (“OTR” **off the record… are these the illegal actions of CO Dem Campaigns/Independent Expenditure Groups?)
Andrew Romanoff (D) – Speaker of the Colorado House/US Senate candidate “the peoples choice”, Co-Chair of a Colorado 527 – Mainstreet Colorado **OTR
Alice Madden (D) – Majority Leader CO House – Chair Colorado 527 – Mainstreet Colorado **OTR
Joan Fitz-Gerald (D) – CO State Senate President, Chair Colorado 527 – Moving Colorado Forward **OTR
Evan Dreyer – Ritter Campaign Manager **OTR

Union Thugs… There are a bunch SEIU, AFSCME, AFL-CIO, CEA, etc., but I found this one most interesting:
Carolyn Siegel – AFL-CIO Public Relations “educate the idiots” >>> idiots … idiots?, are they referring to us everyday Americans, the regular voters, non union working slobs (or is that scabs)?

There are a number of 527 Groups in Colorado, and a majority of them have one person in common Julie Wells.

Who is Julie Wells? She is the Registered Agent for most of the 527s during the 2008/2009/2010 election seasons, and prior. She is also notorious for a 2001 law suit against the City of Denver. “JULIE N. WELLS; FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION, INC.; THE COLORADO CHAPTER OF THE FREEDOM FROM RELIGION FOUNDATION, INC., Plaintiff - Appellant, v. CITY AND COUNTY OF DENVER Defendant” Apparently the Christmas Lighting display at City Hall is an affront to atheists, pagans… etc., and a violation of the establishment clause. http://openjurist.org/257/f3d/1132/julie-wells

Julie, Julie, Julie… You are the registered agent for a number of 527 groups and member of the Colorado Democrat “Strategy Group & 527 Coordinating Operatives”;
Democracy Alliance
Citizens for Colorado
Alliance for a Better Colorado
New West Fellowship
Colorado Voter Project
Too Extreme for Colorado (CD-7 527)
Coloradans for Life
Colorado’s on the Move
Accountability for Colorado IE Committee

(I am sure there are more I just have not found them yet.)

Oh, Julie who are Kevin Paul and Saskia Young-Dehring? (Just asking?)

So why did I notice your Accountability for Colorado IE Committee mail piece attacking my candidate for the Colorado State House? Because, it is filled with misinformation and outright lies… http://bendegrow.com/2010/ironically-named-accountability-for-colorado-dishing-up-vicious-anti-gop-smears-with-teacher-union-money/
Maybe, but your 527 Accountability for Colorado IE Committee, has blanketed the Great State of Colorado with similar ads, and mail pieces, which have been used to attack conservative and unaffiliated candidates. http://coloradoindependent.com/63924/ugly-attack-mailer-battle-moves-to-house-district-34


Julie, aren’t your democrat voters those who are asking all parties to stop the negative campaigning? John Hickenlooper keeps running into the shower with his clothes on and says they are. The voters are so niave. Sadly, My candidate has worked his tail off, while his opponent hasn’t lifted her finger. She has been able to rely on the political machine to do her work. She is even running again as a conservative, when her record in the legislature is nearly the most liberal there. Just like 2008. http://www.coloradostatesman.com/content/99522-opponents-hd-36-join-denouncing-attack-ad

The voters of Colorado should never trust any democrat in Colorado again. While much of my information is historic, I cannot believe that anything has changed in this election cycle. The democrats and “Gang of Four” continue to manipulate the voters of the Great State of Colorado and violate State and Federal election laws.

Gary Marshall or Su for HD36?

Hi, guys.

I just got polled tonight. Well not really, my son a Teamster Union member was the target, but he was not home. So, they asked if another registered voter was available. Of course as one of the precenct co-captians I think that I am an eligible and registered voter and I am totally available for a poll!

Our family is very conservative. The only reason my son is a teamster is because he works for UPS, and Colorado is not a "Right to Work" state. At one time the State Legislature passed a "Right to Work" bill and it was vetoed by then Gov. Roy Romer (D). Bad for Colorado, thank you colorado democrats, even Michigan the Union state is a "Right to Work State" how much political influence do the Unions in Colorado really have?

Back to the poll. It was conducted by "Research Center", which when goolged shows up as a conservative polling group. If you really drill down to the candidates the real pollster appears to be Myers Research & Strategic Services. Who is Myers Research & Strategic Services? From their web site we have the following:

"Myers Research Strategic Services is a full-service public opinion research firm specializing in electing Democrats at all levels and advancing progressive causes. We provide clients with a full range of public opinion research tools as well as on-going message and communications consulting. Since the firm was founded in 2002, we have won more races for Democrats in more states across the nation than any other polling firm, Democrat or Republican."
http://myersresearch.com/MYERS_WEBSITE/whoweare.php

They asked a number of questions:

If your were voting for position today would you vote for Dem or GOP... etc., they covered all of the state wide races then focused on our HD 36 race. They asked if I had knew of the candidates and if I had had any contact with the candidates. We all know that Gary has walked the precincts, and we have signs in our yards. The only contact we have received from Su Ryden are mailers from political interest groups, and 527's (Colorado Alliance for Working Families, Accountibility for Colorado, Friends of Su Ryden, etc.). There are no yard signs that I have seen while driving through the district, and Su has never been to my door.

We who worked hard for Kathy Green saw our yard signs disappear in the last election, and surprisingly they were all replaced by Su signs. It was suspected that temporary labor employed by unions like SEIU were tasked with replacing the GOP signs with Su's. All of the mailers from supporters of Su imply that she is very fiscally conservative and her opponents are all "TOO EXTREME FOR COLORADO". (This is an Alinsky tactic, "demonize and/or ridicule your opponent"). Look at Su's record in the state house and you will see that she is an extreme liberal/progressive. How intouch is that with the center right Colorado voters?

Who is intouch with the Colorado voters, liberal/progressive Ryden or Gary Marshall?

I think Gary is more of what we want in our district and in the state house. Vote for Gary!

DL

Please send this to your family and friends in HD36! Gary will be better for us and the citizens of the state!

Colorado Governors Race Enters the Alinsky Twilight Zone

“Imagine for a moment if you will… You're travelling through another dimension, a dimension not only of sight and sound but of mind; a journey into a wondrous land whose boundaries are that of imagination—next stop, the Twilight Zone!”
Rod Serling

We know that Barack Obama’s former chief of staff, Rahm Emanuel once said, “Never let a crisis go to waste”. It is my belief that some on the left truly understand the crisis to the liberal goal, of a progressive amerika, which is the grassroots teaparty.

We also know that as early as 1969 the concept of “strategic voting under the qualified majority rule” was being considered and developed. The concept is basically this. If you have “Qualified Majority Parties” and you pull enough votes away from one of those parties, they will loose their qualified status. This could effectively diminish the opposition party to the point that they became irrelevant. Traditionally, it has been considered extremely difficult, because different parties with their own agendas cannot garner enough votes from the other qualified majority parties, or build a large enough coalition from the minor parties for this strategy to be effective. http://www.nuffield.ox.ac.uk/economics/papers/2000/w7/qualified.pdf

Saul Alinsky believed and taught some people (the “Haves”) can direct their money to be politically advantaged, while others (the “Have-Nots”) can organize or create the illusion of a greater number of people, creating a populist movement. How interesting would it have been if Alinsky could have built a coalition of “Haves” and “Have-Nots”? He would be able to elect a black man to be President.

Some Alinsky strategies have been tried and include ridiculing or demonizing your opposition, to drive voters away from them. A great example is the ads from “independent” 527s used effectively in Colorado in the 2006 and 2008 elections. Remember the phrase “TOO EXTREME FOR COLORADO”. These ads were effective in costing good candidates their campaigns. They were not only used in statewide national races but also in the regional state and local races. (They are again being used in this election cycle.)

I wonder who paid for those ads in Colorado? Could it be the "Gang of Four"? Patricia (Pat) Stryker, Jared Polis, Tim Gill, and Rutt Bridges are known in Colorado political circles as the "Gang of Four". Significant political contributions from this group in 2006 and 2008 to favored Democratic candidates played a role in electing a Democratic majority in Colorado's house and senate.

The "Gang of Four" are an interesting group. According to New York Times reporter Matt Bai, Stryker attended the April 2005 meeting of the Democracy Alliance. “The Democracy Alliance, founded in 2005, is a partnership of change-makers who seek to strengthen democracy by partnering with, making human and financial investments in, and fostering collaboration among leaders and institutions committed to realizing a vision of a more progressive America.” It has strong ties to union groups, like the astro-turfing Service Employees International Union (SEIU), who bussed in groups of people to Democrat Town hall meetings in the summer of 2009 and more recent events. Democracy Alliance was founded with major funding from Tim Gill and George Soros. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Alliance

It has been suggested that Alinsky’s strategy of infiltration has been used in teaparty groups. http://alinskydefeater.wordpress.com/2010/04/12/infiltration-of-the-tea-party-is-an-alinsky-tactic/

What would happen if an infiltrator became a teaparty candidate? Sneaky Dems Plant Phony Tea Party Candidate in NJ Congressional Race
http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2010/07/sneaky-dems-plant-phony-tea-party.html )

Jumping back into the Twilight Zone of the Colorado’s Governors race… What if a great number of Democrat Infiltrators became first time delegates to the republican state assembly? What if Dan Maes, the populist candidate, was a Democrat Infiltrator, or a group of Democrat “Haves” like our “Gang of Four” saw him as a weaker candidate than the other GOP candidates? Could they have exploited their financial power to see that he won his primary? A 527 known as the Freedom Fund ran a number of negative ads against GOP Candidate Scott McInnis just prior to the state primary. “(Colorado) Secretary of State records list Julie Wells as the registered agent on eight 527 or political committees, all featuring large contributions from philanthropists Pat Stryker of Fort Collins and Tim Gill of Denver.” http://tinyurl.com/27j4o3e (Isn’t Hickenlooper a “philanthropist”?)

Since Dan Maes won the GOP Primary, he has continued to torpedo his own canoe, and by doing so is sinking the Colorado GOP to the bottom of the South Platte. His most recent faux pas seems to be an endorsement of his opponent’s economic plan. “We’ve seen several major Republican businessmen back John Hickenlooper, so I would absolutely trust the Mayor when it comes to the economic health of our state and the business community…”, said Maes. http://blogs.denverpost.com/thespot/2010/10/11/maes-backs-hickenloopers-economic-policies/16133/ If the most important issue in the race is the economy, why would any candidate endorse his opponent’s plan?

Was this the grand old plan of the progressives? Infiltrate the Republican Party to insure their guy (Hick) wins. (possibly) How about a bigger more risky step to create a situation where the party self destructs and loses its “Qualified Majority” Status. Could the “vast left wing” conspirators be that clever? (I think not.) It is interesting to see that if you can put up a bad enough candidate you can force party loyalists to demand that voters put the interest of the party’s “Qualified Majority” status over the party’s own principles.

In the end, for principled Colorado conservatives there is only one choice for Governor. That choice is Tancredo. The long term damage from four more years of the progressive agenda is too great for the people of the Great State of Colorado.

DL

Garmin is Misleading the Enviro-Lemmings with Bad Science

So this is the story. My sons bought me a GPS for Father’s day. I did my research and finally picked out a Garmin Nuvi a couple of weeks ago. It is really a pretty cool toy! The Nuvi has an awesome EcoChallenge feature, which tracks mileage, fuel economy, trip efficiency, etc. The user inputs the fuel economy averages for city and highway driving, their fuel cost and the Nuvi calculates the rest. One of the included features is the users Carbon Footprint Estimate. However, according to my calculations their software is flawed resulting in an errant Carbon Footprint Estimate.

I am including my exchange with Garmin Support.

Dear Garmin,
How is the carbon footprint calculated by my Nuvi? I don't think it is at all accurate.

Dear Don,
Thank you for contacting Garmin International. I am happy to assist you.

When you enter your car information and fuel information. It will track how fast you drive and so on and use a its [sic] program to get you a good idea of what your footprint might be. It is only a [sic] idea it will not be 100%. it [sic] is made to help you try to do a few thing different like keep at a good speed and thing [sic] like that.

Please let me know if I can help further.

With Best Regards,
Dustin P.
Product Support Specialist

Dear Garmin,
Thank you, I understand the concept. My question is more correctly this, how does the EcoChallenge software make the calculation? The reason I ask is when dealing with matter, volume, and mass you cannot increase the mass of a substance. (Didn’t we learn this at some point in our middle school science class at the public school?)

For instance in my situation I used 13.8 gallons of gasoline the weight of that amount of fuel is just under 85 lbs. If the gasoline was made up of only carbon molecules, then my maximum carbon emissions could only weigh just under 85 lbs. (We know that fuel has many molecular elements which make up the chemical we know as gasoline, so the carbon mass of the emissions is much smaller.) The volume of the fuel as a liquid will be smaller than the volume of the same fuel as a gas (vapor) having less density, resulting in fewer molecules of carbon per cubic centimeter, however the mass will not have changed. The calculation from my Nuvi suggests my carbon footprint is nearly three times that amount at 249 lbs. Garmin’s EcoChallenge software is flawed providing misleading results. If we want to be serious and clear about the "Global Warming – Climate Change" debate we should ensure that we are using accurate science with valid results. A small deviation of even 10 percent in accuracy would be more tolerable than a 300 percent error.

Dear Don,
Thank you for contacting Garmin International. I will be happy to help you with this.

Unfortunately the information you are requesting is proprietary information. Our engineering team does not release the specifics of how our products work.

If there is anything else I can help you with feel free to email me back.

With Best Regards,
Anthony G.
Product Support Specialist

Dear Garmin,

I still love my Nuvi. I like that it calculates my gas mileage for every tank of gas, but I don’t trust your EcoChallenge Carbon Footprint Estimate. I will say again, “If we want to be serious and clear about the "Global Warming – Climate Change" debate we should ensure that we are using accurate science…” Not just fear mongering.

I am not an Enviro-Lemming.

DL

The Stinker's Picks for the Primary

What started as a promising election year, at the Colorado GOP State Assembly, has turned out to have some unexpected twists. The spoiler, Tom Tancredo, is jumping in to the fray to make it even more twisted. In my opinion, Tancredo should stay out of this and let the process resolve itself.

So, let me give you my picks for the primary.

In the Governor’s race we have Scott McInnis and Dan Maes. Both candidates have turned out to have their share of weaknesses. No matter the outcome, I think that in the General election we will end up with the coronation of Colorado’s Liberal Media Darling Governor John Hickenlooper.

The plagiarism allegations against McInnis may not be totally his fault. Some responsibility should rest on his researcher as well. It is a best practice to cite sources when research is provided, even when the research is not being published, so that the research can be verified. McInnis is a family friend so these developments certainly come with a great deal of disappointment.

Maes on the other hand continues to have some significant questions unanswered concerning his financial situation, and claims of being a successful businessman. How close is Maes to bankruptcy and a foreclosure on his Evergreen, CO home? What is the truth behind his campaign’s financial irregularities?

In the Governor’s race my choice will remain Scott McInnis.

Thankfully, the US Senate race is a lot clearer. After the GOP Assembly and a successful petition process, I would have preferred that Jane Norton participated in the GOP Assembly process. Norton is a genuinely nice person, who listens and seems to have the desire to truly represent the citizens of the state. I think as a conservative woman Norton irritates the Denver Media, which in itself would be reason to vote for her.

Ken Buck generated a lot of support early, as the dark horse tea-party conservative candidate. His ethics have been questioned, concerning the Golyansky affair. He has other ethical issues, which will be exposed during the campaign. As Weld County District Attorney, his seizure of confidential tax records to investigate identity theft by illegal immigrants without probable cause, will become fodder for the media. Wait until Colorado’s Liberal Media alleges Buck’s “racist” treatment of immigrants. Is Buck a little too cozy with the Democrat Party? Remember, Ritter was the best man at Buck’s Wedding. Is Buck as conservative as he wants the GOP voters to believe, or is he Colorado’s Arlen Specter?

In the US Senate race Jane Norton will get my vote.

Colorado’s 7th Congressional District candidates Ryan Frazier and Lang Sias both have military service, a plus for any candidate. Frazier came from a modest background, learning the value of family, faith, education and hard work along the way. Frazier is a small businessman, co-founder of a charter school, community leader, who is dedicated to the needs of his constituents.

While impressive to listen to Lang Sias, the Top Gun, Lawyer, only recently joined the party. Sias was registered as an independent, a democrat, an independent, and now a republican, has he made up his mind? Sias only recently moved to the district, from Colorado’s 2nd Dist. Sias hasn’t exercised his duty by voting in the past ten years. Sias contributed to the Congressional Campaign of Mark Udall. Sias's attacks on Frazier's missed "Final Votes" on the Aurora Council, might make good headlines, they are not necessarily the key votes nor do they accrurately reflect Aurora's process (the final votes are a mere formality, which is something that Sias supporter Former Mayor Paul Tauer should know).

Ryan Frazier is the best candidate to beat the incumbent in this race.

In the State Treasurer’s race we have J.J. Ament and Walker Stapleton. Both candidates seem to have similar financial business experience, with Ament gaining the edge in having experience working with the State as a client, to finance higher-education capital construction projects. While Stapleton is a newcomer to the state, he has family roots here. Ament is a native of the state.

My choice is J.J. Ament in this race.

So my lineup is McInnis for Governor, Norton for US Senate, Frazier for CO-7th District, Ament for CO Treasurer.

For full disclosure as a long time party activist (over 34 years), in this election cycle, I have contributed to the Norton and Frazier Campaigns, and have done volunteer work for Frazier.

Open Letter to Betsy Markey (D) CO-4 and the Colorado Democrat Delegation

Betsy Markey,

You should be ashamed!

What deal did Nancy Pelosi and Barack H Obama make with you for your Yes vote?

When you know that this YES vote will cost you your house seat! Additionally, you will lose your house retirement because you have only served one term.

When Nancy Pelosi was elected as speaker, she pledged to have the most ethical congress ever. when Barack H Obama ran for and was elected president he pledged to have transparency and change the politics as usual in Washington DC. I do not think that the American people expected the corruption, bribery, pay-offs, back-room dealing, lack of transparency, and chicago style politics that they are currently engaging in.

The Senate Bill Mandates Abortion! Not only with Government Funding but it mandates private funding of abortion. Each plan enrollee must pay a fee for "ABORTION SERVICES"!!! This will be the law if this bill is passed.

The Secretary of Health and Human Services will determine the fee for ABORTION SERVICES of not less than $1.00 per enrollee in an insurance plan. That means my four week old granddaughter, my two year old grandson, my three sons, their wives, my wife and I must pay to murder innocent americans, even when we conscientiously object to this horrific pro-abort holocaust!

The constitution guarantees three unalienable rights, Life Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness. No rights are safe when the right to life is not. I believe that abortion is murder. At the moment of conception a unique individual is created. This is proven by science. An individual's DNA is unique at the first cell split.

If you vote yes for this bill, the reconciliation and "deemed to be passed" maneuver/Slaughter Rule you will be violating your oath of congress to protect and defend the constitution of the United States. If you vote yes for this bill you will be authorizing the homicide of every aborted child. You will be responsible for the horrific holocaust that each abortion creates.

The house leaders cannot guarantee that the senate will pass the reconciliation bill. If the senate does not pass the reconciliation bill the senate bill will be the law of the land, with no remedy for the problems it creates.

When you vote yes, you are voting against the majority of the constituents in your district, and all districts in the country. What part of idea that you are the representative of the people in your district do you not understand?

I would ask that you reconsider and vote NO on this measure. Kill this bill and start over with realistic and practical solutions for health care.

I pledge to you and the colorado democrat party, that until the day I die I will work to insure that your party loses each seat it currently holds, and does not win back any of those seats.

yours,

Don Lewis

P.S. Carpet Bagging Senator Michael Bennet, I just saw your latest advertisement, in which you say you are listening to the people of Colorado. You are not, stop lying!

Note, I would encourage the readers of this blog to copy and edit this entry, email/fax/link distribute it to your representatives.

The Obama/Sebelius Health Care Reform Insidious Abortion Mandate

It might just be me, but it looks like the Senate Bill has created a Federal Abortion Surcharge/Tax, merely disguised as an insurance premium. The Abortion Services fee is mandated for all Insurance Plan's offering "Abortion Services". If your employer selects a plan offering "Abortion Services", YOU will be paying to kill babies. If you are a person who believes in the sanctity of all life, Atheist, Catholic, pro-life Christian, buddhist, etc., this will be a violation, a mandate against your beliefs. And this legislation creates an accounting nightmare, which requires separate accounts for "Abortion Services" as well as premium payments, for your healthcare.

The Senate Bill, passed on December 24, 2009, requires/mandates (this will be the law) that private insurers charge a fee of, at a minimum, $1 per enrollee per month, to be set aside for "Abortion Services" (the actual "Fee"... yet to be determined by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius, who said... "don't worry women's reproductive services [abortion] is covered by Obamacare"). When Obamacare is made law, "Abortion Services" must be covered by private insurance. This means that everyone covered by the "plan" must pay the "Abortion Services Fee". If you have a family with children, their enrollment in the plan requires you to pay the fee for yourself, your spouse, and your children, regardless of age. Your baby, your 5 year old, etc., will be paying for abortions, through your plan. Will Medicaid providers be required to pay this "Fee"? If so your 95 year old GrandPa, who will never need this service, will be paying as well. Will any of these payers require an abortion? I think not. Should a person be required to pay for something they did not purchase? NO!!! This is a tax! This is un-American!

Additionally, the "Abortion Services Fee" must be paid separately from the rest of the premium payment, into separate accounts (to fund the murder of our most precious assets, our children) for (B)(i) and (B)(ii) funding requirements (sounds like a tax to me). The fee will be determined by the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. (Section 1303. Special Rules Pages 2069-2078), blah, blah, blah...

‘‘(i) collect from each enrollee in the plan (without regard to the enrollee’s age, sex, or family status) a separate payment for each of the following:

‘‘(I) an amount equal to the portion of the premium to be paid directly by the enrollee for coverage under the plan of services other than services de- scribed in paragraph (1)(B)(i) (after reduction for credits and cost- sharing reductions described in subparagraph (A)); and

‘‘(II) an amount equal to the actuarial value of the coverage of services described in paragraph (1)(B)(i), and

‘‘(ii) shall deposit all such separate payments into separate allocation accounts as provided in subparagraph (C).

In the case of an enrollee whose premium for coverage under the plan is paid through employee payroll deposit, the separate payments required under this subparagraph shall each be paid by a separate deposit.

Does any one really read this legislation? Nancy Pelosi was quoted today, 3/10/2010, "We need to Pass this bill to see what is in it". This terrifies me and should terrify you!!! My own Representative (Democrat Ed Perlmutter CO-7, who voted for Stimulus, Cap and Tax, and the Health Care Bill passed previously by the House of Representatives), admitted on the floor during the arguments before approving the Stimulus Bill, that "he did not need to read the bill before voting, because he was told what was in it". Is this the representation you expect when you pull the lever in your voting booth?

It is an irony, that the legislation has a section requiring "(B) USE OF PLAIN LANGUAGE.—The information required to be submitted under subparagraph (A) shall be provided in plain language...." Maybe 'we the people' should require that all legislation be required to meet the 'Use of Plain Language' requirement. (page 2080 line 8)

Call your "Representatives"(Congressmen/women and Senators) and demand that they vote no on the health care reform bill, so that they do not make you fund the murder of innocents! Demand that they start over and create a realistic bill that moves incrementally and does not allow the Government to take over and destroy the best health care system on this earth!

DL

Glendale Cherry Creek Chronicle Voorhis/Ritter/Villafuerte

In an effort to cover the news that the Denver mainstream media won't the independent newspaper Glendale Cherry Creek Chronicle covered the Voorhis hearing. This is their report.
Thanks to Charles C. Bonniwell.

Voorhis Hearing Explodes With Accusations Against Ritter
ICE Agent Asserts That Ritter’s Office Was Involved In Obstruction Of Justice

by Charles C. Bonniwell

The long anticipated hearing for former Immigration and Customs
Enforcement (ICE) agent Cory Voorhis to regain his federal job back
was heard in a federal courtroom in the Byron Rogers Courthouse in
downtown Denver on January 18 and 19. The Voorhis controversy
had resulted in the withdrawal of Stephanie Villafuerte’s nomination
for United States Attorney on December 14, 2009, and many believe
it had a significant role, directly or indirectly, in Governor Bill Ritter’s
decision not to seek a second term as governor of Colorado.

The hearing was in the U.S. Tax Court courtroom to accommodate
the large number of spectators wanting to attend the hearing. The
Department of Homeland Security had originally sought to prevent
the hearing from being public claiming “security” concerns. On the
first day of the proceeding a large number of law enforcement
officers stood guard outside giving the hearing an Oklahoma City
Bombing trial atmosphere.

Charges Of Unauthorized Access
Voorhis had been accused by then candidate and later Governor
Ritter of illegally accessing a confidential federal crime base to benefit
his Republican opponent Bob Beauprez in the 2006 governor’s contest.
Countercharges were then made by the Beauprez campaign that
Ritter’s close and longtime aide, Stephanie Villafuerte, had been
involved in illegally accessing the same database on behalf of the
Ritter campaign. The exact nature of the relationship between
Governor Ritter and Villafuerte also became a matter of intense
speculation when it caused her to be nominated as United States
Attorney for Colorado. Her withdrawal of her nomination on December
14 was followed by Governor Ritter’s announcement three weeks later
that he would not seek a second term as governor in order to spend
more time withhis family.

Voorhis had been indicted in federal court for unauthorized access
to the database but was found not guilty by a jury in April of last
year. Notwithstanding the verdict, ICE fired Voorhis shortly after
the federal trial. The former ICE agent was now attempting to get
his job back. Voorhis had not testified at his criminal trial and the
hearing was the first time he took the stand to give his side of the
story and his testimony was explosive.

Voorhis Testifies
Taking the stand on the second day of the hearing, he testified that
he had been outraged that in an August 23, 2006, article in the
Rocky Mountain News, former Denver District Attorney Bill Ritter
then claimed that he was tough on those illegally in the country when
they committed serious crimes. Voorhis testified that Ritter and his
D.A.’s office would in fact simply dismiss charges against illegal
immigrants once ICE indicated that they would deport the individual
if convicted.

Voorhis also claimed that Ritter’s office routinely plea bargained
serious feloniesdown to minor misdemeanors such as “Agricultural
Trespass.” Among those given plea bargain deals were, according to
Voorhis, dangerous gang members who later went on to commit serious
crimes including sexual assault on minors. One such person was
Carlos Estrada Medina, aka Walter Ramo, who was the subject of a
Beauprez campaign ad in October 2006.

Voorhis testified that the practice in Ritter’s office got so bad that
American citizens would falsely claim they were illegal aliens so that
charges against them would be dropped or plea bargained down to
minor misdemeanors. He went on to testify that he believed Ritter
and his office’s actions constituted criminal obstruction of justice.

Results Pending
The cross examination of Voorhis by Government attorney Robert
Erbe was anxiously awaited. Erbe did not appear to significantly dent
Voorhis’ allegations against Ritter, or his defense that he only gave to
John Marshall, Beauprez’s campaign manager who he stated he
believed was a congressional staffer, publicly available information.
After the hearing Voorhis stated that he was glad to finally tell his
side of the story and thanked the many people who had supported
him in what has taken almost four years of his life and left him with
over three quarters of a million dollars in legal bills.

Among those attending the hearing were former gubernatorial
candidate Bob Beauprez and his wife. Beauprez indicated after the
hearing that he believed that Voorhis had been vindicated by the
two days of testimony. His impression seemed to be
seconded by many who attend the hearing.

Beth Johnson of Denver stated, “If you took a vote among those
attending the hearing, I would bet that 99 percent would say they
believe that Cory Voorhis should be given back his job based on the
testimony.” She went on to note, “Of course, what those attending
the hearing think doesn’t really matter. It is all up to the
administrative law judge.”

The administrative law judge, Jeremiah Cassidy, asked the attorneys
to submit written closing briefs and he is expected to make a written
ruling in 60 to 90 days.

www.glendalecherrycreek.com

####

History and Legacies - The Peoples Seat in the Senate is now Scott Brown's!

It is fitting that Scott Brown won the special election in, the democrat stronghold, Massachusetts for the Senate seat long held by Edward "Teddy" Kennedy. It is fitting for two reasons, historical and the end of a legacy.

From a historical perspective we need to go back to Boston of 1773. Caused by two issues in colonial America, the first Boston Tea Party was the result of financial problems of the British Empire, and disputes surrounding the extent of authority exercised by Parliament. This past summer we began seeing a rising swell among the citizenry leading to the second "Tea Party" movement. As the Administration and Congress moved forward their agenda, without regard to the input of the opposition party or the people who elected them, who they are supposed to represent.

Voter discontent began with out of control spending and culminated in secret meetings and negotiations to jam legislation down on the American public. A congress and administration that promised to be the most ethical in history and to provide transparency has shown little of their promises to the public.

The first small wave has splashed on the shore of American politics, its impact has closed a chapter of modern American History, the Kennedy Political Legacy. Once known as Camelot the Kennedy dynasty has come to an end with the election of Republican Scott Brown to the senate seat, which was long held by Ted Kennedy and is now known as the peoples seat.

This election should serve notice to the Administration and the Democrat controlled Congress, that what started as a small ripple among a disgruntled electorate has the potential to become a red tidal wave this November.

Obama, Pelosi and Reid how are you going to handle this notice? Are you going to continue your business as usual methods, or are you going to listen to the people you serve?

Stimulus Jobs Created in Actual Congressional Districts and Zipcodes

Stimulus: Jobs for Colorado's Seventh District, I think we have a Culture of Corruption here, don't you?

Representative Ed Perlmutter (D) CO 7th, is proud of the Stimulus Bill he supported, even when he admitted on the floor of congress that he didn't read it. Perlmutter reports that his support of the Stimulus Bill created jobs for his district. Let's fact check the jobs he says he created for Colorado's seventh district.

Let's look at the Alliance For Sustainable Energy, LLC., who was awarded several contracts, but we will examine just this one, $159,559,420.00 for a contract in Golden/Lakewood Colorado. This contract reports to create 42 jobs, for $159.5 million dollars, which works out to be nearly 3.8 million per job. (Ed, I think we could have paid a lot of people to do absolutely nothing with that money and it would have made more of a impact on our economy.)

You would expect that a company awarded $159.5 million dollars of your tax dollars would have a web site offering the 42 jobs they created from your stimulus tax dollars, in your district. Let's go to the company website to find their jobs.

http://www.allianceforsustainableenergy.org/Default.aspx

Examining their website we find no jobs being offered, no Human Resources Department, and no real company only five proposed leaders, from the website which has a creation date of 2008. Interestingly these company leaders are/were/have been, previous to July 2008 when this was created, all associated with NATIONAL RENEWABLE ENERGY LABORATORY (NREL) a government program that is part of the Department of Energy (can you say culture of corruption?).

NREL began operating in 1977 as the Solar Energy Research Institute. It was designated a national laboratory of the US Department of Energy (DOE) in September 1991 and its name changed to NREL. We do see references to press releases from two companies which have joined in a partnership to create this LLC (Limited Liability Company). Battelle and Midwest Research Institute have joined together to manage the NREL facility in Golden Colorado which is part of the seventh congressional district.

BATTELLE, a company headquartered in Columbus Ohio has one job offering at their website, which is in Colorado in the energy sector. That job is located in Pueblo, CO, not part of the seventh district, but part of the third congressional district, Rep John Salazar (D) CO 3rd, brother of Department of Interior Secretary Ken Salazar.

MIDWEST RESEARCH INSTITUTE located in Kansas City, MO is offering no positions in Colorado in any congressional district.

So let's go to the NREL website and search for Battelle/MRI jobs. there are no jobs from this group. It appears that there is a single job in the state of Colorado which has been created by Battelle. It is not located in the 7th Congressional district.

As a citizen and taxpayer, do you expect a program that has been funded by the Department of Energy since 1977 would not be continued to be funded? Is this stimulus money more than what we would have already funded? If it is what happened to the money we already and/or would have designated to this program? Why was $159.5 million spent on this existing funded program and no real jobs where created?

Ed you have some explaining to do. The Alliance For Sustainable Energy, LLC was awarded approximately 20 contracts from the stimulus money according to Recovery.gov, which was over $1 billion dollars. They currently have no jobs offered in Colorado, but one of their partner corporations, Battelle offers one, which is not even in your district.

www.allianceforsustainableenergy.org
Alliance For Sustainable Energy
1617 Cole Boulevard
Lakewood, CO 80401-3305
(720) 279-6746

DL