Is Hickenlooper losing his bid for the Presidential run?

firm Public Policy Polling adds to that portrait of political pain today with the second part of their statewide survey, which shows a scant 21% of voters would like to see Hickenlooper run for president.

An overwhelming 65% of Coloradans don’t want Hick to run.

The first part of their survey found Hick’s negatives skyrocketing, with an increase of 18 points in his disapproval rating.

With most other states in the union shying away from gun control, and the damage to his brand and polling numbers, we’re betting Governor Hickenlooper is having second thoughts about doing New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s bidding.

A few other noteworthy bits from the poll:

• Secretary of State Gessler, despite being barraged with attacks by Democrats for most of the last two years, is beating declared Democratic candidate for SOS, Ken Gordon, 42%-38%. No wonder the Colorado Democratic Party backed off their threat of a recall campaign against Gessler.
• President Barack Obama’s numbers are falling. After winning Colorado by 5 points in 2012, his approval rating is now under water at 48% approval to 50% disapproval. This could negatively impact Democrats in 2014 if it continues to sink.
• Independents oppose gun control by a 49%-46% margin. We’re betting that margin is far higher among independents who count guns as an issue that will change their vote.

Our buddies over at Colorado Pols laughingly assert that Hickenlooper is facing a backlash from the left over his unqualified support for oil and gas drilling. Unfortunately, we know they’re pushing that line only because Pols‘ co-founder Jason Bane is employed in communications by the environmental group, Western Resource Advocates. Despite the enviros best attempts to muddy up Hick for his love of fracking, a whopping 94% of self-described “very liberal” voters approve of Hick’s job performance.

Great work, enviro guys.

Hick’s stock is definitely falling, but it ain’t among those on the far left. He’s seeping support from the all-important middle.

I’d like to thank the Glenwood Springs Post Independent for agreeing to publish a monthly column about happenings at the state Capitol. I’ve agreed to keep it nonpartisan and avoid advocating a specific position on the many bills passing under the dome.

My hope is to inspire interest and engage the reader to follow the historic 69th Colorado General Assembly. I’m honored to serve as your representative and be able to communicate my experiences in government with you.

Click here to read more http://bit.ly/147OG8w

“Our company [Magpul] could not, in good conscience, continue to manufacture our products in a state where law-abiding citizens are prohibited from purchasing and owning them. ” Founder, President and CEO of Magpul Industries Richard Fitzpatrick said in a statement. “The passage of this bill will do nothing to enhance public safety, but will force us to immediately begin taking our business to another state.”

Beyond the public policy deliberations related to HB 1224, there are significant legal defects and enforcement issues surrounding HB 1224. These issues were not resolved through the legislative process and, under the state constitution, it is the responsibility of the Governor, “who shall take care that the laws be faithfully executed,” to address the significant legal defects of HB 1224. (Colorado Constitution Article IV, Section 2).

To read the entire legal argument submitted to Gov. Hickenlooper by MagPul on 03/15/2013, click the link, or click on the images below. MagPul 1224 veto (2)

On Tuesday, Hudak, D-Westminster, told the victim who was testifying against a bill banning concealed-carry weapons on Colorado college campuses that–“statistics are not on your side even if you had a gun.”  Now, The Denver Post has reported that Hudak was not only disrespectful to a victim of rape, but was misrepresenting the statistics she cited from the Violence Policy Center.

“Sen. Hudak was profoundly disrespectful to a victim of rape who took the time out of her day to share her story and fight for the right of women to protect themselves from violent crimes,” Colorado Republican Committee Chairman Ryan Call said.  “Now we’re learning that Sen. Hudak was also misrepresenting the statics she cited.”

Hudak told the victim who was testifying that the data from the Violence Policy Center shows “for every one woman who used a handgun to kill someone in self-defense, 83 were murdered by them.”  Yet the Center told The Denver Post that “no data exist for instances of a woman killed by a man who used her gun against her.”

“An apology won’t make up for Sen. Hudak’s hurtful words, but it is simply the right thing for her to do,” Call added.  “Before Sen. Hudak tows the Democratic Party line and votes to make it more difficult for women to protect themselves from violent criminals, she must stand on the Floor of the state Senate and apologize for both her insensitive comments and for misleading Coloradans.”

According to The Associated Press, the dramatic spike in health insurance costs will begin in January 2014, as Obamacare begins to take effect.

“Sen. Mark Udall, owes an apology to every person that will lose her job or health insurance because of this price hike,” Colorado Republican Committee Chairman Ryan Call said.  “Sen. Udall was sent to Washington to fight on behalf of Colorado’s working families, but Obamacare will cost taxpayers an additional $1 trillion over the next decade and will make it much harder for employers to provide good health insurance benefits to their employees.”

The report further warned small business owners and other job creators to expect “volatility of cost on a month-to-month basis and even higher costs some years.”

Call added that Washington should be trying to encourage businesses to grow by giving them certainty, not making it more costly to do business and impossible for them to plan for the future–

“Ask any small business owner in Colorado, and they’ll tell you that skyrocketing health care prices that will change month-to-month and year-to-year make it more difficult for them to create jobs. If Sen. Udall really cares about the people of Colorado, he must support the complete repeal of Obamacare.”

GARFIELD COUNTY REPUBLICAN WOMEN held their reorganizational meeting…….congratulations to newly elected SHIRLEY STARR, president and BECKY GREMILLION, vice president…….BRAVO.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
February 19, 2013

Chairman Ryan Call calls on Rep. Joe Salazar to issue a sincere apology to Colorado Women

Last week State Rep. Joe Salazar (D- Thornton) insulted women and proved definitively that he does not take the issues of women’s safety seriously. On the floor of the Colorado House of Representatives he stated that women should not have the right to carry a weapon on a college campus because they may mistakenly shoot someone if they “feel” like they may be in danger or they “feel” like they could be raped.

“It’s why we have call boxes, it’s why we have safe zones, it’s why we have the whistles, because you just don’t know who you’re gonna be shooting at. And you don’t know if you feel like you’re gonna be raped, or if you feel like someone’s been following you around or if you feel like you’re in trouble when you may actually not be, that you pop out that gun and you pop … pop a round at somebody,” stated Rep. Salazar.

Rep Salazar followed up his comments with an apology that fell dramatically short of acknowledging the insensitivity and callousness of his comments, merely saying, “I am sorry if my remarks offended anyone.”

“The safety of women on our college campuses should be a top priority for legislators on both sides of the aisle.” stated Colorado Republican Chair Ryan Call.  “To attempt to use this kind of an example is profoundly demeaning to women and implies they are incapable of responsible gun ownership because of their gender.”

“Colorado women deserve a real apology for his insensitive and demeaning remarks.  Perhaps even more importantly, citizens deserve to know why Representative Salazar and his Democrat colleagues are unwilling to trust responsible, law-abiding women in the exercise of their constitutionally-guaranteed rights, and why they want to create gun-free zones on our college campuses that put young women and others at significant risk,” Call concluded.

###

HB 1224 -Prohibiting large capacity ammunition magazines passing 34/31. Representative Rankin’s speech from the floor:

“This bill is based on hope. I, too, have hope.

This bill is based on the best of intentions and I, too, have good intentions.

This bill is based on the idea that we must do something. I want to do something.

But this bill is based on the premise that the “split second” that it takes a mass murderer to change magazines will allow response. Hopefully from a courageous citizen who posses a gun and knows how to use it.

How often do mass murders occur? When armed citizens have responded have they waited for a magazine change?

What good will this bill really do and what price are we willing to pay for this hope, for this split second.

Are we willing to sacrifice hundreds of jobs in manufacturing and sport hunting?

Are we willing to polarize our citizens?

Are we willing to violate the constitution for this rarely occurring split second that has never been shown to matter?

Are we even working on the right problem?

Perhaps we should limit magazine size in video games.

Let’s have hope, let’s do something. But let’s do something that matters, something that our citizens accept, and something that doesn’t violate our Constitution.

Defending the Second Amendment

I have been asked by many constituents about my position regarding the Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States, specifically with regard to my position as your Sheriff and defending those rights. I cannot respond to every inquiry, so I hope this paper will define my position. There are several key points to consider including our absolute right to keep and bear arms under the Second Amendment, the compromise of managing that right as well as the enforcement of state laws.

Simply put, I cannot and will not compromise my rights afforded me and others under the Constitution of the United States, particularly the Second Amendment. The starting point and ending point of our position should be that the rights of law abiding citizens to “keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed”. That last phrase, carefully crafted by the Founding Fathers, makes
this right absolute. Nothing further should be discussed. No compromise should be considered.

Since the founding of our country, millions of Americans have shed blood and died protecting these basic tenets of our rights. Thomas Jefferson said, “When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. When the government fears the people, there is liberty”. To chip away at the Second Amendment, the cornerstone of our safety and freedom, will only cause the remaining pillars to crumble, along with our nation as we know it.

When I took my oath of office, the most critical part of that oath was to support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of Colorado, not be part of destroying them. I believe that I have supported and defended them with honor and intend to do so in the future. On the other hand, I do not “enforce” the Constitution, i.e. I can’t arrest someone
for violating a Constitutional principle, but rather for violating a specific law. However, make no mistake that I support it and will defend it!

As a Sheriff, I have many statutory responsibilities that are outlined and delegated by State statute. Further, the laws I enforce are enumerated in State statute, enacted by the Colorado Legislature and I must enforce these statutes as required. However, I can and will oppose any attempt to create laws through the legislative process that that I believe infringe on our
Constitutional rights. Hopefully, individually and collectively our voices will be heard by those who represent us in the Legislature.

There was a time when I supported data bases and background checks, but now, convinced that they will not prevent evil people from being evil, I oppose ANY government intervention into the rights of law abiding citizens. As a law enforcement official, I know that criminals will not comply with these requirements. If gang-banger #1 wants to buy a gun from gang-banger #2, he will not first seek a background check. He’s a criminal and does not abide by the law. Even if he did clear a background check, how will this process prevent him from shooting up a school, a mall, or a rival gang? It won’t. Nor will it prevent other evil people from doing heinous things to society. Some of our most notorious serial killers never used a gun, yet they were responsible
for killing hundreds of people. Therefore background checks and data bases serve no purpose other than creating a way to take honest, law-abiding citizens and turn them into criminals if they don’t comply. I certainly do not believe that the reason for these lists is to confiscate my legally owned property ( although there are many citizens who do), so given what we know about such lists, there is no rationale to support creating or maintaining them.

Additionally, my right to own a so-called “assault weapon” (even though nobody can define what that is), or any other legal weapon, or component, for whatever legal reason I chose is nobody’s business, especially the government’s. It is my right under the Constitution and the discussion should end there. If you don’t want to own a gun, don’t. But do not attempt to force
your opinion on me.

Finally, the intentional degradation of the Second Amendment, for some radical factions, is NOT about safety or guns, or protecting lives, but about eliminating our rights and controlling the population. I have no doubt that success with eliminating the Second Amendment will only fuel the fire of such radicals to eliminate the remaining ones.

I certainly support further discussion and debate regarding school safety programs, mental illness, severe penalties for criminals, and other measures that will strengthen our personal security and reduce gun crimes. I’m fairly certain that’s what our Constitution is all about. However, I cannot in good conscience disregard those that fought and died for these rights, nor the oath I took to defend them.

Lou Vallario
Sheriff, Garfield County

01/22/13