Unconcerned about very poor? Then expanding Medicaid is "very radical"

by: Jason Salzman

Mon Feb 06, 2012 at 10:08:17 AM MST

That's the tenor of the debate about cutting Medicaid in Colorado. It's not like the Republicans want to do it, we read in the media, because they know that cutting money for poor people can cause hardship, sickness, and even death.

But there's a budget problem (assuming we don't want to raise taxes on the vulnerable 1 percent) and, besides, skin should be inserted in the game.

When Mitt Romney changes the tone of the conversation about poverty, and says brazenly, "I'm not concerned about the very poor," that's news.

And rightly so, because in America, we're supposed to care about each other, and our country is supposed to provide basic opportunity for everyone, right? And, as the debate about Medicaid shows, no one's saying, let the poor get sick and die.

But what about proposals to expand Medicaid? These proposals save lives, yet politicians go around trashing the Medicaid-expansion aspects of Obamacare day in and day out, with near media immunity, as if saving poverty-stricken Americans from sickness and death is so outrageous.

Gessler won't say there's fraud in Denver elections, as he did before, but there "very well may be"

by: Jason Salzman

Tue Nov 15, 2011 at 11:08:57 AM MST

I asked Gessler about his statement, on a radio show in September, that there was actual fraud among mail ballots returned by inactive voters in Denver.

He said he was "not quite sure" he made this statement about the last election. He didn't. He was referring to the 2009 municipal election, but the same question applies: Was there actual fraud, like he said?

In the radio interview, Gessler said there was a "pretty high incidence of fraud" in Denver's 2009 election among ballots returned by inactive voters. Listen to Gessler's Sept. 30 radio statement here.

Regarding 2009, Gessler told me last night:

Gessler: I think if you look at Denver, though, you'll see in 2009, for a large number of folks, the signatures didn't match. I think that's an indicium of fraud, right there, when the signatures don't match.

Jason: It's an indication of fraud, but you wouldn't say that it's fraud, would you?

Gessler: I said it's an indicium of fraud. It very well may be. It's not been fully investigated, to my knowledge.

No talk show host or reporter that I know of asked Gessler what actual factual fraud he was talking about, so I tried to fill in the gap and ask his office, but I got no comment. Until last night.

Why does Gessler think "fraud exists" in Denver elections? His office is "not going to comment"

by: Jason Salzman

Wed Oct 19, 2011 at 06:28:16 AM MST

I've left lots of messages and gotten no response.

This surprised me, truly, because you'd think the Secretary of State would want to make it clear either way.

If he thinks there is really fraud, that's obviously a huge problem that every active, inactive, and dead voter should hear about.

If there's no fraud, then we should hear this, to put us at ease since Gessler previously said there was fraud.

So I was overjoyed Tuesday when I got Gessler's media spokesperson Rich Coolidge, instead of an answering machine, when I called his direct line in Gessler's press office.

But disappointment followed....

Dick Armey's appearance on Mike Rosen show illustrates effectiveness of "Wall Street Greed" Protest

by: Jason Salzman

Wed Oct 05, 2011 at 15:11:47 PM MST

Armey's rambling about the demonstration shows why the simple message of Wall Street Greed is so effective.

The conservatives try to say, Wall Street is not greedy because.... and they immediately start to sound really out of touch.

Here's Dick Armey, who's not a stupid guy:

Armey: ...Goofballs that are walking around now protesting what they call, Wall Street greed is just ridiculous. I don't know how you even respond to people like that.

Rosen: You're talking about the, Occupy Wall Street, demonstration here.

Armey: Right, right. These folks first of all, the first thing the left does, progressives, there's a documented history of this is a design by them, is distort the language. Basically what they argue is that people who have gone out and worked hard and earned their living and want to keep the money they earned through their legal, honest effort, these people are greedy.... To me, greed was wanting something from someone else that you hadn't earned. That's what I always thought greed was. But to these folks, greed is wanting to keep what you worked very hard to earn. I mean, I don't get it. I don't get their line of thinking. You know, I think they've got a distorted sense of truth. I don't know, it's very frustrating to me because it's hard to know how anybody can be that misguided and that arrogant.

Rosen might have been alone, even among his audience, in not wanting to ask: Ok, about that Wall Street Greed that is self evident in America?

Mike Rosen's Hatred Is Overwhelming - Case Example

by: WeatherDem

Thu Dec 30, 2010 at 12:40:54 PM MST

The supposed topic is the repeal of the odious, unconstitutional "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy keeping certain Americans from serving their country as proudly as Americans who more neatly fit the idyllic vision of an imaginary America that Rosen and other scared, angry white males hold dear.