Tag Archives: Colorado

New Colorado gun law bans all-online firearm training

second amendment2

Fox News: In an age where you can buy a car or get a college degree without ever  leaving the house, Colorado lawmakers have made one thing impossible to obtain from comfort of the couch: A concealed weapon permit.

A new law requires people to show a firearm instructor in person that they  can safely handle a gun before they get a permit, seeking to close what  lawmakers say is an Internet-era loophole they didn’t envision 10 years ago.

“There was no thought of anyone going and sitting in front of a computer and doing the whole course online,” said Democratic Sen. Lois Tochtrop, a sponsor of the new law, and one of the legislators who voted in favor of Colorado’s concealed-carry law in 2003.

Most states require proof of training to carry a concealed weapon.  Instructors teach basics like how to load and unload a gun, how to hold it and fire it and ways to store it properly. Only a few states allow people to  complete a concealed-carry training course entirely online.

Some Colorado lawmakers were astonished at the ease with which people could get a concealed-carry training certificate. Democratic Rep. Jenise May, who sponsored the bill with Tochtrop, said one of her staffers found a course online and got a certificate in less than an hour after answering eight questions and skipping a training video.

Colorado was one of the few states to pass gun legislation this year, despite  national outrage over mass shootings and President Barack Obama’s failed  attempts to get federal gun laws through Congress. Laws to provide for universal  background checks and limits on ammunition magazines made it through the state Legislature with no Republican support.

The change in training rules got a handful of Republican votes, although most  in the state GOP rejected the idea of scrapping all-online training permits.

“We allow people to obtain full, four-year college degrees online. Why  wouldn’t you be allowed to obtainthe training for a concealed carry weapons  permit completely online?” said Republican Sen. Greg Brophy.

The importance of in-person gun training is debated. Those who offer the all-online courses insist their teachings are rigorous, and say they’re filling a market need of the digital age by allowing people to complete a class quicker and cheaper than before.

Eric Korn, the president and CEO of Virginia-based American Firearms  Training, said he started offering online handgun training in Colorado about two years ago, and his company also offers training in other states where all-online  permits are allowed — Oregon, Idaho, Wyoming, Iowa, Missouri and Virginia.

He said the online courses are just as effective. His company’s training includes six videos and more than 100 exam questions, and is much cheaper than  in-person training: $50 once you pass the course to get the certificate, free if you don’t pass. In-person training courses can cost three times as much. “I think what we did was socially conscious and relevant,” Korn said.

Other firearm trainers say there’s no substitute for learning gun safety in  person. “My point of view is, nobody knows everything about firearm safety,” said  Kevin Holroyd, who runs a business called Colorado Concealed Carry. He said his  training — which is offered at his Aurora location — lasts about eight hours and includes information on shooting fundamentals such showing people to always keep a gun pointed in a safe direction and always keep their finger off the trigger  until ready to shoot.

Colorado county sheriffs, who are the final authority on whether to approve  or deny concealed-carry training permits, supported the bill, even though they opposed the other new firearm restrictions.

Some counties already refused to approve permits if the training was done  entirely online. Sheriffs don’t keep track of how many certificates were approved from all-online courses, said Chris Olson, the executive director of  the County Sheriffs of Colorado.

Sheriffs had concerns about the online training, saying it wasn’t enough to  learn proper safety procedures, Olson said.

In Oregon, Democratic lawmakers also want to get people away from their  computer and to a real instructor. The proposal would specify that training  courses could not be taken online. However, the bill doesn’t appear to have enough support to get out of committee.

“There are responsibilities that come with having a concealed handgun permit, and one of them is knowing how to use it,” said Sen. Floyd Prozanski, a Eugene Democrat and chief sponsor of the bill. His proposal would’ve also required  people to pass a “live” fire test but that provision has been dropped from the bill.

John W. Jones, the executive director of the Virginia Sheriff’s Association,  said online training has not surfaced as a big concern for his group. Although  in Virginia the court clerks issue concealed-carry permits, the sheriffs have  veto authority, Jones said. “Everybody does things online. My sense is that we can live with it if it’s good course,” he said.

Colorado’s new law, which took effect after the governor signed it last  month, still allows most of the training to be done online. It requires, though, that a gun owner complete show an instructor in person they know how to handle a gun.

It’s like driver’s training, May said: People can learn the basics of driving  and the rules of the road online, but have to take the actual driving test in  person.

“People need to know how to shoot a weapon and store correctly so it doesn’t  go off,” May said. “Those are all things that you can’t necessarily learn from  the Internet.”

stoopid

I think online training, in addition to real practice, could be a good thing. I took a 4-hour in-person training course and it cost $75. Other courses offered at my gun range run about $100 up to $650 – it can be very expensive. I’m all for every gun owner learning about firearm safety.

And I don’t know how you can obtain a conceal carry permit on-line: In my state I had to appear in person and give my finger prints in order to complete the criminal background check.

But here’s the thing: every gun owner I know always takes their shooting and safety seriously. It’s the criminals that don’t follow the rules. It just seems that Colorado is going out of their way to make legal gun owners go through many hoops to practice their Second Amendment right.

DCG

Colorado Gun Companies Keep Promise and Leave State

I just love when people keep their promise

————————————————————————–

2nd

Colorado Gun Companies Keep Promise and Leave State

Posted on May 6, 2013 by Dave Jolly 

Last month I reported that two firearms related companies had made announcements that they were leaving the state of Colorado due to the anti-gun laws the state had passed. Three companies had vowed to leave the state: Magpul, Alfred Manufacturing and HiViz.
The companies were being courted by a number of states that are proud of their gun-friendly laws, but the Colorado companies were being rather secretive as to where they might be heading. That is until now.
HiViz Shooting Systems, formerly located in Fort Collins, manufactures various parts for a number of weapons, some of which are now outlawed under Colorado law. They have just announced that are moving their entire operations to Laramie, Wyoming. In their announcement, HiViz stated that their decision on Laramie was partially due to their gun friendly laws, but also due to certain tax advantages and it is an hour away from their Fort Collins location, allowing most of their employees to make the drive and continue to work for them. Ground breaking for their new facility is expected to take place this summer.
Magpul Industries manufactures high capacity magazines that hold 30 rounds. Their magazines are now illegal in Colorado and they said that they would not stay in a state that outlaws their product. According to recent reports, Magpul has already started production in another state, but that location is being kept under wraps until after the NRA Convention being held in Houston.
All I can say is that I’m glad these companies are following through on their threats, even though it has to cost them a pretty penny to move their operations. I just wish more firearms related firms would leave their states that have passed anti-Second Amendment legislation.        More HERE!!!

~Steve~           H/T Godfather Politics

Democratic Strategist’s Shocking Claim: Women Don’t Need Guns For Self-Defense, Just Tell Men ‘Not To Rape Women’

Warning Warning Warning. Have duct tape ready as your head will explode.

——————————  ~  Steve ~  ————————————–

Appearing on Fox News Tuesday night, Democratic Strategist Zerlina Maxwell argued that preventing rape should start by simply “telling men not to rape women.” She was arguing against women using guns as a means of self-defense when she made the questionable remarks.

Host Sean Hannity began by slamming the “ignorant politicians” in Colorado for trying to remove a woman’s right to use a firearm to defend herself against an attacker via gun control legislation.
“I don’t think that we should be telling women anything,” Maxwell said. “I think we should be telling men not to rape women and start the conversation there.
“Criminals are not going to listen to that,” Hannity interjected.
“You are talking about it as if there is some faceless, nameless criminal, when a lot of times it is someone that you know and trust,” Maxwell replied.
Hannity pointed out that “evil exists in the world” and women need to know that these situations unfortunately occur.
We can prevent rape by telling men not to commit it,” Maxwell said, repeating the same bizarre claim.
Instead, Maxwell, who is a rape survivor herself, said she wants women to “not be in this situation.” She added that if you

“train”  men not to be rapists, we can prevent rape.

“If firearms were the answer, then the military would be the safest place for women and it’s not,” she said.”

———————————————————————————-

If she is a dem strategist, then how the hell do they beat us with this level of stupidity. 

Rhetorical question.  ducttapebandit

H/T   The Blaze

Where Are The Justice Bro’s When You Need Them? That’s Right, We Need Rev’s Al And Jesse Now!!!

Parents Upset Over Tutoring Program That Excluded Whites

images11111

 

By Todd Starnes

http://radio.foxnews.com/toddstarnes/top-stories/parents-upset-over-tutoring-program-that-excluded-whites.html

A Colorado school principal is apologizing after he mailed parents a letter informing them that an after-school tutoring program was for non-whites only.

FOLLOW TODD ON FACEBOOK FOR CULTURE WAR NEWS. CLICK HERE TO JOIN!

Andre Pearson, the principal at Mission Viejo Elementary School in Aurora, also left a voice mail message confirming that the program excluded whites.

It’s focused for and designed for children of color,” Principal Pearson said in a voicemail to parent Nicole Cox. “If we have space for other kids who have needs, we can definitely meet those needs.”

The voicemail was obtained by CBS-4 News in Denver.

I was infuriated,” Cox told the television station. “I didn’t understand why they would include or exclude certain groups.”

Cox, who is white, said her daughter needed tutoring.

We have come so far in all these years to show everybody that everyone is equal, that everyone should be treated equally – this is a form of bullying,” she said.

Tustin Amole, the director of communications for the Cherry Creek School District, told Fox News it was simply a mistake.

The communication the principal sent out was wrong,” she said. “He made a mistake and he has apologized for that.”

Amole said the tutoring program was created last year in a partnership with parents of color. The purpose of the program was to talk about how the school could meet the needs of their children.

We have a performance plan for the entire school district and a very big piece of that is excellence in equity – narrowing our achievement gap,” she said.

Amole said white students were a part of the program last year and this year. Approximately 44 percent of the children in the district are non-white.

No one is turned away,” she said. “There is no segregation. We serve the needs of all children.”

She would not comment on whether the principal faces disciplinary action. However, she did say that parents would be receiving an apology letter and it would also be posted on the school’s website.

 

 

It’s come to this – “One Nation Under Allah”

allegiance

Outrage as high school recites Pledge in Arabic saying ‘One Nation Under Allah’

DailyMail: Fury is brewing at Rocky Mountain High  School, in Colorado, after a multicultural student group were encouraged to recite the Pledge of Allegiance over the loudspeaker in Arabic – replacing ‘one nation under God’ with ‘one nation under Allah’.

Following Monday’s pledge, Principal Tom  Lopez has been inundated with complaints from outraged parents concerned that saying the Pledge in any language other than English is unpatriotic.

Standing by his controversial decision, Principal Lopez has said that despite the irate telephone calls and emails, he is not in any way or form trying to push an Islamic agenda at the Fort Collins school. ‘These students love this country,’ said  Lopez to Fox News. ‘They were not being un-American in trying to do this. They believed they were accentuating the meaning of the words as spoken regularly in English.

At the school, the Pledge of Allegiance is recited once a week and on Monday, a member of the Cultural Arms Club at Rocky Mountain High School read out an Arabic version. The pupils sought the permission of Principal Lopez, who previously had allowed the Pledge to be read out in French and Spanish.

However, the backlash began from students hours after the recital and has continued through the week as angry parents have  waded into the controversy. ‘We understand not everybody would agree with the students’ choice,’ said Danielle Clark, communications director of the  Poudre School District to Fox  News. ‘We’ve heard there are some who are  upset.’

Clark said though, that the club has a history of reading the Pledge in different languages and some parents have  emailed to say it ‘was a great thing’. And she added that the students had asked  permission from the principal. ‘We deferred to the students because it’s their deal,’ she said to Fox News.

Students at the school rushed to the classmates defense, keen to highlight the motto of the Cultural Arms Club which  seeks to ‘destroy the barriers, embrace the cultures.‘No matter what language it’s said in, pledging your allegiance to the United States is the same in every language,’  student Skyler Bowden told The  Coloradoan.

The issue for some parents and pupils at the  school is that in an Arabic translation of the Pledge of Allegiance, ‘one nation  under God’ is replaced with ‘one nation under Allah’. Obviously in Arabic, you would use the word  Allah, but Christian Arabs would use the word Allah,’ said Ibrahim Hooper, of the Council on American Islamic Relations. ‘It’s not necessarily specific to Islam and  Muslims.’

Principal Lopez has borne the brunt of the  criticism of the decision to allow the recital – and some have gone as far as to  label him as a traitor. ‘They claim they are outraged that this is blaspheming a real major tenet of our patriotism – which in their mind the Pledge of Allegiance is only in English,’ said Lopez.

Principal knows best...

Principal knows best…

Other parents have accused him of ‘pushing a  Muslim Brotherhood agenda – to push Islam into the school.’ ‘How on earth is it un-American to recite the Pledge of Allegiance in another language,’ said Hooper to Fox News. ‘It doesn’t make sense unless the people complaining are anti-Muslim or anti-middle eastern bigots.’

Indeed, the embattled head is becoming wary  at the number of complaints and level of abuse he has received. ‘I’ve been shocked with prejudicial  statements that have been made,’ said Lopez. ‘I’ve been shocked with the lack of seeking  understanding. There’s definitely suspicion and fear expressed in these people’s  minds. There’s some hate.

Lopez says the school is a place of inclusion where one message can be communicated in many different ways. ‘When they pledge allegiance to United States, that’s exactly what they’re saying,’ Lopez said. ‘They’re just using  another language as their vehicle,’ he said.

Well, call me a bigot yet I would be offended too. I distrust a religion, with a god named “Allah”, that:

  • Imprisons a Christian Pastor for “threatening the national security of Iran through his leadership in Christian house churches”;
  • Locks up and lashes women for being immodest;
  • Throws stones at Jewish kindergarteners;
  • Allows men to have sex with underage girls;
  • Has no love for unbelievers;
  • Doesn’t allow women to drive; and
  • Is the best of deceivers through Taqiyya.

The “religion of peace” that “Allah” purports is not symbolic of the patriotism that Americans hold true.

DCG

Here’s contact info for Rocky Mountain High School:

  • Address: 1300 W. Swallow Rd., Fort Collins, CO 80526-2412
  • Email: rmhs@psdschools.org
  • School principal Tom López’s phone no: 970-488-7005

~Eowyn

The Evil Act in Aurora, Colorado

In Aurora:

Evil is Responsible, Holmes was the Tool, and Violence and Death was the Result

After the attack and murder of twelve innocent people in Aurora, Colorado, the usual reaction of the liberals is to place the blame anywhere and on anyone other than the perpetrator and the liberal theology of persecuting Christianity, indoctrination of our youth in homosexuality, pornography, violence in music, in movies, in television and violence in video games.

Liberals have managed to evict God from most aspects of our lives and substitute him with sex, violence and Hollywood and spoon feed it to our children on a daily basis and then they wonder why one of those children grows up to become James Holmes and walks into a cinema and sprays the crowd with bullets.

Guns, and the ability of law-abiding citizens to purchase them are the No. 1 target of the liberals and they argue that taking away that ability would be the cure-all for the violence. To that I say BULLSHIT, one only has to look to places that have strict gun laws like Chicago and see that  violence has doubled  there even with some of the strictest gun laws in the entire country. If someone is hell-bent to commit violence they will find a way to do it, no matter what.

Holmes could have just as easy burst into that theater and thrown several molotov cocktails into the crowd and dozens could have been burned to death. He could have bought a ticket like any other patron and slipped a homemade bomb under a seat or in a trash container and triggered it remotely, he had the knowledge, just look at the elaborate booby traps he set at his apartment.

My point is that this man had the desire to commit an evil act of murder and mayhem no matter what, but just one person, a law-abiding citizen with a firearm, training, and a concealed carry permit could have saved many if not all of the twelve that died that night and the countless others that were injured. Even if he had missed him , I sure Holmes would have run for the exit not expecting someone to be returning fire. As gauged by the fact that he wore a gas mask and bullet proof vest, Holmes valued his own life more than the people he was killing.

Tom in NC

Note to my fellow posters and readers of FOTM, sorry I have been away for a while, some external mechanisms such as work and a busy schedule have kept me away more than I like, but I think things have calmed down a bit (at least for the present), so I hope I can get back into the swing of things. 

Obama: Killer of Jobs, Divider of Races, Out-of-Control Spender and Now Destroyer of Forests

How Obama Bureaucrats Fueled Western Wildfires

By Michelle Malkin  •  June 20, 2012 01:12 AM


High Park Fire, image via InciWeb

My fellow Coloradans have endured a terrifying and miserable summer so far. Wildfires have ravaged the state. Thousands have been evacuated. Open burning has been banned. Air quality is oppressive. Dry weather and strong winds aren’t helping the front-line personnel trying to contain the blazes. And the season has only just begun here and in across the West. Sean Paige, who runs the invaluable MonkeyWrenchingAmerica.com site, first alerted me to the fateful decisions made by the Obama administration last year that effectively poured fuel on the 2012 Western wildfires. Read my column below and weep. And then make sure you do all you can to 1) help the victims; 2) press the feds for answers about the government’s shrinking aerial tanker fleet, and 3) replace the negligent bureaucrats and their bosses with competent officials who put the core public safety duties of government first instead of last.

***

How Obama Bureaucrats Fueled Western Wildfires
by Michelle Malkin
Creators Syndicate
Copyright 2012

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. — The smell of singed air here is inescapable. Less than 50 miles west of my neighborhood, the latest wildfire has spread across 1,100 acres. It’s the fifth active blaze to erupt in our state over the past month. But ashes aren’t the only things smoldering.

The Obama administration’s neglect of the federal government’s aerial tanker fleet raises acrid questions about its core public safety priorities. Bipartisan complaints goaded the White House into signing a Band-Aid fix last week. But it smacks more of election-year gesture politics: Too little, too late, too fake.

Ten years ago, the feds had a fleet of 44 firefighting planes. Today, the number is down to nine for the entire country. Last summer, Obama’s U.S. Forest Service canceled a key federal contract with Sacramento-based Aero Union just as last season’s wildfires were raging. Aero Union had supplied eight vital air tankers to Washington’s dwindling aerial firefighting fleet. Two weeks later, the company closed down, and 60 employees lost their jobs. Aero Union had been a leader in the business for a half-century.

Why were they grounded? U.S. Forest Service bureaucrats and some media accounts cite “safety” concerns. But as California GOP Rep. Dan Lungren noted in a letter obtained by reporter Audrey Hudson of the conservative D.C. newspaper Human Events last year, a Federal Aviation Administration representative said it was a contractual/compliance matter, not safety, that doomed Aero Union’s fleet.

“I am deeply troubled by the Forest Service’s sudden action,” Lungren warned, “particularly as California enters into the fire season. Our aerial firefighting fleet is already seriously undercapitalized.” Both the U.S. Government Accountability Office and the Department of Agriculture’s Inspector General have been critical of the Forest Service’s handling of the matter. All of this has been known to the Obama administration since it took the reins in 2009.

Nine months after Lungren’s warning, the deadly High Park fire in Larimer County, Colo., claimed a grandmother’s life, destroyed 189 homes and scorched nearly 60,000 acres. Arizona, New Mexico, Washington and Wyoming also have battled infernos this summer.

After months of dire red flags from a diverse group of politicians ranging from Texas GOP Gov. Rick Perry and Arizona GOP Sen. Jon Kyl to Oregon Democratic Sen. Ron Wyden and New Mexico Democratic Sen. Jeff Bingaman, President Obama finally signed emergency legislation last week to expedite the contracting process. Obama will borrow planes from Canada and provide $24 million for new aerial tanker contracts.

But the money won’t come until next year, and the dog-and-pony rescue moves will not result in any immediate relief. “It’s nice, but this problem isn’t fixed with a stroke of the pen,” former Forest Service official and bomber pilot Tony Kern told the Denver Post this week. “You need to have the airplanes available now.” Veteran wildland firefighter and blogger Bill Gabbert of WildfireToday.com adds: “The USFS should have awarded contracts for at least 20 additional air tankers, not 7.”

Imagine if Obama’s Forest Service had been a private company. White House eco-radicals would be rushing to place their “boots on the necks” of the bureaucrats who made the fateful decision to put an experienced aerial tanker firm out of business as wildfires raged and the available rescue fleet shrunk.

“The Obama administration is scrambling now to help ensure the Forest Service has the air assets it needs to fight the ongoing inferno,” Colorado free-market environmental watchdog Sean Paige reported at MonkeyWrenchingAmerica.com last week. “But the crisis is bound to raise questions not just about whether the cancelled contract created additional weaknesses and vulnerabilities, but about what the administration has been doing over the past three summers to shore-up the service’s air fleet.”

Where there’s smoke swirling over Team Obama, there are usually flames of incompetence, cronyism and ideological zealotry at the source. The ultimate rescue mission? Evacuating Obama’s wrecking crew from the White House permanently. November can’t come soon enough.

Who’s to Blame for the Southwest’s Wildfires?

by
Caren Cowan

June 23, 2011

The ironies of “be careful what you ask for” have never been clearer — despite the smoky haze in Albuquerque and throughout New Mexico and Arizona. So far, some 700,000 acres have burned in just two fires, as a direct result of the federal government’s inability to manage forests in the Southwest. At the same time, the radical environmental groups who are responsible for these catastrophic fires are also involved in hearings in New Mexico on air quality — and demanding expensive “pollution” controls on the suppliers of the state’s electricity.

The connection between the radical environmental groups and these life-threatening fires is easy to make. Radical groups like WildEarth Guardians (WEG) (formerly Forest Guardians) and the Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) oppose all management and uses of national forests, including timber production (thinning) and livestock grazing. When national forests are not managed, they burn with intensive fury, killing wildlife, their habitats, jobs, communities, and part of our national heritage. The CBD and WEG claim they are trying to take America back to the way it looked prior to European settlement; but Native Americans also managed the landscape, so the attempt to eliminate human existence is not realistic, nor is it healthy for our national forests.

Now, as a result of the inability to manage national forests, the damage that has been done to air quality in New Mexico because of these and other fires will take months, if not years, to repair. Pet owners are now being asked to use caution in exercising their pets. For those with respiratory problems, air quality in Albuquerque and other areas is literally life-threatening.

Advertisement
For nearly two decades the US Forest Service (USFS) has spent much of its time and our taxpayer dollars fighting so-called environmental groups in litigation rather than pursuing common-sense forestry and land management practices that have been mandated in federal law. Rather than managing our region’s forests for health and multiple uses, the USFS has been forced to nearly eliminate economic use and put at risk the wildlife populations that are supposed to be so near and dear to groups like the WEG and CBD.

These groups who have filed hundreds of lawsuits in New Mexico and Arizona and collected millions of taxpayer dollars to stop the USFS from managing for healthy forests claim to be doing good in the name of species like the Mexican spotted owl, the Mexican wolf, the spikedace, and the loach minnow. The list is almost endless. In every case, the answer the WEG and the CBD have called for, and often gotten, is the removal of management and economic activity such as logging, mining, and ranching.

Little seems to have been learned from the Rodeo-Chediski Fire in Arizona in 2002 — when most of the area’s habitat for the Mexican spotted owl was charred beyond recognition. Rather than understanding the horrors of their actions in removing logging and grazing that naturally keep the fuels that feed the past decade’s catastrophic fires, these groups have filed more lawsuits, which keep the fire-ravaged areas from being rehabilitated. Natural resources that could be salvaged go unused.

The Mexican wolf, a species that has cost the American taxpayer millions of dollars and is on the verge of collapse, is further threatened by these ongoing catastrophic wildfires. According to the federal government, the Wallow Fire has already consumed the wolf habitat in Arizona. The habitat in New Mexico is now in the line of fire. How many wolves have survived the fire to this point? There is no answer to that question and there is unlikely to be one for time to come. However, it is not unreasonable to expect that wolves that have received millions of dollars in federal and state funding have been lost.

Even the availability of electric generation across many western states is at risk as the Wallow and Horseshoe fires indiscriminately race across landscapes that house power lines feeding homes and businesses from Texas to California. Despite the WEG’s hearing and press releases about potential pollution for electricity generation, the air quality that New Mexico and Arizona are suffering today can be laid directly at the feet of the WEG.

So that there is no misunderstanding, natural fire is not always bad. But when the fuel load is not controlled — and it has not been for decades — it becomes violent and dangerous to animal and man alike. In the mid 1990s, one Arizona forestry specialist noted that even at that point, the fuel load was comparable to setting a match to thirty oil tankers per acre. Over the past fifteen years, that number has probably increased tenfold. And it is one thing when fires are “natural” — but in this case, the fires are believed to be intentionally set by drug backpackers trying to evade US Border Patrol.

Whether the issue is air quality, forest management, or productive natural resource use, it is time for the citizens of this nation to stand up and take control of our forests back from radical environmental groups. It is time to stop paying these groups to destroy our treasured forests and their wildlife — not to mention the people who live, work, and play there.

Reprinted from PJ Media

Two separate stories that point out hypocrisy, ineptitude and downright stupidity of the Obama administration and the criminally insane radical environmentalist movement. Hundreds of thousands to millions of acres of forest that burn every year, mostly thanks to eco-nuts that sue to prevent logging and other measures to sucessfully manage our forests and prevent these massive wildfires

Tom in NC 

Same Dirty Trick at Colorado Convention

The “fake slate” gambit is exposed on Youtube once again. 

This link gives a good account of the Colorado Convention.  http://sarahewelch.com/2012/04/15/colorado-gop-congressional-district-state-assemblies/

 

Santorum wins big in 3 states!

Mitt Romney and the GOP establishment have better hold their water ’cause a Mitt presidential nomination is not a done deal.

Last night, true conservative Rick Santorum who actually had won the Iowa caucuses, swept the GOP caucuses and primaries in three states — Minnesota, Colorado, and Missouri!

The Minnesota result marked the first time so far in the 2012 Republican race that Romney did not come in first or second. Romney also lost in two states – Colorado and Minnesota – that he had won in his failed 2008 bid for the Republican presidential nomination.

Steve Holland reports for Reuters, Feb. 8, 2012:

“Former U.S. senator Rick Santorum rejuvenated his presidential hopes on Tuesday with a shocking sweep of the three nominating contests in Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri, dealing a blow to wounded front-runner Mitt Romney.

Even though Romney still holds strong advantages in financing and organization, his campaign will now have to refocus to fight back the challenge from the surging conservative Santorum.

Backed by a wealthy “Super PAC” that pays for attack ads against rivals, Romney had excelled in major contests thus far in the race. After big wins in Nevada and Florida in the previous week, he did little campaigning in Minnesota and Missouri and had been expected to win easily in Colorado.

Until Tuesday, Santorum had won only one of the first five Republican contests in the state-by-state battle for the Republican nomination to face President Barack Obama in the November 6 election.”

Here are the results of the GOP contests in the three states:

Colorado Caucuses (36 delegates; with 99% of precincts reporting):

  1. Rick Santorum: 40%
  2. Mitt Romney: 35%
  3. Newt Gingrich: 13%
  4. Ron Paul: 12%

Missouri Primary (52 delegates; with 99% of precincts reporting):

  1. Rick Santorum: 55%
  2. Mitt Romney: 25%
  3. Ron Paul: 12%
  4. Uncommitted: 4%

Minnesota Caucuses (40 delegates; with 95% of precincts reporting):

  1. Rick Santorum: 45%
  2. Ron Paul: 27%
  3. Mitt Romney: 17%
  4. Newt Gingrich: 11%

Santorum is a devout Catholic who had been in a battle with Gingrich to become the conservative alternative to RINO Romney. Santorum’s victories give heart to social conservatives fighting battles of abortion, gay marriage and contraception in recent days.

Tuesday’s strong showing by Santorum came as divisive social issues came to the forefront again in U.S. politics. Earlier in the day, a U.S. appeals court ruled that California’s ban on gay marriage violated the U.S. Constitution in a case expected to lead to a showdown in the Supreme Court.

In addition, U.S. Roman Catholic bishops have slammed the Obama administration for a new regulation that would require health insurance to include birth control. The bishops contend the policy infringes on religious liberty because the church does not condone birth control of any kind.

Santorum took some jabs at Obama, focusing in particular on the new contraception rule. He accused the president of trying to “impose his secular values on the people of this country.”

“I don’t stand here to claim to be the conservative alternative to Mitt Romney, I stand here to be the conservative alternative to Barack Obama,” he added to cheers from the crowd.

The startling results in Colorado, Minnesota and Missouri raised fresh doubts about whether Romney, long considered the most likely Republican nominee, can win over the broad swathe of Republican voters, particularly the most conservative ones who are the most unenthusiastic toward him.

But Santorum’s campaign is far behind Romney in fund-raising and in support by the Republican establishment. Santorum is not a wealthy man like Mitt, nor does he have a billionaire SuperPAC donor like Newt. Despite that, Santorum has managed to win 4 of 8 GOP contests to date (Mitt won 3; Newt won 1; and Ron has won none).

So if you want a real conservative to run against Obama this November, donate some dollars to Rick Santorum! Click here.

The next major Republican nominating contests are the Arizona and Michigan primaries on February 28, while Maine wraps up its caucuses this Saturday.

~Eowyn

Agenda 21- Stacy Lynne Explains UN Takeover of American City Councils

U.S. Mayors Climate Action Agreement – Handbook

H/T Kelleigh

~LTG