Posted 3 months, 8 days ago in 
Loading ...
Former Grand Junction City Council member and former Mesa County commissioner Jim Spehar was quoted on April 16’s front page regarding a defiant act directed toward Gov. Bill Ritter by a Club 20 official. Unless this was taken out of context, the quote indicates that Mr. Spehar believes Gov. Ritter is serving an eight-year term as governor.
Last time I checked, Colorado’s governor only serves a four-year term unless re-elected. Maybe it is time for Mr. Spehar to enroll in a Colorado Civics refresher.
PETER BARTH
Montrose
19 Responses to “Seems Spehar needs a refresher”
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 11:56 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Jim is not stupid. He understands that there will be a second term. People realize finally that Republicans offer nothing for most citizens other than rhetoric as opposed to trying to do something to make our existence smoother and more rational. Living on anti-tax sound bites to romance the electorate to get elected and then do nothing but stand by and watch our infrastructure deteriorate and a significant number of our citizens suffer can no longer be considered governance.
Posted April 17th, 2008 at 8:41 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
No, actually spehar is really that stupid.
I make the judgment by the people who support him.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 9:44 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
No, Johnson, “actually” the only “stupid” thing here is your inane, childish comment about Spehar.
And how you make your judgement enforces your simplified thought processes.
You, again, are just trolling to be contrary to anything posted here. Just sad.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 10:12 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
John B.
You confuse me. Just a short while ago, you were expounding on the virtues of “wanna’ be” Republican candidate for Mesa County Commissioner, David Kearsley. Could this be a symptom of a bi-polar disorder, or have you just inadvertently let the cat out of the bag? Are you saying that Mr. Kearsley is a RINO (Republican in name only)? I wonder if “Dave” (as you refer to him) realizes just how lucky he is to have a man of your obvious intellect speaking on his behalf. Something tells me that you are under-appreciated. Why don’t you check with “Dave” and see how he feels?
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 1:28 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
To faux America Patriot; Dave is an acquaintance who is a died-in-the-wool life long Republican and will remain so long after this commissioner contest is over. I’ll vote for him depending on how serious his Democratic opponent is, or isn’t. But first he has to get on the ballot after the primaries. If he remains the best man he’ll get my vote. The objective is to get rid of the incompetent Rowland woman in favor of someone who approaches the energy situation in a rational way to do the drilling but to also protect our local enviornment, which is one of the biggest reasons for someone to want to live here.
I realize that this is probably too complex for you to grasp but it is entirely possible for anybody , regardless of party, to be the best person for the job. If Dave gets on the general election ballot he may or may not get my vote. Probably hard for a “patriot” such as you to understand, since you seem to have no idea what patriotism is and going beyond pure, blind, partisanship is probably a concept beyond your consideration. Check the voter registration rolls and you’ll see I’m neither Democrat or Republican. I don’t need instructions on who to vote for. Back off, idiot, you’re in way over your head.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 2:28 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
John B.,
Oh now I get it. You’re not against Republicans, you’re just against incumbents. I seem to remember you saying that people who run for public office should be admired for their courage to put up with all those people like you that abuse them. You really should try to be more consistent John. In that way you can achieve a more harmonious outcome. As for who or what you vote for, I really don’t want to know, but I am sure that will not keep you from announcing it to the whole world. I suspect that Dave Kearsley and I have something in common. We have both enjoyed about all of your opinions or help we can stand. I really don’t think you are doing your friend “Dave” a favor by ranting against the Blue Star Moms and the disabled, but that’s not to say that I don’t appreciate it. Your words will stand in infamy as a shining example of independent (read liberal) thought. I also appreciate your warning to me to “back off”, but you forgot to finish your sentence. I sit with bated breath awaiting the “or what” part. What a country, you know what I mean, big fella; free speech and all.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 2:43 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
There is nothing beyond “back off” It’s the “You’re in over your head part” and you’ve just proved it. You’ve seen your words on the little screen and everybody knows everything they need to know about you now. The “back off” part was a suggestion that you might want to consider not embarrasing yourself further. You didn’t take the advice and now we’re wondering just exactly what your point was, assuming you thought you actually had a point. Your Kearsley nonsense is off the table so are we back on to the Blue Star Mothers non-issue now? Rant on!Prove the only point to be made–that ignorance and bias are no hindrance at all to showing the world the dark underside of blind partisanship.
Posted April 18th, 2008 at 3:00 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
“Now you’re talkin’ to me John, I like that. Keep it up”
For just a second there, I thought there really was hope for you. (going postal, I mean), but I wasn’t really scared, John. The most guys like you do is break wind and scratch yourself. Now, how about answering the questions John. Will you be there to speak for David Kearsley when he is elected? Yes, No, choose one.
Posted April 19th, 2008 at 10:57 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Is there a question there? Speak for?
Posted April 19th, 2008 at 4:46 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
John B.,
Yes John, it is the same question I have asked in every post addressed to you. You obviously have no intention of answering it, but that small fact will not keep me from asking the question. To the contrary, your avoidance of the question only affords me an opportunity to continue to point out that you are a self appointed (I presume) spokesperson for wanna be Republican Candidate for Mesa County Commissioner, David Kearsley. Why else would you answer a question that was addressed to him? That was rude, John, and rude behavior is just something I will not tolerate. And from your “back off” statement, it is apparent to me that rude behavior is something you don’t like either. So why did you butt in, in the first place? If you really wish for me to back off, all you need to do is answer the question I ask you, and then unless I address you directly, butt out. Fair enough?
Posted April 20th, 2008 at 8:12 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Restate your question. It wasn’t clear what you are seeking then and it still isn’t. And why are you so hung-up on Dave Kearsley?
Posted April 20th, 2008 at 10:24 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
May I respectfully suggest that we cease these back and forth “personal” messages on this board. Let us discuss issues, and in substance. We have way too much name-calling and labeling of others when it is obvious that most have absolutely no concept of what words really mean, even when they use them.
Not blameless myself, as I have “whacked” several individuals myself, but carefully and when I believed that they deserved it, either for incivility or when it was obvious that they were not discussing but propagandizing. What is almost always totally lacking in their posts is anything even resembling any type of individual contribution to any discourse. Just like some people just love to hear themselves talk, with this new medium they just love to “be read” It makes absolutely no difference to them that what they “write” is but regurgitation of the same line, over and over again. Like a defective record, they keep playing the same track.
What I have found is that such is totally non-productive and that such individuals. To respond to them satifies their apparent need for attention. They really don’t care how they get it.
Posted April 20th, 2008 at 10:36 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I think some warnings have already been issued, which explains the lack of recent posts.
Posted April 20th, 2008 at 12:13 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
thanks for stating that RL - nothing like the internet to expose the woolly underbelly of GJ & lack of civility and respect and tolerance around here. this should be a place to air ideas & thoughts, not a place for freaky stalkers like “american patriot.”
Posted April 20th, 2008 at 1:11 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Thanks to you, too MikeHunt. “Freaky stalkers” is an apt description. I think the patriot is the guy that included my address in one of his strange posts, for who knows what purpose. I can’t verify that now because the Sentinel gave him a warning and removed the comment from the record. The folks that think this is an entertainment site should find other diversions. Or go watch Jerry Springer, if he’s still on, or some other confrontational program on TV. I think it’s hard to prove your manhood or spectacular intelligence when you hang on to anonymity.
Posted April 20th, 2008 at 1:22 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Here’s my post from way back in the good old days.
It’s in response to a letter about how wonderful obama is.
Post #7.
”
# Willis_Leon_Johnson
Posted February 27th, 2008 at 1:10 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Golly, roland called me a troll.
More name calling? Based on rolands reading and comprehension deficiency?
Here’s a copy from the original post in another topic.
“Willis Leon Johnson Says:
February 26th, 2008 at 7:08 am
Dear e u, your last sentence says:
“The sane R’s are now realizing it and rightly figure if they want to remain a viable party in America they will defiantly have to tack to the center and isolate the looney extremists of the Republican Party.”
Do you have the same requirement for the looney extremists on the far left in your party?”
roland, yer bestest buddy eu first used the “looney” word.
As far as using this as a way of stirring things up.
No, this is a debate of ideas and philosophies.
If you have FACTS, and care to present them in a rational manner, then we can have a “debate”
If you need to resort to name calling to bolster your position….
You need to go back to school and take a debate class. Check if they have a “how to be a grown up” course while you’re there. It would help.
And, since you’re going back for higher education, read the Constitution while you’re there. it will improve your mind, and maybe you can be smarter too.
If you continue to feel the need to play the name calling game, expect to be belittled.”
So, even back in February we were trying to carry on intelligent conversations, on to be met with more name calling.
And today, we get “Freaky stalkers”.
Still no improvement in your methodology.
Why is that?
Facts really bother you people, and history is irrelevant.
But keep trying.
Have a nice day.
Posted April 20th, 2008 at 2:43 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Nice to see some things will never change, though. It’s reassuring, in a way.
Posted April 20th, 2008 at 5:51 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Some have taken to attacking Senator Obama, not because he said anything improper, but primarily because far too many do not really understand what he says. That is not being “elitist” but merely stating things as they are. If someone tells me something, I will first make the effort to first, think about what he/she said is true and accurate. If something I did not know, that does not make the other person “elitist”, all it does is point out my own ignorance (a malady with which we are all afflicted, and in more areas than those in which we are proficient), that I did not know it, especially when I should have already been aware of it. My denying something, merely because I do not wish to admit it, does nothing but insure that I will remain ignorant. That, at least to this individual, would mean that, not only would I remain in that state, but have lowered myself to the level of stupidity. After all, one is not “stupid” but by virtue of choosing to remain in a state of ignorance.
I recently received and e-mail that because Senator Obama “chewed out” the two moderators of the last debate, Gibson and Stephanopolous, that he was somehow wrong to do so. Actually, they deserved to have their “heads handed to them on a platter.” With all the important issues to be faced and addressed, they were wasting everybody’s time with what some “acquaintance” said. That is sheer idiocy. Examining our own lives we have known, or currently know, many people whose “views” we may hear, but with which we disgree and vehemently. Some are even in our own families.
Let us have considerably more serious “thinking” in our lives, and use our minds to a greater extent than we use our mouths. With the chronic whiners with which we are constantly bombarded on radio and television, from what are called talking heads (my term for most is “bombastic buffoons”), is it any wonder that those who fill their heads with this type of “garbage input” believe it, and begin behaving in like manner.
Environment does not only affect children. It will also have an effect on so-called adults with the emotional and intellectual level of children. So, may I suggest that people begin giving far more consideration to what they allow to take up residence in their heads. Then, follow the guidance in the saying “Engage mind before engaging mouth.”
Posted April 21st, 2008 at 8:21 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
There is no doubt that in the age of gotcha politics, whatever a politician says or does, will be dissected so as to try to find fault or controversy. It is a means of creating news in a world of 24 hour cable news channels. Having said that, the candidacy of Barak Obama, a man whose positions and philosophy must be taken at his word because he does not have a significant track record on which to make judgements, requires a different kind of analysis. Who is Barak Obama? From what I can see, it is his freshness, his oratory skills, and his magnetic personality that has lifted him to the top of the Democratic presidential slate. Frankly, one could have said the same of Fidel Castro. And while I am ceretainly not suggesting that Barak Obama will turn out to be a Fidel Castro, the point is that when Fidel came to power, few of his supportes actually understood that the man was a communist. With Barak Obama, we don’t really know what he will try to do once he is in office. But we need to learn as much as we can about him, who he really is. And to help us understand that we need to know who his friends are and we need to know what he really believes. And that includes dissecting what he says at times when he might be caught off guard and not delivirening his canned campaign speech. And as to the ABC debate, the reason the questioners took the route they took, is because ther isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the two candidates when it comes to policy issues. What’s left is character and that is what they went after.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.