Posted 1 year, 0 months ago in 
Loading ...
Laura Bradford is a person we need to represent this side of the mountains in Denver.
Because of her business experience, she will say “No” to Gov. Bill Ritter’s taxing and spending policies. And, she will work for sensible restrictions on the oil and gas industries, so they won’t pack up and leave our area, creating another “bust” of our local economy.
Laura has my strongest support for state representative from House District 55.
Sue Benjamin
Grand Junction
58 Responses to “Bradford is best for District 55”
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 5:28 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
“And, she will work for sensible restrictions on the oil and gas industries, so they won’t pack up and leave our area, creating another “bust” of our local economy.”
Ms. Benjamin, please don’t insult our intelligence. Thank you.
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 9:39 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I agree dc. Bradford will work for no restrictions on O&G, “reasonable” or not. She will continue to play on our scared sheep mentality; that is that we MUST allow O&G to pollute our air and water and run roughshod over the rights of landowners, or else everyone and their uncle in this valley is going to lose their jobs.
Posted November 1st, 2008 at 4:12 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Yawn, Baby, Yawn. Bradford will soon suffer the same fate as that other right-wing zealot Shari Bjorklund. Keep these people out of political office.
GO BERNIE!
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 10:14 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I think Bernie is worried! Look at all the outside bucks they are spending on those goofy attack ads against Laura. There is not logic to them! Nothing on relevant issues. We know Laura doesn’t have to buddy up with the Gov and those Western Slope liberals so she can be a big wheel.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 10:17 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Outside bucks, by law, are not under Bernies’ control.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 10:27 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
The ads against Laura Bradford were deplorable.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 11:45 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ash - I disagree about the Laura Bradford ads - they were factual and on strategy. Sad or not, negative advertising works most of the time more effectively than the positive kind. Demonizing ones opponent is a time-honored political strategy dating back to colonial times.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 12:15 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ullr we will have to agree to disagree on this one. Unless we are talking about different ads. Factual or not these ads were tacky and slimy. I am not surprised Buescher would not put his name on them.
Oh and I did not see the one about cancer screening, and have not examined her record personally but have heard from honorable people that this message was blatantly false. if you can show me otherwise that would be great — I do not wish to get my story wrong.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 12:33 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ash - Unfortunately, “tacky and slimy” is the nature of American political advertising (I must admit I was in the advertising business for 35 years).
I did see the ad about cancer screening. Whoever produced the ads (Bernie had nothing to do with them) used the classic technique of taking a comment made by Bradford somewhat our of context and focus on a “possible” consequence of that comment. It’s admittedly sleazy, but acceptable in the world of political advertising.
The watch word for this type of advertising has always been, “Demonize your opponent, while obfuscating your candidate.”
Heaven forbid having political advertising that was straightforward and truthful - nobody would watch the ads - way too boring.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 1:20 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Yes tacky is the norm, negative is perfectly acceptable … but lying (though it has become standard practice) we must never consider acceptable.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 1:55 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
So Ash, I asked earlier, but you never answered.
What did you vote for?
You voted for Obama.
Obama campaigned on “change you can count on”.
What ‘change’ did he promise that you voted FOR?
I know he promised tax cuts for everybody that earns less than $250,000 then $200,000 then $150,000 then $120,000 per year.
And in the next sentence he speaks of the “average person making one half to one million dollars a year”.
Is your husband ‘average’ making $500,000 to a million a year?
Do you know ANY ‘average’ person that makes that much?
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 2:05 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
The difficulty, and one that I have previously mentioned, is at time not that people are “lying” (there are exceptions), it is that two individuals may look at the same thing or situations and, depending upon their perspective, may see things differently.
Many others, also cannot brook dissent. Any disagreement, especially if challenging a deeply held belief, is viewed as a “personal” assault, or “put down.”
We all see things differently, and we also differ greatly on fundamental issues. There is nothing wrong with that. Those who put forth their “beliefs” or views should expect to be challenged both as to their content, and as to their source. If not, they are attempting to dictate, not discuss. With such individuals, one can merely argue, not engage in meaningful discourse.
Time and time again throughout history, we have been reminded by the greatest of thinkers that one of the worst mistakes any individual can make is that he/she “cannot be wrong”; i.e. infallible. It is also a fact that the worst crimes ever perpetrated upon humanity have been committed, not by those who who believe themselves to to merely “right”, but by those who believe that they “can’t be wrong.” And it makes not difference what the source of the belief is.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 2:21 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
As the issue of Laura Bradford is restricted to Grand Junction, in whom people vote for, I have not commented upon it. What does concern me is as to whether she (and Josh Penry for that matter), even know what insurance really is; i.e. do they know the basics of it. It would appear that neither does. That enables insurance companies to engage in “red-lining”, and not based upon geographical positions, but statistically; i.e. width of base and distribution of risk, that determines the premium to be charged. For instance, no insurance company will sell a life insurance policy to someone who is on their deathbed, and if they do, they will charge almost the full amount of coverage, at which point there is absolutely no need for insurance.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 2:23 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Sorry Ash, I thought we were discussing political lies spoken in order to garner votes.
I was only pointing out that the person you voted for never did offer any specific “changes”, and he couldn’t remember what the lie was on tax cuts.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 2:31 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I thought we were talking about attack ads on Laura Bradford. So we continue to talk about different things, that’s cool. I’ll just stay in my own little world. I do not wish for Laura Bradford to win, but I repeat the ads against her were sleazy. I also will repeat, as someone correctly pointed out earlier that Buescher had nothing to do with these ads … but my point is, it is NOT alright for 527’s to attack candidates with sleazy/false ads even IF (*gasp*) their target is a Republican.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 3:09 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Oh, you mean like the “trooper gate” lies told about Sarah Palin?
She was cleared of any wrongdoing.
That kind of lie?
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 3:20 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
So that means your accusations against Ayers are lies as well, since he was never convicted of the things you accused him of.
Nice.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 3:20 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ethics violations are not wrongdoing? What are they for? Ethics don’t count?
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 3:21 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Apparently they only count if they can prove the case against you.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 3:22 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
I am unaware of any “troopergate” ads; the fact that she was under investigation was not a lie.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 4:07 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis, you said, “Ash, the media went to a lot of trouble to smear Mrs Palin unfairly and with extreme malice.”
All the media did was showcase the fact that Sarah Palin is ignorant trailer trash from the boondocks who gets her weekend jollies shooting wolves from the air and has absolutely no qualifications to be Vice President of the United States of AmeriKa.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 4:11 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis,
First of all, I’m not attacking you. I’m pointing out a gaping hole in your logic. Second of all, it doesn’t matter what Ayers said. You said:
” Oh, you mean like the “trooper gate” lies told about Sarah Palin?
She was cleared of any wrongdoing.”
This appears to mean that the fact that she was cleared means the charges against her were lies. By extension, if Ayers was cleared then the charges against him were lies.
Of course, most of us recognize the fact that being cleared of something has nothing at all to do with whether you are guilty (O.J. Simpson, anyone?) Therefore, we recognize that just because Sarah Palin was cleared does not mean she wasn’t guilty. It doesn’t mean she is, but contrary to your post #16, the accusations against her are not automatically lies simply because she was cleared.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 4:31 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis - I’ll have you know my double-wide cost me $267,000 and I live on a residential lot on top of a hill overlooking Grand Junction. My winter home in Mexico is “stick-built” of adobe, and was constructed by happy, smiling local peasants.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 4:46 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
The fact that Palin gets her jollies shooting wolves from the air says more about her than any “troopergate” ever did anyway.
Posted November 4th, 2008 at 4:47 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis,
Was Ayers convicted of any of the deaths you claimed he was responsible for?
No.
Therefore, by your own logic (i.e. Post #16), the accusation that he had anything to do with it is a lie.
Would you admit that Sarah Palin was guilty of unethical practices if she admitted it after being cleared?
Wriggle, twist and try to distract all you want. You are only living down to our expectations of you.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 8:14 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Now Ash, rm would consider that post as churlish, mean spirited, vile, hateful, and just plain downright rude.
However, Michelle obama gets her jollies by spending $455.00 of campaign donors money on a midday snack for herself.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 8:40 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ah Willis…still spreading the “facts” around, eh? You might want to check your sources–the snack thing is a hoax.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 8:44 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis, sreading a hoax, lies and right-wing nonsense? Never, he’s a man of learning and truthful facts! NOT
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 9:05 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Wow. Everyone should be happy now. The sick will be made well, the blind will see and after the redistribution we will all be rich (or at least as rich as our neighbor) so what’s not to like?
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 9:36 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis,
My comparison between Ayers and Palin was based on your logic in saying that since Palin was cleared the charges against her were lies.
I agree that the premise is false and retarded. It is, after all, YOUR premise in the first place. I’m glad you see that now.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 9:38 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis, you’d I don’t know what you’er talking about Reagan and better dig into your archives to show me about the legal action stuff.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 9:40 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
OH NO………..Bradford won……………..
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 9:41 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Willis, let’s try that again. I don’t know what you are talking about with the Reagan mention and you’d better dig into your archives to show me about the legal action stuff.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 9:44 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Rancherswife, I know …. we are going to need lawyers.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 9:46 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
For sure… but first a recount.
Just in case, I’ve got a list of attorneys started.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 9:51 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Good. The wildlife and conservation org’s should be able to help. With Mies and Rowland still here too, and no additional county commissioners to dilute their antics the citizens are going to have to start getting tougher.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 10:02 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ash,
I went to an interesting meeting this last weekend. All I’ll say for now is that they are.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 10:05 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Very good to hear.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 10:39 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I have a feeling Mr. Meis is not going to enjoy the next couple of years. The hounds are gathering. Willis will have much to kvetch about in defense of his oily buddy.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 10:41 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
ash and ranchers wife, just because bradford won, and with a 1.6% lead as of late last night, why do you insist it’s fraud?
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 10:42 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Threatening an elected public official dc?
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 10:46 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Hite, you misunderstand. No one thinks it is fraud. A recount would just verify that the tally was correct. I am just assuming she did win; she has made it quite clear that she is more of the “Drill, baby, drill” philosophy, (Shared by Commissioner Meis who was decisively re-elected), and given all of this it will be more important than ever to work to protect watersheds, landowner rights etc. from potential O&G industry abuse.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 10:58 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
i don’t have a problem with drilling…responsible drilling, that is…while i agree that we need oversight on the o&g industry, we cannot afford to shut em down like many want to do…our economy depends on this, locally and nationally
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 10:59 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
oh yeah, a recount is automatic when the race is within .5%, but if it’s as decisive as indicated last night, why do we need a recount?…seems a waste of time, effort and money, to me…
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 11:03 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I agree with you Hite on your point 48. The problem is in the cases where it has not been done responsibly, such as the Delta no permit issue; many citizens believe that more vigilant oversight is needed as “the wolves are watching the henhouse.”
I do not have a very strong opinion about a recount. Would depend on how likely it was that the tally was wrong.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 11:04 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Ash,
I predict that Ms. Bradford will become as much of an embarrassment to Mesa county as Douglas Bruce is to El Paso county. Once again the Republican party of Mesa county has demonstrated its’ domination of local politics. The political dynamic in Happy Valley remains unchanged, except that, now another oil and gas puppet will represent this area.
Those who care about fairness, the environment, and a sustainable economy will continue to hold the toadies of Big Oil accountable. By the time the next elections roll around, the rigs will be dotting the landscape and polluting the air right here in the valley.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 11:08 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
there’s no permit needed in delta county to drill?…i hadn’t heard anything about that…and dc, just like i’m gonna do with the bammer, why don’t you give ms. bradford a chance before castigating her?…you haven’t any solid evidence of her “puppetry”, do you?
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 11:09 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Once again the majority of voters in Mesa County have demonstrated that they are out of touch with the rest of the State of Colorado, disconnected completely from the mood of the rest of the nation and entirely ignorant of world views. CNN statistics for the U.S as a whole show that the more education the voter had, the more likely he/she was to have voted for Obama. Thus it becomes a kind of intelligence test. It is therefore no surprise to see the brightest of our high school graduates in Mesa county leave this area as fast as they can get away.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 11:19 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Hite, I was referring to a case involving Delta Petroleum where they failed to get a permit for activities where one was obviously required and was later given a “pass” by our commissioners though they knowingly violated the law. As far as giving Ms. Bradford a chance, it seems she has already made clear where her loyalties will lie … but maybe you are right …
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 11:38 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
ash, if that’s the case, then they should have at the very least been fined and lost their opportunity to drill, giving that permit to a company willing to abide within the regulations…as for ms. bradford, i’ve never heard anything about her going against current regulations in regards to drilling…the nice thing about our system is, if a representative or other elected official is found doing things illegaly, we as citizens have recourse to fire em…
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 11:41 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
The drilling issue is important but the biggest problem with Bradford is that Bernie was one of, if not the, most influential members of the House and was in the best position to look out for Western Slope interests which are always under attack in the legislture. If Bradford does win we will have the most junior, least influential member of the House who is an ideologue totally out of step with the direction of things–and she is not going to change that direction. We had a big “something” and now we wiil have a tiny “nothing”. All this for the sake of tribal solidarity, screw the general populace.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 11:46 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
I did not wish to be in error about Delta Petroleum. It appears they did pay the fine in the end, but an interesting story … it seems the county commissioners had overturned the decision of the planning commission and granted Delta Petroleum the permit even after they knew the company had acted illegally.
“Delta Petroleum had started construction of a natural gas compressor station, at 69861 E. Colorado Highway 330, on 6.5 acres northeast of Vega Reservoir, prior to applying for and receiving a conditional-use permit from the county. Shortly after construction started, it did apply for the required permit, but continued with construction until the company was issued a cease-and-desist order July 10 by Mesa County Code Enforcement.
On July 24 the Mesa County Planning Commission heard Delta Petroleum’s request for the conditional-use permit and denied it on a 3-2 vote. On Aug. 12 the company appealed to the Mesa County Commission and was granted the permit, allowing the company to finish the construction of its compressor station…”
http://www.gjsentinel.com/news/content/news/stories/2008/10/09/101008_2a_Delta_Petroleum_fine.html
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 11:55 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Well said, John. I have had a chance to get to know how things work at the state capitol. The election of Laura Bradford essentially means another soldier for the oil and gas industry (I was in the room when she announced her fealty to the O&G boys and claimed that she would love to have a drilling rig in her front yard) and an enormous loss for the rest of us. I will watch for the day when Rep. Bradford disobeys the instructions of Sen. Penry and Kathy Hall.
One thing that will be an improvement is the direction of the BLM. At least our public lands have been given a fighting chance.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 11:55 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
thanks for the story, ash, now i remember…they really should have lost that contract, tbh, and it should have went to a company willing to lay within the rules…dc, i think i understand where you’re coming from now, it’s not so much what bradford stands for as the lact of influence for the west slope, am i correct?
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 12:08 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
That and the fact that she has demonstrated a singular lack of knowledge and understanding of the issues. IMHO, she will rely on Penry, Meis, Hall, and that cadre of industry supplicants for guidance and instruction on oil and gas issues. The rest of the Republican party will guide her on other subjects. I sincerely doubt if she will do her own thinking.
I base my opinion on the numerous occasions I have heard her speak on the issues. “toot,toot”
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 1:32 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Class: “CNN statistics for the U.S as a whole show that the more education the voter had, the more likely he/she was to have voted for Obama. Thus it becomes a kind of intelligence test.”
Actually, the results I saw were fairly close, except for the two extremes. Of those with post-graduate degrees, 58% voted for Obama and 40% for McCain. on the other hand, of those who did not graduate from high school, 63% voted for Obama and 34% for McCain.
The results for groups with education levels going from high school through a bachelors degree, show little difference from the overall election margin.
So to suggest that voting for Obama is a sign of intelligence, is a classless remark and not a great way to start a new political era.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122584499389399483.html#articleTabs%3Dinteractive
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 1:41 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Regardless of education status the results speak for themselves. New leadership, new direction and hopefully sound judgement. In any case the people have spoken.
Posted November 5th, 2008 at 1:46 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Warhorse, I don’t disagree with your post. And I certainly wish Obama the best.
But to suggest that the more intelligent the person the more likely he was to vote for Obama,is offensive and is not borne out by the data.
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.