In a move that is likely to cause some controversy, a Maryland pledged delegate has announced he is switching from Clinton to Obama:
Prince George's County Executive Jack B. Johnson, a Democratic convention delegate pledged to support Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, said yesterday that he thinks Sen. Barack Obama has "in a real sense" won the Democratic nomination and that he now plans to support Obama at the August convention.
...
This is Johnson's second change of heart in the race. He had allowed his name to be listed as a supporter by the Obama campaign in December.

Unlike superdelegates, who are free to endorse either candidate, Johnson is one of 28 pledged delegates who have agreed to represent the 36 percent of Maryland Democrats who voted for Clinton on Feb. 12.

Some Clinton delegates were chosen by voters at the ballot. Others, such as Johnson, were selected in consultation with the Clinton campaign by the Maryland Democratic State Central Committee, party spokesman David Paulson said.A few thoughts here: First, as we've noted often, pledged delegates are free within the rules of the convention to vote for anyone they want. From the Call to the Convention:
All delegates to the National Convention pledged to a presidential candidate shall in all good conscience reflect the sentiments of those who elected them.but they are not required to. Whether they should is another matter, but they are allowed to.

Second, we've stated how this was unlikely to happen as pledged delegates are vetted by the campaigns and tend to be the most committed, the most loyal of supporters. But that seems to have broken down here. As noted in the article, Johnson was an Obama supporter until December of 2007. Doesn't sound like the definition of "most loyal of supporters".

And the article says he was appointed by the Maryland Democratic State Central Committee (to a state at-large position) in consultation with the Clinton campaign, which also does not sound like the normal process.

This presents a bit of a problem for the Obama campaign. While they would certainly welcome the vote in general, it does legitimize the Clinton proposed theory that pledged delegates can switch their votes, and therefore enables an argument that all delegates to the convention should be considered open to changing their vote.

It will be interesting to see how the Obama camp responds to this.

In the United States, every religion under the sun, Christian and non-Christian, has a foothold, and no nation on Earth with a comparable level of economic development is so religious in practice. Religion is a fill in the blank question. No multiple choice option is comprehensive enough to fit a simple survey accurately.

In most of Europe, in any given place, there tend to be three predominant religious identifications. One is the established or formerly established form of Christianity -- Anglicans in England, Lutherans in Scandinavia and Northern Germany, Catholics in France, Spain, Italy and Southern Germany. A second, increasingly the second most common faith in most regions of Europe, is Islam. A third is some form of secular, atheistic or non-religious identification.

For example, in France, in a 2003 poll, religious self-identification was "62% . . . Roman Catholic, 7% Muslim, 2% Protestant, 1% Jewish, 2% "other religions" (except for Orthodox or Buddhist, which were negligible), 26% 'no religion'" Moreover, a significant share of those who self-identify as Catholic or Muslim see this as a cultural designation rather than a theological one and simultaneously view themselves as atheist, agnostic or believers in a far more vague form of divinity than Catholic or Islamic doctrine describe (about 12% of the French come from Islamic countries, and historically, almost all of the French were considered Catholics).

In much of what we think of as the Islamic world, almost everyone is considered Muslim and the only real alternative, as a default, is a secular stance.

Globalization could play out a couple of ways. One would be for secularism to arise as a consensus alternative in a world where most societies are multiple choice or either-or in their universe of culturally acceptable religious roles.

The other would be for the exposure to multiple world religions to turn what had previously been multiple choice societies from a religious perspective into fill in the blank societies as more options appear. For example, this appears to be happening in London.

Time will tell which response predominates.Copyright Andrew Oh-Willeke (2007)

Over at Echidne of the Snakes, Anthony McCarthy is helping to fill in for the moment and writes:

It’s Next Year That Could Get Us Killed If We’re Not Smart About It:

Those on the blog threads who are discouraging people from vigorously opposing and voting against the Republicans, in the only way that will affect reality in January, are acting as Republican agents provocateurs. I know that they will have some idealistic sounding reason for it, they will have some line, but reality is real*, that is the real life effect of what they are saying.

There is no rational reason for someone who doesn’t want the Bush-Cheney nightmare to continue under a new name to discourage people from voting for the Democratic nominee. There is either an irrational reason for them doing it or they are actually working to continue the policies of the Bush-Cheney nightmare. The six months before November will be too busy trying to prevent disaster to try to sort out the moles from the dupes. Until after the election, I’m considering them all Republican operatives, because they’ll be doing the same thing.

* Anticipating the usual eloquent appeals for "the future", well, January 2009 is as much "the future" as their age of their glorious millennium. I am pretty sure January will come next year, I haven’t seen any evidence that their fantasy future will get here. And since time goes all in one direction and only on one road, the road to whatever future there is will have to go through next year. That’s the reality of it. People are going to have to eat next year, have health problems next year, need an environment that will grow them food and sustain their lives next year, keep from getting involved with McCain’s war on Iran next year. We need a good next year to have a future beyond it. Next year could get us all killed.

American military fatalities in Iraq since March 2003: 4076

Total coalition fatalities: 4388

Estimated (because nobody counts) Iraqi military and civilian fatalities in the same period: 200,000 to 1.4 million, depending on the source.

The Overnight News Digest is posted.

This evening's Rescue Rangers are Yashua, PaintyKat, jennyjem, Wes Opinion, grog, and joyful, with shayera as editor.

• One of the worse things about having a non-obvious chronic medical condition is people not believing you are actually sick. dancing in a field of yellow flowers explains in her diary But you look so good!. (Wes Opinion)
• iampunha writes a powerful piece that recalls both the birthday of good man, and a terrible mass-murder in May 12, 1889 and 1942: Otto Frank and Auschwitz. (jennyjem)
• JohnnyRook walks us through the political and psychological back story of those who don't believe in global warming in Why Climate Denialists are Blind to Facts and Reason: The Role of Ideology. (grog)
• DCLaw brings us a truly creative tale of intrigue, action and heroism, in which the GOP Superfriends Battle for Telecom Immunity – Full Story! (Yashua)
• In a primer for pundits and anyone else who's a bit fuzzy on how polls work. kendg8r explains it all in an informative diary titled Why The Pundits Don't Understand Polling. (Wes Opinion)
• rmelcher wonders whether we have given sufficient thought to the potential use or abuse of power concerning online organizing and the Presidency in The Presidential Cult. (PaintyKat)
• Mrs Panstreppon connects the dots and gets a picture of a PAC in this link-a-licious post, American Future Fund, GOP Front: Update. (jennyjem)
• Might as well face it, the Bushies are addicted to war, writes ezdidit in the post The Drumbeat for War on Iran...denial and relapse...$20/gal gas? (jennyjem)
• Darkmoth believing we are all racist, discusses his personal perspectives, his experiences, and his comfort level concerning racism and racial accusations race, racist, racism...ugh. (PaintyKat)
• In a well-researched diary about a little known episode in the history of U.S. and Central American relations, gjohnsit takes us through what it takes to go From a whorehouse to a White House. (Wes Opinion)
• Code Breaker questions whether our dependency on oil will raise our unemployment and foster the global food shortage now in its infancy Guess what, US Economy worse than you think. (PaintyKat)

jotter has High Impact Diaries - May 11, 2008.

kath25 has Top Comments 05/12/08 : Of Monks and Mandalas.

Add your favorite diaries from the past 24 hours and use as an open thread.

We know the horse race numbers don't matter, but there's no reason in this latest ABC/WaPo poll for depressed Republicans to cheer up.

Americans Losing Confidence in Current Leadership

Americans are gloomier about the direction of the country than at any point since 1992, and Democrats have matched their biggest advantage in 25 years as the party better able to deal with the nation's main problems, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Despite more than eight in 10 now saying the country is headed in the wrong direction and growing disaffection with the Republican Party, Sen. John McCain, the GOP's presumptive presidential nominee, remains competitive in a general election matchup with Sen. Barack Obama, the favorite for the Democratic nomination, and runs almost even with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton.

Those findings indicate that McCain continues to elude some of the anger aimed at his party and at President Bush, whose own approval dipped to an all-time low in Post-ABC polling. Maintaining a separate identity will be a key to McCain's chances of winning the White House in November. Overall, Democrats enjoy a 21-point advantage over Republicans as the party best-equipped to handle the nation's problems.

McCain eludes some of the anger but not all. And that's now, before the campaign really heats up, and highlights his positions on the issues and ties him to Bush.

       May April  (+/- 3%)
McCain   44 (44)
Obama    51 (49)

The important numbers are Bush at 31 and wrong track at 82. McCain may run better than most other Republicans, but he still has to run against the fundamentals. In addition to right track/wrong track and Bush unpopularity, far more people (38%) are uncomfortable with McCain's age than an African-American President (12%) or a woman President (16%) - the explanation for the pushback against McCain 'losing his bearings'.

Obama will run as a fresh face, and do his best to highlight where McCain and Bush are inseparable (Iraq, health care and the economy). McCain will do the usual Republican shtick about "liberals and Pelosi and San Francisco values", all the things that didn't work in IL and LA special elections (there are new Dem congressmen as a consequence).

Oh, and by the way, Dems are in no hurry to see the race end (Hillary stay in-drop out is 64-35) and don't see it hurting Democrats (despite daily bloviating about this on cable TV, only 27% think it hurts and 56% think it makes no difference).

So, McCain trails by 7 compared to:

Overall, which party, the (Democrats) or the (Republicans), do you trust to do a better job in coping with the main problems the nation faces over the next few years?

Democrats   53
Republicans 32

meaning that McCain loses less. Still, he loses, with numbers consistent with the latest LA Times Bloomberg poll. And with short coat tails, Republicans and their severely damaged brand are in real trouble this fall.

First it was endangered Republican Senator Gordon Smith and now it's entire House Republican caucus trying to coopt the message of change.

It looks like Republicans will counter the Democratic push for change from the years of the Bush administration with their own pledge to deliver, drum roll please, "the change you deserve." The first element of the party agenda developed over the past few months by the leadership and select party members will focus on family issues.

"Through our "Change You Deserve" message and through our "American Families Agenda," House Republicans will continue our efforts to speak directly to an American public looking for leaders who will offer real solutions for the challenges they confront every day," said the memo prepared for lawmakers.

The party agenda is part of an effort to show that Republicans have ideas beyond simply blocking Democratic initiatives and supporting Mr. Bush on his multiple veto threats, some of which are looming over bills that could be before lawmakers this week.

Maybe they're worried that little Mother's Day stunt backfired. After all, it's not very smart to vote against Mom.

Let's look at their ideas to provide solutions for the challenges Americans face every day. They've killed SCHIP, which would have extended health insurance to children in moderate income families. They're getting help from the Blue Dog Democrats to block a vote on the GI Bill of Rights. Hmmm, that's not very friendly to American families of veterans. Of course, they also want to keep our military mired in a hopeless civil war in Iraq for "as long as it takes." That's not very friendly to the families of service members.

They've blocked consideration of a bill intended to help Americans caught in the mortgage crisis. That seems downright hostile to hurting families. They want to extend amnesty to law-breaking telcos, which is very friendly to the families of AT&T and Verizon executives, but that's a pretty small group that I expect the Republicans had wrapped up already.

Somehow I don't think the Republicans' idea of change is really what America has in mind.

A number of readers have asked for a Pledged Delegate History chart, similar to our Superdelegate History Chart. We weren't able to provide this data, but ABC News has now done it for us:



They also have interesting charts of the popular vote totals over time.

We're off to the races in Connecticut, with one red-hot House race in the Fourth District, and two solid freshman Dems looking to consolidate their support in the Second and Fifth Districts. The GOP has nominated their slate of candidates, and are ready to start the official campaign.

CT-02: Democrat "Landslide Joe" Courtney won election last year in one of the narrowest races in the country. Courtney edged Republican Rob Simmons by just 83 votes, a margin which is actually not unusual for the district. Former Representative Sam Gejdenson won reelection in 1994 by just 21 votes, and lost his seat to Simmons in 2002 by under 2,000 votes.

Courtney is a solid Democrat on national issues, and an outspoken opponent of the Iraq War. The district leans strongly Democratic at the presidential level (Gore won it by 14 points, and Kerry by 10), but it has placed a heavy emphasis in recent years on electing Representatives with the ability to deliver for the district, most particularly with regard to the submarine manufacturing base in Groton. The sub base is the district's largest employer, and Gejdenson lost in 2000 amid rumors of the base closing.

With the prominence of the submarine base in mind, the GOP recruited the former base commander, Captain Sean Sullivan, as their candidate. While this sounded promising for the Republicans initially (as much as any candidate would in a D+7.6 district in a Democratic year), the highly touted Sullivan has proven to be a fundraising dud. He has just over $100K on hand (and that number isn't increasing very quickly, as he pulled in a grand total of $3,000 in three weeks in April).

Courtney, meanwhile, has over $1.2 million on hand to go with a fine record for his first term in Congress. Rob Simmons had some nice words for our man Joe:

Former Republican Rep. Rob Simmons, who in 2006 lost narrowly to Courtney, the one-time Vernon town attorney, belittled his former opponent.

"If John McCain becomes the next president, who do you think he'll turn to for advice in Congress?" he asked Republicans gathered in Willimantic. "A town attorney from Vernon or a decorated Navy captain with more than 20 years of distinguished service?"

Yeah, well...that ain't happening.

CT-04: For the third year in a row, CT-04 is shaping up to be one of the hottest races in the country. Republican incumbent Christopher Shays, who narrowly won reelection with 52% in both 2004 and 2006, is the last Republican Representative from New England left in Congress. After spirited challenges the last two cycles from Diane Farrell, Shays is now challenger by Democrat Jim Himes.

Himes, 41, is a former Goldman Sachs vice president and Rhodes Scholar. He has proven to be a terrific fundraiser, with over $1.1 million cash-on-hand as of last filing. By comparison, 20-year incumbent Shays has roughly $30,000 more in the bank than Himes. Himes is also an early addition to the DCCC's Red to Blue list.

Shays has a long-standing reputation as a moderate, and he's certainly proven to be a survivor in this Democratic-leaning Bridgeport-based district. The Fourth was Lieberman country in 2006, which may well have helped Shays win reelection that year. Still, Himes is a truly formidable candidate, and even after the close calls of the last two cycles, Shays may yet be in for the race of his life.

CT-05: By PVI, the Fifth is Connecticut's least Democratic district (D+3.7). Republican Nancy Johnson represented the area for 24 years until 2006, when she was defeated by Democrat Chris Murphy.

Murphy, 34, has had a remarkable record of political success, particularly for such a young guy. Fresh out of college at 22, he managed the campaign of Democrat Charlotte Koskoff, who ran against Johnson in 1996 and came within one point of unseating her. After graduating from law school, Murphy then defeated a 14-year incumbent to win a seat in the State House, then captured a Republican-held seat in the State Senate before defeating Johnson quite badly in 2006, winning by 12 points after  a series of nasty attacks by the Johnson campaign. Since his election, Murphy has proven to be a popular Congressman and an excellent fundraiser, currently sitting on a $1.5 million war chest.

The Republicans hope to take this seat back with State Senator David Cappiello, who has been forced to run away from his unpopular president in this Dem-leaning district. Needless to say, that hasn't gone over especially well with his based (though he and Bush appear to be getting on fine, as Bush held a fundraiser for Cappiello at Henry Kissinger's house a few weeks ago).

It appears that the line of attack will be to paint Murphy as a DC insider who is soft on terrorism-indeed, it appears that that is already what they're doing. As DemFromCT notes, however, it's unlikely to work:

This is a winning strategery for McCain and Republicans... why? It's not 2002 any more. The inept Republican fear campaign played badly for Nancy Johnson in 2006 and Rudy Giuliani in 2008. Why would it work better now?

Alas, it's going to take a Democratic win in November to purge the system of the idea that Republican fear and smear still work. Chalk that up to yet another reason to vote Democratic.

Hear, hear.

The Republicans are dreaming big about CT-05, but I don't think this is the year they're going to stop Chris Murphy's meteoric rise.

Remember Virgil Goode?  Goode, whose name is pronounced like spreading goo rather than doing the right thing, entered Congress as a Democrat, but jumped to the GOP side when he feared being in the minority.  Once on Team Bush, he remade himself as the man who is afraid of Muslims

During today’s House debate on Iraq, virulently anti-Muslim Rep. Virgil Goode (R-VA) said supporting the anti-escalation resolution would "aid and assist the Islamic jihadists who want the crescent and star to wave over the Capitol of the United States and over the White House of this country."

very afraid of Muslims

"I fear that radical Muslims who want to control the Middle East and ultimately the world would love to see 'In God We Trust' stricken from our money and replaced with 'In Muhammad We Trust.'"

very very afraid of Muslim immigrants

I believe that if we do not stop illegal immigration totally, reduce legal immigration and end diversity visas, we are leaving ourselves vulnerable to infiltration by those who want to mold the United States into the image of their religion, rather than working within the Judeo-Christian principles that have made us a beacon for freedom-loving persons around the world.

and afraid of Muslim congressmen

I fear that in the next century we will have many more Muslims in the United States if we do not adopt the strict immigration policies that I believe are necessary to preserve the values and beliefs traditional to the United States of America...

Doesn't it seem like someone ought to give Mr. Goode the chance to escape the horrors of Washington and hide from scary Muslims in the safety of own basement?  

That someone is Tom Perriello.  

Perriello has launched a program to take out Virgil Goode, for good, by  doing good for his community.  

With events in Danville, Collinsville, and Charlottesville, the Perriello for Congress campaign launched its volunteer tithing initiative, unprecedented for a political campaign. The campaign will tithe 10% of all its volunteer hours to community service projects around the district. The campaign has logged more than 1,700 volunteer hours in total; over the weekend, volunteers kicked off the initiative by tithing 42 volunteer hours and moving forward, will tithe 10% of its hours.

This idea, of putting campaign efforts into doing work for the community, is one that I've been pushing for some time, and I'm extremely excited to see the Perriello campaign making this move (though I don't think for a second that they got the idea from me!  After all, the Dean Corps followed much the same plan).  I'm betting that time spent on actually helping out around the district will be much more valuable than more hours on phone banks or another commercial on local TV.  If you're a local, you could help make that prediction come true by volunteering.  If you're stuck at a distance, there's always the Perriello Act Blue Page.

While Virgil Goode talks about defending his values from scary Muslims.  Tom Perriello wants to show his values not through fear, but in service to others.

"I was raised to believe that a strong faith is a lived faith that must be made clear by our deeds. I want my campaign for Congress to reflect those same values," said Tom Perriello. "That is why we are asking our campaign team to commit 10% of their volunteer hours to local charities to reflect the value of service to community and to country."

What Perriello is asking from his volunteers is only an extension of what he's already asked of himself.

After receiving his law degree from Yale University, Tom accepted an assignment working to end atrocities in the West African countries of Liberia and Sierra Leone, which had suffered long civil wars fueled by blood diamonds. Tom’s work with child soldiers, amputees, and local pro-democracy groups in Sierra Leone played a significant role in the peace and reconciliation process that ended twelve years of violence in that country. ... He has worked inside Darfur and twice in Afghanistan.

Here's hoping that other campaigns also make this commitment.

What You Missed on Sunday Kos ....

• In The Past and Future Election, DemFromCT discussed the stark policy contrasts between the two presumptive nominees for president--particularly in policies that the American people are reporting as most important to them this election cycle.
• DemFromCT--doing double duty this Sunday--addressed the painful and difficult topic of how decisions are made about who to treat and who not to during a widespread emergency, when medical resources are finite and can't cover all of the afflicted, in Disasters, Surge and Pandemics.
• SusanG reviewed Larry Bartels' Unequal Democracy.
• DHinMI explored how the Bush administration's naivete and bumbling closes doors on opportunity in Lebanon: Yet Another Foreign Policy Opportunity Screwed Up by the Bush Administration.
• BarbinMD looked at John McCain's long, corrupt history of doing favors for shady characters and land speculators in If the Price is Right, You've Got a Friend in John McCain..
• mcjoan examined the subterranean ties between telecoms and front groups involved in the electoral process in Hoyer's and Rockefeller's Strange Corporate Bedfellow.
• Plutonium Page gave readers the rundown on the new line of junk science making the rounds in Alaska in Enter the Inhofian Polar Bear Expert.
• Meteor Blades reviewed Tim Shorrock's Spies for Hire.

Colorado Pols: "Former Republican Congressman Bob Barr announced today he's running for president as a Libertarian."

Category: 2008 Presidential Election

From The Denver Business Journal: " A report issued Monday by the federal Department of Energy --- saying that wind power could meet 20 percent of the nation's needs by 2030 --- could boost Colorado's fledgling wind industry. 'We're really been positioning ourselves as the center for the new energy economy,' said Craig Cox, executive director of Interwest Energy Alliance, a renewable energy trade association based in Conifer."

Category: 2008 Presidential Election

If you're following the public comment period for the Oil Shale and Tar Sands Draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (PEIS) for oil shale development click here for the public comments and here for the written comments.

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Category: 2008 Presidential Election

Now here's something to shake up the Republican base. Republicans for Environmental Protection sent out email linking to John McCain's speech in Oregon today on global warming. Here's the link to the speech. A couple of excerpts:

In the coming weeks, I intend to address many of the great challenges that America's energy policies must meet. When we debate energy bills in Washington, it should be more than a competition among industries for special favors, subsidies, and tax breaks. In the Congress, we need to send the special interests on their way - without their favors and subsidies. We need to draw on the best ideas of both parties, and on all the resources a free market can provide. We need to keep our eyes on big goals in energy policy, the serious dangers, and the common interests of the American people.

Today I'd like to focus on just one of those challenges, and among environmental dangers it is surely the most serious of all. Whether we call it "climate change" or "global warming," in the end we're all left with the same set of facts. The facts of global warming demand our urgent attention, especially in Washington. Good stewardship, prudence, and simple common sense demand that we to act meet the challenge, and act quickly.

Some of the most compelling evidence of global warming comes to us from NASA. No longer do we need to rely on guesswork and computer modeling, because satellite images reveal a dramatic disappearance of glaciers, Antarctic ice shelves and polar ice sheets. And I've seen some of this evidence up close. A few years ago I traveled to the area of Svalbard, Norway, a group of islands in the Arctic Ocean. I was shown the southernmost point where a glacier had reached twenty years earlier. From there, we had to venture northward up the fjord to see where that same glacier ends today - because all the rest has melted. On a trip to Alaska, I heard about a national park visitor's center that was built to offer a picture-perfect view of a large glacier. Problem is, the glacier is gone. A work of nature that took ages to form had melted away in a matter of decades...

We have many advantages in the fight against global warming, but time is not one of them. Instead of idly debating the precise extent of global warming, or the precise timeline of global warming, we need to deal with the central facts of rising temperatures, rising waters, and all the endless troubles that global warming will bring. We stand warned by serious and credible scientists across the world that time is short and the dangers are great. The most relevant question now is whether our own government is equal to the challenge.

Memo to Barack and Hillary. McCain just stole your natural position on this issue. Have you figured out who white people are going to vote for? Sigh.

Category: 2008 Presidential Election

Here's an update on Rueter-Hess Reservoir from The Denver Post. From the article:

The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers recently approved the Parker Water and Sanitation District's request to quadruple the size of the Rueter-Hess Reservoir near Parker. When it is completed in 2011, it will serve the Parker area as well as Castle Rock, Castle Pines North and Stonegate, all of which agreed to buy into the partnership. Although it won't be a full solution to the area's water problems, it will help as Douglas County continues to add houses. It will also bring in new sources of water to existing homes. "Rueter-Hess is only a water-management tool," said Frank Jaeger, manager of the Parker Water and Sanitation District. "We are going to have to find other sources of water. We're looking in every river basin. In order to sustain the type of growth on the Front Range, water is going to have to be developed on all those basins."

The reservoir will store both future water acquisitions and recycled water from the system's two wastewater treatment plants. The water district also will be able to divert and store water from Cherry Creek. The expansion will allow the reservoir to store 72,000 acre-feet of water and be 1,140 acres on the surface. That is enough water for 140,000 homes. The first phase of the reservoir, which already is built, can store 16,000 acre-feet. The total price at completion is estimated at $165 million...

Recent studies have found that the [Denver Basin Aquifers] are being depleted at about 30 feet a year. That is why Jaeger and others think the area needs to secure more water options by gaining rights on one of the state's river basins, such as the Arkansas or South Platte. "I believe we will have to import water in the long term, that being only 20 years," Jaeger said. "We need to be working diligently to develop water from other river basins and import water through pipelines."

More Coyote Gulch coverage here and here.

Category: Colorado Water

TalkLeft: "The San Francisco Chronicle has an article today on the presidential candidates and their positions on federal raids of marijuana dispensaries. It gets it somewhat right, but is a little misleading in my view. With the Oregon vote coming up, it paints Barack Obama as the only true friend of the medical marijuana user. (None are a friend to the recreational user, although Obama once said he was.)"

Category: 2008 Presidential Election

Colorado Confidential "The war over rules for establishing unions in Colorado workplaces is being funded by unions and corporations rather than by individual donors, recent financial reports show. State and national labor unions have contributed more than $1.5 million in only two months to defeat a so-called "right-to-work" ballot initiative that would prohibit union shops from requiring nonunion members to join and pay dues or fees and to support two counterproposals that would make corporate executives liable for any fraud that happens in their companies and make employers give a reason when workers are fired. All three measures are slated for Colorado's November election, but at this time only right-to-work has gained the required petition signatures to make the ballot."

Category: Denver November 2008 Election

Political Wire: "A new Research 2000 poll in West Virginia finds Sen. Hillary Clinton leading Sen. Barack Obama, 58% to 31%, in tomorrow's Democratic primary. However, in general election match ups both Democrats get crushed by Sen. John McCain. McCain leads Clinton, 53% to 41%, and tops Obama, 58% to 33%,"

Political Wire: "Just a day before the West Virginia primary, a new Suffolk University poll finds Sen. Hillary Clinton leading Sen. Barack Obama among Democratic voters by a wide margin, 60% to 24%."

Category: 2008 Presidential Election

Discussing the anti-affirmative action ballot measure Amendment 46 on the May 11 broadcast of KNUS 710 AM's Backbone Radio, host John Andrews and guest Ward Connerly extolled Jessica Peck Corry as the leader of the campaign for the measure -- known as the Colorado Civil Rights Initiative -- without identifying her as a policy analyst and political strategist with the "free-market" Independence Institute. Corry also serves as director of the think tank's Campus Accountability Project.

Connerly, who is founder and chairman of the American Civil Rights Institute, described Corry as "well-informed about the issue" of affirmative action, while Andrews called her "a good friend of this radio program." But both failed to mention that Corry supported a controversial anti-affirmative action bake sale held by College Republicans in 2004 at the University of Colorado in Boulder that charged different prices for baked goods depending on the customer's skin color, as Colorado Media Matters has noted.

From the May 11 broadcast of KNUS 710 AM's Backbone Radio:

ANDREWS: Here in Colorado, I wouldn't be surprised if you have essentially a lonely battle as far as elites not rallying to your flag either, but if the people are just given a chance to vote on this, if judges will step back as the other side sometimes wants to de-legitimize you with litigation -- I'm confident we can get a result as we did in Michigan.

CONNERLY: I think we will. And we're very, very tickled to have leading the effort now Jessica Corry, who is very bright, well-informed about the issue, as was Valery Pech Orr [Colorado Civil Rights Initiative executive director]. Jessica is going to carry this ball across the goal line.

ANDREWS: Well, she's a good friend of this radio program. She wrote a terrific piece; I just looked it up in the Rocky, and we'll make sure it's linked on BackboneAmerica.net, telling the goals of the initiative and some of the lies and dirty tricks put up by the other side. But Jessica's a fighter; she has in you the example of a very well-seasoned fighter, a general for the whole national effort, Ward Connerly. And we're with you all the way. We'll check in with you again in a month and continue to advocate for it in the meantime.

On her May 9 1310 KFKA broadcast, Amy Oliver, director of operations for the "free-market" Independence Institute, uncritically allowed frequent guest Sean Conway to misrepresent Democratic U.S. Senate candidate and current U.S. Rep. Mark Udall's position on energy development on Colorado's Roan Plateau by stating that Udall "want[s] to prohibit all development" there. In fact, on April 17, U.S. Rep. John Salazar (D) introduced on behalf of himself and Udall legislation "[t]o provide for orderly and balanced development of energy resources within the Roan Plateau Planning Area of Colorado."

Conway further asserted inaccurately, referring to the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR), that "there is more oil reserves (sic) in ANWR than in Saudi Arabia." In fact, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), "Saudi Arabia contains about 260 billion barrels of proven oil reserves," while at the upper end of its estimates, EIA gives "a 5 percent probability that at least 16 billion barrels of technically recoverable undiscovered oil are in the ANWR coastal plain."

Conway, who is chief of staff for Colorado U.S. Sen. Wayne Allard (R), included Salazar among Colorado members of Congress who "want to prohibit all development on the Roan Plateau."

From the May 9 broadcast of 1310 KFKA's The Amy Oliver Show:

CONWAY: Your caller just said, "When are we gonna get Congress out of the business of regulating and allowing us to produce this oil and gas domestically?" In Colorado there's a big division. In fact, in the United States Senate race this year, there's gonna be a big distinction between Mark Udall and his approach in terms of trying to deal with $4-a-gallon gasoline and Bob Schaffer's -- i.e., the Roan Plateau. You even saw a transformation with Governor [Bill] Ritter on exploration, which still Mark Udall and John Salazar want to prohibit all development on the Roan Plateau in this state.

CALLER: Can we make that, you know, a large part of the campaigning, to point out the differences?

Contrary to Conway's assertion that Udall and Salazar "want to prohibit all development on the Roan Plateau," on April 17 Salazar "for himself and Mr. Udall of Colorado" introduced H.R. 5851, which "provide[s] for balanced development of the energy resources of the Roan Plateau in a manner that minimizes the adverse impacts on fish and wildlife habitats and environmental resources and values while increasing the financial returns to the United States and the State of Colorado." Grand Junction's NBC affiliate KKCO 11 News reported April 5 after Udall toured the Roan Plateau that he voiced his support for phased development of the Roan, consistent with an approach that Ritter had advocated:

During a visit to Grand Junction Saturday, U.S. Representative Mark Udall took an airplane tour over the Roan Plateau.

The Congressman has been at the center of the firestorm surrounding natural gas drilling atop the natural landmark. Udall says he's in favor of drilling, but not at the expense of damaging the environment.

He says he supports the plan laid out by Governor Bill Ritter, which calls for leasing out sites in specific areas, and only leasing out so many at one time. That plan was rejected by the Bureau of Land Management, but Udall says he hopes push it through Congress and turn it into federal law.

"It's truly a unique resource," said Rep. Udall. "It really defines all of us who love Western Colorado. There's no reason we can't develop the gas in a responsible way and also protect surface areas at the top of the Roan."

In an April 18 article about H.R. 5851, the Rocky Mountain News similarly reported, contrary to the distinction Conway drew between the Ritter and Udall positions on Roan energy development, that the plan favored by Udall, John Salazar, and U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar (D) "mirrors most of the provisions Gov. Bill Ritter has said he wants in place before more gas drilling begins."

Further distorting energy issues, Conway falsely asserted that "[t]here is more oil in ANWR than in Saudi Arabia," later restating the claim as "there is more oil reserves (sic) in ANWR than in Saudi Arabia":

OLIVER: And you know what, Progress Now -- I don't know if you've seen these, [caller] -- but Progress Now, which is the uber-leftist, just radical leftist group that is trying to smear Bob Schaffer. They have put "Big Oil Bob" -- they have it all over websites and everything else. You know what -- what's funny about it, I'm thinking, "Big Oil Bob," like, it should have some sort of negative connotation. I'm thinking thank you, thank you, thank you, for looking domestically at sources for energy as opposed to, you know, those who would like to, first of all, halt economic growth. I think that's the number-one reason why enviros don't want domestic drilling. As far as they're concerned, they don't care if we go backwards economically.

CONWAY: Well, here's a statistic that isn't said enough, so I'm gonna say it. There is more oil in ANWR than in Saudi Arabia. If you, do you hear that in the mainstream media? Do you hear that discussed?

OLIVER: No, 'cause you're gonna destroy the tundra. [laughs]

CONWAY: Think about that for a second. We are not allowing ANWR -- and we've all talked about the small imprint that that represents in terms of exploration, from domestic exploration -- and there is more oil reserves in ANWR than in Saudi Arabia. But environmentalists say, "Oh, it'd only be a trickle." Well, if it's only a trickle, why are we so dependent on imported oil from Saudi Arabia?

OLIVER: Well, the other thing you hear, "It's gonna take forever." Hey, [caller], good call.

Conway did not cite the source for his "statistic" about oil reserves in ANWR compared with those in Saudi Arabia. According to information from the EIA, estimated oil reserves in ANWR are a fraction of Saudi Arabia's proven oil reserves. Regarding ANWR, the EIA states:

The 1.5 million-acre coastal plain of the 19 million-acre Arctic National Wildlife Refuge is the largest unexplored, potentially productive geologic onshore basin in the United States. The primary area of the coastal plain is the 1002 Area of ANWR established when ANWR was created. A decision on permitting the exploration and development of the 1002 Area is up to Congress and has not been approved to date. Also included in the Coastal Plain are State lands to the 3-mile offshore limit and Native Inupiat land near the village of Kaktovik.

The USGS estimated:

• a 95 percent probability that at least 5.7 billion barrels of technically recoverable undiscovered oil are in the ANWR coastal plain,
• a 5 percent probability that at least 16 billion barrels of technically recoverable undiscovered oil are in the ANWR coastal plain, and
• a mean or expected value of 10.3 billion barrels of technically recoverable undiscovered oil in the ANWR coastal plain. [emphases added]

In contrast, the EIA notes of Saudi Arabia:

According to the Oil and Gas Journal, Saudi Arabia contains about 260 billion barrels of proven oil reserves (including 2.5 billion barrels in the Saudi-Kuwaiti Divided, or "Neutral" Zone), or around one-fifth of proven, conventional world oil reserves. Around two-thirds of Saudi reserves are considered "light" or "extra light" grades of oil, with the rest either "medium" or "heavy." Although Saudi Arabia has over 100 oil and gas fields (and more than 1,500 wells), over half of its oil reserves are contained in only eight fields, including the giant 1260-sq mile Ghawar (the world's largest oil field, with estimated remaining reserves of 70 billion barrels) and Safaniya, including Khafji and Hout (the world's largest offshore oilfield, with estimated reserves of 25-35 billion barrels). [emphases added]