http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/blog_rss/jennydaviesschley You know the story by now. A man who dressed and acted like a Secret Service agent threw out three Coloradans from last week's Bush-Beauprez Social Security meeting because they had emerged from a car with a "No Blood For Oil" bumpersticker. And always loathe to do what most of us do every day--admit an error and apologize--the Bush White House, Congressman Beauprez and the Republican Party stand firm on denying culpability. The "bouncer" was an unnamed, overzealous volunteer. Ooops, no. He's a Republican Party staffer who still will be unnamed. They were ejected because they " might try to disrupt the event." (because we can read your minds?) It's not Beauprez's fault: "No one has ever been asked to leave for dissent from a Beauprez event," claim his spokesperson. The Colorado Republican Party and the Republican National Committee firmly deny they had anything to do it. Because in BushWorld no bigwig is ever responsible for his actions. Consequences? What consequences? Air Force brass can ignore sexual harrassment and assault, hanging women cadets out to dry. Military officers can evade punishment in systematic torture of war prisoners, but let's court-martial PFCs and other grunts. Security agencies can refuse to share intelligence. Hell, so can intra-agency divisions . Honchos can be "dead wrong" on intelligence that starts an unfounded war that kills 100,000+ civilians. State Department officials can eliminate the US's share of UN Population Fund funding ($34 million) the result of which is an estimated "2 million unwanted pregnancies, 800,000 induced abortions, 4700 maternal deaths and 77000 infant and child deaths." Wait a minute...aren't these the same people who campaigned on the virture of "personal responsibility" people. Oh, I get it...that's just for the little people, like people "on welfare" and women whose birth control method fails. Well, believe it or not, most of us out here in the heartland actually take this personal responsibility seriously. At my house, kids are: 1) Not punished for THINKING ABOUT "bad choices" they don't make 2) Are reprimanded for transgressions they actually accomplish Memo to White House Chief of Staff Andy Card: Unless your event henchman has secret psychic powers unavailable to the rest of us, it was just wrong to throw the three Denver residents out. THEY HADN'T DONE ANYTHING "DISRUPTIVE!" Repeat after me: Don't punish the innocent...don't punish the innocent...dont punish the innocent. As for the responsibility shirkers in your circle, I'd be happy to host a boot camp for your staffers. My kids, John and Sarah, can demonstrate how to own mistakes, accept consequences and apologize and make restitituion. And since we don't seem to have this problem around here, Charlie and I can coach you, Karl Rove and President Bush on how to set behavior expectations and enforce the rules. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2Lf http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2Lf/commentary#comments Thu, 31 Mar 2005 10:52:08 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2Lf Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C2Lf/ The news is full of the tough choice Governor Bill Owens faces in deciding whether to sign House Bill 1042, requiring Colorado hospitals to tell rape victims about emergency contraception during their post-assault examinations. Tough choice? For whom, exactly? Not for most victims of sexual assault. As Representative Fran Coleman said, "This bill is for someone who has just been sexually assaulted, who did not welcome that sperm into her body...It's just like wanting a bullet removed from your body." But supposedly it's tough because the governor is Roman Catholic and he campaigned on "conservative values." I have a lot of Catholic friends, none of whom buy the church's anti-contraceptive, mandatory-be-fruitful-and-multiply doctrine. It's an anachronistic vestige of the agricultural past, regardless of what Archbishop Charles Chaput wants his flock to believe. And the bill isn't about prescribing abortion pills. It requires hospital emergency rooms to offer INFORMATION about EMERGENCY CONTRACEPTION. ER's don't even have to stock the pills--they are simply required to tell women that the pills exist if they don't want to be impregnated by a hideous, violent rapist. Women themselves can decide whether EC is for them or not. Catholic hospitals are in the business of offering medical treatment and advice. I highly doubt these institutions are recommending self-flagellation for depressed patients or other acts of barbarism practiced by members of various Catholic sects over the centuries. Giving information to traumatized women is compassionate--it's very New Testament. Catholic hospital administrators should feel comfortable about offering this kind of help to suffering rape victims. Because forcing women victims to carry and bear the child of their rapist is barbaric. Period. This is about real people and real lives. It's not theater of the absurd, where Monty Python's mega-parody "Every Sperm is Sacred" is actually true. And surely even the most ardent pro-lifer, whether Catholic or a "conservative values" activist, can understand that preventing an unwanted pregnancy prevents abortion, something we can all agree is a good thing. And for those pregnant rape victims who want to stay that way--like the mom who played an audio tape of her rape-conceived child singing "Jesus Loves Me"--there is nothing that prevents them from choosing that path. Amanda Mountjoy, fellow Catholic, fellow Republican and spokeswoman for Republican Majority for Choice confirms that this shouldn't be a tough choice for the governor. Fellow conservatives Senator Nancy Spence and Representative Lynn Hefley agree. Hmmm...all women. Very interesting. Can it be that only women can conceive of the pain, violence, violation and degradation of rape? Maybe I'm not suitably realistic, but I don't believe that. I think men can at least begin to understand. As far as I can see, this is a no-brainer for the governor, even though he has yet to take a position on the matter. C'mon Governor Owens...do the right thing for the women of Colorado. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2FS http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2FS/commentary#comments Wed, 30 Mar 2005 10:44:28 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2FS Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C2FS/ How convenient that acting Air Force Secretary Peter B. Teets retired and left office on Friday, just days after deciding not to punish any of the brass involved in the Air Force Academy sexual assault and harassment scandal. You remember the details: Women cadets who reported sexual assaults and sexual harassment brought them retaliation, while their cases were botched and mishandled. In conducting his investigation, Teets himself admits he didn't interview any of the cadets involved, nor anyone else connected to the rape cases. Nevertheless Teets said the officials were "not intentionally or willfully derelict in their duties...The record of missed warning signs is disturbing but these officers acted in good faith to discharge their responsibilities to act in the cadet's best interests by taking bold steps to deter sexual assaults..." In a nutshell, the Air Force is "not responsible" for the assault problem. It's just like a bunch of frat boys shrugging innocently at the cops looking into alcohol and sex infractions in the aftermath of a raging party, "I dunno who bought the kegs"..."I didn't know there were minors here"..."Girls? Were there girls here?" Even though the Air Force insists that Teets' decision is final unless additional information or allegations come forward, there's a movement afoot to call on Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to take further action to hold officials accountable. Call me cynical, but asking Donald Rumsfeld to take on issues of military responsibility is a little like inviting the fox to guard the henhouse. See Abu Ghraib and other major scandals. It's just so outrageous. We are talking about women who are willing to give their lives to defend us in war, and a war is being waged against them within their own ranks. Women in the military have to fight both enemy combatants and their "brothers-in arms." Who's going to watch their backs? There are a few members of Congress calling for a full and fair investigation of the Air Force's dereliction of duty when it comes to women. I hope they can break the code of silence. And I gotta give full credit to Senator Wayne Allard, with whom I disagree on virtually every policy issue, who has been pursuing justice for the women cadets from the beginning. He called Teets' decision "inexcusable." More power to you on this one, Senator Allard...keep the pressure on. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2Fx http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2Fx/commentary#comments Tue, 29 Mar 2005 11:23:50 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2Fx Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C2Fx/ For those of you who think that feminism is, well, so 70's, think again. A recent Census Bureau study finds-- no surprise --white men with college degrees have the highest salaries of any demographic group, making over $66,000 on average. When looked at in terms of just gender, male college graduates typically made $63,000, while college-educated women earned $38,000. Oh, sure, you can look for excuses. Women often cut back hours or take a hiatus from work while their children are little. Some women choose lower-paying "helping" professions like K-12 teaching or social work rather than purely commerce-driven ones. But so do some men. But $25,000 differential? Puh-leaz. That's all about gender discrimination. Women don't receive equal pay for equal work. It's just that simple. And the effect go beyond a paycheck, penalizing women in retirement by creating gaps in Social Security and pensions, as well. I actually like to work--I enjoy the social interaction and the intellectual stimulation that my work provides. And I'm good at what I do. But even though I like it (and despite the fact that I took extended maternity leave after the birth of my kids), I should be paid a comparable hourly rate to a male colleague with similar talents and abilities. It's called fairness. And the fact that I love my work and that I'm mega-productive, which I make work by consulting around my kids' schedules, should be a hint to employers that flex-time is a really good idea. And on a different-but-relevant note, there's a growing movement of "Pharmacists for Life" who not only won't dispense medications that violate their personal, moral or religious beliefs, but also refuse to transfer or refer prescriptions to a pharmacy that will. Those "medications" are birth control and morning-after pills. And they have their defenders. Like the Christian Legal Society's Center for Law and Religious Freedom's Steven H. Aden who says, "More and more pharmacists are becoming aware of their right to conscientiously refuse to pass objectionable medications across the counter. We are on the very front edge of a wave that's going to break not too far down the line." Whoa, that's taking contolling women's future to a whole new level. I don't even want to think about what it means for the most vulnerable women--the poor, who don't have resources to drive around town to find alternatives; the rural, who may have only one pharmacy from which to choose; and the young, who are more easily intimidated. But even for a middle-class woman with relative privilege, what a violation! Who is my local pharmacist to deny me my doctor-prescribed birth control pills? It's none of his or her business how my husband and I decide to plan our lives. Family size is a decision with more impact that any other. I am getting the willies just thinking about what these trends mean. Can there really be a force in society trying to reassert total control over women? All those "traditional family values" folks, like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell and Colorado's very own James Dobson really mean it: They're seeking to reinstate a societal norm where Dad is the sole breadwinner; Mom bears as many children as is physically possible, spending all her time keeping the household logistics running; and all those kids are obedient and well-behaved. There's nothing inherently wrong with that if everyone in the household, especially Mom, is on board. But it sure isn't for everyone; I know it's not for me as I have my hands full emotionally. physically and financially with two kids. It's so 17th century, but I see the Dobsons of the world working feverishly to make it the only real option for all of us. Denying women fair wages and compelling unwanted pregnancies looks like part of a pretty smart strategy to re-establish the workplace as a man's domain. Yikes. Oh, yeah...it's time for the feminist movement to become mainstream once again. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2HY http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2HY/commentary#comments Mon, 28 Mar 2005 14:34:53 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2HY Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C2HY/ It's teacher contract negotiation time again in Denver, and negotiators have reached an impasse. It's not looking good for the teachers. Yesterday 1,000 teachers went down to DPS HQ at 900 Grant to express their frustration with a chintzy .1% raise with small step increases; disappearing planning time; large class size; and what is widely perceived as a lack of respect. While it might look like a raise to outsiders, being married to a teacher, I happen to know otherwise. To provide health care coverage for our healthy family of four, every month $910 is taken out of his paycheck to go to Pacificare. And since Pacificare is raising its rates by 10% for next year, we'll be paying over $1000 a month for health care--almost 40% of his take-home pay! We can kiss that "raise" goodbye; it seems like a salary reduction in that context. While that would seem like purely a labor relations issue, it's not. We keep saying that recruiting and retaining teachers is the key to quality education, and virtually all the research supports it. But when salary and benefits are not competitive with other industries, we end up with two types of teachers: unremarkable employees who put in their time because they don't have other options, and the gotta-save-the-world-types who are willing to put up with substandard compensation because the vow of poverty thing works for them. So if we want kids to have the best teachers in every classroom instead in just a few, we must attract good teachers. If we're going to attract numbers of good teachers, we must pay them well. Period. Why is planning time a big deal? Charlie's official workday is 7:30 AM to 3:30 PM, but he's usually there by 6:30 AM and stays later than 3:30 PM. Why? Because you can't possibly grade papers, gather activity materials, supervise kids to and from the bus, prepare lessons for kids from pre-reading to a 6th grade reading level, call parents, conference privately with students, meet with the special ed team and everything else a teacher has to do during the day. It's not humanly possible. Having student-taught in DPS myself, I can confirm this. When I wasn't getting away from school before 6 PM to be with my 2-year old, I knew teaching was an almost-impossible profession for a mother of small children. Planning time is what separates great teaching from just-getting-through-the-day. Planning time determines whether there are interesting, engaging activities that stimulate curiosity and learning in a classroom, or filling out worksheets dominates the day. Planning time is when teachers grade papers and assess performance so they can figure out what each kid needs to get to the next level. Let's be honest--it makes the difference in whether or not students are receiving a good education or a mediocre to poor one. The class size issue is also one that gets to good teaching and good learning. It's not rocket science...when your kid is competing for teacher attention with 35 other kids, it's pretty much a "take a number" situation. When class size is smaller, there are more opportunities for student-teacher interaction, helping to identify areas of need and allowing a little extra attention to address that need. The various reform committees and task forces have recommended smaller classes: As West High School English teacher Gabe DeMola made a good point, saying DPS' "...attitude hurts me. Increasing class sizes and increasing workloads, it's all contrary to the reform." Respect encompasses all of these issues--pay, planning time and class size, because these form the foundation on whether or not teachers have the kind of environment conducive to optimally practicing their profession. But it also means having a seat at the table when curriculum decisions are made and budget decisions are weighed. And most teachers agree that the what and how to teach changes of late have been shoved down their throats, not approached in a professionally collaborative manner. Superintendent Jerry Wartgow was quoted as saying, "There is a way to negotiate these issues." Okay, great. I'm not hearing any details, so run it all up the flagpole and we'll see if teachers salute. FYI, as a parent with two DPS students, my priorities include good teachers who are paid well and have adequate planning time and smaller class sizes. School board member Theresa Pena is looking ahead to next year, pledging to create a more transparent budget process in the future, "We need to balance the budget of 2005-06 and then start immediately again for next year and get everyone at the table." I really like the spirit of problem-solving and it's a great way to set up how to make it better in the future. At some point, I think the taxpayers are going to have to come to grips with the fact that public schools need more money to deal with all of these matters. But what's going to happen for the upcoming school year? http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2HQ http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2HQ/commentary#comments Fri, 25 Mar 2005 11:31:08 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2HQ Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C2HQ/ For those of you who know me, this is going to be shocking. But I'm gonna do it anyway. I'm saying it loud and clear: Governor Owens, you're doing the right thing. Gov. Owens and I typically agree on very little. I think he'd probably agree with my characterization of him as a rightie with very, very conservative views. I'm more of a moderate-to-liberal progressive. Our opinions diverge on the environment, choice, health care policy, K-12 funding priorities and a lot of other things. But he's taking a whole bunch of flak for his position on a state budget compromise and I feel like I have to point out that his detractors on this are, well, crackpots. Of course in this case, the battering Gov. Owens is taking is closer to friendly fire than conventional bipartisan warfare. It's Republicans like Senator John Evans, Senator Tom Wiens, Representative Joe Stengel and Independence Institute honcho Jon Caldera taking potshots at him. But unfortunately for Gov. Owens, the criticism is no accident. So much for the Ronald Reagan Memorial Rule of Republicans: "Speak no ill of fellow Republicans." As my old-style Republican dad used to say on issues of legislative policy, " If neither party is completely happy, then it's a good compromise for the people." In these days of lockstep Republican orthodoxy, he'd be kicked out of the party. But then he was a pragmatist, not a dogmatist. Senator Ken Gordon, admittedly a Democrat, said "What brought (both parties) to the center was reality." I agree. Without a compromise, deep and painful cuts are looming for basic government functions. A number of Senate Republicans understand this reality and got on board with the compromise The Senate's top Republican, Mark Hillman has asked for a little Republican kumbaya on this issue, asking opponents to cool their jets, "What we owe the voters between now and November is an even-handed discussion of the choices that we are going to face." Yeah, but the current naysayers are living in a la-la land based on distorted thinking. Their patron saint, D.C.-based uber-taxcutter Grover Norquist, thinks that military protection is the only truly legitimate government expenditure. I'm afraid they're going to skip the sing-a-long. So at this point let me say "Go, Bill, go!" You take on your opponents in this thing and let them know that the rest of us actually expect government to invest in our common infrastructure and the state's future. Good luck to you. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2HH http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2HH/commentary#comments Thu, 24 Mar 2005 13:13:30 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2HH Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C2HH/ I hesitate to even write about the Schiavo case because it is so intensely, painfully private. There are certain decisions that are really only meant to be made by the immediate people involved. Sacred ones like birth, marriage and death. More mundane ones like money matters. These are the kinds of personal choices that government really needs to stay out of. The Schiavo case is a tragedy for everyone involved--Terri herself, her husband Michael, parents Mr. and Mrs. Schindler, her siblings and her doctors. My heart breaks for every one of them. The decision to withdraw life-support measures is traumatic. When my father, mother, sisters, doctor add I agreed it was time to remove my dad's ventilator after an unsuccessful 5-day attempt to restore a little strength to his emphysema-ravaged lungs, I thought I my grief would paralyze me forever. But this is different. Ms. Schiavo was only 26 years old when she entered her current vegetative state; she's 41 years old today. I don't pretend to know what it must be like to be in their shoes. I'm sure her parents' religious beliefs form the basis for their desire to keep her alive, even though the medical professionals say she is in permanent vegetative state...it's been 15 years already. But letting go of your loved ones is the hardest thing we do in this life. Her husband waited and hoped for eight years before coming to the conclusion that it was time to let her go--that withdrawing life-support would be the most merciful thing to do. I happen to believe that her husband is telling the truth about the conversations he and his wife had about end-of-life decisions. My husband and I have had many of them...I imagine most couples do. I have a living will and a medical power of attorney because I think that deciding how to die is an extention of how a person decides to live. Emotionally-speaking, not only is a permanent vegetative state not the way I want to live my life, but I also don't want to subject my loved ones to the torture of years of false hope and grief. Pragmatically, I'd really rather our limited health care dollars go toward others with a future. But that's MY preference. My husband's end-of-life ideas are clear and I will respect them, if and when the time comes to make such decisions. Those are OUR decisions. And that's the point. I'm still reeling over the Congress and the President involving themselves in such an obviously private matter. This family's pain is personal, not something to be paraded around for political gain. Shame on Congressman Tom Delay and all of his cynical colleagues looking to score a few points with the right-to-lifers at the expense of this family. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2Hq http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2Hq/commentary#comments Wed, 23 Mar 2005 10:44:00 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2Hq Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C2Hq/ President Bush's "Social Security Skulduggery: Provoking Privatization" tour will stop in Colorado today, joined by Congressman Beauprez and hundreds of cheering supporters. Of course, in an administration that guarantees unadulterated message delivery via generous cash payments to columnists and in-house production of bogus news stories for local TV stations, these supporters are all hand-selected Republican donors and voters. Footage of privatization enthusiasts attending the event notwithstanding, 59% of Americans oppose privatizing Social Security, according to a recent Newsweek poll. I haven't seen any Colorado-specific numbers, but I imagine they're no different. We aren't buying it. Noted Wall Street Journal columnist Jeff D. Opdyke isn't necessarily buying it, either. In yesterday's "Privatizing Social Security: A Mom's Tale," he details the plight of his own mother. Despite numerous attempts to offer financial coaching, she doesn't really understand money and investing. His mom had a 401(k) at one point. But after tapping into it for various "necessary" expenses, coupled with the interest and penalties incurred for early account withdrawal, it's completely gone. A back injury has prevented her from working for several years, during which she has received a monthly disability payment. Ignoring her son's advice, she recently accepted a lump sum distribution of $65,000 in lieu of monthly payments. Backlogged medical bills, a dental procedure, a charitable gift and a vacation later, she is broke again. So Social Security is the only thing that's going to keep his mom afloat. And here's the thing. Despite the fact that it's all she has left, she admits that if she had a Social Security private account, she might try to access it to pay off bills. It's not necessarily that people like Opdyke's mother aren't smart. But when competing with immediate pressures like jobs, children, housework, extended family obligations, existing bills, volunteer work and everything else, long-term financial planning is pushed to the back burner. Especially when lacking the necessary skills and experience. Hey, if people want to save money for retirement, more power to them. In fact, I think it's a great idea. My husband and I have modest investments for that purpose. Between his pension and our investments, we hope to be able to maintain a similar middle-income lifestyle after we retire. But Social Security is different. It's the safety net that provides the most basic of food and shelter to the elderly--it's what prevents them from destitution. Opdyke's recommendation? "...Ironclad safeguards to protect the untutored and undisciplined from ruining their retirement years...prevent people from accessing their Social Security money until retirement, despite the fact that it will be legally in their name." My recommendation? Find a solution that puts the "security" back into Social Security. This is not about making great profits, but about providing a basic level of dignity to Americans in their twilight years. So don't think those Bush-idolizing sign-wavers you might see on the news tonight represent most of us. Because this time, they're not going to succeed at selling fiction as truth. We're opposed to Social Security privatization, and no cheesy PR offensive is going to change our minds. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2Hn http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2Hn/commentary#comments Mon, 21 Mar 2005 12:20:31 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C2Hn Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C2Hn/ Just when I had concluded that a state budget compromise was completely out of the question, lawmakers and the Governor came together and got a deal done . Sometimes it's good to be wrong. While I would have like to have seen a longer-term solution, the reported plan will work for now. Congratulations to all of the players who sat at the table and kept negotiating until they found something that all sides could accept, including Governor Owens, who was on the receiving end of much nudging here from yours truly. Now it's on to the November ballot. The bipartisan measure will be supported by the Chamber of Commerce because the business community understands that fiscal conservatism does not include the destruction of everything reasonable people hold dear--like good schools, excellent universities, decent health care and passable roads. In fact, the health of our economy depends on these things. Businesses, generally run by reasonable people, don't want to locate where schools, health care and roads are bad. If passed, the state will devote funds slated for tax refunds to build roads, bolster Medicaid and improve K-12 and higher education. Of course, there are the wing-nuts out there who are in complete denial about our budget woes and are opposing this reasonable solution. There's TABOR author Douglas Bruce, who is in denial about our budget woes, "They don't even need $3 more than the very generous growth formula that they've had now." Yeah, tell that to the 700,000 Coloradans without health insurance . And don't forget Senator Jim Dyer of Centennial, "This is a fundamental violation of the trust we have with the taxpayers" (What a hypocrite talking about trust! Dyer is a guy who was found guilty--twice--of civil conspiracy in tricking an 83-year old lady with Alzheimer's into quit-claiming her house to him for ten bucks!). Luckily, they're on the lunatic fringe; I don't think voters will agree with them. Not to say that the campaign is going to be an easy one. But leaders on both sides of the aisle said they would work together to pass it. And the business community on board sure helps. Here's another reason to celebrate: This budget breakthrough could be a glimpse of future bipartisan cooperation on other issues. Imagine a legislature working together for the good of Colorado... It's almost enough to make me giddy! http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3TY http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3TY/commentary#comments Fri, 18 Mar 2005 11:50:03 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3TY Jenny Jenny 1 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C3TY/ It's not exactly a newsflash that despite women making up about 20% of the troop force, the U.S. military has "female problems." As in sexual harassment, rape and discrimination. Here in Colorado, the newspapers have been filled with stories detailing assaults and harassment of women cadets at the U.S. Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs. California's Sacramento Bee has published a series of stories this month detailing sexual harassment of dozens of women soldiers by "male comrades-in-arms" while in the Iraq. Not surprisingly, many said the military hierarchy has not adequately addressed this problem. Now we hear that the U.S. Army MWR (Morale, Welfare and Recreation) Unit, the Iraq Multi-National Corps and Halliburton recently cosponsored a two-week travelling "show" for soldiers in Iraq featuring an all-female group called "The Purrfect Angelz." The name alone is enough to make any normal person sick. Predictably, the photo I saw featured four women scantily clothed in tiny red bikinis and black leather chaps, strutting their "stuff" provacatively. The Purrfect Angelz reportedly were booked to "raise troop morale." And whose morale, exactly, would that be? Certainly not the 100,000 women who have served in Iraq since combat began two years ago. I'm thinking that their reactions would range from annoyed to nauseated. Personally, I think that the Angelz' quasi-pornographic show is generally degrading to women. But I'm not a complete prude--if that's the kind of thing an adult wants to view on his (or her) own time and dime, it's none of my business. But it's deplorable to think that our taxpayer dollars are going to reinforce an already-out-of-control adolescent, frat-boy culture that exists in parts of the military. As former Navy Captain Lory Manning said, "Women in the military should not have to put up with this kind of thing." Baghdad-stationed U.S. Air Force captain Sharon Kibiloski (speaking as "an outraged woman", not in her official capacity) is also not amused. "The show only appeals to men, and in my mind has the potential to increase sexual advances toward female soldiers afterward...to me, if the military really cared about sexual harassment, they would not sponsor such a show." Look, this is not tough stuff to understand. We have a two-gender military now. It's time to deal with what that means. In denying responsibility, Armed Forces Entertainment Air Force Master Sgt. John Martin claims he has never heard of the Purrfect Angelz, saying "The only thing we had that even remotely resembled that was "The Pinup Girls," and that was back in February of '04." Guess what. They STILL don't "get it." http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3Tz http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3Tz/commentary#comments Thu, 17 Mar 2005 12:09:38 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3Tz Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C3Tz/ The Bush administration has spent more than a quarter of a BILLION dollar--at least $254 million and maybe more--on producing TV propaganda. During Bush's tenure, at least 20 federal agencies have contracted with PR firms to produce administration-friendly, media-ready pieces. We're not talking about customary press releases here. We're talking fake news segments taped by government agencies promoting the President's agenda. These prepackaged TV news stories, "indistinguishable from news stories produced by private sector television news organizations" have aired on local TV stations across the country, generally without explaining that the government produced the tape, not legitimate journalists. In producing this bogus "news," the administration is seeking to completely control the message and terms of debate. I guess they figure, "Why present an opposing viewpoint since ours is the only valid one anyway?" It is nothing short of mind manipulation. And on the taxpayers' dime, too. Coupled with the discovery that several columnists and commentators, like Armstrong Williams, have been on Bush's payroll to spin the "party line," I am reminded of George Orwell's 1984 . If you've read it, you'll recognize the Bush administration as Big Brother, the only institution that knows right from wrong, and it's "public education" efforts as an exercise in "doublethink" to make all of us suckers buy their snake oil. But I'm not buying. Believe it or not, the only thing holding the Bushies accountable to we the people is a free press--otherwise, they're free to deceive the public. Let's call this abuse of power and money what it is--an affront to democracy. Wake up! Support an open and free press. If real journalists no longer hold these Machiavellis' feet to the fire, we'll all be speaking newspeak as members of the Oceania Party. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3TL http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3TL/commentary#comments Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:24:06 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3TL Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C3TL/ Straight out of Colorado Springs, comes a brilliant obstructionist strategy on the budget crisis and TABOR: Introduce 16 different budget tinkering measures for the November ball...that'll confuse those voters and cause them to give up in disgust at the ballot box. Yup, that's just what the CS-based Colorado Club for Growth with it's Jeffco partner, the Independence Institute, has done in the past week. And the outcome I described is just what they're hoping for. Just who is this Colorado Club for Growth? Well, according to their website, they only have three board members, but they are far-right superstars: former U.S. Senator Bill Armstrong, former U.S. Senate candidate Terry Considine and Bill Miller. One of their irrational propositions is to freeze future spending regardless of inflation and population growth. Geez, even TABOR allows for inflation and population growth and yet it has the state in a financial stranglehold. Here's the deal: TABOR boosters and their brethren even farther to the right want to "starve the beast," meaning cut taxes until there are no government services left save the military. As their patron saint Grover Norquist has said, "I want to shrink government to the size where I can drag it into the bathroom and drown it in the bathtub." A homegrown Colorado wing-nut with the so-called Colorado Freedom Report thinks the right-wing Independence Institute's recent report on TABOR is too leftie: "But don't these conservative/libertarian organizations recognize that there are some 'services' that the government ought not be providing, at all? We don't want efficient delivery of a fundamentally inappropriate service." These folks aren't fiscal conservativ...they're kamikaze pilots hoping the government will end up in pile of smoking rubble. They must live in some kind of la-la land of their own making--far, far away from the ordinary lives most of us lead. I mean, come on people--you need to come to grips that y'all are on the far edges of the outermost fringes. You might not believe it, but most of us actually want good public schools, drivable roads and state parks. We think the government is not a beast--rather, it's the way we support our present communities and invest in our future. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3T3 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3T3/commentary#comments Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:34:37 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3T3 Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C3T3/ Does anyone else's stomach turn at the mere sight of CU football coach Gary Barnett? Barnett's face stared out at me from the front page of the Denver Post this AM, and all I could do was utter a gutteral sound somewhere between "ugh" and "argh." The headline screams "Barnett vows he'll stay." As a CU alumna (both undergrad and Masters). he makes me want to scream. But what I'll do is vow to ignore all alumni fundraising appeals. Barnett's stubborn refusal to admit wrongdoing and his cocky approach throughout the football recruiting "scandal" is both an outrage and an embarassment. I am humiliated to think I attended a university where academics are almost an afterthought. Consider that at the moment, the football coach makes over a million bucks a year--while a full professor earns less than 10% of that, an associate professor 7% and an assistant professor 6%. Un-freakin'-believable. And I am infuriated about the message this mess sends to women: "Shut up and sit down, ladies." I don't care what Barnett says to try to repair the damage of his team's booze and sex-fueled recruiting parties--all information points to a locker room ripe with irresponsible, self-centered aggrandizement of jock culture. Which includes treating women as objects. You know, like women don't matter, except to serve men. The wink-wink, "boys will be boys" attitude about paid strippers at player recruitment events, raped women by players, sexual harassment in the . training room . And then there's the infamous Katie Hnida remarks. After CU kicker Katie Hnida described ongoing harassment and a rape by a fellow player, Barnett's stupid reaction was to describe the lack of respect the "guys" held for her due to her performance on the field: " Katie was not only a girl, she was terrible. OK? There's no other way to say it. She couldn't kick the ball through the uprights." I'll tell you one thing--CU is no place for any of our daughters. There is no way in hell I'd encourage Sarah to attend her parents' alma mater. It is amazing to me that the only CU administrator to survive this travesty is Barnett, the most offensive and arrogant one of the bunch. If I were CU, I'd worry less about a crazy loose cannon like Ward Churchill, and a whole lot more about a millionaire misogynist in charge at the Dal Ward Center. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3TJ http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3TJ/commentary#comments Fri, 11 Mar 2005 10:51:23 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3TJ Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C3TJ/ Yesterday I picked up my daughter Sarah at preschool a couple of minutes early so we could head to the Auraria campus for lunch and a panel discussion on faith and social justice. Evangelist Jim Wallis , author of the New York Times' Bestseller book, God's Politics, was joined by Colorado clergy and activists in discussing government budgets as moral documents. As we approached St. Cajetan's, Sarah was quite impressed with the rosy color of the building. Pink, after all, is the official color of all 4-year-old girls. As we entered St. Cajetan's, I was quite impressed with the meeting turnout--at least 350 to 400 self-described "progressives" voluntarily attending a session on religion and policy. Whoa. But it's about time liberals realized that faith is a driving force in people's lives. In fact, it is faith that provides both the impetus and the motivation for many progressive policies. Myself, I was influenced by the First United Methodist Church of Akron, the downtown, inner-city church I attended weekly as a child. It was all about social justice--helping your neighbor, feeding the hungry, caring for the sick, reaching out to the poor. I admit I moved away from the church as I reached adulthood due to theological differences. But I hold tight to the imperative to advocate for "the least among us." And I don't need a minister or church to tell me it's the right thing to do. My heart feels it and my brain knows it. Right now, the progressive agenda seems like a simple laundry list of "special interests" rather than a coherent philosophy. Wallis assured the crowd that there are not only middle-of-the-road people of faith who reject the far-right agenda represented by groups like Focus on the Family, but a large number of evangelical Christians, too....evangelicals who believe that that addressing poverty is the number one priority outlined in the Bible and therefore for policy, that protective environmental policies are needed for God's creation and that a foreign policy that emphasizes peace is desirable. "Whoever wins the debate about values will shape the future of politics," Wallis explained to the crowd. So it's up to us who consider ourselves progressive to really think about why we believe as we do and articulate our policy positions as an extention of these core values. There are a whole lot of people out there who don't identify as "progressive," but are eager to hear what we have to say. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3Tx http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3Tx/commentary#comments Thu, 10 Mar 2005 10:38:19 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3Tx Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C3Tx/ Keith Swain, an openly gay man who is a Denver Post Colorado Voices columnist, is understandably nervous. This week he received "...a letter scrawled in pencil on lined paper. The writer quoted Bible verses, and was obviously angry. 'The wages of sin are death,' he quoted the Bible, and added his own commentary: 'God demands the death of all homosexuals ... There is more to come ... .'" Swain, having been a friend of Alan Berg, the radio show host killed by white supremicists for his "liberal" views, had seen many of the scary notes Berg received prior to his murder. So Swain recognizes the hallmarks of a real threat: odd, rambling, handwritten notes on dirty pieces of paper, loaded with bible quotes, with allegations that God will kill him. There are over 3,000 verses in the Bible about helping the poor, but depending your theologian, there are none or very few that mention the so-called scourge of homosexuality. I also seem to recall spending a whole lot of time on loving your brother as yourself, forgiveness and not casting stones from my Sunday School days. Look, everybody's entitled to his or her own opinion, however misinformed or ignorant it may be. If someone wants to object to homosexuality, fine--pair up with a member of the opposite sex or stay single. But why should it go farther than that? What is it that makes certain people want to make it illegal for two people to live and love in a committed relationship? Can't they just be left alone? I know Swain would appreciate it. Here's a newsflash for the radical right: Maybe you never thought of this, but you can oppose without imposing. Really, you can. Try it and see. Then you can concentrate on the 3,000 Bible passages that command you to alleviate the suffering of the poor. We can even work together on that. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3TB http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3TB/commentary#comments Wed, 09 Mar 2005 11:28:53 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3TB Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C3TB/ Today my son John says he doesn't want to go on a trip to Mesa Verde over spring break. He tells me he'd rather stay home. He's a 7-year old history buff who can tell you all about the American westward movement and its effect on various Native American cultures. But because he's never been to Mesa Verde, HQ of the ancient Anasazi people in southwestern Colorado, and he doesn't know what his experience might be like, he is completely resistant, even though it will be "good for him" both intellectually and in terms of sheer fun. He knows he's comfortable at home, so he's digging in his heels, insisting that he's right and I am wrong. He kind of reminds me of Governor Bill Owens , who keeps insisting that TABOR budget limits are great, even though everyone knows that in order for the state to meet its most basic of obligations, he and lawmakers must find a fix. But Gov. Owens has never ruled without TABOR, and he doesn't know what his experience might be like, so he's resisting all serious legislative attempts to alleviate the stranglehold TABOR has on the state budget, even though it would be "good for" the state. Gov. Owens rose to power under TABOR's popularity, and the politics of tax cuts has been very, very good to him. He's comfortable with TABOR, so he's digging in his heels insisting he's right and everybody else is wrong. Um, no. It's just that what's good isn't always easy. But there's good news. After reading this to John before he left for school, he blushed a little, giggled a lot and changed his mind: He WILL try Mesa Verde after all. Will the Governor try something new, too? http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3k4 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3k4/commentary#comments Tue, 08 Mar 2005 11:11:53 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3k4 Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C3k4/ Generally speaking, I'm no Joel Hefley fan. I disagree with the Colorado Springs Congressman on almost all the issues. But I gotta give Hefley credit for having the guts to preside over an "admonishment" of House Majority Tom DeLay for repeated abuses of power, as the Chairman of the House Ethics Committee. Let's face it...DeLay, investigated for illegal campaign funds, money laundering and other scandals, is a caricature of the corrupt Washington politician who deserved even harsher treatment. Seemingly tone-deaf, House Republicans' response to DeLay's admonishment was trying to weaken ethics rules. And Hefley stepped up again to protest. So as a nice howdy-do, House Speaker Dennis Hastert fired Hefley from his committee position and now its new chairman, Congressman Doc Hastings has fired two senior staff lawyers involved in the DeLay investigation. Having been the good soldier when he was invited off the committee, now that staffers are taking the fall, Hefley is a little miffed. He was quoted in today's Boulder Daily Camera as saying, "That looks very much like a purge...It seems to me like it was." Of course, Hastings' mouthpiece has denied any such purge. Yeah, and I have some great Florida land to sell you for cheap. Here is the far-right message from D.C. to us in the heartland: Winning first. Loyalty next. Ethics never. And here's our message from us in the heartland to D.C.: Ethics matter. We're going to remember this for Novembers to come. So Congressman Hefley, let me offer my condolences for the corrupt subculture in which you live. Let's hope that Americans take notice and fire the immoral leadership that put you in the position you're in today. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3kz http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3kz/commentary#comments Mon, 07 Mar 2005 11:38:51 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3kz Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C3kz/ When you're a working mom, life is precariously balanced. The schedule has to be planned down to the nanosecond. Mine goes something like this: 5:10: Stagger downstairs for a cup of coffee 5:15: Start daily workout 6:15: Start first work session of the day 7:15: Get children's breakfast ready to go (waffles in toaster, milk poured) 7:20: Wake kids up, get them dressed, breakfasted and ready 7:55: Throw in load of laundry 8:05: Announce that in 5 minutes it'll be time to get shoes on 8:08: Announce that in 2 minutes it'll be time to get shoes on 8:10: Supervise shoes and coats finding their way to the proper body parts 8:15: Transport kids to bus stop where child #2 gets on bus 8:20: Drive back home to catch child #1's ride to school 8:30: Type on computer and go to meetings until 3:45 PM which is the easy part. Sure, I overschedule a bit, but running around is my specialty. At 3:45 I begin the wild adventure that starts with the pick up of child #1 at school then child #2 at Grandma's; do more work; kids to practices; whip up dinner; do a little volunteering; throw in another load of laundry; do some more work; bathe children then read stories; finish up work; fall into bed sometime after 10 PM. The slightest unplanned event can bring the whole house of cards tumbling down. The toilet overflowing. A work project that changes dramatically after work has begun. The dog barfing on the rug outside the bedrooms. A meeting that runs overtime. Lost homework. An extra draft of a report. Missing shoes, coat, hat or mittens. A computer crash. No milk in the fridge. Running out of paper or ink. Your mom calling from out of state as you're going out the door. Any one of those things throws off the carefully timed schedule and we miss the bus or I'm late to a meeting. Any combination of them means paralysis for the system we call a "family," not to mention that your work day goes to hell in a handbasket. I am lucky enough to be a consultant, so I have more flexibility than most women. That's not to say that, for example, a sick kid doesn't throw a major curve into my life. It most certainly does--I have to cancel or postpone meetings, drive to the pediatrician's office, move my 'to dos" on my Palm and work around the water/medicine/comfort needs of my child. Ask me today, after our 4-year old coughed all night. Her dad is a walking zombie today, thanks to the sleep deprivation he experienced while comforting her. But he had to report for work at 7:30 AM. But what if I had to clock into my workplace? I might get a pass once or twice. But the reprimands and warnings would start rolling in pretty quick. Hey, I know it was my (well, with my husband) choice to have a family. We don't expect special treatment for that. Plus, being a mom is the best thing I do in my life...I love it. If a client started to make demands that interfere with motherhood, I'd just let the contract expire and move on. Most people don't have that luxury. But women in mid-life bring a lot of competence, knowledge and life-experience to employers--we're valuable as employees. Not only are we skilled, but God knows we know how to multitask, too. As a country we need to get serious about offering flexible schedules and telecommuting (if possible) to moms (and dads) who have lives that look like mine. If their jobs allow it, these workers should be able to put in the same amount of time when and where it works best for them. I am so fortunate to be able to work around my family, not only because I'm a consultant, but also because my clients are progressive non-profit organizations, and most of them "get it." But that doesn't mean I'll stop fighting for the rights of other women to be able to do the same. Hey American businesses: Establish women-friendly workplaces. Its right for the economy, it's right for business, it's right for families and it's right for society. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3fR http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3fR/commentary#comments Fri, 04 Mar 2005 14:53:34 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3fR Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C3fR/ Fundamentalism is our biggest threat. So said my late father who died at 83 in 2002. Man, I miss those Saturday morning phone calls with my dad. We'd catch up on all things family and hometown, saving a good half-hour for geopolitical analysis. Our last discussion before he went into the hospital for his final week of life centered on whether a Palestinian-Israeli peace ever would be possible. A life-long Republican, raised in a western Pennsylvania coal mining town by immigrant parents during the Depression, serving in WWII as a pilot in the Army Air Corps before returning to work on a MA then a PhD in Economics, my dad was always a thoughtful and skillful discussion partner. Worldwide fundamentalism was his greatest fear for civilization as we know it. Fundamentalists are all about us vs. them: The unflappable belief that they are right and everyone else is wrong...the inflexible dictates on social roles (think man/woman, parent/child, clergy/laity)...a "devil" to hate (think liberals, "secular humanism," American materialism, Jews, books, movies, etc. depending on your "brand" of fundamentalism). FYI: We're not "us." We are "them." Make no mistake about it: Whether Christian, Islamist or whatever, they're out to remake the world in their image alone. They are sending out invitations to their exclusive world party, and the rest of us are not invited. They are deadly serious. Obviously 9-11 was a shocking U.S. introduction to Islamist fundamentalist thinking. But it's not limited to the Middle East. It's alive and well in the U.S. Consider the words of a homegrown U.S. fundamentalist: "This is our land. This is our world. This is our heritage, and with God's help, we shall reclaim this nation for Jesus Christ. And no power on earth can stop us." -- D. James Kennedy in his book, Character & Destiny: A Nation In Search of Its Soul With Focus on the Family and 65+ other Christian activist organizations in the state, Colorado is at the epicenter of American fundamentalism--we cannot be lulled into complacency. I don't want to deny the fundamentalists' right to believe and worship as they please. But I sure as hell don't want them to make it mandatory for me to adopt their worldview and live by their rules. We independent-types must be vigilant to keep our freedoms intact; as my dad always used to say, "Eternal vigilance is the price of liberty." Our democracy depends on it. http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3fj http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3fj/commentary#comments Thu, 03 Mar 2005 12:10:06 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3fj Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C3fj/ In a 5-4 decision welcomed by diverse groups like the American Medical Association, the American Bar Association, the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and the European Union, a "bitterly divided" Supreme Court banned executions for juvenile killers yesterday. The U.S. was the world's last executioner of juveniles. The Court has added juveniles to the mentally retarded as groups not subject to capital punishments. It's hard to believe that this is a disappointing decision for anyone. I mean, it's pretty barbaric to execute a child. People under the age of 18 are considered a child in the eyes of the law. And Justice Anthony Kennedy mentioned this in the opinion, "The age of 18 is the point where society draws the line for many purposes between childhood and adulthood. It is, we conclude, the age at which the line for death eligibility ought to rest." And he cited numerous psychological and medical studies about young minds vis-a-vis adult minds: Young people "lack maturity," are "more vulnerable or susceptible to negative influences" and have characters that are "not as well formed as that of an adult," Kennedy wrote. But predictably, Justices Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas and William Rehnquist dissented vigorously, while Justice Sandra Day O'Connor dissented separately. And a pro-dealth-penalty group Criminal Justice Legal Foundation issued a statement through their attorney describing the decision as another example of judges overstepping their roles. Anyone with a teenager at home can verify what the research clearly shows: Teens are still working on the reality "thing." While it is abundantly clear that youth criminals should be punished, execution is wholly inappropriate. My hope is for rehabilitation and education for these teens to provide hope, incentive and motivation to become ethical and productive members of society. Americans love a redemption story...shouldn't troubled kids get the chance and the tools to remake themselves? http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3fg http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3fg/commentary#comments Wed, 02 Mar 2005 10:50:48 EST http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/post/jennydaviesschley/C3fg Jenny Jenny 0 http://www.progressnowcolorado.org/page/community/comment_rss/C3fg/