Harassment charge hits Bruce
By Lynn Bartels, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Wednesday, April 30, 2008
Rep. Douglas Bruce, R-Colorado Springs, works on an amendment on the floor of the House.
- Email this
- Print this
- Comments
- Change text size
- Subscribe to print edition
- iPod friendly
Rep. Douglas Bruce was instructed Wednesday to stay away from a woman working at the state Capitol who lodged a sexual harassment complaint against him.
Speaker Andrew Romanoff, D-Denver, handed Bruce a letter on the House floor. Bruce read it, then he and Romanoff briefly met in the speaker's office.
Bruce, a Colorado Springs Republican, would not comment.
"If there is some rumor, you can do whatever you want with whatever rumor you've got," he said.
Bruce referred questions to Romanoff, but House rules prevent leadership from discussing complaints.
Other lawmakers confirmed that a complaint had been filed and that Bruce had been told to have no contact with the woman.
Rep. Amy Stephens, R-Monument, said Bruce's antics throughout the session have turned off many of his GOP colleagues.
"You're dealing with an extremely bright 7-year-old boy in a 54-year-old's body," she said.
Stephens said leadership took the complaint seriously.
"We need people to feel safe here," she said. "I've been there before. I get it when someone feels harassed or uncomfortable when things are said that cross the line."
Details were not revealed, and it is unclear if the person who filed it is a staffer or a lobbyist.
The legislature's sexual harassment policy outlines how to handle complaints, and gives examples of conduct that could constitute sexual harassment. The examples included making sexual comments, giving gifts of a sexual nature, or intentionally brushing against someone's body.
Bruce, who was appointed to the legislature to fill a vacancy, previously served as an El Paso County commissioner. His behavior there was inappropriate, Republican commissioner Sallie Clark said, although she declined to go into detail.
"We're all kind of trying to move on here in El Paso County," she said Wednesday.
Clark said she was not aware of any official complaints, but had her own run-ins with Bruce.
She said Bruce referred to her as "Mother" or "Mommy" when she chaired a committee, and he once told her take a "PMS pill" when she told him his comments about a group of young visitors were inappropriate.
Shortly after taking office in January, Bruce became the first lawmaker in Colorado history to be censured after kicking a Rocky Mountain News photographer.
bartels@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5327
The book on Bruce so far this session
* April 21: During a debate, the Colorado Springs Republican is ordered to leave the podium after calling immigrant workers "illiterate peasants."
* Earlier in the month: When the House spends more than 45 minutes debating a resolution on the 1915 massacre of 1.5 million Armenians, Bruce has this to say: "I was tempted to say something, but I try to avoid contributing to the time-wasting aspect, so I just sat there." That statement brings both laughs and cries of "You've got to be kidding!"
* April 10: Bruce criticized Rep. Larry Liston's proposed pilot program giving tax credits to employers who hire disabled workers. Bruce called the bill an unconstitutional tax loophole that "encourages people to get onto this form of a welfare program." His comments drew tears from Rep. John Soper, whose brother is developmentally disabled.
* Feb. 14: Bruce refuses to co-sponsor a resolution honoring military veterans. Later, fellow Republicans remove him from the State, Veterans and Military Affairs Committee.
* Jan. 14: A couple of hours before he is sworn into office, Bruce kicks a Rocky Mountain News photographer during a prayer on the House floor, resulting in the first censure in the legislature's 131-year history.
He said it
"I didn't come up here to be loved. I came up here to tell the truth."
Douglas Bruce
April 30, 2008
7:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
BTP writes:
Bruce has nobody other than himself to blame for being under scruitiny. If he is found to have sexually harassed one of the staff members, he should be GONE. The guy just has no clue about how to conduct himself.
April 30, 2008
7:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
platoro79 writes:
Doug Bruce had nothing to say. Wow!
April 30, 2008
7:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
Gene writes:
BTP,
The nature of the complaint was not revealed - you may be assuming too much.
April 30, 2008
7:15 p.m.
Suggest removal
AC writes:
Yeah, sure, Q, everyone's hatred of Bruce led him to harass women. Ri-i-i-ight. How typical.
April 30, 2008
7:34 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
I highly doubt this had anything to do with sex. We shall see? If anything she complained because Doug was being his typical asshole self. Not many people can deal with the coarseness or gruffness of Doug Bruce. After the first time I spoke to Doug on the phone I was literally in trauma. I got used to it and now I am more of a man.
Doug has been under much pressure lately and now Romanoff is trying to destroy Dougs only child, Tabor. Hopefully Dougie can keep it together?
April 30, 2008
7:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
Must be that bad batch of generic Oxycontin that's been going around.
April 30, 2008
7:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
llcj writes:
Wow! The timing of this alleged harrassment...highly suspect. Didn't think he would be stupid enough to do that considering everyone is looking for a "reason" to get rid of him and I'm sure he knows that also. Good reason, better prove it people. Hope you are all confident sticking your rears on the line with this new allegation. Jumping on the band wagon isn't always the best idea.
April 30, 2008
7:46 p.m.
Suggest removal
LoFat writes:
Let's see. The Duke lacrosse team was unjustly accused of rape and the Democrat Attorney General ran with it. After the case was proven to be a bald-faced lie, nothing was done to the lying accuser. The lacrosse players were threatened, reviled and expelled. The Attorney General, Mike Nifong, was proven to have withheld evidence from the very start that proved all charges filed were false. He was an accomplice to the crime after the fact.
If Bruce actually comitted a crime, punish him. I sincerely doubt that he did anything at all, given the Democrats now in power and their unbridled rage against him. If there is no merit to the case, how about giving the woman six months to two years in the State penitentiary and kicking the persecuting, oops I meant prosecuting, Democrats out of the legislature, charged as accomplices to a criminal violation?
I am not a Bruce fan, but something just doesn't seem right. Punish the guilty.
April 30, 2008
8:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
Excuse me but the woman did not file a criminal complaint. Doug Bruce isn't headed for the gallows just yet.
The story says that she merely complained. He must've pissed her off.
He's kind of mean, you know. What with kicking reporters and, well, just look at that ornery SOB. He stalks around like he's got a corn cob stuck up his kazoo.
April 30, 2008
8:20 p.m.
BirdonaWire writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
April 30, 2008
8:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
bushmaster writes:
witch hunt
April 30, 2008
8:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
BirdonaWire writes:
"Unbridled rage"? Extreme dislike, yes. Absolutely annoyed, yes. I think Bruce has the rage issue. Just ask that photographer.
April 30, 2008
8:36 p.m.
Suggest removal
backspace writes:
Lynn Bartelis said Bruce's face turned red when he read the letter. How would she know? Whatever the case, it sounds like
she has an axe to grind. I would bet she's a liberal with disdain
for Bruce's views. Bruce's face turned red... what a silly thing to write.
April 30, 2008
8:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
BOW,
If Bruce has a rage issue don’t you think he would have booted the photog square in the nuts? That’s what I would have done if I was pissed and rage full. Of course if I was in a similar situation I would not have been pissed and rage full but more likely slightly annoyed and probably just nudged the guy. Kind of like Bruce did.
April 30, 2008
8:53 p.m.
Suggest removal
BMat writes:
witch hunt indeed
April 30, 2008
9:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
Charles_B writes:
It's a mistake to believe that Democrats hate Bruce. He's actually like manna from heaven for them. He allows them to cast Republicans in his image--which is more or less accurate.
April 30, 2008
9:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
Rangerjoe1 writes:
isn't that what happens to anyone against ILLEGALS that break into this country and our state. This is 100% witch hunt. I trust Bruce alot more than the rest of these anti-Colorado legislators.
April 30, 2008
9:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Lynn,
I am confused. Lynn maybe you can help me. You said that details were not revealed and the leadership would not comment. How then do you know the nature of the harassment or the nature of the letter at all? How do you know it was sexual? Who was your source?
Secondly you said Bruce’s face was red. Seems like a normal reaction. Once again did you see this or did somebody share this with you? Who was your source?
Seems like the Rocky publishes stories before they do any fact finding? Maybe Bruce was a scum bag in this incidence? It sure would be helpful to have some facts to go along with this piece of fiction. If it turns out that Bruce is innocent do you think you will right a retraction and apology?
April 30, 2008
9:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
DD writes:
Dougie has Mommy issues. Doesn't he live with his mommy? Maybe she didn't spank him enough as a child.....
April 30, 2008
10:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Spencer writes:
Didn't the Democrat resign right away?
April 30, 2008
10:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
titancain writes:
It's hilarious! The rightwingers think you can grab a womans ****, and think it's ok, because he's a good christian rebuplican?
April 30, 2008
10:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
Tommy writes:
Character assassination. When the fog clears it will be a Democratic polico.
April 30, 2008
10:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
Nothing to say from his big fat mouth, must be something there. Hopefully he resigns ASAP.
Hopefully Romanov has this guy trapped like Garcia, maybe the capital will be De-Bruced before the end of the week.
Don't infer I mean removeal of Tabor you smart allick tax and spend government types.
April 30, 2008
10:57 p.m.
Suggest removal
Civility writes:
Past behavior is a predictor of future behavior. His past behavior in El Paso County was inappropriate among his fellow republicans. So why did we expect anything different at the statehouse? Unless he truly found Christ. However his behavior during the last few weeks does not indicate that.
April 30, 2008
11:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
butch_m writes:
I'm still wondering why he hasn't been honored for protecting American interests against the scourge of illegal immigration?
April 30, 2008
11:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
clyde writes:
So what actual substance is here besides the usual speculation and innuendo?
May 1, 2008
12:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
The article gives no information what so ever. I am very curious to learn some facts. Innocent till proven guilty.
May 1, 2008
5:10 a.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
Hmmm - that "staffer" - do we know his name?
May 1, 2008
5:41 a.m.
Suggest removal
tiero writes:
This sounds coincidental to me. Maybe tax Romanov put someone up to it. Where's Curry
May 1, 2008
6:04 a.m.
Suggest removal
freethinker07 writes:
Bruce will always be considered guilty until proven innocent.
He reminds me of Clinton and Bush. He enrages his opponents until they are past rational thought.
May 1, 2008
6:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
Could he have maladroitly "hit" on a woman to deflect rumors that he's from the Ralph Nader, Ed Koch, J. Edgar Hoover end of the girl-boy spectrum?
May 1, 2008
6:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
rumplstilskin writes:
I love this guy, he speaks his mind without political fog. They are now acusing him of sexual harassment. That's probably a crock of garbage. They are all gunning for him. I'm voting against anyone who attacks him. Hang in there Mr. Bruce "the voice of so many", they are afraid of you, and you have them on the run...............YES!!!!!!!!
May 1, 2008
6:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mtnsjohn writes:
Seems like there is a movement to drive Bruce out......along with his "ugly stepchild", the TABOR amendment.
I fault his kicking a cameraman but calling illegals what they are for the most part and this allegation smacks of PC correctness and a politically motivated witch hunt.
May 1, 2008
6:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Mtnsjohn writes:
Seems like there is a movement to drive Bruce out......along with his "ugly stepchild", the TABOR amendment.
I fault his kicking a cameraman but calling illegals what they are for the most part and this allegation smacks of PC correctness and a politically motivated witch hunt.
May 1, 2008
7:06 a.m.
Suggest removal
Clark writes:
Doug is not liked by most politicians because of TABOR, the zipper on the state money bag. The republican and democrat legislators all hate TABOR (Taxpayer Bill Of Rights) the state wide restriction on uncontrollable spending. The sole author is Mr. Douglas Bruce, the unruly character that has provided Journalists free material for years including this story which is not professionally reported and supported with the facts. He is actually a Colorado citizens “taxpayers hero”. Hang in there Doug.
May 1, 2008
7:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
I'll bet Romanov can't de-bruce the capital or the state (TABOR reform).
I'll buy anyone a beer or a lemonade if either is accomplished!
May 1, 2008
7:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Froward69 writes:
California Deported him here. I say we deport him to Texas. he and most republics have a deportation fetish anyway. at least the Democrat, like Nixon had the Honor to Resign. unlike bruce and bush.
May 1, 2008
7:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
Ike writes:
Politics is nothing more than show business for ugly people and Bruce's latest incident is once again proof of the pudding. Whatever his crime is, let the system work and we can see where it takes this episode. Candidly, I've not been this entertained since the "I can't seem to recall that" Ronald Reagan testimony. Before you start, I voted for Ronnie both times.
May 1, 2008
7:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
Gene writes:
Notice the words "woman" and "sexual harassmet" have been added to this story. How did Lynn Bartels get this information?
May 1, 2008
7:27 a.m.
Suggest removal
malis writes:
What do y'all think of the speculation that Bruce is planning to resign? (well before this latest incident) He'd use the model of a military commander who cannot, in good conscience, support his superiors. "I've unexpectedly discovered the Colorado Legislature to be completely, incurably corrupt and beyond redemption. Therefore, as an honorable man, I have only one choice. In protest of this whole rotten system, I must resign!"
This would, entirely coincidently of course, also let him avoid the ignominy of another Primary defeat (you all remember his first legislative race, the "Little Red Wagon" campaign," right?).
May 1, 2008
7:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
Earl writes:
now only if they can find the stained dress they might have something to talk about but then again we have been down this road and were all told to shut up as its just sex. oh wait that was a dem pres and thats different as Bruce is a republican. now I get it. maybe if the lady who is crying was only in her early 20's it would have been ok and besides it wasnt sex only oral stuff.
May 1, 2008
7:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Bonji writes:
This guy is a terrible role model to Colorado Citizens. How many strikes does he get before he is asked to resign. His constituents should be embarrassed by his behavior.
May 1, 2008
7:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
Spencer writes:
Gene, did you think he was sexually harrassing a man? I think the description of a 7 year old boy in a 54 year old man's body is very appropos.
May 1, 2008
7:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
jacka writes:
Good to see the criminal conspirators are not calling for the outing of the woman or man who filed the complaint.
Thats a move usually reserved for democrats.
May 1, 2008
7:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Any facts yet? I really would like to know what the legal authorities have found during their investigation? Have they investigated? Will they? Where is the proof? What happened? Who complained?
May 1, 2008
7:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
kathyM writes:
"...7-year-old inside a 54-year-old man's body." What a great description of Bruce! He has all the self-control of a 7-year-old, that's for sure. I bet he snapped the lady's bra strap.
May 1, 2008
8:08 a.m.
Suggest removal
Gene writes:
kathyM
You are pretty frisky this morning. You will probobly be even friskier after tonight's hockey game.
May 1, 2008
8:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
The fact that some details were leaked to the media against house rules makes this look like an Anita Hill style setup which will only serve to cheapen legitimate harassment cases.
May 1, 2008
8:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
EdwardGRobinson writes:
Teah Yeah go ta Denver
You big Talkin man
Go ta Denver...
They'll lead ya round like a scalded hound
With your tail tucked 'tween your legs!
Dick Tracy couldn't have written a more absurd character.
May 1, 2008
8:17 a.m.
Suggest removal
mrNiceGuy writes:
Would you rather have a representative you like because he speaks flowery and woos you the way you like, or one that straight-up tells you who he really is and what he really thinks?
May 1, 2008
8:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
RLaitres writes:
It is quite clear, from the above posts that some are, depending upon their political or other biases, entering upon either a defense or condemnation of Mr. Bruce. May I respectfully suggest that everyone "Put a sock in it."
I am not a Bruce supporter as I consider his past actions and statements totally reprehensible. However, prior to rendering any judgment on this issue, as on any other, we should all "cool it" until the facts are fully and completely ascertained.
Perhaps each and every single one of us should ask the simple question. Do I know the facts? If the answer is NO, then it is NO. There is "NO, but..." If the reply is the latter, everything after the NO is only gossip, and reflects nothing but an immature thought process.
May 1, 2008
8:20 a.m.
Suggest removal
homeradam writes:
I'm so happy that I don't live in Colorado anymore. The state is being taken over by illegal mexicans and liberal women who destroy this man over a bad hair day. Let me guess.....this dumb broad is probably an illegal mexican intern whose husband was just busted at a chicken gutting plant by customs for being in the state without a green card. Her illegitimate kids were probably going to a state subsidized school. Disgusting.
May 1, 2008
8:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
Froward69 writes:
homeradam, I am glad you don't live here either.
May 1, 2008
8:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
mrNiceGuy writes:
homeradam
You forgot to mention.......
Colorado loves to keep it's good people under it's thumb (try and take an 8 year old boy to Urgent Care for a hurt arm - they'll treat the parent like a child abuser) but the liberal attitude keeps the dirt on the street (try reporting to DHS child abuse - they'll barely do anything). It's the state where if you get bit by a dog, everyone comes out to defend the dog. It's the state where a road raged off duty cop can shoot a guy in his heart & kill him and it's justified, but if you slap a cop you get 4 years in fed pen for assault.
I could go on, and on, and on, but I will not. Like the rest of CO's good citizens, I will hide behind my computer and wait for the next rally for the illegals, homeless, or animals.
May 1, 2008
8:36 a.m.
Suggest removal
EdwardGRobinson writes:
homer, pass that on to Lowtax=anarchy; he admits being confused and you can set him straight.
I'm sure it was just another tap, a nudge, a poke - ask Sallie Clark, John Hazelhurst, Bob Isaak, or a the nearest photog within striking distance.
May 1, 2008
8:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
Buckwheat writes:
Two words......Witch Hunt....You be the Judge...
May 1, 2008
8:38 a.m.
Suggest removal
ptorres writes:
Bruce, I'm will to provide you a free Sexual Harassment training course "A Commonsense Approach" to avoid Sexual Harassment complainants and it includes a video. As for your other problem with making comments about peasants we are also willing to send you to San Luis Portsi Mexico to chili out at the natural hot springs.
May 1, 2008
8:40 a.m.
Suggest removal
plotz writes:
The article does not mention what the exact nature of the complaint was about. Nor does it mention if the compliantant or anyone else is pressing charges. This is a non article and violates the basics of journalism. In my opinion, this is a stunt by those who loathe Bruce to smear him. To make him politically impotent(sorry for the intentional pun) or get him the capitol for good. Personally, I kind of like Bruce, he makes otherwise dull and mostly pointless Colorado politics fun and interesting. He is honest and many people do like an honest person.
Lastly, if Bruce is charged with a crime...can you imagine him in sex offender therapy...never work. The therapist are in for a ride.
May 1, 2008
8:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
EdwardGRobinson writes:
Rlaitres,
it's quite clear from your post that you know nothing of DB's past behavioral problems. While awaiting the 'truth' to come out, watch the spin on hizzonners totally one-sided websites for his version of it (the propaganda's almost as bad as Radio Havana's).
May 1, 2008
8:54 a.m.
Suggest removal
American100 writes:
Not fan of Bruce but my first thought upon reading this is "I wonder who's paying her and how much.".
May 1, 2008
8:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
Squatch writes:
I remember reading a comment that Black and Mexican Men treat their Ladies with no respect but yet again we have a story of a MAN treating a women with no respect. Guess it isnt just a racial issue its a gender issue.
May 1, 2008
8:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
AC writes:
There is no need to "set up" a guy who is known to be a loose cannon. That Bruce would continue to provide genuine ammunition to shoot himself in the foot is a *guarantee.*
This incident is for real, folks.
May 1, 2008
8:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
gregapps5 writes:
From the Greg & Beau Eagle Morning Show - 103.9 FM, Colorado Springs
Top 10 things Doug Bruce might have said to be accused of sexual harassment:
10. Wanna go halvsies on a young Republican?
9.I’ll give you Rocky Mountain High!
8. If you think it takes me long to swear-in, you haven’t seen anything yet.
7. There’s a small fire burning in Cheyenne Canyon, there’s a larger one burning in my pants.
6. I’m thinking of donating more than just a copy of the U.S. Constitution to you.
5. You think everybody in my slum houses actually has to pay?
4. Have you been De-Bruced?
3. Ever make it with someone that’s been censured?
2. I didn’t mean to kick that photographer when he was on his knees, it’s just a force of habit.
…and the number one thing Doug Bruce MIGHT have said to be accused of sexual harassment:
1. Is it talking dirty when I call you an illiterate peasant?
May 1, 2008
8:58 a.m.
Suggest removal
MGD writes:
Can someone explain to me why TABOR is bad? I'm asking, not making a point. Controls on Governement spending are a good thing, aren't they?
As for Bruce, like him or hate him he is definitely making things more interesting. I will say this in his defense, he doesn't care what you think. So many politicians are smooth talkers with hidden agendas. Bruce just says what he thinks and acts on it. If all politicians did that, it would be much easier to figure out who to elect. Instead they tell each audience something different and then put their resources toward protecting special interests anyway.
May 1, 2008
8:59 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Any facts yet? Is this woman going to give the papers an interview with her side of the story? Does she have legal council? What do the police have to say about this?
May 1, 2008
9:05 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
MGD,
Read the comments after this article. It might help answer your question. It is a laymans take on Tabor.
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/news...
May 1, 2008
9:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
mt writes:
I can't understand why so many people hate this guy. He ruffles feathers in politics. Good, it's about time someone did that indstead of laying down and being a 'yes mamm' and following what everyone else is doing since they don't have enough of a backbone to stand up for what they believe in. Politicians want to get elected so they won't make any noise or stand out unless they are pointing out someone elses flaws. If they do stand out then the idiotic, cry baby, please don't hurt my feelings public lashes out. Seems like all most of you want is someone who will sit there and agree with everyone else. Politics at their best!
May 1, 2008
9:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
ezekiel777 writes:
i'm no defender of doug bruce... he's a gift that just keeps on giving.
still, if these allegations are politically motivated...whether made up or simply exaggerated....it will be a serious miscalculation as the charges will put him on a martyr's pedestal.... giving his supporters a rallying point...
the best way to respond to this fellow is to repeal TABOR.
May 1, 2008
9:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
ochis writes:
Life's tough, it's even tougher if you're stupid.
May 1, 2008
9:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
newsjunkie writes:
you know what's really disturbing about this? that another story about this stupid boob is the headline story - and the story that we should all truly care about and be outraged about - the details of the Thompson indictment - is no where to be seen. wow - no wonder children are dying every week at the hands of their caretakers in this state - folks just aren't interested - they'd rather read more about Bruce's latest antics. instead of wasting more time and ink on this idiot - how about focusing our energies on what went so terribly wrong that our society (and social services who were involved with these people) failed to notice the disappearance of a 3 year old girl for possibly 3 or 4 years after the fact.
May 1, 2008
9:39 a.m.
Suggest removal
PajamaPulitzer writes:
Kill TABOR and you give the taxandspendocrats even more of a blank check.
May 1, 2008
9:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
Dougie,Dougie,Dougie!
What are we going to do with you?
Simple
He is a distraction and counterproductive to the entire State Legislature. The Republican leaders in the house and the party leadership of the State Party should simply ask for his resignation (it they had any good sense)
And if he refuses -
the legislature must act to remove him!
Bruce MUST go!
And if there is Strong enough evidence,
both criminal and civil actions should be filed against him!
May 1, 2008
9:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
eziekel777,
You wrote "the best way to respond to this fellow is to repeal TABOR."
Doug Bruce is the self appointed King of Tabor however many people were part of it's creation. The theory of limited government has been around long before Doug Bruce. This theory is what prompted the thousands of grassroots supporters to get Tabor to the ballot. Finally the MAJORITY of Coloradoans approved it. If you take down Tabor you are taking down more than Doug Bruce. You are taking down the will of the people and you are taking down your own freedom. Are you willing to take down Tabor for spite?
Seems to me that most people who hate Tabor make their living via taxes and or are on the dole.
May 1, 2008
9:48 a.m.
Suggest removal
RickyLee writes:
Romanoff probably paid her very well.
Probably got the money from Critter's campaign manager.
May 1, 2008
9:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Where are the facts? Are there any facts yet? Doug Bruce could go to prison and I would still support Tabor. Tabor is much more than Doug Bruce. Not even Doug Bruce is smart enough and powerful enough to make Tabor happen. Tabor was a Godsend.
Where are the facts, I am getting impatient. This story from Lynn would have been better if some supporting evidence was included.
May 1, 2008
9:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Gene writes:
Note to ezekiel777
You are the so called conservative that will never vote conservative again because someone looked cross-eyed at you, and now you are inherently against TABOR; maybe you are finally now being little bit honest?
May 1, 2008
10 a.m.
Suggest removal
newsaddict writes:
Everybody seems to be focusing on sexual harassment as possibly something he said to her of a sexual nature. Knowing how Bruce talks condescendingly to people, my guess is it was more like a sexual put down. Probably something to do with women being inferior. Just a hunch.
May 1, 2008
10:11 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
newsaddict,
Good ponit!
Maybe someday newspapers will be renamed. Speculationpapers? You could change your screen name to speculationaddict. :)
May 1, 2008
10:15 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
TABOR isn't bad, it's just the politicians that want our money in taxes make it sound so bad, awful and evil........ and the gullible fall for it. The uninformed and easily led think TABOR's what's causing the problem with the state budget but it's not nearly as simple as that. If we have to live within a budget, our government can learn how to do so as well. Keep TABOR alive!
I won't pass judgment on Bruce, because it's a complaint with no details, and there's no criminal complaint either. It sounds too much like a thing to make Bruce look bad so it's easier to overturn TABOR, so I'll wait and see if there's any foundation to it. Could be that the woman is Democrat, and in a crowded hallway Bruce and her brushed against each other walking opposite ways and she was offended; one of the women that thinks crowds should part for her so she doesn't have to touch up against anyone.
If the accusation is false, the woman should be banned from the Capitol building and she should make a public apology. If the accusation is true, and proven with merit, Bruce should resign his position and make the apology.
May 1, 2008
10:16 a.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
Lowtaxequalsfreedom
Facts:
A complaint was filed.
That complaint most have some merit as it was taken seriously by the leadership of the Legislature.
Doug Bruce is a loud mouth who barks and smarts-off to anyone and everyone. He likes to shock people.
He has been and continues to be a very controversial and contenious personality who likes to stirs things up and seeks the public lime light.
Therefore
You could not put it passed him to have done and or said something that crossed the line.
A Further investigation is ongoing - it would not be appropriate to make detail available to the press at that time.
Bruces would not make any comment on it, to even deny it! (Doug Bruce not commenting -very interesting point ..and a FACT!)
There are some FACTS.
Too bad you are not smart enough to have pulled those out of the story for yourself?!?!
Your Support or lack of it for Tabor should not depend on if Bruce is kicked out of the state house or goes to prison or not - so whats the point of that statement?
There is nothing to connect this story to Tabor except the name Bruce.
If you are so interested in facts, why don't you stick to them?
May 1, 2008
10:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
AC writes:
TABOR *is* bad. It's not the "vote on tax increases" or even the cap on spending growth; it's the "ratchet" effect of it that over time forces a real reduction in the scope of government. It's why your prisons and courts are overcrowded, why your roads and bridges aren't being fixed. And THAT was the goal of the "drown government in the bathtub" crowd that pushed it; shrink government.
Now that may sound good to the fringe, but government is how we conduct our public business, and to handcuff it is stupid. Vote on tax increases and put a ceiling on growth, sure. But to hide that "ratchet" effect in the mechanism betrays the real purpose.
And Doug ain't being set up here. Anyone who thinks it's inconceivable he could do something stupid from a harassment point of view clearly doesn't know the guy. Romanoff is OBLIGATED to "hide" the charges at this point; it violates the rules to disclose it.
But you can bet the Dems would be sorry to see this guy go. As someone else said, since the Dems would never win his district in El Paso in a million years, what better way to neutralize it than to have this guy hold it?
May 1, 2008
10:28 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Diff,
The only fact you provide in your rant was that a complaint was filed.
Do you have any more facts?
May 1, 2008
10:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
brucey gets more irrelevant by the day
May 1, 2008
10:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
AC,
According to Romanoff Ref C permanently removed the ratchet. Seriously he claims to have solved the ratchet issue. So that would make Tabor a good thing right? Then why are we trying to water Tabor down even more? Fact is those in power want more. They always will. It will never be enough.
Why are our courts overcrowded and other government service running short? Because of economics. If you do not attach value to a service via a price or cost then it will always be abused and over used. The more you provide the more it is used. Economics guide us all. You will never overcome the forces of economics NEVER! If you want to achieve equilibrium you must attach a cost or price to all government services. I did not create the laws of economics but I am forced to live by them.
Oh and BTW AC do you have any actual dollar figures of the ratchet effect? When you take the subtractions of the ratchet and balance them against Ref C and other new taxes who is winning? Has the dollar amount of State spending been reduced? I can already tell you that the States budget is up. 18 Billion dollars is hardly bankrupt. That is not just 18 Billion one time. That is 18 Billion next year and another 18 Billion the following year. What could you do with 18 Billion each and every year?
Colorado is ranked 35 by the taxpayer foundation. Our tax free day this year was April 28th. The National tax free day is May first. Colorado is by no means a low tax State.
Just think we work until April 28th. just to pay our taxes. WOW.
May 1, 2008
10:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
If you Can't see them - there is no way I can make you see them -
So your saying CB did comment?
What did he say? did he deny it? - I don't see that in this article nor on any other news source - Mmmm
The Leadership to whom the complaint was made - dismissed it -
though it did not have enough merit to warrant looking to it further?
Statement in this article says "Stephens said leadership took the complaint seriously"
OK ok ... Bruce being a guy who likes the lime light and is always running off his mouth - more my opinion than "fact" even tho it seems painfully obvious to me ...
OH btw my previous post was not a rant - it was a response to your little ( and I mean that in every way ) rant
This is a rant!
OUT!
May 1, 2008
10:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cel writes:
What species is the accuser?
May 1, 2008
10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Diff,
What are the facts? I understand that a complaint was filed. What else do we know about the incident? When did it happen? Where? Who was present? What was the nature of the incident? What is Doug Bruce saying? What is the complainant saying? Is there any supporting evidence such as DNA, video, audio? What have the police learned about the incident? How about posting a copy of the actual complaint? Maybe some background on the complainant such as party affiliation, groups, clubs, legal status ect, ect.
Some facts would be great.
Facts. Facts. Facts.
May 1, 2008
11:09 a.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
You are asking good questions, that need to be and may be answered at some point -
But to what end in your case -
You can't see or won't accept the facts as they are and are available now.. Why would that change when more facts become available and as answers to the questions
Thats what you where asking about the FACTS - no?
you can't even make a case as to why the facts I pointed out are not facts ...
instead you want to try to make implications of "facts" from simply asking questions...
One more FACT-
I am of the opinion that you must be a Bruce loving IDIOT - mostly - just an Idiot!
May 1, 2008
11:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
newsjunkie writes:
not to beat a dead horse here(forgive me), but I note the comments piling up in response to stories about Carmelo Anthony' drunk driving, a pink poodle and a moronic attention starved state representative (now up to 94). yet RMN does not feature in the top headlines the explosive indictment against an alleged child abuser/murderer whose child no one noticed was missing from age 3 to 7. and whose body has never been found. and the comments posted yesterday to the original release of the story went off on a stupid tangent about what race is the subject of the most abuse/child death allegations. for the love of god, just what are our priorities in this culture???? what a sad commentary on who we are.
May 1, 2008
11:19 a.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
bruce is the political gift that keeps on giving.
to be sure...let's make sure everyone reading understands that Douglas Bruce is a Republican.
May 1, 2008
11:23 a.m.
Suggest removal
Gene writes:
Jay,
I want to thank you very much for hitting the capital letter key on D. B. and R. Now I understand.
May 1, 2008
11:30 a.m.
Suggest removal
DenverDan writes:
The last of the "Good old Boy Club" all Republicans?
May 1, 2008
11:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
artstarzz writes:
It must be hard on Bruce . He quotes the law well all the time breaking it . I can see who the real peasant is . He is nothing more then a bully . He is on his way out ., thats a good thing .
May 1, 2008
11:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
Starburst writes:
From editor John Temple's column of Feb. 2 after his newspaper was beaten on the story about more egregious allegations against Rep. Michael Garcia:
"The story was a case of "he said, she said," I told Lynn. Without witnesses or other women or a prosecutor or confirmation from the House speaker, we would do nothing with the story except continue to investigate it - unless the woman was willing to put her name to the allegations.
Our policy on anonymous sources is clear:
"The Rocky Mountain News discourages the use of anonymous sources. Their use threatens the credibility of the newspaper because the reader has no way to judge whether the source is reliable and/or whether the source is using the newspaper for his or her own end.
"When considering whether to grant an exception to our rejection of anonymity, journalists should ask whether the information from the source is crucial to the story, whether it is informational or accusatory and whether it is fact or opinion.
"The News does not use anonymous sources for opinion or accusatory material, or for incidental elements."
It was clear that we were dealing with accusatory material and couldn't publish it."
Lying hypocrites.
May 1, 2008
12:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
artstarzz writes:
MGD
You are right he says what he thinks and acts on it . I think they call that thereat
May 1, 2008
12:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Starburst,
You nailed it.
Any facts yet? Still waiting.
May 1, 2008
12:33 p.m.
Suggest removal
RickyLee writes:
I just love where Diff says,"That complains must have some merit because it was taken seriously by the leadership in the legislature".
REALLY?!?!?
You think it has merit because some POLITICIANS who hate Doug Bruce and TABOR "take it seriously". Wow, you're pretty gullible.
Politicians NEVER lie, do they?
It may very well be a meritricious allegation, I don't know.
But I'm certainly not going to rubber stamp it because some POLITICIANS like the opportunity to smear someone they don't like.
That never happens, does it? Politicians smearing someone they don't like?
May 1, 2008
12:38 p.m.
Suggest removal
Bob299 writes:
I love that some of Bruce's harshest critics are his own party.
Welcome to the Republican Legacy.
May 1, 2008
12:42 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Bob299,
Unlike the Dems who pledge blind elegance.
May 1, 2008
12:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
MGD writes:
Can someone explain to me the difference between the cap on growth and the ratchet effect that AC mentions?
AC, do you think that the state budget should grow at a higher rate than TABOR currently allows? If so, what is the right amount for state budget to increase.
Sorry for not slinging mud, I'm just trying to get a better handle on TABOR.
May 1, 2008
12:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
Denverboy1 writes:
I think this so called Rep. should be replaced. He needs to just stay at home...Let our State conduct it's business..His B.S. is taking way to much time and energy away from matters that need the Goverments attention.. But then again is there not a Bigger Elephant in the White House who's B.S. is costing everyone ...... Perhaps it's a new plank in there parties platform yet I dare say they honestly think they are being good leaders........Just cant wait till November.........
May 1, 2008
1:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
MGD,
I have asked many opponents of Tabor what the ideal year to year government growth should be and I have yet to receive a straight answer but their answer is usually along these lines “As much as possible”.
We can get into the ratchet later. I am curious what AC has to say about the appropriate year to year growth and the ratchet.
May 1, 2008
1:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
RickyLee,
Would you like wise NOT dismiss the allegation just because he someone that is not well liked and might be a target for some?
That would be even more Foolish to me, to right it off to a Political attack.
We don't even know who made the allegation, a staffer though might or might not be 'political' could be a simple capitol staffer who is a state employee
For them to make the complaint "official" seems to me to carry at least more weight that someone simply making an allegation.
BTW - I am far from gullible, in fact my first thought on hearing this on the morning news was - someone is going to get DB someway or another!
AND I'd hope they do get him, at least out of the State legislature. he has no business their will be bad for OUR state in the long run.
And as i said before IF there is strong enough evidence (and hope there is) that charges are filed and maybe a law suit too.
I do doubt that it will come to that however ....
Lowtaxequalsfreedom, you would not know a fact, or at least admit to one -if it sat in you lap!
May 1, 2008
1:09 p.m.
Suggest removal
JSeifert writes:
Funny how this comes out when he starts fighting to keep Tabor which affects state employee's and democrats.
May 1, 2008
1:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Any Facts yet?
A complaint has been filed. Who filed it? What was the nature of the complaint? Can I see a copy of the complaint? What is the response of DB? Does the person lodging the complaint have anything to add to the story? What do we know about this person? What are the police saying? Are the police conducting an investigation? What are the lawyers saying? Have any politicians made a formal statement? Is Romanoff conducting an investigation? If so what has done to guarantee the investigation is fair and impartial? Will any citizens be allowed to be part of the investigations to help guarantee fairness?
Some facts would sure help this along.
May 1, 2008
1:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
GetReal writes:
Starburst -
[from editor John Temple's column of Feb. 2 after his newspaper was beaten on the story about more egregious allegations against Rep. Michael Garcia:
"The story was a case of "he said, she said," I told Lynn. Without witnesses or other women or a prosecutor or confirmation from the House speaker, we would do nothing with the story except continue to investigate it - unless the woman was willing to put her name to the allegations.
Our policy on anonymous sources is clear:
"The Rocky Mountain News discourages the use of anonymous sources. Their use threatens the credibility of the newspaper because the reader has no way to judge whether the source is reliable and/or whether the source is using the newspaper for his or her own end.
"When considering whether to grant an exception to our rejection of anonymity, journalists should ask whether the information from the source is crucial to the story, whether it is informational or accusatory and whether it is fact or opinion.
"The News does not use anonymous sources for opinion or accusatory material, or for incidental elements."
It was clear that we were dealing with accusatory material and couldn't publish it."
Lying hypocrites.]
Absolutely THE most insightful post on this thread, and just one more example of how the "unbiased reporters" at the liberal RMN handle stories on politicians solely on whether an R or D precedes their name.
WELL DONE!
May 1, 2008
1:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
cgmarsh writes:
What most of us would like to know is who in their right mind would ever vote for this idiot to represent them at any level of government. Are his constituens as out of touch with reality as he is? Thank god some of us west of the divide are reprented by Al White!!
May 1, 2008
2:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Al White,
The guy that said somehting to this effect, we do not need to undestand the US Constitution we have city attorneys for that. Is the the Al White you refer to?
May 1, 2008
2:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
RickyLee writes:
Like I said, Diff, I'm not going to rubber-stamp it.
I have no idea if the allegation is true. Neither do you.
May 1, 2008
2:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
RickyLee writes:
cgmarsh, you need to get up to speed on how Doug B. got into office.
starburst....AWESOME!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nothing like glaring hypocrisy out of the RMN, and someone like you to call them out on it. Nicely done.
I wonder if John Temple would like to comment on this?
Sadly, it's not at all suprising.
May 1, 2008
2:18 p.m.
Suggest removal
MGD writes:
I'll ask again.
If you are opposed to TABOR, what is a responsbile rate of growth for the Colorado budget? I keep reading that TABOR handcuffs our government by limiting it's growth (tax revenue/budget). What is the right amount by which the budget can grow and be a reasonable burden for tax-payers and still provide basic services?
I'm getting decent information from the pro-TABOR crowd but not much from the anti-TABOR crowd.
May 1, 2008
2:19 p.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
Ricky - I would also agree and not rubber stamp it as "guilty" as well - ( I did say IF when talking about charges)
Even DB gets to take advantage of the Bill of Rights
and everyone deserves that "benefit of doubt" in a court of law
This however is not a court - it's just that I, for me. (MHO) have a lot less doubt about this particular person, because of his past actions, history and attitude.
And a lot of people seem to agree
It seems to me the people that would want him out the most, the Repubs and the conservatives, since he make them look bad - are the ones who are defending him the most..
I don't get that...
May 1, 2008
2:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
cgmarsh -
NO ONE voted for him - he was appointed to fill a vacant seat - (by some group of the republican party?) And who voted for them is maybe a better question - or at least...
What where you thinking?! (followed by a group dope slap ... )
May 1, 2008
2:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
cgmarsh -
NO ONE voted for him - he was appointed to fill a vacant seat - (by some group of the republican party?) And who voted for them is maybe a better question - or at least...
What were you thinking?! (followed by a group dope slap ... )
May 1, 2008
2:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
Mac1 writes:
Bruce the buffoon.
Wonder what his stunt of the week will be next week?
May 1, 2008
3:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
MGD,
The ratchet is an important discussion as well. The term is used in 2 different ways. A few call the formula for increased spending a ratchet because it does not allow the government to grow as fast as our own personal income growth. Personally I think this application is very false and only a hardcore statist would think that the Gov should grow as quick or quicker than our personal income growth.
The more common reference is in regards to a very rare phenomenon that only happens during a reduction in State revenue. For example if 2012 legal revenue is 25B and 2013 actual revenue is 22B then the legal limit for 2014 would be 22B adjusted upwards for population and inflation. So essentially the State would realize a reduction of 2B. State revenue rarely declines and when it does it is not nearly as severe as my example. I exaggerated for illustration purposes only.
The ratchet is highly OVER EMPAHZISED in an attempt to scare middle of the road voters. More propaganda.
Romanoff claims to have legally removed the ratchet via Ref C however many would argue that Tabor does not grant referendums the ability to change this feature. If Bruce still has legs there will be an awesome court battle when REF C expires. Yet one more motive for the big spenders to tarnish Bruce now.
May 1, 2008
3:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
jay writes:
Just to be sure we're keeping the readers up to date.
That is Douglas Bruce, Colorado Republican
May 1, 2008
3:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Any facts yet?
You would think a good reporter would have some new info by now? Something that would substantiate the accusations.
Any facts yet?
May 1, 2008
3:22 p.m.
Suggest removal
DonfromCS writes:
I believe its time for this "Slum Landlord " to get out of public life and find a nice little hole to crawl into. Seriously, the man still hasn't even paid the fines that were assesed against him for the horrible coditions of the houses/apts he owns in Colorado Springs becuse "he dosn't believe the city insepecters or the El Paso Count Health Department has the power or right to tell him or other landlords how to care for their property" He was an embarresment to El Paso County and now the whole state of Colorado. I would certainy back any legislation or motions or whatever it takes to get this man out of politics and out of public view. He's done one semi-decent thing which was Tabor (and he didn't even do all the work himself). He's used Tabor far too long to outway the bad thathe done sinc then. This "man" must go and go soon!
May 1, 2008
3:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
elkman writes:
Where theres smoke, theres fire!
May 1, 2008
3:43 p.m.
Suggest removal
junglegymco writes:
Man are the right wing-nuts out in force today.
First - NOWHERE does the article use "ANONYMOUS" sources. It identifies them as other legislators, but does not name them. HUGE DIFFERENCE. LEARN TO READ. The RMN liberal? You have GOT to be kidding me. Perhaps if you're a fascist the RMN is liberal. Most people would see it as highly conservative.
Second - Sexual harassment is NOT defined by touching, groping, or even how it was "meant". The question is does the receiving party find it offensive and/or would a reasonable person find it offensive? All the old groping white men writing on this board who think Bruce has to grab her breasts in order to be sexually harassed need to get out of 1974 and into 2008.
Third - all the whiners out there who think it's a "witch hunt" need to understand that there are rules of decorum in the legislature and if someone makes an accusation of sexual harassment, it needs to be investigated. This is NOT a witch hunt or politically motivated. It's simply following the rules. Note that the Speaker has not made a SINGLE COMMENT on the issue, nor is he the one making allegations, so STOP SHOOTING THE MESSENGER! Romanoff is following the rules.
Wow - it must be bring-your-brainless-fascists to the RMN board day.
May 1, 2008
3:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
buffsblg writes:
Lowtax
I have no idea if this is a valid complaint or not, but I am interested in your view that the existence of said complaint is not "news". Is it your position that nothing should have been reported until after the investigation? I agree that there is a dearth of facts (which of course has not prevented a vast amount of speculation) but I would think that the filing of such a complaint against any legislator would be a matter of public interest. Of course as Bruce has a higher profile (which he has sought and enjoyed for years) this gets more play, but do you really believe this should have been kept quiet. And would you believe the same if someone accused Romanoff?
May 1, 2008
3:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
From today's live at the Capitol blog:
Just minutes later, the House recessed and House Speaker Andrew Romanoff handed Bruce an envelope that is suspected to contained information about the harassment complaint filed by a woman who worked at the Capitol. Lawmakers confirmed that Bruce had been ordered to stay away from the woman.
Bruce's face turned red as he read the letter at his desk and he asked to speak with Romanoff in private for 30 seconds.
Bruce is either angry or he embarrassed him self this time, but for some one to do that they must first have some humility - maybe he is mad he was caught this time - guess he is not so glib now.
But I doubt he is embarrassed because it obviously has no humility.
Fact: he was ordered -ORDERED, to say away from the woman.
May 1, 2008
3:52 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
junglegymco,
I respect your explanation of protocol and the difference between anonymous sources vs. other legislators. Fair enough.
However when it come to your labels I am a bit confused. You use the labels liberal, conservative, right wing and fascist.
Could you please give your definition of each of these labels and then I will plug in your definitions and reread your post.
Please.
May 1, 2008
4 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
buffsblg,
Considering this is a public official I suppose it is new worthy before the facts come in. I really despise when they do this to private citizens.
The entire article presented a guilty till proven innocent slant. No?
Never the less I am really very curious about the facts. If Bruce is guilty I will drop him like a hot potato. However I will continue to vehemently support Tabor.
Any facts yet?
May 1, 2008
4:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
JSeifert writes:
Its easy to follow the rules when you are making them. Personnaly I do not care one way or another about the man but I do want Tabor acually I want a Harder verson of Tabor I want the State to come to us for every dollar spent. I am tired of hearing of some State rep spending millions on some Crap bill when the roads need fixed or millions on some feel good Bill when gas is high or some diversity rule when food is coming hard to get. Its time the Government had to work with what they have JUST LIKE WE HAVE TO. We do not get to take more money from our employers when we want to buy gas we have to work for it. Its time the state government did the same . When they have a bill that requires spending more money then they have they need to come to us the taxpayer and explain why they need it for how long and how much then let us deside if we want to pay for it.
May 1, 2008
4:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
Lowtaxequalsfreedom writes:
Diff,
Envelop SUSPECTED to contain a complaint. Face turned red.
Envelope could have said, you have a 6 foot long piece of toilet paper on your shoe. Face turned red.
May 1, 2008
4:12 p.m.
Suggest removal
Diff writes:
Lowtaxequalsfreedom
Dougie? is that you?
You are at least being as big an idiot as DB ...
Or maybe your name is Friday - you know Sgt Joe Friday?
"just the facts"
May 1, 2008
4:13 p.m.
Suggest removal
Big_D writes:
So Bruce is a victim? I think he has been convicted of tax evasion, harassment, being a slumlord and he has also kicked a photographer on tape, ranting like a racist pig, and now sexual harassment. He was never elected. But, now his supporters say it is all just a witch hunt. Have you ever heard the fool me once saying? I think you Bruce supporters are on about fool me twenty times and I'm just a fool. I think he is a good representation of how backwater and stupid his constituents are and if they have a problem with that they should demand a replacement. His district must be full of pinhead racist sexist morons with only grade school educations. Way to be Douglas County! You’re represented!
May 1, 2008
4:14 p.m.
Suggest removal
buffsblg writes:
Lowtax,
I agree that there is a big difference between a private citizen and someone who has deliberately thrust themselves into the public eye. Elected officials know what they are getting into. We all would like more facts, but we also have a right to know what is available.
As to the guilty until proven innocent "slant", that comes primarily from the quotes of other Republicans, which does not necessarily mean it is fair (but perhaps a bit amusing.)
One of my pet peeves is the perception (fostered in part by Bruce) that he is somehow the sole guardian of TABOR. It was passed by the voters and whatever Bruce's flaws, they should not matter in discussions of TABOR. I am not a huge fan of it but my views as to it's continued viability are based upon its impact on government, not on Doug Bruce's personality.
May 1, 2008
4:20 p.m.