We here at the BrokenCountry have a few questions for President Obama. How much of the taxpayers money is President Obama spending to go to Massachusetts and stump for Coakley? Is the tab being picked up by the Democratic National Committee? What other pressing issues is he ignoring to make sure that the democrats maintain a “super majority” in the senate? Why is this such an important issue to Obama?

These are just a few questions that I want asked and answered. I think this may be a first. I am probably wrong, because I am wrong quite frequently (but at least I can admit it) but I cannot remember a sitting president traveling to stump for a party candidate in a mid-term election.

It should also be noted that, should Coakley lose the race, it will look incredibly bad for President Obama. Obama is pulling out all the stops for Coakley, and if she doesn’t come up the winner in Massachusetts, a state where virtually every congressman sent to Washington is a democrat, it will be incredibly embarrassing and a virtual rebuke of Obama’s liberal agenda.

By going to Massachusetts, Obama is almost condemning the democrat party should Coakley lose. House and senate democrats will have no choice but to turn their back on Obama’s agenda if his presence cannot produce a victory for Coakley. Could it be that Obama is so egocentric that he thinks that his mere presence makes it a slam dunk for Coakley? Even after the Copenhagen, Olympic Games debacle?

One can only wonder. We see it as a republican victory even is Scott Borwn loses the election. Think about it. Here is the late Ted Kennedy’s senate seat. A seat not held by a republican since 1955, and there is a good chance that a republican is going to replace a Kennedy in one of the most liberal states in the union.

The liberal naysayers and Obamatrons will be out in force with either outcome of the election. If Coakley wins, the libs will call it a victory for Obama and his agenda. If Brown wins, they will say it was because of republicans running a smear campaign and spending millions of dollars in a state that they would normally ignore.

But not a word will be said about the expense of sending a sitting president, in Air Force One, with his three support aircraft, a second Air Force One as a decoy for the terrorists, three hundred people that make up the presidential detail, military escort including aircraft, and the press pool to Massachusetts to stump for a senate seat. JD

Leave it to California to legalized drugs to raise tax revenue.   Nice job NBC.  Your joint of oregano and parsley looks  . . .  STUPID!!!   You could have at least tried to make it look like real weed.    JD

The first step to legalize marijuana in California could happen Tuesday.

Lawmakers will vote on Assembly Bill 390 — legislation to tax and regulate marijuana. The assembly’s Public Safety Committee is expected to vote after a hearing that begins at 9 a.m. hearing in Sacramento.

The bill, authored by San Francisco Assemblyman Tom Ammiano, would essentially treat pot the same way alcohol is treated under the law and would allow adults over 21 to possess, smoke and grow marijuana.

The law would also call for a fee of $50 per ounce sold and would help fund drug eradication and awareness programs. It could help  pull California out of debt, supporters say, raising up to $990 million from the fees.

Among the supporters of legalizing marijuana is a group of police, judges and prosecutors who formed a group called Law Enforcement Against Prohibition. The organization firmly believes that legalizing marijuana for adults will help improve American society by restricting youth access to it and taking the attraction away from cartels that traffic pot as an illegal substance.

“The mere fact that there will be votes in the Assembly to regulate and control the sale and distribution of marijuana would have been unthinkable even one year ago.” Retired Orange County California Supreme Court Judge Jim Gray via a statement from the group. “And if the bill doesn’t pass this year, it will soon. Or, the bill will be irrelevant because the voters will have passed the measure to regulate and tax marijuana that will be on the ballot this November.”

Gray testified before the assembly’s informational hearing in October 2009 and defined the group’s position about why they are for overturning the prohibition on marijuana.

This is the first time in U.S. history any state legislative body has ever considered repealing marijuana prohibition, which has been in place since 1913.

Typical democrat.   Raise taxes in a bad economy.  Like the buffoon that he is,  Governor Bill Ritter is going to punish the poor to benefit the rich people of Colorado.   The age old question that no one seems to ask,  is how is this punishing the poor?

The answer can be found in the Socialist handbook of France,  whereas,   which group of people consume the most soda,  beer and snack food in America?    THE POOR !!!!    Who smokes the most cigarettes in America?   THE POOR !!!!   Who uses public education that Governor Ritter just cut spending to?    THE POOR!!!

Wealthy people send their kids to private schools.   Next election cycle,  when the liberal democrats run for office,   I would hope that the dopey saps that live up in Boulder and Denver,  which I have been told are Colorado’s equivalent of San Francisco out here is California when it comes to politics, would vote republican.   JD

NY Times Article below

DENVER (AP) — Facing an expected $1 billion shortfall in next year’s budget, Gov. Bill Ritter Jr. is proposing that education spending be cut by $260 million and that Colorado bring in an additional $132 million by charging sales tax on candy and soft drinks as well as online sales.

Under a plan submitted to state lawmakers on Friday, some business-specific tax breaks would also be eliminated or suspended, including a sales tax exemption on agricultural compounds and bull semen, which would be worth $1.5 million a year. Mr. Ritter, a Democrat, also proposed limiting conservation easement credits for three years, raising $13 million annually.

State workers would also take home less money in a move intended to avoid more furloughs. State workers would pick up the state’s share of their pension contribution — 2.5 percent of their salary — for a year to save $20.1 million.

State colleges and universities would receive $56 million less next year but would be given the power to increase tuition by up to 9 percent.

Mr. Ritter said that the budget was fair and that it spread the pain among a variety of groups.

“We are asking everyone to share in this sacrifice,” he said.

His proposal is for the budget year that begins in July, and it still has a long way to go. This week, Mr. Ritter plans to make his case to members of the Joint Budget Committee. Those lawmakers actually write the budget that will be submitted and debated in the Legislature next year, and they can adopt or disregard parts of Mr. Ritter’s proposal.

State Representative Kent Lambert, a Republican committee member, said voters should be asked to weigh in on any tax changes because the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights requires all new taxes be put to a vote.

The Democrats who control the Legislature, meanwhile, have maintained that they have the right to change existing tax policy, just not impose new taxes, under a recent Colorado Supreme Court ruling.