Principles of Liberty, Colorado

Dot org, that's one word "principlesoflibertydotorg," the guy neglected to go "doink" with his finger for "dot" because it is really not all one word as stated, but we know he means anyway, bookmarked the website and signed up for the mailer.

And I never am sure if it's principles or principals. It's always a guess.

They are a group that reviews, let's say rakes, each piece of legislation going through Colorado legislature just as the unions and the interest groups rake each piece of legislation that affects them directly and now the group Principles of Liberty is getting attention and considerable traction.

They rake according to core principles.

They define their core principles closely examining the role of government by challenging each piece along the lines of,

Individual liberty
Personal responsibility
Property rights
Free markets
Limited government
State vs. Federal balance of power
Fiscal responsibility
Equal Protection/Rule o law
Uphold the Constitutions of U.S. and the State of Colorado

Each of these categories expand here.

From their website:

Our goal is to help influence political policy in Colorado by focusing upon the core principles of good government that our nation was founded upon and comparing the actions of our state legislators with principles of good government. The primary tools for accomplishing this goal are our weekly Legislative Analysis Report of bills being run in the State House and Senate in the Colorado Legislature and our annual review/grades of legislator voting records.

Grades? 

There is not much to this website. One thing that sticks out, right in the middle in red, "Grow a Pair!" Come on, that's irresistible, I click, it is an essay about the 'national discussion' about allowing knives on airplanes. They're for it.

Back to the grades. pdf

For 2013 In the Senate Republicans had consistently lower scores. Highest scores are B-. 

The House experienced a lot of changes people moving all over, but it were Freshmen House Republicans who led from the rear, two A+, one A, one A-

Senate Democrats could have saved a lot of money by just mailing it in, their votes obviously predetermined. Their scores ranged from 8.5% - 12.9%, a very tight range, and low.

House Democrats, same thing 7.8% - 12.1%

Principles of Liberty defends, 

Again, that's not because we only rated a few bills. The House Democrats' voting records generated 16,765 data points on POL rated (raked) bills this year. The number of data points per Democratic legislator ranged from a low of 369 to a high of 523. Despite this good sample size, the narrow range of Democrat scores is alarming.

2013  results, at the bottom of the page, here pdf 

House 

Everett 94.7 A+ (Really? That's an A+? I thought A+ would have to be 100) 

Saine  94.2 A+

Humphrey 91.2 A

Holbert  86.5 A-

So, easy grading system. You don't even have to get 90 for an A. But still too harsh for most.

7 Bs

5 Cs

9 Ds

35 Fs

I saw this on television. On PBS, some show I never see that discusses political things. I woke up to it. The segment with a man representing Principles of Liberty was introduced ironically as "now an interview with two bald guys," suggesting the segment couldn't possibly be interesting, and I almost did click off.

There's my segue.

I want to talk about the guy's hair because this is important and I was distracted the whole way through so that it interfered with full comprehension, in fact I never did hear or see the guy's name, and I looked for it. 

The interviewer who made the introduction is properly bald. You can see that his head is shaved. He is not particularly handsome nor rugged but he is particularly masculine but not in demeanor. His kind and gentle wit and charm shine through with his intelligence.  

The interviewee is losing his hair dramatically. A band of hair is still there around the sides. It is trimmed short, not at all like images Benjamin Franklin where the remnant band is grown long and wilted. 

And I was just talking about this very thing today with a hairdresser and using another hairdresser with a full head of hair but cut so severely as to be nearly bald. 

The interviewee's band of hair makes his whole face look avuncular and goofy. He speaks and imparts tremendously agreeable levelheaded utterances, not at all the clowning that his hair suggests. His eyes sparkle with life, he tilts his head and smiles and although charming straightforward and intelligent all gravitas is forfeited by his silly appearance, the camera shifts to the completely bald interviewer doing all the same conversational things and more so, observable behavior less serious but more masculine in appearance due to hair management, and you see immediately the difference. 

I say, although psychologically difficult, say goodbye to the hair altogether and take the clip attachment off the shaver and say hello to a whole new tighter more masculine look. Ten out of ten hairdressers agree with me in my mind.