The Colorado Springs Gazette Editorial Board gives Registered Citizens a middle finger for Christmas

I managed to bypass the Gazette's shitty paywall to bring you the absolutely worst and dumbest OpEd I've read this year. 

One commenter wrote, "Say it out loud: "stupid, unethical editors". Not "adults who failed journalism and run divisive media outlets". Same thing in the case of the Gazette, but might as well stick with brevity." 

To that, I say the terms Yellow Journalism ("journalism that is based upon sensationalism and crude exaggeration") or better yet, "brown journalism ("journalism so biased, fallacious. filthy and full of shit that it makes mainstream journalism appear accurate and objective by comparison"), best describe whoever wrote this tripe for the DUHzette. 

https://gazette.com/premium/editorial-say-it-out-loud-sex-offender/article_48e07fce-6454-11ec-86ca-57d4b17574f6.html

EDITORIAL: Say it out loud in Colorado — sex offender

The Gazette editorial board Dec 24, 2021 Updated Dec 24, 2021

(Note, here are the five fucktards on the editorial board: Ryan McKibben, Chairman; Christian Anschutz, Vice Chairman; Chris Reen, Publisher; Wayne Laugesen, Editorial Page Editor, Pula Davis, Newsroom Operations Director)

Kudos to Gov. Jared Polis for nixing the Colorado Sex Offender Management Board’s vote last month to substitute silly, “person first” wokeism for sound policy.

Readers might recall that the obscure board, which writes the rules for rehabilitating and monitoring convicted sex offenders, made news a few weeks ago with its 10-6 vote to bar — ironically — the term “sex offender” from board use.

Board members decided instead to call sex offenders, “adults who commit sexual offenses.” Precious, right? To say nothing of absurd, pointless and insulting to the many Coloradans who have been victims of sexual assault.

Last week, the board voted again — to reverse its decision and table the new policy — after a timely trip to the woodshed. The governor appears to have felt putting the person first when it comes to convicted sex offenders could be interpreted as putting the victims last.

“We must be wary not to normalize violent acts of sexual aggression or even give the appearance of normalizing such unacceptable behavior,” Polis wrote to board Director Kimberly Kline the day before the vote.

“I hope that the board will reevaluate its previous decision to allow for additional discussions with the wider community, including carefully examining potential trauma to victims. …”

Which, of course, is diplomatic gubernatorial parlance for, “Are you guys nuts?”

Just plain bad policy aside, the board’s vote also was tone deaf amid public alarm over Colorado’s skyrocketing crime rate. Violent crime in our state soared 35% from 2011 to last year — it rose only 3% nationwide — and among the grim stats was a 9% jump in rape.

It can’t have escaped Polis’ attention that his fellow Colorado Democrats have been dogged lately by a soft-on-crime reputation. So the timing of the board’s ill-advised decision last month couldn’t be worse.

Actually, it could be worse — and in fact is. As reported in The Gazette on Thursday, courtesy of Denver’s 9News, a man who had been sentenced to 23 years in prison in 2014 for sexual assaults — and served only a fraction of that time — has been accused of sexually assaulting a 7-year-old girl in Aurora this month. Just 18 months after his prison release.

Kenneth Dean Lee was arrested Dec. 10 and faces charges of sexual assault on a child and first-degree burglary. Aurora police officers were told a man, later identified as Lee, entered a residence around noon, identified himself as an immigration official, and assaulted the victim.

A quick search for “sex offender” in The Gazette’s archives turns up a trove of tragic and unnerving headlines just from recent months. Here’s a sampling:

“Sex offender gets 48 years for kidnapping, sexually assaulting Douglas County woman”

“Repeat child sex offender sentenced to 126 years in prison”

“Aurora man who sexually assaulted a teenage boy is sentenced to a minimum of 22 years in prison”

They don’t need to be coddled with kinder, gentler labels. They urgently need help — and they should be getting it behind bars, preferably while serving out their full sentences.

Meanwhile, the Colorado Sex Offender Management Board could use a little therapy, too. Members who voted for the change should be required to repeat the words, “sex offender” aloud 100 times. Acknowledging who they truly are is the first step toward helping them.

Colorado Governor Jared Polis is trying to out-stupid Lauren Boebert

Is CO Gov. Jared Polis in a competition with Lauren Boebert for dumbest politician in Colorado? You'd think a gay person would understand the demeaning power of labels. But then you'd be wrong. I sent him a pretty scathing email to remind him of the power of negative labels. He needs to study up on gay history too, since it wasn't that long ago the "sex offender" label was used to target the gay community.  

https://www.denverpost.com/2021/12/20/sex-offender-label-colorado-jared-polis/

Colorado board reverses controversial change to “sex offender” label at urging of Gov. Jared Polis and his appointee

In November, the state Sex Offender Management Board voted to replace “sex offenders” with “adults who commit sexual offenses.” Then the board opened that decision up to public comment, and that’s where things went off track.

By ALEX BURNESS | aburness@denverpost.com | The Denver Post

PUBLISHED: December 20, 2021 at 1:31 p.m. | UPDATED: December 20, 2021 at 3:39 p.m.

Under pressure from the governor and the state’s public safety director, Colorado’s Sex Offender Management Board has reversed its controversial November decision to scrap the term “sex offenders” in its own guiding principles in favor of “adults who commit sexual offenses.”

The board, commonly referred to as the SOMB, voted 16-2 on Dec. 17 to “table” the language-change matter and refer it back to a subcommittee. It’s possible the board votes again to change terminology in the future, but the tabling means it’s not likely to happen anytime soon.

This decision followed a 10-6 vote by the board in November to stop using “sex offenders” in its own principles and policies. The board controls treatment standards for people convicted of sex offenses, and changing the language in this way would not have affected treatment or management policies. But it was hailed by supporters as an important step away from labels and toward “person-first” language that research shows can improve rehabilitation prospects.

After the November vote, however, the board opened a public comment period. That’s where things went off track.

The language change had gotten coverage on talk radio, on Fox News and in The Daily Caller, in addition to various Colorado outlets. More than 400 people submitted comment on the matter, an overwhelming number for a state board that tends to generate little public attention.

Public defenders and people who’ve committed sexual offenses, plus their family members and advocates, were supportive of the change. But comments from victim advocates and members of the general public were by far in favor of no language change. Law enforcement leaders have also opposed the change from the start.

“The coddling from some of the offender-affiliated representatives was repugnant,” tweeted Colorado sex assault survivor and motivational speaker Kimberly Corban, two days after the vote on a language change. “This shift is offensive for those of us who have experienced victimization at the hands of sex offenders who don’t like their ‘label.'”

On Dec. 16, the day before the board’s reversal vote, Democratic Gov. Jared Polis sent a letter to Kimberly Kline, the chair of the SOMB.

“We must be wary not to normalize violent acts of sexual aggression or even give the appearance of normalizing such unacceptable behavior,” he wrote. “I hope that the Board will re-evaluate its previous decision to allow for additional discussions with the wider community including carefully examining potential trauma to victims and ensuring that a clear message continues to be sent to the general public than non-consentual (sic) sexual aggression is not acceptable or tolerated in Colorado.”

Polis also expressed concern that the SOMB, a 25-member board when fully seated, had only 16 of its members present for the November vote. Polis appointee Stan Hilkey, director of the Colorado Department of Public Safety, said the same in his own letter to Kline.

“The oddity of this policy change occurring without a true board majority subjects the SOMB and CDPS to public scrutiny,” Hilkey wrote.

Hilkey suggested that, as director of the department that oversees the SOMB, he would likely reject the new language as a policy change.

“I … wish to avoid a scenario where the Board and the Department are not in alignment on the issue, which would place community trust, credibility and relevance of both entities at peril of reputational harm that could jeopardize our collective success,” he wrote. “While unintended, I am concerned that this is on a path to cause more harm than was trying to be fixed within the narrow intent of the trauma-informed language in the first place.”

Polis and Hilkey got their way, to the frustration of reform-minded advocates.

“The research is overwhelming that how we label people impacts their ability to build healthy, prosocial identities and lifestyles that are incompatible with sexual offending,” Laurie Rose Kepros, director of sexual litigation for the Office of the State Public Defender, told The Denver Post. “The SOMB Standards provide the regulations that govern the professionals charged with supporting these positive changes, so the language should support that mission.  Do we want these clients to reoffend or not?”

This was Kline’s argument all along — that the language change was not, in fact, anti-victim, but rather pro-rehabilitation and public safety.

“If we’re talking about how someone speaks about themself, … that can increase risk,” Kline, arguing against labeling people, said ahead of the November vote. “Ultimately it is victim-centered if we’re reducing risk.”

Illinois State Rep. Kelly Cassidy uses bounties on "sexual abusers" as prop for abortion law protest

There are over 200 murdered registrants, and thousands more have been harassed. It seems Ill-noise state rep Kelly Cassidy loves murder, be it registered persons or the unborn. Hyperbole or not, calling for bounties on those accused of sexual offenses is appalling and I think her term in office should be the only thing aborted. 

https://www.nprillinois.org/statehouse/2021-09-14/democrat-sponsored-texas-act-would-allow-10k-bounties-on-sexual-abusers-those-who-cause-unwanted-pregnancies

Democrat-Sponsored ‘TEXAS Act’ Would Allow $10K Bounties On Sexual Abusers, Those Who Cause Unwanted Pregnancies

NPR Illinois | 91.9 UIS | By Hannah Meisel

Published September 14, 2021 at 3:57 PM CDT

Two weeks after Texas effectively banned abortions after six weeks of pregnancy, a Democratic state lawmaker in Illinois is proposing a law based on Texas’ model — but turned on its head.

State Rep. Kelly Cassidy (D-Chicago), who in 2019 sponsored law defining abortion as a fundamental right in Illinois, is introducing a bill dubbed "The EXpanding Abortion Services Act,” the acronym of which spells TEXAS.

The Texas law is uniquely designed, allowing private citizens the right to bring a civil lawsuit against anyone who performs an abortion, gets an abortion or aids in someone getting an abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. Opponents of the law have described the minimum $10,000 in damages up for grabs as a “bounty.”

Cassidy’s proposal instead would instead give Illinoisans the right to seek at least $10,000 in damages against anyone who causes an unwanted pregnancy — even if it resulted from consensual sex — or anyone who commits sexual assault or abuse, including domestic violence.

“If folks are policing the bodies of people who are seeking reproductive healthcare in Texas, well, then maybe we should be policing the bodies of the people who are causing those problems here in Illinois,” Cassidy told NPR Illinois.

Under Cassidy’s bill, half of the damages awarded would go toward a new “State Abortion Freedom Access Fund,” to be managed by the state’s Department of Healthcare and Family Services. The money would also be required to be halved even if a case is settled. The fund would be used as financial aid for people from states with limited abortion access to travel to Illinois for the procedure.

While Cassidy acknowledged the bill’s name and modeling after the Texas law includes some element of trolling, she said she’s serious about getting co-sponsors and a hearing on the legislation.

“There’s certainly an element of ‘hold my beer’ to this, obviously,” Cassidy said. “But the truth here is if this is our new normal, if this is the way that conservatives are going to police women’s bodies, and we as a state have — with a great deal of intentionality — have established ourselves as a safe haven, we also…have to figure out a way to manage that.”

House Speaker Chris Welch (D-Hillside) spokeswoman Jaclyn Driscoll said it’s up to Cassidy to request a hearing on the bill, but “the Speaker certainly wouldn’t stand in the way of one.” Welch has also pushed for reproductive rights in his time in office.

At an event in Aurora Tuesday morning, Planned Parenthood of Illinois President and CEO Jennifer Welch (no relation to Speaker Welch) appeared with Gov. JB Pritzker and three Democratic members of Congress to promote legislation seeking to enshrine abortion rights in federal law. Welch said Planned Parenthood facilities in Illinois have already seen an uptick in people traveling across state lines to get abortions in Illinois.

“It only took two days after [the Texas law] was enacted for us to see Texas patients here in Illinois, despite those long distances they had to travel,” Welch said. “We expect those numbers to significantly increase when these dangerous laws continue.”

Cassidy said she’s heard the same anecdotally from abortion providers, and recalled doubt from colleagues and others when she sponsored the Reproductive Health Act in 2019, saying she was told it was hyperbolic to predict the U.S. Supreme Court's landmark 1973 decision in Roe v. Wade would be overturned. That decision upheld a woman's right to privacy in decisions about abortion, effectively allowing the practice nationwide.

Because private citizens act as the enforcement mechanism in the Texas law — and not any one state official — a majority on U.S. Supreme Court late last month declined to block the law from going into effect, reasoning it escapes federal judicial review.

The U.S. Supreme Court is readying to hear a direct challenge to Roe v. Wade in a case stemming from Mississippi’s ban on abortions after 15 weeks.

At Tuesday morning’s event in Aurora, Pritzker described conservatives’ wins restricting abortion in Republican-run states as a “dystopian future”

“…As radical Republican legislators across the country seek to functionally eradicate their constituents’ autonomy with no intervention from the nation’s highest court to be found,” the governor said.

A 2017 law signed by then-Republican Gov. Bruce Rauner also aimed to shield Illinois from any future Supreme Court overturning of Roe v. Wade by removing decades-old language from state law that stipulated Roe v. Wade's overturn would trigger the end of abortion protections in Illinois too. That law also legalized the use of state funds for abortions, including for Medicaid recipients.

Ralph Rivera of Illinois Right to Life Action didn't find Cassidy's bill very funny, though he did say he would be on board for legalizing bounties for rapists. Otherwise, he speculated some of the broader strokes in the bill might be found unconstitutional.

"We’re talking about human life," Rivera said. "It’s not silly. Taking a serious matter and trying to be flippant...she could’ve just stated that and not filed a bill."

Klas-less: Miami Herald's Mary Ellen Klas casts Anti-Registry activist Derek Logue in a False Light Statement

Senator Book is pretty good at lying about being stalked so is this even true, or is this another of her long list of lies to help detract from her ineptitude as the state's democratic senate leader? But whatever the case, adding Derek Logue's name in a blatant false light statement in an unrelated case is still a civilly liable action. I guess the Miasma Herald isn't what it used to be. 

In Logue v. Book, 297 So. 3d 605 (Fla. Ct. App. 2020), the Court didn't just overturn the protection order because Mr. Logue was merely exercising the 1st Amendment right to protest a corrupt lobbyist and his corrupt daughter/priofessional victim/crooked politician, they found that there WERE NO ACTIONS that could have possibly lead to stalking under the Florida statute. In other words, the court determine there was NO STALKING involved. Book is a liar, and apparently Mary Ellen No-Klas seems to care about the truth. 

https://www.tampabay.com/news/florida-politics/2021/12/02/plantation-man-arrested-on-charges-of-extorting-harassing-state-sen-lauren-book/

Plantation man arrested on charges of extorting, harassing state Sen. Lauren Book

The lawmaker, known as an advocate for abuse victims, alerted state law enforcement officials in November.

By Mary Ellen Klas

Published Dec. 2, Updated Dec. 3

"Florida police have arrested 19-year-old **** of Plantation on cyber stalking and extortion charges after he allegedly faked sexually explicit photos of state Sen. Lauren Book and threatened to distribute them to news media outlets...

A record search showed ****, who lives in Book’s district and is a registered Democrat, does not have a criminal record....

This is not the first time Book has faced harassment and cyber stalking.

Book, who suffered sexual abuse by a nanny when she was a child, leads the advocacy group Lauren’s Kids.

In 2018, she obtained an injunction against Derek Logue, an outspoken critic of sex-offender laws, whom she accused of cyber stalking and harassment. A Broward County circuit judge issued an injunction that included a series of requirements designed to prevent Logue from having contact with the lawmaker or threatening her.

But Logue appealed to the Fourth District Court of Appeal, which ruled in a 2-1 decision in 2019 that the injunction violated his First Amendment rights. A footnote in the majority opinion said an Alabama court in 2001 convicted Logue of improper relations with a minor."