Today, I saw a quote on a far left wing democratic blog that appears to be funded by someone, some say Tim Gill. It said about this blog:
The far-righties are holding on tight to BS, while writing wild-eye attacks against Udall and treating BS as their lord and savior (it's very coulterish, or cultish?). They even go as far to claim Shaffer is a "realist" while Udall is extreme. It's comedy at it's best, since they think they are doing their guy good.
That charge was so far off base in terms of my politics that I took the time to write a 2000 word rebuttal. This blog's format is too small to post entries here, so it is posted elsewhere as "Why Mark Udall Will Be In Trouble."
Udall is in trouble because people like me and my co-bloggers, who can't be dismissed as "far-righties" are so mistrustful of his instincts. He is so far out of the mainstream that he seems to lack common sense when it comes to the major issues of the day.
And to correct a point that our friend made, no one on this blog has ever called Udall "extreme." We have merely reported that either the msm or liberal blogs have called him "extreme" or "liberal," or "reliably left wing" multiple times, to the point where we keep a scoreboard.
Added: We changed "is" to "appears to be" in the second paragraph within 5 minutes after posting this, should there be a future question. We try to be accurate. Tim Gill is thought, along with George Soros, to be the funding source for several left wing blogs and the organizations behind them.