Does Colorado really need another Ken Salazar in Washington?

Although I've been listed as a contributor to Schaffer v Udall for some time, this is my first post here. The demands of two jobs, school, and teenage children at home have prevented me from being as involved in this campaign as I would like to have been. I thought it important that I weigh in now before the campaign is over, to give my perspective on the choice before us.

Back in 2006, Ken Salazar ran against Republican candidate Pete Coors for the U.S. Senate seat vacated by the retiring Ben Nighthorse Campbell. During that campaign, Salazar assured us that he was a moderate, and would consider the views of everyone in Colorado. For his first two years, as a member of the minority party in the House, he did work in a bipartisan manner. Once the Democrat party took the majority, this behavior changed immediately.

Over the past two years, Salazar has been in lock-step with the Senate leadership, which has accomplished almost nothing during its tenure. Mark Udall, has done the same thing during his time in the U.S. House of Representatives. Udall was against drilling for our own oil before he was for it. Salazar is fine with us having to pay $10/gal. for gasoline. Senator Obama, whom Mark Udall supported as a Democratic Party Superdelegate wants to bankrupt the coal industry. This will cost Colorado a substantial number of jobs if he goes through with it, and Mark Udall will support him.

Many people talk about the unpopularity of our current President. There is no doubt that this is true. He has frustrated members of both major parties with his policies. Yet, there is another branch of government that is even less popular than the Executive branch. It is the 110th Congress, of which Mark Udall is a member. Their favorability ratings are half that of the President's; they have even seen single digits for the first time in history.

Change has been discussed often during this political campaign. Almost everyone will agree that we need some sort of change. The question I have to ask you is this: Will electing Mark Udall help to bring change, when he is currently a part of the problem?

Ultimately, this election comes down to character and trust. Mark Udall promised to vote against the summer House recess so we could have real debate on energy policy. He broke that promise because he was too busy meeting with fundraisers instead of doing his job.

Bob Schaffer keeps his promises. When he ran for the U.S. House of Representatives years ago, he promised to only spend two terms there. He kept his promise, even after a plea from the President of the United States.

We need someone in Washington to represent us that will keep his promises. We need someone that will fight for Colorado, not by bringing home bacon, but by strengthening the economy of the nation, and allowing us to utilize the natural resources that we have to our benefit and that of our nation.

We don't need another Ken Salazar in Washington. That's what electing Mark Udall will give us. We need a man of character, and someone that knows how to get things done.

The choice is clear. Colorado needs Bob Schaffer, for U.S. Senate.