Water Wars and Courage

Mike Saccone has an excellent article in the Grand Junction Sentinel on water as a potential issue in the November contest between Mark Udall and Bob Schaffer. It essentially says that old news is...old news.

It does, however, reinforce a theme that we have often repeated here. Mark Udall is a coward when the interests of his favorite special interest, the environmentalist lobby, conflict with the interests of Coloradoans:

[ Josh ] Penry said an examination of [ Mark ] Udall’s voting record shows he also has made some bad decisions on water.

During a July 2000 vote on the House Resources Committee, [ Mark ] Udall voted “present” on a more than $343 million water storage project that drew from the Animas and La Plata rivers.

Penry, who worked for the bill’s sponsor, Congressman Scott McInnis, R-Colo., said everyone was stunned upon hearing Udall’s vote.

“Mark Udall didn’t vote yes, he didn’t vote no,” Penry said. “He voted present.”

Penry said that vote shows that Udall’s priorities on water storage are much closer to groups opposing all water storage than those of widely revered Congressman Wayne Aspinall, D-Colo.

We say that it was just another example of a lack of courage by Mark Udall. Does it remind anyone of Mark Udall's refusal to buck the environmentalists to authorize the needed forest roads to create fire breaks in our dead and dying pine forests, even when that refusal has already cost lives and will cost more?

Can anyone say "Mark Udall, (D-Sierra Club)?

On Kittens and Grooming

When a kitten is taken from its mother before it learns to groom itself, it never learns to groom itself.

Mark Udall is in need of a comb. This isn't the first time we made that observation. It is said that you dress for the job you want. Our garbage men show up with combed hair more often than Mark Udall does, and they only come once a week.

Today's fashion statement picture was in the Grand Junction Sentinel.

The accompanying article has an interesting quote in it that is very likely another lie from the Mark Udall camp:

“This is solely about bolstering the base,” [ Mike ] Melanson said. “This is indicative of what we’ve been seeing in our research that Bob Schaffer has been having problems in his own base and this is about trying to scare Republicans back into the fold.”

Udall's minions are telling the left wing blogosphere in response to the latest poll showing a toss-up that their internal polls always showed the race to be close. Ok, Melanson, which is it? It reminds one of Mark Udall's Cornfusion, where he told three different audiences what they wanted to hear about corn ethanol.

If I Had a Wagon...I Would Go To Colorado

Ralph D’Andrea, a western slope liberal blogger has been quoted in a recent Political Notebook interview admitting that Mark Udall is "out of the mainstream."

PN: Is he [ Bob Schaffer ] more out of the mainstream than Mark Udall?
RD: No. So it all depends on who appeals to the voters in the middle.

This comment adds to our Mark Udall is not a moderate scoreboard. It is hard to score, so we will just add it to the liberal category.

The Mark Udall is not a moderate scoreboard:
extremist 2
reliably left wing 4
liberal 20
moderate 0
conservative (not in this lifetime--or the next)

We started this scoreboard when we noticed that liberal blogs and the msm was routinely calling Mark Udall a "liberal," "reliably left wing," and even "extremist." We do not count comments from conservative blogs and we didn't count a comment on a liberal show by a conservative politician. Those who would like to check our methodology can follow the bread crumbs backwards.

Mike Saccone on Schaffer's Silence

Mike Saccone is the political writer for the Grand Junction Sentinel:

So is Schaffer’s silence a bad thing?

For Democrats, yes. Schaffer’s silence on igneous issues gives his opponent, Congressman Mark Udall, D-Colo., or liberal political organizations little to attack the veteran statesman on. It also allows him to work on his announced goal or rebuilding his party’s core, waiting for the right moment to go public with his views.

For Schaffer and the GOP, his silence is — to use a tried and tired cliche — golden. Schaffer’s silence while he works to build up his base ahead of what is certain to be an intensely competitive contest should be frustrating for Democrats and political reporters. Nonetheless, it’s a good idea if you want to keep free from early inning errors.

More Wisdom From The West

Mike Saccone of the Grand Junction Sentinel is having a war of words with the lefties. He comments:

So why is criticizing conservative talking head Rush Limbaugh a bad tactic ahead of the 2008 election? … In a nutshell: it does nothing to burnish Udall’s moderate credentials. Indeed, allying oneself with Congressman Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, on a resolution that will have no binding effect is, well, kind of a nonstarter. Sure it’s a principled stance, but it’s nothing more than that.

More importantly, it lets politicos, from Schaffer to state Sen. Josh Penry, R-Grand Junction, stand back and lob the “Boulder liberal” label * at Udall...

Nonetheless, it’s a political stance and an electoral risk [Mark ] Udall did not have to take.

This is the second Saccone essay on the subject. He got beat up by the local liberals and David Sirota on the first one. We like short essays, so we will take on Sirota (the commentator, who according to a gang of four colleague, grabs attention by standing on one foot and spinning. Picture him in a pink tutu with fuzzy yellow bedroom slippers.) in another post.

*Note that we normally kill links embedded in quotes, but the Saccone link was so full of wisdom that we left it in. (Yes, we are laughing as this is being written.)

Udall's Resolution Folly Bound to Hurt Him on Western Slope

In light of the justifiably stern rebuke Boulder liberal Rep. Mark Udall received from the Grand Junction Sentinel yesterday, this nugget of information on Colorado's recent U.S. Senate race poll numbers doesn't bode well for Udall's performance on the Western Slope:

According to the poll results, 39 percent of Western Slope voters prefer Schaffer, and 27 percent support Udall. Twenty-six percent of Western Slope voters, the poll shows, are undecided.

Already 12 points behind, since the survey was conducted before Udall's anti-Limbaugh resolution folly, the Democrat's numbers on the far side of the state only figure to push him even further behind. That 27 percent figure may recede, while independent conservative Republican Bob Schaffer could very well pick up more support from the large crop of undecideds.

The first three notes just happen to be: do re mi

The Mark Udall is not a moderate scoreboard:
extremist 2
reliably left wing 4
liberal 19
moderate 0
conservative (not in this lifetime)

It was incremented today when the Grand Junction Sentinel made the following comment:

It’s curious that Udall, a certified liberal who is seeking statewide office in a state that does not always vote in a certifiably liberal fashion, has bought into a phony attack on Limbaugh propagated by Media Matters, the liberal Internet group. Even after reading the transcript of Limbaugh’s Sept. 26 show posted on Media Matters’ Web site, it takes a considerable stretch to conclude Limbaugh’s “phony soldiers” comment referred to military personnel who merely favor a speedy U.S. withdrawal from Iraq.

We started this scoreboard when we noticed that liberal blogs and the msm was routinely calling Mark Udall a "liberal," "reliably left wing," and even "extremist." We do not count comments from conservative blogs and we didn't count a comment on a liberal show by a conservative politician. Those who would like to check our methodology can follow the bread crumbs backwards.

And yes, we know that we linked to the same article on two sequential posts, but each post had a different purpose.

Wisdom from Grand Junction

Wisdom from Grand Junction:

Although one might presume that they would know better, that hasn’t kept two Democrats [ Mark Udall and Ken Salazar ] who represent Colorado from joining the braying pack led by the hard-left loonies at MediaMatters.org alleging that Limbaugh has impugned the character of American servicemen with his reference last week to “phony soldiers.”

Schaffer Exudes Blend of Realism and Confidence on Statewide GOP Tour

Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer is on the stump crossing the state, speaking to local party groups candidly about where the Colorado GOP is at and optimistically about what it can accomplish. An article in today's Grand Junction Sentinel highlights such a stop for Schaffer along the Western Slope, as he spoke to the Mesa County Republican Party:

Schaffer, who addressed the county party’s monthly luncheon, said the Colorado Republican Party has to figure out where it parted company with mainstream voters.

“Frankly, friends, Republicans, we need to have a candid conversation among ourselves about what it is our party is for and what we exist to do,” Schaffer told onlookers.

He said in light of the Republican Party’s defeats in 2004’s U.S. Senate race between Pete Coors and Democrat Ken Salazar and 2006’s gubernatorial race between Bob Beauprez and Democrat Bill Ritter, some rebuilding is in order.

Schaffer, of Fort Collins, said he plans to travel Colorado over the next several months, “building the base … trying to get our party back up on its feet.”

“That’s a hard thing to say, but I believe it’s true,” Schaffer added. “And I think that even before we get to the point of proposing to take on Democrats, we’ve got to do a good job of getting our own house in line.”

This kind of frank talk is refreshing and necessary after two bitterly divisive election cycles. It helps immensely that the primary field is clear (despite the wishful thinking and hard work of certain liberal bloggers) for Schaffer to carry the party's banner. He's going to need all the time he has to get the job done. But if he stays consistent with his honest, realistic tone and his clear, confident vision, the Republican Party in this state will benefit greatly.

Houston, We Have a Disconnect

Houston, We Have A Disconnect

[via Colorado Senate News]

Just so you know:

From the Denver Post:

The Post believes Ritter deserves a chance to weigh in on such a critical issue. Thus, we support the idea of a moratorium. But even if the BLM plan is held up for Ritter's review, some drilling will, and should, begin fairly soon.

That could trigger up to $1 billion as the state share of leasing payments on the land. Additionally, the state could collect $100 million or more annually for the next 20 to 30 years

From the Rocky Mountain News:

The opposition to leasing is sincere and passionate, but we think opponents overstate the downside and fail to appreciate the potential benefits. These would accrue not only to consumers of natural gas - meaning just about everyone - but more specifically to the taxpayers of this state. Penry and White's proposal highlights the boon that Roan could represent for higher education without individual taxpayers being called upon, once again, to finance the rescue operation.

Grand Junction Daily Sentinel:

short of a highly unlikely act of Congress, gas drilling on the top of the Roan Plateau is all but a fait accomplii

And, finally, the Colorado Springs Gazette:

But since the West’s energy boom began, the “stunning,” “pristine,” “special,” teaming-with-fragile-flora-and-fauna Roan has taken on near-mythical status with the anti-drilling crowd, like some lost world re-discovered. . . .

No politician is stupid enough to support a blanket ban on drilling, especially when energy prices are pinching. They just oppose drilling in the “pristine,” “special,” “irreplaceable” parts of their state or congressional district, which amounts to the same thing. . . .

And with the nation facing a serious energy crunch, the no-drilling option simply doesn’t make sense.

And, then, on the other side:

Rep. Mark Udall:

"Oil shale has potential as an energy source, but Colorado’s Western Slope has had experience with a rush to development that ended up hurting our region’s economy," . . .
My amendment will slow that process down so that we can be thoughtful about oil shale development."

And Sen. Ken Salazar:

“As I have said before, the top of the Roan Plateau is one of Colorado’s special places, and I believe that this unique Colorado crown jewel should not be opened to drilling for oil and gas at this time.


That DOES make it pretty easy to see Udall and Salazar as a bit, well, extreme on this particular issue, doesn't it?

Boy, they sure would make quite a team in the Senate, dontcha think? Oy!

[cross-posted at BestDestiny]