New NRSC Ad Identifies Mark Udall as "Part of the Problem in Washington"

The National Republican Senatorial Committee tags Mark Udall's voting record as "part of the problem in Washington":

This is one of the clearer and more straightforward ads of the campaign season. Its claims are well-documented, as Boulder liberal Mark Udall has stood against domestic energy exploration, against middle class tax relief, and against funding our troops in harm's way. On these and other important issues, Udall clearly doesn't represent the values of mainstream Colorado.

Bob Schaffer Signs Anti-Death Tax Pledge, No One Anticipates Mark Udall to Join Him

Bob Schaffer made an unsurprising but strong statement today by signing a pledge to continue the repeal of the "death tax"'s double hits on family businesses.

With his record of raising taxes on the middle class and general failing marks from the National Taxpayers Union, we would be very surprised to see Mark Udall also sign the pledge.

On this issue and many others, the contrast could hardly be clearer: Bob Schaffer is on the side of families, small businesses, and economic growth. Mark Udall is on the side of growing government.

Bob Schaffer Prefers Flat Tax to "Fair Tax"; Mark Udall Just Wants to Raise Your Taxes

Grand Junction Daily Sentinel reporter Mike Saccone has fresh video of Bob Schaffer on the stump in Mesa County, explaining why the "Fair Tax" is preferable to our current tax system but not as feasible as reform that would bring a lower flat income tax.

What about Boulder liberal Mark Udall? He's just been busy this year voting to raise taxes on middle-class families in Colorado.

The contrast couldn't be clearer.

The Only Place Mark Udall Wants to Drill Is Your Wallet

This is a fabulous idea: How about bumper stickers that read "Your Wallet: The Only Place Udall Wants to Drill"? I'd put one on my car.

Mark Udall's Support of Middle Class Tax Hike: Out of Step with Coloradans

One of the key contrasts in the important Colorado U.S. Senate race is the issue of tax reform. Bob Schaffer has a consistent record as the taxpayer's friend, while Mark Udall has a consistent record as an old school tax-and-spend liberal Democrat.

You can almost hear the groans of protest from some Democrats: Mark Udall? He's just against all those tax cuts for the rich? He wouldn't vote to increase taxes on the middle class, especially not as Colorado families face the crunch of rising energy prices? Right?

Wrong. Fellow Democratic Congressman have called out Mark Udall and the Party's liberal leadership for just that:

Reps. Bill Foster (D-Ill.) and Don Cazayoux (D-La.), who both won election earlier this year in districts held for years by the GOP, explained their votes against the Democratic budget as stands against tax increases on middle-class voters.

“I can’t support a budget, from either party, that raises taxes on the middle class,” Foster said in a statement posted on his website. “I campaigned on a platform of middle-class tax relief, and I was elected to Washington to bring about change. When asked to choose between my party and the people I represent, I will choose the families of the 14th district every single time.”

Cazayoux struck a very similar tone.

“I voted against [the budget] because it allows tax cuts to expire in 2010, raising taxes on most American taxpayers,” he said in a statement given to The Hill. “I promised the people of the 6th district of Louisiana to vote with my party when they are right, and vote against them when they are wrong. My vote today was the right vote for my constituents.”

On a narrowly decided question, Mark Udall's vote in the House of Representatives helped to lay the groundwork for bringing back the marriage penalty and other tax hikes on hard-working, middle-class Colorado families.

Mark Udall is just representing liberal Boulder in Congress. But he is out of step with most of Colorado.

Bob Schaffer Campaigning on Tax Cuts, Contrasts with Tax-and-Spend Mark Udall

On a trip to the Western slope yesterday, Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer highlighted one of his major campaign themes:

Schaffer pinned his race on the economy and called for tax cuts to revive it, including cutting the corporate income tax from 35 percent to 25 percent.

“We have the second-highest corporate tax rate on the planet,” Schaffer said. Cutting it would help to preserve American jobs and encourage companies to maintain headquarters in the country, he said.

Schaffer also proposed an optional flat tax and the elimination of the alternative minimum tax.

Schaffer also called for the restoration of the research-and-development tax credit and slashing the repatriation tax on profits earned overseas from 40 percent to 5 percent.

A member of Congress from 1997 to 2003, Schaffer said he was part of the Republican movement that “raised taxes dramatically in the United States” by lowering tax rates, thereby stimulating economic activity.

There's a reason why this should make for such a consistent and successful campaign theme for Bob Schaffer, because its contrasts him significantly with his tax-and-spend liberal opponent Mark Udall (who incidentally has hidden from taking a stance on fellow Democrat Gov. Bill Ritter's property tax hike).

It also explains why Udall and the Big Blue Lie Machine are so intent on changing the subject, especially by conjuring up phony scandals. It furthermore gives an idea why Udall seems so reluctant to join the debate with Schaffer.

Mark Udall: Consistent Taxpayer's Enemy vs. Bob Schaffer: Loyal Taxpayer's Friend

When it comes to his Congressional voting record on behalf of taxpayers, Mark Udall displays near perfect consistency: near-perfect consistent failure, that is. The National Taxpayers Union (NTU) released its 2007 rankings today, updating Udall's record. Here's the year-by-year breakdown for the Boulder liberal:
1999 - 22% (F)
2000 - 30% (F)
2001 - 14% (F)
2002 - 23% (F)
2003 - 33% (D)
2004 - 13% (F)
2005 - 16% (F)
2006 - 16% (F)
2007 - 5% (F)

A report card like this would be very bad news for most students. One D in 2003 hardly atones for the slate of Fs, the worst of which comes in 2007. Only voting with taxpayers 5% of the time? If Udall continues this trend, it's bad news for hard-working families and small businesses who pay taxes.

Mark Udall, the taxer-and-spender, has been in Washington too long. He needs some remediation, some time out of office back in Colorado.

The contrast with his Republican opponent Bob Schaffer could hardly be more stark:
1997 - 69% (A)
1998 - 82% (A)
1999 - 77% (A)
2000 - 81% (A)
2001 - 85% (A)
2002 - 63% (B+)

Clearly, NTU grades on a curve, because too often Congress does not vote in the best interests of taxpayers. But Bob Schaffer was one of the top 10 taxpayer-friendly members of Congress during four of his six years in Congress.

Kristina Rasmussen at the NTU blog has the skinny on which members of Congress distinguished themselves in 2007 - both in a good light and a not-so-good light.

Hollywood Democrat Supporting Bob Schaffer Because of DSCC Anti-Ukraine Bias

Five days ago we highlighted why a new attack ad from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) against Republican U.S. Senate candidate was pure folly: it ended up contrasting Schaffer's integrity and fiscal conservatism with his Democratic opponent Mark Udall, a tax-and-spend liberal career politician.

Now its folly is exposed for another reason. A Hollywood Democrat who blogs at Cyber Cossack is angry with the DSCC for using the ad to exploit anti-Ukrainian prejudice in a low political attack:

The video ridicules Bob Schaffer, a former Congressman who is now running for Senate from Colorado on the Republican ticket. Mr. Schaffer is part Ukrainian and has been very supportive of Ukraine’s struggle against communism and for democracy and a free market economy – both supposedly laudable goals on both sides of the aisle in the United States Senate.

This commercial is blatantly both anti-Ukrainian and anti-American in its racist bias. To rub in the point, the commercial “just happens” to accompany the video image with Mexican mariachi music, thus extending the insult to an even larger important American minority community.

I find it appalling that in 2008, in the United States of America, such cheap racism would be posted by a major political party’s official senatorial campaign committee. There are myriad nations that have received hundreds, if not thousands of times as much aid from the United States as does Ukraine. Why has the DSCC not campaigned against support for any other nation? Why has the DSCC singled out Ukraine for ridicule?

Either the Democratic Party is in fact anti-Ukrainian racist or it believes that Ukrainian-Americans are so inept and impotent that they can be abused at will without consequence.

I don't necessarily accept all the writer's assumptions (the national Democratic party does not generally favor free market economic principles) or his conclusions (I think the DSCC is likely more motivated by narrow political ambition and blind to the consequence of its rhetoric than it is anti-Ukrainian or racist).

But his anger and frustration does an excellent job in further highlighting the folly and the unintended consequences of Mark Udall's supporters in trying to bring down their political opponent. This is the Cyber Cossack's best idea:

I call on the Democratic candidate Mark Udall to personally refute this racist characterization of Ukraine, immediately withdraw this commercial and to replace it with an apology to all Americans and Ukrainian-Americans together with a strong statement of support for Ukraine’s struggle for democracy and a free market economy.

Contact candidate Mark Udall at 1100 Bannock Street, Denver CO 80208, tel. 303-820-2008, fax 303-893-4078, e-mail via his web site http://www.markudall.com/page/s/contact

If it seems like good advice to you, too, feel free to take it.

Finally, the Cyber Cossack's endorsement:

Mr. Schaffer deserves only our admiration – and, Yes – THE THANKS OF ALL AMERICANS – for his hard work in defense of democracy.

His words, not mine. But I can give them a hearty "Amen."

DSCC "Attack Ad" on Bob Schaffer Ends Up Highlighting Mark Udall's Weaknesses

The Washington Times blog reports on the latest hit from the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) on Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer:

The Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC) today issued a video attacking Schaffer for a 2002 statement in the Denver Post claiming that he'd accomplished more for the Ukraine "with less effort than I have in my own district with more effort."

Schaffer's mother is a Ukrainian immigrant and he was former co-chairman of the Congressional Ukrainian Caucus. The DSCC quoted the Denver Post saying that Schaffer's impact on his district was debatable, due to a self-imposed term limit and his tendency to oppose non-defense spending.

Wow, DSCC. Way to wring a quote way out of context. To know Bob Schaffer is to know this quote is about his commitment to advancing the principles of freedom both at home and abroad. That he may have been able to accomplish more vis a vis Ukraine than northeastern Colorado says more about the relative conditions of the two places following the end of the Cold War than his interest in helping the citizens of his district.

What a pathetic attack. And to what effect? The DSCC ends up highlighting Bob Schaffer's integrity (he honored his term-limit pledge) and his fiscal conservatism (he wasn't a big fan of Congressional pork). This is an exact quote from the December 15, 2002, Denver Post article in question [No active link]:

[Schaffer's] term-limits pledge and opposition to government spending that led him to oppose every spending bill except defense each year did not endear him to those who dole out favors in Washington.

That contrasts pretty well with Mark Udall, the career Washington politician, with a tax-and-spend liberal record. Keep these ads coming.

Schaffer Seeks to Connect Message with Voters; Udall Struggles to Find Mainstream

A story in yesterday's Longmont Times-Call highlights the positive message of the Schaffer campaign:

“We’ve just got to do a better job of articulating our message” in this year’s elections, Schaffer told more than 40 people attending a Longmont Republican Women luncheon at the Terroir restaurant on Thursday.

He suggested the GOP needs to convey that Republicans are pro-business and pro-economic growth, and that they oppose tax increases that would burden the middle class and deter capital investment.

Schaffer cautioned that it won’t be easy for Republicans in races such as his U.S. Senate contest with his likely Democratic opponent Mark Udall, an Eldorado Springs resident who represents Colorado’s 2nd Congressional District.

Schaffer, a onetime state senator and a former congressman from Colorado’s 4th District who’s now on the State Board of Education, acknowledged that he and other GOP candidates have “to hold our base together” but also will need support from non-Republican voters.

To do that, Republican office-seekers must “speak forcefully and articulately in a way that draws people back to us,” he said.

Toward the end of the article came this response:

Insofar as Schaffer’s remarks about Republicans representing mainstream Coloradans’ concerns, [Udall spokeswoman Taylor] West said: “Over the next several months, voters are going to have a chance to really get to know Mark Udall and his record and his reputation and his vision for Colorado.”

Well, for one thing, Udall's record is pretty well documented here at Schaffer v Udall. Here are just a few examples:

- Voted for the largest tax increase in American history
- Voting consistently against Second Amendment rights that Coloradans enjoy
- Sponsoring a bill to create a U.S. Department of Peace
- Sponsoring a bill to open up drilling in Castro's Cuban waters while stopping any energy exploration that would benefit Coloradans
- Throwing away workers' rights to secret ballot elections to benefit union bosses
- Voting to fund the National Endowment of the Arts at the expense of forest management vital to Colorado's natural beauty and economic well-being

Yet West had the laughable audacity to make this comment in yesterday's story:

She added, “I don’t think Bob Schaffer’s record holds up in the mainstream.”

Even as political spin goes, this remark ranks as very unconvincing. I don't think Udall and his crew could identify Colorado mainstream views to save their lives.

Udall Adds Another Tax Hike to his Record

A defining issue in the coming 2008 U.S. Senate campaign between Boulder liberal Rep. Mark Udall and former Congressman Bob Schaffer is the issue of taxes. Yesterday, the House voted to shield many middle-class families from the harsh effects of a scheduled tax increase under the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT), while raising taxes on entrepreneurs and the investor class by $81 billion. The better alternative would have been to spare the middle class without a tax hike on anyone. However, Udall voted with bill sponsor Charlie Rangel (D-NY) and the Democrat majority.

Back in 1999, the House had a vote to abolish the harmful AMT structure and provide $800 billion in across-the-board tax relief to Americans. Schaffer voted in favor of tax relief. Udall voted against tax relief, and to keep the AMT in place.

Shifting the tax burden and preserving the AMT is only the first phase in Rangel's plan to slow down the economy with an $800 billion tax hike that more than 80 percent of financial advisors say is a terrible idea.

With Udall's 1999 vote against tax relief and his vote yesterday for $81 billion in new taxes among his long history as a tax-raising Congressman, don't Coloradans have the right to know where Udall stands on Rep. Rangel's crushing $800 billion tax-hike plan? Meanwhile, his campaign remains silent on the issues, going on 10 days now.

Mark Udall: A Good Friend of Higher Taxes

The National Republican Senatorial Committee has just put out a laundry list of Mark Udall's tax votes for higher taxes. The list is so impressive that it is too long to repeat here, where we like to keep our posts short. We will share committee's observations:

Boulder liberal Mark Udall may be Colorado taxpayers' worst nightmare. First, Udall voted for a budget that provided for the largest tax increase in American history. To make matters worse, Udall also "mistakenly" voted for an even more extreme tax hiking budget. Now, it's a question of whether Udall will support a bill that hits millions of Americans with the largest personal income tax increase in American history.

It seems that voting to hike taxes billions of dollars earlier this year may not be enough for the free-spending Boulder liberal Mark Udall. Where will Mark Udall stand when it comes time to vote on the latest Democrat proposal for tax increases?

Yesterday, Democrats proposed a bill that will raise taxes on hard working Americans by an additional $1.3 trillion dollars.

The bill, written by the House's chief tax writer, will hit small business owners, married couples and middle class families -- approximately 10 million taxpayers directly.

If Udall's past record is any indication, Colorado voters can be sure their taxes will rise to unseen levels:

A Most Precious Commodity

Mark Udall is working in Congress, with Ken Salizar, to give Colorado Water to New Mexico. There are some Republicans in on the game, to their shame, but Udall appears to be trying to aid his New Mexico cousin, Rep. Tom Udall, while selling Colorado "down the river."

But there is still more. In a more recent House hearing on its version of the Navajo settlement act, HR1970, Colorado congressman Mark Udall, apparently acting as surrogate for his cousin, New Mexico congressman Tom Udall who is HR1970's sponsor, lit into the fretting Bob Johnson, Reclamation's new commissioner, who is obviously only carrying stinging coals for OMB.

Declaring himself the undying friend of the Indian, Udall said OMB had to get over its queasiness about how the public was being asked to spend its money, for after all hadn't Governor Richardson promised at least $75 million toward a tax bill that will easily exceed $1 billion in construction costs alone? Wasn't that enough he intoned? Never once did Mark Udall, the man who would be the next Democratic senator from Colorado, ask questions concerning the baffling hydrologic study; never once did he elicit concern over the adverse impact this settlement would have on Colorado's legitimate rights to water in the Colorado River under the interstate compact; and never once did he show concern that more irrigation for the Navajo might actually cause them to lose more money than presently.

This is came from a long article by Phil Doe, who once worked in the Interior Department, and is chair of Citizens Progressive Alliance in Littleton, Colorado. Read it all, and weep!

"Tax 'Em All" Udall and Another Liberal Double Standard

Liberal gotchas like this one might hold more credibility if they were accompanied by a little consistency. Citing a CBS-4 Denver report, a diarist on the Dead Guvs' site highlights the following critique of one part of a Republican ad against Boulder liberal Mark Udall:

He didn't vote to raise taxes, he voted against a tax cut passed by a Republican Congress and vetoed by President Clinton. While critics say Udall's vote had the same effect as supporting higher taxes, the fact remains, Udall voted to maintain the status quo, which is not the same as voting for a tax hike.

"He didn't vote to raise taxes, he voted against a tax cut...." When was the last time you saw a liberal attacking a conservative lawmaker with the allegation of cutting spending on Government Program X when all he or she did was vote against a large budget increase? It's an even steeper stretch in logic than the one in the ad against Udall.

I know, it once was so common you hardly thought about it. Of course, with many Capitol Hill "conservatives" losing all sense of fiscal responsibility in recent years, there haven't been as many such instances to highlight. But the point of the liberal double standard still stands.

I look forward to CBS-4 Denver's debunking of liberal campaign ads that make such spurious accusations.

Of course, even the Dead Guv diarist had to concede that there were other instances where Udall actually has voted to raise taxes. There is no denying that Colorado taxpayers carry a heavier federal burden today in part because of Udall's votes in Congress.

Sounds like a great slogan idea ... Mark Udall for Colorado: he'll tax 'em all.

The ad may have been less than careful in making a legitimate point about the Boulder liberal's voting record. But the ad's liberal critics should take care to check the mirror first.

Cross posted at Mount Virtus

Is Mark Udall "Taxing?"

The NRSC seems to think so.

More Lefty Silliness

Colorado's Lefties are all atwitter with having discovered the initials of the Republican 2008 candidate for U.S. Senate. When their side is stuck with the tax-and-spend record of Boulder liberal Mark Udall, I guess you have to resort to silly, juvenile distractions like this one. Oh, well. As time wears on, more adults will be choosing to support Bob Schaffer.

Behind the liberal snickers lurks a clump of anxious knots in many stomachs. It may be time for some of them to find more productive uses of their time.

Cross posted at Mount Virtus