Reporter's Claim that Mark Udall "Never Lived in Boulder" Borders on the Absurd

In her "25 things you might not know about Mark Udall" in Saturday's Rocky Mountain News, Lynn Bartels went out of her way to make this questionable statement number one:

1 He's never lived in Boulder, although he's referred to as "Boulder liberal Mark Udall" by his opponents.

I thought we'd been over this one before in discussing Bartels' "case-by-case" approach to airbrushing Boulder from Udall's name.

Lynn Bartels may wish to be more precise. Mark Udall's recent former residence of 6255 Simmons Drive - where he lived for many years, including through much of his term in Congress - doesn't appear to be quite within Boulder city limits. However, not only could you just about throw a stone from within city limits to the house, but also the City of Boulder recognizes it as part of a "subcommunity" known as "Southeast Boulder".

In addition, both Mark Udall's current home and the home on Simmons Drive listed Boulder as his mailing address, and for years he was recognized by the Congressional clerk as "Mark Udall, D-Boulder".

So maybe Lynn Bartels meant to write that Mark Udall has "never lived within the city limits of Boulder." If she had, she probably would have been technically accurate, but readers would have seen it for the pedantic and insignificant distinction that it is.

Why is it so important for Bartels to insist on repeating the spurious claim that Mark Udall has never lived in Boulder? Whether out of spite for Udall's opponent or some other reason, it's her prerogative to do so. But it would be nice at least to see her support for Udall printed in her byline.

Bob Schaffer Connecting with Voters During His Tour of Southern Colorado

Following the momentum from his Monday debate victory, Bob Schaffer has taken to the road. Schaffer is touring southern Colorado with his message of energy independence to contrast with Mark Udall's obstructionism.

The Pueblo Chieftain highlights Bob Schaffer's views on Pinon Canyon but offers little new. Traveling with Schaffer, Lynn Bartels of the Rocky Mountain News recounts day two of the trip, as Schaffer interacts with voters in Pueblo, Westcliffe, and Salida, including this aw-shucks anecdote:

Hillside resident Fred Berry took a Schaffer for Senate T-shirt provided by the candidate’s campaign.

"I'm getting work clothes for my wife," the 69-year-old Custer County rancher joked. "When she’s out baling (hay) she can be electioneering for Schaffer."

Of course, the advantage of grassroots energy in Schaffer's campaign was most visible recently at the turnout and enthusiasm of the debate crowd.

Grand Junction Sentinel Joins Act of Airbrushing "Boulder" from Mark Udall

Rocky Mountain News reporter Lynn Bartels appears to have started a trend in airbrushing the "Boulder" label in quoted descriptions of Democrat U.S. Senate candidate Mark Udall.

Mark Udall's opponent Bob Schaffer submitted an op-ed to the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel that was published this morning. A copy of Bob Schaffer's draft was shared with this blog, bringing to light a couple interesting changes made by the Sentinel. (Emphases are added to highlight the differences.)

1. Here is Bob Schaffer's draft:

Sadly, some of the worst culprits are from Colorado. I’m running against one of them – Boulder’s Democratic Congressman Mark Udall.

Here's the edited version:

Sadly, some of the worst culprits are from Colorado. I’m running against one of them — Boulder County Democrat Mark Udall.

Nothing inaccurate in the original description, but that didn't seem to matter.

2. From Bob Schaffer's draft:

The liberal views espoused by Boulder’s Congressman couldn’t be more different than mine.

And then what the Sentinel published:

The liberal views espoused by Udall couldn’t be more different than mine.

Would the editors justify this change as an essential way to cut extra words and save space? Perhaps, but coupled with the first instance, it looks more like part of a policy that changes one candidate's words while ignoring pertinent facts about his opponent.

It looks like the Western Slope's biggest newspaper has adopted Lynn Bartels' "case-by-case" approach to deciding when and how the term Boulder can be used to describe the man who has represented Boulder in Congress for nine years, who for years was officially recognized by the Congressional clerk as "Mark Udall, D-Boulder", who has publicly referred to Boulder as his "touchstone", and who stated last year that he would not be affected by the "Boulder liberal" tag.

In what ways did the Sentinel edit Mark Udall's column?

Mark Udall Winning on Internet Ads, But Obstructing Energy Solutions for Colorado

Long weekend, slow political news cycle. Lynn Bartels at the Rocky Mountain News writes about how Democrat Mark Udall's campaign is absolutely cleaning up on the Internet advertising front:

Udall's campaign has turned to the Internet for an advertising blitz that puts the candidate's face on more than 250 Web sites. Browsers who click on Udall's ads are sent to his campaign Web site, which recently received rave reviews from a blog that grades such sites.

"We hear people say they see Mark's ad in lots of places," said Taylor West, Udall's campaign spokesperson.

Heck, I'm surprised Mark Udall hasn't bought ad space on this site. (It's a joke. Ha.)

And Taylor West was replaced as official campaign spokesperson weeks ago. How long has this story been in the can?

Mike Saccone at the Grand Junction Sentinel also reports that Mark Udall is winning the not-yet-meaningful Facebook rivalry.

Meanwhile, the issue of rising gasoline prices raises the profile on oil shale extraction in Colorado. But Mark Udall stands in the way of energy relief. Smaller newspapers get the importance of the issue (H/T Coyote Gulch). The technology is there to do this far more cleanly than in the past.

Hopefully the discussion of campaign Internet advertising will give way soon to substantive campaign issues, like Mark Udall's obstruction of sensible energy solutions that would benefit consumers.

Lynn Bartels to Airbrush "Boulder Liberal" from Mark Udall "on a case-by-case basis"

Liberal Rocky Mountain News media critic Jason Salzman adds a clarification:

In my last post, I provided Rocky Mountain News reporter Lynn Bartels explanation of why she deleted “Boulder liberal” from a quotation from Dick Wadhams, spokesman for Republican Senate candidate Bob Schaffer.

I should have made it clear that Bartels will not routinely delete “Boulder liberal” from Wadhams’ quotations in which he refers to Democratic Senate candidate Mark Udall of Eldorado Springs as “Boulder liberal Mark Udall.”

She will evaluate Wadhams quotes on a case-by-case basis.

Applying the rule arbitrarily rather than uniformly does not make the situation any better. Readers of the Rocky Mountain News deserve to know what criteria will be used to airbrush the accurate phrase "Boulder liberal" from quoted descriptions of Mark Udall in Lynn Bartels' news stories.

And Colorado voters deserve to know why the phrase "Boulder liberal" suddenly seems to frighten Mark Udall so much.

Satire Highlights Pro-Udall Media Bias, Mark Udall in Boulder Liberal Denial

Earlier this week we took advantage of Rocky Mountain News reporter Lynn Bartels' airbrush of "Boulder liberal" from a quote about Mark Udall to remind readers why the "Boulder liberal" tag indeed accurately describes Udall. We closed with this admonition:

Lynn Bartels' explanation for omitting both "Boulder" and "liberal" from Wadhams' quote to describe Democratic candidate Mark Udall has ignored some pertinent facts. The editorializing should be left to others.

The case since has been made more thoroughly - and tongue-in-cheek to boot - by "Andrew Ripemoff" on Face The State:

Ah yes, the old "I didn’t have the space to explain to readers" excuse. Fortunately, she somehow found the space on May 30th, defending Udall in the Rocky: "Republicans have inaccurately pegged Udall as a Boulder liberal, although he’s never lived within the city limits."

To be fair to Ms. Bartels, all of this is technically true. Just like it’s true that Udall lives in Boulder County, and has a Boulder mailing address. He’s also been officially recognized as "Mark Udall, D-Boulder" by the Office of the Clerk of the 107th Congress of the United States House of Representatives.

The important thing is that hopefully other journalists will jump on this trend of censoring quotes from political types. For example, when someone like former President Bill Clinton says, "I did not have sexual relations with that woman," a clever reporter could delete words, turning it in to: "I did have sexual relations with that woman." Then, when questioned about selective editing, the reporter could simply state that she didn’t have enough space to "explain to readers" the situation.

But Bartels didn't stop there. She took the extra step of explaining to readers in a May 26th Rocky report that Mark Udall is really a favorite son of Eldorado Springs.

So we’ll play along. Sure. Mark Udall is NOT a liberal, and has never lived anywhere close to Boulder. In fact, he’s never even HEARD of Boulder. Truth be known, he’s a far right-wing conservative from Craig who routinely drives over deer with his SUV on his way to pick up royalty checks from the gas rigs he owns.

Sometimes, nothing makes a point quite so effectively as satire. Clearly, the reporter referenced here isn't the only one in the tank for Udall.

But rather than dwelling on the obvious issue of liberal media bias, a bigger question still lingers: Why is Mark Udall running away from who he is?

"Boulder Liberal" Airbrush Only Reminds Why Tag Accurately Describes Mark Udall

When liberal columnist Jason Salzman covers for Rocky Mountain News reporter Lynn Bartels' editorial decision to airbrush Dick Wadhams' "Boulder liberal" description from a quote to describe Mark Udall, it's our job to re-introduce a few relevant facts.

Though Mark Udall has never lived within the Boulder city limits, his official residence for years was listed as "Mark Udall (D-Boulder)", without protest. Within the last year, Udall has publicly referred to Boulder as his "touchstone."

This blog also did a months-long tally of references of Mark Udall's position on the political spectrum by Left-of-center bloggers and traditional press. "Liberal" is not only the most commonly used tag to describe Udall but also the most mainstream designation, with variations of "reliably Left wing" coming in second. Hence the name: "The Mark Udall is not a Moderate Scoreboard."

Finally, Mark Udall's spokesperson also has admitted the "Boulder liberal" tag will not hurt the candidate. We can only guess Udall may have changed his mind, that having Coloradans reminded he is a "Boulder liberal" is not helping the campaign at all.

Lynn Bartels' explanation for omitting both "Boulder" and "liberal" from Wadhams' quote to describe Democratic candidate Mark Udall has ignored some pertinent facts. The editorializing should be left to others.

Schaffer on John McCain

Lynn Bartels reminds readers in the Rocky Mountain News of a negative comment Bob Schaffer once made on the Aaron Harber show that may have been directed at John McCain:

Schaffer said he disagreed with some GOP presidential candidates' views, and had to consider the possibility of running for the U.S. Senate "in parallel with somebody whose views on America I find somewhat destructive."

Many people in the party felt this way a year ago, but like Bob Schaffer, have set aside their differences. We recognize a need for a united run against the true threat to the Republic and economic freedom - a congress and an executive branch in the firm grasp of the left wing.

McCain and Udall Compared and Contrasted

This is in response to the Lynn Bartels article in today's Rocky Mountain News. We left a comment promising to explain why Bob Schaffer will not have a problem if Mark Udall tries to cozy up to John McCain.

We promised links. Many of the links we provide are links to other blog essays, here and elsewhere, which zero in on the issue and themselves have links to the original source. Even better than links are the "labels" at the bottom of the essay which you might want to follow.

Here goes:

Mark Udall and John McCain are two different people.

1. John McCain prides himself on running the "straight talk express." We have caught Mark Udall and his staff in lies so often that we developed a "Udall as a liar" label. We also have a "Big Blue Lie Machine" label for those less closely tied to Udall who are less than truthful. See below.

2. John McCain is a self described conservative though many moderates like him because he isn't an orthodox conservative. Mark Udall is a liberal's liberal. He calls Boulder his "touchstone" and his spokesperson has opined that being tagged as a "Boulder liberal" won't hurt him. Liberals and the msm routinely call him "liberal," reliably left wing, progressive, and twice extremist. We have documented over 40 examples of that happening. To see the documentation and our methodology, follow the bread crumbs backwards.

3. John McCain is a war hero and the son and grandson of Navy Admirals. Mark Udall has so little understanding of the apolitical traditions of the military and how they keep our democracy free from a military coup that he once sponsored a resolution that would have encouraged the politicization of military officers. Not content with politicizing the military, it would have encouraged officers to make political complaints to the congress and exhorted congress to pay heed to those complaints.

4. John McCain promoted the surge. Mark Udall promoted a Department of Peace.

5. Once John McCain learned his lesson with the Keating Five, he never again allowed the source of his political fund raising to cloud his judgement or compromise his integrity. The NY Times tried to claim that he more recently had helped a lobbyist, but that help was limited to two letters asking a regulatory commission to vote on a two year old issue while carefully telling them he was not telling them how to vote. Seems reasonable, though the NYT didn't think so.

Mark Udall is taking big bucks from labor unions and has publicly admitted that he had co-sponsored a labor bill that he doesn't like. He is taking even bigger bucks from the environmentalists who don't give a damn if the whole state burns to the ground so long as no forest roads are built that might allow the beetle killed trees to be removed, even dead trees adjacent to mountain towns.

Mark Udall is so deep in the grasp of his environmentalist paymasters that last year he proposed an amendment that would close existing roads which makes the problem worse. Even his heavily self promoted and under financed bill to remove dead trees around mountain towns didn't prompt him to speak out when the environmentalists objected to the road building that would be necessary.

6. Rush Limbaugh and James Dobson dislike John McCain. Daily Kos held a fundraiser for Mark Udall.

7. In 1971, John McCain was in a POW camp in North Vietnam and had been for years. In 1971, Mark Udall was in an Arizona court having his car confiscated and being placed on a year's probation for drugs.

8. John McCain is a man of proven courage, personal and political. We recently wrote that an appropriate bumper sticker for Mark Udall would be "Vote Udall: A Coward For Today In Every Way."

Lynn Bartels would do well to note that John McCain was praising and quoting Mo Udall, not Mark Udall. It isn't uncommon in congress to refer to one's mortal enemy as "my friend."

In the end, the election in Colorado will be about character. Udall lacks moral courage and says what he believes will get him elected. Schaffer just says what he believes.

If the subject comes up in a debate, Bob Schaffer can truthfully say "I know John McCain, John McCain is a friend of mine. You're no John McCain!"

Don't They Know The Law?

We had to chuckle at this weak comeback to the disclosure that four Colorado millionaires plan to put their foot on the throat of Bob Schafffer as reported by Lynn Bartels in the Rocky Mountain News:

"Talk about hypocrisy," said Matt Sugar, spokesman for the Colorado Democratic Party. "And if Dick Wadhams is so interested in disclosure, perhaps he could enlighten us as to what millionaires are on the secret list attending Bob Schaffer's fund-raiser in Cherry Hills this Thursday with the president of the United States."

The last we heard, Bob Schaffer has to report the names of his contributors, admittedly not until mid-April, but he can't avoid reporting them. Matt Sugar is being dumb. This may not qualify as a big blue lie machine lie, but it seems silly to run the risk given the number of lies Democrats seem willing to tell to get their guy across the line.

Exposed: Left-Wing Billionaires' Plans to Smear Schaffer Early

Not that this news is terribly surprising, but the Rocky Mountain News reports today that the Colorado Democrats' Left-wing billionaire power bosses are planning to spend a hefty amount attacking U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer and other Republicans:

Two years ago, two of Colorado's richest Democratic benefactors plowed more than $7 million into Democratic candidates and causes.

Now a confidential memo to one of their advisers suggests that it would take contributions of nearly $12 million to finance independent political groups trying to influence the outcome of the presidential, U.S. Senate and 4th Congressional District races.

The money - to be spent by political groups known as 527s - would help buy TV ads, radio time and mailings, according to internal documents obtained by the Rocky Mountain News.

The memo was prepared by political consultant Dominic DelPapa and sent to Al Yates, who wears many hats, including adviser to Pat Stryker, a Fort Collins heiress. Stryker and philanthropist Tim Gill, of Denver, spent $7.46 million in 2006 to try to swing elections for Democratic candidates and causes.

More specifically, on the Schaffer-Udall race:

The memo doesn't say who would contribute the money, and DelPapa wouldn't reveal any details. His memo outlines a proposed media strategy that suggests spending $5.1 million of the proposed $11.7 million budget on the Senate race alone.

Part of the Senate budget calls for a $1.9 million advertising campaign in March and April that would target Republican Bob Schaffer, who likely will face Democrat Mark Udall in the U.S. Senate race. "Define Schaffer/Foot on Throat," the campaign effort reads, according to a financial spreadsheet marked "very rough preliminary paid communications budget."

These few paragraphs sum up the attitudes of the respective sides:

"I would be careful if I were you about reading more into this than actually exists," said Yates, a former Colorado State University president active in civic affairs.

But [state Republican Party chair Dick] Wadhams said that the memo seemed clear to him.

"This is nothing short of coordinated character assassination by a handful of left-wing billionaires," he said. [Emphasis added]

Is it just me, or does that remark by Yates sound like a line from a movie script where the Mafia boss gives a little friendly advice to a potential informant? Maybe not how he intended it, but it sure sounds funny.

Some may expect that inconvenient figures like investigative journalists shouldn't get in the way of the powerful Left-wing political machine and its Boulderized agenda for Colorado, including its Boulder liberal U.S. Senate candidate Mark Udall. But their job will be made more difficult by the fact the truth is out there, including the well-chronicled months of information on this site.

Most telling, it says a lot about the Left's expectations for this race that they plan to spend so much money, and to start the dirty campaign smear in the spring. Brace yourselves.

DSCC Big Blue Lie Machine Still Churning

You would think that the Democrats who are supporting the Mark Udall candidacy would have figured out that this author takes great pleasure in pointing out their fibs, falsehoods, and fabrications.

It is quite obvious that no one in that campaign believes that Mark Udall can be elected if they stick to the truth. They can't even be consistent in their lies.

The liberal blogs have raised a hue and cry over the fact that Bob Schaffer won't spell out his positions. Mike Saccone wrote an essay on "Schaffer's Silence." The DSCC is so lacking in material that it started its own "Parody site" on the theory that if Schaffer wouldn't spell out his positions, it could make them up. Since that site was founded, Schaffer still has not spelled out his positions (and shouldn't be in a hurry to do so).

Today, Lynn Bartels of the Rocky Mountain News provided the following quote from a DSCC spokesperson:

"Bob Schaffer must figure that since he has wholeheartedly endorsed George Bush's agenda, he might as well get something in return," said Matthew Miller, Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee spokesman.

Matthew Miller and the DSCC must figure that Lynn Bartels will publish any inconsistent lie without questioning its inconsistencies. We are curious, as Bartels should have been, about the basis for the statement that "Bob Schaffer...has wholeheartedly endorsed George Bush's agenda..."

This, folks, is how the Big Blue Lie Machine Works: Keep throwing out lies and some will slip into the msm.