Even the staunchly conservative editor-in-chief of the Rocky Mountain News has heard enough:
Republican Bob Schaffer has spent the week suggesting that his opponent in the U.S. Senate race, Democrat Mark Udall, is a hypocrite because he sponsored a resolution in 2002 denouncing Saddam Hussein in the strongest terms, stipulating that he possessed a variety of terrible weapons and describing Iraq as a state sponsor of terrorism.
The resolution was even billed as a “preliminary authorization for the use of force against Iraq.”
If you fail to look closely, you could easily conclude that the supposedly anti-war Udall was actually on the same page as the congressional majority that ultimately did authorize war – and that Udall’s vote against their resolution amounted to splitting hairs.
That’s rubbish. Schaffer should cut it out.
Udall has never been part of the “see-no-evil” faction of the Democratic left that downplayed Saddam’s savagery or denied Iraq’s role as a destabilizing force in the Middle East and beyond. He never doubted the tyrant’s intentions regarding weapons of mass destruction, or mocked the U.S. goal of regime change.
But Udall did sincerely oppose the resolution that gave the president the green light to topple Saddam. That’s a fact, and it’s a big deal. Udall did so because he thought the measure gave the president an open-ended right to act whenever and however he liked, thus degrading the constitutional role of Congress, and because he thought it important for the U.S. to secure the support of the United Nations before acting. Otherwise, Udall worried, the U.S. would have a difficult time turning Iraq into a functioning republic.
Udall repeated these themes on the House floor, in public meetings and in correspondence. His own resolution was meant to further those goals, not to catapult us into Operation Iraqi Freedom…
A commenter posted a Youtube of Udall’s 2002 floor speech on the resolution, we’ve reposted it after the jump. And we agree with Vince Carroll: this was a stupid and duplicitous hit, the true facts of which make Schaffer look a cheap hack several different ways.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BY: notaskinnycook
IN: DNC Grand Finale Promises Something Special
BY: notaskinnycook
IN: Here’s a Smart Idea for Avoiding Another Round of Dumb Hostage-Taking on Policy Issues
BY: Duke Cox
IN: Here’s a Smart Idea for Avoiding Another Round of Dumb Hostage-Taking on Policy Issues
BY: JeffcoBlue
IN: DNC Grand Finale Promises Something Special
BY: JohnNorthofDenver
IN: Russia Ready To Process Your MAGAsylum Claims, Says Alex Jones
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: DNC Grand Finale Promises Something Special
BY: JohnNorthofDenver
IN: DNC Grand Finale Promises Something Special
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Rep. Brandi Bradley Desperate To Start Her Very Own Culture War
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Here’s a Smart Idea for Avoiding Another Round of Dumb Hostage-Taking on Policy Issues
BY: JohnInDenver
IN: Thursday Open Thread
Subscribe to our monthly newsletter to stay in the loop with regular updates!
And neither of them will make the dailies because they’re so shopworn and cliched by now:
“Boulder Liberal.”
the sun rises, Bob Schaffer lies, Wadhams repeats the Boulder Liberal rosary, the sun sets…
On few occasions have I been prouder of Mark Udall than that day. I wish he would speak on the floor of the house more often.
His even temper and thoughtful approach lie in stark contrast to those like Bob Schaffer who blasted heading into this ridiculous war at the cost of over 4,000 American lives and hundreds of billions of dollars.
It was Mark’s finest moment. He stood up to do his job and did the right thing at a time when there was a lot of pressure to just go along on the march to war.
and the voters will see through this nonsense.
I continue to believe that a near-majority of Colorado voters don’t look past the “R” after a candidate’s name before they mark their ballot (or touch their screen, or do whatever they’ll be doing in November to cast votes).
waiting in line at the Denver and Douglas County voting centers
Mr. Schaffer is on the wrong side of the Iraq war issue, so his and Mr. Wadhams’ strategy is to put Udall on the same side with Schaffer through misrepresentations and lies in order to neutralize the issue.
To them, it doesn’t matter that they are making it up as they go; but for us what is important to recognize here is Messrs. Schaffer and Wadhams’ cynicism toward us, the voters of Colorado. They believe they can fool us. They believe we are not intelligent and can be lead by the nose to believe anything they publish. Their attitude is full of arrogance and contempt for us, the citizens of Colorado. Since they think they can get away with this in a campaign there isn’t any doubt Mr. Schaffer will treat the voters with the same contempt if elected.
Both of them should be ashamed of themselves and in the future they should follow Abraham Lincoln’s admonition about trying to fool the voters.
Even their ideological allies are having trouble with the Wadhams-Schaffer campaign strategy this year!
What type of action was it when the congress passed the “Gulf of Tankin Resolution”? Maybe it is just either incompetents or someone who has a different ax to grind. Maybe the Constition got changed for responsibilities in the last forty years so that it could display the new politics of Texans. How does a Larimer/Weld representative get involved with Kurdish oil? Might, on a larger scale, explain the new thought patterns.
I can’t remember Carroll ever coming out so strong against a GOP candidate. Kudos to Vince for having a set…of scruples.
Did you edit that and do the voice over yourself?
It works better manifest if you don’t appear to be a hack for your own canidate. Some on this board are better at it than others, but I know its hard, keep trying.
.
Schaffer was using the Udall resolution to demonstrate that almost the entire Congress was beating the drums:
some louder, some more rapidly,
but almost all were rattling allegorical sabers.
Even Udall.
.
but Udall was clearly going for diplomacy first, military action only as last resort. There hasn’t been a significant change in Udall’s steady 9 point lead for quite some time and the Schaffer campaign gets into some new jam every few days like clockwork. It’s looking very good for your favorite “Boulder Liberal”.
.
Don’t really have one.
Maybe Terri Steinborn.
But if you were asking about my favorite Boulder Libertarian, that would be a cinch.
Trygve Brev Bauge.
Except you folks deported him.
.
but why quibble about a zip code.
The Baron must have a thing for cryogenics.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F…
Boulder-ness encompasses much more than the simple zip code.
Schaffer omits the parts about UN approval and allowing the UN weapons inspectors time to complete their mission. Big difference in that resolution and what Udall voted against.
Maybe Schaffer can now make a big deal about Udall supporting a time line for withdrawal which Schaffer opposes while ignoring Bush’s acceptance of time “horizons” for withdrawal.
Too bad Schaffer can’t get elected by telling the voters how devoted he is to right wing solutions. I guess being honest with the voters about who “he” is isn’t going to get him elected. I wonder why he can’t run on his own record?
.
But I think Schaffer made the point that most everyone in Congress believed that something had to be done about Saddam and his WMD.
Many folks who paid attention all along knew the “intel” furnished by the White House to the Congress was bogus.
Most folks who post here know that a scientist from Oak Ridge fully refuted the stuff about the aluminum tubes.
Most Pols-sters know that the 500 tons of yellowcake that was just removed from Iraq did not come from Niger,
it was mined right in Iraq.
But not everyone knew.
Based on the speech, it appears that Mark didn’t know.
Can’t really blame him, when the President completely politicizes the CIA and the intel that he allows Congress to see.
It is a lie that Congress saw the same intel as the President.
He cherry-picked it and slanted it.
He know there was no case for war.
But Mark didn’t,
and presumably Bob didn’t.
That’s what I think Bob was trying to get across.
was a completely dishonest slam on Udall. Not that I blame him. He’s carrying so much baggage now his only hope is to make Udall look even worse. That won’t be easy. Udall didn’t shill for scumbags who force their near slave labor force to have abortions or do oil deals contrary to US interests during wartime, just for starters.
by inferring that Udall was for it before he was against it. If you took the time to view Udall’s speech you would have heard the term “absent the evidence of an imminent threat”. If you want to be hypnotized by Schaffer’s rewriting of history OK but don’t BS us with this cockamamie idea that Udall didn’t know what he was voting on. Udall opposed giving Bush unlimited powers to wage war and history has proven that all of his concerns about unilateral nation building were warranted. Schaffer if not an outright liar is being disingenuous. It is bad campaigning and has persuaded me that Udall is the better candidate. I’m done griping about Udall’s move to the center. Schaffer campaigns as badly as Beauprez.