President (To Win Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(D) Kamala Harris
(R) Donald Trump
80%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) V. Archuleta
98%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Marshall Dawson
95%
5%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(D) Adam Frisch
(R) Jeff Hurd
50%
50%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert
(D) Trisha Calvarese
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank
(D) River Gassen
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) John Fabbricatore
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen
(R) Sergei Matveyuk
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(R) Gabe Evans
70%↑
30%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
August 01, 2008 06:56 PM UTC
130 Comments
Now the press should ask Mr. Schaffer to apologize.
which seem to work well at the time he claims them. A day or so later they are found out to be half truths at best, but then we’re already focusing on the next half truth.
Short attention span theater.
How do you say “tempest in a teapot” in Latin?
Cicero coined the phrase.
That’s my favorite.
How did this last two whole days without one of the reporters actually checking the nature of Tuesday’s vote?
Tancredo missed today’s vote. Waiting for Wadhams, in his capacity as state GOP chairman, to blast the congressman from Littleton.
Even if the blood was just ketchup (or catsup if you prefer).
But if you got hoodwinked by a police department PIO once, you’d never print what they told you again without seeing the body for yourself.
Think the press corps will hold Wadhams to this standard?
He was there for the final vote. The final vote is the only one that mattered (obviously). Is that hard to comprehend or something?
Tancredo to keep HIS promises.
The text itself shows that another vote was necessary, this just seems to lay out when they’ll begin again afterward. If the vote today didn’t happen, the House would not have actually adjourned.
Who wants to bet that Udall knew exactly what was going on? Instead of getting all blustery (“going Wadhams”) two days ago, he wrote a polite letter to Speaker Pelosi and bided his time. Wadhams goes all in, probably pays to produce an attack ad set to roll out DURING the debate Sunday night, and the press obligingly gives Wadhams enough rope …
This raises a serious question about Bob Schaffer. He was, supposedly, a member of Congress for six years, and doubtless voted on numerous resolutions concerning adjournment. Did he fail to understand the mechanics of this week’s resolutions?
Was Schaffer’s advice to his own campaign on congressional procedures as winning as his advice to Aspect Energy on oil contracts, his oversight of the NAFF board fraudulently exploiting a $3.6 million EPA grant, his lobbying activity for Aspect over wind tax credits, his fact-finding mission to the Mariana Islands?
When has Schaffer exhibited even the barest minimum competence in any of his advisory, oversight or fact-finding roles? If he can’t get the House rules right, how’s he going to perform in the Senate, which has rules that are even more complicated?
As if there aren’t already enough questions
If Udall is so concerned about gas prices where is he. Don’t know if you have seen the news but Republicans are still on the floor
http://www.politico.com/blogs/…
Fake outrage and theatre politics is no replacement for real solutions and action. They’re a hucksters putting on a play for big oil.
it’s not like cramming for a college exam -you can’t just take some adderall and caffeine and stay up all night and cram.
Tell the morons still on the floor they had years to do this ! Why are they there now ? Why didn’t they do something when they controlled both houses and the white house ?
Idiots.
Photo op……A version of it worked once before for the Repubs. In ’94, Newt Gingrich used the House TV camera for the one-minute speeches his conference members got to deliver to an empty chamber.
to an empty House floor because nobody gives a rat’s ass about their propaganda speeches.
Look up Schaffer’s congressional record. He was a member of the RSC’s on-minute hate squad. He’s said all kinds of kooky things in that empty room.
…that Udall’s op research staff is going through the video of B.S.’s Greatest Bloopers as we speak, putting together an audio-visual scapbook of some of his most outlandish things. We’ll see them after Labor Day.
The key vote was earlier in the week and Udall missed it.
The press and the public is not going to buy this rather bizarre explanation. Udall chose to raise money instead of getting to DC in time to vote. All the parsing in the world will not change that fact.
The vote Udall missed was inconsequential. Wadhams either misunderstood the procedure or intentionally misrepresented it. Neither interpretation is flattering to Wadhams or his candidate.
Is Wadhams willing to explain why Schaffer missed FOUR TIMES as many votes as Udall did when the two served together in Congress?
How the first vote was more consequential than the FINAL vote. I’m willing to bet you don’t have a clue as to what either vote did.
That vote was today. The Wednesday bill was just the necessary procedural steps to coordinate the adjournment with the Senate.
And you’re the parser, I’m afraid.
Look – Udall made the final vote. And he only missed the PRELIMINARY vote by a matter of seconds. He TRIED to get there and just missed it.
Geez, it wasn’t like he was out parasailing on a junket, or something.
Give it a rest, or you’ll end up looking as ridiculous as Wadhams.
Like I said yesterday, the crap-release out of the Schaffer campaign led to a crappy story by our media who is unable to perform any sort of independent research and simply rewrites the crap-release.
The Schaffer campaign is playing the media for fools, leading them on a short-leash in circles, and it’s as if they like it.
..why didn’t Udall say so then, instead of complaining to Pelosi and then releasing the complaint letter to everyone? If this was Udall’s strategy, darlings, I think it’s open to question. As others have noted, this whole mess is very confusing and I doubt Udall will be able to make much hay out of it at this point (if that’s what he originally intended). But what do I know?
he obviously wanted to be there to vote no on it as well, if for no reason other than to deny Dick Wadhams any ammunition (even if it is only blanks).
Of course the main reason is that he thinks Congress should stay put until it passes some relief for people on gas prices–even if the Republicans don’t actually want relief, but just another gimmick.
I understand that Jambalaya’s darlings and sweeties are grating. They annoy me too. But I find the use of “sugar tits” to be highly offensive and I’m sure I’m not the only one who feels that way. If you want to attack her as an idiot, or a commie, or whatever, go at it. But don’t attack her for being a woman in a manner that demeans all women. Sugar lips, okay, that’s a fair response to darlin. Sugar tits only makes you look like a lout.
http://www.coloradopols.com/sh…
I’m just one gurl dishing it with another Bob.
You know you’re better than that, why not let us know it too.
It’s a term my grandmother used on a daily basis when my cousins were young (and I’m sure when I was young as well).
For a teething baby her recipe was to tie a lump of sugar in a piece of cheesecloth for the baby to suck on. If that didn’t work, bourbon. For her, not the baby.
but I also know that is not the meaning that self-desdcfribed macho men have in mind when they call women at the singles bars “sugar tits,” prior to going home alone for yet another night to practice what used to be called self-abuse. Please understand, I like your stuff and respect your ideas, which is why I asked you to not use a phrase that I think undercut your message. You’re good, girl, if girl you are (I had been assuming guy until your post calling yourself a gurl) and your contributions are valuable.
That’s why it’s “gurl” instead of “girl.”
“grrrl”
I had assumed gay dude from your earlier posts. Anyway, please understand that I mean what I said about respecting your contributions and have respected them for a long time. Let’s kiss and make up, if only to piss off the Dobson crowd.;-)
“friend of Dorothy.”
Is the term “sugar tits” acceptable, offensive, hilarious or demeaning?
I vote hilarious and acceptable, but I’m 28 and a member of the South Park generation, so consequently I find Bob’s reprimand to be curmudgeonly and funny.
it isn’t a euphenimism for the c-word, if thats what you are aluding too.
or your iq. If you really think sugar tits is hilarious, I’d have to assume the latter.
But, hey, I’m just a guy who really does know how to communicate ideas effectively.
You are in more dire need of a blow job than any white man in history.
I would guess 14 years younger from your posts…
28 IS your IQ.
At least you recognize and have admitted your problem Ewegen. It’s a long road to recovery however.
Bob, I hope you were trying to be funny, but “sugar lips” doesn’t mean what you might think it means. Arguably, it’s a lot more offensive than “sugar tits.”
..although I realize that your objections were not about me personally, I feel honored nonetheless!
also, it’s curious how people assume I’m a boy at first, then a girl, then a gurl (I didn’t know this meant gay man, either), but what about a lesbian? or bilingual?
Plus, didn’t anyone see Transamerica?
I think you referred to yourself as lesbian in an earlier post.
I was shocked beyond measure;-)
Cool it, please.
…and my alleged sugar tits? Unlike others, I’m not terribly sensitive about such labels as sugar tits, darling, etc. Except that profanity is tricky unless the context and motive of the speaker are clear.
Feel free to call me what you want, honey-britches!
Well, sugar pie, honey bunch, you might read the posts that actually ask and answer your question rather than just the ones that complain how oh-so confusing it is. (Hint: it’s not confusing at all.) What Udall accomplished was a masterful political stroke.
they were just mistaken.
….and this is coming from a girl (!) who likes ol’Bill.
I will admit that I enjoy reading what is on Colorado Pols, however, lately it has not been very politically neutral… it has been almost as liberal leaning as CNN! Give the conservatives a break… Mark Udall messed up, so please stop defending him. Udall definitely did not fulfill his pledge to vote against adjourning for the summer until an energy bill passed! He didn’t even bother to show up for the vote! This is the lowest of low and he doesn’t deserve to be our Senator. He is an environmental enthusiast and a union lover and does not say anything substantial about how he is going to “change” our lives when he is in the Senate. Sound like someone else running this year?!
Face it, Poet, Wadhams screwed up. He relied on Bob Schaffer for expertise on House procedures. Big mistake.
I hope someone can post a copy of the ad Wadhams produced, since it certainly won’t be airing.
RedGreen… are you even trying to compare Bob’s intelligence to Mark’s? Were you at the 1st debate at the Wildlife Experience? Schaffer absolutely KILLED Udall! Udall had nothing to support anything that he said. It was ridiculous. I had no idea how awful a debated Mark Udall was. I actually had no idea how awful Udall is for Colorado until recently. At the past two debates there have been folks there dressed up like Waldo, holding signs which said “Where’s Udall on EFCA?” I had no idea Mark Udall supports this highly deceptive bill, and I think, actually co-sponsored it. It is definitely bad for Colorado business owners like myself.
Seems like he’s alive and kicking to me if he’s running up the capitol steps to make a vote.
If when yuo say Schaffer “killed” Udall you mean that he lies better, then I’ll grant you that. Schaffer can be a convincing liar.
I live-blogged the first debate here. It’s true the two candidates approached the debate differently, and that’s a fair assessment that Schaffer appeared more aggressive and riled up his followers (and goaded Udall’s supporters). But the consensus on the second debate, set to air Sunday night on KDVR-31, is that Udall wiped the floor with Schaffer. Does that mean Schaffer lost IQ points in the interim?
You can judge their smarts based on how they performed when it counts. Time and again, Schaffer has dropped the ball and displayed an appalling lack of judgment. I won’t repeat the litany here (it’s mentioned above in this thread), but suffice it to say anyone concerned about our next senator’s judgment would be rightly worried about Schaffer’s.
And positions on the EFCA don’t fall along intelligence lines, it’s a matter of political preference. Smart people support it, smart people oppose it. Smart business owners would be wise to figure out a way to live with it, because it’s going to be the law.
He should have consulted Tancredo who, because he reneged on his term-limits pledge, has much more expertise on the subject of House procedural rules.
But Tancredo missed today’s vote, alone among the delegation. When does Wadhams lambaste him for that? I thought this was the most important vote of the session.
for Wadhams to try to push, and now that the real vote occurred and Udall voted as he indicated, it is even sillier. Your team is so bankrupt this is all it has. And since when has being an environmental enthusiast been a bad thing, especially in Colorado. Being a war profiteer on the other hand…
What a crock of you know what! Mark Udall, the biggest celebrity in the state??? You must work for Udall if you think that. He might be beating Schaffer right now, but not by enough to consider him the biggest celeb in the state. I think more people know of Governor Ritter, Governor Owens, or even Mayor Hickenlooper than this liberal congressman.
do you?
I think it flew over 6thCD’s head RedGreen.
I guarantee more people have heard of Hick than Mark Udall. Beides being an awful debater, another huge problem I have with Mark Udall is that he took $75,000 from union leaders to put his name as a co-sponsor on the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), despite admitting to “serious reservations”. What was he thinking??? As soon as the working class begins to understand what udall actually stands for, he is not going to be as loved by people like you, RedGreen.
Leave Bob Schafer alone.
You liberals are sooo mean to my man Bob.
Sure he can take money from fat cat oil companies but that mean Mark Udall better not take money from unions.
Baa waaa waaa. Leave Bob Schafer alone.
Did I summarize your post Mr. Poet?
Both are massive big money organizations that favor one party. But the vast majority of Americans, save a few thousand hippies in Ned, use oil/gas/petroleum on a daily basis. Only 8% of workers in the private sector are even in a union anymore, and yet they are a massive fundraising maching that donate 97% of their funds to to Dems.
Udall has taken over a million from unions in his career, has a 93% lifetime afl-cio rating, and will continue to support bills like the Employee Free Choice Act, a big labor/Democrat party power grab to make up for their diminishing numbers…
American Conservative Union
Funny, I didn’t see the Unions listing yet another all-time-ever in the history-of-the-world profit haul this past quarter, to which Big Oil Bob helped contribute as he voted to award taxpayer largess on the richest industry in the world.
Because our world runs on it! You ignore my point. Obviously Bob Schaffer has a conservative voting record. He’s a… conservative. The point is that unions only benefit 7% of workers, while the oil companies deal in a product used by nearly all people, working or not. Free markets have shrunk unions and rewarded the oil industry.
And in regards to tax breaks for oil companies. Where do you think the oil companies would have made up for those tax breaks? It certainly wouldn’t come out of the pockets of the company, but instead out of your pocket right at the pump through higher prices than we are already suffering.
then they’ll lower our prices…is that how the ‘free’ market works lax?
Just give us everything we want (tax breaks, drilling rights), and then maybe we’ll pass it on to the consumer.
As evidenced by $ 4 per gallon, it isn’t trickling down.
like it or not, the biggest celebrity in Colorado is Tom Tancredo. Put me in the not liking it camp, but it’s a reality. Of course, he’s not running for anything this year.
that’s a joke about the McCain camp’s attack on Obama, rightly derided as exposing their candidate’s lack of substance on his own? Context, people.
Maybe he is the most popular in the 6th congressional, but I doubt the entire state.
I’d say it’s a toss-up between Hickenlooper and Tancredo as far as celebrity statewide. Doesn’t necessarily mean popular — does anyone actually like Paris Hilton? — but those are the two who attract attention because they attract attention.
Tancredo has a following of millions across the country, namely the anti-immigration zealots. show me anybody in Orange County Calif. who even know who Udall is. But we here from them whenever we criticize Tancredo. In this case, celebrity stems from notoriety, not popularity.
What do you mean by lately? It’s been this way for quite some time now. While from time to time I like to call my left wing friends on some of their hypocrisy, with a couple of exceptions, I sympathize more with them on substantive issues than with the right wingers.
That said, I like a good fight with right wingers. But these days, Haners, Newsman and L.B. (and sometimes Poet and GOPundit) are the only regulars who still carry the fight for the right in here. The others have, for the most part, cut and run.
Pretty sad!
Reality has a well-known liberal bias. Sucks to be a rightie in this day and age, but that’s not Pols’ fault.
That’s, um, WashParkPoetic license.
“Udall spokeswoman Tara Trujillo said the lawmaker was running up the Capitol stairs as the vote closed at 1:04 p.m. Udall had flown into Washington, D.C., yesterday morning from Colorado where he conducted staff meetings, met with business leaders and held campaign events. Udall didnВќt make the vote because there was no advance notice, said Trujillo. Udall called House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to try to delay the vote after he learned about it, but was not successful in getting it postponed.”
http://www.thedenverdailynews….
Schaffer just can’t stay out of trouble, can he?
No matter what most people will only remember that Udall “Missed An Important Vote”.
I am not saying that is right but that is call Politics. The Right and the Left play these games. Some you win some you lose.
Sad but this is what Politics has come to half truths and lies on both sides!
at his day job, bilking taxpayers for tens of thousands of dollars while he jets about on the ‘Straight Talk Express’ calling Americans whiners to boot.
The “Update 3” ad can still run, it’s not outright lying. Udall missed a vote and that’s what the voters will hear.
Why didn’t Udall contact the press 2 days ago and explain that the “real” vote wasn’t until today?
This is already gaining traction, might as well keep pushing it.
“Most people”, including your average voter, will not remember this at all. “Most people” aren’t even aware this happened in the first place.
LMAOAHSSJI!11!
Geez, is that the worst Schaffer can peg on this guy? Bob must be pretty DESPARATE!”
Which is true, of course.
highly offensive!
Democrats voted to go home on vacation as the majority, while the rest of us deal with the high price of gasoline (caused by Democrat policies) and this is somehow a victory for Democrats? (Maybe short term – they all get to relax…)
Leave it to the Libs on Colorado Pols to spin this one. Keep crowing just a little bit louder that the Dems voted to go home on vacation while the rest of us suffer.
reaffirming unfair stereotypes and all.
Please spell out such a far-reaching and far-fetched claim (no, oil shale doesn’t work, OCS drilling and the Arctic Refuge is years away); the ‘Enron Loophole’ that fueled energy speculation was a Republican product… so please, do tell, and reference ExxonMobil’s highest ever in the world, on top of highest ever in the world, on top of highest ever in the world, profits and how that relates to having two Republican oil men in the White House and GOP having been in Control on Congress for 12 of the last 15 years…
All the Libs on this site wanted to see gasoline taxes increased. So how that helps the price of gas get lower, I don’t know. The other thing the Libs did was force states like Colorado to use expensive “alternative” energy by law. There is an added 20% increase in the cost of anything energy related right there.
Next thing they did is block any kind of drilling – ANWR etc.
Lastly – your facts are wrong – wrong just plain wrong. Drilling in the Gulf will be online in 3 years – yep 3.
Next ANWR will be online in 8. Now you all have been working on Solar and wind since your failed Carter administration since the 70’s and we still don’t have affordable alternative energy. So the answer to you is NO DRILLING – period. What kind of solution is that?
Good math question for you Oliver if alternative energy isn’t going to be on line for at least another 30 years or more before we can all afford it… is 50 a bigger or smaller numbber then 8?
Try using the subtraction equation for that one ok?
Your sweeping generalizations aside, lifted from your little shill sheet devoid of an iota of supporting information…like when I said or posted that, for instance the ‘person’ you are here ‘refuting’…Drilling has been increasing quickly across the West, for instance, so saying that Dems have been blocking ‘any kind of drilling’ is unadulterated horseshit. (Remember horseshit? think of your last failed Bob). According to the EIA, if the Arctic Refuge comes ‘online’ the price for a gallon at the pump might be reduced by 4 cents, in 8-14 years. Some areas close in on the OCS might be online in 3 years, but other places would likely be a decade or more. The reason energy has spiked so much in CO is not renewables, its the affects of living in an energy colony, and shipping what was once a (locally) abundant resource off to feed the national market, driving up local prices as well. In other words, its an effect of drilling out our resources too fast in Colorado, so (out-of-state companies that also take away 70% of the revenue) have to ship more and more out-of-state to recoup their costs on their massive installations of infrastructure.
Again, you should change your screen name, you really are perpetuating unfair stereotypes.
and assuming it will actually make a difference on the price, which the Bush Administration says it won’t, how exactly does that fix the problem of people paying $4/gallon right now?
Don’t let the facts get in the way:
Sounds like the Democrats in charge in Colorado are doing anything but blocking “any kind of drilling.” But you’re not posting from Colorado, are you? Take your falsehoods, misrepresentations and outright lies to a state that isn’t experiencing an energy boom. You’ll have a better chance of peddling them there.
Your beloved Rethugs controlled the presidency and the congress from 2001 to 2007. What the hell did they do about energy supplies besides give the oil companies more and more tax breaks? And what was the result? Retail gasoline prices tripled. How in the hell is that the Democrat’s fault? Name one proposal that Bushco has put forward that will actually make a damned bit of difference. You can’t. The crap you spew about offshore drilling and ANWR won’t do anything about retail prices. From this week’s Time magazine:
So wrecking the environment will at best cut gas prices by seven cents a gallon in 20 years. As for the alternative energy requirement for Colorado electrical generation, I signed up for Xcel’s Windsource program not long after it became available, because I thought it was worth it to pay a little extra to reduce greenhouse gases. When the price curves intersected and wind power became cheaper than natural gas, demand for Windsource skyrocketed. Since Xcel is entitled to make a fixed percentage rate of return on their production costs, they freaked out when costs for wind went down. Lower production costs mean less money for Xcel, so they lobbied for and got a new tariff that made wind power permanently more expensive, no matter how much the cost of production undercuts natural gas. So, explain to me how that makes energy 20% more expensive. I’m pretty good at arithmetic but I can’t figure that one out.
My conclusion is that you’re a shill for big oil, a liar, or an idiot. In any event, do us a favor and shut the hell up.
Sheesh. But thanks: I used to be blond and you actually make me glad I’m BALD!
There he goes, aiming straight for the polite, conservative vote.
Maybe he’s aiming for the Ted Haggard demographic.
Not that it was ever in doubt.
Let no fact come between this man and his prey. It’s deplorable, isn’t it? Would not any reasonable well-adjusted person agree?
Pols is as guilty for spreading this story as Wadhams is for starting it.
How often do you see newspapers do that with corrections?
The story is equally about how far Wadhams is willing to go to twist the truth to score a point. That story deserves legs.
Our first mention of this “non-story” quoted a Denver Post story. [buzzer]
Quoting someone else’s non-story makes this a story?
Good luck with that.
If you don’t think Dick Wadhams was perfectly capable of making this a story on his own, you don’t know Dick.
It’s just that your angst (if appropriate at all) is better directed at the Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News, various TV outlets, etc. And we haven’t exactly been nice in our coverage of the coverage.
However, it’s frequently alleged that we secretly control the Colorado media or suddenly have become more widely trafficked than all of them combined, either of which would pleasantly surprise our advertisers (upper right column, click here to get your own–they might be an incredible steal).
Once you snag the American Furniture Warehouse and Lasik Eye Center ads, I’ll believe that rumor.
“Quoting someone else’s non-story makes this a story? Good luck with that.”
Curious. I wonder if Ralphie reads the JunctionDailyBlog. As in yesterday’s post. Good luck with that.
…did he?! Deliciously declasse! Leave room in the gutter for me, Dick.
…is that Udall was running up the steps of the capitol when the vote occured and clearly wanted to be there in time. But he didn’t take an early enough flight to insure it would not be an issue. Why?
Maybe he just didn’t get to the airport on time. How many times do people want to make it to their destination on time and miss it by a few minutes?
To cut it so close when he had made that public committment. And clearly most reps had made it back by then based on the vote totals.
It’s obvious that if you read RedGreen’s comment below, that the circumstances were beyond his control and that it was short notice that he couldn’t get back in time because of what Pelosi did. Wag your finger all you want.
It was during the regularly scheduled session hours. Udall has been claiming throughout this campaign that he’s been too busy working as a rep to go do voter meet & greets.
Yet he clearly was one of the last to show up for this weeks session. Which is understandable most weeks for someone in a close race as they do need to concentrate on campaigning (even if they pretend they are mostly working as a Rep).
But the week that a vote he made a public committment on was going to be held – he should have been there first thing like the other 425 managed.
He (and all of you Udall supporters) are spinning this very well, as you should. And it’s probably not that big a deal because of the second vote. But I see it as an unnecessary mis-step on his part.
…that Reps (or Senators) might not make all the votes, even the best ones? He counted on a particular vote being at a certain time and Pelosi just decided to move it up at the last second. One can only do so much to be prepared for that.
But after making that promise in a debate – he should have flown in the night before so there was no way he would miss it.
Especially with his constant claim that he’s busy doing his job as a rep. Especially with flights being delayed and cancelled all the time.
It’s not like rescheduling is all that unusual. Again, not a giant deal but he would have been better off if he had gotten there for the start of session in case it got moved up.
I’ve missed you…mean it….
while he was on the airplane. His flight gave him plenty of time but Pelosi changed the schedule on short notice.
that the vote was called because Pelosi knew Republican whip Roy Blunt wasn’t there (and he in fact missed the vote). She was apparently hoping he wouldn’t be able to whip his caucus and their pro-vacation instincts would overwhelm their pro-drilling instincts. Of course, as usual, she was wrong. The Republicans voted unanimously, and Mark Udall was thrown under the bus for yet another failed attempt to stick it in the eye of the Republicans rather than working to fix the $4 gas problem.
Mark Udall has thrown Betsy Markey under the bus numerous times by having a PR love-fest with Marilyn Musgrave to burnish his moderate credentials.
Turnabout is fair play.
…do bipartisan work on issues. They even appear together and do PR together. Do you think this is the first time anybody did anything like that?
Besides, it looks like Betsy is doing pretty well right now anyway.
Rumor’s not wrong on Roy Blunt. He missed this vote, but magically managed to cast one 10 minutes later. If this resolution was so important for the Republican leadership, you’d think their Whip would manage to make it to the floor 10 minutes earlier. Could it be Blunt skipped the vote to set up a strawman for Schaffer and friends to throw jabs at? Could the Republican leadership be playing politics with gas prices?