Veterans blast Schaffer; Udall hit for absence
By Lynn Bartels, Rocky Mountain News (Contact)
Published August 20, 2008 at 1:57 p.m.
Updated August 21, 2008 at 3:03 a.m.
Both U.S. Senate candidates are targeted in attack ads that debuted this week, igniting another angry back-and-forth by the campaigns.
Three Colorado Iraq war veterans rip Republican Senate candidate Bob Schaffer in an ad that focuses on a trip to Iraq by the former oil executive.
"I went to Iraq for my country. Bob Schaffer went to Iraq for a big oil company," one veteran says.
Another ad bashes the Democratic Senate candidate, Mark Udall, for being absent from Congress when it took its initial vote on whether to adjourn for the summer.
"Energy reform. Mark Udall promised to fight for it. So what'd he do when the vote came up? He skipped it," a narrator says.
Political consultant Steve Welchert said both ads are "pretty good."
"The problem is (that) voters are going to be left wondering who is telling the truth," he said.
The veterans ad is the work of VoteVets.org, which says part of its mission is to educate the public on the war and military issues and help get Iraq war veterans elected.
Critics, including Schaffer's campaign manager, say it's a leftist organization.
The ad is playing in Denver and Colorado Springs.
In a news conference Wednesday in Denver, VoteVets chairman Jon Soltz criticized a trip Schaffer took to Iraq on behalf of his former employer, Denver-based Aspect Energy, which later signed an oil contract with the Kurds.
"He's a war profiteer - 100 percent," Soltz said.
Soltz also said Schaffer compiled a "dreadful" record of supporting veterans when he served in Congress.
Schaffer's campaign manager, Dick Wadhams, demanded that the group apologize to Schaffer for calling him a war profiteer.
"That is the most reprehensible and disgusting attack that could be leveled," Wadhams said, adding that three of Schaffer's five children are officers in training in college and could be deployed within a few years.
The anti-Udall ad is from Freedom's Work, which bills itself as a conservative issues advocacy group. Critics say the group was formed to support the Bush administration and help GOP candidates.
"Liberals like Mark Udall need to recognize that the majority of people in this country want a comprehensive energy package," Freedom's Work spokesman Tim Pearce said.
Udall's spokeswoman, Taylor West, said the ad is misleading because the vote in question wasn't on energy reform, it was on whether to adjourn for the summer. Udall missed the initial vote but participated in a second, official vote on the question.
The ad is playing on network and cable stations in Colorado Springs, Denver and Grand Junction.
bartels@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-5327
Battle of the airwaves
* The ad attacking Republican Bob Schaffer:
Casey Howard: I went to Iraq for my country. Bob Schaffer went to Iraq for a big oil company.
Rebecca Driessel: I tried to secure peace in Iraq. Bob Schaffer tried to secure an oil deal in Iraq.
Howard: Our time in Iraq left thousands with head trauma. Bob Schaffer's time in Iraq helped land a contract for oil.
Rick Duncan: Too many vets can't get the care they need. Congressman Schaffer voted against billions in funds for veterans.
Howard: We fought for our country. Why hasn't Bob Schaffer voted for us?
* The ad attacking Democrat Mark Udall:
Narrator: Energy reform. Mark Udall promised to fight for it. So what'd he do when the vote came up? He skipped it. Instead of supporting oil exploration. Nuclear energy. New refineries. Or anything that might reduce gas prices.
Udall skipped work. Went to a fundraiser. And sent Congress on vacation. By one vote.
So next time you're at the pump. Call Skip Udall. errr . . . Mark Udall. Tell him not to skip the next energy vote.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Legislature Blog
Read live updates from the opening of the 2009 legislative session.
-
Rocky multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Who's next?
Complete coverage of the Broncos' search for a new coach.
-
Rocky year in photos
View an audio slide show of staff selections from 2008.
-
Winter Escapes
Your insider’s guide to the copious joys of the coolest season.
-
Sam Adams' Open Mic
Open Mic: Two-man advantage with Avs
-
Shanahan's career
See photos from Mike Shanahan's career as Broncos coach.
-
12 days of Drew
Look back at the year that has been with Drew Litton.
-
A dream fulfilled
A Rocky Mountain News and MediaStorm production
August 20, 2008
2:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
At least you cannot "swiftboat" Bob Schaffer. The only person he's ever served is himself.
War profiteering may actually be the least of Bob Schaffer's injuries to the American public. If you wonder why you're worried about your job and your wages are down remember that slavery is waiting in the right wing to take you out of the economy entirely.
Bob Schaffer is Colorado's own pro-slavery bully. After Jack Abramoff bought a $13,000 vacation for Bob Schaffer in the Mariana Islands, Schaffer proved vital to destroying a congressional initiative to improve the conditions of labor camps there. Convicted felon and lobbyist Jack Abramoff bragged how he could always count on Bob Schaffer to vote for his clients and their special interests.
Workers who were brought to those labor camps were tricked by promises that they were coming to America. Instead, they were taken to the American protectorate in the Mariana Islands and crammed into barracks behind barbed wire.
They were forced to work over 12 hours per day, many without pay if they failed to meet unrealistic production quotas. Some of the women and girls were selected to be prostitutes. Forced abortions were a common practice. When some of the workers were brought to congress to testify about those labor camps, they were bullied and savaged by Bob Schaffer who accused them of lying.
http://www.denverpost.com/ci_8872607
http://coloradopols.com/showDiary.do?...
Ironically, voting for Mark Udall will be a tremendous help to the Republican Party in this case. If you empower Bob Schaffer with a Senate seat, he will do maximum damage to the households of average Americans while bullying good people away from the Republican Party.
There are literally dozens of Republicans who would do a much better job for the people of Colorado and our nation. If you don't believe me then go talk to Bob Schaffer yourself about how you want him to protect your job and see to it that you can afford medicine or a college education for your kids. Then question the subsidies he gave to his own company and the rest of the oil royals. You'll see what I mean.
No veteran owes an apology to Bob Schaffer. They rightfully deserve a shot at giving him the Rochambeau.
August 20, 2008
3:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
So we've got Udall who skips out of Congress at a crucial moment and Schaffer who doesn't sounds much better.
Time to vote "none of the above".
August 20, 2008
3:23 p.m.
Suggest removal
buffsblg writes:
I have no idea who this group is or if their beef is real or manufactured. It seems undisputed that Schaffer, on behalf of his company, ignored the requests of the State Department that companies not make deals separate from the central Iraqi government and instead signed a very lucrative deal with the Kurds. Whether this is "war profiteering" is likely a matter of definition, but compared to the billions raked in by Halliburton it seems pretty small potatoes.
The funniest thing about the article is Wadhams pretending to be morally offended and demanding a list of donors. First, Wadhams has no morals and second, my TV is full every day with attack ads against Udall funded by out of state groups who refuse to say who they are (although we all know they are oil companies). Wadhams moral outrage seems a bit manufactured. This is going to be a long nasty campaign.
August 20, 2008
3:25 p.m.
Suggest removal
buffsblg writes:
Note for posters, although the article quotes "D*ck Wadhams" if you attempt to use his first name in your post, you get chastised. Got to love big brother.
August 20, 2008
3:31 p.m.
Suggest removal
Elwood writes:
Looks like George Carlin's 7 words you can't say on TV have increased to about 200. Great freedom of speech we enjoy here in Denver, CO. Pretty sad when you can't even use someone's given name in a post because it might offend someone.
August 20, 2008
3:32 p.m.
Suggest removal
BurgandyWine writes:
"Bob Schaffer does not speak for Bob Schaffer"
Thanks,
D. Wadhams
Seriously, the guy can't even argue the charges made by the veterans. He has to run and hide behind his kids.
I wonder if he'll keep voting against Veterans benefits once his kids are deployed.
August 20, 2008
3:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
bwforaccuracy writes:
Too bad American companies have to go overseas to help other companies develop their oil resources. Too many restrictions on developing AMerican resources is the real story.
I am happy to see at least the Kurdistan portion of Iraq trying to develop their economy. There are many companies from around the world investing in developing the oil resources. I hope all of Iraq is able to stand on its own economically, so the US presence can be reduced. The real story is greed and corruption amongst the Iraqi's, and everyone trying to get a cut of the Kurdish oil. Kind of like if Alaska would have to share its oil revenue they return to the residents of ALaska and give it to the rest of the US as well.
August 20, 2008
3:39 p.m.
Suggest removal
BurgandyWine writes:
BW -
I agree that it's a good thing for Iraq to stand on its own economically, however Schaffer's deal is actually undermining that goal because he and his company cut the deal with the Kurdish regional government against the wishes of the Iraqi central government and the U.S. State Dept.
It's only going to fuel the long standing feud between Baghdad and the Kurds.
August 20, 2008
4:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
rickg19611 writes:
"I have no idea who this group is or if their beef is real or manufactured."
They're a fringe group of people who claim to support veterans, however they admit their membership is made up of less than 1/2 of 1% of veterans.
They refuse to reveal who funds their multi-million dollar ad campaigns that always seem to support one political party. Must just be an "accident" that they only support one political party.
Of course, since they only have a handful of token veterans posing as members of their "organization", they're being funded by some fatcats that aren't veterans.
Just another con-job by political hatchet types hiding behind veterans, and hoping people are stupid enough to fall for what their fatcat political operatives are spewing.
August 20, 2008
4:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
ollie writes:
Duckhead?(censord) Wadhams is a pig wallowing in smear campaign crap and whines when his candidate gets revealed with the truth.
August 20, 2008
4:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
HolierThanThou writes:
As long as Bob Schaffer has chosen to hide behind his kids. Let's have a look at them. Justin Schaffer would have a short career in our military even if they overlooked his overt devotion to racism. Some folks were good enough to save his Facebook:
http://schafferfamilyvalues.com/
Wadhams spins Justin's cheering for slavery as "not racist". When viewed in the context of his comparing Obama to Count Chocula, that spin is a flat out lie. Bob Schaffer is a racist and so are his kids, who wouldn't likely last through basic training. The US military has a disproportionately high percentage of the very same people that Bob Schaffer and his family hatefully insult. Racists are devastating to the morale of any American military unit. So, they get tossed out. I would vote to toss all racists out of America and off the planet if that were possible.
Justin Schaffer believes that "Slavery gets sh*t done". This economic cretinism was inherited. Slavery is very bad for the economy. Slaves don't get paid, so the market for goods is thereby reduced. Slavery forces paid work into destitution. On the bright side, the market for whips, shackles, razor wire, and instruments of torture would be brisk.
Slavery is what every vote cast for Bob Schaffer is voting for.
Don't you wish that we could bring Abraham Lincoln back to have a talk with Bob Schaffer and his sons? I can see it now. They'd make jokes about the head wound and tell him that John Wilkes Booth is looking for him, "Just kidding, Abe old man! Say, that firing squad is just a reenactment isn't it? Mr. President?"
August 20, 2008
5:05 p.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
How is Schaffer's deal for Aspect not war profiteering? The man had no experience in the oil industry before being hired by Aspect. Best I can tell, Schaffer's experience in the private business arena was largely that he ran a small marketing and website design firm.
Also, the company has been rather vague about what exactly Schaffer did for the company other than that one deal. Further, he didn't stay there very long before he decided to leave and take yet another one of his perennial campaigns for the Senate.
And how come D*ick Wadhams, a spokesperson, ends up hogging the limelight in every article that comes out about Schaffer, the actual candidate? I really think Schaffer must be terrified of the guy. He certainly keeps quiet and gives the reigns of control over to him. Perhaps he's intimidated by Wadhams' blustering, I don't know.
August 20, 2008
5:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
Dustoff76 writes:
I am a member of VoteVets, and I would not have become involved with the group if it were a front organization or was made up of "a handful of token veterans posing as members of their "organization" (rickg19611). The vast majority of our members are veterans, active duty service members, and their family members. I served in Iraq with the 101st Airborne Division, and I am proud of the work VoteVets is doing and of my membership.
I can tell you all, without reservations, that this organization is only interested in speaking out for effective foreign policy, strong national defense, and for taking care of the troops who take care of us. We are a non-partisan organization, and we have endorsed candidates from both parties who are willing to stand up for what's right. VoteVets is a pro-military organization, and our views are based on our members' combat experiences and the treatment they receive after they come home. I have met the VoteVets leadership and many of its members, and I can personally attest to the fact that our only interest is to make the nation safer through intelligent and responsible policy, period.
Regarding this ad campaign, Bob Schaffer has repeatedly chosen to privilege personal profit over security and party politics over the best interests of our troops. VoteVets has no reason to apologize for making those flaws known to voters. Thanks.
August 20, 2008
5:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
HopiMedicineMan writes:
Wadhams is continually tapped because with each interview the reporter has an opportunity to quote Wadhams in a typical offensive comment, basically office language which used to be street language. Understand, it's the reporter phoning Wadhams. At this point, Mr. Bartels qualifies as Udall's campaign manager, if not press agent. Bartels is probably getting a new RAV-4 out of it.
August 20, 2008
5:16 p.m.
Suggest removal
bxwatso writes:
Liking Bob better and better. Bob=drill for oil in the US, Mark=pipe dream of wishing away oil consumption.
August 20, 2008
5:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
HopiMedicineMan writes:
A year ago Udall supported Salazar's ban on a pilot shale project. Now he's Oil Man Udall. It's called "change." I wonder if Salazar has changed? He's not running and the reporters don't want to disturb his deep slumber.
Our lives depend on oil, not distilled potato juice.
August 20, 2008
5:55 p.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
HopiMedicineMan, MS. Bartels is obviously the reporter assigned to cover the Senatorial race for the Rocky Mountain News. To infer she is getting paid under the table by the Udall campaign is a pretty serious accusation you're leveling there.
Wadhams knows very well his offensive comments are quote-worthy. That's why he keeps making them. He appears to be an egomaniac who time after time, can't resist getting attention for himself even at the expense of discrediting his candidate.
He's proven this with every campaign he's ever managed. You should do some reading on the guy, I don't know why people keep hiring him. He's got a losing streak a mile long, and his abrasive language and strong-arm tactics are often to blame.
And hiring this guy is certainly an example of Schaffer's own poor judgment.
August 20, 2008
6:07 p.m.
Suggest removal
ollie writes:
Big_D;
As I said, Wadhams is a squealing pig.
August 21, 2008
10:14 a.m.
Suggest removal
HopiMedicineMan writes:
MyTwoSins,
Hi Lynn.
August 21, 2008
10:47 a.m.
Suggest removal
mytwosense writes:
Hopi, I wish! Boy do I have some stories I'd love to cover if I wrote for the RMN...
August 21, 2008
11:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
HopiMedicineMan writes:
Mytwosense,
Me too!
August 21, 2008
1:58 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ian74 writes:
Holier, they are on his facebook page because they are a Joke. If he actually took those things serious, he may as well be in jail or dead. Or, he would be on Hannity and Colmes. None of which I have seen or heard of. You are labeling him as a racist. Hm, ironic. Let's make sure our posts are rational before we try to connect the dots on who is racist and who isn't.
August 21, 2008
2:06 p.m.
Suggest removal
Ian74 writes:
I would much rather supported a Big-Oil Schaffer who supports drilling and renewables than U-Turn Udall who can't make up his mind on the issue. Also, his hardly mentioned support for the employee free choice act.
August 21, 2008
4:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
HopiMedicineMan writes:
MyTwoSense,
Reporters have no problem leveling serious charges against politicians. The context in which Schaffer's position at Aspect is presented, is as if he were profiteering and not as someone with a leg up on the energy problem over Udall. That is the reality of this race and is not being presented by this reporter except in the cliche of profiteering. Reporters have the same interest in politics as the people they cover. They sometimes take sides. I mean it's
impossible to read it as anything but Schaffer/Wadhams vs. Udall/ Bartels. Reporters are under no scrutiny. Anything could be occurring on the writing side of the story. And this reporter is so consistently biased, one must ponder the possibility.