Udall, Schaffer get contentious in Senate race's final debate
By Ed Sealover, Rocky Mountain News
Published October 30, 2008 at 5:34 p.m.
Photo by Matt McClain / The Rocky
CBS4's Brian Brooks, left, gives a signal as senatorial candidates Mark Udall, center, and Bob Schaffer wind up their final debate before Tuesday's election.
Photo by Matt McClain / The Rocky
U.S. Senate candidates Bob Schaffer, left, and Mark Udall watch as CBS4 News' Tim Wieland flips a coin to determine who will field the first question and who will have the final remarks at their debate Thursday in the station's Denver studio.
CORRECTION:This story should have made it clear that Senate candidate Bob Schaffer didn't know the model of his leased campaign car, not his personal car.
Democrat Mark Udall said that he does "not necessarily" support Barack Obama's proposed tax plan during the often contentious final debate of Colorado's 2008 U.S. Senate race.
Republican Bob Schaffer repeatedly questioned the truthfulness of that and other answers given by Udall and said it is time to rid Washington of people like Udall who have been a part of a "do-nothing Congress."
Tension in the air
Thursday's Rocky Mountain News/CBS4 News debate, the 15th and last tussle between the two men seeking Colorado's open Senate seat, was fast-paced, touched on some new issues and showcased the tension that's built up during the campaign.
Udall, when asked to sum up in one word Schaffer's debate performances, answered "rude." Schaffer "has been unwilling to listen," he added.
"We have enough people in the United States Senate who don't listen. . . . We're going to have to find ways to work together," Udall said.
Schaffer's response to the same question - "explaining." Udall has been on the defensive about his liberal voting record, Schaffer said.
"For those who have their feelings hurt by having questions raised about their voting record . . . I would suggest that maybe the United States Senate is too harsh a place to be," Schaffer said in response to Udall's "rude" comment.
Despite a campaign that's raged for a year and a half, the candidates delivered a few surprises.
Both stated their opposition to the little-mentioned issue of legalizing same-sex marriage. While Udall added that he is "a strong supporter of civil unions and domestic partnerships," Schaffer said states should not be forced to recognize "a union that is not a marriage."
Tax stance spurs dispute
When asked whether they favor Democratic presidential nominee Obama's plan to give tax credits even to people who don't pay income taxes, Udall said: "The Obama package is not necessarily one that I support."
The congressman from Eldorado Springs clarified his remark after the debate by saying he specifically opposes Obama's plans to enact a tax against companies making windfall profits and to raise the capital-gains tax.
"I haven't spent a lot of time studying Senator Obama's tax plan," Udall said in an interview. "I've been focused on my plan."
Udall said he agrees with Obama's focus on giving tax cuts to the middle class.
Schaffer, a former congressman from Fort Collins, responded that Udall has voted in the past to give checks to those who don't pay tax just as he claimed Obama would.
Finally: What's your ride?
The two also clashed over the next steps in the Iraq war.
"We have won the war in Iraq. It's time to turn Iraq back to the Iraqis," Udall said.
Schaffer said that while "success is right before us," it is premature to leave the country. Iraq must be able to defend itself against insurgencies, maintain its territorial integrity and hold democratic elections, he said.
When the discussion turned to the souring economy, Schaffer said that Congress should have stayed in session longer to cut spending and offer tax relief that he said would encourage more private investment and create jobs. He criticized Udall for backing a $50 billion African aid package, saying the money would have been better used to help Americans.
Udall said that he wants the next Congress to come up with an incentive plan for Americans to save more money.
While some have said cutting back on spending will hurt sections of the economy such as retailers, Udall and Schaffer agreed Americans need to save more.
The last question put to the candidates was what kind of car they drive.
Schaffer said he drove a Ford but couldn't remember the model. Udall said he drives a hybrid Toyota Prius.
But Schaffer took issue even with that.
"The congressman's driving a bus. . . . It's not a Prius," Schaffer said.
Highlights, lowlights
Some moments from the final debate between Republican Bob Schaffer and Democrat Mark Udall:
They got the memo
* Both candidates showed up in blue shirts and red ties.
He'll have his with Miracle Whip
* When Udall said Schaffer once proposed getting rid of the U.S. Department of Education, Schaffer replied, "That's baloney." But when Schaffer ran for Congress in 1996 his own position paper talked about how he "favors the abolition" of the education department.
Mission accomplished
* "We have won the war in Iraq." That was from Udall, not Schaffer, and no doubt the statement took plenty of Democrats by surprise.
Colorado on $673 a day
* When asked about personal belt-tightening, Schaffer said, "Let me tell you, it's especially hard for the Schaffer household right now." He quit his job at Aspect Energy in December to campaign full time. He didn't mention his $226,819 severance package.
I don't know, something American
* Udall gets driven to campaign events in a Toyota Prius hybrid. Schaffer gets driven in a Ford, but he wasn't sure of the model.
On the road with Ralph Kramden
* Schaffer zinged Udall but good on his Prius, pointing out that the past two weeks Udall actually has been touring the state in a big "luxury" bus. (It's bio-diesel.)
So that's why the folks in Congress are so tan
* Schaffer repeated his jab that Udall is on a "five-week vacation," referring to the fall break that Congress takes each year. Schaffer took the same break when he was in Congress, and some of the time is spent on constituent services.
Featured
-
DNC in Denver
Complete coverage of the 2008 Democratic National Convention.
-
The Crevasse
A five-part series that examines one tragic day on Mount Rainier.
-
Deadly denial
Sick nuclear workers applied for government compensation but most haven't seen a dime.
-
Final Salute
The Rocky followed Maj. Steve Beck as he took on the most difficult duty of his career.
-
'Colorado's burning'
Coverage of the state's worst wildfires.
-
Columbine shootings
Coverage of the April 20, 1999, shootings at Littleton's Columbine High School.
-
The Crossing
Colorado's deadliest traffic accident killed 20 children on Dec. 14, 1961.
-
Osveli's journey
Osveli Sales left Guatemala for a better life. Two months later, he came home in a box.
-
Wake for an Indian warrior
Oglala Sioux bestow a tribute to the first tribal fatality in Iraq.
October 30, 2008
9:22 p.m.
bronco writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
October 30, 2008
9:35 p.m.
Suggest removal
H20 writes:
I second that, What he lacks in competency be makes up in taking over his opponent and being rude. I hope he loses.
October 30, 2008
9:36 p.m.
speakthetruth writes:
(This comment was removed by the site staff.)
October 30, 2008
9:37 p.m.
Suggest removal
Who_Me writes:
Yawn.
October 30, 2008
9:49 p.m.
Suggest removal
SheikYurBooty writes:
"Rude" is putting it mildly. But we have to understand that in recent weeks Schaffer has suffered the rude awakening of seeing that his act is going down in flames.
October 30, 2008
11:02 p.m.
Suggest removal
NeilT writes:
Schaffer is so out of touch he doesn't know the name of his car.
He said he drives a "Ford...something"
Kind of like not knowing how many houses you own.
October 30, 2008
11:10 p.m.
Suggest removal
chizman69 writes:
Udall is to much of a two face.
October 30, 2008
11:48 p.m.
Suggest removal
Kukulcan writes:
Der Spiegel is a German news magazine analogous to Time, Newsweek or US News in America. They publish in English as well as German.
Der Spiegel documented "gay marriage" among animals; giraffes, zebras, seagulls, swans, penguins, dolphins, birds and other animals in this 2006 feature story.
Here is a link to the story, you can view the text without viewing the pictures, your choice;
http://www.spiegel.de/international/0...
Thus, how can demagogues possibly claim that being gay is "against nature"?
Could it be that for SOME people, being gay is natural, just like those animals in the story?
I don't see why anyone would want to discriminate against any of our fellow citizens simply because of their INNATE sexual orientation.
WHY NOT TREAT EVERYBODY EQUALLY?
What exactly are you homophobes so scared of? Is being gay contagious? How do gay people even affect you--or me?
Personally, I am not gay, but I just don't see what the big deal is--other than demagogues using hate as a political tool.
October 31, 2008
2:31 a.m.
Suggest removal
TimeLord writes:
Schaffer's certainly a pig, but that's what his party likes...
October 31, 2008
4:18 a.m.
Suggest removal
LOUIE writes:
Last night belonged to Mr. Shaffer; he was more prepared, more direct to the questions asked, less evasive about his record. Udall was off, less confident, changed topic to avoid addressing the questions asked. Udall's mannerisms and eyes showed uncertainty in his responses, Shaffer showed up better versed and prepared against the issues more directly. Yes he over talked, shows he was willing to share much more on the subject; Udall finished on spot of time, as though he were relieve it to be over. Personally, I like the one who talks, he reconizes the desire of the people to have a full explanation of all matters as they relate to subject. Pure style, composure, willingness to be direct in responses to the question without changing subjects to avoid answering, and lastly the desire to talk at greater lenth than time allotted on the subject, I must defer to Shaffer. Stopping on the button each time reflected someone who was happy to quit talking for fear of making an error, Udall was relieved when his time was up, a drink of water later. It was Shaffer's night last night; Udall didn't come off as organized, too evasive to the questions asked. When a politician doesn't want to be direct to the question, it shows he is changing the subject to not to have to answer a potentially damaging question, or one that he was not prepared to answer. Also of note; whether you approve or disapprove of Shaffer's actions in the international business community that he once worked for, at least he has that skill to do international business. What has Udall done in international business? Not much, his life has been groomed to be a politician, it's the Udall family heritage handed down to him. Whether I agree with, or disagee with, the contents of a business contract in international business, I highly respect the skill of that ability to be handled confidently to the benifit of the man's employer at the time, verses a man with little international business experence and no track record of any notable international business accords. Gary Hart, a democrat of note, has the brillant ability to get things accomplished around the globe in business, some are naturally given to working in the world of international business. It's an asset to have, regardless of who issued the man the contract to get inked. Last night was Shaffer all the way over Udall; I expected better of Udall as he was way too stiff.
October 31, 2008
4:45 a.m.
Suggest removal
LOUIE writes:
Sidebar: If someone purchases signed mail in ballots from registered voters, albiet the dead, the indigent, people who care nothing for society, and marked the candidates on the signed ballot in proxy for the named holder of the ballot who sold it, other than a rat, would the election officals be the wiser? I don't approve of mail in ballots, sorry. I like the levers punching the card, of the mechanical machine, of the person identified as the true registered voter. Just a thought, hell I wonder what keeps the system honest, a machine or people. Just a thought...
October 31, 2008
6:12 a.m.
Suggest removal
rumplstilskin writes:
Hey Louie...I'm still voting for Udall!!
October 31, 2008
6:42 a.m.
Suggest removal
cowboy69 writes:
Udall may say he does not support the Obama socialist political platform today. However, he is a party line voter that is bought off bt special interest and will vote how instructed. The best thing for Colorado is to leave him at home. Tax payers will save allot of money in the long run.
October 31, 2008
7:21 a.m.
Suggest removal
roger44 writes:
Bob beat him up good in my opinion. I don't vote party lines, I don't vote for career politicians. And Udall is one, his family history of career politicians goes way back. They can call it service if they want, I don't see it that way. next what will happen is the banks we've bailed out will pay big bonuses with our dollars because those idiots in Congress didn't put it in the bailout to prevent it, Barney Frank said he trusted them to do the right thing. Are you kidding me? These Politicians are pooping all over us.
October 31, 2008
7:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
radagan writes:
Udall doesn't like to be called out on his record. He's been a Pelosi flunky. The Dem party pretty much calls the shots for him.
Udall tries to talk around the hard issues saying things like "I don't necessarily support that".
I think the choice is clear, select Udall if you want more gov't programs and taxes, select Schaffer if you want a less gov't and taxes. The Dems are already going to control congress, the key is if they have 60 senators then they will be able to pass any legislation they want without any compromise.
October 31, 2008
7:51 a.m.
Suggest removal
socrates writes:
What kind of a guy doesn't know what kind of car he has? He might as well have said "um... I think it's a red one..."
October 31, 2008
8:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
Udall is a bag of hot air. Boulder politician, and considering how much Boulder is out of touch with normalcy, I sure hope he's not voted in. Also, I thought he was for the environment, but about two thirds of the political junk mail I receive are for Udall from the Democratic Party. In one week, I received the same stupid ad three times. That's a huge waste of paper, and tells me that Udall's only for the environment when it suits his purposes.
Schaffer doesn't seem as arrogant either, and I don't care for arrogant politicians. If Udall doesn't like Schaffer being "rude" to him, then Udall's not capable of having the job. We don't want whiney, sensitive people running the country.
October 31, 2008
8:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
FCZ writes:
Dear Mr Obama,
Having spent 12 months in Iraq theatre I can promise you it's not a mistake.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TG4fe9...
October 31, 2008
9:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
One other thing, some of you are making too much out of Schaffer not knowing what type of Ford he drives. On the other hand, you must be okay with Udall saying he's driving a Prius when he's actually going around in a bus..... even if it's bio-diesel, it still puts out more emissions than the Ford, or any passenger car on the road. For the environment my a.......
October 31, 2008
9:37 a.m.
Suggest removal
GeeTee writes:
Bobby Schaffer is the worst kind of Republican and politician -- stupid and proud of it. Get in the unemployment line, Bobby, you're done.
October 31, 2008
9:53 a.m.
Suggest removal
mmmark217 writes:
How on earth, after the last 8 years of a Republican in the White House and a Republican held in Congress, could anybody vote Republican and also pass a Sobriety test is beyond me. The Republicans are so out of touch with what this country needs, it's truly amazing. Vote A.B.R.......ANYTHING BUT REPUBLICAN.
October 31, 2008
9:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
CO_567 writes:
Whatever happened to objective journalism? It's no wonder so many people listen to conservative talk radio to hear another perspective on issues.
October 31, 2008
10:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
mmmark217 writes:
Oh, and I'm an independent. I do not wholly susbscribe to any party. I believe in trying to do what works, not a specific ideology.
October 31, 2008
10:02 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cwillyrun1 writes:
I know CO........ there's no balance with mainstream media.
By the way mmmark, the Democrats have controlled Congress for the last two years, and thanks to the Democrats, the bailout package went through. Republicans were split on it, but the Democrats mostly fell in line to vote for it. It'd be helpful for you to understand it's both parties, and if Obama wins and the Democrats control Congress, they'll screw it up and the Republican party you don't like will gain all the power again. It's inevitable. Too much power for one party at the top is a recipe for disaster. Now, we'll get to find out just how bad the Democrats can screw things up, and those supporting the Democrats will have no room to cry and whine about the people they voted for.
October 31, 2008
1:03 p.m.
Suggest removal
avoice writes:
The questioner asked what kind of cars the candidates drive around the state campaigning, not what kind of cars they OWN. The only one to actually answer the question, as was the case for most of the questions last night, was Schaffer. Schaffer stated his campaign leased a Ford (an American made car, by the way). These guys have paid staffers drive them to events, so it is unremarkable that Schaffer wasn't sure of the model that his campaign leased. Udall dodged the question completely. He must have figured it was better admit he drives a Japanese car than take responsibility for the giant luxury bus idling in the parking lot with his name on it.
October 31, 2008
4:54 p.m.
Suggest removal
FCZ writes:
Did you see that amazing video obtained by the Los Angeles Times of Sen. Barack Obama toasting a prominent former PLO member at an Arab American Action Network meeting in 2003? The video in which Obama gives Yasser Arafat’s frontman a warm embrace, as Bill Ayers look on?
You haven’t seen it? Me, neither. The Los Angeles Times refuses to release it.
And so an incriminating video of Obama literally “palling around” with PLO supporters becomes one more nail in the coffin of “objective journalism.”
Alas, the obit for objective reporting has been buried - along with the stories about Obama’s 2001 support for court-imposed “redistribution of wealth” and Joe Biden’s latest gaffe.
it is particularly heartbreaking for me to see the death of objective journalism. And believe me - it is stone cold dead. Sacrificed on the altar of service to Barack Obama.
Former New York Times columnist and veteran newspaperman Michael Malone knows it.
“I’ve begun - for the first time in my adult life - to be embarrassed to admit what I do for a living,” he said.
Malone is disturbed by the “shameless support” journalists have been giving the Obama campaign. Where’s the hardball coverage for Obama they give McCain? Instead, journalists are “actively serving as attack dogs for the Obama/Biden ticket.”
The percentage of Americans who rate reporters as objective and not favoring either candidate? Eight percent.
My friends in the Partisan Press, your reputation has now fallen lower than both President Bush (25 percent) and the Democratic Congress (18 percent). Journalistic integrity now ranks along side communicable diseases and nuclear mishaps.
When Americans look for tough, honest journalists , where will we find them?
http://www.bostonherald.com/news/opin...
November 1, 2008
8:01 a.m.
Suggest removal
SlouchingTowardBoulder writes:
One of the first things that Udall and the Democrats will push is the "card check" bill as a favor to their union buddies; then a revisitation of the odious and misnamed "fairness doctrine" through new appointees to the FCC (most likely look for Blair Levin of Stifel, Nicholas to be the new chairman), then pushing through the "Fredoom of Choice Act" to roll back, in one fell swoop, all state limitations on abortion and, in effect, rolling over Casey v. Planned Parenthood.
So, in sum, immediately, the most liberal President and both houses of a Democratic Congress will reward the following liberal interest groups: (1) Unions, (2) far-left activists that want to shut down conservative talk radio, and (3) the abortion on demand activists.
Folks, welcome to the new liberal America of "tolerance" and "first amendment" and doing "away" with "special interests".
November 1, 2008
9:33 a.m.
Suggest removal
libertarianbill writes:
Anybody who thinks Udall will work with the other side to reach bi-partisan solutions is clueless as to his real voting record. If you really believe Udall is a centrist, you also probably believe that Obama spent 20 years in his church and never heard pastor Wright make racist comments. I guess if you are not smart enough to understand what these people actually believe, you will vote for what ever they say. Anybody who believes what Udall says is truly gullible - and probably a Democrat. The truth lives in his voting record. Look it up people!!