Economy: Post Bail-Out & Election: Post VP-Debate

There was a lot of news and commentary this weekend after Bush’s Bailout was passed and Sarah Palin demonstrated just how unknowledgable she is about important domestic and foreign policies.  The economy has been bad for average Americans for years and this election is critical.  So I’m going to stay on top of both issues by pointing to aspects of news and commentary I found.  I’ll update this post throughout the day due to the volume of material I want to cover.

1. Democratic Rep. Mark Udall and Republican Bob Schaffer were profiled in the Rocky Mountain News. Here’s a short bio on both: Rep. Udall has spent a good portion of his career trying to improve our energy policies – in Colorado first, and then nationally.  There is a long road to walk until we have a renewable energy-based society, which is needed for a healthy climate and national securtiy.  Mark Udall will make a decent Senator (note I didn’t say good or great.  I have real problems with his centrist approach in general and his recent vote to retroactively immunize telecom corporations who illegally wiretapped domestic traffic).  Bob Schaffer used to be a Jack Abramoff yes-man.  His actions tell us he is in favor of forced abortions, sweatshops and fossil fuels.  His past is well-paved with corruption and Colorado can’t afford to have a 20th century fringe CONservative blocking work to move forward in the 111th Congress.

2. Bush admitted on Friday as he signed his Bailout that the legislation is just “the beginning”. Really?  The beginning of what, exactly?  The beginning of more taxpayers Bailouts of immoral corporate gambling?  Overall, Americans recognized this Bailout is just that.  There is no part of the legislation that addresses the actual problems in the economy.  No homeowner assitance.  No path towards more jobs.  No increase in income.  The Bush administration will not prosecute the fools that set up this economic collapse.  The bottom line: trickle-down (voodoo) economics does not work.  Dumping larger sums of money at the top will not make any more fall to the bottom.

3. The Bailout passed because of the tax breaks attached to it. There are many reasons why that fact is odious, but I’ll focus on one for now: all of them already exist.  That’s correct: the tax breaks were merely extensions!  Entities like the Denver Post, in fact, spent more time opining about the tax breaks than they did about the underlying Bailout.  The Senate hadn’t extended any of the tax breaks all year, but managed to stick it on the Bailout so it would pass.  Oh, the corporate media also hasn’t reported the reason those extensions hadn’t passed all year: a CONservative Senator from Oklahoma issued a record number of filibuster threats this Congress.  One person alone managed to hold up about 100 necessary bills.  All so the CONS could run ads saying Congress didn’t do anything all year.  CONS put all their focus on elections and none of their focus on governing.

What’s In The News: 9/18/08

Bush breaks yet another record.  George Bush’s disapproval rating is the highest of any President.  Ever.

Palin can’t answer questions.

Pine beetles are also eating at Utah’s forests.  Part of a Utah newspaper story: the complex relationship between climate change, pine beetles and wildfires.

File this in a desperate campaign’s attempt to garner attention.  Republican Bob Schaffer is telling audiences that Rep. Mark Udall won’t debate him.  Despite the fact that they’ve debated six times already and have eight more scheduled in the next 47 days, or one per week.  Udall’s spokesman said it best, “I have two concerns here. One is that Bob Schaffer can’t count. The other is that he is dishonest.”  Hey Bob, there’s a reason your campaign is down by double digits.  Telling lies won’t close that gap – it will just make you look like an ass when you lose.

McCain’s Bad Water Policy, Bob Schaffer’s Oil Problems, Marilyn Musgrave’s Oil Problems

Does John McCain want Arizona and California to have more access to Colorado River water, leaving other western states without?  He’ll have to contend with millions of Colorado voters to get anywhere near such a policy.  My hunch is Coloradans won’t like the idea too much.

***

Bob Schaffer, perpetually trailing Rep. Mark Udall in polling throughout the cycle, continues to desperately search for anything that might decrease Udall’s chances.  The latest charge: Udall wants to increase the gas tax by 50 cents per gallon.  It’s untrue, of course, but when you’re behind, you attack your opponent.

Bob Schaffer had the gall to tell reporters after their 2nd debate that oil corporations have a small margin of profit.  Raise your hand if you think they should get a larger margin becuase Schaffer is arguing that $11.68 billion in just three months is too small.

Mark Udall, in contrast, wants to stop the corporate welfare going to Exxon and others and instead provide money for renewable energy ventures so we can end our dependence on fossil fuels.  Which is only one reason why Udall continues to hold a lead in the Colorado Senate race.

***

Marilyn Musgrave thinks her record and efforts to lower the price of gas for families in Colorado should help get her reelected this year.  That’s a novel approach because since her first election, gas prices have increased from $1.50 per gallon to over $4.00 per gallon this year.  What exactly has she down to lower prices?  Billions of dollars in corporate welfare to oil corporations didn’t work.  Invading and occupying a major oil supplier didn’t work.  Voting against every pro-renewable energy bill and amendment didn’t work.  Enough already, Marilyn.  You haven’t represented your constituents for years.  It’s time for Betsy Markey.

Schaffer Family Values on Display

Well, well, well. It turns out Republican Senate candidate Bob Schaffer isn’t the only member of his family to have a problem regarding the enslavement of people. His flap over supporting servitude on the Mariana Islands has never been fully explained. Now it’s obvious that, like a good Republican, he molded the values of his family. His son Justin’s Facebook page displayed a series of bumper stickers, one of which read, “Slavery Gets Shit Done”. My, oh my. What a lovely family you’ve raised, Bob. Another sticker shows Jesus in front of a Confederate flag with an assault rifle in his hand and has this text, “What Would Republican Jesus Do?”. Other stickers demean women. Obama is shown in one photoshopped onto a picture of bin Laden in front of the White House. The imagery goes way beyond childish. It’s disgusting and displays a patterned way of thinking that is simply unacceptable.

According to the Denver Post, Justin issued a written apology, taking full responsibility and trying to deflect fall-out by saying the values presented within the page directly contradict what he was taught at home. The apology does nothing, in my opinion. I’m sure he is sorry he got caught and that it might affect his father’s campaign, but such cavalier use of pro-slavery and anti-anything not white and male is a reflection on the environment he grew up in. I don’t see any evidence that he’s sorry he’s racist or bigoted.

These type of values have no place in the U.S. Senate. This is just one more example that Bob Schaffer is unfit to represent Colorado. His job would be to represent all Coloradans, not just white, male, racist bigots. His previous time in Congress and his family’s actions clearly show he couldn’t do that.

Rocky Mountain News Opinion Page Defends Bob Schaffer & Big Oil

The right-wing opinion writers that make up the Rocky Mountain “News” (RMN) editorial board came to the defense of Bob “Big Oil” Schaffer’s support of the fossil fuel industry in today’s piece. Entitled, “Buying into the Big Oil smear”, the editorialists manufacture plenty of crocodile tears for the poor voters who buy into misleading attack ads.

They cite Republican political consultant Katy Atkinson’s oh-so-sincere concern over the League of Conservation Voters “negative” ad linking Bob Schaffer with Big Oil. The next item mentioned in the column is closer to her true concern with Schaffer’s 2008 campaign, I think:

When negative ads are running without anything contradicting them, and when there are no negatives against Udall . . . I wouldn’t have been surprised if Udall’s lead was 15.

As long as Republicans run negative ads in return, everything would be fine, it appears. I didn’t hear Katy or any other Republicans whining about the negative ads their party and related 527s ran in 2006 or 2004 or … anytime recently. But that was before they started losing races at every level across the country. Now, negative ads are just plain bad. They’re probably not representative of our old fashioned American values, either. But as far as Republican ads go, in no way should Democrats or associated groups feel sorry that they can’t raise money or interest in their candidates this year. Bob Schaffer made the decision to run. It’s his responsibility to define himself to voters. If he allows others to do it for him, well, that’s just the way it goes.

More on the Rocky’s concerns after the fold.

A Look at Telecom Donations to Democrats

When I think something is shady or unethical about the way in which a Democrat votes, I don’t hesitate to call it as I see it. The House’s approval of retroactive immunity for telecommunication corporations last week is a prime example. I have zero love for corporatist Democrats. My interests (and yours) aren’t taken seriously when companies like AT&T, Verizon and Sprint can spend millions of dollars to ensure they get their way.

MapLight.org examines how two votes this year produced Democrats that voted against immunity before they voted for it. Not surprisingly, a large number of Democrats that switched their votes also received money from the afore-mentioned corporations.

Verizon, AT&T, and Sprint gave PAC contributions averaging:

$8,359 to each Democrat who changed their position to support immunity for Telcos (94 Dems)
$4,987 to each Democrat who remained opposed to immunity for Telcos (116 Dems)

88 percent of the Dems who changed to supporting immunity (83 Dems of the 94) received PAC contributions from Verizon, AT&T, or Sprint during the last three years (Jan. 2005-Mar. 2008).

Click on the link above to see the list of these 94 Dems.

Of note to Coloradans:

John Salazar (CO-03): $6,000

Ed Perlmutter (CO-07): $1,000

Mark Udall (CO-02): $0

Here’s the way I read this: John Salazar is a Corporatist Democrat. He’s willing to vote based on pressure applied from big-money interests (note: you and I don’t make that list). I don’t think Ed Perlmutter is a Corporatist Democrat, but I’m not sure how else to describe him. Why would he vote to grant retroactive immunity to corporations that knowingly broke federal wiretapping laws? Especially with Qwest’s presence in the state: they didn’t hand control over to the Bushies. Why should the other telecoms get off scott free?

Mark Udall is running hard for the center of the political spectrum and it’s disgusting, quite frankly. Republican politicians will stab his “bipartisanship” in the back the first chance they get (see Sen. Ken Salazar’s ridiculous contortions for proof). I don’t think Republican voters want immunity that much more than Democrats do, which is to say not at all. I would be very interested in seeing any kind of quantitative rationale for switching his vote. Does his campaign think it will secure Undeclared or Republican votes this November? He might need them if he continues to stick it to his base.

Here’s what it means to Democrats at the national level: folks like Steny Hoyer, Rahm Emanuel and Nancy Pelosi need to be replaced with better Democrats. This capitulation based on campaign donations is sickening.

Colorado Political News 6/24/08

First up: the Colorado Senate race. Republican Bob Schaffer has been busy trying to explain his past associations and actions away since announcing. From a growing mound of evidence demonstrating his connections to the ethically corrupt Jack Abramoff and his support for sweatshops and forced abortions to not being able to recognize the difference between Pikes Peak and Mt. McKinley (which is in Alaska, Bob), things have been busy. Now another piece of Bob’s past is coming back to haunt him.

A Republican activist from Aurora who pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in connection with a larger fraud prosecution was sentenced Monday to a year’s probation and a $3,450 fine. Scott Shires, 55, faced up to a year in prison after pleading guilty to filing false tax returns in connection with a case against his one-time employer, Octane International Limited, which purported to be making an alternative-fuel additive. Shires is well connected in GOP circles in Colorado and recruited Bob Schaffer to be a board member of Octane International in 2004.

Part of the problem here: Bob Schaffer first said he hadn’t been compensated for his services as a board member. Turns out, he did. But Bob left his income from Octane off of a 2007 campaign disclosure form. Rank-and-file Republicans might want to take a closer look at their party’s leadership: the propensity to volunteer and donate doesn’t seem to happen too much up at the top. Given Republican officials constant charges aimed at Democrats, it seems they know best what elitism really is.

[Update] Another poll shows Mark Udall with the same 9-point lead over Bob Schaffer that a Rasmussen poll showed earlier.  This poll has Udall up 46%-37%.  Considering the only ads that have gone out have been generic, introductory-style, I don’t see things getting better for Schaffer any time soon.

***

Second: Colorado’s 4th Congressional District (CO-04). Democrat Betsy Markey is targeting Marilyn Musgrave’s seat. Previously, the DCCC had announced it is including Markey in their Red to Blue program. In 2006, “Red to Blue” raised an average of over $400,000 per candidate. Expect that number to grow this year with the increased focus and energy on the poor state of our nation. Now, word comes that environmental groups are also planning on targeting CO-04, possibly to the tune of $500,000 by themselves. The group spent $1.5 million to oust the ethically challenged Republican Richard Pombo of California in 2006 (does anyone see a pattern here?).

Marilyn Musgrave has been a very loyal pro-oil and gas voter while in Congress (for tax breaks for large corporations & against increased gas mileage for vehicles). After her very narrow win in 2006, she has made a concerted effort to change her image. Which sort of makes her actions even more out of step with Coloradans. We don’t tend to like hypocrites.

Add in what Betsy Markey herself will raise, a competitive Senate seat and a competitive Presidential contest and a whole lot of money will likely be spent in Colorado this year.

***

Third: Citizens are asking the Colorado Oil and Gas Conservation Commission to not issue one-size-fits-all rules that they are considering for oil and gas drilling. Conditions aren’t the same around the state, they argue, and so any rules they develop should reflect that. I don’t know all the ins and outs of their individual cases or how the proposed rules would impact them, but on the surface I tend to agree with their statement. We’ll see how the rules are eventually implemented. What I don’t think is that if the rules are implemented, oil and gas industries will collapse in Colorado.

Bob Schaffer – Jack Abramoff Links Still Growing

The Colorado Senate race this year is important on many different levels.

One, we have the opportunity to get rid of Wayne “Do-Nothing” Allard. If you think that’s a silly name, do a search for legislation he’s sponsored. Despite a decent level of seniority within the Senate, he hasn’t done much except vote for Bush’s legislation the way Bush wants.

Two, we have the opportunity to send a Senator from Colorado that more accurately reflects our Western views. Mark Udall understands that the Iraq invasion and occupation was wrong, he understands the importance of science in our 21st century society, and he understands that Coloradans and Americans need and deserve a universal health care program.

Three, Bob Schaffer displayed an amazing lack of understanding of what his job entailed while representing Colorado’s 4th Congressional District. He is on record as being proud that he did more for the Ukraine than his district. His Republican colleagues are on record as noting that Bob Schaffer wasn’t terribly engaged. He is on record as only wanting to serve a limited number of terms in Congress. After a hiatus, he’s running for office again. This short list alone should preclude him from being elected to the Senate. But there are plenty more reasons not to elect Bob Schaffer.

As johne at SquareState has been busy documenting, Bob Schaffer‘s Congressional career is proving to have been linked in significant ways to Jack Abramoff’s large web of corruption. Legislators were sent around to world on junkets paid for by lobbyists. When they returned to Congress for hearings, they attacked and subverted established government entities and workers. Those workers and agencies were functioning well, and as such didn’t fit into the Republicans’ worldview of being bad. Many people associated in one way or another with Abramoff have found themselves found guilty (by plea or by decision) of numerous crimes. Many more await, I’m sure.

This latest Schaffer-Abramoff post utilizes items found in Bob Schaffer’s Congressional archives. This is important to note: his own memos and emails, combined with the growing body of evidence surrounding Abramoffs’ and others’ activities are painting their own picture. Unlike Dick “Macaca” Wadhams, intrepid muckrakers don’t have to try to make things stick to Schaffer. He’s done the job quite nicely on his own. As these details and the larger narrative of Schaffer’s corruption slowly make their way to the public, this Senate race should increasingly lean Mark Udall’s way.