Search Results for: "Bob Schaffer"

DeVos Tours Bob Schaffer’s High School, Because Of Course

Bob Schaffer.

Brooklyn Dance of the Fort Collins Coloradoan reports:

U.S. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos will visit Fort Collins charter school Liberty Common High School and Greeley’s Aims Community College with U.S. Rep. Ken Buck on Thursday.

DeVos and Buck, who represents Colorado’s 4th District in the U.S. House of Representatives, are visiting the two schools to look at how they are approaching education, according to a Wednesday news release from the U.S. Department of Education…

Liberty Common is a parent-run, public charter school authorized by Poudre School District. The school — which emphasizes literature, history, civics and languages in its curriculum — offers grades K-12, with an elementary school for students in kindergarten through sixth grade and a separate high school campus for students in seventh through 12th grades. DeVos will visit the high school campus.

Known affectionately in some circles as “Hilldale by the Hillside,” Liberty Common High School in Fort Collins’ headmaster is former Rep. Bob Schaffer. Schaffer earned a reputation as an unapologetic “culture warrior” conservative during his career in elected office from the Colorado legislature to Congress, but was soundly defeated in his 2008 run for the U.S. Senate against Mark Udall under a scandalous cloud resulting from Schaffer’s ties to corrupt former lobbyist Jack Abramoff.

Liberty Common by all indicators has a very high and consistent level of academic achievement. The school has a long waiting list of applicants, and is understood to be both an academic and ideological “magnet” for political conservatives. That of course makes it a perfect venue for Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, by far the most ideologically polarizing Secretary of Education since the department’s creation in 1979. Most recently, Liberty Common was in the news for having applied for a waiver to exempt itself from the state’s revised sex ed guidelines passed in 2019–we assume out of an abundance of, you know, tolerance.

DeVos’ tenure as Secretary of Education has been one of the most troubled of any member of Donald Trump’s Cabinet, which says a lot. A 2017 poll ranked DeVos as the least popular cabinet member. DeVos’ legendary interview bombs, which preceded her confirmation, continued to haunt her to the point where she limits her exposure these days to more friendly confines–like the recent Washington, D.C. fundraising dinner in which DeVos compared abortion to slavery.

With all of this in mind, we’ll be watching for news breaking from Liberty Common today.

And no news will be good news.

Charter School Led by Bob Schaffer Is First to Apply for a Waiver to New Sex Ed Law

(Promoted by Colorado Pols)

Former Republican Congressman Bob Schaffer.

Liberty Common School in Ft. Collins is the first applicant for a waiver to Colorado’s new sex-ed law.

If granted by Colorado’s State Board of Education, the waiver would allow the charter to completely or partially ignore the law’s requirement that public schools, including charter schools, teach a comprehensive sex-ed curriculum, including lessons on consent and information for LGBT students, if they choose to offer sex ed at all.

Liberty Common, which serves elementary, middle, and high school students in Ft. Collins, is overseen by headmaster Bob Schaffer, a former Colorado Republican Congressman, who helped found the school in 1997 and was promoted from principal to headmaster last year.

Schaffer is widely known as a champion of conservative causes, including school privatization via vouchers. Ivanka Trump, the president’s daughter, toured Liberty Common, which regularly receives high ratings in state rankings, during the last presidential race.

Under existing Colorado law, charter schools and school districts already had the option of obtaining waivers to sidestep state guidelines for sex-ed and to teach the subject however they want. The new law doesn’t change this for charters. But school districts can no longer receive waivers, pursuant to the new law, according to Bill Kottenstette, who heads the Colorado Department of Education’s Schools of Choice Unit. (Here’s info on what’s new in Colorado’s 2019 sex-ed law.)

Instead of seeking a waiver, a school district or charter school can choose not to teach sex ed at all. If they do teach the subject, however, it must be comprehensive, as spelled out in the law, which means more inclusivity for LGBT students, and lessons on consent, family planning, and more.

Liberty Common has decided not to opt out of teaching sex ed but is seeking a waiver from the state guidelines, in part, because it wants to teach “human sexual reproduction strictly within the context of science instruction,” according to Schaffer, the headmaster.

(more…)

Bill Owens–Yay! Bob Schaffer? Um…

We noted yesterday that Gov.-elect John Hickenlooper has selected former GOP Gov. Bill Owens as a statewide co-chair of his transition team. This is being widely viewed as an excellent choice, and we think the moderate Owens will do as much as possible to broker the kind of bipartisan cooperation that Hickenlooper wants to lead off his term with.

We’re a little less enthusiastic about another choice that Hickenlooper made–in addition to appointing Owens as a statewide co-chair, apparently his transition team saw fit to appoint former GOP Senate candidate Bob Schaffer as a committee co-chair dealing with education issues. Superficially, this would seem to make sense, since Schaffer does serve on the state Board of Education. But we can’t help but note that if the unthinkable had happened, and Tom Tancredo had somehow won the election, Schaffer’s role wouldn’t have changed much:

Which linked to this statement:

“Tom has always been a tireless leader on issues of education reform, tax limitation and economic growth,” said Schaffer. “I’m proud to support Tom Tancredo, and I urge all educators, tax reformers and business leaders across the state to do the same.”

Look folks, we’re not naive. We get that it’s natural to include the chairman of the Board of Education in the gubernatorial transition process, and that politicians who oppose one another in a campaign have to come back and work together afterward. But Tancredo was no ordinary candidate, and Schaffer is an open proponent of education policies that most Coloradans would thank goodness he doesn’t have the power to implement if they knew. Remember, this is a guy who’s past debating old hat issues like vouchers for religious schools, and prefers livelier topics like whether a paddling on the backside or a ruler to the knuckles works better on the kiddies.

Despite this, Hickenlooper has an opportunity for leadership here more than a problem, depending on how he handles it. At the very least, we know some nervous teachers who will want some reassurance that Schaffer’s fringy views aren’t what they voted for, and that they were making a choice on education policy when they voted for Hickenlooper. As in, not Tom Tancredo’s.

That shouldn’t be hard to do, right?

Bob Schaffer: Twitter Fail

(Slavery gets $#|+ done… – promoted by ThillyWabbit)

Bob Schaffer’s twitter account not only pimps the booze but tries to connect to his “followers” and fails.

I have a Republican twitter sockpuppet who Schaffer followed for reasons unknown to me. After his requesting to follow my sockpuppet, I decided to follow him back. I received this direct message:

Wow, a new follower — and a persuasive one, too! Thanks for connecting. ..will keep watching your posts closely!

I thought geez, Bob Schaffer is crazy if he likes my sockpuppet. Then I realized there is no way in hell Schaffer is paying that much attention. So I decided to test my hypothesis that his direct message is crap. And I was right.

I, sufimarie, started following him to see if I would get the exact same direct message. And I did.

So remember tweeting Republicans: encouragement by your establishment Republican leaders is as hollow as your platform.

That is all.

also at s2

McInnis Inducted Into Bob Schaffer’s Mountain-Moving Hall of Shame

As you may have noticed, your hosts were a little busy yesterday morning doing all of the non-bloggy things we do, and didn’t have a chance to get some posts going until the early afternoon.

Fortunately, our observant readers are always on duty. Recounting some familiar-sounding fun from yesterday’s open thread related to gubernatorial candidate Scott McInnis’ new website, the Colorado Independent reports:



Hours after launching his campaign Web site to much fanfare, official Republican gubernatorial hopeful Scott McInnis yanked from the site a prominent graphic featuring a vista of Lake Louise, a resort nestled in the Canadian Rockies. The Canadian terrain appeared behind the question, “What do you want for the future of Colorado?”

Soon after bloggers uncovered the geographic blooper, lovely Lake Louise vanished from the McInnis site, replaced with background shots of the Boulder Flatirons.

A McInnis campaign spokesman didn’t return a phone call or e-mail seeking comment.

Intrepid contributors to the political blog Colorado Pols uncovered the McInnis campaign’s graphic mixup Thursday afternoon. After speculating the range might be the result of creative Photoshopping, and then discarding the possibility it portrayed a seldom-seen view of Mount of the Holy Cross or Maroon Bells, a blogger using the name johnpauljones found images of the mountain range McInnis used

McInnis’ misplaced mountain echoes a famous snafu from a little over a year ago when Republican Senate candidate Bob Schaffer had to pull his inaugural campaign commercial when bloggers discovered it featured Alaska’s Mount McKinley rather than Pike’s Peak. Schaffer campaign manager Dick Wadhams blamed the mistake on a Washington, D.C.-based media consulting firm.

McInnis made waves right before the election last fall when he told The Colorado Independent he would have done a better job than Schaffer did in the U.S. Senate contest against the eventual winner, Democrat Mark Udall. “I would have beat Udall, that wasn’t the issue,” McInnis said.

That’s what he says, but it looks to us like McInnis is following Bob Schaffer’s campaign kickoff playbook–from the self-destructive and ridiculous “shadow campaign” to this really bizarre inability to proof non-Colorado mountains out of one’s campaign materials before they become the joke of the week–with deja vu-inspiring precision.

Vince Carroll attempts to whitewash Bob Schaffer’s Iraq profiteering

(Ouch – promoted by Colorado Pols)

I’m really not sure what Rocky refugee editor Vince Carroll is trying to accomplish with his op-ed today. It look as though he’s defending last year’s defeated Senate candidate Bob Schaffer, against the charge leveled by many including former Reagan administration diplomats, that oil production contracts he negotiated with the Kurdistan Regional Government without consulting the Iraqi federal government have fueled unnecessary tensions – possibly even prolonging the war. Majorly discussed on this blog last year.

Reacting to news that the Kurds have begun exporting oil via Turkey with the grudging permission of the federal government, Carroll declares Bob Schaffer ‘vindicated!’

Carroll: Vindication for Bob Schaffer

http://www.denverpost.com/sear…

Let’s close the circle on a nasty political story from last year. Let’s call out those who defamed a man for allegedly putting profits above patriotism now that he has been vindicated by events.

As the campaign for the U.S. Senate in Colorado hit full stride last summer, a spokeswoman for the eventual winner, Democrat Mark Udall, accused Republican Bob Schaffer of engaging in “business activities that made it harder for (U.S.) troops to accomplish that mission” in Iraq…

Now fast forward to this month and let The Associated Press pick up our tale.

“Iraq’s self-ruled Kurdish region officially started pumping crude oil to the international market on (June 1),” The AP reported, “a development that will boost Iraq’s cash-strapped economy.”

Indeed, the AP added, production is “expected to reach a total capacity of 250,000 barrels per day within a year and 1 million barrels per day in the coming two to three years . . . .”

The Iraqi oil ministry that would never lift its opposition to Kurdish exports eventually did. The contracts that were supposedly a threat to destabilize Iraq in fact are going to help fill its coffers…

Wish I had a link to this Aspect Energy press release AP story he mentioned, because the ones I find don’t seem nearly so rosy about these exports. No, it looks like what Rand Beers and Larry Kolb said about Schaffer’s side deals with the Kurds – a destabilizing factor in an already tense situation – is no less true today than it was a year ago.

Here’s a Reuters story about the Kurds and Bob Schaffer’s ‘vindication,’ also from June 1.

The largely autonomous Kurdish Regional Government (KRG) and Baghdad have had a long and bitter feud over territory and resources, and while allowing the exports, Baghdad rejects the contracts the KRG has signed with private oil firms.

“Today we are the successful example for the rest of Iraq. Today we show that the market driven policies and competition can lay a foundation for Iraq,” KRG natural resources minister Ashti Hawrami told an audience of several hundred people.

Any central government representatives present kept a very low profile…

The exports from new fields in Kurdistan are a poke in the eye for [federal Oil Minister Hussain] Shahristani, who says the KRG’s deals are illegal.

Shahristani faces growing criticism in parliament, having presided over a drop in overall Iraqi oil output to 2.3-2.4 million bpd, lower than before the 2003 U.S. invasion.

“From the central government’s point of view, these contracts are not correct, are not constitutional,” Shahristani told U.S.-funded al-Hurra television, defending his record.

“They were completed secretly, not competitively, and the interest of the Iraqi people, who own this wealth, was not taken into account.”

A sharp fall in oil prices since last year has hit Iraq’s finances hard and Baghdad’s acceptance of the Kurdish crude exports is thought to be a sign of its need for money.

TROUBLE AHEAD

Shunning production sharing deals, Shahristani is instead offering tenders for long-term, fixed fee service contracts in two rounds, the first to be decided at the end of June. Fields around the northern city of Kirkuk, disputed by Kurds, Arabs and ethnic Turkmen, are among those on offer.

Hawrami warned that the KRG expected to be consulted over the Kirkuk tender and could reject any deal.

U.S. officials fear Kurd-Arab tensions could reignite violence just as the sectarian war and insurgency are fading.

I sure hope Vince Carroll’s propaganda column isn’t the only thing that’s been printed about the Kurdish oil exports in the Denver Post. This story is just one of dozens of very sober and troubling ones you can find on the situation between the Kurds and the Iraqi federal government: all you have to do is Google “Kurdish oil exports.” Has the State Department changed its position on sidestepping the Iraqi federal government it is still spending billions of dollars to support? No. How exactly would ‘reigniting violence’ between Arabs and Kurds help stabilize the country? Well, Vince?

And as for Schaffer being somehow vindicated by any of this? Shut your eyes and pretend like Vince did, that’s the closest you’ll ever get.

Bob Schaffer, “Smart Girl”

Former Senate candidate Bob Schaffer, as most of you know, has kept quite a presence up for himself in various online forums, most recently (and curiously) setting up a blog at the conservative social networking site Smart Girl Politics.

Which is pretty interesting in more than the obvious gender-bending ways. Let’s start with the definition of “temperance” from the Merriam-Webster Dictionary:

tem·per·ance n.

a: habitual moderation in the indulgence of the appetites or passions

b: moderation in or abstinence from the use of alcoholic beverages [Pols emphasis]

We assume that Schaffer, extolling the virtues of “temperance” to all those Smart Girls out there, meant the former, even though anyone with a cursory knowledge of American history will instantly associate “temperance” with the latter. You hope Smart Girls figure out what he’s talking about anyway, before they read Schaffer’s “Smart Girl Politics” profile:

‘Buy Coyote Gold margaritas liberally,’ Schaffer tells the Smart Girls who just read his little blog about “temperance” and want to learn more. Now we’re not sure exactly how real “smart girls” are supposed to reconcile that, kind of like our recollection of Schaffer blasting Pete Coors in the ’04 Senate primary for pretty much the same hypocrisy and now he’s selling margaritas–but we’re guessing the “frat boys” are totally down with them trying.

Someone Get Bob Schaffer A History Book

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Bob Schaffer needs a little lesson in American history. Or maybe just a lesson in political ideologies.

Michael Roberts of Westword has the story:

Republican senatorial candidate Bob Schaffer needs a game-changer right now, given the size of Democratic opponent Mark Udall’s lead in most polls. So why not imply that liberals wanted to mollycoddle the Third Reich? That’s the apparent strategy behind his comments in the following video clip, in which Schaffer tells a voter that had left-wingers’ nefarious plot succeeded, we would all be “speaking German right now.” [rsb emphasis]

Maybe someone should let Bob know that it was the conservatives clamoring for isolationist policies in the lead up to World War II. If it hadn’t been for those “whining liberals” we might have let Hitler and the Axis completely crush Europe before we got involved. By then it would have been too late–and then we really might have been breaking out the lederhosen and brushing up on our Wagner operas.

Bob Schaffer, From Contender To Joke

The AP reports in the first of many such epitaphs:

As if things aren’t looking bad enough for Bob Schaffer, now he’s getting fashion advice from his own supporters.

Down in the polls, the Republican seeking Colorado’s open seat for U.S. Senate is looking for a last-minute surge of cash and volunteers to take on Democratic Rep. Mark Udall. Today he’s in Elizabeth, a suburb south of Denver, working a small crowd of GOP volunteers.

It’ll be a tight race, he says, but one he can win with their help.

But a couple of supporters mention television ads showing a casual Udall in front of the Rocky Mountains. Why can’t Schaffer work harder on his homey, guy-next-door image?

“Udall has been able to convince people, with his denim shirt and the amber waves of grain or whatever behind him, to convince people he’s this great Coloradan,” scoffs Joy Overbeck, a freelance magazine writer from Kiowa.

Schaffer smiles and replies that he does have such an ad – one showing his family with a barn and cows in the background. Haven’t they seen it?

The crowd looks at him blankly…

This is the hardest week of Bob Schaffer’s life. He entered this race as the linchpin of the GOP’s strategy to hold, if not improve on, its current status in the Senate. In the last few months that has slipped, first to a longshot and now to a near-impossibility. We can understand why he feels angry and frustrated. Goddamn it, he says to himself, I’m not Bob Beauprez!

More has been spent on this campaign than any in Colorado history, with the candidates hauling in more than $12 million. Millions more have been spent on ads by hard-to-track independent expenditure groups.

Now there are signs Udall is pulling away, buoyed by a national turn away from the GOP and a middle-of-the-road pitch to invest in renewable energy. Schaffer has labeled Udall a “Boulder liberal” and depicted him as too cozy with national Democrats, but the argument hasn’t gained traction…

In Elizabeth, Schaffer urged volunteers to keep working the phones and knocking on doors because victory is possible in a state that voted for President Bush twice. [Pols emphasis]

Rebuttal more or less unnecessary.

Marilyn Musgrave and Bob Schaffer: Bad for Colorado’s water

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Musgrave Schaffer

–Cross post from Progress Now Action, from the New Environment Colorado reports

Coloradans deserve clean water. But Reps. Marilyn Musgrave and Bob Schaffer have consistently taken the side of polluters in opposing stronger protections for our waterways.

Full report on Rep. Musgrave

Full report on Bob Schaffer

Report follows:

Who can protect Colorado’s water?

Coloradans depend on clean water for drinking, recreation, agriculture and the preservation of healthy ecosystems for fish and wildlife. Clean water is especially important in arid western states like Colorado, where there is already too little water to go around.

Colorado needs a U.S. Senator who understands the importance of clean water to the state’s economy and our environment and who will take on the polluters. Unfortunately, during their time in Congress, Reps. Bob Schaffer & Marilyn Musgrave stood with George Bush and the polluters as they worked to dismantle America’s protections for clean water.

The Bush administration’s assault on clean water

Since passage of the Clean Water Act in 1972, America has made great progress toward cleaning up our nation’s waters. However, our rivers, lakes and streams are still in dire need of protection from industrial pollution, contaminated runoff, sewage overflows and a host of other threats.

Even today, 47 percent of America’s assessed rivers and streams and 59 percent of our assessed lakes are too polluted for fishing, swimming or other uses. Polluters dumped more than 244 million pounds of toxic chemicals into American waterways in 2006. And more than 850 billion gallons of raw or inadequately treated sewage are discharged into waterways each year.

But under George Bush, America has taken a large step backward in the protection of our precious water supplies. Time and again, the Bush administration has pushed to roll back critical protections for clean water. President Bush:

  • Moved to eliminate Clean Water Act protections for 68 percent of Colorado’s streams – waterways that are critical for a variety of wildlife provide and feed the drinking water supplies of more than 3.5 million people.
  • Curtailed enforcement of the Clean Water Act. For example, major Colorado facilities exceeded their permitted amounts of water pollution more than 120 times in 2005.
  • Curbed the public’s right to know about toxic pollution of waterways by allowing polluters to conceal more information about their toxic discharges.
  • Put the interests of Big Oil ahead of the public by exempting the construction of oil and gas drilling sites from the Clean Water Act.

Cleaning up America’s waterways

Americans deserve clean water and a healthy environment. To get there, we need to take a few common-sense steps:

  • Restore Clean Water Act protections to all U.S. waterways, including source water streams and wetlands.
  • Enforce the Clean Water Act to make sure polluters are following the law and reduce discharges of toxic chemicals, sewage and other pollution into waterways. Make polluters pay to clean up the damage they have caused.
  • Invest in repairing outdated sewer systems and measures to reduce runoff pollution.
  • Defend and expand the public’s right to know to know about the release of toxic pollution into our rivers, lakes and streams.

Reps. Musgrave and Schaffer: No friends of clean water

Time and again, Rep. Musgrave has stood with George Bush and the polluters to weaken protections for America’s waterways. Rep. Musgrave:

  • Voted against critical funding for the repair and upgrading of outdated sewer systems in Colorado and elsewhere across the country at a time when 16 percent of Colorado’s assessed rivers and streams and 18 percent of our assessed lakes are too polluted for fishing, swimming or other uses.
  • Voted to exempt the construction of oil and gas drilling sites from the Clean Water Act.
  • Voted to give Big Oil a free pass to avoid liability for contamination from the toxic gasoline additive, MTBE, which has fouled drinking water supplies serving 22 million to 46 million people nationwide.

During his time in Congress, Rep. Schaffer:

  • Voted against funding for proper enforcement of the Clean Water Act in 2001. As a result of lax enforcement, major Colorado facilities exceeded their permitted amount of pollution more than 120 times in 2005.
  • Voted with George Bush against tightening the standard for arsenic in drinking water, which would have exposed as many as 34 million Americans to increased risk of cancer.
  • Voted against stronger clean water rules for hardrock mining operations, which have already polluted 40 percent of all watersheds in the West.
  • Voted to let polluters off the hook for paying the cost of cleaning up Superfund toxic waste sites, including the 18 sites in Colorado.

Coloradans have a choice this November. Coloradans in the 4th congressional district should elect Betsy Markey to the U.S. Congress.  Not to mention, that in Rep. Mark Udall, Coloradans have a champion who is willing to take on the polluters and fight to restore our waterways.

For more info about the candidates voting records click:

Election 2008: Candidates and Issues

Bob Schaffer Demands His Notes

UPDATE #2: At least three people have sent us links to replacement video (now posted below), and a local copy in case another attempt at removal is made. Seriously, trying to suppress it just makes it worse–don’t bother.

UPDATE: The video has been removed. Who got the lawyers involved?

We just got forwarded this hilarious clip from right before today’s debate between Senate candidates Mark Udall and Bob Schaffer, recorded at Denver’s Channel 7 studios:

According to the Udall campaign, the predefined rules for this debate called for neither candidate to use notes. The moderator calmly explains that Dick Wadhams got the letter with the rules. Schaffer wasn’t pleased–he even half-accused Channel 7 of setting him up. He obviously had no idea he was being recorded.

He’ll be even less pleased watching himself…

UPDATE #3: The Post’s Michael Riley writes for Politics West:

Taping of a debate between Colorado’s U.S. Senate candidates was delayed for about 30 minutes today as Republican Bob Schaffer argued with officials from KMGH Channel 7 over the use of notes.

Democrat Mark Udall said that he signed debate rules indicating that the two men competing to replace retiring Sen. Wayne Allard, R-Loveland, would not use props or notes. Former congressman Schaffer argued from the set that he knew nothing about those rules.

The standoff was ultimately broken by Udall, who offered what could go down as one of his best moments from any of the debates between the two men: “Look, let me say this,” Udall said. “I think this is fast paced. I think this is a test of your wits — it’s a test of what you have in your head. If Bob needs to have a few notes with him, fine. But I’m here with an empty pad and let’s go. Let’s debate.”

Now-dead original:

Bob Schaffer – financial genius

from the Rocky Mountain News

Democrat Mark Udall’s campaign says Schaffer violated federal law by not having the candidate’s image appear in the final four seconds of the new TV ad on taxes.

Udall’s attorneys asked Colorado’s TV stations on Thursday to enforce a provision of the law that says that requirement must be met for campaigns to get the discount rates that TV stations charge candidates.



If the stations comply, she said, Schaffer’s $2.7 million ad buy would end up costing him an additional $1.7 million.

Dick Wadhams was his normal high-class act. Maybe Wadhams could teach an elementary school civics class.

Schaffer’s campaign manager, Dick Wadhams, called the request “legal bullshit from the Democrats.” The campaign wrote a rebuttal letter to TV stations.

YouTube Q&A With Bob Schaffer And Mark Udall

If you’ve got a webcam and a few minutes (and if you don’t, they’re $30 at your nearest Office Depot), you can ask Senate candidates Bob Schaffer and Mark Udall a question to be posed in an upcoming YouTube debate.

The global warming snowman may be passé, but if we see any real-life sock puppets, we’ll know you’re family:

With the start of the Democratic National Convention this week in Denver, it’s fitting that our next You Choose Spotlight focuses on the Colorado Senate race between Bob Schaffer and Mark Udall. Schaffer and Udall are no novices to politics. Schaffer served as a Colorado State Senator for nine years, and in the U.S. Congress from 1997-2003. Udall meanwhile has served in Congress since 1999, representing Colorado’s 2nd district. He also comes from a prominent political family tree: he’s the first cousin of Congressman (and fellow Senate candidate) Tom Udall of New Mexico, a second cousin of Senator Gordon Smith of Oregon, and the nephew of former Interior Secretary Stewart Udall.

Hoping to fill the vacancy that will be left by retiring Senator Wayne Allard, Schaffer and Udall are engaged in a fierce political battle, both on the campaign trail and on YouTube. And while Udall is a popular politician, Schaffer’s business experience working with oil companies may give him an edge, especially in a state where the majority of residents are in favor of domestic oil drilling.

So, got a question for Schaffer and Udall? Watch our call-out video and submit your question by August 31st! [Pols emphasis]

Bob Schaffer, Renewable Energy Role Model

As the AP reports on yesterday’s debate, at least he has a sense of humor…even if it makes him look silly:

Schaffer and Udall clashed repeatedly over energy policy after Schaffer accused Udall of flip-flopping, voting against expansion of drilling rights as a congressman from the 2nd Congressional District and now supporting it as part of a comprehensive solution to the nation’s energy problems.

Udall said he opposed offshore drilling because it would hurt tourism in states like California and Florida. He introduced legislation that would have increased the area available for leasing on the outer continental shelf 100 miles off the Florida coast, a measure that was increased to 125 miles in 2006.

Three of the candidates said they had installed solar power at their homes. The only holdout was Schaffer, who worked for an energy company after he retired from Congress and campaigned on the potential of renewable energy.

“We have windows at our house,” Schaffer joked…

Bah-dum-bum.

That would be hilarious if it wasn’t for the fact that Schaffer is always touting solar energy. Here’s how the exchange happened:

[Reporter/Debate Panelist Lynn Bartels]: “Bob, when you are on the campaign trail, you always pull out that tiny [piece of solar cell material]…you probably have it with you now so you can show people…that you’ve touted as the cutting edge of solar research.  How much of your home is solar-powered?”

[Schaffer]:  “My home isn’t…well, to the extent…”

[Bartels]: “Do you have solar panels at your house?”

[Schaffer]: “We have windows at our house.”

Now, we’re paraphrasing here, but in short Schaffer’s energy plan is thus:

1. Drill for more oil

2. Install more windows

Bob Schaffer makes it up as he goes along

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

TUESDAY AM POLS UPDATE: New Rocky Mountain News state political beat director Ed Sealover (formerly of the Colorado Springs Gazette) kicked off his tour at the Rocky this morning by taking the bait detailed below hook, line and sinker. Welcome to school, Ed!

Fascinating debate today between Democrat Mark Udall and Republican Bob Schaffer, ranging from energy policy to the war in Iraq. As you’ve doubtless read or saw on TV by now, both sides are pretty sure they won.

One very interesting thing got asserted at the beginning of this debate, however, trumpeted in a press release from the Schaffer campaign immediately afterward. From their release:

U.S. Senate Candidate Bob Schaffer exposed the hypocrisy of Congressman Mark Udall’s (D-CO) record concerning the war in Iraq today at a debate in Parker sponsored by the Southeast Business Partnership and moderated by Channel 9’s Adam Schrager.

“Boulder Liberal Mark Udall continues to hide from his votes on both the war and energy,” said Schaffer campaign manager Dick Wadhams. “The voters of Colorado deserve to know Boulder Liberal Mark Udall’s real record.”

When asked about why the United States went to war, Schaffer responded by reading excerpts from House Joint Resolution 118 introduced on October 7, 2002. The war resolution authorizing the use of force outlined Iraq’s refusal to comply with the United Nations Security Council’s call for the need to remove Saddam Hussein and Iraq’s record as a state sponsor of terror.

Schaffer then asked the crowd to raise their hands if they agreed with the resolution. Udall supports sneered and chuckled until they were told the resolution was introduced by Congressman Udall. An audible gasp was heard from the crowd…

Wow, really? Because it was always my understanding that Udall voted against the Iraq war, a considerable point of pride for him in the disastrous years that have followed.

I was compelled to do some checking on this rather audacious claim from the Schaffer campaign. And what I found was pretty interesting, in a sleazeball (to use the Dick Wadhams term) disingenuous sort of way.

As it turns out, Schaffer was reading from the 107th Congress’ HJR 118, a resolution that didn’t pass. The one that did pass was HJR 114, which Schaffer voted for and Udall voted against (note Udall’s bill was introduced in response). And there were some pretty big differences between the two bills–here’s a Rocky Mountain News article from October of 2002 titled “Udall urges option – his bill would withhold Congress’ OK to attack Iraq until diplomacy exhausted” you may find illuminating (no longer available online, retrieved from Lexis-Nexis):

Rep. Mark Udall has introduced an alternative war powers resolution that would withhold final congressional authorization for an attack on Iraq until all diplomatic means are exhausted.

The Boulder Democrat faces an uphill battle in the House, since most Republicans and some Democrats, including House Minority Leader Richard Gephardt, already endorse a version that would give President Bush broader authority to reduce the threat of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons programs in Iraq.

The White House-backed version requires the president to report to Congress and certify that he has exhausted diplomatic efforts, but Udall ‘s version would go further.

It would require Bush to seek a United Nations Security Council resolution, and seek to deploy a “coercive inspection and disarmament program” against Iraq, backed by a U.S.-led multinational force.

If those efforts failed, under Udall ‘s bill the president would have to return to Congress to ask for separate authorization to attack Iraq…

So let’s get this straight: Udall sponsored a bill that would have required the President to go back to the UN, wait for a new rigorous round of WMD inspections in Iraq, then and only in the event of failure being able to go back to Congress to secure another vote authorizing force?

Funny, I read this and feel pretty confident that if Udall’s bill had passed instead of the one Schaffer voted for and Udall opposed, we would not be at war in Iraq today. It’s tough to know for sure, but obviously Udall’s bill had safeguards against war in it that the one Schaffer voted for lacked–understandable, since the whole point of the bill Schaffer voted for was to pave the way for war.

And to think, this is the bill Schaffer selectively read from at today’s debate, hoping to play up somebody’s “real record.”  You know, “exposing hypocrisy?”

Mission accomplished, Bob.

Cross-posted at ProgressNowAction

Pete Coors To Make Spoons With Bob Schaffer

Made you look, though the Denver Post reports not too far off the mark:

Brewing scion Pete Coors, who stuck a fork in Bob Schaffer’s GOP senatorial bid in 2004, will be playing [Pols emphasis] the spoons for Schaffer at a honky-tonk fundraiser this month at The Stampede in Aurora.

“You see, a few months ago, I was honored to play ‘spoons’ in Brett Jones’ new song, ‘Before They Were Famous,” Coors writes in a letter that accompanies the invitation to the July 15 event. “It’ll be featured on Brett’s soon to be released album, “Life’s Road.” But before it reaches the public, you can come see us play it live at our Record Release Party – and support Bob Schaffer all at the same time.”

Coors and Schaffer “have a very good relationship now,” said Dick Wadhams, Schaffer’s campaign manager and chairman of the Colorado Republican Party. “Pete Coors is supporting Bob Schaffer in 2008. Bob Schaffer supported Coors in 2004.”

If Dick Wadhams puts any more gloss on that history somebody’s going to slip, but whatever. Pete’s damaged goods now anyway, and bygones are bygones.

The full Abramoff monty and Bob Schaffer’s involvement

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

What opportune timing.  Between the Bill Orr trial, trying to prove who gave him that earmark, and so many other political scandals and events, I wasn’t sure when was the right time to reveal what else we dug out of Bob Schaffer’s Congressional archive.  But, now that Ross Kaminsky has started his belated by two months defense of Sweat Shop Bob Schaffer, he’s given me the right opportunity to bring this up again.  I’m going to show how his attempt to get to the “truth” is the furthest thing from reality.

Media Matters is already on the case pointing out that he’s ignored Preston Gate’s involvement here, and an article referenced by the Denver Post from the Washington Post detailing how the Traditional Values Coalition worked with Jack Abramoff for quite some time to launder money.

To discount Abramoff’s involvement by saying Preston Gates is a large firm just ignores the facts.  According to a lobbyist disclosure form from 1999, the first lobbyist listed for the client Western Pacific Economic Council is none other than Jack Abramoff.  For 1999, there are no other lobbyists listed than those on this form or other lobbying firms working for that client or any client related to the Commonwealth of Northern Mariana Islands.  The database is here.  The House Lobbyist database shows nothing for those clients or Abramoff until 2001 when he was with Greenberg Traurig. This is the very same Western Pacific Economic Council listed on page 2 of Schaffer’s agenda that he was to be meeting with on his first day on the islands.  In later files, you’ll see Abramoff was also the lead lobbyist for this client with many others working for him.

Cross Posted at SquareState.net

click images for full size

If we have any question of Kaminsky’s purpose or agenda, just look at who’s on his list for interviews.  Bob Schaffer has been seemingly hiding in an undisclosed location and running from the press when asked about Abramoff.  Isn’t it amazing Dick Wadhams will now let Bob Schaffer talk openly?

Kaminsky’s now written two pieces.  His second is an interview with Andrea (Sheldon) Lafferty, executive direction of the Traditional Values Coalition (TVC).  Andrea is the daughter of the founder, “Lucky” Lou Sheldon and is married to Jim Lafferty, former press secretary to Tom Delay.  I’m only going to need this one article however to pop both of Ross’ balloons.



To get a little further into Abramoff’s involvement in the Commonwealth of Nothern Mariana Islands (CNMI), one need look no further than the offer of lobbying services to Willie Tan and Governor Tenorio in 1997.

The full page 1 of this email is here.   Abramoff also says:

The following is an outline of each of the areas, who is in charge of them at the firm, and what they will be covering.  I would be very grateful for your comments and thoughts on this approach.  Of course, for each area, I will remain in charge and will be actively involved…



Page 2 of this memo contains the following:


The CNMI has many needs and thanks to the past trips, many friends on the Appropriations Committee in the Congress.  Of urgent focus this year will be the affect either to defund or more likely to severely limit the activities of the Office of Insular Affairs. This office, led by Stayman has been the main source of difficulty for the CNMI.



We had considered an effort to defund and close the OIA, but we will recommend against this for several reasons.  First, carrying out such an attack with success will guarantee additional hostile press articles aplenty.  Second, if the department is wiped out, the Administration is free to carry on those activities in another branch and can merely transfer Stayman to that location, thereby defeating our aim.  By placing restrictions, we can accomplish our goal (stopping Stayman from abusing the people of the CNMI) and make it stick.

Page 4:


VI.    Travel Subgroup

This group will have responsibility for any trips to the CNMI or trips of CNMI officials and leaders to Washington DC.  This group will be responsible to plan and schedule Teno’s February trip, as well as to work with the Hearings subgroup to plan the hearings trip.



There is no doubt that trips to the CNMI are one of the most effective ways to build permanent friends on the Hill and among policy makers in Washington…

With the cancellation of the Young trip, it would be wise for the CNMI to host a group of Resource Committee members at some time prior to the hearings.

Note, Bob Schaffer was on the Resource Committee in 1999 when he took his trip to the islands.

What was the CNMI so opposed to, and why was Abramoff working for them to hinder Stayman’s work and/or get him removed?  In a recent house oversight report shows on page 2: (direct pdf link)


Mr. Abramoff’s Influence Inside the White House.

The documents show that Mr. Abramoff and his associates influenced some White House actions. In one instance, the Abramoff team persuaded White House officials to intervene to remove from office a State Department official, Allen Stayman, who had advocated reforms in the Northern Mariana Islands that Mr. Abramoff opposed. In one exchange, Mr. Schlapp e-mailed Monica Kladakis, the deputy associate director of presidential personnel, to ask “how do we fix this?” Ms. Kladakis responded: “I think we can do something about it, but I’m trying to figure out what is the best way to go about it. I don’t want a firing scandal on our hands.” Both Karl Rove, the President’s top political advisor, and Stephen Hadley, the deputy National Security Advisor, were informed of Mr. Abramoff’s opposition to Mr. Stayman.

Next, let’s get to the involvement of the Traditional Values Coalition and thus, Andrea Sheldon.   The Senate Finance Committee revealed Abramoff’s use of tax exempt organizations for money laundering.  In the case of another tax-exempt organization, the committee found (on page 24):


Ms. Ridenour said Mr. Abramoff believed that the ”full story” on

the U.S. Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (”CNMI”)

was not getting out, so he arranged ”fact-finding” trips for employ-

ees of think tanks, Members of Congress, congressional staff, and

others. She said Mr. Abramoff asked that NCPPR become a spon-

sor so that Members of Congress and their staffs could attend and

abide by the rules. She said she had no objections because she had

gone on such a trip and it had been truly educational. ”As far as

I knew for years, he, they went, sat in a room like I did, talked

about OSHA violations, I don’t know,” Ms. Ridenour told Com-

mittee staff.

Patrick Pizzella, a colleague of Mr. Abramoff’s at Preston Gates,

wrote to Mr. Abramoff on July 1, 1996, to explain how they

planned to funnel money to NCPPR to pay expenses related to a

trip to the CNMI.

However, as we see in emails gathered by the committee, this was also going on with TVC:


From:            Abramoff, Jack (DC)

Sent:             Wednesday, June 14, 2000 6:38PM

To:                Abramoff, Jack (DC)

Subject          FW: Bob Daum

Have checks come in for this?

—-Original Message—

From:   Ralston, Susan (DC)

Sent:    Wesnesday, June 14, 2000 12:28 PM

To:       Abramoff, Jack (DC)

Subject:             Bob, Daum

[redacted phone number]

ATR $80k

Ralph fee $20k

Radio Campaign

TVC $25k


From: Abramoff, Jack (DC)

Sent:  Thursday, June 22, 2000 11:13 AM

To: Ralston, Susan (DC)

Subject:      RE: Faith & Family Alliance

Copy all.  Send TVC check to Lou.  Call Grover, tell him I am in Michigan and that I have two checks for him totalling 160 and need a check back for Faith and Family for $150K.  If that is OK, send over to him via courier.  If you don’t get him or there are any problems, try to get me on the call constantly.

Now let’s get to Andrea (Sheldon) Lafferty who would want us to believe that she was shocked, just shocked that labor abuses and forced abortions were going on in CNMI.  Her words contradict her.  For instance, in this local paper, Marianas Variety, from one of her visits to the islands:


US President Bill Clinton recenty wrote a letter to Gov. Froilan Tenorio about the “alleged abuses” in the CNMI and said federal laws should be imposed.

According to Sheldon, U.S. President Bill Clinton and his political appointees are trying to gain support for the measures but he “doesn’t always get what he wants.”



“This is a very beautiful island, and so far it seems it was worth the trip.”

As well, there are documented meetings between Andrea Lafferty, Jack Abramoff, and his subordinates.  In meeting with Abramoff, was she advocating for better labor standards and efforts to stop the occurrence of forced abortions?  Ha!  

In another case as documented by the Washington Post, the Traditional Values Coalition publicly opposed gambling yet worked with Abramoff to help internet gambling:

To reach the House conservatives, Abramoff turned to Sheldon, leader of the Orange County, Calif. – based Traditional Values Coalition, a politically potent group that publicly opposed gambling and said it represented 43,000 churches. Abramoff had teamed up with Sheldon before on issues affecting his clients. Because of their previous success, Abramoff called Sheldon “Lucky Louie,” former associates said.

One might be wondering what Bob Schaffer has to do with all of this.  It’s time we got to that.  As I’ve already showed, Abramoff’s strategy for his client the government of CNMI and it’s garment factory owners (remember he had both of these as clients) was to get members of congress to the Islands on trips.  Trips that were, “the most effective ways to build permanent friends on the Hill”.  Of course, Schaffer went on one of these trips.  Another part of the strategy was to use members of the House Resource Committee, of which Schaffer was a member.  You’ll recall he grilled a witness during one such hearing (pdf), (text link) thusly (on page 168):


Mr. SCHAFFER. Toppen [Mr. Jahedi’s nickname]. I appreciate your taking my call last

night. It was a nice conversation. I appreciate that.

That’s right, Schaffer called this witness the night before the hearing.  Schaffer goes on to ask this witness about his involvement in a rally for workers rights:

Mr. SCHAFFER. Did you receive any money or compensation at all

for attending that rally and rounding up friends?

Mr. JAHEDI. No, sir. No, sir.

Mr. SCHAFFER. None at all?

Mr. JAHEDI. No.

Mr. SCHAFFER. Do you know any others who did?

Mr. JAHEDI. No, sir. I don’t know about that.

Mr. SCHAFFER. On my visit to Saipan just two weeks ago.

Mr. JAHEDI. Yes, sir.

Mr. SCHAFFER. I heard from two separate individuals that you

received $1,200 from a Federal official, frankly, to attend that rally.

And that you used it to help pay for food and gas and so on. Is that

incorrect or is it correct?

Mr. JAHEDI. No, sir. It’s not correct.

Mr. SCHAFFER. Okay.

Mr. JAHEDI. It’s not correct.

Mr. SCHAFFER. Do you know any others who received money to

attend that rally from any Federal officials?

Mr. JAHEDI. No, sir.

Mr. SCHAFFER. None at all?

Mr. JAHEDI. No, sir.

Mr. SCHAFFER. Let me-how about the signs that were used at

the rally. Did you make those signs?

Yeah, he’s asking about who made the protest signs.  What a great use of our tax payer dollars.

In other words, here Schaffer isn’t trying to get to what should be done to improve conditions for the people of CNMI, but question the current executive branch’s meddling by the likes of Alan Stayman and the Office of Insular Affairs.

One of Bob Schaffer’s responses in recent months was that he didn’t, “observe a forced abortion.”  Wow, let’s get you a junior Inspector Clueseau badge. Despite their attempts to get to the “truth” it seems Schaffer and Andrea Laffery didn’t look too hard since others found plenty of evidence.  In addition to a 1998 article in the Philly Inquirer (see image), there was also Rep George Miller’s report – pdf, an interview with reporter Brian Ross, and an article in Ms. Magazine. This list goes on and on.

But, what else can we learn about Bob Schaffer’s involvement in all of this?  One might look at other Jack Abramoff associates who have connections to Bob Schaffer.  One of those is then Secretary of the Department of Labor and Immigration for the CNMI, Mark Zachares.  This is one of the officials Schaffer met with during his trip.  As well, Zachares was present at that September 1999 hearing. Later Zachares plead to conspiracy to commit wire fraud.  In his basis for plea (pdf) it’s revealed that:


3. ZACHARES and Abramoff became personal and professional acquaintances during ZACHARES’ tenure as an official of the CNMI.

4. No later than October 2000, during ZACHARES’ tenure as Secretary of DOLl, Abramoff and ZACHARES discussed the prospect of Abramoff finding a job for ZACHARES in Washington, D.C.

5. From in or about late 2000 through 2001, Abramoff attempted to secure for ZACHARES an Executive Branch appointment as the Director of the Office of Insular Affairs (OTA) within the United States Department of the Interior (DOT), which, among other things, administers federal funds appropriated to the CNMI, a position that was important to Abramoff’s lobbying interests.

Zachares is an interesting connection for Bob Schaffer because found in his Congressional archive is this letter from Zachares to the Office of Insular Affairs.  Contained within:


First, we have received several requests from the ombudsperson to employ alien contract workers as “caseworkers/interpreters.”  As you know, the federal government is prohibited by CNMI law from employing alien contract workers.  Furthermore, I have been advised by U.S. Immigration that the employment of aliens as federal employees may violate federal law.  I note the irony in Interior attempting to hire foreign workers while criticizing the CNMI’s alleged dependence on foreign workers.  Please be advised that if the ombudsperson employs (or attempts to employ) any contract workers, we would be forced to prosecute any such violations to the fullest extent of our labor, immigration and criminal laws.

Under the system at the time, only the CNMI could create job contracts for foreign workers even to speak with and interview existing laborers.  That’s a pretty neat situation to keep OAI from doing oversight.  You would think that someone in charge of LABOR would want to ensure the safety and working conditions of the citizens of CNMI, but I guess Abramoff, Schaffer, and Zachares had different ideas.

They had different ideas indeed.  As the next document we found in Schaffer’s archive was a Request for Statement of Qualifcations from the Saipan Garment Manufacturer’s Association to hire their own factory monitors.  Playing the game is much easier when you own the refs.  Convenient.


The purpose of this Request for Statement of Qualifications (RFQ) is to select a pool of qualified external monitors who can provide factory monitoring and inspection services on behalf of the Saipan Garment Manufacturers’ Association (SGMA) and/or its individual members.

Isn’t it interesting these pieces would be in his archive regarding CNMI and not anything else regarding the islands?  I don’t think there’s any longer a question as to what Bob Schaffer was up to as a Congressman.  

Where documents exist online, I’ve linked to them.  Other sources include Bob Schaffer’s Congressional archive, various oversight commitee reports, and documents obtained from several reporters investigation Jack Abramoff in the past.

One final matter.  Kaminsky alleges Dailykos is so left wing that it called the Denver Post, “so pro-republican.”  The diary he’s referring to is here, written by well known Colorado blogger Davidthi808, not Markos Moulitsas or anyone on his staff.  In Kaminsky’s mind if I go write a diary there about how everyone should have a pony, he’d claim DailyKos is a socialist/Marxist site that wants to redistribute the wealth by way of pony ownership.

Bob Schaffer, Victim

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

Bob Schaffer’s ties to Bill Orr, convicted yesterday in a multi-million dollar scheme to defraud the federal government, spent the night as the lead stories on Talking Points Memo and its sister site, TPM Muckraker. But at home in Colorado, news outlets paint a different picture, perhaps a result of what Colorado Pols reported last week:

… Dick Wadhams has gone even further than usual in trying to persuade news outlets to ignore the story, going over the heads of reporters directly to managing editors in a preemptive attempt to keep it from exploding into yet another damaging scandal.

Denver Post business columnist Al Lewis lumps Schaffer with Orr’s other victims, in an attempt to wring sympathy for the former congressman, who trusted friends and political associates a little too much.

Any penny-ante huckster can con a few suckers with a fuel-additive scam.

William Orr conned Congress.

He also shafted Bob Schaffer, GOP candidate for Colorado’s open U.S. Senate seat.

Lewis goes on to recount details from Orr’s trial, including the defense theory that the Feds were out to get him because he dared sue the EPA over other, unrelated fuel testing requirements. Returning to Schaffer, Lewis lays blame squarely at the foot of Schaffer’s trusting nature:

Schaffer, who served on the board of Orr’s congressionally funded National Alternative Fuels Foundation, is not saying a peep.

His spokesman, Dick Wadhams, said Schaffer was not paid for his nearly six months of service beginning in October 1994.

“As soon as he was alerted to the problems, he resigned from the board,” Wadhams said.

Schaffer joined the board at the behest of his longtime political associate Scott Shires, a notable GOP operative.

Shires pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor in the case. His sentencing is slated for June 23. He faces up to a year in prison and a $25,000 fine.

If Schaffer and the members of Congress who put up the $3.6 million earmark are indeed Orr’s victims, it’s hard to imagine how they could be such easy marks.

Lewis continues, other reporters weigh in (or not), and there’s a poll after the jump.

Years before Orr set his sights on them, he was allegedly fleecing guys like Larry Potthoff, a Franktown general contractor, who told me he lost about $13,000 to Orr beginning in the mid-1990s.

“He kept sending letters, saying he’s talking to Saudi Arabia . . . and on and on and on. But you could never get him on the phone. . . . He used Scott Shires as his go-between guy,” Potthoff said. “I called several times and told him I wanted my money back. No response.”

What are you gonna do when a flim-flam man with Orr’s talents comes to town?

The Post’s Karen Crummy writes a brief business story, reinforcing the point Schaffer wasn’t paid for his work on NAFF’s board. Crummy’s story also includes this tidbit:

The money for the grant was provided in a congressional earmark. A then-House Appropriations Committee staffer slipped the earmark into a conference report after the bill passed, according to a federal official with knowledge of the government’s case.

The two Post articles knock back questions raised yesterday by Colorado Pols, Talking Points and ProgressNow, whether Schaffer was paid for his work as a NAFF director and whether he had a hand in the initial $3.7 million Congressional earmark that funded Orr’s scheme.

Only one Colorado reporter writes an article contrary to the story line advanced by Wadhams. The Grand Junction Daily Sentinel’s Mike Saccone, who endured the wrath of Wadhams a month ago, writes a story headlined Schaffer-linked Pol Convicted of Fraud.

Yesterday’s 9News story doesn’t mention Schaffer’s connection at all, and today’s Rocky Mountain News skips the matter entirely.

Has Wadhams succeeded in persuading the local press to ignore the story, and scored a real coup casting Schaffer as Orr’s victim, rather than a hapless accomplice who lacks judgment and the oversight skills necessary in a senator? Or is there more to the story?

Schaffer's ties to Orr

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Is Bob Schaffer lying on his bio again?

( – promoted by Colorado Pols)

While doing our due diligence at ProgressNowAction looking into claims made in recent independent ads, we discovered something pretty interesting.

A few months ago, we took a routine screenshot of Senate candidate Bob Schaffer’s biography web page at his former employer’s site, Aspect Energy. Here’s what it said.

Bob Schaffer

CHx Capital – Vice President Emeritus

Bob Schaffer is Vice President for business development at CHx Capital, LLC where he is involved with a variety of energy, mining and education projects. Additionally, Bob is actively involved in international business development activities for Aspect Energy, including sourcing and development of international oil and gas exploration opportunities for the Company. In 2007, Bob Schaffer provided notice to Aspect and CHx of his intention to run for the United States Senate. Bob Schaffer resigned his position with CHx Capital, LLC / Aspect Energy, LLC effective December 21, 2007. We wish him the best of luck and offer him our congratulations for his contributions to energy and wind development efforts.

Sounds about right, doesn’t it? I mean he doesn’t come right out and say “he led Aspect’s delegation to Iraq in search of oil development contracts,” but it doesn’t seem at first glance like he’s hiding anything.

Unless you read the bio they replaced it with a few weeks ago:

Bob Schaffer

CHx Capital – Vice-president Emeritus

Bob Schaffer previously acted as Vice-President for business development at CHx Capital, LLC. Bob was involved in a variety of wind power investments, international energy opportunities, and education projects. Bob worked to improve the US Wind Industry. Specifically, he worked to increase entrepreneurial opportunities for small business owners by ensuring that wind-specific tax credits could be utilized indirectly by wind developers classified as small business owners. Bob helped educate Congress about the benefits of wind power including its positive impact on the environment, job creation, and its importance to making the United States less dependent on foreign sources of oil. In 2007, Bob Schaffer provided notice to Aspect and CHx of his intention to run for the United States Senate. Bob Schaffer resigned his position with CHx Capital, LLC / Aspect Energy, LLC effective December 31, 2007. We wish him the best of luck and offer him our congratulations for his contributions to energy and wind development efforts.

Amazing how quickly you can go from Aspect Energy’s point man for “sourcing and development of international oil and gas exploration opportunities” to helping “educate Congress about the benefits of wind power including its positive impact on the environment, job creation, and its importance to making the United States less dependent on foreign sources of oil,” don’t you think? Were precautions against whiplash necessary?

Actually, all it took was a text editor.

All told, a rather dishonest little “greenwashing,” as we noted in a press release a few minutes ago:

Is Bob Schaffer lying on his bio again?

ProgressNowAction calls on Schaffer to apologize for his pattern of dishonesty

Denver, CO – ProgressNowAction questioned whether Bob Schaffer is changing his professional biography to mislead the public about his record of lobbying for Big Oil.

This is not the first time that Schaffer has lied to the public about his bio.  He was caught by his fellow conservative colleagues in 2004 for lying on his resume, claiming to be the director of a bank which did not exist. (Rocky Mountain News, July 5, 2004; Denver Post, July 18, 2004)

For the past year Bob Schaffer had this biography on his website:

Bob Schaffer

CHx Capital – Vice President Emeritus

Bob Schaffer is Vice President for business development at CHx Capital, LLC where he is involved with a variety of energy, mining and education projects. Additionally, Bob is actively involved in international business development activities for Aspect Energy, including sourcing and development of international oil and gas exploration opportunities for the Company. In 2007, Bob Schaffer provided notice to Aspect and CHx of his intention to run for the United States Senate. Bob Schaffer resigned his position with CHx Capital, LLC / Aspect Energy, LLC effective December 21, 2007. We wish him the best of luck and offer him our congratulations for his contributions to energy and wind development efforts.

In the past few weeks, and at the same time as the launch of the new Schaffer TV ads, Schaffer’s bio has been entirely rewritten touting the very politically popular issue of wind energy for the first time and ever so prominently, mentioning it six times:

Bob Schaffer

CHx Capital – Vice-president Emeritus

Bob Schaffer previously acted as Vice-President for business development at CHx Capital, LLC. Bob was involved in a variety of wind power investments, international energy opportunities, and education projects. Bob worked to improve the US Wind Industry. Specifically, he worked to increase entrepreneurial opportunities for small business owners by ensuring that wind-specific tax credits could be utilized indirectly by wind developers classified as small business owners. Bob helped educate Congress about the benefits of wind power including its positive impact on the environment, job creation, and its importance to making the United States less dependent on foreign sources of oil. In 2007, Bob Schaffer provided notice to Aspect and CHx of his intention to run for the United States Senate. Bob Schaffer resigned his position with CHx Capital, LLC / Aspect Energy, LLC effective December 31, 2007. We wish him the best of luck and offer him our congratulations for his contributions to energy and wind development efforts.

“We call on Schaffer to apologize for once again lying to the public about his record,” stated Michael Huttner, Executive Director of ProgressNowAction, the state’s largest online progressive advocacy organization. “In 2004, Schaffer invented a bank to say he had buisiness experience and this year, his oil company is rewriting his bio to greenwash his dirty oil past.”

Big Oil Bob’s Record:

In 2001, Schaffer voted against establishing a renewable energy reserve program. (HR 2646, House Roll Call Vote 363, 10/3/01)

That same year, Schaffer voted against increasing funding for energy efficiency by $12 million. (HR 2217, House Roll Call Vote 178, 6/21/01)

Schaffer was one of only 15 members of the House to vote against promoting renewable and alternative energy. (HR 4, Vote 310, 8/1/01)

And Schaffer voted to give oil and gas companies more than $13 billion in tax breaks. (HR 4, vote 320, 8/2/01)

# # #

Cross-posted at ProgressNowAction

Bob Schaffer’s First Campaign Ad

UPDATE #4: Not to be outdone, the Rocky Mountain News reports:

They say faith can move mountains. Apparently, so can political campaigns.

But when a television ad for the Republican Bob Schaffer’s campaign for U.S. Senate mistakenly switched Mount McKinley in Alaska for Pikes Peak in Colorado, the consequences can be rugged and steep.

“I am very frustrated,” said Schaffer campaign manager Dick Wadhams, who admitted the mistake and said a corrected ad will be on the air by Wednesday night.

“What is frustrating about it is that when we saw the rough cut of the ad we asked the media consultant to check that,” Wadhams added. But after being reassured that the mountain was a “stock photo” image from Colorado, the ad ran.

It didn’t take long, though for some mountaineering Democrats to climb all over the error. The Web site ColoradoPols posted the discovery, leading several activists to contend that the error says more about Schaffer than his media consultant.

“For Schaffer, who comes from Ohio, to not know the most important mountain in Colorado is just foolish,” said Mike Huttner, executive director of the liberal group Progress Now Action.

Wadhams, however, defended the accuracy of the rest of the ad…

UPDATE #3: “We’re sorry, this video is no longer available.” And as Politics West reports:

A frustrated Dick Wadhams, Schaffer’s campaign manager, conceded the mistake and said the ad would be pulled and re-edited with Colorado mountains. Wadhams said that the campaign raised the issue with their media consultant during rough cuts, directing them to make sure the mountain shots were authentic – something that obviously didn’t happen. But for an ad meant to underscore Schaffer’s strong ties to his home state, it’s exactly the kind of screw-up the campaign doesn’t want to make. This is going to be an incredibly hard-fought campaign and one the Republicans desperately need to win. Why give your Democratic opponent those kinds of easy hits?

UPDATE #2: Liberal activist group Progress Now is calling for the ad to be immediately pulled–release follows. Quotable quote: “To Schaffer, who came here from  Ohio, all mountains probably look the same, but Coloradans with common sense know better.”

UPDATE: Diligent fact-checkers have found that the mountain featured in this ad, the theme of which is “Colorado is My Life,” is in fact Alaska’s world-famous Denali, otherwise known as Mt. McKinley. Which isn’t in Colorado, as most elementary school students know. Oops!

This isn’t a big deal on its own, but taken within a pattern of behavior it makes Schaffer’s campaign look sloppier and sloppier. Bob Beauprez’s campaign for governor in 2006 unfolded in much the same way–a series of small blunders that gradually built into one giant ball of crap.

Released today alongside opponent Mark Udall’s first ad.

Title: “The Change We Need.”

UPDATE: The original video was removed by the Schaffer campaign after only a few hours–but apparently not fast enough to avoid it being re-recorded for posterity (below, original now-dead video is after the jump).

Schaffer Fumbles “Colorado Common Sense” in New TV Ad:

Claims Denali is Pike’s Peak

Call for Schaffer to Pull Ad Immediately

For Immediate Release

Wednesday, May 14, 2008

Michael Huttner

(303) 931-4547 cell

Denver — Bob Schaffer launched a new television ad in Colorado where he claims to have “Colorado Common Sense” while falsely claiming that Denali (Mt. McKinley) is Pike’s Peak.

“That Schaffer would claim “Colorado common sense” when he doesn’t know the difference between Pike’s Peak and Denali in Alaska shows he’s a fool,” stated Michael Huttner, Executive Director of ProgressNowAction, the state’s largest online progressive advocacy organization.  “We call on Schaffer to immediately pull his ad and stop misleading the public over his lack of knowledge of Colorado.”

Schaffer’s new ad shows the image of Denali at the same time that he claims it’s Pike’s Peak and that our state needs some “Colorado common sense.”

While Schaffer claims Colorado is his life, the truth is that Schaffer is from Ohio, where he graduated in from the University of Dayton in 1984 and worked as partisan political operative in Ohio until 1985.

“To Schaffer, who came here from  Ohio, all mountains probably look the same, but Coloradans with common sense know better,” added Huttner.

In Schaffer’s new ad launched today in the Western Slope and Southern Colorado can be viewed at www.ColoradoPols.com.

###

Bob Schaffer on the issues

A post on a GJ Sentinel blog today, that will likely be published as a letter-to-the-editor, claims that GOP candidate Bob Schaffer is right on the issues:

This is another case of Bob Schaffer, our next senator from Colorado, being on the correct side of an important issue.

Bob is very articulate and very knowledgeable on the issues. Bob knows our Constitution and our history as a nation.

Being the curious sort, I thought to research this myself.  How ‘right’ is Bob?  Answers after the jump…

So, naturally I went to Bob’s website (www.bobschafferforsenate.com/) to learn more about this man who wants to be my next senator.

Sorry–in advance–for the length of this post, but I thought it prudent to include all of Bob’s answer’s.

Schaffer on the economy-

Schaffer on the Environment & Global Warming-

Schaffer on the New Energy Economy & Energy Independence-

Shaffer on the Iraq War, Afghanistan, Iran, Syria, Palestine & Israel –

Schaeffer on Abramoff and government corruption-

Wow!  That is some list of issues that Bob cares enough about to want to be Senator.  If nothing else, should ‘silent’ Bob get elected he will at least carry on the proud tradition of our current GOP Senator, Wayne ‘Potted Plant’ Allard.  

Time magazine ranks members of the 109th Congress in the issue published for the week of April 16, and a Colorado senator is ranked among the five worst in the nation.

…Wayne Allard (Colorado): “The Invisible Man” — In a Senate full of ambitious members, Colorado Republican Wayne Allard is so bland that his critics have dubbed him “Dullard.” Now in his 10th year, Allard almost never plays a role in major legislation, even though he’s on two key Senate committees, Budget and Appropriations. His kind of anonymity makes him one of the least influential senators, Time reports.

Is Silent Bob 'right' on the issues?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Is Bob Schaffer bad at math?

Well the Sweatshop Schaffer story seems to be dying down (I guess the Schaffer campaign’s plan of no respone – no story is working).

But before we bid it a final adieu, I wonder if it illustrates one more problem that Bob Schaffer has. He appears to suck at counting.

In the Denver Post we have the following. As the article was written on 4/10 and there has been no correction, we can assume that Bob Schaffer found no inaccuracies in it:

he [Schaffer] said, noting that he visited more than 20 factories and found serious problems in only one.

Now we go over to schaffer v udall which gives us a copy of Bob Schaffer’s testimony at the oversight hearings (note to Ben – Congressmen do not testify under oath):

I [Schaffer] went to Saipan and spent five days. Visited probably eight or nine factories in the time that we were there.

Leaving the specific issue of the Marianas Islands aside, do we want a Senator who votes to fund a program at “more than 20 billion” when he think’s it’s “8 or 9 billion?” I’m very concerned that with these poor math skills, Bob Schaffer will double our deficit while he thinks he has halved it.

Update: Based on a comment below, I may have been too obtuse in this post. The issue I am trying to raise is how many factories did Bob actually visit. Was it 1?

Do math skills matter for a Senator?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...

Bob Schaffer and the “A-Team”

(What’s a day without a “Sweatshop Schaffer” front pager? – promoted by DavidThi808)


Worried about his religious right base, Bob Schaffer recently claimed that in 1999 he “investigated” and was able to reject claims of forced abortions at the Marianas Islands:

“Schaffer said he discussed that issue with the Catholic bishop and other Catholic leaders.”

“None of them could confirm any examples or episodes of this,” he said.

Well that solves that! Or does it? Unheard no more is dedicated to CNMI abuses. They take a look at Sweatshop Schaffer:

Of course, Schaffer could not admit that there may be evidence of coerced abortion. That was not in the game plan. One of the key players at the 1998 Senate Hearing was the Traditional Values Coalition, an organization said to be tied into the Abramoff web. In fact, it was the Traditional Values Coalition who funded the $13,000 trip that Schaffer and his wife took to the CNMI in 1999. Executive Director, Andrea Sheldon Rafferty was also an Abramoff foot soldier and took a junket to the CNMI.

Andrea Sheldon appeared outside the hearing room in 1998. She was distributing a handbill calling the hearing a “sham” because their prepared witnesses who wanted to refute the documented incidences of coerced abortions and religious persecution were not asked to testify. I watched her confront one witness, Eric Gregoire who testified that as the former human rights advocate for the Diocese of Chalan Kanoa.


She yelled at him, “Why didn’t you tell me about forced abortions when I was in Saipan?”

(h/t Squarestate.net)

Bob Schaffer, David Brennan and D’Oh!

We wrote in August that Republican Senate candidate Bob Schaffer was trying to deflect charges that donations he received from David Brennan influenced his votes on a shaky charter school connected with Brennan.

Schaffer’s connection with Brennan could be getting worse in light of a couple of recent stories out of Ohio. From The Columbus Dispatch:

A record $5.2 million fine was levied yesterday by the Ohio Elections Commission against a pro-charter-school group that helped elect Republicans across Ohio in 2006.

The whopping fine fell on All Children Matter, a Michigan-based organization that the commission said illegally funneled $870,000 in campaign contributions through its Virginia political-action committee to its PAC in Ohio in 2006. David Brennan of Akron, Ohio’s biggest charter-school operator, has donated $200,000 to the group.

Voting 5-0, the bipartisan commission agreed with the secretary of state’s argument that All Children violated Ohio campaign finance laws that limited PAC contributions to $10,000.

The fine amount was unheard of, particularly from a commission that is regularly criticized by watchdog groups and others for going light on campaign-finance violators. Philip C. Richter, executive director of the commission, said his previous highest recommendation for a fine was about $90,000.

This certainly doesn’t make Schaffer’s involvement with Brennan look very good. And neither does this story from The Cincinnati Enquirer:

One of the Ohio’s largest teachers unions is challenging the tax-exempt status of schools run by the state’s largest operator of charter schools.

The Ohio Federation of Teachers on Thursday sent a letter to the Internal Revenue Service asking it to investigate the nonprofit, tax-exempt status of at least 25 of the charter schools run by White Hat Management Inc.

White Hat, a for-profit company based in Akron, operates 31 charter schools in Ohio, including four Cincinnati-area schools: Life Skills Centers in Middletown, Walnut Hills and Roselawn, and Riverside Academy, a Hope Academy in Riverside. Its Ohio schools serve more than 9,000 students; the schools received about $85 million in state revenue last year, the union said.

The company also operates schools in Arizona, Colorado, Florida, Michigan and Pennsylvania [Pols emphasis]

…Also, at least 95 percent of these schools’ revenues – mainly Ohio education dollars – are “passed through” to for-profit White Hat entities.

Many White Hat schools lease or sublease their buildings from White Hat entities. Sometimes those arrangements are profitable for White Hat and expensive for the schools, Taylor said.

For instance, one Cleveland-area White Hat school subleasing from a White Hat subsidiary pays that subsidiary’s “base rent” of $48,000 a year plus an additional 6 percent of the school’s annual revenue over $800,000 a year. That becomes profit for White Hat, the letter says.

White Hat staff and attorneys – not the nonprofit boards or authorizers – negotiated contracts with the Ohio Department of Education to create many of the White Hat schools, the letter states. Sometimes, Ohio’s Education Department staff corresponded with White Hat founder David Brennan and his company attorneys on school matters, rather than with the schools’ governing boards.

This story seems like it is only going to get worse, and if it does, Schaffer’s ties to the whole for-profit charter school industry are going to be a major drag on his Senate campaign.