Attacks On Schaffer Reveal Another Udall U-Turn, Schaffer's CNMI Testimony Refutes Anti-Schaffer Hit Job

It appears that Rep. Mark Udall, his campaign, and liberal/lefty water-carriers in the blogosphere forgot one thing:

Udall's record.

Face the State unearths some of Udall's votes against Internet gambling resolutions that Jack Abramoff's firms lobbied to kill, and their coincidence with donations Udall received prior to the votes. Then, after Abramoff was sent packing for fraud and corruption, Udall abruptly reversed his vote--another U-turn.

---

Furthermore, Ben DeGrow at Schaffer v Udall excerpts key portions of then-Rep. Bob Schaffer's testimony (under oath) regarding the CNMI investigation, including Schaffer's conclusion (read the lengthy excerpt in its entirety):

I guess the final conclusion is that there are acknowledged problems in CNMI but Washington, DC, is the absolute last place anyone should look to fix them because this government has proven time and time and time again that, in the end, at the end of the day, people around here in DC tend to make matters worse, not better. [emphases added]

To say therefore that Bob Schaffer "abetted a scheme that deprived workers of basic rights (and even their unborn children)" is more than a gross exaggeration - it is an intentional mischaracterization of a substantive, philosophical policy disagreement, taken out of the context of its time as fodder for a scandal du jour. Whether it's been perpetrated out of ignorance or willful malice, participants in an "honest debate" would look at such evidence and reassess their characterizations.

I suggest that if Alan and the Big Blue Lie Machine wanted an "honest debate" about the issue, they wouldn't ignore actual evidence and leap to a conclusion that smears someone's character, and then browbeat anyone who disagrees with that evidence-free conclusion. Because Bob Schaffer did not work to support a particular kind of heavy-handed federal reform does not mean he "enabled a medieval nightmare of abuse and exploitation on American soil...."

Those on the Left may disagree with Bob Schaffer's view (whether past or present) of how to reform CNMI, but they have not been approaching the issue in that way - they have been approaching it as an opportunity to engage in political mud-throwing. Too bad. Perhaps they could explain why workers trapped in alleged "sweatshops" that were enduring "a medieval nightmare of abuse and exploitation" did not see the situation as dire as cadres of Lefty bloggers sitting in comfortable Colorado homes and offices apparently do.

Besides building their attacks on a distorted characterization of events and conditions at CNMI, the Big Blue Lie Machine's impeachment of Bob Schaffer's character and integrity has yet to prove that any of the arrangements or indirect connections with Jack Abramoff led to a change in Schaffer's votes. They have just concluded that the votes were immoral based on a preconceived notion that has been challenged here.

Visit Schaffer v Udall for all the latest on the Schaffer-Udall Senate showdown.