Liberal distortions about Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer‘s early fundraising totals continue to circulate among the blogosphere’s left-wing echo chamber without any serious reflection or criticism. The latest repeat of an unsubtantiated rumor that the $717,000 has fueled the fire for a more “moderate” Republican to join the race shows up at a site called The Political Realm:
Bob Schaffer, Udall’s likely opponent, apparently has some Colorado Republicans worried that he may not be able to keep up with Udall’s strong fundraising.
Of course, I already refuted the distortion earlier, but Denver Post columnist David Harsanyi has taken the explanation even further on a new blog to which he contributes:
Republicans of a “moderate†variety were indeed lined up to take on Mark Udall had Bob Schaffer opted out. But my GOP sources — and there is always a chance they’re a.) lying b.) unreliable and/or c.) intoxicated — tell me Republicans are set on Schaffer (though they have reservations about his staffing decisions) and none have mentioned anything about a search for a “moderate†candidate.
But let’s define our terms: A “moderate†means a candidate that sees things a little more clearly — like a Democrat. As my co-blogger David Sirtoa proves in his posts, there is rarely a conservative who isn’t “far-right†or “extreme.†Conservative positions are by default extreme to many liberals.
Continued attempts by the Left to stir up dissension within the Republican ranks through unsubstantiated rumor and innuendo should be rejected assertively. As Harsanyi points out, in the world of facts (not the world of liberal wishful thinking), Colorado’s 2008 Senate showdown is setting up to be a clear choice between Right and Left. From my vantagepoint, that doesn’t bode well for supporters of Boulder liberal Mark Udall.
After considering what you wrote, I have altered our comments on Political Realm.