In an interview featured September 19 on his Washingtonpost.com blog, "The Fix," Chris Cillizza highlighted Colorado Republican U.S. Senate candidate Bob Schaffer's assertion that, regarding fundraising, “I'm just a guy. I don't hang out with millionaires for a living.” In fact, Federal Election Commission (FEC) data indicate that millionaire associates -- including Schaffer's employer, Aspect Energy chairman Alex Cranberg -- have contributed to his campaign. According to Cillizza's post, Schaffer also “rejected the perception -- fostered by Democrats -- that he is too conservative to win statewide” and quoted Schaffer's claim that he voted against his party “a lot” while serving in Congress from 1997 to 2003. However, according to The Washington Post's “The U.S. Congress Votes Database,” Schaffer voted with the Republican Party more than 80 percent of the time during his three terms in Congress.

Cillizza's post about his interview with Schaffer included a video of the first five minutes of the interview and the following bulleted “highlight”:

• Asked whether he can raise the money to compete with Rep. Mark Udall (D), who ended June with $2.5 million in the bank, Schaffer expressed confidence. He noted that he raised more than $1 million in his four-month campaign against [Pete] Coors and that in the first six week of this race he brought in more than $700,000. But, Schaffer added: “I'm just a guy. I don't hang out with millionaires for a living.”

Cillizza did not question the statement. But contradicting Schaffer's assertion that he "[doesn't] hang out with millionaires for a living," Schaffer counts among his supporters Cranberg, the chairman of Aspect Energy, a “privately held independent oil and gas exploration and energy investment company,” according to its website. The website further notes that “Aspect and its affiliate companies will have combined revenues of $360 million in 2007 and expected exploration and development capital expenditures of $180 million” and that “Mr. Cranberg is Aspect Energy's largest shareholder holding approximately 52% of the outstanding units.” Schaffer is vice president for business development at CHx Capital, “the private investment firm of the Cranberg/Morrice family.” An FEC filing indicates that Cranberg contributed the maximum to Schaffer's campaign: $2,300 for the primary and another $2,300 for the general election.

Another notable contributor to Schaffer's current Senate campaign is former Colorado Republican Party chairman and failed gubernatorial candidate Bruce Benson. President of Benson Mineral Group, Benson “listed his net worth at $24 million in a 1994 campaign disclosure filing,” according to a June 12, 2000, Denver Post article (accessed through the Nexis database). FEC filings (here and here) indicate that Benson and his wife, Marcy, each made the maximum contributions to Schaffer's current campaign -- $2,300 from each of them for the primary and $2,300 from each of them for the general election, for a total of $9,200.

Cillizza's interview featured another bulleted highlight with more unchallenged misinformation from Schaffer:

• Schaffer rejected the perception -- fostered by Democrats -- that he is too conservative to win statewide. “I think it's because I'm consistent,” Schaffer said of his reputation, adding that he voted against his party “a lot” in Congress especially when it “was drifting toward the left on spending [and] budgeting.”

In fact, according to the Washington Post's database, Schaffer voted with the Republican Party 86.8 percent of the time in the 105th Congress and 82 percent of the time in the 106th Congress. During Schaffer's final term in the 107th Congress, the Washington Post reported he voted with “his party” 81.3 percent of the time.

Schaffer's comments to Cillizza were among the dubious or misleading statements he has made recently to news media. As Colorado Media Matters noted, The Pueblo Chieftain on August 22 quoted Schaffer suggesting that he had not yet decided whether he would run for Senate when, in fact, he was at the time already a declared candidate registered with the FEC.

From the September 19 “Fix Cam” interview of Bob Schaffer on washingtonpost.com, video of which is available at the website:

CILLIZZA: I have a question about Colorado more generally. This looked like it was moving to be a Republican stronghold state, and then 2004 and 2006 happened. It's a place Democrats point to nationally as a place where they've made a lot of progress: a governor, a Senate seat, two House seats now in the last two elections. What happened, and how critical is this '08 race to re-establishing Colorado as a place where a Republican can win?

SCHAFFER: Yeah. The -- not much has changed other than the leadership, which is huge. But the reality is -- let me not state it as a Republican state, but as a state where Republican values appeal to the majority of voters. It's still the case. And by way of example, I would point to Ken Salazar; Bill Ritter, the governor; John Salazar; Ed Perlmutter -- all Democrat candidates who campaigned as conservatives. They campaigned as pro-economic growth, that they were going to be expanding the agriculture economy and agriculture markets in the state, favorable to mining and oil and gas production, favorable to holding the line on excessive spending and tax policy. Bill Ritter ran as a pro-life Democrat. And so you had Democrats running on essentially conservative themes, successfully. And this was not the first time. [Former Gov.] Roy Romer had a history of campaigning on conservative themes. This is a fairly routine occurrence in the state. But in '04 and '06, Republicans had lost their credibility to stand up to this. Plus, these guys were all outsiders. All these names that I mentioned, they were running for a big statewide office or for Congress for the first time; they had no record that anchored them to their liberal traditions of their party. What's different in '08 is there is no independent outsider running for the United States Senate on the Democrat side. There is no one running for Senate on the Democrat side who isn't anchored to the left-wing causes of the Democrat Party and traditions. There's no one running who is not wedded to the idea of high taxes on the Democrat side, bigger government, or a policy of weakness when it comes to national security. There's no one who is free from those -- running on the Democrat side for the United States Senate -- who is free from those trappings of his party.