The non-partisan National Taxpayers Union has released an analysis of the campaign platforms of senate candidates Bob Schaffer and Mark Udall finds that Udall would increase federal spending by an estimated $55.3 billion as compared to $5.8 billion for Schaffer.

http://www.ntu.org/main/press.php?PressID=1070&

These results aren't a surprise, given the records of the two men, but a $50 billion difference should concern anyone with even a modicum of concern for federal fiscal responsibility, particularly given the likelihood of a Democratic president and a large Democratic majority in Congress.

Colorado might be seen as a key state in trying to prevent the Democrats from getting the 60 votes in the Senate that they need to do great and long-lasting damage to the nation.

And please, my liberal friends, don't bother replying about "the last 8 years" and other such backward-looking distractions. We all know that the GOP was a disaster so far this decade, but if there's one good lesson that people of any and all political affiliations should learn from that, it's that divided government is far better than one-party control. By the way, the last time the Democrats had 60 or more seats in the Senate was 1977-1979. How many of you want to return to the Carter Administration?