Friday, December 31, 2010

The King and Queen of America livin' it up on the US tax payer

I wanted to end the year with a year-end- review but it seems that everyone does that anyway, so if you want to re-hash the good the bad and the ugly for the US in 2010 you’ll have to look elsewhere.  So instead, I thought I would focus on the most recent political news and like so many other news worthy items this one comes from President Obama and his wife Michele, the King and Queen of America.

It is no news to anyone that the US economy has suffered the worst recession since the great depression.  Americans have lost their jobs in record numbers.  As of this post the true unemployment number is teetering on 17%, not the 9.5% the government keeps talking about. Those lucky Americans who still have a job have been forced to cut back, to scrimp and save every penny just to pay the bills. 

Tuesday, December 28, 2010

Death Panels are back and Sarah Palin was right!

Remember when president Obama was making all of those back room deals with legislators by promising them special favors such as state exemptions and piles of payoff cash for their districts and states if they would support his Obama-Care Health Care Plan? Before I go further let me correct something…it was NOT HIS plan! He did not propose the legislation it was his ultra leftist and communist special interest groups who actually wrote the 2000 plus page monstrosity.

Anyway, as he traveled the halls of Congress trying to drum up support for the Health Care Bill he continued to run into opposition from members of his own party. Too many Democrats were cautious and concerned about how their constituents would respond to the government takeover of health care.

Monday, December 27, 2010

Guttenberg gave us the first printed Bible and now asks for a Ronald Reagan memorial in Berlin

In 1439 a great innovator from Germany named Johannes Gutenberg gave the world the first printed Bible with his revolutionary printing press. Now in 2010 another great innovator Karl-Theodor Gutenberg, conservative German politician and German defense minister is on a campaign to have Berlin honor the late US president Ronald Regan by naming a street or square after him by what would have been his 100th birthday on February 6th.

He told the daily Bild; “I would welcome naming a street after this great honorary citizen and it would be evidence that the gratitude of (the city’s left-wing government) didn’t stop at (leftist student leader) Rudi Dutschke,”

Gutenberg and other conservative German politicians are frustrated that the government has no plans to honor the man whom they believe brought an end to the Soviet Union with his strong stance against communism marked by his famous speech at Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate in 1987 where he said; “Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!”

Friday, December 10, 2010

Surprise! Brian David Mitchell found Guilty of the Kidnapping and Rape of Elizabeth Smart

Am I the only person in Utah who isn't surprised that this monster Brian David Mitchell was found guilty of the kidnapping and repeated rape of Elizabeth Smart?  Of course I understand and appreciate the concept that in the US legal system you are innocent until proven guilty, but this trial has never really been about whether or not he kidnapped Elizabeth Smart, instead, it has been about whether or not he is of sound mind.

The defense tried to convince the jury that he was not sane and should therefore not be found guilty of the crime he committed. This is where I have an issue with the legal loopholes in our laws.  I don't believe that anyone who commits this type of crime against another is acting with total mental clarity.  In fact, I believe that anyone who willfully harms another human being unless in self-defense is missing a few marbles.  So to me yes he is out of his gourd.  But does that give him license to commit crime against humanity?  Of course not. He may in fact be a complete loony tune but it doesn't change the fact that he is guilty.

Saturday, August 7, 2010

Obama THE TAX MAN! Just wait until the LIBERALS let the Bush tax cuts expire!

For those of you who missed Obama's address to a joint session of Congress, I thought that I would show you the part so many never saw.  Obama and the liberal democrats in Washington are about to let the Bush tax cuts expire and we ALL will be paying more taxes as our economy slides further into the SECOND or DOUBLE DIP RECESSION.  But don't be surprised because Obama admits that he is the TAX MAN.

Aren't you glad that you aren't one of those uninformed voters who put an Obama Change bumper sticker on your car?  As a matter of fact, I don't see as many as I used too and just yesterday I saw one that the driver tired to tear off of his bumper but he couldn't get it all off.  It's like eating spaghetti with a white shirt; it may taste good at first but the stains never come out.

Wednesday, June 23, 2010

Becky Edwards was re-elected for a second term as a member of the Utah State House of Representatives in District 20.

Becky successfully overcame her challenger DJ Schanz with a final figure of 43 to 57.

The thing I hate about primaries is that the best two candidates are pitted against each other and when that happens a little mud begins to be slung back and forth blemishing both candidates.

The other thing I hate is being forced to choose between two good people and in this case both are personal friends.

I have made it clear from the beginning that I like both DJ and Becky and whoever wins will get my full support in the general election.

Primaries can cause hard feelings as people are forced to make a choice. Now we all need to come together and support Becky as our candidate against the Democrat challenger. She deserves our support.

DJ thanks for caring enough about your community and state to take a stand. Whenever an elected official has a challenger it causes them to rethink who they are what they believe and how well they truly serve their constituents. I believe that this race will make Becky a better representative and she has my support as she works through the issues in the upcoming term.

I encourage each of you to get involved in your community and state; discover the issues that will impact you, your family and your way of life. I understand that it is difficult as an elected representative to listen to the issues, the pro’s and con's and then to have to make a vote based on what you hear. Sometimes votes are cast for or against an issue based on the passion of those who either support or oppose it. This means that the right vote is not always cast. For this reason I believe that it is important that we all learn the issues and contact Becky and let her know how we believe. This makes it easier for her to truly represent her district.

I know that Becky is thoughtful and committed to vote according to what she thinks is best. And I know that she welcomes your opinion. Again, congratulations to Becky Edwards. Now lets' do our part as Republicans and vote for her in the general election in November!

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

“Representation for Real” or “Republican for Real," you decide.

Those who know me know that both Becky Edwards and DJ Schanz are friends of mine. I believe that they are both good people and each would do their best to represent our district according to the dictates of his or her conscience.
The question is not which “friend” I should support. The question is which person do I believe truly represents my values, beliefs and views as well as those of my neighbors in legislative District 20.

Some of you may think that the Republican Party in Utah has moved too far to the right and others may think that we have allowed our party to be directed by the more moderate wing. Just for the record the name of my blog is “leaningwright” not “moderately middle” so hopefully you understand my political position.

I believe that the only time our party has been represented accurately according to our State and National platforms is when it is represented by those whose political leaning is to the right; the conservative agenda.

Ronald Reagan is without question the most revered conservative Republican president in modern times. He never left anyone to question how he stood on issues. He always made it clear that he was a conservative who held true to his conservative values.

Having said this, I also realize that he occasionally made decisions that were not in line with the conservative agenda, such as amnesty to ill-legal aliens and his support for free-trade which ultimately led to free trade agreements that sent American jobs out of the US and into other countries. Neither of these ideas is based on conservative principles. And I am willing to cut him some slack for bad decisions just as I would Becky if “some” of her decisions were not in line with our Republican platform.

But when it came to basic conservative and Republican principles Reagan never wavered but held true to things like protecting our country with a strong military, family values; his belief that government sponsored abortion and abortion on demand was wrong, his opposition to special rights for selected groups, his support for the sanctity of marriage, parents right to choose the education of their children, and his opposition to high powered and corrupt unions including the NEA are among just a few of the conservative principles he believed. And he never apologized for being a conservative!

We live in the most conservative State in the US and the Bountiful area is also very conservative. It is amazing to me how many people in this area have the same conservative views yet don’t get enough information and vote for candidates that don’t truly represent their political views.

This is why people like Sheryl Allen are elected for sixteen years under the guise that they are Republican and support the State platform when in actuality they vote like a Democrat. And in her case she is now running for Lieutenant Governor of Utah on the Democrat Party ticket! When someone of this position finally steps into the light everyone can see the truth about their political agenda.

Although DJ Schanz has been telling us that he is a conservative and he has been espousing his conservative political views for months we have nothing to judge him on except his statements and his promises. And all politicians make promises when they run for office just like Becky did when she ran two years ago against conservative Paul Neuenschwander with the slogan “Representation for Real.”

I would assume that everyone who voted for Becky two years ago in the Republican primary expected that her slogan meant that she would vote and represent her constituents like a “Real” Republican and according to the beliefs and values “Real” Republicans in Legislative District 20 care about.

I want to take a moment here and list some issues that both candidates have responded to. I have compiled their responses and how they would vote on each issue. If you are still not sure which candidate best represents your political values and beliefs, perhaps this list will help.

1. Would you vote to keep instate tuition for students here in Utah and our country illegally?

Becky: YES

2. Would you vote for a bill to increase taxes including cigarette taxes?

Becky: YES

3. Would you vote for a bill to make it easier for cities to increase recreation taxes?

Becky: YES

4. Would you vote for a bill to require licensing on hunting guides and outfitters?

Becky: YES

5. Would you vote for a bill to permit power companies to restrict your electrical consumption without your approval?

Becky: YES

6. Would you vote for a bill that allows a teacher to receive half of their income after quitting teaching and working full time for the UEA?

Becky: YES

7. Would you vote for a bill that requires cities to make financial information available to the public?

Becky: NO

8. Would you vote for a bill that would allow Utah to withdraw from the Western Climate Initiative, which imposes unnecessary and unproven regulation on private companies based on questionable Global Warming science?

Becky: NO

9. Would you vote for a bill that would end Affirmative action n Utah State Government employment positions which includes State Colleges and Universities, even as most minorities are lobbying to get rid of it?

Becky: NO

10. Would you vote for a bill in favor of "common ground" initiatives to grant special rights to gays and lesbians?

Becky: YES

Questions 1-8 represent actual bills that did come before the Utah State legislature and the responses Becky gave were based on how she voted. The last two questions are based on bills that will come before the legislature and the responses represent the positions that Becky and DJ have taken on each issue.

Two years ago Becky was in the same position as DJ and those who voted for her had to trust that she would represent according to the values and beliefs she claimed. For DJ, he has the challenge of convincing the voter if elected he will be the legislator he claims he would be. He claims to be a conservative Republican and that he will not vote for anything that challenges the constitution. That he will not vote for anything that takes away or unfairly restricts our freedoms, compromises are morals, standards and Republican values and that he will not vote for unfair or un-needed taxation.

However, with Becky we can look at her record for the last term. Do you believe that Becky Edwards votes the way you would vote? Does her record prove to you that she represents your Republican values? She is still using her original slogan of “Representation for Real.” Is this the real representation that you want to send back to our State government?

I believe that her vote on these issues tells us something about the type of “Representation for Real” she must have meant when she ran the first time and the type of representation she will continue to render in our behalf if re-elected.

I have noticed that DJ’s campaign signs say “Republican for Real.” Based on what we have heard from both candidates and based on the record that Becky has created in her first term, I believe the voters in our Republican primary MUST ask themselves this question; “Which of these candidates truly represents me and which candidate IS the Real Republican?”

Don’t vote for your best friend, vote for the person that you believe will best represent you each time a new bill or issues comes to the floor Representation for Real or Republican for Real, you decide.

*For a list of the bills quoted in this blog go to PAGE THREE: “BECKY EDWARDS, Is this the Representation for real you voted for?”

Friday, June 11, 2010

Obama should be looking for a way to plug the hole instead of an "Ass to kick"!

We are now into the second month since the April 20th, 2010 oil disaster at sea that took the lives of 11 BP oil rig workers in the Louisiana Gulf as well as sank the rig and created what has now become the worst oil disaster in history.

This disaster has been acerbated due to a series of government blunders that initially kept BP, the State of Louisiana and other private companies from offering immediate help to the prevention of what now appears to be oil coming ashore on the coasts of all of the Gulf coast states, including Florida!

This is by far the biggest and most costly presidential blunder of American History. We don’t even know yet the true costs of this nightmare. We don’t know how many businesses including small, medium and large companies will fold as they see their livelihood in the fishing and recreation industries disappear.

But it’s much more than just those who fish; it affects tourism, restaurants, financial institutions that hold loans for hundreds of companies in the area, it impacts insurance companies already strapped from the Hurricane Katrina disaster a few years ago, all types of jobs are interconnected with this industry. The economic impact has potential for massive wide spread collapse!

In the midst of this our inept president looking for a finger to point makes a comment that he’s looking for “whose ass to kick.” I am furious at the ignorance and incompetence of this political pawn of the left wing socialist progressive movement. He has never met with the CEO of BP who has asked for a meeting the convenience of the president, he drug his feet for WEEKS before his administration could authorize permits to those in the gulf who knew how to prevent this disaster from coming ashore. Instead, he has spent his time golfing and entertaining Hollywood celebrities in an expensive temporary fun tent gala on the Whitehouse lawn!

Now that the heat is on we see the true nature of this man exposed. He may be good at reading a teleprompter but when it comes to commander in chief he is nowhere to be found; well that’s not entirely true, if the tent is still up!

I feel the pain of those who were duped into voting for this fraud. I am still shocked when I see the occasional OBAMA 08 bumper sticker on a car. Now is the time to buy stock in Gillette as razor blade purchases should start going thru the roof as former Obama supporters began buying them to scrape any trace of their support for OBAMA off of their vehicles!

Obama is trying desperately to demonize BP as the big bad oil company responsible for the entire mess, yet his administration has down played the fact that BP was given a pass on a safety inspection just weeks before the disaster.

In an ABC News story on May 27, 2010 written by news correspondent Yunji de Nies, we learned of the “resignation” of S. Elizabeth Birnbaum the Director of the Mineral Management Service in the Obama administration. She reported; “At a news conference this afternoon, President Obama told reporters he was informed of Birnbaum’s resignation earlier this morning and did not know the circumstances by which it came about.”

Do you believe for one minute that Obama knew nothing about the circumstances of her resignation? This is a double edged sword. If he knew nothing about it, it proves my point at his ineptness as president; if he knew about it, it proves his culpability as the president that he knew about a vital department’s lack of oversight as a federal agency charged with overseeing safety and security of companies operating in this industry and did nothing to fix it!

Obama knew about the scandal ridden department in September of 2008 when MMS Employees were fired for accepting gifts, favors - even sex - from oil industry employees in exchange for “looking the other way.” He appointed Ken Salazar to be Secretary of the Interior in December 2008 and he pledged to clean things up

Obama told ABC news “I can tell you what I’ve said to Ken Salazar, is that we have to make sure if we are going forward with domestic oil production that the federal agency charged with overseeing its safety and security is operating at the highest level.” I guess the words “highest level” must mean something different to Obama than they do to the rest of us.

And finally, (sorry this is so long, but I’m a little heated and I need to get this off of my chest) the embarrassment Speaker of the House said that BP shareholders are going to have to wait on the dividend until BP has covered the costs of this disaster. When I first heard this I was driving in my car and thankfully there were no other cars near me because I’m sure my driving became quite erratic at that moment. Madam Speaker, the government does not have the right or authority to tell any private company who they will pay, how much they will pay or when they will pay! The United States is still a REPUBLIC not a Dictatorship or Communist régime!

Later I heard the CEO of BP suggest that his shareholders may not be getting their dividends. I don’t know if this comment was made because of US pressure or not, but I have no problem if a company makes this type of decision on its own, but not under the dictate of the US Government. The last time I checked Obama still owned to US auto companies but he hadnt taken over BP yet!

There are those who would like to see BP destroyed by this. I understand the frustration but BP is an international company owned 39% by Americans, American pensioners and American pension funds The financial fallout would be devastating to hundreds of thousands of Americans who have invested in this company.

Here is a list of some of the larger investors; State Street Bank, Wellington Management , Barrow Hanley, Bank of America , State Farm Insurance, T. Rowe Price, Morgan Stanley, Fidelity Management, Tradewinds Global and Gates Foundation. These companies have invested billions into BP. Just imagine the magnitude of financial crisis it would cause if BP went under because of this.

No, we do not want to see BP destroyed by this unfortunate and horrific disaster. Instead, we need them to be strong enough to help pay for the cleanup and restitution to those who died working on the oil rig and the untold future numbers of those whose livelihood will be impacted for years to come.

President Obama would be better off keeping his dirty mouth shut and letting the governor's in the Gulf States handle this mess with whatever help or authorization they need from the FED's but without their direct involvement.  The Federal Government's involvement in the BP oil disaster gives new meaning to the term "muddy the water."

Thursday, June 3, 2010

Looking at two of the Nation’s biggest disasters, The BP Oil spill in the Gulf and President Barack Obama!

The oil spill in the Gulf is now being called the worst oil spill in US history. BP, President Obama and Bobbie Jindal, the Governor of Louisiana struggle to find a way to cap the broken drill pipe which is releasing about 800,000 gallons of oil each day off the coast of Louisiana. Oil has started to run ashore in Louisiana, Alabama and soon Florida.

This unthinkable mess that killed 11 oil rig workers on April 20th, 2010 when the oil rig exploded and sank in ocean waters over a mile deep is now threatening the fishing industry in at least two states and the tourism industry in three states.

Governor Jindal blasted the Obama administration today for not moving quicker to issue Federal permits for containment plans. He said it took over three weeks for the administration to respond and then they only received about 25% of the permits they have requested. While thousands of workers are on the scene, every attempt thus far to cap the pipe has failed.

President Obama, in an attempt to look presidential and in charge, went to Louisiana last week and held a bloviated news conference with top military leaders and advisors including-- college professors. He embarrassed himself when he spoke about how his daughter asked “daddy when are you going to plug the hole?” He threatened BP with the cost of the cleanup and any other financial hardship caused by the catastrophe. And he concluded his rambling remarks with a promise to the American people that this disaster is top on his priority list and that he will use every resource available to him to plug the hole!

So far nothing has worked to plug the hole and he has now turned to Hollywood as he usually does when nothing else is working for him and has asked movie director James Cameron to help with a solution to capping the pipe. James Cameron couldn’t stop the Titanic from sinking (one of the most successful films he directed) but hopefully that experience has taught him more about oceanic disasters so that he can be one of Obama’s best resources.

I’m sure if Mr. Cameron’s ideas don’t work he’ll turn to other well-qualified sources such as comedian Jerry Seinfeld or perhaps famous singer-songwriter Sir Paul McCartney who both just appeared at the White House Wednesday June 2nd, 2010. Of course, they are among his top secret back-up plans invited to the White House under the cover of Sir McCartney receiving the nation’s highest musical award. Hopefully one of the three will be able to come up with the idea that will finally plug the hole!

Here are the facts:

• More than 17,000 National Guard troops from Gulf Coast States have been authorized to help with the spill

• Over 20,000 government, private and contract workers are on the scene

• About four million feet of containment and sorbent boom has been deployed to contain the spill and almost 14 million gallons of oily water has been recovered so far.

• There are over 120 controlled burns of oil on the water

• Over 1,900 ships are helping in the containment and clean up efforts

As you read these statistics you, like me, probably thought that this pipe must be massive. We know that it is about a mile deep and hard for conventional dives and equipment to reach. But with the difficulty and numerous attempts to cap the spewing pipe it must be the size of an oil tanker, right? Wrong! Would you believe that the pipe is only 6.625 inches in diameter? That is about the size of your average student calculator.

Now, I surely don’t claim to be an engineer or rocket scientist or oceanographer or college professor or even famous movie director, comedian, singer or any other specialist in hole plugging. But since this pipe opening is only about the size of a small waste paper basket, if I were Obama I would take my daughters advice and find something that would simply plug the leak instead of capping it.

And if I were Obama I would know just the thing—something that is thicker than two phone books, absorbent when wet, thoroughly useless, never known and surely would not be missed by the government or the American public. By using this item Obama would be the hero--the leak would be stopped and the country would even be saved from financial ruin.

Mr. Obama please, I beg of you cork the leak with the only thing sure to gum-up and plug the system, the new HR 4872, 2,087 page Health Care bill you and congress just shoved down our throats! I can promise you that about two thirds of the country will apalud as you "fill Barry fill!"

Tuesday, June 1, 2010

We're all so different yet so much alike

As I write this post I am sitting in a terminal in the Atlanta airport waiting for my flight.  I look around and see waves and waves of people from all walks of life, ethnicity and national origin. They’ve come here from all parts of the world as a leg or final destination of their journey; all so different, yet all alike. 
By the time you have made it through the full body scan, pat down and disrobing security process you seem to be striped of your individuality and you are just like everyone else who just went through the same irritating and somewhat humiliating procedure just to board a plane.
As I look around I don’t see a variety of political, religious and social beliefs I simply see people, people just like me trying to get by in life the best they can.  It is odd how you feel that connection to strangers in an airport. 
Our political beliefs cover the full spectrum of ideas but when you strip away that thin layer of differences our connection is a spiritual connection that we are all children of a higher being. We share similar hopes and dreams of freedom, security financial success, and personal liberty, healthy and happy families.  We are all very much alike.
I remember the Bay area Earthquake October 17th 1989 at 5:04 PM in the Oakland, San Francisco and San Jose California area. The World Series had just started at Candlestick Park in San Francisco and the stadium was filled to capacity when the 7.1 magnitude earthquake hit. 
Within minutes the Oakland Bay Bridge crashed into the ocean killing the handful of people in their cars.  The irony is that typically at 5:04 PM on a weekday that bridge would normally be packed bumper to bumper with traffic as workers were on their way home. But not this day, it was the World Series and Candle Stick Park was the destination of most of those vehicles.  It was the savior of hundreds maybe even thousands of lives who decided to go to a ball game instead of driving the long and congested commute home.
I was in my office in a high rise building in San Jose when the quake struck.  The sudden jolt and continual gyrations overturned desks, filing cabinets, and chairs and shook pictures off of the walls.  I looked out the window and watched as the road in front of the office moved up and down like a wave in the sea. 
The quake seemed to last forever as we were all frozen in time all wondering if this was the big one.  There was nothing you could do, nowhere to go nowhere to hide.  When the quake and aftershocks finally ended I felt a tremendous sense of relief and gratitude to god for sparing my life and the life’s of millions including my friends and family.
That night as I drove home my typical 30 minute drive took over two hours.  Along the way I could see damage to some of the homes where front porches or chimneys pulled away from the home. Cellular phones or “car phones” as they were initially known, were fairly new and I was one of the fortunate ones to own one but I had no service all the way home.  So my attempts at contacting my family were in vain, and all I could do was hope and pray that they were safe.
The oddity of the experience is that there was not one reported traffic accident or citation that evening in northern California.  People would approach a non-working traffic light and politely wave people by and they took turns through the intersection.  Somehow that one night each of us were able to put aside our differences in politics, religion and social beliefs and we simply became people, survivors who united in what we had in common instead of dividing with our differences.
One other oddity happened that night that did not manifest itself until nine months later.  Northern California had its largest baby boom sense World War II.  The survivors embraced and expressed their love for their family and friends and their gratitude for god and his saving grace.  And many did more than just embrace.  And yes, I will admit my wife and I also participated in the expression of love as we witnessed the birth of a beautiful baby girl July 17th, 1990 exactly nine months later to the day and almost hour.
Well my plane will be boarding soon so I need to go to my gate.  One last look around and I am grateful for my connection to all of these strangers. We’re not so different after all. May their hopes and dreams come true and I hope that each of them makes it safely to their final destination.

Monday, May 24, 2010

It’s time to say “good bye” to those LEFT LEANING Republicans!

I realize that there are many degrees of Republicans in the Utah Republican party, but those who have leaned so far to the left that they have actually climbed on board of the Democrat express need to turn in their “R’s” for “D’s.”
Two prominent Utah Republican women have recently stepped into the political spotlight by embracing the Democrat party while still claiming to be Republican. One is from Salt Lake and the other is from Bountiful.

A small article appeared on Section B of THE SALT LAKE TRIBUNE May 21st 2010 edition by Paul Rolly, titled “Some in GOP see the right turning wrong” I applaud his accurate headline. Former Salt Lake County Republican Chairwoman Tiani Coleman is the campaign manager for Karen Hyer the Democrat candidate for Utah’s 3rd Congressional District seat currently held by Republican Jason Chaffetz.

According to Rolly’s article Coleman claims to be a conservative but doesn’t like the direction the Utah GOP is going. She then lamented what she called the “pandering of politicians to a small group of delegates in order to win the party’s nomination.” Hey Tiani isn’t that the way you won the party’s nomination to be the Salt Lake County Chair? Looks like it worked just fine for you but it’s not fair for anybody else! She says that she is considering becoming unaffiliated. Hey Tiani, I will second the motion for you to become unaffiliated. All in favor say “I”. The motion carries, “Good bye!”

Now let’s look at Bountiful resident Sheryl Allen who first ran for and was elected as a State Representative in House District 19 in 1994 and has maintained her seat for the last 16 years in fact most of her re-elections were unchallenged. She has been noted as one of the most liberal Representatives in the Utah House, yet she serves from the conservative city of Bountiful. How could a “left leaning moderate” continue to be re-elected for seven terms?

Sheryl Allen is the Foundation Director of the Davis County School District, an impressive non-profit organization with the objective of securing “contributions from private sources to help fund enrichment and learning projects not funded through the normal budgetary process” (as stated on its website

She also served on the Davis County School Board from 1977 to 1989. Could her longevity as a member of the Utah House of Representatives have something to do with her heavily entrenched involvement with the UEA? It never hurts to have a large union backing you for political office and it is a great deterrent to would-be challengers who aren’t up to spending that type of matching funds for a campaign.

I find it interesting that within days of Sheryl’s announcement that she would not run another term that there were four contenders for her seat. Where were these people the last sixteen years? I know that most of them were living in Bountiful at the time and some were very politically active.

Anyway, here is the reason I believe that Sheryl Allen should turn in her Republican motif in exchange for a new “D” next to her name. Sheryl Allen has been named by Democratic Gubernatorial Candidate and current Salt Lake County Mayor Peter Corroon as his running mate for this November's special election. Gee, am I missing something here? Is a long-time “Republican” member of the Utah House of Representatives running as a Democrat for the office of Lt. Governor? And is she doing so while still holding onto her letterman’s jacket from her Republican Alma Mater?

She was quoted as saying; "I really want to preach the gospel of bi-partisanship," and will join Corroon in "getting back to basics" to improve Utah's educational system and our economy.” Is this for real? I know Sheryl personally and she is a likeable and very intelligent person but does she really expect us, her fellow Republicans in her home town to simply smile and yell “Go Sheryl go!” while fighting against the Republican candidate for Utah Governor???

And I have a big issue with someone like Sheryl Allen who has successfully obtained millions and millions of dollars from the Utah tax payers over the years for education to talk about how we need to “get back to basics.” What basics could she be talking about, reading, writing and arithmetic or better pay for teachers and more accountability from the school districts and administration? Or how about smaller class sizes?

While I’m on the subject she also fought against a key point in the Utah Republican platform called a parent’s choice in education. If this is what she means then why did she fight so hard against Charter Schools which have proven to reduce the size of public schools and have higher test scores with smaller class sizes?

It seems to me Sheryl, that the best way to get back to basics in education is to reduce the role of the government and increase the role of the parents in education. Then let’s target the exceptional teachers and give them a raise and ask the tenured and checked out teachers to consider one of two options, an early retirement or an early retirement!

To recap, more schools, smaller class sizes being taught by the best teachers who make the highest pay. Why is this so difficult to do? Yeah, I know, it's called UEA! (Usurped Education Association).

I don’t question that Tiani Coleman and Sheryl Allen have done some good along the way in their respective political offices within the Republican Party. But I do find it interesting that they both think they can simultaneously ride two trains on two tracks heading further and further apart from one another. Even Gumby can only stretch so far before losing a limb. So for your own health and our well being, here’s a boot to help you make your decision. And to make it as clear as possible we’ve added a very prominent letter “D” to the tread. “Good Bye!”

Wednesday, May 19, 2010

The Three Voter Groups. (A reply to one of my blog readers)


Thanks again for your comments. I appreciate the fact that you take time to create well articulated opinions. I think that you and I agree on quite a bit. I would never ever propose putting caps or spending limits on political campaigns. I am against anything that is an assault on our constitutional rights, such as freedom of speech. I believe that my comments on the winner being the one who spends the most money are simple statements of “that’s the way it is”, if I can quote the late Walter Cronkite.

I realize that the winner is not ALWAYS the person who spends the most but the odds are extremely high that those who lose are those who are out spent.

Let me try to clarify my comments about delegates voting in behalf of the people.

There are basically three types of citizens in every community,  
  1. Group One: the concerned and educated voters
  2. Group Two: those who vote without educating themselves on the issues or candidates.
  3. Group Three: those who don’t vote
Typically Group one, the educated voter is proactive in the political process. They are truly concerned about what happens in their community, State and Country so they learn all they can. These are the voters who normally attend their neighborhood caucus meetings. These are the voters who choose the delegates to represent them at the state convention. I am the most empathetic with this group simply because they take the time to learn and then to teach and educate others. They understand and value their constitutional right to vote!

Group Two voters “typically” don’t take the time to become educated and simply vote according to the impressions they get from cards with bullet points, robo calls, yard signs and various campaign junk mail. These are the voters most candidates want because the candidate doesn’t need to personally answer tough questions or justify their positions. This is why incumbents always want a primary run-off because they hope to be re-elected by the uneducated voter who won’t question their record but simply vote according to name recognition. If they can “buy” a vote with a flashy post card they will do it. (Now, don’t jump on me for the “buy” a vote comment. I am simply trying to illustrate how the money factor plays a big part in a successful campaign).

The Group Three non-voters who don’t exercise their constitutional right to vote simply miss out on letting their voices be heard. I am amazed at how many in this group will complain about elected officials when they did not take the time to vote!

You asked me “In your opinion what is the solution to the problem in local elections?” Unfortunately local elections are often the toughest because small communities like Bountiful have city council seats at large. This means a candidate needs to get his or her message to over 40,000 people. It takes a LOT of time and MONEY to do this. Again, the incumbent has the advantage simply due to name recognition. We may have the Clipper but it is not a daily paper and like most papers it is slanted toward the incumbents too.

MY SOLUTION: A simple solution for cities like Bountiful. Create council districts that take the city and divide it into smaller geographical sections. This will allow candidates from each district a better and less costly opportunity to meet the people in their district. It will also make for better representation since different parts of the city have different needs. Perhaps one of the council seats could remain a seat at large. (Hey that sounds like the delegate process used by the Republican Party! Yes, it does! And it is a great idea, something I campaigned on).

It looks like my response is longer than my original blog post. Sorry for the length but this is why I post so that people will talk and exchange ideas. I don’t claim to know it all. I do have firm beliefs but I too am educated every day and I truly appreciate people like you who take the time to ask questions and express your opinion. You would be amazed at how many people are afraid to link their name to a comments section on my blog so they respond to my posts by sending me a private email. Most are very kind and are in agreement others are vulgar and inappropriate to publish.

Thanks again Marc. Your comments are always welcome!

Saturday, May 15, 2010

Why don’t more people run for public office?

I think that most people are too busy trying to make a living to consider running for public office. If they live in a town that seems to be well managed they don’t notice anything wrong that makes them question how well their local government is doing its job.

If the water comes on when they turn the nozzle, the lights come on when they flip a switch, the snow is plowed before it’s too difficult to drive through and the roads are not filled with pot holes then life seems to be just rosy in the town where they live.

Occasionally someone will attend a city council meeting because they hear about a local issue affecting a friend, co-worker or family member. They attend the meeting and get their first taste of local politics. After assessing the meeting they think to themselves that they would have done a much better job if they were a member of the city council or even the mayor. But for the average person these feelings don’t last long and then they return back to their busy life and daily routine.

But every now and then something happens to jolt a citizen into action. They want to fight for a cause or against an injustice and they take on City Hall. The experience gets them a small measure of local fame and then they think that perhaps they could do a better job than the elected official. Then realty sets in and they soon discover that there is no way they could fit one more thing into their busy life so they pull out from the controversy and try to quietly slip back into their anonymous life.

There are others who would make excellent legislators or local city officials but they are not in a position financially to take on the cost of a political campaign. Often, if the candidate is popular enough people will contribute to a campaign helping to offset the costs, but most local campaigns still end up costing the candidate.

So who wins most campaigns? Typically those who win campaigns are those who have the time to devote to public office and enough money to spend and run an expensive campaign. Seldom does the best candidate win an election; instead it is the candidate who can spend the most money. There is a simple reason for this; it’s called “name impressions” through marketing. The more often a candidate gets their name in front of the voter the greater the subconscious impression they make with the voter which results in a greater likelihood of obtaining the vote.

Surely you have known someone who said they voted for the name they knew, or perhaps you have even done the same thing. The average voter does not take the time to learn the issues or discover how the candidates believe or would vote on the issues. Instead, they tend to vote for the name they recognize on the ballot. So, if you are running a campaign the more you can get your name in front of a voter the greater the chances that they will recognize your name on Election Day and vote for you.

This is why you are constantly asked to donate to a campaign either directly through the political party you are associated with or from a candidate who believes you would support them. Money is essential in winning a campaign; qualification or ability unfortunately often comes in a distant second. In the end he or she who has the most money wins!

Tuesday, May 11, 2010

How can the Delegates be more conservative than the average voter when they were chosen by the average voter?

I find it amazing just how out of touch and misinformed the media is. I heard several different reporters all saying the reason Bob Bennett was not sent back to Washington was because the Utah State Delegates were more conservative than the average Utah voter. Do these people not do any investigative reporting on their own? Or do they simply read the teleprompter? And do all of the news outlets compare notes to make sure they are all saying the same thing?

Just who elects the State Delegates in Utah? Surprise! It’s the average voters! It’s called holding elections at the state caucus meetings that were held last March. And guess what media; the average Utah voter who attended their state caucus meeting decided who they wanted to go to the Utah Republican Convention to represent them! They “chose” delegates from each precinct to represent them!

So if the Utah State Delegates were more conservative than the average Utah voter it seems that the average Utah voter figured that they better send those who were more conservative. Does this make any sense? Of course not! Why can’t the media call things they way they are? The reason Bob Bennett was voted out at the Utah Republican Convention was because he had become a Rhino Republican, he was no longer acting as a conservative, he voted for TARP and then told Delegate audiences all over Utah that TARP didn’t really need to be as big as it was but that Washington thought that they had better at least double its size so that the average American would believe it was a bigger problem than it was and would agree with the bailout!

He co-authored a Health Care Program with a liberal Democrat that included unconstitutional mandates for every citizen to either buy the plan or join elsewhere, no there was not an “opt out” option, if you didn’t buy into his plan you were mandated to buy into another!

Perhaps one of the biggest unanswered breaches of public trust was when Senator Bennett accepted large sums of “Bribe” money from associates of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and conveniently kept his mouth shut over and over again when President Bush called for an audit of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Some may think calling it Bribe money is too harsh and unsubstantiated, but what would you call it when a US Senator takes money from the two largest buyers of US Mortgages and then turns a blind eye to numerous calls to their investigation which later turned out to be one of the largest financial disasters in US history causing world-wide recession and a multi-trillion dollar US bailout program?

Is the average Utah voter so moderate that these things don’t matter? Or is it possible that the average Utah voter was more than irritated at a respected US Senator who traded his integrity and good judgment for money and power?

Bob Bennett, the junior Senator had some great accomplishments in his first term. He then promised the average Utah voter that he would only serve two terms but that promise was not kept when he ran for term number three. It is an extraordinary lack of judgment and just plain arrogance that he wanted to run for a fourth term after what he knew were extremely controversial votes, proposed bills and questionable acceptance of large sums of money .

I was empathetic to Bob Bennett until he said while being interviewed after his defeat that he did not think his votes and decision would have ended his “CAREER”! That is perhaps the biggest issue with Bob Bennett; he went to Washington to represent the State of Utah for two terms and then decided to make it his career!! We did not send him there to become a career politician!

The average Utah voter sent Bob Bennett home, not just the 3,500 delegates at the State Convention. Oh and one more thing, I am not a member of the Tea Party movement. In fact, I met many, many delegates at the Convention and the words Tea Party never came up! But words like RHINO, self-serving, disingenuous, term limits, career politician, moderate, liberal, arrogant, selfish, out of touch were bantered around by many all day long.

I believe that Bob Bennett is a good man who was tempted by money, prestige and power the bi-products of public service when it becomes a long term career. Over time it clouds the mind and impairs the judgment.

Bob Bennett may be the first Utah Senator in seven decades to be ousted at Convention but he surely won’t be the last. Your time is coming too Orin Hatch!

Saturday, May 8, 2010

No more Bennett in the Senate!

I consider myself very blessed to be a part of political Republican Party history today as I participated in the retirement of Senator Bob Bennett.  After 18 years as a US Senator from Utah his reign has come to an end.  Although he was introduced at the convention by Utah’s (adopted) very own, Mitt Romney he could not muster enough votes to make it through the primary.
As I sat listening to each of the candidates most of whom gave very good patriotic and moving speeches I was most impressed with Cherilyn Eager.  She was dynamic, passionate and extremely articulate.  She was my first choice. She is by far the most conservative of the bunch and it was probably her ultra Conservative positions that did her in.
The first round of voting looked like this:  Mike Lee28.75%, Tim Bridgewater 26.84%, Bob Bennett 25.91% and Cherilyn Eager 15.84%. The first round eliminated four other candidates including former two-term Merrill Cook.  I don’t understand why he tried to run for another high office.  Can’t any of our Senators and Congressmen be satisfied with serving two terms?  He gave a very good speech but looked like he was about to have a heart attack at any moment.  The gentleman sitting next to me leaned over and asked me if I thought that the streams of sweat running down Mr. Cooks face were indications of a pending heart attack.
The comic relief of the bunch was Leonard Fabiano.  I probably shouldn’t say such a thing because I am sure that he is a fine person but his speech quickly turned into an endorsement for Cleon Skousen’s  (incredible) book, THE 5000 YEAR LEAP, a book that teaches an in-depth course on the founding of our constitution.  
He spent the majority of his 5 minute speech talking about how he wanted to organize an army of soldier delegate who would go two-by-two all over the state of Utah teaching from the book.  I know what you are thinking, yes, it did sound very similar to a very successful program run by the LDS church. But I will cut him some slack since he recently returned as an LDS Mission President in Europe. 
But just when you thought his call for this massive conservative political army was purely metaphoric he called for two of us from each County to meet with him after the convention to start the organization of what he eventually called “Revolution for the Constitution.”   At this point delegates began to laugh under their breath at this poor man. Again, a very nice guy but in the end I was convinced that he was probably not operating on all cylinders.
Back to the vote…
Round two was euphoric.  The atmosphere in the Salt Palace was filled with tension and anticipation. We waited what seemed like hours, although it was about 40 minutes for the ballots to be counted.  Then the news came around 3:30.  Bridgewater took the lead with 37.42% and Mike Lee second with 35.99 and Bennett left the Senate with a third place finish and only 26.59% of the vote.
The crowd jumped to their feet and erupted in cheers and whistles for what seemed like another 40 minutes but actually only five very long minutes.  Now that Bridgewater took the lead it was time for the final vote into round three.  After another very long wait for ballots to be counted Bridgewater came in on top with 57.28% of the vote to Lee’s 42.72%.  He fell short of winning the nomination without a primary by only 2.72% or about 94 votes out of 3,452 voting delegates.
At this point Bob Bennett had already become ancient (no pun intended) history.  All of the attention was focused on Bridgewater who for weeks was considered the underdog behind Lee.   Tim gave a very passionate and conservative speech.  He outlined his conservative beliefs and political agenda.  I am confident that he will win over Lee in the primary.  He surely has my vote!
One last thing, the Chairman called for recognition of the years of service Bennett gave our state and the delegates offered him a hearty applause. 
I believe this election was more about “Self-Imposed Term Limits” than anything else.  Although Bennett stepped in the political cow dung on several occasions with his huge cash contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddy Mac employees, his own version of a Health Care bill with “Government Mandated” requirements and his pro vote for the TARP (troubled asset relief program), it was obvious to me by the numerous comments I heard all day long about his commitment to only serve two terms that really ended his political career. 
It will be interesting to see if our next Senator makes the same term limit commitments or if he will be running for a third term in 18 years from now. 
History in the making and I loved every minute of it!   

Wednesday, May 5, 2010

Are you Wishy-Washy? It's much worse than you think!

Wishy-Washy: According to the Urban Dictionary is “Someone who is indecisive, ineffectual; afraid to stand up for what is right and moral.  A typical attribute of a Liberal.”  
How many times in your lifetime have you heard that phrase used to describe someone?  We tend to think that a liberal is someone with definite ideas that lean to the extreme left, but in fact the definition of a liberal is more encompassing. 
I find it interesting that the liberals in our society today claim to have a big tent where everyone with differing opinions is welcome.  I guess they really do since their tent doesn’t just include the extreme leftists but also everyone else who is Wishy-Washy. 
The more you think about it a person who is indecisive and afraid to stand up for what is right and moral is easily swayed to believe the liberal agenda that teaches that there is no absolute right and wrong, and to avoid those who believe differently. 
The other interesting thing is that liberal ideology claims complete freedom of thought yet without morals and religious values that sustain and enforce right and wrong.  The liberal movement slowly moves toward tyranny as those within the movement who lust for power fool the Wishy-Washy followers to follow their feelings instead of logic.  And the power mongers have convinced their “open-minded” followers that they can lead them to ultimate fairness and happiness with socialized ideas to “Level the playing field” thereby making everyone equal.
But in the end, the more  a person moves to the left the closer they get to Oligarchy where those with the power in the tyrannical movement make the decisions and speak for those who have “Opened their minds” in order for others to fill them up!
Look at many of the liberal activist in the US today.  Most of these men and women have little or no morals and values.  They are tax cheats, haters of freedom and the US Constitution, fake champions of the poor whom they keep dependent on the government with hand outs and special rights and privileges to keep them voting in their favor, they have illegitimate children, hidden affairs, millions of dollars in hush money, and special interest money. 
They claim that the planet is warming due to man-made causes and events and they preach about reducing our carbon foot print while they live in secluded estates with homes in excess of 10 to 25 thousand square feet, drive large luxury SUV’s and travel the globe in private jets.  The things they preach do not apply to them, only the little people.  They rise in power and notoriety by exploiting the lives and misguided beliefs of their followers. 
So the question you may want to ask yourself is’ “Am I wishy-washy, indecisive, ineffectual; afraid to stand up for what is right and moral?“  Because if you are wishy-washy you will eventually end up as one of the liberal lemmings who follow their leaders everywhere and eventually off of the cliff

Saturday, May 1, 2010

Thomas Jefferson wouldn’t be voting for Bennett to serve another term either!

Bob Bennett has been a US Senator for 18 years now and it is time for him to do the admirable thing and step down. The arrogance in Washington is unbelievable in this day and age. We just witnessed the liberal Democrats and our Socialist President Obama push through the most outrageous, expensive and unconstitutional health care reform bill in US history! Nearly 70% of the citizens in this country were against it yet they thumbed their noses at us and did it anyway.

Senator Bennett and his supporters will tell you that he stood alongside all of the Republicans in defiance of this bill, yet what he won’t tell you is that over two years ago he proposed a very similar health care reform bill of his own, Senate Bill 391 that he co-authored with liberal Democrat Ron Wyden of Oregon. This bill was even quoted by Obama as evidence that there was bipartisan support for his health care reform bill.

If Senator Bennett’s bill had passed it too would have included (illegal) government mandates forcing every American citizen to buy the government health insurance or pay costly fines for non compliance. In fact, Bennett’s bill was used as a pattern for the bill Congress finally passed!

Bob Bennett may have served well his first two terms but he, like most, who become career politicians has forgotten the conservative values he took to Washington eighteen years ago. It infuriates me to hear these seasoned politicians claim that due to their tenure and seniority that they have the power to stop Washington from imposing its will on us. This is the BIG LIE! Our Founding Fathers never intended for citizens to make politics a career. In actuality, the opposite is true of seniority, it does not protect us it deprives us of our freedoms.

Thomas Jefferson said; “Experience hath shown, that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.” Tyranny happens when government gets too powerful and exerts its will on the people, such as this outlandish health care bill that just passed. And YES, people, Senator Bob Bennett would have tried to push his health care bill through if the liberal Democrats had not succeeded with theirs!

This is one of MANY reasons that I WILL NOT VOTE FOR BENNETT again! He is no different on this horrible issue than all of the liberals who voted for it! If Thomas Jefferson were alive today he would rally as many as possible against Bob Bennett!

Wednesday, April 28, 2010

As a REPUBLIC we elect our officials by Representation. The role of a DELEGATE is to choose the nominee not force a primary!

I am a State Delegate for the Republican Party this year. I consider it an honor and also a great responsibility. I was elected by my peers in my caucus meeting. A caucus is a neighborhood geographical area comprised of a few hundred people. I want to explain how our party determines who will represent us in a general election.

There are essentially two ways that someone could become the nominee for the Republican Party to run against the opposition in a general election; one, they run in a “Primary” giving every voter in their district the opportunity to vote for them or two, they are elected by the “Delegates at the Republican County and State Conventions”

In Utah we use the convention method instead of the primary. Here is why I believe that election by Delegate in the convention is the best method. If we simply allowed each candidate to run in a primary election where all of the citizens were allowed to vote the candidate with the most money will buy the election almost every time.

“How does someone buy an election?” you ask. I’ll tell you. The more money a person has the more they can spend on advertising. They spend thousands of dollars on yard signs, full color two-sided or even “pop-up” brochures, yes I did say “pop-up” brochures. Some candidates even buy breakfast, lunch and dinner for prospective supporters.

These wealthy candidates also spend money on billboards, pamphlets attached to every door in their voting neighborhoods, automated phone messages, advertisements in the news papers and any other method to get their name out in front of Jane and John Doe voter.

“But why is this problem?” you ask. I’ll tell you. Because most voters in this type of election never get to actually meet the candidate, talk to the candidate or ask the candidate questions face-to-face to determine if that candidate is the person whom they would want to represent them in political office.

Since the voters never actually meet the candidate they simply rely on catchy advertising, a few bullet points on a flyer, an automated phone call or two or three and name recognition due to the inundation of campaign propaganda!

Most voters simply vote for the name that has been in front of their face during the course of the election. This is called impression marketing; the more you can make an impression on someone the more likely they will buy your product, i.e., candidate!

So, the bottom line is “He or she who has the most money wins!” Are we to assume that the most qualified person to represent you is the wealthiest? Of course not! But look around and you will discover that there are not many “average” everyday Joe’s and Jane’s representing you in government, most are either wealthy or come from a family with name recognition.

I believe that there are many wonderful people who never consider running for political office in primary or general elections because they have neither money nor name recognition. But with the Convention method the playing field is a little more fair and those who are voting, the delegates who represent hundreds of their friends and neighbors actually meet and grill each candidate face-to-face and often on numerous occasions.

This means that the candidates CANNOT win the nomination based on how much money they have to spend but based on their ideas, character and personal political platform. The delegates learn all that they can about the candidates and then they choose the person whom they believe will best represent the needs, beliefs and values of their friends and neighbors.

Election by Delegation is a basic principle of our Constitution and Republic form of government. A group of neighbors “delegate” a person to represent them; hence they choose a Delegate and send that person to the Convention.

If you are a Delegate it is your responsibility to learn ALL you can about the candidates, report to members of your caucus from time to time and then vote for the candidate whom you discover meets the criteria of your delegation.

If you think it is your responsibility to “muddy the water” and vote for your second choice to force a primary you don’t understand your fiduciary responsibility as a delegate and you never should have accepted the nomination in the first place!

I believe that nomination by the Delegate process is essential in helping to find the most qualified person for public office and the best insurance to discourage someone from buying an election.

Monday, April 26, 2010

Is Bennett a CONSERVATIVE? Maybe, maybe not! Will I vote for him to serve another term? NO!

There is quite a bit of “Anyone but Bennett” going around in the Utah State Delegate circles and some of the reasoning may be justified, some is very misinformed, and some is simply because it is kind of like the new fad—everyone else is doing it so why don’t I?  I wanted to take a few minutes and analyze Senator Bennett’s record on some key “Conservative Issues” so that I could be fair to him and help others understand why I won’t vote for him to serve another term.

In Senator Bennett’s website he has a section titled “Top Ten Myths.”  He tries to refute what he says are the top ten myths about him.  For the most part, he does a good job refuting them.  So I thought that I would list the top ten things that I think he should be assessed on and then I would rate each item and give him a score.

Let's look at his record and evaluate ten BIG issues and see how he stacks up.  I will rate him 1-5 with 1 being and F and 5 being an A.  Since there are 10 items a perfect “Conservative” score would be 50.  You may be surprised when you read my scores and see where he actually ranks on the Conservative scale.

(5) Abortion:  He has been a strong opponent of abortion his entire political career.  In fact, he supported restricting it and requiring parental notification before an abortion could take place and he opposed late term abortions.  He also supported a ban on letting minors cross state lines to have an abortion.  Having said this, he has not been nearly as defined on his opinion against stem cell research, something that he appears to support.  Overall, I would give him an A- on the Conservative position of abortion.

(5) States Sanctioning GAY and LESBIAN marriage:  He opposed the Domestic Partnership Benefits and Obligations Act, which would have given benefits to the domestic partners of gay and lesbian federal employees

(2) Affirmative Action:  Bennett has voted against any affirmative action proposal that involves quotas. However, he has voted in favor of increased funding to businesses owned by women and minorities this is still affirmative action and it discriminates against everyone else who is not a woman or minority!  
(4) Patriotism: Bob Bennett served as a Chaplin in the Utah Army National Guard from 1957-69 so he did serve his country and this service cannot be questioned. But I am a bit perplexed on his stance on flag burning.  Utah’s other Senator Orin Hatch proposed a constitutional ban on flag burning and Bob Bennett voted against it.  He said that he thought desecrating the flag was protected by Freedom of Speech and that the only time it should be inappropriate is if the flag was burned on federal property with federally-owned flags.  Again, I won’t question his patriotism simply on the issue of flag burning but I do think that most conservatives consider the US flag to be somewhat of a sacred relic of our country and burning it is most offensive.  He did support the Bush administration with the Patriot Act and the US government’s rights to wire tap suspected terrorists.  If the flag burning issue was not in the mix I would give him an A but since it is in here I will only give him a B.  I have a very hard time with flag burning, especially claiming that free speech should defend such an act.
(5) TAXES:  Bob Bennett supports the flat tax idea.  He wants to get rid of the Inheritance Tax, Alternative Minimum Tax and the Marriage Penalty.  He has voted against minimum wage increases.  I must give him an A on his stance and record on taxes.
(1) Government Run Health Care: Bob Bennett has been an outspoken opponent of government run health care including the recently passed Obama Health Care Bill.
But wait a minute, there is a big problem here.  Bob Bennett is the co-sponsor of the Healthy Americans Act, also known as the Wyden Bennett Act.  This is a universal health care program that would “Require” Americans to enroll in it. There is another name for this plan HAPI, Healthy Americans Private Insurance plan. It would be a private and government funded plan.  So, even though Bennett claims to be a big Opponent of The Socialist Obama Health Care Bill recently passed he has no problem creating a “Socialist” plan of his own that would also require all American’s to enroll in a plan of their own or this new government plan.  By the way, Wyden is a Democrat.

(5) Immigration and homeland security:  Bennett has supported tighter immigration control, he voted for the border fence between the US and Mexico, English as the Official Language of the US and against citizenship rights to guest workers.   Another A on this one.
(5) Energy and the environment:  He voted against energy standard proposals, CAFÉ and is not a believer in Global Warming.  He supports drilling in ANWR and using nuclear power.  A
(1). "Few politicians have more ties to Freddie and Fannie than Utah Senator Bob Bennett, who topped all Republicans in campaign contributions from the mortgage duo since 1989." (Salt Lake Tribune, 09/12/08) Senator Bennett’s website claims that this statement from an article in the Salt Lake Tribune is misleading because it is illegal for a corporation to donate to a campaign therefore making it impossible for FNMA or FHLMC to have donated to his campaign.  However, he did receive huge donations from people who work for these institutions.  Senator Bennett surely you have heard the statement “avoid even the appearance of evil”?  If it looks like a rat, sounds like a rat and smells like a rat it probably is a rat!  We the public are not stupid!!

(1). Senator Bob Bennett broke his term limits pledge when he ran for re-election in 2004. Bennett has now been in the Senate for 18 years. (Deseret News, 10/07/98)  Senator Bennett like so many other “Career Politicians” has tasted of the power, prestige and most definitely the special interest money of being a US Senator and has justified for lying to his constituents about only serving two terms. This is an issue of integrity and unfortunately most Politian’s stumble on this one.  They claim that they will only serve two terms but when the time comes to hold true to their word they can’t resist all that comes with political power.  They then try to justify the actions by saying; “if everyone else will limit their terms I will too.”   

This is a cop out and Mr. Bennett knows it.  THIS IS THE MAIN REASON I WILL NOT VOTE TO SEND HIM BACK TO WASHINGTON AGAIN!  Integrity defines who we are and men who lack integrity are self-absorbed and self-centered.  Just look at the arrogance of most of our leaders in Washington, they think they are smarter than we are and that without them we would parish. They ignored us when we told them NO on Health Care reform and they now say they have even bigger things planned for us!

Now let’s add up the score and see where Mr. Bennett ranks.  His total score is 34 out of 50.  This gives him a 68% which I would call a C-.  In my book Bob Bennett is not a conservative.  I believe that he has been in office too long and he has become one of the good old boys.  We don’t send people to Washington to make deals with the other side, to make it a career or to become part of the problem.  We send them there to represent us, our values, our morals and our beliefs.  

 I believe that Mr. Bennett did a good job his first two terms, but things started to go downhill after that.  If Mr. Bennett thinks that somehow his tenure is the most important reason to send him back why didn’t his tenure stop Obama and the Liberals in Washington from passing the most overwhelming government takeover of the free market system in America?   Why hasn’t his tenure stopped the liberals from raising our taxes and pushing forward the most aggressive social agenda since the McCarthy era?   

No Mr. Bennett we don’t need you in the senate for another six years.  We need fresh conservative ideas from someone who can actually represent our state and who will hopefully not follow another 18 years in your  footsteps.  You did a lot of things right, but the longer you are there the more tainted you become.  You can’t sit in the proverbial  bar for 18 years without finally having a drink yourself. Bob it’s time to get off of the stool and let a new face represent Utah--as far from the club as possible!

Friday, April 23, 2010

Becky, Chet or DJ? Hmmmmm. Here is what I think so far

While US Senator Bob Bennett is fighting for his political life another locally important but much less known race is underway; the House District 20 seat currently held by Republican Becky Edwards.  Representative Edwards is running for re-election to a second term along with two Republican challengers, Chet Loftis and DJ Schanz.  As a State Delegate for the Republican Party I need to decide who to vote for.
I met Becky when she ran against Paul Neuenschwander in the last election.  Becky is one of the nicest people you would ever meet.  As a matter of fact I have never met anyone who doesn’t believe the same about Becky even those who don’t want to see her re-elected agree that she is a genuinely good and decent person. 
I was a supporter of Paul and I felt that he did a good job with his first and subsequently only term as a State Representative.  I asked Becky when she ran against Paul if she thought that he had not lived up to her expectations as her representative.  I must admit that I fully expected that a challenger of a one-term State Representative would be running against the incumbent because she did not believe that the incumbent did a good job or had somehow let down his constituents.  But her answer was quite a surprise to me.  She said that she liked Paul and thought that he had done a good job in his first term but that she just wanted the opportunity to serve. 
I realize that there are many reasons people decide to run for public office but it seems to me that if you, as member of the same political party believe that your representative has done a good job that you would not let your personal ambitions lead you to run against that person.  I don’t say this to be harsh toward Becky, again, I think she is a wonderful person and as a State Representative I believe she has done her best to be thoughtful and fair when voting on the issues that face our state. She is not as conservative in many of her views as I, but I would not lose sleep is she was re-elected.  Her answer to me that day simply left me somewhat speechless and I don’t think that Becky thoroughly considered her reply to my question before she answered.
This brings me to the one issue that I believe will be the biggest cause of trouble for Becky in her bid for re-election.  It’s occasional poor judgment on critical issues.  Let me explain.  Becky has been accused of leaving the Democrat party and registering as a Republican shortly before she decided to run for the Republican nomination for State Representative in House District 20.  If those accusations are true it would have made sense for an ambitious person who wanted to be elected in a heavily Republican dominated district to run as a Republican and not a Democrat.  Strategically, it would make great sense.  But, if it were true it would also put her in a very difficult position trying to explain her actions.
I recently spoke to her husband John Edwards and I asked him to explain to me what had happened and if the rumors were true.  He denied that Becky was ever anything but a Republican.  He even insisted that she had served as a Delegate for the Republican Party in Davis County.  I took him at his word and did not verify his assertion.  I will leave that up to others. 
John said that he and Becky were big supporters of Mitt Romney during the Republican Presidential primaries in 2008.  He said they donated to his campaign, supported him and even had one of his signs in their yard. But when Becky went to her neighborhood voting precinct to vote in the Republican primary she was told that she was not a registered Republican and could not vote in the primary.  (hmmm…) According to John, Becky became very upset and frustrated.  He said that she thought that it was ridiculous that she had to be a registered Republican to vote in a Republican Primary. He continued by saying that she was not allowed to register as a Republican at that time and in her frustration and strong desire to vote she simply registered as a Democrat so that she could, as he put it, “exercise her civic duty and right to vote.” 
He then said that she never told him who she voted for and he never asked.  He concluded the explanation by telling me that sometime later Becky asked him to tell her who she was politically.  He reminded her that she had always voted Republican and that she always voted for the Republican Presidential candidate so there was no question but that she was a Republican.  Hence, she changed her short-lived political party affiliation from Democrat to Republican and soon thereafter ran as a Republican challenger to Paul Neuenschwander. 
After hearing John’s response to the “rumors” about Becky changing from a Democrat to a Republican just to increase her chance of winning I told him that I did not question the truthfulness of his story but I did question the critical judgment of Becky, especially if she had ever before considered the possibility that she would one day run as a Republican for State office. He agreed that in hindsight it was not the best course for her to have taken.
Two years later Becky now finds herself in the same position that Paul was in and she is seeking another term, her second.  I told her that I thought that a two-year term was too short to judge an incumbent unless they were blatantly pathetic in their performance and overall I do not think that anyone could honestly describe Becky that way.  She has made some tough decisions, many of which surely caused some deep soul searching but I believe that she has worked hard to be as “conservative” as her beliefs and values dictate even if she had been judged by some as not conservative enough. 
Ronald Reagan was a Democrat before changing to the Republican Party. Of course, he claimed that the Democrat party left him and if Becky’s story is entirely true she was never really a Democrat or at least her time as a Democrat was short lived and ill-conceived in a moment of poor judgment.  This is Becky’s challenge in a very fired up “Conservative” movement in this year’s election.  And her challengers know that this is her biggest weakness and they will surely take advantage of the situation.  
Now let me briefly write about her two challengers.  First, who is Chet Loftis?  Is he a Republican, or more importantly is he a “conservative”?  I spoke to Chet on two occasions and frankly I have two problems with Chet.  Number one, he is an attorney and I think that we don’t need any more attorneys in our government.  They have a way of arrogantly assuming that the rest of us need their intelligence and wisdom due to a lack of our own.  I know that I just offended any attorney who reads this, but relax, not every attorney runs for political office, only those who believe as I have stated above.  OK, I apologize for my broad and possibly unfair characterization of an important segment of our society.  It’s just that so many of our inept and unethical legislators are attorneys that it makes me suspicious of another attorney running for political office.
The main reason that I will not vote for Chet is that he is a lobbyist and in my opinion the only thing worse than an attorney in political office is a former lobbyist.  Chet doesn’t seem to have many strong political views or conservative ideas but he definitely relishes the opportunity of being “lobbied to” instead of “lobbying at” for a change. Chet may be a wonderful person but there is nothing about his campaign that reaches out for my vote as a conservative.
Now, on to DJ Schanz.  I have spoken to DJ a few times and recently spent nearly an hour one-on-one with him.  There is no question in my mind that DJ is a conservative.  He is also quite articulate and well versed in politics and constitutional issues.  Of the three candidates DJ more closely represents my political views in almost every area.  But the more you get to know someone the more you realize that we are all different and no one thinks completely alike on every issue. 
This is not a bad thing unless the difference of opinion is a political deal breaker.  Everything that DJ expressed to me hit home for me and rang very true in my conservative soul, until he mentioned the one thing and frankly, the only thing that would cause me to question his political judgment.  He was a big supporter of Ron Paul.  Although I think Ron Paul is an intelligent man and quite the student of the constitution I believe that his political views are too isolationist and narrow-minded.  I agree with him that it is not the responsibility of the US to be the world police, but we do have political and economical interest throughout the world that we must protect.  Like it or not, we are a big part of the world economy and it is simply too late to pick up our toys and go home.
Is DJ’s support of Ron Paul a political deal-breaker for me? Probably not, but this brings up the same issue I have with Becky Edwards; political judgment.  Perhaps it would be easier if we didn’t know too much about our candidates.  It would be easier if we simply judged them according to their actions and political record and not their rhetoric. 
To me this race is between Becky Edwards and DJ Schanz, two good people with similar ideas.  Becky wants what Paul Neuenschwander wanted two years ago-- the opportunity to serve a second term and ironically DJ wants what Becky wanted two years ago to defeat the one-term incumbent. 
If you ask DJ he will tell you that Becky is not conservative enough and if you ask Becky she will tell you that she deserves another chance to prove that she can represent our district according to the values and beliefs we hold true.
I am going to keep my vote private at this time.  But I will say that whoever of the two becomes our Republican nominee will, without hesitation have my full support in the general election.

If you've Never FAILED you've never lived.

Blogs that I Follow