Bennett out in UT Senate race; Update: Primary for GOP
posted at 5:56 pm on May 8, 2010 by Ed Morrissey
In a humiliating end to his career, Senator Bob Bennett of Utah couldn’t get enough of his own party’s delegates at the Utah GOP convention to get past the second round of balloting for his re-election bid. After coming in third in the first two rounds, Bennett was automatically eliminated for the third round of voting. Earlier, he had pleaded with delegates to give him a second chance after coming under fire for supporting the TARP bailouts:
Sen. Bob Bennett (R-UT) has lost the battle for a fourth term in office after delegates to the UT GOP convention refused to renominate him on Saturday, a highly-placed source with knowledge of the vote count tells Hotline OnCall.
Instead, GOPers will choose between attorney Mike Lee (R) and business consultant Tim Bridgewater (R), who will advance to a third ballot. If neither candidate receives 60% of the vote, they will face off in a June 22 primary.
On the first ballot, Lee led with 28.75%, followed by Bridgewater’s 26.84%. Bennett finished third, with 25.91%. The remaining vote split among candidates who have openly opposed Bennett, making any comeback attempt a longshot to begin with.
Bennett, the 3-term incumbent with a largely conservative record, is the first victim of an angry GOP primary electorate, which is upset with his votes over TARP legislation and his work with Sen. Ron Wyden (D-OR) to try and forge a health care consensus. He had been targeted by the conservative Club for Growth, which did not back a specific rival but urged delegates to vote against the incumbent.
Bennett’s not the only one with egg on his face after today’s votes. Mitt Romney endorsed Bennett’s bid for re-election and introduced him at the convention, and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell endorsed him as well. Sen. Orrin Hatch tried rounding up delegates for Bennett at the convention. However, the state’s GOP leadership declined to publicly back him and worked to keep the national party out of the convention fight as well.
This shows that the Tea Party movement isn’t about restoring a Republican status quo. The movement’s activists want real change, and real action to reverse the growth of government and the profligate spending that has gone on for far too long in Washington DC. Republican incumbents nationwide should consider this a wake-up call.
Bennett may not go quietly, however:
But Bennett could still have an impact in the contest. He told the AP earlier today he would not rule out a write-in candidacy if he loses at the convention. If Bennett, who is still popular among the larger UT electorate, were to run, he could have a chance at becoming the first successful write-in candidate since the late Strom Thurmond did it in ’54.
That would put the Utah GOP in a very tough position in the fall. They should have no trouble beating the Democrat in a one-on-one race, as Utah is a deeply Republican state. If Bennett tries splitting the vote with a write-in campaign, it may complicate matters for the eventual nominee. However, as Bennett could only get 27% of the vote even in the second round, there hardly seems to be a groundswell of Republican support that Bennett can ride to a general-election win … and Democrats certainly won’t bother writing in his name on the line.
The Club for Growth released a statement celebrating Bennett’s political demise:
“Utah Republicans made the right decision today for their state, and sent a clear message that change is finally coming to Washington. The media may report this as Bob Bennett’s loss, but we see it as a victory for Utah, for the United States Senate, and for the cause of economic freedom.
“Our goal all along was to ensure Utah Republicans knew about Bob Bennett’s true record in the Senate, so that they could make an informed decision today. The results show that we succeeded in that effort, and I thank the delegates for taking their considered attention.
“Mike Lee and Tim Bridgewater are genuine pro-growth conservatives, and we wish both the best of luck in next round of balloting.”
I interviewed Mike Lee at CPAC this year, and he seemed very optimistic that he could derail Bennett even then. It turned out that he was right, although he may not win enough ballots to get the nomination outright. If not, Lee and Bridgewater will face off in a June primary. Here’s the interview with Lee, which was a bit choppy due to bandwidth limitations for my connection:
Update: Tim Bridgewater overtook Mike Lee in the final ballot, but could not reach the required threshold of 60%, falling just short at 57% to Lee’s 43%. That means that the two will face each other in a primary on June 22nd. The Democrats have the same problem in a Congressional race:
Utah Democrats forced Rep. Jim Matheson (D-Utah) into a primary, giving the veteran congressman only 55% of the vote against progressive activist Claudia Wright, clearly blowback for Matheson’s votes against the Democratic agenda.
Hotline gives more background on the Democratic split:
Wright challenged the Blue Dog Matheson on his moderate voting record, and was particularly incensed by his vote against the new health care law. Matheson also voted against the cap-and-trade bill, and overall, he held the 25th most-conservative voting record for a Dem in ’09, according to NJ vote ratings.
Wright’s performance today is impressive, but her challenge in a primary will be much tougher. So far this cycle, she’s reported raising just $10K, and had just $9K CoH. In his pre-convo report, Matheson had over $1.4M CoH.
By most measures, this should be a top GOP pickup. Matheson’s CD gave John McCain 58% in ’08, and holds a Cook PVI rating of R+15. That rating is the fifth-highest for a Dem. This is strong GOP territory.
But Matheson’s voting record — which Wright and some liberals attack as too moderate — has proven to be a good fit for this CD. In Mar. — during the heat of the health care debate — Matheson registered a strong 57% approval rating. In addition, Matheson has only failed to reach 55% in a general election once — in ’02.
If the underdog Wright does pull off the upset on 6/22, this seat would again be in play, as her liberal positions are sure to put her a bit out the mainstream with the strongly GOP CD. But if Matheson’s the nominee, the CD will move much further down the GOP’s target list.
If Wright can bump Matheson out in the primary, the GOP may have a shot at grabbing this House seat. However, in case any voters think about registering as a Democrat to engage in some strategic primary voting, the Senate primary for the Republicans will probably convince those to leave the Democratic race to the Democrats, as Dave Weigel suggests.









Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Excellent news.
RedState: Beware of Bridgewater Part II:
Rae on May 8, 2010 at 7:53 PM
I think the difference may be that Ryan fought the HC bill tooth and nail while Bennett was willing to serve us up ona platter with his terrible HC version in his spirit of bipartisanship. At some point when will they realize , the party of NO is what we want. These politicians have lost all common sense in their own sense of entitlementm seems to me.
bluemarlin on May 8, 2010 at 7:54 PM
Good. Bye. Sniffleupagus.
AH_C on May 8, 2010 at 7:58 PM
massrighty on May 8, 2010 at 7:39 PM
What is more palatable to the public: A primary in which 500,000 voters participate to elect a candidate? Or a state party convention in which 5000 delegates (chosen by a process not totally clear to the general public) make the primary decision? The notion that a primary election vote is arbitrary is a rather nasty one to hold.
Key West Reader on May 8, 2010 at 7:37 PM
Someone needs to learn how to win gracefully before lecturing someone to be graceful in defeat, obviously.
BradSchwartze on May 8, 2010 at 8:00 PM
That picture is priceless! LMAO!
Dire Straits on May 8, 2010 at 8:02 PM
I have a “Remember in November” bumpersticker on the car and haven’t had my tires slashed yet. I wanted to get something really snarky and really anti-Obama, but again, the tire slashing thing. One guy passed me the other day on the way to work and gave me a thumbs up.
TxAnn56 on May 8, 2010 at 8:03 PM
This is going to suck. Looks like Bennett’s people got behind Bridgewater.
Lee FTW. Come on, Utah.
Red Cloud on May 8, 2010 at 8:04 PM
P.S. If there was only a way to send Cornyn and KBH back to the ranch. Cornyn just got re-elected and KBH reniged on her promise to quit in November. What do we call that in Texas? Lower than a snake’s belly in a wagon rut.
TxAnn56 on May 8, 2010 at 8:07 PM
It’s quiet and brutal that we exit the RHINO’s and they don’t understand. The new officials better behave themselves or they will exit too.
mixplix on May 8, 2010 at 8:08 PM
But you’re ignoring that the voting populace in Utah can change the system (alter or abolish it, if you will,) whenever they wish. So, it must be “palatable.” And, anyone who can get the required threshold of convention support (including, in prior elections, Bennett,) can move on to the primary.
You’re beef is that it’s not inclusive enough, and you’d like to have wide open primaries. So, do any of the following that you have not yet done:
1. Move to Utah.
2. Change the system.
3. Participate in the new system.
massrighty on May 8, 2010 at 8:08 PM
God Bless Darlington.
hillbillyjim on May 8, 2010 at 8:48 PM
And you completely missed the point that our founding fathers envisioned: that the House is elected by We the People to represent them and the Senate are appointed by the State Govt apparatus – however they deem suitable – but not by popular vote, because their responsiblity was to represent the Federal States, not the popular will of the people.
In 1913, that all changed with the 17th Amendment. Ever since, Seantors have taken to acting like a band of Princes/Princesses. And this has brought us to the point where we see the likes of Bennett, Nelson et al, presuming to know better than the duly elected Governors and State Legislature as to what’s good for the home State and the nation at large.
Before you start detesting processes that aren’t directly tied to the voters, understand why that is. We
arewere supposed to be a federation of States, not a democracy of emotional mobs.More so here: Bennett -> Senate; Dede -> House, get the difference? Likewise, what happens when a Rep has to be replaced? A special election is held because they represent the people. Replacing the Senator on the other hand runs the gamut from Governor appointment to special elections, depending on prevailing State laws.
Had the 17th never come into being it would be the rare Senator that survives 2 or 3 terms — who needs term limits for them?
AH_C on May 8, 2010 at 8:53 PM
idea that the market would have just settled down and everything would have worked out like magic without it is naive.
Terrye on May 8, 2010 at 7:36 PM
That is not what those against TARP thought at all. We understtod that it would be brutal that it would be painful but it was a needed correction so that capital could be reallocated to the most productive, the sucess away from the failed policies of the last 70 years. At first I was for TARP becaus eI thought it would keep socilaism out of the gov because hard economic times usally brings socilaist/communist takeovers but then TARP ended up not keeping it away but made it part of the internal workings of the government. TARP allowed communism/socialism to grow like a cancer within the body politic.
We needed massive failure, we needed the elites to go from riches to rags and we needed the new blood to replace those elites as the stewards of our finacial ship of state. We got none of that with TARP. We got the status quo on steriods.
TARP could be the tipping point that cemented a CLASS SOCIETY within AMerica for the first time in this nation’s history.
unseen on May 8, 2010 at 8:57 PM
With apologies to Ed M., the first repub casualty of the tea partiers was not Bob Bennett, but was a tie between Arlen Spectre who had to change parties to suck up to Obama, in a vain attempt to be re-elected as Senator. The other initialrepub (another RINO) casualty was Ms. Scuzzyfava bean of NY23. She resigned from the race and true to her democrap roots and RINO false face she endorsed the democrap. That traitor ended her political career and was just as responsible for the passage of Obamacare as the falsely named six ‘prolife’ democraps who sold out the country for thirty pieces of silver.
eaglewingz08 on May 8, 2010 at 8:57 PM
It’s funny; all the talk was about how Tea Partiers might toss elections by going third party. No one thought it might be Establishment Republicans going independent!
Bennett’s been a decent senator. We shouldn’t slander him. But it’s a new day and time for new blood. There is no disgrace in that. It would be a literally dis-graceful exit if he were to secure a democrat victory. I hope he doesn’t do that. These are the people’s seats in Utah, too.
Noel on May 8, 2010 at 9:00 PM
I have
O B A M A
ONE BIG ASSED MISTAKE AMERICA.
and
YOU ARE BEING TAXED FOR IT NOW.
WHEN DOES YOUR RATIONED HEALTH CARE BEGIN?
on my truck and haven’t had a problem. But I do live in the southern end of the Denver metro area in Colorado.
Slowburn on May 8, 2010 at 9:04 PM
Hi guys, well its either a very slow news day, or Ed & Allah have taken a vacation. So I figured I’d throw out a little fodder for us to feast on.
First there’s another Obama friend/Chicago pol under scrutiny of a Federal grand jury….
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/2250646,CST-NWS-whitaker09.article
And just for general reading pleasure, more from John Kass (Trib) on the cess-pool that is Chicago/Illinois politics.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-met-kass-0506-20100506,0,5398011.column
&
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/columnists/ct-met-kass-0506-20100506,0,5398011.column
Yep, I’m bored.
Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 9:07 PM
Right. Because social classes didn’t exist in the eighteenth and nineteenth century.
Grow Fins on May 8, 2010 at 9:08 PM
I love Romney. But I don’t believe in career politicians. Politics should never be a career. One should leave there career serve office for a time then go back to it. Its a civic duty but should not be a career where ambition and power make one not reliable to serve the peoples interest when it conflicts with their own political ambitions. Romney understands this. He is not a career politician and I appreciate that about him
Bennett has been in office too long. It became a career to him, albeit a second career but nonetheless a career. He should have retired.
Romney is very loyal and his choice to endorse Bennett probably was out of friendship. If your friend came to you pleading for help only a cold person could refuse a heartfelt plea. If it hadn’t been for Romney, Bennett may not even have survived the first ballot. Bennett is a good man but I think his time has come to an end.
Change is good. Change will keep away the career politicians.
Lori on May 8, 2010 at 9:23 PM
This is the kind of “Hope and Change” America needs.
We must politically destroy the Democrat Socialist Workers Party and their RINO enablers, like Bennett, if we are serious about returning our country to its’ Constitutional limits.
DeathB4Tyranny on May 8, 2010 at 9:23 PM
The fascists see this as a power grab by the people. If this doesn’t stink of elitism, I don’t know what does:
“This is just the latest battle in the corrosive Republican intra-party civil war that has resulted in the Tea Party devouring two Republicans in just as many weeks,” Kaine said. “If there was any question before, there should now be no doubt that the Republican leadership has handed the reigns to the Tea Party.”
madmonkphotog on May 8, 2010 at 9:25 PM
Great news! They need a primary. Primaries allow the sunlight to shine in and the voters to meet the candidates. Gets the candidates sharp too.
conservative pilgrim on May 8, 2010 at 9:25 PM
So says DNC chairman Tim Kaine. haha. Gotta love it when the Democrats give Republicans advice.
conservative pilgrim on May 8, 2010 at 9:27 PM
FlickeringFloyd’s Tears. They are salty.
Bwaaa haaa haaaa.
portlandon on May 8, 2010 at 9:32 PM
So you essentially want to eliminate every amendment to the Constitution? Or do you, again, want to pick and choose depending on whatever floats your boat?
You know, there are quite a few good amendments to the Constitution, but apparently in AH_C’s world, black people are 3/5th human and women shouldn’t be allowed to vote.
Good luck with that.
NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 9:38 PM
Well if Kaine has a problem with this then it must be ok!
Vince on May 8, 2010 at 9:41 PM
So what happens when Republicans are in majority? How do they govern?
And if Bennet is a RINO, then God help conservatives!
I mean look a t Haywoorth currently the hero of many: What was his fiscal record when he was sin congress?
rightistliberal on May 8, 2010 at 9:48 PM
“Mitt Romney was backed almost unanimously by Utah GOP prez primary electorate in ’08. But his intro of Bennett this a.m.? Boos & no effect.” -Larry Sabato live tweet from vote in Utah.
This does look like some trouble for Romney. When he gets booed, by Republicans in the Redest state, in the Mormon capital of the world,…..Mitts got some trouble brewing.
portlandon on May 8, 2010 at 9:52 PM
Y’know, the moderation on HA is beginnig to get outta hand, my last post was censored out for citing what a UCLA Prof is calling on his students to do.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yGqPo5ofk0s
Le Raza is designating itself as an enemy of our nation.
Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 9:53 PM
That’ll do pig, that’ll do.
abobo on May 8, 2010 at 9:54 PM
I tend to agree. I also don’t think that anyone could have anticipated how far off the rails the TARP program would go from its original mandate, nor could they have known how ‘regulators’ would use brass knuckle tactics to force banks to take out loans they didn’t need or want, or use the TARP loans to keep GM afloat- only to screw Senior bondholders later.
Buy Danish on May 8, 2010 at 9:56 PM
I sent the linky to tips@hotair.com earlier today…
… I guess calling for ‘Open Revolution’ against the United States of America isn’t even an infraction anymore.
Who knew?
Seven Percent Solution on May 8, 2010 at 10:01 PM
I sent the linky in to “tips” earlier today…
… then a comment I just posted got swallowed up.
Nice!
Seven Percent Solution on May 8, 2010 at 10:03 PM
Handed the “reigns” not “reins”? Either the Dems aren’t as well-educated as they pretend to be, or that was a bad pun, or a Freudian slip.
Buy Danish on May 8, 2010 at 10:03 PM
NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 9:38 PM
Strawman arguement, AH_C never advocated repeal of every amendment. Just the one that circumvents the checks and balances the FF’s brillantly constructed, I for one would very much support a repeal of 17th.
Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 10:03 PM
Hmmm… question.
Can Bennett try and run as a write in in the Republican primary?
I wouldn’t be nearly as put out by Bennett doing that as I would him running as a write in Independent.
Sackett on May 8, 2010 at 10:06 PM
Seven Percent Solution on May 8, 2010 at 10:03 PM
I know Ed & Allah mean well and are just trying to keep HA on the up & up, but at some point censorship is gonna get downright dangerous.
Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 10:06 PM
Handed the “reigns” not “reins”? Either the Dems aren’t as well-educated as they pretend to be, or that was a bad pun, or a Freudian slip.
Buy Danish on May 8, 2010 at 10:03 PM
My money is on Freudian slip.
Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 10:08 PM
They also “brilliantly constructed” amendments that prohibited women from voting and counted african americans as 3/5th human.
So what you’re saying is only parts of the Constitution are brilliant, yes? I know in the ‘tea party’ reality, you are allowed to have it both ways. But here in the real world, it doesn’t work like that.
I’m not arguing against the repeal of the 17th amendment, but it’s hypocritical to say only sections of the original Constitution are correct and not necessary to amend.
NoStoppingUs on May 8, 2010 at 10:09 PM
Again strawman, AH_C never called for their repeal either. When one has no solid basis for their arguments they always seek to distract with something totally unrelated.
Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 10:12 PM
That’s what I was thinking. It fits their neo-Monarchist, Marie Antoinette vibe.
Buy Danish on May 8, 2010 at 10:13 PM
And quit making me the issue with your references to TEA party and the like, you haven’t a clue about anything about me. The perfectly legitimate arguement was about the 17th.
Nothing else.
Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 10:16 PM
Goodbye you big gov’t, amnesty loving RINO.
BYE.
artist on May 8, 2010 at 10:18 PM
One down….
ElectricPhase on May 8, 2010 at 10:23 PM
Why is the Mitt Romney connection being ignored here on HotAir? Romney endorsed Bennett and even flew out to Utah to introduce Bennett at the very convention that GOP voters gave him the boot!
BENNETT’S ACE IN THE HOLE: MITT ROMNEY
MITT ROMNEY ENDORSES BOB BENNETT
Now, by comparison – you can better damn bet your last greenback that if JD Hayworth beats John McCain – the major story on HotAir will be “Palin’s endorsement REJECTED by the Grassroots”
Yet here we have the same exact circumstance with Mitt Romney and the connection is ignored?
This is big. The Utah GOP has been “assimilated” by the Tea Party … they not only threw out Bob Bennett – but they REJECTED Mitt’s endorsement of the man.
This happened in UTAH people – a State where Mitt Romney’s endorsement is kind of supposed to carry a lot of weight. His defeat here is a big deal – why is this angle being ignored?
HondaV65 on May 8, 2010 at 10:23 PM
..I am sorry, for those like me who are dense, please explain. You want to chuck out Ryan and Bachmann?
The War Planner on May 8, 2010 at 10:29 PM
HondaV65 on May 8, 2010 at 10:23 PM
Actually its been havily commented upon up higher in the thread and on the previous page. HA & Co put this post up early today with nothing after, so this thread has drifted as hot heads have no other subject matter to address.
Someone at HA central is asleep at the switch.
Ed? Allah? Bueller….
Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 10:32 PM
Cornyn and Hillary with their HIB Visa program have given jobs to Indian workers and usurped American voters….He loves foreigners….big bucks…
He continues to push RINOS on all of us in the Senate races.
He yells at Limbaugh for saying O’s policies should fail….
Is he gay…can we find anything to make this guy go away….Williams of Texas would make a good GOP bully…
nondhimmie on May 8, 2010 at 10:32 PM
Hahaha!!
Well at least C4P is covering the Romney angle – even that aspect of this event is ignored here on HotAir …
HondaV65 on May 8, 2010 at 10:33 PM
Tea Party claims first Republican scalp?
===========================================
Bennett voted for the Bailout!
Consquences are a b*tch!!
I’ll have to go to my Great Grand Purge List which
has a lot of names,and scratch this one off!!(sarc).
canopfor on May 8, 2010 at 10:36 PM
HondaV65 on May 8, 2010 at 10:23 PM
It’s called turning a blind eye out of “vested interests”.
technopeasant on May 8, 2010 at 10:36 PM
HondaV65 on May 8, 2010 at 10:33 PM
Thanks for the link, things are slow here
so I’ll check that out a while.
Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 10:41 PM
Right. Because social classes didn’t exist in the eighteenth and nineteenth century.
Grow Fins on May 8, 2010 at 9:08 PM
guess you missed the word cemented…..In the 18th and 19th, 20th century they was always the rags to riches and the riches to rags in American classes. Anyone could get to the top and anyone making bad decisions faced the possibility of hitting the bottom. TARP stopped that flow of the riches to rags. hell even Murdoff is still wealthy.
unseen on May 8, 2010 at 10:41 PM
“Looking back on them, with one or two very minor exceptions, I wouldn’t have cast them any differently even if I’d known at the time it would cost me my career.”
Your career?! You promised to serve two terms max and now you’re running for your fourth at the age of 77. Dottering old fool. Time to hit the links. You’ll probably run into “the One”.
ncjetsfan on May 8, 2010 at 10:43 PM
It was Freudian slip. Trust me on this.
Sigmund on May 8, 2010 at 10:54 PM
Let’s hope Bennett has 32 other fellow Senators join him in retirement this Fall.
EVERY RINO must go!!!!!
NOvember !!!!!!!!!!
PappyD61 on May 8, 2010 at 10:59 PM
Yowza. What a close-knit group they are. As a bonus, his news is hitting just in time for Michelle to take center stage.
Buy Danish on May 8, 2010 at 11:00 PM
Ed,
To say that the Tea Party claimed this scalp is quite simplistic. The discontent started longer ago than this year. When Jason Chaffetz defeated Rep Chris Cannon 2 years ago, the die was cast for Bennett. Utah activists (and Bennett’s opponents) learned from the lessons of the Chaffetz campaign and did what had to be done to take Senator Bennett down.
This defeat was at least 2 years in the making!
LL
Lady Logician on May 8, 2010 at 11:01 PM
Ha! I trust you, Siggie.
Buy Danish on May 8, 2010 at 11:04 PM
Bennett is not a RINO BUT he has lost touch with the base in his state. They said, pretty loudly, no spending and no tarp and no Health Care scheme ‘negotiations’…compromise)and he ignored them…
When the powers that be in Washington and the Party Elites wake up to the fact that the folk who put them in power are simply not going to take being ignored any longer, those elites might have a chance of surviving…
JIMV on May 8, 2010 at 11:04 PM
Are you nuts? AH_C never said he wanted to repeal every amendment. You are just making crap up. He just dropped some education on you about the way the House and Senate work and the way that changed after the 17th amendment was added in 1913. He didn’t advocate for a return of slavery or any other such thing.
I get the feeling you are either of poor intelligence, low reading comprehension, or just a dishonest debater. Which is it?
dczombie on May 8, 2010 at 11:08 PM
All of the above…just google its moniker and hotair.com. It has zero credibility and can be summarily ignored.
Inanemergencydial on May 8, 2010 at 11:17 PM
dczombie on May 8, 2010 at 11:08 PM
Ahem,
NoStoppingUs = Troll + Tool = Trool
Archimedes on May 8, 2010 at 11:19 PM
OH MY GOD: TOTALLY OFF TOPIC BUT DID EVERYONE HEAR THAT THEY ARE BUILDING A GIANT $100 MILLION MOSQUE RIGHT NEXT TO GROUND ZERO? CRAZY!!! http://www.breitbart.tv/100-million-mosque-planned-for-near-ground-zero/#comments
andy85719 on May 8, 2010 at 11:27 PM
A Good start. Now if we can get rid of Mitch.. that would be wonderful
shar61 on May 8, 2010 at 11:33 PM
Thanks for the heads up. I’ve been around HA quite a bit and somehow managed to miss out on this troll until now. My loss….or something like that. ;-)
dczombie on May 8, 2010 at 11:38 PM
What an ignoramus. There was no “amendment that prohibited women from voting”, and the constantly-bemoaned 3/5 clause was a compromise that enabled the adoption of the very Constitution that allowed for the eventual prohibition of slavery. Read up on some history and try again…although I’m sure you’ll still cling to that whining over the 3/5 clause. It makes you feel soooooo good.
ddrintn on May 8, 2010 at 11:45 PM
Is there anyone left with America’s interests at heart?
MB4 on May 8, 2010 at 11:48 PM
Yeah… I saw Mitt on CSPAN trying to sell Bennett… *yawn
MeatHeadinCA on May 8, 2010 at 11:50 PM
Actually, the Constitution does not mention African Americans at all. The 3/5 Clause simply applies to all individuals held in servitude.
andy85719 on May 8, 2010 at 11:55 PM
I’m no Constitutional scholar, but what you say here is factually incorrect.
There is no amendment prohibiting women from voting, nor is there anything in the main body of the Constitution prohibiting nor guaranteeing the right to vote to anyone.
Also, the 3/5s representative apportionment is not an amendment, nor does it refer to African Americans.
Your understanding of the Constitution seems, at this point anyway, to fall below the mean average that tea partiers appear to have.
Saltysam on May 8, 2010 at 11:55 PM
Moreover, for a purely political standpoint, removed from the ethical considerations, the 3/5 Clause made sense, in that it lent southern states political clout while restricting the degree to which accumulating slaves contributed to representation. Were slaves not counted at all, the south would have had nominal representation only, but if slaves were counted as a full person, the south would have wielded complete power and the demise of slavery would likely have taken longer.
andy85719 on May 9, 2010 at 12:01 AM
I commented that a couple of days ago from Atlasshrugs. Didn’t get much response. You probably won’t either. Allah and Ed are ignoring it. NYC’s mayor is ignoring it. He is probably spending his time trying to figure out a way to blame the recent attempted mass killing bombing on someone who is against ObamasteinCare.
Monster Mosque Pushes Ahead in Shadow of World Trade Center Islamic Death and Destruction
SIOA CAMPAIGN OFFENSIVE: STOP THE 911 MOSQUE!
MB4 on May 9, 2010 at 12:05 AM
It will be fun to watch, will this will light a fire under Utah Senator Orrin Hatch?
RJL on May 9, 2010 at 12:13 AM
You won’t see AP post on it (unless he can somehow smear Palin with it) but Mittens got booed. Mittens has lost Utah. The mormon has lost the mormon state, and the rest of the country isn’t too sure about this ‘Joseph Smith and the magic scrying device’ religious mythology Mittens believes in.
Mittens might find a spot in Palin’s cabinet if he plays his cards right.
Mr Purple on May 9, 2010 at 12:19 AM
andy85719 on May 9, 2010 at 12:01 AM
Exactly.
An African slave in the South post 1789 most likely would have been better off being counted as 0/5. It’s quite possible slavery would have been outlawed sooner, and without the war.
Most people do not realize that the 3/5 apportionment was a compromise. The South wanted slaves to be counted 5/5 while the North preferred the 0/5. This is completely missed by the poorly educated in American history.
The simple fact is slavery would have essentially been eradicated had it not been for the South’s insistence that slaves be counted in the census.
Saltysam on May 9, 2010 at 12:24 AM
MB4 on May 9, 2010 at 12:05 AM
Y’know the change in management from MM to Townhall is really starting to show. As Buy Danish and I commented on earlier, the moderation/censorship is really getting outta hand.
This is a bad move for HA ’cause I’ starting to see a migration occur from here to Ace.
Big drag man. I like Ace, but HA has been home for some time now and I really don’t want to follow suit, but I’m a capitalist and if this keeps up I’ll take my “clicks” elsewhere.
Kinda makes me sad if it comes to that.
Sigh….
Archimedes on May 9, 2010 at 12:31 AM
I believe only those held in perpetual servitude. I’m think those held for a finite term were counted fully in the census.
Saltysam on May 9, 2010 at 12:39 AM
There is so much misinformation about the history of this country that people are lucky they aren’t tested on it like they are for driving.
http://www.slavenorth.com/index.html
I am the smartest man in the world because I know what I don’t know. Elites make me puke. I’m so sick of ‘em I could get all Pulp Fiction on ‘em.
platypus on May 9, 2010 at 1:02 AM
OT,
This is what DOOMED looks like.
Moody’s reveals its sovereign projection for US.
http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysis/Article.aspx?id=532490
Welcome to our nightmare, loss of AAA rating by 2013?
Archimedes on May 9, 2010 at 1:09 AM
I’m not even going to quote the rest of your vitriol.
As a Utahn, I can tell you without a doubt Mitt has not lost any popularity.
I helped vote Bennett out.
I am moving to Salt Lake and will help vote Matheson out.
Don’t try and tell me who we like and dislike.
All this primary shows is that we can make our own decisions.
We WILL vote for Mitt. I guarantee it.
scotash on May 9, 2010 at 1:13 AM
Can’t post link – in the mill – on Drudge, top/left, a teacher is calling for a Mexican r e v o l u t i o n in the U.S.
Schadenfreude on May 9, 2010 at 1:16 AM
Also remember Mitt brought the end to the Democrat Supermajority with Scott Brown.
Don’t turn on one of our best assets people!
scotash on May 9, 2010 at 1:21 AM
If he is the best the Republicans can do then we might as well declare defeat right now!
Tasha on May 9, 2010 at 1:24 AM
Schadenfreude on May 9, 2010 at 1:16 AM
Its posted above, its most likely the accompaning comment with it that got it screened.
Accurate quoting of our opponents language ist verbotten, honesty is the 1st casualty of censorship.
Archimedes on May 9, 2010 at 1:26 AM
Mittens got booed!
If Palin runs, and there is absolutely NO reason to think she won’t…she wins UT.
I can’t see a scenario where Romney even finishes second in that deal.
Palin has been out there showing she is a real leader, kickin’ arse and taking names. Making HARD, and often unpopular decisions for the good of the country.
Romney is nowhere to be found. NOWHERE.
American wants a LEADER not someone who looks the part but is scared to pony up.
gary4205 on May 9, 2010 at 1:27 AM
The most interesting feature to observe about Bennett becoming a lame duck is how does he behave without ‘strings’. Is he going to trend conservative into the sunset (doubtful)? Or is he going to become a loose RINO cannon like Specter, embarrassing the GOP Senate RINO leadership on every turn about what they really stand for?
Get another crate of popcorn, this is going to be …
drfredc on May 9, 2010 at 1:40 AM
When I was a young man, I spent a few months in Boston. The racism was rampant.
Saltysam on May 9, 2010 at 1:49 AM
So….Utahns have ALWAYS booed Mittens?
Bennett gets ousted because he isn’t conservative enough – but you think a TARP supporting Mittens who installed the ObamaCare model in Massachussetts is somehow going to be conservative enough for Utahns? That just doesn’t make any sense.
Basically what you are saying is that it doesn’t really matter if you are a conservative or not, as long as you believe Joseph Smith spoke to angels and the White Jesus lived in America.
Mr Purple on May 9, 2010 at 1:50 AM
Bennett should be allowed in the Primary… and this convention system is stupid…
ninjapirate on May 9, 2010 at 1:56 AM
Nothing like reasoned thoughtful debate.
Go back and read the Constitution. Article I Section 3:
“The Senate of the United States shall be composed of two Senators from each state[chosen by the Legislature] thereof for six years; and each Senator shall have one vote.”
Obviously that was changed by the 17th Amendment, but selecting candidates by means other than popular vote is nothing new. In fact, in the earliest of days Presidents were chosen by a relative handful of people!
Bennett, like everyone else knew the rules when he played the game. The rules are the same for everyone, so they are fair.
Bennett lost. Get over, go home and take the grandkids fishing, or whatever one does in Utah.
gary4205 on May 9, 2010 at 2:47 AM
Schadenfreude.
Allahpundit?! Hellooooooooooo!!!!!!!!!!!!
Schadenfreude.
Lockstein13 on May 9, 2010 at 4:22 AM
Not to be a party pooper, but I am sick of the word RINO. I have decided it means any Republican who doesn’t agree with ME. A Rino to one person is a patriot to another.
bopbottle on May 9, 2010 at 5:11 AM
These trough pigs really piss me off. He’s 76 years old and gets a benefit package that any of us would kill for. Politicians argue against term limits by saying it’s up to the voters. Then, when the voters exercise their perogative, they bums whine and cry and fight like hell to get back in any way they can. Bennett now makes a great argument for 12 years and out.
Mr. Grump on May 9, 2010 at 6:09 AM
The GOP Senate Good Ol’ Boys’ Club breaking apart.
Suh-weet!
Bennett’s “I may run as a write-in” is just one more example showing that he’s not out for the people; he’s out for himself.
Let’s clean out the whole nest.
davidk on May 9, 2010 at 7:11 AM
Visit the wives.
davidk on May 9, 2010 at 7:15 AM
This is the power of organizing at the lowest level of a political party: changing it at the precinct and State level to impact National politics.
This system is no more ‘unfair’ than that the GOP has in other States that are slipping through the fingers of the elites – Florida and Ohio to name two others. The great and good joy is that Tea Partiers are also learning that the Democratic Party is organized this way and has many, many, many vacant precincts in the States. When this concept is utilized to ‘cross-over’ and remove the underpinnings of the elites in both parties, then we will see the crumbling of the end of the Progressive Era.
The unimagineable happened to the National GOP yesterday: it learned that it is beholden to the State Republican Parties, not the other way around.
As for Bennett, he will be seen as rejected by his party, old and unable to give up his grasp for power and, ultimately, unable to marshal the minority faction of the old guard in the GOP to his side. Does one expect to see Romney or Hatch campaigning for a write-in candidate rejected by the Utah GOP?
This is not the end of the process, but the very first mark of its beginning. It will be slow to start with, but this movement is the mark of a sea change in US politics. Perhaps too late, but this is America, after all. At the beginning of the Revolution only 15% were for the Revolution and 15% were against it…. 70% wanted no part of it, but the Revolution would come to engulf them all and remove the fence that the 70% sat upon. The fence is now crumbling again…soon there will be no place to sit upon it left.
ajacksonian on May 9, 2010 at 7:38 AM
That is the real story. Crist was backed by the NSRC and now stabs the Party in the back. Bennett was endorsed by the Party regulars and may now turn traitor as well. This clearly proves the true nature of the GOP leadership, a bunch of selfish elitist bastards that stand for nothing but $$$ in their own pockets.
If Romney doesn’t publicly pressure his pal Bennett against screwing the Party and the Tea Party conservatives then he declares himself an anti-Tea Party elitist and any more “I’m a conservative” speeches will get the same boos he got standing up for Bennett.
rcl on May 9, 2010 at 7:55 AM
Purge the RINOS.
SurferDoc on May 9, 2010 at 7:56 AM
This is probably true. I think people understand that Ryan honestly believed they were looking at a crisis and acted on that account..but he did not move on to do other things to give people the impression that he just loved government intervention.
My only fear with some of the talk concerning TARP is that people seem to get the idea that if there had been no action then things would have just worked out fine. I don’t think that is true. The market did not create the crisis and I am not so sure that it could easily have fixed it either. I just think that if TARP had been the beginning and end of it, and if the money had been paid back like it was in the S&L collapse, people would not have been so upset about it all.
I just the Democrats took advantage of the situation to expand government in a way they knew they could not otherwise get away with. But that does not mean that people want government to watch the economy collapse without so much as a kiss my behind.
Terrye on May 9, 2010 at 7:57 AM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »