Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Overthrow a Sign of Tea-Party Clout
WSJ ^ | May 9, 2010 | Stu Woo

Posted on 05/09/2010 5:56:10 PM PDT by FTJM

Republican officials sought to unify the party after Saturday's tea-party driven ouster of three-term Utah Republican Senator Robert Bennett.

Mr. Bennett became the year's first victim of the anti-incumbent fervor sweeping through the Republican Party when he lost his bid for his party's nomination at a state GOP convention here. GOP activists blasted him as a Washington insider who had lost touch with Utah's conservative ideals and will instead nominate a tea party-backed populist candidate who promises adherence to conservative principles.

The GOP candidate hasn't yet been chosen, but it will be one of Mr. Bennett's two challengers, businessman Tim Bridgewater and lawyer Mike Lee, both favored by the tea party and who will face off in a June 22 primary. The winner will be favored to win the general election in this heavily Republican state.

Mr. Bennett has missed the filing deadline to run as an independent contestant, but he can run as a write-in candidate.

Mr. Bennett has missed the filing deadline to run as an independent contestant, but he can run as a write-in candidate. In congratulating his two opponents he appeared not to be favoring that option, and a Bennett spokeswoman on Sunday said a write-in campaign was unlikely.

(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events; Politics/Elections; US: Utah
KEYWORDS: bennett; demint; gopprimary; teaparty; ut2010

1 posted on 05/09/2010 5:56:10 PM PDT by FTJM
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: FTJM

Methinks ole swimmer’s seat became the first victim of the tea party.


2 posted on 05/09/2010 5:57:47 PM PDT by Carley (WE CAN SEE NOVEMBER FROM OUR HOUSE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FTJM

Too bad this did not happen fifteen years ago —


3 posted on 05/09/2010 5:58:56 PM PDT by EagleUSA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FTJM

There was a time when Bennett was a fairly decent Senator. But he obviously didn’t have a clue about the feelings of his constituents, because he shifted left just as they were looking for the opposite.

I hope they find a good replacement.


4 posted on 05/09/2010 6:02:06 PM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FTJM

Sounds like the people are taking control. The “insiders” are not going to like it.


5 posted on 05/09/2010 6:03:26 PM PDT by Parley Baer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FTJM

You can’t be populist and conservative at the same time. It doesn’t work like that.

You can be a conservative who is populist on some things or a populist who is a conservative on some things but you just can’t be both because they are diametrically opposed ideologies.


6 posted on 05/09/2010 6:04:11 PM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FTJM

Another thing. Why exactly is a convention held to determine who has the right to run in a primary? Last time I checked, primaries are supposed to be where voters select candidates themselves.


7 posted on 05/09/2010 6:05:51 PM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
Bennet sounds like a run of the mill long termer with a bad case of beltway-itis. Happens to the best of them. The only cure is retirement, voluntary or otherwise.
8 posted on 05/09/2010 6:05:52 PM PDT by hinckley buzzard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FTJM
Term limits and pork a recipe for a deserved retirement.
9 posted on 05/09/2010 6:08:42 PM PDT by Recon Dad ( USMC SSgt Patrick O - 3rd Afghanistan Deployment - Day 201)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
...because they are diametrically opposed ideologies.

You sure about that?

10 posted on 05/09/2010 6:09:09 PM PDT by Minn (Here is a realistic picture of the prophet: ----> ([: {()
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer

It’s past time to make all “insiders” OUTsiders.


11 posted on 05/09/2010 6:12:22 PM PDT by brushcop (SFC Sallie, CPL Long, LTHarris, SSG Brown, PVT Simmons KIA OIF lll&V, they died for you, honor them)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Minn

Yeah I am. I know exactly was populism is. Populism calls for the little people taking whatever they want by government force and distributing it amongst themselves, and of course, fighting for the “people” against those who “oppress” the people, whatever that happens to mean at the time.

Conservatism stands for the idea of no more government than necessary and the idea that there should be no unearned obligation free handouts to the able from the public treasury. Different concepts entirely.

Hugo Chavez is a populist. My point stands.


12 posted on 05/09/2010 6:12:56 PM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Carley

Scuzzafava was.


13 posted on 05/09/2010 6:14:00 PM PDT by CPT Clay (Pick up your weapon and follow me.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691

Sarah Palin is a populist.


14 posted on 05/09/2010 6:16:01 PM PDT by ez ("Abashed the Devil stood and felt how awful goodness is." - Milton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: hinckley buzzard

His whining about the vote clears-up any doubts concerning his retirement.


15 posted on 05/09/2010 6:17:31 PM PDT by RepublicanMeansAmerican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: FTJM

After the delegates showed him the door, Bennett said that looking back on his votes, he would not have changed any of them.

Okay, Bob. Bu-bye.


16 posted on 05/09/2010 6:21:29 PM PDT by lurk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
There was a time when Bennett was a fairly decent Senator. But he obviously didn’t have a clue about the feelings of his constituents...

He'd lived in DC for nearly two decades. All his friends were there and almost all of them, even the ones who called themselves as "conservatives" saw themselves as wiser than the rubes back home and much more able to chart the course of the country. In short, he became part of the problem.

Not to worry though, he'll most likely have a great career as a lobbyist.

17 posted on 05/09/2010 6:21:34 PM PDT by InABunkerUnderSF (Anyone who has ever read Roman history knows a barbarian invasion when they see one.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: FTJM

It’s not “anti-incumbent fervor sweeping through the Republican Party”, it’s “anti-RINO fervor sweeping through the Republican Party”


18 posted on 05/09/2010 6:22:05 PM PDT by wny
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cicero
he obviously didn’t have a clue about the feelings of his constituents

You do not think that a Senator does not believe in constituent services when he brings in a boatload of pork for the benefit [of a few who will be generous with campaign contributions] of the constituents of his district.

19 posted on 05/09/2010 6:33:20 PM PDT by AndyJackson
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
In Utah, the convention chooses the nominees. Since there was no clear winner, and Bennett came in third in the delgate vote, the top two are having a runoff.

Sucks to be him. That the Wards weren't all behind him, and the Temple tells the Wards how to think, cost him.

20 posted on 05/09/2010 6:37:02 PM PDT by jonascord (We've got the Constitution to protect us. Why should we worry?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
In Utah, the convention chooses the nominees. Since there was no clear winner, and Bennett came in third in the delgate vote, the top two are having a runoff.

Sucks to be him. That the Wards weren't all behind him, and the Temple tells the Wards how to think, cost him.

21 posted on 05/09/2010 6:37:03 PM PDT by jonascord (We've got the Constitution to protect us. Why should we worry?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
In Utah, the convention chooses the nominees. Since there was no clear winner, and Bennett came in third in the delgate vote, the top two are having a runoff.

Sucks to be him. That the Wards weren't all behind him, and the Temple tells the Wards how to think, cost him.

22 posted on 05/09/2010 6:38:06 PM PDT by jonascord (We've got the Constitution to protect us. Why should we worry?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: FTJM

RINOs in Utah are held to a higher standard.


23 posted on 05/09/2010 6:38:08 PM PDT by Paladin2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CPT Clay

True and I hear she is not running again.


24 posted on 05/09/2010 6:40:17 PM PDT by Carley (WE CAN SEE NOVEMBER FROM OUR HOUSE)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: jonascord

You’ve basically confirmed that Utah is a defacto theocracy.

Having actually gone there on business before I already knew this. But I would figure that they would far rather do something like this in a primary itself than through a convention. Mitt Romney managed to get 89% of the vote in a primary and we all know there was only one reason for that.

With a convention you run the risk of non-Mormon interests having a vehicle with which they could use to fight Temple control of the state. Then again, I don’t live there and I’m not a Mormon elder so I guess I shouldn’t speak on these things


25 posted on 05/09/2010 6:42:54 PM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: jonascord

Jonas, you’re stuttering again.


26 posted on 05/09/2010 6:45:16 PM PDT by tx_eggman (Liberalism is only possible in that moment when a man chooses Barabas over Christ.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: FTJM

Our only chance of saving the Republic is to vote all incumbents out of office.
Good, bad or ugly. They have to go. Corruption is too deep.


27 posted on 05/09/2010 6:45:30 PM PDT by marygam ((Obama is not a messiah, wake up folks!))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ez
Sarah Palin is a populist.

Suggest you re-read your American history.

As a political movement, "populism" is a coalition of so-called "little people" who demand government intervention in their favor vis-a-vis "big corporations" and "the rich".

See Bryant, William Jennings.

Anybody who wants smaller, less intrusive government -- as Palin does -- is demonstrably not a "populist".

28 posted on 05/09/2010 6:49:12 PM PDT by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: wny

For two years now the lamestream press has been lamenting a lack of leadership in the Republican Party. Who is the leader of the GOP they asked as though they were concerned with our welfare. Article after article pointed to a party wandering aimlessly in search of a purpose and wondering who was in charge. Thanks to the Tea Party movement we have finally answered that question. “The people” have seized control of the Republican Party, and woe unto the politician who fails to listen to them.


29 posted on 05/09/2010 6:52:08 PM PDT by csmusaret (Remember, half the people in this country are below average)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
You can’t be populist and conservative at the same time.

Why not. Conservatism means being opposed to government intervention in the marketplace, period. That means no bailouts and no subsidies for financial firms and corporations. That's what driving the Tea Party movement.

Populism has many definitions. You're thinking in terms of left-leaning populism, the kind that Democrats used to advocate.

30 posted on 05/09/2010 6:59:55 PM PDT by Extremely Extreme Extremist (Obamunism: You have two cows. The regime redistributes them and shoots you dead)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: okie01

Noun
S: (n) populism (the political doctrine that supports the rights and powers of the common people in their struggle with the privileged elite)


31 posted on 05/09/2010 7:19:32 PM PDT by jpsb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691

Each State political party can set their own nominating guidelines.


32 posted on 05/09/2010 7:25:16 PM PDT by no dems
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Extremely Extreme Extremist; AzaleaCity5691

Jack Kemp, may he rest in peace, was a Conservative Populist.


33 posted on 05/09/2010 7:27:10 PM PDT by no dems
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
You can’t be populist and conservative at the same time. It doesn’t work like that.

It works exactly like that.

There are populist conservatives and populist liberals.

34 posted on 05/09/2010 7:47:56 PM PDT by Graybeard58 (No Romney,No Mark Kirk (Illinois), not now, not ever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691

I was going to say the same thing. How in the world could a Conservative candidates who swears to represent Conservative ideals be termed a “populist”. First the GOP says we need more “moderates” to win elections, and now they are trying to paint Tea-Party backed candidates who support TRUE Conservative ideals of smaller government, and Freedom as populist? The idea is laughable frankly... What will they try next?


35 posted on 05/09/2010 7:48:25 PM PDT by LibertyRocks (http://libertyrocks.wordpress.com ~ Anti-Obama Gear: http://cafepress.com/NO_ObamaBiden08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: ez

I think you may be confusing “Popular” with “Populist”.


36 posted on 05/09/2010 7:49:37 PM PDT by LibertyRocks (http://libertyrocks.wordpress.com ~ Anti-Obama Gear: http://cafepress.com/NO_ObamaBiden08)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Parley Baer

The Maine Republican Party had our Convention last weekend, and on Saturday 5/8 passed a new platform that completely replaces the former one.

http://paintmainered.ning.com/forum/topic/show?id=2731571:Topic:31119

- OR - :

http://paintmainered.ning.com/forum/attachment/download?id=2731571%3AUploadedFi38%3A31117

I was a Delegate there, and frankly didn’t think that it stood the proverbial snowball’s chance - so was quite pleasantly surprised when it did!

The “Progressive / Moderate” Republicans, the Democrats, and the media are virtually apoplectic, needless to say.

There are a couple of things in there that I would have left out... like “Austrian Economy”.. what’s up with that??

It is, however, no less than a R3Volutionary document to get past the Snowe / Collins party establishment!

Gee; you’d almost think that there was a Tea Party in the house up here in dark blue People’s Ripublik of Maine, wouldn’t ya?


37 posted on 05/09/2010 8:17:25 PM PDT by George Varnum (Liberty, like our Forefather's Flintlock Musket, must be kept clean, oiled, and READY!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: AzaleaCity5691
Then again, I don’t live there and I’m not a Mormon elder so I guess I shouldn’t speak on these things

You got that right. Anyone thinks that the Mormon church had anything to do with Bennett's loss is shocking misinformed about this race.

It really is embarrassing for you.

38 posted on 05/09/2010 10:17:29 PM PDT by GreyMountainReagan ("Pray for America")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: jonascord
That the Wards weren't all behind him, and the Temple tells the Wards how to think, cost him.

Laughably stupid comment. It was Bennett's vote on the bailout that cost him.

Mormon church had zero to do with it.

39 posted on 05/09/2010 10:18:56 PM PDT by GreyMountainReagan ("Pray for America")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: FTJM; All

40 posted on 05/10/2010 2:10:56 AM PDT by backhoe (Just an Old Keyboard Cowboy, ridin' the trakball into America's Twilight...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Anybody who wants smaller, less intrusive government -- as Palin does -- is demonstrably not a "populist".

No, I read up on populism before I posted. Populism is tapping into a popular movement of the people, and can be pro-government or anti-government. IMHO, Palin is tapping into the anti-big-government sentiments of broad group[s of the people, and is populist. Buchanon was populist... REAGAN was populist.

41 posted on 05/10/2010 3:11:54 AM PDT by ez ("Abashed the Devil stood and felt how awful goodness is." - Milton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ez

And on the left we had people like Huey Long, Lester Maddox, George Wallace.

Huey - A chicken in every pot. Maddox and Wallace were racists running under the cause of “states rights”. Nothing wrong with being for state’s rights but their underlying agenda was racist.


42 posted on 05/10/2010 5:40:28 AM PDT by Graybeard58 (No Romney,No Mark Kirk (Illinois), not now, not ever!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

The only thing that was really “left” about Wallace might have been his union support. Wallace was supporting the chief conservative issue in his state at the time and so his combination of moderate-to-left economic policies combined with his conservative social policies endeared him to a lot of Alabamians, and scores of Alabama politicians still try to walk his tightrope.

And Wallace was not a racist. I personally knew Wallace. My father supported every campaign of his from ‘58 onward (and it ‘58 he was painted as a red, which motivated his shift on segregation). I personally voted for Wallace in both the primary and the general in 1982 and would have done so again in 1986, partly due to daddy’s business connections and partly because in 1986 I could only consciously remember 2 governors, Wallace and James and James was regarded by everyone at the time as a collosal failure.

Wallace took up the cause he did because it was what the public expected at the time and he wanted to be a politician.

People also woefully misunderstand what Maddox was about. Maddox ended up being more racially tolerant in policy than the guys who wanted to keep him out. Maddox simply really believed that a private property owner had the right to dictate who could be on their property and as a business decision wanted to keep his restaraunt as it was because that’s what he believed his customer base wanted. A lot of his political activity was a business decision to try and kep working class Atlantans coming into his establishment


43 posted on 05/10/2010 7:41:41 AM PDT by AzaleaCity5691
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: EagleUSA

Conservatives, inherently, are “live and let live”.

We’ve just been pushed too damn far this time.


44 posted on 05/10/2010 7:43:24 AM PDT by MrB (The difference between a (de)humanist and a Satanist is that the latter knows who he's working for.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: GreyMountainReagan
In UTAH? Yeah, right, sure, Uh Huh...

Looked to buy a house in Park City. First question was what Ward I belonged to. Suddenly the price went up...

If you want to pretend that the center of the world in the state isn't Temple Square, and the Elders, go ahead. However, for the rest of us Gentiles, that propaganda is not valid. Try and sell it to some 23 year old girl with 5 kids...

But, that's how they like it, and the Church is not holding a gun to their heads. Deseret Industries does a better job of social services that the feds do.

45 posted on 05/10/2010 11:49:23 AM PDT by jonascord (We've got the Constitution to protect us. Why should we worry?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: jonascord
There was ZERO communication, stated, written, smoke signals or otherwise from the LDS church for or against Bennett to the Utah Republican delegates to the State Convention.

Feel free to continue thinking otherwise though.

46 posted on 05/10/2010 4:27:01 PM PDT by GreyMountainReagan ("Pray for America")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: ez
Palin...is populist. Buchanon was populist... REAGAN was populist.

Then, you are using a very loose definition of populism -- which asks that the government take an activist role on the side of the "little people" against the "corporations".

In his later iterations, Buchanan was indeed a populist. He wanted the government to take an activist role in protecting American industry and jobs -- no matter how inefficient they might be.

Reagan never opined that more government was the solution. Quite the contrary. Palin, similarly.

Your definition of populism is a popular misconception. Actually, it is very specific -- tracing to the era of William Jennings Bryant and the conflict between the Great Plains farmers and the railroads and the millers.

47 posted on 05/10/2010 8:12:07 PM PDT by okie01 (THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA: Ignorance on Parade)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson