- Scott N. Bradley (C)
- Mike Lee (R)
- Sam F. Granato (D)
Scott N. Bradley - Mr. Bradley is a champion of the constitution with a PhD in constitutional law. He is from North Logan and has been involved in management for a number of years. His campaign signs make him look like a mad scientists. Someone tell him to comb that hair down just a little. Website: www.scottbradleyforsenate.com
Mike Lee - Another constitutional law expert and lawyer. He clerked for Justice Alito (which could have been anything from making waffles to writing opinions). He is from Alpine and has signs everywhere. He is a bit to radical for my tastes. Website: www.mikelee2010.com
Sam F. Granato - Business owner and entrepreneur. He is on a number of boards including IHC, Beehive Credit Union and Utah Dept of Alcoholic Beverages. I think he brings a well rounded resume to the picture but I would worry about special interests. Website: www.voteforgranato.com
Feel free to comment and share your feelings about the candidates. As for endorsement, I haven't decided on this one. Mike Lee is a little much for me but Granato doesn't make me jump either.
7 comments:
So, yon the issue of endorsement you say that Mike Lee is a bit much for you but that you aren't thrilled with Granato either not mentioning Scott Bradley at all. Does this mean that you have already ruled him out? Just wondered because you didn't seem to have anything bad to say about him other than his hair on campaign posters.
Audrey,
Thanks for the post. You hit it on the head. Neither candidate has given me a real reason to support them. At this time I am leaning away from Mike Lee. I know nothing of Scott besides his campaign signs and website. But Granato has reached out to me and so has Mike Lee. Yet, I am still undecided on this race. I am a Republican but I am not a sheep. So this is a tough one for me.
I am not sure where you stand constitutionally, but I am what would be called a Constitutional originalist, I believe in studying and learning about the Constitution as it was written and originally intended. To that end I appreciate the Freedom Index that is put out periodically by "The New American" magazine and website. "The Freedom Index" rates congressmen based on their adherence to constitutional principles of limited government, fiscal responsibility, and a traditional foreign policy of avoiding foreign entanglements. If you would like to know where the candidates stand Constitutionally you can see the most recent index here:
http://www.thenewamerican.com/files/Freedom_Index_111-4.pdf
I don't believe in voting only Democrat or Republican because of the theory that a person will be "throwing away their vote" otherwise. (In fact I am unaffiliated with any political party because I don't believe in party politics, I vote for who I believe is the best candidate regardless of party affiliation or lack thereof). The only way a person throws away their vote is if they vote for a candidate they don't fully believe in because they are afraid that the candidate they DO fully support won't win. The only reason third party candidates "can't win" is because so many people who believe in them still won't vote for them for fear of "throwing away their vote". It isn't until people stop believing these falsehoods and start voting their conscience regardless of the candidates affiliation that there will truly be change in this country.
Oh, and I will be voting for Scott Bradley :)
Audrey,
Thanks for the great comments and opinions. Scott does have some great Ideas and I can see how strongly he supports the Constitution. Though I disagree with you on Party Politics, I do agree with you that you need to look at all candidates and vote for you who you believe in; regardless if they will win.
I have often voted for a losing person out of principle and belief than just to get them eleceted. Scott has some good things.
Thanks again for the info.
No problem, it's been a good discussion :)
May I submit for your viewing George Washington's viewpoint on political parties as delivered in his farewell address given in 1792:
"They serve to organize faction, to give it an artificial and extraordinary force; to put, in the place of the delegated will of the nation, the will of a party, often a small but artful and enterprising minority of the community; and, according to the alternate triumphs of different parties, to make the public administration the mirror of the ill-concerted and incongruous projects of faction, rather than the organ of consistent and wholesome plans digested by common counsels, and modified by mutual interests.
However combinations or associations of the above description may now and then answer popular ends, they are likely, in the course of time and things, to become potent engines, by which cunning, ambitious, and unprincipled men will be enabled to subvert the power of the people, and to usurp for themselves the reins of government; destroying afterwards the very engines, which have lifted them to unjust dominion."
I respectfully submit that what George Washington said political parties would cause is exactly what has been happening to this country.
Case in point, a GOP convention in Nevada in 2008 was cut short by the party leadership when it became obvious that a majority of the people there were Ron Paul supporters, rather than McCain supporters, and that they wanted a chance to send delegates back to the national convention. You can read about that here:
http://www.lvrj.com/news/18312799.html
In Utah that same year my brother-in-law went to the state convention as a pro Ron Paul delegate and witnessed the GOP leadership ignoring the Ron Paul supporters and not allowing them time to speak at all.
Post a Comment