Comments about ‘New Senate president says he is 'willing to stand up for what's right'’

How does a conservative Republican pro-business, more freedom and less governmental intervention reconcile a position of stricter governmental regulation of liquor laws imposed on private businesses? Whenever someone says they stand up for what's "right" there's always going to be the problem of who is to say what's "right." Such principled talk sounds lofty, but it also can be perceived as "righteous."

Hmm, so what's wrong with 'righteous'?

What a confused guy -- he doesn't have a clue why he stands for what he supposedly stands for. So easy to believe, so difficult to think. He ought to try thinking every once in awhile.

I can't beleive that his district keeps sending him back, let alone him being appointed Senate Pres. There are times I just don't know what people can be thinking.

I think it's actually called "hypocrisy," at which our legislators excel. They are against government intrusion except when it suits their purposes.

Actually, its called balance. It is the role of our elected leaders to consider rights, responsibilities and risks and strike a balance between them.

As a society, we like having government involved in our lives. We have created a cradle to grave safety net that does practically everything except wipe our noses. And, for some, it does even that. We may not like this or that intrusion, but we are just as guilty of 'hypocrisy' as our legislators supposedly are.

Righteous is what you think it is. Is it righteous to control liquer or to stifle business? He is both.

In my eyes, guns allowed in schools or churches is far from "right." Its a bad thing. He's the sort that propagates the idea that moderate republicans are too liberal, democrats are just plain evil, and that a two party system should be replaced by the republican religious right. Guns and big corporations haven't done our country any good, as of late, but those are they lobbies that influence him and most Utah republican representatives. Their constituents - not so much.

Senator Waddoups states that eliminating the private club structure will promote underage drinking, but has yet to explain just HOW this will occur. Yes, his wife was in an accident caused by an intoxicated driver, but that driver imbibed at HOME - not at a club.

Arguments without facts and data to back them up are just personal views. We need a Senate President that is willing to look at hard facts and not someone who just relies on their personal views.

I thought it was being allowed to protect yourself from a bad guy with a gun in a school or the state trying to override churches' existing private property rights to restrict guns themselves that was the issue.

Bottom line.................he's a MORMON!!

How does keeping the current system of private clubs stifle liquor consumption? The private club system does not regulate who drinks, where, and how much. Each location is only required to keep a sign in sheet, that's it. There is no interconnected system to monitor where people are drinking and how often. It is an archaic system that serves no viable purpose, much like the millions spent on placing those state tax stamps on every bottle of alcohol. Basically we have "righteous people" who have no logical reasoning for their righteousness.

Waddoups represents a dwindling majority in the Utah Senate who can only maintain its grip on power through gerrymandering of senate districts. Those of us in the current minority will remember how we were treated when our time arrives (admittedly in many years, but its coming). Notwithstanding the usual rank hypocrisy Mr. Waddoups exhibits (typical for the righteous right) in regards to his keep government out of business / government should regulate a consumers free choice to drink alcohol conflicting positions, his true wrongdoings center around the legislation he has pushed through on behalf of the property management / landlord community, basically allowing slumlords to choose not to repair a rental unit in violation of health codes and giving them the green light to ride roughshod over tenants with impunity in this state. It is disgusting that someone can hold state government office and be allowed to be a lobbyist at he same time.

where is the 13th comment

Or is it righteous to limit the negative impacts "liquer" [sic] has on our society by limiting the problems at the source. Business is free to prosper within the bounds that the legislature sets as derived from community standards. And our community standards (from a state perspective) is still not in favor of a free flowing buzz machine.

And your point...? Do I sense bigotry? Being a Mormon, what harm can that do?

Waddoups is just embarrassing.

The zion curtain solved nothing. Make DUI laws tougher if you want to have an impact with alcohol regulations.

No data backs up what Sutherland and Waddoups are about to push on us. Google it. These people are zealots who will waste our time when we have much more effective directions to go with our limited session. Fools with megaphones.

Yup, Huntsman is nearly a liberal democrat, masquerading as a Republican in order to be elected in Utah. It is no wonder he could not support Mitt Romney.