Deseret News | Bennett spending heavily a year before Senate election

Reader comments
Bennett spending heavily a year before Senate election

912 | 3:05 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Spend all you like Bob. You betrayed our trust and now we'll vote you into history.

randy | 3:31 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

i am a republican .. i will not be voting for this incumbent senator .. he got america into this mess .. why would i want to vote him back in again??

sure hope this state wakes up and doesnt vote for bennett in 2010 and hatch in 2012 ..

it was on their watch that america fell to all this corruption and greed .. since they couldnt change it or fix .. why would this great state of utah want to vote for them to put them back into their senate seats ??

utah please .. incumbents out ... challengers in

DW | 4:05 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

He can spend all he wants...he won't get my vote again. We need to kick all the bums out and replace them with honest, Constitution loving citizens that are decent and not beholden to special interests.

Comments continue below

Bailout for Bob? | 4:07 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Nope, I hope Bennett is out and anyone who had anything to do with this mess, Republican or Demorcratic alike. Hatch has done a good job on the judiciary but I am not sure if that is enough for me to vote for him again on his next run. I am favoring new blood. But yes, Bennett is out as far as I am concerned. His spending Citibank and/or former bailout money only makes it worse.

alwaysquestion | 4:18 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Bennett is still a much, much, much better choice than crooked and corrupt Mark Shurtleff. Shurtleff is the most crooked politician this state has ever seen. If you want to vote for Eagar or someone else, great, but Shurtleff is the MOST corrupt politician ever.

Evets | 4:25 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Bennett must go as he has burnt his bridges and no rebuilding will be enough. I am still watching Hatch but I have a couple more years to see how he does.
Now for replacement.....that is a hard one so far. I just don't know who to believe yet. Good thing we still have some time to go before the election. I just hope a good constitutional conservative is allowed to run.

Nacilbupera | 7:43 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Comments are great with nearly all of us agreeing that Bennett is gone. This is further evidence of the straw poll showing Bennett in last place behind contenders Eagar and Shurtleff.

Bennett needs to learn we do not sell our principles for money. If he gets as many votes as he has in Utah percentage of donations (2%) then we have nothing to lose.

Every Republican running is a better choice than two-decade Bennett. We know Eagar is smart and will represent our state well, while not being beholden to big business nor big government. She has also agreed to limit herself to TWO TERMS if elected.

Now wouldn't she be a nice change for Utah politics?

Just Cause | 8:02 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

Imagine. With all the hoopla of how much Bennett and Shurtleff have raised, Eagar has raised more from her constituents than either of the "power" politicians.

This race is showing that you can either work hard and show the people who you are, or call in favors from out of town glad-handers and show the people who you are.

The choice is clear. Eagar is for the State of Utah.

Voter | 10:20 p.m. Oct. 20, 2009

I will not vote for Bennett in the November election if he is the Republican nominee.

I will work hard to become a delegate to the Republican State Convention again, so I can vote against Bennett there!

Eagar has a very loyal and dedicated base, but I don't like her stand on issues. I like Shurtleff and he has generally be a good reliable conservative, except for his pro-amnesty foolishness.

Anonymous | 12:13 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

I need to make a clarification to this report. It is my choice as a candidate not to buy delegate votes, just as Jason Chaffetz did not. We hold "BYOL's" frequently.

That choice has nothing to do with whether or not the campaign cannot afford to do it. If we wanted to buy delegate votes, we would raise the money to do it. However, this campaign is focused on principles for a change. We're fighting earmarks and the special interests that buy our Senator's votes. He is part of the problem. I cannot in good conscience play that game.

Also, while there are other good men in this race, I share no affinity with our Attorney General's political views and compromising style and his record does not show him to be a Reagan conservative by a long shot. The only two issues we share in common that I'm aware of are gun rights and Utah land access issues.

Cherilyn Eagar

Buying Lunches | 4:34 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Eagar has announced at her BYOL (Buy Your Own Lunch) Principle #1: There's no FREE lunch. (Reaganomics 101)

Chaffetz didn't buy me any lunches as a state delegate last year. Why should Eagar do it this year?

Out of the choices, Eagar is the one actually campaigning, and doing it without spending like there is no tomorrow.

I hope the choices end up with Granato v Eagar.

Re: Bailout Bob... | 4:49 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

In March of this year Senator Bob Bennett was rated one of the ten most liberal Republicans in the Senate by Human Events based on the American Conservative Union Ratings for 2008. Why Bennett would pay money to convince voters he is Conservative is beyond me.

Principles vs Issues | 4:56 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

When Michael Steele was in town, Chair of the GOP, he said the way to get good people in Washington was to look for the principles, not the issues. Issues change, but the principles are what we should vote for.

Eagar has posted why she is against the proposed Health Care bills, including Bennett's and proposes solutions. Her website has these principles:
-
Principles for a Change.

Fiscal Restraint
Limited Government
Free Market Solutions
Energy Independence
Strong National Defense

... not only abroad and along our borders, but within our communities and our families.

Principled. Passionate. Persuasive. Prepared.
--
How can anyone be against that?

JackFlagstaff | 9:35 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Sen. Bennett has been in Washington so long, he really has lost touch with reality. I was at the GOP conv. in '06 when he spoke on immigration reform. Wow, what a speech! I was totally behind him! Then Hannity, Limbaugh and others got the bill, read it and proclaimed the truth about it. The backlash by voters across the board sank that "shamnesty" bill in committee. Then, in '08, TARP. Now, it's healthcare: This time, I read the bill for myself. Premiums collected by the IRS? Almost every insurance company required to pay for abortions? No, Senator, NO! This is not what Utah wants. This isn't what any American wants. It is time for you to retire. You can buy me all the dinners you want; I accept happily, in fact, I hope you do. I have a few things I'd like to discuss with you.

Who do we want...? | 9:51 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Bennett has been back in D.C. too long.
Shurtleff is also a 3 term incumbent for AG, and we don't need any more attorneys as US Senators.
Eagar has more experience than either Bennett or Hatch did when they were elected.

I am voting for Eagar.

Corrupt Delegates | 11:53 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Any Republican delegate who accepts gifts of any kind including free meals from Senator Bennett or any other candidate for office gives the appearance of corruption.

Delegates are selected to study the issues, evaluate the candidates, and to represent their neighbors not to be bribed by campaign trinkets and free meals.

Ethical behavior in politics should begin with the delegates but all too often they act just like the politicians do. If politicians should not take gifts, then delegates should not either.

A. State Delegate | 11:56 a.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Lee Benson, I am sure that you must have been in attendance at the 2009 Republican Organizing Convention. These were the hardcore delegates, most of whom will be returned to the Republican Nominating Convention in 2010. You saw how they treated Senator Bennett at this convention.

They were not happy and would have been rude if the chairman had not asked them to be polite. Bennett is spending a huge amount now, because he knows that he is in trouble. Any delegate that stands up at his precinct caucus and supports Senator Bennett will not be going to the convention. People remember that he voted for "amnesty" for illegal aliens in 2006 and 2007, voter for the TARP, and has been on the Senate Banking Committee since 1993(fox in the henhouse)

The main problem at this point is that his opponents so far are weak. Mark Shurtluff the Attorney General has as many opponents in Utah as Sen. Bennett. Cherilyn Eagar would be better than both of them, but is unknown. However, the use of the Chaffetz grassroots technique may help her. James Williams, is good but unknown. I believe there will be other good candidates getting involved.

Sterling | 3:51 p.m. Oct. 21, 2009

If I were "Bailout Bob" I would be EMBARASSED to even think about asking Utahns for their votes! The bankers are probably throwing money at his campaign with the hope they can keep themselves on the taxpayer subsidized gravy train!
Then there's Mark "I won't arrest you if you're illegal" Shurtleff! Obviously the top law enforcement officer in Utah isn't interested in the oath he took to uphold and support the law so why will he suddenly become interested in supporting the law if he becomes Senator?
ANYONE BUT THESE TWO!! Our elected representatives REALLY NEED to understand that we taxpayers want the laws upheld, NOT ignored!

Bennett Will Get My Vote | 4:18 p.m. Oct. 21, 2009

Bob Bennett is far from perfect, but has earned my vote again next year. Bennett is smart, savvy, and well respected in Washington. Had our economy come to a screeching halt last year (like Bush, McCain and many other Republicans believed was likely), the same critics complaining about the bailout would screaming that Washington should have intervened. Bennett made the right decision with the information available at the time. Something needs to be done about immigration and health care. At least Bennett is trying.

Dave | 4:37 p.m. Oct. 21, 2009

WOW! I could not agree more with everyone else, Bennett is out of touch, he has gone against almost everything we here in Utah have asked him to do. He forgot how he got his job and now Utahns are going to remind him who really is in comtrol.

Anonymous | 7:43 p.m. Oct. 21, 2009

I don't like all of what Bennett does, but in the choice of what else is available. I will be voting for him this time in the primary. Then I will go democrat for the main election, period!

Consitutent | 12:19 a.m. Oct. 22, 2009

Bennett is one of the worst earmark spenders in congress. He's in the 91'st percentile. Yes folks, that means he sees you as his personal piggybank to pay off the special interest groups who funded his election.

The arrogance of his office is palpable. Not only can you not ever get a real person at the Washington office, but the jerks at the local offices act as though they were hired to beat talking points into your dumb little brains rather than LISTEN to your input. (And to the staffer I spoke to this week, I HAD watched the youtube video and read the bill. That's WHY I was calling. THAT'S what I had a problem with! May I suggest you listen to the callers through the end of the sentence before you go off on your tirade? WE are the boss. You work for US, remember??)

Get to your local caucus meeting and become a delegate Mar 23. That way you can go to the state convention and pick another candidate to be on the ballot. You want control of the process? You want choice? A real choice? That's how to do it.

Anonymous | 7:08 a.m. Oct. 22, 2009

You people are something. Bennett just isn't crazy enough for you. As a result, I don't see him getting by without a primary election. You would throw his seniority aside because he delivers earmarks for Utah? And you say he's been in DC too long, but you support Hatch, who has been there since before Jimmy Carter. If Utah wants to be even more irrelevant, bring in a bomb-throwing nothing like Chaffetz. But Utah would do well to send Bennett back. The only thing that would raise Utah's status, though, is to elect a Democrat. But that won't happen in the Soviet Republic of Utah.

DMC | 7:50 a.m. Oct. 22, 2009

We need change. Our founding fathers never envisioned a federal government like we have today--one that is driven by money and special interests; one that fosters career politicians like Bennett and Hatch; one that arrogantly acts as if its own powers are limitless.

We need a candidate to challenge Bennett who understands and loves our constitution. One who remembers that this is a government of LIMITED powers--a government of the people, by the people and FOR the people.

Sen. Bennett thinks the constitution is outdated and antiquated. Actually, Sen. Bennett is the one who is outdated and antiquated.

Delegates! Do the right thing. Don't let money buy your vote. Stand on your principles. Choose a candidate that understands the constitution and will work tirelessly to protect our most fundamental freedoms.

no more bennett in senate | 8:47 a.m. Oct. 22, 2009

This says it all,

"less than 2 percent of the $390,000 the senator raised in the quarter came from Utahns, just more than $6,000. But he received at least $83,850 from the finance industry (including $27,750 from employees of Citigroup and its subsidiaries)."

AND THIS MAN REPRESENTS UTAH??? NOT. And from another AP story, Citigroup is handing out 5.3 billion in bonuses and it's still one of 7 that have not repaid our tax money.

AND THIS MAN IS ON THE SENATE BANKING COMMITTEE??? CORRUPTION.

He promised to limit himself to two terms. And now he's running again. He doesn't answer constituent mail.

Did anyone read Bennett's comments on overspending for the lavish new Congress museum? Paraphrasing "this is an important museum, no amount of spending is too great."

Well that pretty well gets to the point. HE thinks HE'S more important than the people who pay taxes. More important than his constituents.

A PROTEST VOTE FOR ANYONE is better than Bennett. We can always throw them out. And anyone running for office will get a clear message.

Anonymous | 9:09 a.m. Oct. 22, 2009

Time for Bob to go...

but lets get someone else in the race besides "amesty for illeages" Shurtlef

Who then? | 12:09 p.m. Oct. 22, 2009

I am an independant, former Republican and will never vote for Bennet or Shurtlef. Is there a true conservative running who will respect the Constitution?

A. State Delegate | 12:35 p.m. Oct. 22, 2009

Consitutent, if you think you had it bad with Bennett's Washington Office, you should try Provo. I visited the office in 2007 to talk about the "Illegal Alien Amnesty Bill." After I was referred to the office manager, I was told that she had nothing to say to me and to leave the office.

The only candidate for senate, so far, that is worse than Bennett is Mark Shurtluff, who only believes in arresting illegal aliens if they are a murderer or a drug lord. Crimes below that such as assault or DUI are considered minor crimes, by the Attorney General. He has made no effort to enforce state law SB-81 in Utah, and so public employers are giving the legislature the proverbial finger.

There will be other candidates to choose from other than Mrs. Eagar by next March. However, Cherilyn Eagar would a far better choice than Bennett. Now is the time to change, because Sen. Bennett's seniority in the senate is worthless while the democrats are in charge.

RW | 8:49 a.m. Oct. 24, 2009

Bennett has more debt than he does cash on hand. It looks like he likes to run his campaign the same way he likes the government to be run--in the red.

RUF | 4:48 p.m. Oct. 24, 2009

Funny how many people seem to think that experience, know-how, and seniority are negatives. Bob Bennett is honest, decent, hard-working, and effective. It would be folly to switch horses.

pbrush | 11:34 p.m. Oct. 24, 2009

Throw all the bums out. The jury is still out on Chaffetz.

Bennett and Hatch both voted to confirm Cass Sunsteen.

That was the last straw for me.

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.