Audio, video clips: Sen. Orrin Hatch, Dan Liljenquist debate on KSL Radio

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Irritabull CHESTER, NE
    July 16, 2012 10:21 a.m.

    Senator Hatch is not good for America or for Utah. 36 years drinking from the public trough
    and we have continued the slide down hill. He does not address the issues that really are
    important and that being the endless fake wars the Military?Industrial complex and their minions continue to implement. We need real Americans with real concern for the small businesses and the working class. Strom Thermon spent an entire lifetime in the Senate and was absolutely useless. We need patriot Senators who are there to make us a great country
    rather then those who want to make it a life time career. Anybody but Hatch is my view.

  • JWB Kaysville, UT
    June 18, 2012 12:41 p.m.

    A Senator is a diplomat and the sounding board Dan is using is not very diplomatic. He is still a chest pounder and needs to realize that some people that get elected, in the House, that is, can do what he is doing. The price of getting elected Senator is to be a diplomat and a statesman, not a person that is bemoaning that the people voted for Senator Hatch to win for six times. There is a reason people vote for Senator Hatch, he knows when to talk and what to say and not just practicing what people did to Senator Bennett, one of our Statesmen from Utah who did what his father did, be a diplomat and represent the Great State of Utah as a Statesman. The people who rode Senator Bennett out on a rail should be ashamed at how they did it for a gentleman and a scholar. People need to be cautious at how they boot a person out of office. There is the way through the ballot box without trying to throw all kind of non-truths about their opponent. Senator Hatch has served us well for 36-years. He deserves better treatment, Dan.

  • MatthewBehun PROVO, UT
    June 16, 2012 10:53 a.m.

    Senator Hatch left me wondering why I'm he doesn't take the blame for the $16 trillion hole he dug for us.

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    June 15, 2012 6:16 p.m.

    A Big Thank You to Deseret News for making the debate available on this site!

    There were many who had not the opportunity of hearing it at 9 a.m. on a weekday
    morning. Thanks also for championing the idea of prime time TV debates between these two.
    You are appreciated.

  • Wixom Bountiful, UT
    June 15, 2012 5:04 p.m.

    You can count on Sen Hatch to tout his record each time he speaks, you can count on Sen Liljenquist to repeat his message that Hatch and Congress is the problem. I heard Sen. Hatch say he would continue to fight for Utah and conservative values. I heard Sen. Liljenquist say he would fight for tea party values. The voters will need to decide what they really want.

    The problem we have is that 2 years ago the tea party knocked Sen. Bennett out his seat and replaced him with Sen. Lee. Sen. Bennett did great things for Utah - moreso than Sen. Hatch. Sen. Lee has yet to perform to even Sen. Hatch's level. Therefore I think it would be unwise to unseat Sen. Hatch at this time and replace him with the inexperienced Sen. Liljenquist. I watched Sen. Liljenquist in the Utah Senate. On the pension issue he didn't do his homework - he was just slashing and burning.

    I believe Sen. Hatch won the debate today. Liljenquist sounded young and defensive - not senatorial.

  • Gildas LOGAN, UT
    June 15, 2012 1:20 p.m.

    Here's my take on this long-awaited short debate:

    Liljenquist, I think very accurately, described Hatch as being typical of a whole generation of congressmen (Republican and Democrat) that had together created unprecedented debt. He pointedly opposed partisanship that was hypocritical, for example when Republicans like Hatch are quick to accuse "the other party" for the same things that Republicans themselves do, notably creating unnecessary debt. He said we need a new generation of congressmen that would do something substantive about national problems and not just "talk a good game" when elections are in the offing.

    While I think Hatch did poorly, I must say I am uneasy about Dan’s talk of “broadening the tax base”, his Palinesque idea that “everyone should pay something” at least if meant to be applied to income tax, as this would erode necessary personal exemptions for basic needs.

    Few specifics were forthcoming from either candidate on reducing spending. Both said nothing about our being militarily over-extended or supporting moves to eliminate redundant, tyrannical federal bureaucracies. Dan did better, I thought than Orrin on Illegal immigration and so, however, I think he won the debate handily.