At the Utah Republican Convention, Bob Bennett received the news that he would not serve a fourth term. However, we as Republicans need to take a deep look at who are the replacement politicians.
Saturday afternoon the second round of voting results came in. After months of speculation, concerning the three term Senator, the votes results were read; Robert Bennett would not serve a fourth term. Cheers erupted, as the Bennett supporters hung their heads.
Now, two days later, the dust has cleared. Bridgewater and Lee (Bennett’s opponents who survived the third round) are preparing for a primary vote and soon Senator Bennett will be back in D.C. to finish his term.
Now that we are, collectively, in the next step of the election cycle, we can objectively look backward and more importantly look forward.
While Senator Bennett is responsible for his voting record, which was often controversial, Utah did lose a Senator with some real clout with Republican leadership. It will be more difficult for Utah to hold on to some defense contracts, NASA contracts as well as other contracts that equate to jobs in the State. Bennett’s understanding of the politics of politics not only gave him valuable insight on how to get things done, but it also gave him the insight to help see that other things (like “cap and trade” and “card check”) are not done. None of this is relevant, right now, because Bennett lost.
Looking forward we have to ask a few questions. Are the new candidates right on enough of the issues that Utah will be equally, or better, served by our new Senator? After three terms will the new Senator have votes that can be torn apart by certain groups and campaigns?
The Second question is impossible to answer right now but the first question is pretty easy to gauge. The Tea Party groups, and groups like them, are an important voice for conservative ideas. They have been berated as hate filled, racist and pawns of oil and health care companies. The Left simply is wetting their collective pants in fear of the new conservative resurgence.
The only way the conservative resurgence can be a loss to the country is if in the push to elect exciting new candidates, they buy something damaging with the excitement. If, for instance, a candidate would have great conservative rhetoric while at the same time espousing the protectionism of Pat Buchanan, then the country might have a net loss. Or, if a candidate is exciting but at the same time espouses the isolationist stances of Ron Paul, then another net loss could come about. If either of these above mentioned stances are embraced by a candidate than the electorate will have shown that some of the lessons of the 1920’s and 1930’s will have gone unlearned, or forgotten.
Utah is unique in many ways. We are a State where industry is embraced on our State Flag. We are a profoundly religious State, a profoundly family focused State and we are a profoundly patriotic State. We believe that U.S. industry can compete when the tax and regulatory stumbling blocks are removed. We don’t need trade protection. We are also a State where our veterans are revered, and our war dead are treated with hallowed ground. Utahns believe that the U.S. influence in the would has been generally good. The sacrifices of those who fought in Iraq and Afghanistan are just as honorable as those who fought in Germany or Japan and their mission is just as important.
As Americans we have had trade and battle with the world from of our nation’s birth. If our candidates don’t understand that; then, while their rhetoric my be exciting, their lasting impact on our State and our Nation will be a net negative. I know that with the Tea Party (and similar movements), conservatism is full of those who understand our nation’s history and economy. Conservatives have the obligation to ensure that their candidates understand these points as well.
Add this page to your favorite Social Bookmarking websites
