Skip to content

2018 Candidates for State-Wide Offices: Utah

It is time for another review of candidates running for offices in 2018. My previous one was on Massachusetts. This time I will discuss Utah, because a former Massachusetts governor and “frequent candidate,” Willard Mitt Romney, is running for U.S. Senate in Utah to replace the dull neocon Orrin Hatch.

Why can’t Willard just leave people alone?

There is also another Republican on the primary ballot, state Rep. Mike Kennedy. (Do we really need another Kennedy in the Senate?) I’ll get to him a little later in this post. The primary is June 26.

Given that Willard Romney is so far ahead in the polls, it appears to me that the Republican voters of Utah forget what a lying two-faced weathervane hack Willard has been for the past 25 years. So, I will remind you of his record.

So here we go. During his 2012 Presidential campaign, Romney said that, regarding taxes, “everything is on the table,” including raising taxes on the wealthy to reduce the deficit. No surprise there.

During his time as governor of Massachusetts, Romney raised taxes on corporations. The tax hikes, according to columnist Deroy Murdock, “totaled $128 million in 2003, $95.5 in 2004, and $85 million in 2005.” And, according to Murdock, Romney “created or increased fees by $432 million…Romney charged more for marriage licenses (from $6 to $12), gun registrations (from $25 to $75), a used-car sales tax ($10 million), gasoline deliveries ($60 million), real-estate transfers ($175 million), and more. Particularly obnoxious was Romney’s $10 fee per Certificate of Blindness.”

My, what a great guy, this Willard.

You see, he is typical of the elitist political class, taking from the poor and middle class and redistributing the wealth to the rich fat-cats, as we saw in his support of the Wall Street Bailout in 2008. To show how clueless he was about the Federal Reserve and the financial crisis of 2007-2009, Romney endorsed the reappointment of Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke in 2010. During his 2012 campaign, Romney received the most among the GOP candidates (and more than Obama as well) from the Big Banks in campaign contributions between just January and September of 2011, according to Michael Snyder: $352,200 from Goldman Sachs, $184,800 from Morgan Stanley, and $112,500 from Bank of America.

As a crony capitalist with Bain Capital, Romney used government subsidies with some of the companies Bain bought out to restructure and sell and profit from.

Speaking of crony capitalism, when it comes to “climate change” interventionism, Romney is all in. No free market solutions in sight with this Willard. For instance, in 2012 he cited a study in support of carbon taxes, and, according to Forbes (or you can view that article here), Romney’s advisors were all for cap-and-trade legislation/regulations, subsidizing renewable energy, with one advisor who was involved in the “Department of Energy loan guarantee program that funded Solyndra,” and another who was responsible for getting the 1990 Clean Air Act amendments passed.

You see, the main reason for this climate change fanaticism is to expand the powers of government and to raise taxes or impose new taxes. More tax-thefts, more stealing from the workers and producers of society by the parasites, by the envious and the covetous. And that’s why “climate change,” “global warming,” and “we’re all gonna die!” hysteria and irrationality. The activists want your money! If you believe otherwise, I have a bridge to sell you.

And who can forget “RomneyCare,” the predecessor to “ObamaCare,” in which Romney colluded with Ted Kennedy and other schnooks to ram mandatory health insurance down the throats of Massachusetts residents. A scheme which didn’t control costs, but which did cause the state’s largest medical provider for the poor to have to dramatically cut costs. (Hmm, isn’t that a little backwards, Willard?)

On guns, do you remember during the 2007-2008 campaign when Romney lied gaffed about hunting? “I’m not a big-game hunter … I’ve made it very clear, I’ve always been a, if you will, a rodent and rabbit hunter, all right? Small, small varmints, if you will. And I began when I was, oh, 15 or so, and have hunted those kinds of varmints since then—more than two times…”

Anyway, in 2004, Romney signed a permanent ban on “assault weapons,” proclaiming, “These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense…” He’s very well informed on all these subjects, so he definitely knows what he’s talking about. Right? So, he’s certainly a flip-flopper when it comes to gun control and gun rights.

Besides all that, Romney is a vicious drug warrior, including prohibiting medical marijuana. (See Romney rudely snub a medical marijuana patient in a wheelchair. What class.)

Romney is also a militarist who said he would have signed the NDAA which permits the suspension of due process in its provision to allow the military to indefinitely detain American citizens. Not exactly “Mr. Civil Libertarian,” that’s for sure.

And, while the conservatives are all criticizing Hillary Clinton in her private email server scandal cover-up, and criticizing the FBI/DOJ conspiracy to frame Donald Trump in “Russia collusions” and cover it all up, why didn’t we ever hear about Willard Romney’s shenanigans with his governor’s office staff destroying computers and removing hard drives from their government offices when he was leaving as governor, and spending $100,000 in taxpayer money to do it? What was he hiding?

Speaking of shenanigans, during the 2012 campaign Ron Paul was very close to winning the GOP nomination, and this article and this article explain how the Romney Establishment colluded in the primaries and caucuses to steal the nomination away from Dr. Paul. In one instance, Ron Paul convention delegates’ hotel rooms were broken into and pot was planted in hotel room safes, and bullets planted in one lady’s luggage, for which she was detained at the airport. Now, I’m not saying that Romney was involved in that. But, why would people do those things? The Establishment loves its power, and will do what’s necessary to retain it or expand it.

And do you remember more recently when Romney gave that big speech calling Donald Trump a “phony,” a “fraud,” a “fake,” and a “con man”? He was talking about HIMSELF!

Okay, enough of Willard. In the Republican primary, there is also state Rep. Mike Kennedy, a father of 8. (Was he a Dick van Patten fan?)

Do we really need another Kennedy in the Senate? No, really. Sadly, some of Kennedy’s legislative “accomplishments” seem very central-planning-obsessed, if you ask me.

For instance, as a state rep. Kennedy sponsored “Termination of Parental Rights Amendments,” which states, among other things, “with regard to a minor who is in the custody of the Division of Child and Family,” … “If the court finds, by a preponderance of the evidence, that return of the minor to the minor’s parent would create a substantial risk of detriment to the minor’s physical or emotional well-being, the minor may not be returned to the custody of the minor’s parent. … return of the minor to a parent or guardian would create a substantial risk of detriment to the minor is established if: (i) the parent or guardian fails to: (A) participate in a court approved child and family plan; (B) comply with a court approved child and family plan in whole or in part; or (C) meet the goals of a court approved child and family plan; or …”

WHY is a Republican sponsoring this kind of legislation, with “court approved” this and “court approved” that?! Why isn’t he sponsoring legislation that abolishes any government “Division of Child and Family”?!! As I have written rather recently, there is no place for government in child care (or education for that matter).

And, according to Dennis Romboy of the Deseret News, state Rep. Mike Kennedy also sponsored legislation this year which “requires the Utah Driver License Division and the State Board of Education to provide information to student drivers on ways to improve air quality and the harmful effects of vehicle emissions.” That’s a Republican? A conservative? (Why isn’t he advocating abolishing the State Board of Education?!!)

And this Kennedy is not particularly honest, as apparently he placed some names of local politicians on his list of endorsements who didn’t actually endorse him. (Maybe he served in Vietnam, too? — Just kidding.)

The Democrat in this race, Jenny Wilson, is on the Salt Lake County Council, has been a press secretary and chief of staff for two different Congressmen, and has a “Masters in Public Administration from the Harvard Kennedy School,” according to her website. Is she promising to “Drain the Swamp”?

Now, there actually is a candidate on the ballot of the Libertarian Party, Craig Bowden. In my view, he’s very good on many issues, pro-liberty. While he isn’t exactly Ron Paul or Harry Browne, most of his views are consistent with the NAP and the voluntaryist perspective.

On criminal justice, he writes on his website, “Criminal laws should be limited in their application to violations of the rights of others through force or fraud, or to deliberate actions that place others involuntarily at significant risk of harm…As your Senator, I would favor the repeal of all laws creating “crimes” without victims, such as the use of drugs for medicinal or recreational purposes…Because civil asset forfeiture involves the taking of property without due process, I would immediately move to cease such practices in all levels possible.”

On economic liberty, Bowden writes, “Each person has the right to offer goods and services to others on the free market. The only proper role of government in the economic realm is to protect property rights, adjudicate disputes, and provide a legal framework in which voluntary trade is protected. All efforts by government to redistribute wealth, or to control or manage trade, are improper in a free society.”

On foreign policy, Bowden writes, “In regards to the number of bases we have around the globe, it is time to take a hard look at what is really necessary for national defense. I believe it is time to start withdrawing from countries we have been stationed in for decades and bring those unit colors back to American soil.” (Do you mean remove ALL those bases and bring ALL U.S. troops back to the U.S.? They don’t belong on foreign lands that are not U.S. territories.)

Among other things, he also writes, “Lastly, I will be moving to remove the United States from entangling and outdated treaties such as NATO and pulling us from the United Nations as neither hold U.S. interests at heart.” (You think Romney or Kennedy would do this?)

I don’t know why he doesn’t mention immigration, because he did in past campaigns, apparently. In his 2016 campaign for Congress, Bowden wrote, “Craig supports the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders.” (You would think that those who proclaim to be “pro-America” would agree with this.)

So, who knows why he doesn’t mention immigration in this year’s campaign website. Is he afraid of putting his actual views online for voters to see? In the past, the Libertarian Party view has been that honest persuasion is important to change the minds of others.

Conservatives and nationalists want to separate “legal” from “illegal” immigration, when they just don’t realize that in government immigration restrictions they are really opposing the free market and private property rights, and supporting socialist government central planning, not to mention the police state.

Now, I know that many conservatives in Utah don’t like Romney, but they will probably vote for him anyway, because he’s a good demagogue who knows how to manipulate people’s emotions, just like Trump and most other pols. And I know that many conservatives want the government to continue its immoral police state with its war on immigration and its drug war. But if voters in Utah really want to put at least one voice to “Drain the Swamp” in Washington, they might consider voting libertarian. Really, what do you have to lose?

Published inUncategorized