I read about how the congressmen from Utah voted last year. The article said "conservative senators" Orrin Hatch and Bob Bennett supported Clinton's agenda almost two-thirds of the time. I have a question: Does this mean Clinton is a conservative also?

If Hatch and Bennett supported Clinton two-thirds of the time and that entitled them to be called conservative by the media, then what does that make our representatives? Cannon supported Clinton only 31 percent of the time, Hansen supported the president 27 percent of the time, and Cook supported Clinton only 24 percent of the time. What will the Associated Press call them to describe their political stance if Hatch and Bennett are conservatives? The media will have to come up with a new phrase to describe them.Utahns need to know Hatch is perceived to be a conservative because of what he did his first two terms. Since then he has gradually drifted to the left until the past year or two he has, as Phyllis Schlafly describes it, made a sharp lurch to the left. That helps to understand his votes during the past year or so.

Bennett said in his campaign six years ago, if he did not make a difference in Washington, he would not seek re-election. In my opinion, he has made a difference for the liberal agenda. He should run as a Democrat.

Utahns need to wake up and check for themselves what our congressmen in Washington are really doing and not let the news media fool them with semantics.

D. Lynn Crook

View Comments

Payson

Join the Conversation
Looking for comments?
Find comments in their new home! Click the buttons at the top or within the article to view them — or use the button below for quick access.