He probably has, he is just confident that his constituency won’t.
You assume that when he read the article, he took the comments about his positions as negatives.
Even if he’s proud to have no integrity, he also knows it’s not considered a compliment.
Who knew reading was so hard?
Does Senator Hatch take his reading tips from the Golfer in Chief?
Here’s something I have a hard time grasping from the SLC Tribune editorial: they strongly imply that there was a quid pro quo: Hatch agrees to support Trump’s tax plan (I would have assumed he would have done so anyway, just on Republican “principle”) in exchange for Trump slashing the Utah national monuments.
Maybe it’s because the concept of *reducing *the size of a national monument is so unprecedented – I fail to understand why this is what Hatch was willing to sell his soul for.
All I can think of: Hatch secretly owns a uranium mine on the property. But that sounds more like a Scooby-Doo plot than real life.
Maybe he’s got an ATV he’s been itching to use.
He gets campaign contributions from the people planning on buying the mining rights.
And votes from Utahn’s that wish to see their natural areas that are attracting tourism dollars to the state and communities be turned into barren wasteland for the profit of some out of state company.
TBF, to the naïve eye, many of Utah’s parks and monuments already look like barren wastelands. In which, to me, lies their appeal. There is much life going on in those rocks, spires, blobs and deserts – you just have to know how to look for it.
Look fast!
Fair enough, I suppose I picked my adjectives poorly. Point is, it is currently in a largely unspoiled state, and I don’t see mining operations and other forms of resource exploitation improving upon it.
After a few out of state mining companies make some money off the land, it’ll no longer be as attractive to tourism. I see this as a loss for Utah in particular, and the US as a whole.
Well, you are not adding in all the new ATV trails that can now be used!
I always enjoy when CEOs, all high and mighty and full of themselves, decide that spouting off their ideology is a GREAT way to get their names in the paper, raise their public profile, stroke their ego to climax; and will in no way impact their business.
Doesn’t matter what side of the political fence you’re on, you’re a CEO, not a politician. You represent a company that needs all of it’s customers, not just your little slice of Americana. STFU, no one cares what you think about anything but your product.
How is this any different from what “Papa John” was saying about the players?
mc
Chimera isn’t a CEO of a company that relies on the goodwill of the people his public opinion would piss off.
IIRC Chimera does support the NFL players potentially pissing on the goodwill their customers, tho.
So why is what’s good for the goose not good for the gander?
mc
Players are the CEO’s of the NFL?
If the Papa John’s pizza delivery guy has a confederate/gay pride flag on his car, are you going to hold that against Papa John’s in general?
Paul Nehlen, the opponent of Paul Ryan’s re-election from the far right, is so far out there, he’s even too extreme for Breitbart.
(sigh)
so when an employee exercises their freedom of expression in a way that potentially angers the company’s customers and possibly affects the bottom line - that’s good.
but, when a CEO exercises his freedom of expression in a way that potentially angers his customers and possibly affects the bottom line - he should just shut the fuck up?
mc