I listened to the debate and was disappointed Jean "Welcher" Hill didn't go off on her campaign contribution limit speech.

You know the one where she promises not to take contributions of more than $5,000, then realizes she already had recieved a contribution of $6,000 and instead of giving $1,000 back to the contributor she doubles her limit to $10,000.

That's what I call integrity.

Oh and Jean, just for the record when you said "the rules apply - just not all of them" the audience wasn't laughing with you they were laughing at you.

You proved Shurtleff's point. Nine years of teacher administrative hearings doesn't qualify you as a prosecutor.

I can't believe that Ms. Hill actually thinks that she is qualified for this position. Administrative hearings? Please! Isn't there some sort of "minimum qualification" requirements?

Here's more interesting news on Shurtleff's choice of Segfried and Jensen--Mitch Jensen's was on probation for 6 months with the Utah Bar for ethical violations last year. Looks like the AG keeps good company.

Discipline Corner

PUBLIC REPRIMAND, PROBATION
On March 21, 2007, the Honorable Robert Hilder, Third Judicial District Court, entered an Order of Discipline: Public Reprimand and [Six Months] Probation against Mitchell R. Jensen for violations of Rules 5.3(a) (Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistants), 5.3(b) (Responsibilities Regarding Nonlawyer Assistants), and 8.4(a) (Misconduct) of the Rules of Professional Conduct.

Being at the debate in person it was easy to see how the rookie Hill crumbled under the pressure and refused to counter any of Shurtleff's assertations.

Jean Welch Hill. Those three names scream Hillary Rotten Clinton to me! I watched the debate and Shurtleff ripped her apart. Clearly she is willing to attack on anything and hopes it sticks to the wall.

Pretty soon Ms. Hill will be a liberal has-been in Utah's pathetic democratic party.

I think an attorney general who spends campaign funds to pay his wife $4000 for "working" on his campaign and spends the rest on Mr Mac suits and dry cleaning is a great leader. Let's keep this guy in office.

The only thing that proves that Welch-Hill is not qualified for the office more than the fact that she only handles administrative hearings, where the rules of evidence actually do not apply, is the fact that she does not know that the rules of evidence do not apply in administrative hearing.

If she doesn't know the rules in the area where she does practice, how can she fool anyone into believing that she knows anything about the areas in which she does not practice?

Jean girl, unfortunately, the attorneys are laughing at you.

Being at the debate it was easy to see who was the underdog. Jean tried to used baseless and angry attacks from the very beginning.

Mark Shurtleff looked like a stern father, who was getting a little tired of having to constantly correct a severely misinformed and angry child who didn't seem to know what she had gotten into.

Whether it was running for the legislature, not understanding who the clients of the AG are, not seeming to realize, at one point, that the AG is also over law enforcement, not having courtroom experience, not knowing to base her arguments in solid fact rather than inuendo, or simply being confused in general about what exactly an AG does, Shurtleff was there to set her straight, thank goodness.

It was clear Mrs. Hill was very angry, maybe not so much at Mark as at her own foolishness.

I'm not going to defend Hill, her candidacy is obviously problematic. However, I do wish there were a credible opponent against Shurtleff.

Shurtleff is too close to the legislators - a problem for necessary separation of powers. This was exemplified by his embarrassing behavior during the voucher dispute when he attempted to discipline staff attorneys who pointed out his voucher stance was wrong. Fortunately, the courts backed up their claims and put Shurtleff in his place.

He should have stood up to legislators, but would not confront his allies there. An AG has to be able to operate independently and take on the other branches of government when they are in the wrong. Instead, Shurtleff has a "go along to get along" practice that gets in the way of good government.

Andrew McCullough is the only candidate for Attorney General who will serve as the people's watchdog on state government, not its lapdog or attack dog.

Right on, Utah Bill. I don't agree with Hill's perspective on many issues, but I just can't bring myself to vote for Mark Shurtleff (again); his disposition seems condescending and is too much for me to bear. I'd be very interested in hearing Andrew McCullough's perspective. I have historically voted for Republican's, but I'm more inclined than ever before to vote Libertarian on this race. Perhaps McCullough would be more inclined to keep authorized power in check than Mr. Shurtleff.

That's a pretty skewed version of the story you're just spouting off as fact my friend.

The truth of the matter is that Shurtleff sent the voucher question off to education specialist in his office and told them "I don't care what the result is, give me your strictly legal opinion." I know cause I've spoken with those involved.

He did the exact opposite of "go along to get along" he gave an opinion that was publicly unpopular because that's what he thought was right.

I mean, do people honestly just go around believing this stuff when the facts are so easily accessible if they'd just look?

Let’s step back to the 2000 race for Attorney General and ask if Mark Shurtleff was qualified for the job? He has NEVER prosecuted a criminal case (as he seems to be saying he has in this debate). His only experience was three years working at the JAG core and then as an underlying at the AG's office. At least Hill has been in an administrative court room- Shurtleff had never even been in A court room. I agree there should be a minimum qualifications test before you can run for AG. Shurtleff would have failed miserably to his more qualified and more experience opponent who had spent his life prosecuting criminals as the Weber County Attorney and as Chief Deputy Attorney General. Shutleff was an inexperienced politician then and he is an inexperienced politician now.

Dear UAG:

FOLLOW UP:

Prescribe written PRENUPTIAL CONTRACTS for polygamists (a) with all incicents of marraige and incidents of children; yet, NOT married (A) in the eyes of the court and (B) in the eyes of the law.

In Regard to Legalilzation of Secular Polygamy PRESCRIBE PRENUPTIAL CONTRACTS FOR BIGAMISTS. POLYGAMISTS HAVE: (A) THE EQUIVALENT OR (B) THE INFERENCE OF: "A [SECULAR] PRENUPTIAL CONTRACT AGREEMENT," WITH ALL INCIDENTS OF MARRIAGE AND CHILDREN; YET, NOT AUTOMATICALLY BEING MARRIED OR NOT AUTOMATICALLY BEING REGISTERED BY DEFAULT: (X) IN THE EYES OF THE LAW, OR (X) IN THE EYES OF THE COURT. BRAD PITT & ANGELINA JOLIE WITH ALL INCIDENTS OF MARRIAGE & CHIDREN; YET THEY ARE NOT MARRIED (A) IN THE EYES OF THE COURTS OR (B) IN THE EYES OF THE LAW. PRENUPTIAL CONTRACT FOR POLYGAMISTS AS: Administrative Decision, not legislative decision, and thus not subject to the ballot box.

This work is licensed under the SAME TERMS AND CONDITIONS as Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Thanks to the person who said I am the best choice for Attorney General. And thanks also to the person who just wants to hear what I have to say. I got 4% in a D-News poll which didn't even mention my name; and they want 5%. I am working hard on my campaign and am advertising substantially. Please see my web site or my blog to learn more; and then tell your friends. We can have an effect on the election if we try. I stand for more freedom and smaller government, and will fight for your individual rights against government power.