« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

A new face in the 2010 Missouri Senate race?

Thomas who?

By: Bill S (Diary)  |  May 12th, 2009 at 08:00 AM  | 

RESIZE: AAA

Several sources are reporting today that a new name has emerged on the Republican side of the quest to replace Christopher “Kit” Bond in the U.S. Senate.  Thomas Schweich, a law school professor at St. Louis’s Washington University and an attorney with Bryan Cave, is apparently being recruited by former MO Senator John C. Danforth, former Hungary ambassador and Bush cousin Bert Walker, and former Belgium ambassador Sam Fox.

My immediate reaction to this news was “if he’s coming from Danforth, I gotta be concerned.”  While Danforth served as a Republican, he has made it a habit in recent years of stabbing Christian conservatives with pointy sticks, despite his credentials as an Episcopalian priest.  Danforth was at the head of the wave of GOP “moderates” blaming social conservatives for the ills of the GOP.  Sound familiar?  And now he’s promoting a candidate for Senate.  Tell me I shouldn’t be suspicious.

But there’s another, more significant reason to be concerned about Schweich.

In 2002, Schweich joined such conservative stalwarts as the Democratic State Committee, Laborer’s Local 579 and 676, AFSCME & AFL-CIO, and the Jackson County Democratic Committee in supporting… Claire McCaskill.  In 2002, McCaskill was the MO State Auditor and was beginning her quest for the nomination for the U.S. Senate seat of then-GOP Senator James Talent.  Schweich’s $500.00 donation to McCaskill is documented in the January 2002 report from “Friends of McCaskill” to the Missouri Ethics Commission (page 35).

If this is indicative of Schweich’s positions, I’d almost rather see Sarah Steelman in the race.  At least I have more confidence that she’s more of a conservative, and as far as I know she hasn’t been complicit in trying to oust a sitting GOP senator.  I’m sure that Mr. Danforth is a fine man, but I do not trust his conservative credentials, especially considering his recent Democrat- and moderate squish-like campaign against social conservatives, so in turn I do not trust his candidate choices.  We do not need another so-called “moderate” in the Senate.  We need a conservative.  And Mr. Schweich, while probably a wonderful person, doesn’t appear to have the creds.

Late last week I had the opportunity to have a brief phone conversation with Congressman Roy Blunt, who is currently the only GOP candidate pursuing Bond’s Senate seat.  He is obviously laser-focused on Robin Carnahan and defeating her in the Senate race.  His main concern is in preventing a far-left liberal from winning the MO Senate seat.  Rep. Blunt told me “It’s important to hold back this onslaught of wrong-headed policies” with respect to the current Obama administration moves.  He also stated “If I didn’t think this was critical to the future of the country, I wouldn’t be running”.  I asked Blunt about some of the accusations that he may not be conservative enough for the seat.  He mentioned his very conservative ranking in the ACU and National Journal surveys, and he discussed some of his current activities in the house, including his work trying to provide a GOP/conservative alternative for health care reform, fighting cap-and-trade, and working to oppose hate crimes legislation (“we shouldn’t have different levels of victims…”).  My conversation with Blunt reinforced my feeling that he is a very strong candidate for the Senate and is unquestionably conservative enough for the job.

Interestingly, Blunt “reached out” to Schweich shortly after the news emerged about his interest in the candidacy. 

I am still concerned about the prospects of a contentious campaign in the event that additional candidates enter the race, especially one of the nature of the 2008 Steelman/Hulshof gubernatorial primary campaign.  I do not believe the GOP can sustain such a blood-letting.  We currently have a proven candidate in Blunt.  We have a speculative almost-candidate who has almost no real track record but who seems to have a lot of interesting things to say in Sarah Steelman.  And now we have another maybe-candidate who is being sponsored by a “moderate” Danforth and who has a record of donating to the bad guys.  

Better give Blunt the whack-a-mole mallet, because they may start popping up like the Chuck-e-Cheese game before long.

Tags: , , , , , ,

COMMENTS

POSTING RULES  |  LOGIN TO COMMENT  |  REGISTER TODAY
  • mbecker908

    Let’s get a couple of points straight.

    1. Any relationship between the “Republican Party” and the people involved with the RMSP is an accident and will soon be rectified. They were founded to work with Democrats to stop the Gingrich Revolution in ’94 and they’ve been working in the same vein since. The RMSP is a blight on civilization and no one who has had anything to do with them who is not in a full “forgive-me-I-was-an-idiot” mode should be cast off.

    2. There is even less relationship between the Episcopal Church (and that would be the “Brit Part” that Danforth belongs to) and Christianity is an even bigger accident.

    Other than that, good diary.

    2.

  • bs

    When I first wrote it, I was quite a bit rougher on them. But I decided to give the benefit of the doubt and be kind.

  • Kyle-MI

    I wouldn’t trust anyone coming from Washington University, especially from the law school faculty. The place is liberal to the hilt even for a university. As an alumni I know from personal experience.

  • http://andrightlyso.com/ civil_truth

    By recruiting and running multiple “moderates” against conservative challengers, these Democratic party surrogates want to bleed funding, confuse the electorate (by having a mulitplicity of people claiming to be Republicans) and prevent the Republican party from recohering to an entity that can challenge the oncoming revolution.

    What I don’t know is if the RMSP types truly see conservatism as the enemy of the state, if they just are focused on their pet bogeymen that they have lost perspective as to the large trends, if they don’t see the rise of the totalitarian left taking over the Democratic party that wants to change the rules of the game – or in plain denial of this, if they’re plain cowards who want to go with the flow so that they get their piece of a** in return for acquiescence, if they have just lost their moral ability to discern evil.

    Not good

  • chipbennett

    If Danforth supports him, then I’m against him.

    Danforth lost any respect I may otherwise have had for him when he supported Amendment 2. He belied his true beliefs, and they aren’t conservative.

    McCaskill-light won’t unseat the incumbent.

  • schweich

    Good afternoon, Interesting blog. Here are some things you should know about me before you jump to conclusions:

    1- I have supported Jim Talent in every election he has run in, and cosponsored a fundraiser for him when he was running for Congress.

    2- I believe it was when I was 11 years old, in 1972, that I walked into the the Bond for Governor campaign office and volunteered to stuff envelopes. I have voted for Kit in every election since I could vote– and supported him financially. He represented a new and exciting force in Republican politics, which is what we badly need right now.

    3- I did give $500 to McCaskill when she was running for auditor in 2002. That year, the Republican party could not field a credible candidate and, I believe, eventually settled on a convicted felon as the nominee. While I am reliably Republican, our candidate must pass the laugh test first.

    4- I supported Talent over McCaskill in the Senate race– hands down– and have been very displeased with McCaskill’s blind support of the Obama agenda– which, if I run, is what I plan to run against.

    5- I have also made contributions to John McCain.

    6- George W. Bush appointed me to political posts three times.

    7- At this early stage, few of you have any idea what my views are on the key issues, but I predict most of you will be supporting me should I decide to run. To give you a hint: I was the state departments senior and second ranking international law enforcement official. I fought terrorism, drugs, organized crime, and corruption from the jungles of Colombia to the mountains of Afghanistan. I grew up in a family with guns, and I have always been pro-life. I have spent time in DC but have never even been to a meeting on K street.

    Let’s keep talking. I am looking forward to meeting you.

    Respectfully,

    Tom Schweich

  • JadedByPolitics

    What is your position on getting the power back to the states and removing it from DC? Do you see that the Federal Government has taken powers that were never granted it in the Constitution. You say you are a Republican but are you a Conservative? Where do you stand on getting the abortion issue back to the states? Where do you stand on removing the Federal government from all forms of social policy? or do you believe that the government has a role in peoples lives personally! I would hope that you would do a diary on yourself and I hope that you will realize that this site is Conservative first but supports the Republican candidate once the electorate has its say in the primaries!

    I might add that I am not religious BUT I STRONGLY support our brethern in the Religious Right of our party because they are the moral leg of our stool and suffice it to say Tom that without one of the three legs WE are not a party at all! What is your position on the Religious Right? Where do you stand on the FisCon portion of our party and to me personally what is your position on the NeoCon….again Tom the bottom line is we are a THREE LEGGED stool and anyone of those legs NOT present makes the stool wobbly and probable to break!

    I look forward to your comments to my question and it is a smart move to engage the grassroots of the party anytime, anywhere and I respect you for it.

    WE need people who show no fear in the face of the libral onslaught that has been perpetrated on our wonderful country!

  • itrytobenice

    I’m an R from SW MO. District 7. I am reasonably pleased with Roy Blunt, though he has strayed from the reservation enough that I fear he has developed Belwayitis. I am always looking for good quality candidates.

    Kit Bond is not a name I would drop around me, however. Since he announced he was not running, he has voted more like a democrat than a Republican. As a matter of fact, I went through (or more accurately – am going through) a period of real discouragement due to the impression that he has been a wolf in sheeps clothing. No wonder we can’t get our agenda moved with Rs who are nothing but a facade.

    As for the felon running against McCaskill, I remember that horrible thing. He was first on the ballot in the primary, and even though we had a very good candidate, we had enough morons who show up and vote with no information whatsoever that he won. The entire R apparatus supported McCaskill in the General. Why in the world anyone would vote for a candidate based on ballot position, I’ll never understand, but it danged sure happened.

  • bs

    Mr. Schweich: I appreciate that you took the time to reply. And you definitely win points by supporting Jim Talent, one of my all-time favorite MO politicians and my former congressman.

    I am still puzzled by your monetary support of a Democrat. If I don’t like a GOP candidate, I certainly don’t subsidize the other side. At most, in an extreme case I might vote for the Dem, as I did in IL years ago when George Ryan was running for Governor (it was obvious to me at the time that he was a crook, and my perception was correct). But the Democrats will never get a penny of my money.

    I would be happy to hear your positions on the key issues. As someone who is being supported by an RMSP board member, you will be under a particularly strong microscope here at Redstate, as that particular GOP faction is not too popular in these parts. Again, I find Danforth’s position on Christian conservatives borderline offensive, and I hope you do not share those positions.

    I urge you to look long and hard at the need to run against Blunt. The last thing the GOP needs is a primary race that takes the focus off of Robin Carnahan.

    As a registered Redstate member, you are free to post your own diaries. If you do so, please send an email to contact@redstate.com and ask it to be forwarded to me. I want to make sure I don’t miss your contributions.

  • schweich

    From: Tom Schweich
    To: red states

    I am really enjoying the discussion and am glad that you want to hear more from me.

    Let’s start with McCaskill. I am going to be very direct. An auditor is hardly the most politically charged position. When I gave her the money, the Republicans had no candidate, and had said that the auditor’s race was not a priority, and eventually rejected Jay Kanzler– a very nice guy– in favor of a felon. I gave McCaskill some money when the Republicans weren’t offering any credible candidate. I am not going to apologize for that, and if that alone is enough for you to ignore the main reason I am thinking about running ( i.e. the Obama onslaught on free enterprise, the massive $20 trillion debt he wants, the $1 trillion in new taxes, the sale of our country to China, and a foreign policy based on weakness and apologies) well then you probably shouldn’t support me. I have heard of one-issue voting, but that would be a bit ridiculous. I have a lot to offer conservatives– just read my book Crashproof Your Life– which, in 2002-3, warned of fiscal irresponsibility and its consequences, when a lot of people and government officials– including all Democrats and some Republicans in Congress– were spending our way into oblivion.

    My main objective– if I ran — would be to reassert fiscal responsibility, states’ rights, and a more credible foreign policy. I would be the anti-Obama in that regard.

    If I run, you will over time learn my views on all the other issues. I will tell you right now, you won’t like all of what I will have to say. But I think we will have enough in common that you will come to the conclusion that I would make a good senator.

    I hope, at the very least, that you can respect someone who calls them like he sees them– no packaging, no handlers, no special interests– and who has a burning desire to keep this country great.

    Tom