The Wall Sreet Journal today gave what was pretty much their endorsement today to Republican gubernatorial candidate Sarah Steelman. Ordinarily, the highly respected conservative paper remains neutral in most state races, and especially in intra-party Republican primary battles. But in this historic year, WSJ concluded that most political rules have been thrown out of the window anyway:
“The 11th commandment of politics is that elected officials shall not take sides in their party primaries. Then again, Missouri Republicans are burdened with so many sins, what’s one more?
For an insight as to why the GOP is down and out in Washington, take a look at Jefferson City. That’s where Sarah Steelman, the state treasurer, is running in an Aug. 5 primary for the Missouri governorship. And it’s where her reform campaign against earmarks and self-dealing is threatening the entrenched status quo, causing her own party to rise against her.”
Echoing similar sentiments that Dick Morris offered while stumping for Steelman in St. Louis last March, writer Kim Strassel labels Steelman a “new mold of Republican.”
“Her sin is in fact to belong to that new mold of Republican – Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, Sens. Tom Coburn and Jim DeMint – who know it’s no longer enough to simply hawk lower taxes. In 10 years as a state legislator and treasurer, her target has been the slothful political favor factory that’s led Republicans away from small-government principles and outraged conservative voters.”
Read the entire article here.
Related:
The Next Right: MO-GOV: I’m Liking Sarah Steelman More and More…
Prime Buzz: Wall Street Journal columnist blasts Missouri GOP, praises Steelman’s maverick streak
KY3 Political Notebook: WSJ Blesses Steelman, Then Cautions Her
Blog CCP: Roe Can Muscle WSJ
MACR: The GOP Reformation
Rothenberg Political Report: Missouri Governor: Hulshof Faces Two Tough Races
0 responses so far ↓
1 Bobbi // Jul 18, 2008 at 11:37 am
I know Coburn and DeMint. I don’t know alot about Jindal and nothing about Palin. I also know that Sarah Steelman is not even in the same ballpark much less the same league as Coburn and DeMint.
To be sure, Hulshof has his own problems, what politician doesn’t? But Steelman isn’t in his league either.
Ms. Stassel needs to get out of the beltway more often.
2 Governor // Jul 18, 2008 at 11:52 am
Bobbi,
You’re kidding yourself. Kenny Hulshof has no chance of beating Jay Nixon. None!
He wasted our tax dollars on the most abusrd things in the world and he wants to bring that wasteful pork barrell spending to Missouri.
We can’t afford it!
Sarah Steelman will beat Kenny Hulshof and she will beat Jay Nixon to become Missouri’s next GOVERNOR.
And not a moment too soon!
3 Bobbi // Jul 18, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Best laugh I have had all week! Thank you.
4 Jim Byrne // Jul 18, 2008 at 2:09 pm
Bobbi…
Let me guess. You’re either a lawyer or a journalist. Right?
60% of the U.S. Senators are lawyers. -That means nothing, absolutely nothing, can get done in Washington without lawyer approval.
Do you think the Framers of our Constitution, or those that signed the Declaration of Independence, would find that to be acceptable?
Do you think Washington is looking out for the citizens or themselves?
I’m sorry, and I don’t mean to rag on attorneys, but damn-it, I’m tired of having our country ruled by an elite aristocracy, and we sure don’t need more of the same at the state level.
Hulshof is bad for Missouri
Section 1 f the Missouri Constitution:
“That all political power is vested in and derived from the people; that all government of right originates from the people, is founded upon their will only, and is instituted solely for the good of the whole.”
Vested in the people and for the good of the whole. Not vested in the lawyers and for the good of the lawyers.
If we elect an attorney to be governor, we end up with one profession controlling two branches of our government. (They would like to get acquire all three branches, but the people are starting to see past their well-crafted speeches.) Every attorney in Missouri is a member of a committee of the Judiciary. (Though not unconstitutional, I believe it presents a conflict of interest and a vesting of political power in one profession.)
5 Bobbi // Jul 18, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Then you should really believe Steelman is the devil incarnate. She was solely responsible for killing an override of tort reform when Holden was governor.
Her husband is one of the biggest trial attorneys there are in the state.
At least Hulshof wasn’t an ambulance chasing, job killing, trial attorney.
And I don’t think we even need to bring up Nixon’s “past”.
6 Jim Byrne // Jul 18, 2008 at 4:04 pm
Bobbi…
I notice you avoided my question. What is your profession?
Steelman was one vote among the Senate. There are 34 Senators.
If you read the Missouri Constitution, instead of trying to point fingers, you will see that no one Senator has the power to do anything. However, I’m sure that won’t stop you from trying to sell your story.
“Her husband is one of the biggest trial attorneys there are in the state.”
So? If being successful is a crime, I’d like to plead guilty.
I know of no instances where David Steelman has acted unethically. I reviewed the appellate court opinions.
Are you an “I hate people with money” Democrat?
On the other hand, maybe you should read up on your buddy Kenny Hulshof. Here’s a great article where Hulshof’s record comes under added scrutiny.
Hulshof, like far too many attorneys, thinks that the system works if the conviction is reversed by the appellate court.
Are appeals free? No!
Are people that are wrongly convicted, as a result of prosecutorial misconduct, given back the days they spent in jail, waiting for the system to work? No!
Kenny Hulshof is a self-interested schmuck.
I trust Steelman. If you were truly unbiased, you would too.
Do you think our government would work better if one profession controlled two of the three branches?
7 Bobbi // Jul 18, 2008 at 6:35 pm
It takes 23 votes to override a gubenatorial veto. When that vote came up, Sarah Steelman beholden to trial attorneys, could have cast THE deciding vote. ONE SENATOR did in fact cause the state to continue to languish with the unjust system for two more years. I am having a difficult time understanding why you don’t understand that 1 senator can indeed stop good things from happening and Sarah Steelman did just that.
As a small business person and a non-lawyer, I do not appreciate the fact that Sarah Steelman decided to represent the trial attorneys interests instead of ours. She is being funded almost exclusively by trial attorney money directly and indirectly. She is a wolf in sheep’s clothing.
Your hatred for Hulshof is clear. However, it is misplaced when it comes to saying that he is a worse choice because he is an attorney. Sarah is the worst choice by far. At least with Hulshof what you see is what you get. With Sarah, it’s only what she wants you to see and that’s not good most of the time.
If you want to see self-interest and a schmuck, look no further than Sarah Steelman.
8 Jim Byrne // Jul 18, 2008 at 9:04 pm
Bobbi…
Here’s what your not getting:
You are correct, 23 out of the 34 Senators are required to overcome a Governor’s veto. Sarah was but one of 12 that did not support Bill. Where are the other 11? Are they not equally accountable to you? Or is Steelman held to a different standard because her husband is an attorney?
Do you think that all Republicans should vote with the majority of Republicans? If so, we should stop this silly voting game and just pass all bills sponsored by the party having a majority.
When SB280 was passed by the senate, it received 21 yeas, and 12 naes (Sen. DePasco was absent with leave). In order to acquire the 23 needed for a super-majority, at least one of those naes had to change their vote. (one of those naes had just as much power as Sarah did) Who was that nae that changed their mind?
Do you know the full story?
Maybe you should read Gov. Holden’s reasoning for veto of the Bill (here on page 6).
Gov. Holden’s reasoning is sound. Perhaps even persuasive to Steelman.
If you want to run for public office, you can be put in the same position (if elected). Until then, get over how an individual voted on one Bill. Start looking at the big picture, not just the one Bill that interests you personally.
I didn’t say that Hulshof is a bad guy because he is an attorney. I know plenty of attorneys that I happen to think are great people. I do have a problem with a guy that works the system in order to put innocent people in jail. How many innocent people should be sent to jail so that your candidate can exploit them for his own political gain?
Read the article that I linked to in my last comment. After reading it, give us your opinion, and tell us why you think Kenny is such a good guy.
Yes, I do have a problem with one profession running our state and federal government. When you decide that life under an aristocracy is good, let me know.
9 Bobbi // Jul 19, 2008 at 3:02 pm
Yeah right and I will sign over the title to that bridge you just bought. What was persuasive to Steelman was the trial attorney money.
If you trule have a problem with one profession running our state and federal government (the last time I looked lawyers weren’t even close to being a majority of the state legislature) then you won’t be able to vote for Governor this year.
Too bad for you.
10 Mr. Obvious // Jul 19, 2008 at 8:31 pm
No Bobbi,
It was Hulshof that bought that bridge.
Unfortunately he paid for it with taxpayer money and it goes to nowhere.
11 Jim // Nov 30, 2010 at 4:33 pm
Kenny can beat Nixon without even trying. Talent can beat Steelman. It’s about time we god some prople back in office who have integrity and some sense.
Leave a Comment