Does Being Rich Qualify?

There’s a lot to like about South Carolina third district congressional candidate Joe Grimaud.  A Vietnam War fighter pilot, a successful businessman, wealthy … in one word; accomplished.

He’s campaigning to be a “Citizen Congressman.”  Again, admirable and he says all the things that modern-day conservatives want to hear and I don’t doubt he means what he says.

There are, however, a couple of head-scratching annoyances.

In February, Mr. Grimaud was considering a challenge to Rep. Joe Wilson for the second district congressional seat.  According to the Politico:

Had he decided to run for the seat, it would have been the second time he would have faced Joe Wilson.  Grimaud lost to Wilson in the 2001 special election to replace Floyd Spence.

So, Joe Grimaud is now running in the third, and here is the second annoyance; does he live in the district or not?  I’ll point out that it isn’t required for a candidate/congressman to live in the district for which (s)he is running or serves.

Still… there is an uncomfortable taste in Mr. Grimaud listing a rented residence in Greenwood, while actually residing in Chapin. [His campaign secretary is his wife whose residence is listed as being in Chapin.]  The campaign’s treasurer lives in Columbia and his bank is in Chapin.

OK, so what? 

Mr. Grimaud wants to be the REPRESENTATIVE to the United States Congress for the people of the third congressional district.  It can be argued that he wants to serve, no matter where and how – and that’s commendable – but he doesn’t appear to be making any committment to the district for which he wants to stand.  There is no inherent connection to the district, no particular familiarity or cohesion.

Maybe that’s why Mr. Grimaud’s fund-raising has been so anemic.  He’s loaned the campaign $301,000 which accounts for 99% of the monies acquired.  The rest?  He contributed.  Not one dime of Mr. Grimaud’s finances have come from anyone but him.

Again, it’s admirable that he can (and does) put so much of his own money to run for office.  If I had $300,000 and was running for office, I’m not confident that I would be so noble as to put up my own cash.  In the end, it will be up to the voters in the third district to decide to what extent they’ll take a candidate’s absentee status in account.

There is a home-grown, district-focused candidate with solid conservative credentials and proven electability available.  State Representative Jeff Duncan (44) is almost 30 years younger than Grimaud (72), an accomplished politician and successful businessman from Laurens.  Duncan’s life, business, family and service has been in the third district.

You can’t buy that.



18 thoughts on “Does Being Rich Qualify?

  1. You had me until the last paragraph; then it became a smear article against the competition. Since you are smearing the competition, Grimaud must be gaining ground; thus causing you concerns.

    Also, in one paragraph, you have demonstrated that Duncan discriminates based on age and that Duncan is a career politician. Two attributes we need neither in Washington nor in Columbia.


    • These are MY thoughts, not Jeff Duncan’s. Any notion, convoluted as it might be, that there is prejudice or discrimination should be directed at me, not Duncan.

      Among the convoluted is that this is a smear. The FACT is that Mr. Grimaud is spending only his money to run for office.


  2. We have another accomplished, conservative businessman running in the 3rd District … Rex Rice. Incidentally, I’m 72 and don’t consider that old.


  3. I hope everyone will listen to Richard Cash speak. He, too, is an accomplished businessman. scholar and most importantly, a man of faith. I have heard him debate at Anderson College and speak at the Tiger’s Den in Clemson. His knowledge of the issues and commitment to conservative values is believable and inspiring. Hopefully, you will hear him personally as he speaks about his reasons for not taking PAC money and for self-imposed term limits. It is also to Richard’s credit that this past year has been his first campaign. Rex Rice, on the other hand, has been in politics for 16 years. Until he set his eyes on DC, his voting record was graded a “C” by the SC Club for Growth. Rice has been in politics for 16 years and that is long enough. Being an experienced politician means knowing how to work the system to get re-elected while buttering one’s own bread at the expense of all US citizens. No more career politicians, please.


  4. There are a few conservatives running in District 3 who have lived and served there for years. Jeff Duncan is one, but Richard Cash is just as fiscally conservative, and he will lead the fight to protect the unborn.

    Mike Vasovski is also conservative, and a good choice if you favor the foreign policy views of Ron Paul. Neal Collins seems like a really nice guy, but I don’t know if he has the experience to lead and withstand both the blazing guns of the Democrats and the siren song of the compromising Republicans.

    Rex Rice? A good man I’m sure, but too much a part of the good old boy network (not a reference to his age) for my taste.

    Richard Cash and Jeff Duncan are, in my opinion, the only strong conservatives with a chance of of winning this race. And my vote goes to Richard Cash.


  5. Ever since Mr. Grimaud sent his first mail piece a few weeks ago, I’ve liked what he said. His qualifications are good, and his message is superb. That being said, I really doubt he can win. As a citizen of the third district, I find myself very turned off by the fact that he wants to come here and buy our district. I will not support him. Thankfully, there is a very qualified field behind him. Jeff Duncan is a solid, “Conservative Politics as Usual” candidate who deserves some attention. However, my support is going to Richard Cash. Anyone who attended the Anderson County Republican Party Debate (which, incidentally Cash won by a 2-1 margin over the closest opponent) knows that Richard Cash has the best message of all the candidates. He has built a large base of support; he can win the election, and I intend to be part of making that happen.


  6. I am personally turned off by someone simply trying to buy an election. I vote for the character and integrity of the candidate running for office. My vote goes for Richard Cash. He has the right message and the conviction and courage to deliver it to Washington DC.
    I hope and pray that there are 100 or more like Richard Cash that will be elected to office this November.
    Our federal government is simply corrupt and out of control. Congress imposes rules and regulations on its citizens that it does not follow. We need persons of strong character like Mr. Cash to change the course of the nation and put God back in the public square.


  7. Richard is a husband of 25 years, father of 8, owns two small businesses, friend of many, and is willing to follow God’s call to go to Washington and make a difference for all of us! I have attended several of the debates and Richard’s stand is the same each time; firm in his belief that we must turn back to God, return the government to the people and stop socialism, Since he has not been in politics before he is not corrupt like all the career politicians. He has pledged to serve no more than 10 years and will reject all PAC money. He’s got my vote!


  8. Let’s get real. Whoever wins this seat will be a freshman congressman in a group of 436 representatives. Thinking the new guy is going to change Washington is just not realistic. All he has to do is vote according to the party leaders. Then he will be hailed as a true conservative. Anything less, he will be scorned as a RINO.

    On another note, I am leery of guys who are running for public office because God told him to run. The first thing he needs to learn is the Constitution; especially the part about the separation of church and state. There are religious zealots killing people because God told them to kill. Also, he can retire on the taxpayers’ dime after 8 years of service,


    • 1. I would prefer our elected officials vote their conscience and in the best interest of their constituents, and not simply according to their party leaders wishes. I believe Mr. Cash has been clear that he will remain conservative and independent at the same time.

      2. Perhaps it is you who needs a constitutional lesson. There is no constitutional assertion of a “separation” of church and state; this notion is simply a myth. The constitution puts limits only on Government’s establishment and restriction of free exercise of religion. Read it: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.”

      3. As far as I know Mr. Cash has never asserted that “God told” him to run. He has stated that after seeking the council of many Godly friends, and spending much time in prayer he felt lead to run. I don’t know of anyone who believes in a personal God, that does not pray and ask God for guidance regarding major life decisions. Mr. Cash has in fact stated that he is not so arrogant as to believe that God has in some way guaranteed him victory, which is why he is working harder than any of the other candidates in the race. I would prefer that all of our elected officials pray and ask God if they are running for the correct reasons before deciding to run.


    • Please don’t confuse being a religious zealot with having faith. Also, Richard is confident of the calling. The outcome of the race might not be the purpose for his being led to run for the office. Maybe, it was for you to read these messages. You are just that important.


  9. A quote from Mr. Cash’s website reads as follows:

    “God. We must turn back to God. For a generation, we have been turning away from God, and the Christian foundations of our nation. We have allowed God to be driven from the public square, and we have rejected God’s moral absolutes. We must turn back to God, and rebuild the foundations of faith and family, upon which our freedoms depend.”

    This sounds like the establishment of a religion to me. What about those citizens who have a religion other than Christian. Is he leaving those citizens out?

    Then there is this quote:

    “Moral Absolutes. We must uphold the virtues of morality that are derived from the Bible. Abraham Lincoln stated, “The Bible is the best gift God has ever given to man . . . But for it we could not know right from wrong.” Pre-marital sex, adultery, and homosexuality are all wrong because the Bible teaches these behaviors are immoral. Therefore, we should support laws and policies that promote Biblical morality, and reject those that do not.”

    Who’s interpretation of the Bible will be used? This is a slippery slope to me.


    • Michael, the “establishment of religion” in the First Amendment was talking about setting up a national Church (like the Church of England). Nobody wants that.

      Evidently you disagree with President Lincoln on the Bible being our guide to right and wrong. Which of the 10 Commandments do you oppose? What Christians refer to as the Old Testament is a sacred book to the three largest religions in the world. Since you reject the Bible, what standard of right and wrong do you think should be the standard, so nobody feels left out?

      We aren’t all going to agree on a single standard, so we have to elect the person who holds to the standard we agree with. In the third district, the majority hold the Bible as the foundational standard, so our representative should hold the same view, as Richard Cash does.

      The slippery slope I fear is the one that has led us to ban prayer in school; to allow mothers to kill their children in the womb; to allow all kinds of sexual perversion to parade through our schools, down our streets, and across our TVs; to forbid the means of self-protection to residents of many large cities; and to take excessive taxes from those of us who work to support those who refuse to work. That’s a slope we’ve been sliding down as a nation, and it’s time we dig in our heels and climb out of this mess.


    • Michael
      As the e 78.4% of Americans (Pew Forum Survey) , not to mention South Carolina 3rd District voters, self identify as Christian, I believe that having a Christian world view would be considered quite representative. I am sure you would agree that overall, a congressman should be representative of his constituents. Just as a representative from a heavily Jewish, Muslim, or majority secular district might have views that are shared by a majority of those in his district, so too it is rational to believe that a representative from a heavily Christian district may have a world view similar to those he represents.

      Furthermore, a Christian man being honest about his belief system is hardly radical. To say that this somehow disqualifies him from public service is absurd. Atheists and humanists are not criticized for allowing their world view to color their views on the law, why then should Christians be criticized. Richard has never advocated the establishment of a national religion. On the contrary he, as one who loves the constitution, is fighting against a system that disqualifies Christian voices based solely on this mythical idea of the “separation between church and state”. Our founders understood that it was the church and people of faith that needed protection from the Government, and not the other way around.

      As a Christian, I will be voting for someone who shares my views. I would recommend that you vote for someone who shares your secular world view. If any of the candidates in this race espouse a strictly secular world view I would be very interested in having that information so I might make a well informed voting decision.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s