Discussion for article #235296
He was terminally verklempt.
Really? You sure donāt get that impression from his election history, his being as state auditor, or his public speeches, of which this one seems typical.
Lots of folks suffer from depression, whether clinical, chronic, sudden onslaught, short interval manic-like or manic-offset-like, or long-set actual manic bipolar.
A whole bunch of those folks are successful even wildly so in singing, acting or directing in movies and TV, in newsertainment, CEOs of big companies, entrepreneurs, professors, scientists, physicians, artists, authors - all very creative contexts.
Iām guessing here, but I think itās very likely we do NOT see nearly such a high percentage of depressives in politics as we do in other creative area, because so much of success in long-term or high-achieving politics is about showing up day after day week on week year on year decade after decade, and being consistently low or no-drama.
I also think that American politics as played by one entire party and even large chunks of the other, isnāt in th least creative, but instead more like rote discipline and service to a cause or more often to masters - whether those who own the official apparatus of one entire party or, at the other extreme, serving what he or she honestly thinks as the best interests of the largest number of people he or sheās been elected to represent.
Schweichās job and public talks, those Iāve watched on video or read, seem characterized by the usual conflict that modern-day establishment Republicans tend to show between OTOH the demands of their public jobs and OTOH what they say about those in public, except maybe somewhat more of it.
IMO what one hears is a standard, old-timey pre-Obama conservative like Rep/President Ford, and Senators Robert Dole, Arlen Specter, Bob Bennett, Mike Castle, that ilk. All of them readily mouthed such platitudes as values that conservative voters believe in or say they do and at least buy into - except that Schweich appears (appeared) HIMSELF to have actually BELIEVED in all or a lot of that horseshit (I think that Mike Castle may still as well).
As state auditor, Schweich was assiduous in not only running his office but reporting to the state legislature and governor and the public in what his office was spending its resources looking at and - emphasis here - how the institutions his office audited performed against those homey-sounding platitudinous horseshit standards.
All that COULD be a source of internal conflict, but not clearly: belief systems that donāt add up or ultimately arenāt capable of surviving close scrutiny (let alone morbid over-thinking) on any objectively rational basis, like Teapsters certainly, but also including post-WWII American conservatism, seem mostly internally inculcated and moderated, like religious belief.
Itās certainly possible a garden variety establishment conservative Republican like Schweich could have suffered from loss of faith (others who suffered from it include Ike, John Dean, post-Watergate Goldwater, the guy who runs Media Matters, economist Bruce Bartlett, Specter, to some extent GW Bush, John McCain every alternative second Thursday p.m. for long enough to get thru the late night talk shows).
Iām maybe flattering myself that I know more than most about suicide dynamics, but Iāve professional and family bases for that. To me, one big lesson is this:
- While itās not that hard for personal physicians, therapists and attentive close family members (so long as not in active denial) to see them coming, the relatively small percentage where there are signs of clear ārational triggersā present (like actual or impending business or romantic disappointment) are overwhelmed by the many where there are no apparent triggers, whatās there is unclear, or whatās present is open to being judged (and often dismissed) as irrational.
This is speculation, but Schweich was a public figure and this story is a public concern, especally in that deeply troubled state: I think itās possible Schweichās the biggest source of anxiety may have been that he just didnāt know those folks opposing his political ambitions, OR that he did know enough about them to lead him to distrust them and even fear the nihilism chaos they cause, and he was concerned that his answering multiple falsehoods and absurdly irrelevant half truths hurled at him constantly (Teapsters never have anything more substantial) might bring out unrelated true embarrassing facts or facts that were too complicated to deal with in a soundbite or a tweet (such as being haunted by loss of faith, or self-doubts, or fearing being the subject of and having to repeatedly deny ad hominem attacks, or WHATEVER, because we all got something going on).
3 Likes
Iām not saying it was a tasteful jokeā¦
anything else to provide a motive
Jewāve got to be kidding.
Oh, yet I get shit!
1 Like
The NRA propaganda machine sending subliminal messages through weaponry made Mr Schweich obey the pistolās command.
a la Aliceās Restaurant.
/S
The NRA propaganda machine sending propaganda through weaponry made
a la Aliceās Restaurant.
So if the police havenāt been able to find a motive for suicide, are they treating it as a homicide??? If they canāt find a reason for him to have (tragically) killed himself, then someone else must have done it, right?
His associate, who also killed himself, is the neighbor of a former co-worker. Literally the apartment next door. Got questioned by the cops and everything.
Apropos of nothing, but I thought it showed what a small world it is.
What did you say? We must have a bad connection! Boative? Goative? No, still not getting it. Anyway, case closed.
If I was Ms. Thompson, or even more if I was a politics reporter in Missouri, I sure wouldnāt be closing this file yet.
Why would anyone whoās been following the news and YouTube views on what American state and local law enforcement has been up to in the last few years (ever, really) conclude that simply because a given state or local law enforcement agency SAYS itās unable to āconcludeā suicide, that that fact means death by some other means (accident, homicide, misadventure, natural causes)?
Say Iām a physicist and I have this theory and I go to test it and get results that confirm my hypothesis to say, 3 sigma (IOW, in 1 against some other number to three significant numbers). Thatās like one in a thousand at least. We put people to death for way, way less. But as proof to other scientists, itās considered less than a confirmed discovery. I mean, I might expect some credit if and when it gets to 5 sigma (See, for example, Peter Higgs et al.), but IN THAT CONTEXT itās not yet reliable scientific fact.
With human events, itās way tougher. There could be a point where itās almost entirely impossible that it could NOT be suicide, even on the standard of scientific certainty. But BELOW that standard,1) how does one go about making meaningful judgments about whatās āenoughā proof, and 2) what if say a third of your departementās top investigators say suicide, a third say theyāre not sure, and the last third say WTF knows?
How do you take THAT judgment public?
Answer: you donāt get anywhere near that specific. Instead, you say whatās been said here. You or I may actually feel a lot stronger about what the evidence the police have gathered on this stands for than they do, because weāre individuals and theyāre an institutional agency. You or I could say, hey, Iām satisfied this is suicide, and thatād be fine for you or for me, but what if you say that and I canāt see the evidence, or I do and say, whoa, Iām not nearly as convinced. None of those scenarios mean it was NOT suicide. And without a definitive internal determination, the file remains open - but theyāre not going to tell us what all they have or will do now or suspect, are they? Nor should they.
1 Like
This being a report from Missouri police I donāt put any credibility to it.
Didnāt read the article? Wife, friends, colleagues, they are all āin on the murder plotā.
The guy was unstable and suicidal. Itās a sickness. He was not murdered.
Exactly, all the interviews with his wife, friends, colleagues, etc., were all faked. And when they all read about this in the papers, they will of course need to be killed or paid off so they donāt talkā¦
You actually think his wife made stuff up about him being suicidal? For real? Wow.
Article says: " Schweich took his own life on April 26"
Now how is that possible? Donātā you mean February 26th?
1 Like
They determined through his wife, friends and colleagues that he was suicidal and had discussed it. What they are saying is they wonāt pinpoint a specific thing that put him over the edge.
They are still analyzing his computer, etc. If they find correspondence indicating it was the alleged whisper campaign, that might be a motive. But without a note, they canāt officially say āthis was itā. Thatās all. Donāt go reading anything crazy into this.
1 Like
I said that where? Please point it out.
Aha, did not realize that was a Yiddish word, thought you were saying he was rubbed out like some others here. I offer my apologiesā¦
That was the entire joke. Like all geniuses, Iām unappreciated in my own time.
1 Like