Thursday, August 19th, 2010
New York City, New York
PANDERING AND HYPOCRISY
OVER A MOSQUE
The political pyromaniacs are on the loose in the nation's capitol, with both parties pandering to their respective bases. Neither democrats nor republicans could be accused of being "bathed in courage" on a litany of important national issues. Political demography is the sound bite of the day as shrill election rhetoric continues to mount.
Being a republican candidate this election season certainly is exhausting. These defenders of our American way of life are consumed by enemies galore, around the clock. As if Gays, socialists, Muslims, Arabs, and illegal immigrants were not enough, now they have to attend to the fear mongering over the Ground Zero mosque.
Except the proposed mosque and community center is not at ground Zero - it's several blocks away and a few hundred feet from an existing mosque. Yes, there will be a place of worship, but also a swimming pool, basketball court, bookstore, fitness center, performing arts center, and a food court. Heaven help us, now our way of life is to be threatened by lamb kabobs and hummus!
There was no real concern expressed over the proposed Islamic cultural center when it was first proposed back in December of 2009. The New York Times published a story at that time quoting the project's developer. "We want to push back against the extremists," said Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf. Jewish leaders and a number of city officials, including the mayor's office, said they supported the idea, as did the mother of a man killed on 9/11. An FBI spokesman said the Imam, (the leader of the mosque), worked for the bureau for years.
Shortly after the Times story ran, conservative media personality Laura Ingraham interviewed Abdul Rauf's wife, Daisy Khan, while guest-hosting "The O'Reilly Factor" on Fox. In hindsight, the segment is remarkable for its cordiality. "I can't find many people who really have a problem with it," Ingraham says of the mosque project, adding at the end of the interview, "I like what you're trying to do." This is the same Laura Ingraham who presently has a book listed as number two on the New York Times best sellers list called, "The Obama Diaries," a blistering attack on the current administration.
Muslims have been praying inside the Pentagon since Sept. 11, but those opposing the Ground Zero mosque have been strangely silent. That's right. Muslims have infiltrated the Pentagon for their nefarious, prayerful purposes - daring to practice their religion inside the building where 184 people died on Sept. 11, 2001. They haven't even had the sensitivity to move two blocks, let alone a mile, away from that sacred site.
As reported in the Washington Times, "Navy imam Chaplain Abuhena M. Saifulislam lifted his voice to God as he called to prayer more than 100 Department of Defense employees at a celebration of Ramadan at the Pentagon. God is most great, sang the lieutenant commander and Islamic leader, in Arabic, as iftar - the end of the daily fast - began. Uniformed military personnel, civilians and family members faced Mecca and knelt on adorned prayer rugs chanting their prayers in quiet invocation to Allah.
"In a ceremony following 9/11, Army Chaplain Abdul-Rasheed Muhammad, the first Muslim chaplain to serve in the military, read a verse from the Koran at the memorial service at the Pentagon on a Thursday, exactly one month after the attack. Muhammad, who became a chaplain eight years ago and works at Walter Reed Medical Center in Washington, ministered to rescuers in front of the smoldering Pentagon after the attack."
So Muslims can pray at the Pentagon, but not several blocks away from Ground Zero? Maybe it's because most Americans, including virtually all of our politicians, see the Islamic world as a single confusing and troubling monolith. In the Christian world, we have no problem making distinctions. Just because someone is an Irish catholic living in New Orleans doesn't mean he's sympathetic to Irish Republican Army terrorists. Southern Baptists do not condone the murderers of abortion doctors.
But in America, we remain blind to the divisions and distinctions within Islam. There are 1.57 billion adherents to the Muslim faith around the globe, making up 23% of the world population. In the U.S., there are estimates of some 5 million Muslims. Yet American education rarely mentions this vast unknown population that many say is the fastest growing religion in the world as well as in the U.S. Without any basic knowledge, how can we determine friend or foe?
As far as the Ground Zero mosque, our politicians are falling all over themselves postulating that there should be no Muslim presence anywhere near this hallowed ground. In Louisiana's hotly contested U.S. Senate race, Incumbent David Vitter is demanding that the President reverse his support for building the mosque, while his opponent, Democrat Charlie Melancon, says that such a building "near Ground Zero isn't appropriate." Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich one ups both of them by declaring that building the mosque would be like putting a Nazi sign by a holocaust museum.
On one hand, there is a good audience for pandering as some two thirds of Americans are against the mosque. But we all have to deal with trifles like the 1st and 14th amendments. Legally, there is little wiggle room for the opposition. But does building such a center make good sense? Probably not. There is a difference between what any organization legally could do as compared to what they should do.
On the other, far from engendering good will and better understanding, Abdul Rauf and his fellow mosque supporters have started a firestorm that has rekindled animosity and distrust. While there may not be a logical foundation for such vehemence -- justified or not, it exists. To be tolerated, both sides, including mosque supporters must be sensitive to the wounds of 9/11 that have yet to heal.
In the current election season, one would think that the campaigns would focus on the economy, healthcare, Iraq, Afghanistan and who is best qualified to lead us. Instead, those who hope to lead are spending too much time exploiting the anger, self-righteous indignation and arrogance concerning the mosque placement at the expense of other very pressing issues.
British economist Josiah Stamp wrote: "It is easy to dodge our responsibilities, but we cannot dodge the consequences of dodging our responsibilities."
Too many elected officials are dodging the major issues facing this country today. Unfortunately, it is the rest of us who will suffer the consequences.
Peace and Justice.
Jim Brown
Jim Brown's syndicated column appears each week in numerous newspapers and websites throughout the South. You can read all is past columns and see continuing updates at www.jimbrownusa.com. You can also hear Jim's nationally syndicated radio show each Sunday morning from 9 am till 11:00 am, central time, on the Genesis Radio Network, with a live stream at http://www.jimbrownusa.com. The show is televised at http://www.justin.tv/jimbrownusa.
New Orleans political commentator Clancy Dubos from Gambit Weekly joined Rachel Maddow to discuss Senator Vitter and how his moral and ethical problems will affect the campaign.
This week saw the official start of the U.S. Senate election – forget about the primary – Senator David Vitter and Congressman Melancon are racing directly to November.
Here are the two Ads – follow the jump for commentary.
Today Congressman and Democratic Challenger to Senator Vitter, Charlie Melancon called on the Senate to finish their work before they leave town.
At issue is the bill that passed in the House but is left inside a huge stack of bills in the Senate.This bill would effectively end the moratorium for those rigs who are meeting or exceeding their responsibilities to operate safely and would provide over $1.2 Billion in penalties against BP that would be directed to Costal Restoration projects.It appears that these bills are caught up in politics and not what is best for Louisiana.
Yesterday saw the close of the qualifying period for a slew of races.These races include the replacement of Mitch Landrieu as our Lt. Governor and all of the Federal races – each congressional district as well as the Vitter Senate seat.(This column is about the Federal Races, the State races will follow.)
There has been so much action it is almost enough to make this political junkies head spin right off my neck, but let’s take a look at the more notable races.
USSenate
David Vitter has had his share of problems and now it seems as if he has more than his far share of challengers.First – let’s look at the Republican Primary – yes, - exciting – there will be one!
Two Republican Challengers will be facing off with the embattled senator and they are former Louisiana Supreme Court Justice Chet Traylor and little known Nick Accardo of Franklin.Traylor is definitely the surprise here in this race and could really give Vitter a run for his money.Lacking no far right bonafides, Traylor enters the race as a “country lawyer” with strong support from north Louisiana and in the business community.Traylor is arguably most famous for writing the opinion of Louisiana’s highest court that retained Louisiana’s Anti Sodomy Laws that are still on the books here in our state (albeit completely unenforceable after Lawrence v. Texas).For more on this check out what they are saying on TPM.
(Bringing this back up to the top, in case anyone missed it! - promoted by Matt B)
As summer sets in and Louisiana yet again finds itself in crisis, many folks are looking towards November to see what if anything recent primaries held throughout the country tell us of our political future.Charlie Melancon is challenging Senator David “Serious Sin” Vitter, Congressman Cao at least on paper seems to be toast and political newcomer Ravi Sangisetty could keep the LA3 in Democratic hands… or…
Nationally pundits can’t seem to stop themselves from pontificating the end of one party or the other using the party primaries in Pennsylvania, Arkansas and Kentucky as their crystal ball.Yet I think many of them are missing the point – what can be learned from these races and what, if anything, does it say for the November results.
Arlen Specter, long time Republican turned Democrat for what appears to be only due to self preservation went down to General turned Congressman Joe Sestak.The “party bosses” from the President through the Governor all supported Specter – yet Sestak won.In Kentucky’s Republican Senate primary Dr. Rand Paul won hands down against the “establishment” choice.And in Arkansas Democratic incumbent Senator Blanche Lincoln is facing a difficult fight with Lt. Governor Bill Halter because she couldn’t muster the support of at least 50% of the Democratic Primary voters to save her position.In all of these cases I think the lesson that can be learned is – “ignore your constituents to your own peril.”
Specter clearly had his own skin as his motivating factor and Sestak caught it on tape and used it against him.Lincoln is in a state where polls showed that well over 65% of the population and almost 90% of Democratic Voters supported Healthcare Reform – yet she fought against it tooth and nail.And in Kentucky “Tea Party” favorite Rand Paul pulls out a win against Party insiders largely due to a revolt against the establishment.Now, most of the country is learning more than they ever cared to about “libertarian views” a la debating the Civil Rights Act.
Points that must be made…In Kentucky with all the “air” being sucked up by the Republican Primary one missed the point that Democrats turned out 3 to 2 at the polls to send state Attorney General Jack Conway to November.So much for Democrats being demoralized and not interested, huh?
But what does this say for our chances here in Louisiana.We have to look at the races: (those races after the jump)
The pivotal first fundraising quarter of 2010 comes to a close this Wednesday, just three days awayTODAY!
While the Sinning Senator David Vitter continues to vie for the title of the most hypocritical member of the U.S. Senate, Democratic Congressman Charlie Melancon has worked hard to lay a foundation for Vitter's defeat in 2010.
You can help further Congressman Melancon's effort with a contribution today via the Expand the Map! ActBlue page. Every dollar he's able to report before the end of the fundraising quarter will demonstrate his campaign's strength against Vitter. It makes a big difference and a real impact.
On the Expand the Map! ActBlue page, Congressman Melancon is just 1 single contribution away from the 25-mark and just $95 awayjust $45 away from the $500-mark! You can help him cross these thresholds with a contribution today.
Please hop on over to the Expand the Map! ActBlue page and support Charlie Melancon (and our other Democratic candidates for Senate) before the quarter ends TODAY!
Earlier this week, I mentioned Stuart Rothenberg's issues with Rasmussen Report's polling #'s. Now, I've got more ammo to debunk the #'s coming Rasmussen Reports, one from Public Policy Polling (PPP) and another from Anzalone-Liszt.
David Vitter of Louisiana. Although recent Rasmussen polls have shown Vitter with a healthy lead, Charlie Melancon is a top tier challenger who though not yet known statewide has performed strongly in a very tough district for Democrats. Voters have had a long time to forget Vitter's past personal transgressions but they'll be reminded of them this fall. Louisiana is also a state that might actually be easier for Dems in a midterm because it's one of the few places that supported Barack Obama at a lower rate than John Kerry.
And now Anzalone-Liszt (hat tip to John Maginnis - subscription only):
A poll done for Congressman Charlie Melancon shows him trailing Sen. David Vitter, 48-38 percent, which is better news for the Democrat than other recent survey results.
The Anzalone-Liszt poll sample of 800 voters was taken Feb. 18-24, with a margin of error of 3.5 percent. The poll contrasts widely with monthly Rasmussen Reports, which showed Vitter's lead expanding from 18 percent to 24 percent in the first two months of the year. The Anzalone poll shows the race has changed little since its May survey when Vitter led 47-37 percent.
Granted, this is a partisan poll, but I'd trust it more than Rasmussen Reports, mainly because Rasmussen is an automated poll, and Anzalone-Liszt has actual human beings conducting the poll. In addition, the Anzalone-Liszt poll showed Melancon's voter ID at 59% compared to Vitter's 92%. That's more in line with a Congressman's voter ID at the start of his first state-wide run.
Now the question is whether the Melancon campaign will fight the fight the Vitter folks are giving them - defending the Democrat's economic agenda, and run as an economic populist. We'll see.
So quite a few folks were disappointed with the last poll on the Senate race came out ... on the Democratic side, that is. But Stuart Rothenberg joined the party of Democratic strategists panning the reliability of Rasmussen Reports #'s on individual races across the country:
The numbers in the Wisconsin survey that stuck out like a sore thumb were the favorable and unfavorable ratings of Republican Senate hopeful Dave Westlake. According to the survey, 33 percent of those polled had a favorable view of Westlake, while 31 percent had an unfavorable opinion of him.
What's so weird about that? Well, Westlake isn't exactly a public figure.
The self-described "entrepreneur and small businessman" went to West Point and earned an MBA from the University of Chicago, but as far as I can tell, he has no political experience and hasn't spent any money to get known. His year-end Federal Election Commission report showed that at the end of 2009 he had raised $33,000, spent $31,000 and had less than $3,000 in the bank.
In November, Public Policy Polling, a Democratic polling company, surveyed the Wisconsin Senate race and found Westlake's ID at 2 percent favorable/9 percent unfavorable. Could Westlake's name ID have skyrocketed from 11 percent to 64 percent from November to February? No, not without a statewide media blitz.
Now ... let's take a look at the Rasmussen Reports #'s for Charlie from that January poll that showed Vitter with a 23 point lead:
Melancon, a congressman since 2004, is viewed favorably by 39% and unfavorably by 46%.
So ... 84% of Louisianans know enough about Charlie, a Congressman from South Louisiana, to give their opinion of him to an automated poll? I find that hard to believe, considering that only 61% gave their opinion about Charlie to Research 2000 back in March 2009, with 39% having no opinion of him at all.
On Thursday, Rasmussen Reports came out with a poll on the Louisiana Senate race that is rather discouraging:
Candidate
Percentage (October 2009)
Sinning Senator (R)
57% (46%)
Charlie Melancon (D)
33% (36%)
One of the reasons for this surge of support for the Sinning Senator is that he has continually attacked Charlie by linking to him to President Obama. One such attack came recently in a fundraising appeal email:
Louisianans and Americans across the country are tightening their family budgets and reducing their spending. President Obama and the liberal friends of Charlie Melancon aren't following the example of families reducing spending, and are instead proposing to grow the government and spend more than at any time in American history.
While this greatly simplifies the President's budget, and fails to remind folks that the GOP-controlled Congress from 2001-2006 borrowed our way from a balanced budget inherited from Democratic President Bill Clinton to deficits as far as the eye can see, (and the Sinning Senator voted for every single budget), I find it curious that the Sinning Senator says one thing about the budget but does another when it comes time to vote on a bill that contains a simple idea that all Louisianans are currently doing - pay as you go.
That's right, Louisiana, while y'all are looking at your family budgets, and determining whether you can afford to get the car fixed, and if so, what you'll forego for the week or the month to be able to afford fixing the car, the Sinning Senator believes that the U.S. government should continue to borrow its way into debt. The proof is in this vote. And if you click on that link, you'll notice that the Sinning Senator was joined in voting NAY by every single one of his Republican colleagues in the Senate.
It is time for Charlie to fight the fight he's been given by the Sinning Senator, and that fight is defending the Democratic economic agenda. It is quite plain that the stimulus is actually working, and people are being put back to work: (hat tip to CenLamar)
It's time to expose the Sinning Senator for the liar that he is when it comes to, well, job creation, health care reform, the federal budget, the stimulus, and on and on by espousing an populist economic agenda, and showing that the Democratic economic agenda is producing positive results.
The only announced Democratic candidate in LA-03, Ravi Sangisetty, released his fundraising numbers:
Candidate
Money Raised
Money Spent
Debts
Cash on Hand
Ravi Sanisetty (D)
$250,000 +
~ $25,000
n/a
$225,000
A first time candidate raising $250,000 is mighty impressive, especially in this state, where far too many Democrats struggle to raise any money at all for their campaigns.
And if there are any Democrats still mulling whether to get in the race or not, I think Mr. Sanisetty's fundraising haul has made the decision for them, as any candidate would be hard-pressed to raise the money it would take to win a Democratic primary against him at this late date.
There are no fundraising #'s being reported as of yet by presumed Republican front-runner Nickie Monica, but I'd be surprised if he doesn't have a sizable warchest at this point, particularly since he's been fundraising since July. There are two other Republicans running - a New Iberian by the name of Kristian Magar, and Jeff Landry, who lost to State Senator Troy Hebert in 2007, reported that he raised over $96,000 in December, and lent his own campaign $20,000 to have approximately $115,000 in the bank. I'd love to see a GOP primary drain the survivor's bank accounts, but we'll see.
Now, on to the rumors ... I've been hearing folks whisper about the Department of Natural Resources Secretary Scott Angelle running for this seat since August. The only problem is that he doesn't know which party he wants to run in, as he was a Democrat back when he served as St. Martin's Parish President and I believe is still a registered Democrat, but as The Houma Today informed us back in August:
When asked this week if he had been approached by state or national Republican Party officials about making the switch, Angelle said no.
"I haven't been contacted by the Republicans or the Democrats or the Libertarians or Greenpeace or any kind of organized political group," he said, laughing. "No."
In a follow-up query by e-mail, he was also asked if he would even consider making the leap.
"Several longtime friends have suggested it over the years and again more recently," Angelle replied. "It is something that I would consider, like (former President) Ronald Reagan, (former Gov.) Mike Foster and (former U.S. Congressman) Billy Tauzin."
And for all those Democrats out there who think Mr. Angelle would be a great candidate to have, y'all should know that he spent his New Year's weekend down in Cameron Parish hosting a fundraiser for none other than Governor PBJ.
Working for a Republican Governor is one thing, but hosting a fundraiser for one? That ain't the mark of a Democrat, y'all.
Last week, Louisiana1976 highlighted an amendment put up by Senator Coburn of Oklahoma that will cut the $300 million that Senator Landrieu successfully inserted into the health care reform legislation prior to the vote to debate the bill in the Senate.
It all has to do with a tweaking of the Federal Medical Assistance Percentage, which determines how much money the federal government and the states have to put up for Medicaid coverage. The Louisiana FMAP has usually been around 67%, meaning that Louisiana usually puts up about 33% of the costs of Medicaid for a fiscal year. However, since the FMAP takes into account the average per capita income from five years to three years prior to the current fiscal year, that means for fiscal year 2011, it will take into account the per capita income of Louisiana between 2006-2008, the years that federal disaster assistance money flooded the state. Thus, the Louisiana FMAP drops from 67% to 63%, causing a $900 million hole in the state's budget this upcoming year.
Senator Landrieu fulfilled the #1 request of Governor PBJ by getting some funding to help close a $2.5 billion dollar hole in the state budget over the next five years.
While Governor PBJ has remained largely silent, the Sinning Senator has twittered his displeasure with "backroom deals" to get health care reform passed. Never mind that he's quite famous for some backroom dealings himself.
Ahhh, I digress.
Back to the FMAP funding issue ... according to The Town Talk, the Sinning Senator is:
"holding off judgment specifically on the Coburn amendment until it comes forward for an actual vote."
Hmmm ... what is there to decide, Sinning Senator? Either you'll vote nay to help out Louisiana, or you'll vote yea to appease your friend from Oklahoma, and you'll screw us all back home.
As Charlie Melancon said in a conference call on the Coburn amendment yesterday, and cut short in a tweet (tweet italicized):
"David Vitter needs to remember that he works for the people of Louisiana, not the Senator from Oklahoma. We're talking about $300 million to head off a state budget crisis and help families that need it most. It doesn't take a Harvard education to figure out that this is common sense and the right thing to do for Louisiana."
While most of us would expect that our Senators do the best thing for the people of this state, it doesn't always work that way with the Sinning Senator ... he looks out for himself before he looks out for the people of Louisiana.
Now the national political media has picked up on Secretary of State Jay Dardenne's floating of a potential primary challenge to the Sinning Senator:
"I've had a lot of people suggest that I do that. I'd have to raise some money. I may do that."
While I believe that such a challenge is the nightmare that keeps the Sinning Senator continually running to North Louisiana to project the image that he's hard at work up in Washington to take folks minds' off the fact that he wasn't on the straight and narrow back in the day, it's getting awfully late ... and if Dardenne is gonna run, he better start raising money quick. The longer he waits to get in, the less seriously I think his campaign will be taken.
Not only does he not rule it out, he pledges to keep listening to folks. Well, I've been hearing that he's been in northern Louisiana quite frequently over the past few months, and taking the time to meet with Republican elected officials. Rumors are flying that Mr. Dardenne is speaking with those elected officials about putting a campaign team together.
Moreover, the Sinning Senator's strategy appears to be to appeal to the hard-core right wing, or as noted pollster and political strategist Stanley Greenberg calls them in his book, The Two Americas: Our Current Political Deadlock and How to Break It, the F-You Boys and F-You Old Men, which is totally unnecessary unless the Sinning Senator anticipates a primary challenge, and is attempting to ward one off.
One such example of the Sinning Senator catering to the F-You Boys (& Old Men) is his ludicrous assertion that an obscure provision in the Cap & Trade Bill would give President Obama new powers of a dictator; an assertion that even right-wing bloggers @ Michele Malkin's Hot Air took issue with: (emphasis added)
That's not to say that this bill isn't dangerous, but it simply doesn't do what Vitter claims. Nowhere in either bill does the term "climate emergency" appear, which Vitter claims is the lever through which the President will claim dictatorial powers. We need to focus on the real problems of the bill, chief among them that it will kill jobs to solve a problem that doesn't exist, rather than generate false hysteria to answer false hysteria.
Now, Democratic operatives tell me that the Sinning Senator's polling has remained remarkably consistent all year despite a climate that has been absolutely vicious for Democrats in Louisiana. That same polling shows that Vitter's Republican support is weak, and it is weakest up in overwhelmingly Baptist North Louisiana.
What does this mean? It means that if Jay Dardenne were to throw his hat in the ring for the Republican nomination, it'd be a battle royale. And those same Democratic operatives are scared of running against Dardenne - he's a stable, well-regarded elected official with a slim record to run against.
Will Mr. Dardenne run? That's the nightmare that keeps the Sinning Senator running to North Louisiana every chance he gets.
Nicolls State University has been awarded a Department of Energy contract to research clean energy as part of Louisiana's Clean Power and Energy Research Consortium.
With all the sugar cane fields in Louisiana, tons of sugarcane waste, a renewable resource, is generated annually. Currently, most of it is burned on location. The research at Nicolls State focuses primarily on generating ethanol from sugarcane waste.
Congressman Melancon released the following statement below:
"Through this important research, Nicholls State University and CPERC are creating a path to energy independence for Louisiana and our nation. Discovering new uses for sugarcane biomass may open up a profitable new market for our farmers and expand the field of renewable energy production in Louisiana."
It's good to see that there are some folks looking at diversifying Louisiana's economy by investing in clean energy research.
I've had 60 town halls this year, 190 since elected. Melancon hasn't had one in 160 days, see countdown @ http://snipurl.com/z3i34
First of all, the Sinning Senator is laughably harkening back to the days when we all wondered what the definition of "is" is. This time, however, he has me wondering what the definition of town hall is.
You can see right on Congressman Melancon's website that he held a "town hall" on October 14th, and another on September 2nd.
In addition, you don't necessarily need to waste taxpayer resources by having town halls masquerading as campaign events if you go to where the people are, and talk to them while you are there. Two such examples are Congressman Melancon spending Veteran's Day at two locations in his Congressional District:
15th Annual Mulberry Elementary Veterans Day Celebration
When: 10:00 a.m. CST
Where: Houma Terrebonne Civic Center
Veterans Day Event and Picnic Lunch
When: 12:00 p.m. CST
Where: Veterans Memorial Park in Gonzales, Louisiana
In addition to the Sinning Senator's lie about Charlie not holding a town hall, I would seriously question whether what the Sinning Senator is holding is a town hall at all, considering that the questions are screened by his staff. For instance, this is how he treated a woman at a town hall who dared to ask him (respectfully) about his vote on an amendment that would victims of rape and discrimination deserve their day in court:
By now, y'all have heard that Congressman Charlie Melancon voted against the health care reform bill that passed the House on Saturday night. He ostensibly voted against it because of the "costs" of the bill. I'll wager the "costs" of the bill that forced Charlie to vote against the bill are not the monetary kind that the country will undergo, but the perceived costs of a "Yea" vote for ol' Charlie Boy himself.
Had he voted "Yea" on the bill, we'd be seeing attacks ads from here on out on Charlie's "Yes" vote, painting him as a crony of Obama. That's the going to be a typical GOP attack for the next 3 years, and we'll still see them here despite Charlie's "nay" vote on this specific bill.
What really galls me about the vote is that Charlie Boy showed he lacks the courage of his convictions. Even as he voted against the bill, he still repeated bland talking points about health care reform:
"Together, we will find a way to make health care more affordable and accessible for all Louisianians, and bring down the rising cost of health care in this country."
Really? How would he do that? By doing nothing? Because that's what his vote signified - let's not do anything. The House bill would reduce the deficit, but that doesn't matter to a Blue Dog that's scared of David Vitter and his allies on the right.
That is why ol' Charlie Boy is going to lose the Senate race. He's too scared of David Vitter to stand and fight for the 800,000 Louisianans that do not have health insurance.
I make this argument because I believe, as many others do, that 2010 is going to be a base election. In other words, the candidate that does a better job of growing his/her base prior to the election, and then gets more of them out, will win. Currently, Democrats can count on roughly 780,000 voters to vote for their candidate in a statewide election, regardless of whether that candidate is white or black. In the last two Senate elections - 2004 and 2008 - the victor received a minimum of 943,000 votes and the losers received a maximum of 867,000 votes (John Kennedy, 2008). While both Senators Landrieu and Vitter won by more than 100,000 votes, let's assume that it's going to take roughly 867,000 votes to win. That means that Charlie Boy is going to have to find an additional 87,000 voters to win this election.
It is my belief that if ol' Charlie Boy continues to vote like Vitter would, most folks are gonna say, what's the difference? In other words, why take Republican-lite when they can have the real thing?
Congressman Charlie Melancon represents Louisiana's Third Congressional District but is seeking the Democratic nomination for the U.S. Senate so that he can run against David Vitter.
I can't for the life of me figure out why!
On Saturday, Melancon voted in favor of the Stupak amendment which banned any public option money and any insurance program in the insurance exchange created in the healthcare reform bill. The vote on the amendment was seen as a necessity by Speaker Nancy Pelosi in order to get the votes needed to pass the overall reform bill.
But, even with the abortion funding ban language included in the bill, Melancon could not bring himself to vote for the bill. He was one of more than 30 Democrats to vote against the bill. Republican Anh Cao of Louisiana's Second Congressional District provided the sole Republican vote in support of the bill, but Melancon could not bring himself to support either his party or his president and support this legislation.
So, the question is this: Why is Charlie Melancon running as a Democrat for the Senate?
The always-resplendent Rachel Maddow lampoons Sinning Senator David Vitter's fear-mongering and misleading Louisiana voters on health care reform:
After watching Rachel's report on Vitter's dishonest scare tactics, wouldn't you like to see him lose his job? You can help bounce the Sinning Senator from the U.S. Senate with a contribution to his Democratic opponent, Congressman Charlie Melancon, via the Expand the Map! ActBlue page.
Today Congressman and Democratic Challenger to Senator Vitter, Charlie Melancon called on the Senate to finish their work before they leave town. 
