Ah, poor David Vitter ... every single time a political sex scandal hits the news, the GOP runs out to defend the politician, unless, of course, that politician is a Democrat, because, of course, IOKIYAR:
One would think after Jack Abramoff's former firm, the Alexander Strategy Group, shuttered its doors that the Spinning Sinning Senator David Vitter would stop hanging out with the principals and employees of that disgraced firm. But then again, the Spinning Sinning Senator thinks that such common sense rules don't apply to him:
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.)
Fundraising Dinner at 6:30 p.m.
Location: 330 Maryland Avenue, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20002
Hosted by: AT&T Federal PAC and Dan Gans Cost: $1,000 per person/PAC
Another couple of refugees from the defunct Republican Alexander Strategy Group have turned up as the Polaris Government Relations lobby shop.
Daniel Gans , who was chief of staff to then-Rep. Bob Riley (R-Ala.), and Amelia Blackwood recently registered to lobby on behalf of the Association of Kentucky Fried Chicken Franchisees on such issues as estate taxes, "frivolous obesity suits," the minimum wage and avian flu. The association was a Gans client at ASG.
ASG closed in January because of its ties to disgraced lobbyist Jack Abramoff and to former House majority leader Tom DeLay (R-Tex.). DeLay is under scrutiny in the Abramoff case and faces Texas charges of campaign-money laundering
So he's still hanging out with folks that did business with Abramoff. And lest we forget, the Spinning Sinning Senator did quite a bit of business with Abramoff himself, who was a principal of the Alexander Strategy Group, according to Roll Call:
Former GOP lobbyist Jack Abramoff hosted a September 2003 fundraiser for now-Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) just two months before Vitter inserted a provision in an Interior spending bill helping one of Abramoff's tribal clients.
Vitter has stated repeatedly that he only met Abramoff once and had no idea that Abramoff's client, the Coushatta Indians of Louisiana, were funding an anti-gambling group with which Vitter had repeated dealings.
But Abramoff hosted a Sept. 9, 2003, fundraiser for Vitter at the restaurant Signatures in Washington, D.C., a popular GOP eatery that Abramoff has a financial stake in.
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) wrote to the Federal Election Commission on April 15 to report that he had discovered that the Washington restaurant Signatures had not charged his credit card -- as he said he had directed -- for a 2003 fundraiser for 16 people that cost $1,846. The event was hosted by Jack Abramoff, a lobbyist and part-owner of the restaurant who is now under congressional and criminal investigation for his handling of millions of dollars in fees from Indian tribes.
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.
The Democrats are poised to pass the health care bill using a process known as reconciliation, which is essentially a legal (it's codified law, which you can find here) way to sidestep a threatened filibuster by the minority party in the U.S. Senate.
And because 60 is the new 50 for the Republicans, they're all spinning the Democrats' use of reconciliation as some new thing that has never ever happened. For instance, here's the Spinning Sinning Senator:
"Well, the president talked a great deal about bipartisanship during the health care summit last week, but it's now clear that was just to distract attention away from his purely partisan strategy - forcing Obamacare down our throats using the unprecedented reconciliation process."
Unprecedented, Senator? Then tell me what these votes were:
The Economic Growth and Tax Reconciliation Act, #118, 5/16/2001
Conference Report on the Economic Growth and Tax Reconciliation Act, #149, 5/26/2001
The Jobs and Growth Reconciliation Tax Act, #182, 5/9/2003
Conference Report on the Jobs and Growth Reconciliation Tax Act, #225, 5/23/2003
The Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005, #10, 2/2/2006
Conference Report on the Tax Increase Prevention and Reconciliation Act of 2005, #118, 5/11/2006
The Deficit Reduction Act of 2005*, #303, 11/3/2005
On the Motion to Concur with House Amendment to Deficit Reduction Act of 2005*, #363, 12/14/2005
The last two votes were on the same bill, the Deficit Reduction Act of 2005, because there were differences between the House version and the Senate version of the bill, which cut Medicare by $6.4 billion and increased premiums for seniors on Medicare, in addition to delivering the largest cut to the student loan program in its history. If you click on the vote #'s, you'll notice that the Measure Title states: "An original bill to provide for reconciliation pursuant to section 202(a) of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2006 (H. Con. Res. 95).
If y'all notice the bold text there says RECONCILIATION, that's because the Republicans, during the era of that great uniter, George W. Bush, were forced to use reconciliation because they couldn't get a supermajority of the Senate to go along with their plans to bankrupt the United States Treasury while giving tax breaks to their rich friends. And if you click on the #'s up there, you'll notice that the Spinning Sinning Senator David Vitter voted YEA ON EVERY SINGLE RECONCILIATION BILL DURING THE BUSH 43 ADMINISTRATION.
Oh, did I forget to mention that those bills put the United States government $1 trillion, 769 billion, 700 million dollars in debt? Yeah, that's right, that's the Spinning Sinning Senator showing his concern on the wasteful spending undertaken by the U.S. Government during W's Administrations, all the while subverting the "60 is the new 50" majority rule he now espouses.
So, let's recap the Vitter rules ... it's okay to plunge the U.S. Government into debt when the Republicans are in charge, but when the Democrats do it, it's bad. And it's normal to use reconciliation to pass a bill, so long as the Republicans are in charge, but when the Democrats threaten to do the same thing, it's "unprecedented." I guess It's OK If You Are Republican, or in shorthand, IOKIYAR.
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.
There's a new website put up by the Louisiana Democratic Party's communications shop:
As usual, you can click on the picture itself, or click here to geaux check it out. I gotta say that I LOVE it. Absolutely LOVE it, particularly since it will make my job oh, so much easier when it comes to highlighting the problems that the Sinning Senator has with telling the truth.
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:
Late this morning, the Sinning Senator pushed the old, tired GOP tactic of telling Americans what to be afraid of back to the forefront again with this tweet on Twitter:
Obama bringing GITMO terrorists to US for trial despite our bi-partisan votes to keep detainees out of US.
Apparently, the Sinning Senator thinks that the folks at Gitmo do not deserve a very American idea called due process, which is embedded in the 5th Amendment:
No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a grand jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.
Maybe we can send the Sinning Senator to a secure prison, and throw the key away for 6 years. I wonder what his response to that will be.
The Sinning Senator has long been misleading Louisianans on his support for veterans. In person, he will be gracious, and thank veterans for their service. The following anecdote from the Louisiana Conservative is telling:
I was completely sold on his sincerity when Veterans approached him one by one after the meeting and he thanked them for his service.
In person, the Sinning Senator can be quite charming when he wants to be. But for a Senator, the key to knowing what he believes lies in how he votes. And veteran's groups have been watching quite closely, and I have posted the highlights below:
Disabled Veterans of America consistently gave Vitter failing grades, including three "zeroes". Of the six rankings given to Vitter between 1999 and 2006, only one was above 42 percent. Vitter's ranking of 40 in 2006 was the lowest in the entire Louisiana delegation.
The Retired Enlisted Association gave Vitter two failing grades of 35 percent and 33 percent in 2006 and 2004, respectively, which are the most recently rankings available.
American Veterans, an organization that traces its roots back to 1944, gave Vitter a ranking of 50 percent in 2003 (most recent ranking available).
The American Legion gave Vitter a ranking of 40 in 2003 (most recent ranking available). By contrast, Congressman Rodney Alexander received a ranking of 80 from the organization.
Is this the kind of representation that our veterans deserve in Washington? Or can we do better?
UPDATE: An interested reader forwarded me a link to a report that the Sinning Senator, along with his fellow GOPers on the Senate Subcommittee on Housing, Transportation, and Community Development decided it was not worth their time to attend a hearing entitled, Ending Veterans' Homelessness. Such compassion for our veterans, no?
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?
So the Sinning Senator, afraid to piss off the voting bloc he's banking his entire re-election campaign on, dispatches his spokesman to say the following about Tangipahoa Parish Justice of the Peace Keith Bardwell:
"First, Sen. Vitter thinks that all judges should follow the law as written and not make it up as they go along. Second, it would be amazing for anyone to do a story based on this fringe, left-wing political hack's blog - he's been handcuffed and detained in the past over his guerrilla tactics."
Notice how he can't say anything about Mr. Bardwell's actions? He's sidestepping the issue, afraid to piss off that voting bloc. As for the second point of his spokesman, isn't it amazing that the Opelousas Daily World, the Baton Rouge Advocate, and the Alexandria Town Talk, all conservative newspapers, deigned it important that the Sinning Senator comment on the issue by comdemning Mr. Bardwell's out of step vision for our society.
I'll have more about that voting bloc once I finish a book called The Two Americas by pollster Stanley Greenberg.
By now, y'all have heard about the Tangipahoa Justice of the Peace Keith Bardwell's refusal to marry an interracial couple. Here's what Governor Jindal had to say:
"This is a clear violation of constitutional rights and federal and state law. ... Disciplinary action should be taken immediately -- including the revoking of his license."
So Gov. PBJ wants him gone. Here's what Senator Mary Landrieu had to say, via a press release from her office:
"I am deeply disturbed by Justice Bardwell's practices and comments concerning interracial marriages. Not only does his decision directly contradict Supreme Court rulings, it is an example of the ugly bigotry that divided our country for too long. I call upon the Louisiana Judiciary Committee to use its authority to have Justice Bardwell dismissed from his position. He clearly has no intention of administering the law or upholding justice for interracial couples."
And, here, ladies and gentlemen of Louisiana, is what your Sinning Senator, the one up for re-election next fall had to say when questioned by Mike Stark, the blogger behind The Crooked Dope:
You don't think that's the case, Sinning Senator? What, that you're the senior most official from the State of Louisiana NOT TO COMMENT on this? If so, please see the quotes from Governor Jindal and Senator Landrieu above. Or perhaps you're not aware that Mr. Bardwell refused to marry an interracial couple? If so, please click here!
Then again, your silence ain't all that surprising to those who know you best ...
In 2005, Jamie Leigh Jones was gang-raped by her co-workers while she was working for Halliburton/KBR in Baghdad. She was detained in a shipping container for at least 24 hours without food, water, or a bed, and "warned her that if she left Iraq for medical treatment, she'd be out of a job." (Jones was not an isolatedcase.) Jones was prevented from bringing charges in court against KBR because her employment contract stipulated that sexual assault allegations would only be heard in private arbitration.
Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) proposed an amendment to the 2010 Defense Appropriations bill that would withhold defense contracts from companies like KBR "if they restrict their employees from taking workplace sexual assault, battery and discrimination cases to court." Speaking on the Senate floor yesterday, Franken said:
The constitution gives everybody the right to due process of law ... And today, defense contractors are using fine print in their contracts do deny women like Jamie Leigh Jones their day in court. ... The victims of rape and discrimination deserve their day in court [and] Congress plainly has the constitutional power to make that happen.
Why should the Sinning Senator have some 'splainin' to do?
It's not enough that he treated women as property in his past. It's not enough that he voted against the Ledbetter Equal Pay Bill, which mandates equal pay for equal work in the workplace. It's not enough that he voted against an amendment that would have expanded access to preventive health care services and education programs that help reduce the spread of sexually transmitted infections (STIs) and reduce unintended pregnancy. No ... he has to go and vote against this amendment which will give women their day in court against their attackers, and their defense contractor employers for letting it happen.
Louisiana Rule of Professional Conduct 8.4(b) provides it is professional misconduct for a lawyer to "commit a criminal act especially one that reflects adversely on the lawyer's honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer in other respects." By his own admission, Sen. Vitter solicited for prostitution in the District of Columbia -- apparently on numerous occasions -- and the evidence strongly suggests he had a pattern of committing the same violations in Louisiana. Because soliciting prostitutes is a crime, Sen. Vitter clearly violated Rule 8.4(b).
While I am surprised it took CREW this long to figure out that the Sinning Senator is a member of the Louisiana Bar, I'm not surprised it's happening now, particularly in light of the Sinning Senator's vendetta against ACORN. As CREW's Executive Director states:
"Sen. Vitter's zeal to see ACORN criminally investigated for offering advice in setting up a prostitution ring reminded me he has yet to be held accountable for his own role in a prostitution ring. While ACORN's conduct is indefensible, so is Sen. Vitter's, and what is good for the goose is good for the gander."
Notwithstanding the reasons for this complaint, this is a serious charge, and should result in at least the Sinning Senator's suspension from the Louisiana Bar Association. Why do I make that claim? Because former President Clinton cut a deal that resulted in his being suspended from the Arkansas Bar for five years back in 2001 for lying to the special counsel investigating the Monica Lewinsky scandal. Soliciting a crime - prostitution - should merit a similar response from the Louisiana Bar Association.
If you want to help put pressure on the Louisiana Bar, y'all should click here to sign the petition to DEFUND VITTER, like he's pushing for the federal government to defund ACORN. Need more convincing? Watch below:
This Eighth Part of the Doing a Vitter series is going to focus on the Sinning Senator's penchant for breaking with the values of his purported faith - Christianity.
The Sinning Senator ran in 2004 on a family values platform, replete with commercials using his children as props. Then came the revelation that he was committed a "serious sin" in breaking the Seventh Commandment of his purported religious faith - Christianity:
Thou shalt not commit adultery.
Unfortunately for the Sinning Senator, (as well as the rest of us), he just started breaking the Eighth or Ninth Commandment (depending on whether you're reading the Catholic Bible or the Catechism) to make up for not breaking the Seventh:
You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.
You might be wondering what neighbor of the Sinning Senator's that I'm talking about ... it is ACORN, which the Sinning Senator has decided is the biggest threat to our Republic since the British invaded Washington D.C. all the way back in 1812. After all, no reputable a news agency as ABC News says of the Sinning Senator:
And then there's man who bills himself as "the Senate's most outspoken critic of ACORN ..."
Let's get the facts straight about ACORN: (hat tip to Anonymous Liberal):
First, let's take a step back and consider just what ACORN is. It is a non-profit organization whose mission is to empower and improve the lives of poor people. As with many other organizations, ACORN has a number of legally distinct parts, each of which has different sources of funding and engages in different kinds of activities (ACORN's conservative enemies routinely conflate these various parts to imply that ACORN is using federal money for improper political purposes). Since its founding the 70s, ACORN and its employees and volunteers have fought successfully to, among other things, increase minimum wages across the country, increase the quality of public education in poor areas, and protect people from predatory lending practices. In the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, ACORN helped rebuild thousands of homes and assisted victims in relocating and finding housing outside of New Orleans. The ACORN activity that has drawn the most conservative ire is its voter registration efforts which, consistent with ACORN's mission, are primarily aimed at low-income voters (who tend to vote Democratic).
See a pattern yet? ACORN helped low income folks in New Orleans, the Democratic stronghold of Louisiana, resettle and/or move back home. Plus, they took it upon themselves to register thousands of working poor Americans in the run-ups to the 2004, 2006 and 2008 elections, and common sense dictates that they'd likely do so again in New Orleans for the 2010 elections - which include the city government elections in the spring, as well as the Sinning Senator's re-election campaign in the fall.
Gee ... no wonder the Sinning Senator wants to destroy ACORN. After all, empowering low income Americans that might vote Democratic next year just doesn't fit in the Sinning Senator's Get Out The Vote operation.
Now, you may be wondering where the Sinning Senator has been bearing false witness. It's here:
"After months of beating the drum and continued news reports of criminal investigations, the president and his administration are finally starting to distance themselves from ACORN. The Census dropping ACORN as a partner is a good, common sense move. Now we must go one step further and support my simple and direct amendment, which declares that no federal funds should go ACORN."
Criminal investigations? Pray tell, what criminal investigations, as ACORN has yet to be charged with a single thing. Perhaps the right wing echo chamber, prodded on by the Sinning Senator, has been bearing false witness against ACORN because they don't like the idea of empowering low-income Americans?
This video from Media Matters seems to show that Fox News is simply throwing the kitchen sink against ACORN, hoping to make something stick ...
Unfortunately ... the ACORN organizer was messing with them:
"They were not believable", said Ms. Kaelke of the two actors. "Somewhat entertaining, but they weren't even good actors. I didn't know what to make of them. They were clearly playing with me. I decided to shock them as much as they were shocking me. Like Stephen Colbert does - saying the most outrageous things with a straightface." While her sense of humor might not be funny to many people, the fact is that she spun false scenario afterfalse scenario and the videographer ate them up.
For example, in response to the set-up by the filmmakers in which they say they are trying get the young woman away from her abusive pimp, she responds that she was abused by her former husband as well (true) and that she shot and killed him (false). He is very much alive and living near Barstow, CA.
Perhaps the Sinning Senator and his allies ought to check their facts prior to bearing false witness.
Text messaging services are now a staple of well-run political campaigns, and they will be coming to Louisiana for the 2010 elections, as evidenced by the post linked to above from The Hill's In the Know. As with all new technology, pols shouldn't do it on the cheap, lest they endure embarrassing gaffes:
Hence the snickers when a political operative recently received a text message from the campaign of Sen. David Vitter (R-La.), he of Deborah Jeane Palfrey fame. Vitter's camp went with a cheap service, and his message included an ad for ... what else? A dating service.
"Is it true love?" asks the ad. The accompanying link guides users to a website where they can find out if their "crush" feels the same way about them; we're told "David" and "Deborah" is a match.
The Sinning Senator just can't escape the snickers about his sexual peccadilloes.
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.
Last cycle, I started an ActBlue page specifically for Democratic Senate candidates working to pick up seats held by Republicans. I named it the Expand the Map! ActBlue page because the goal was to expand the map of competitive Senate seats. The effort was a big success, achieving over 300 contributions and $40,000 for the Democratic Senate candidates included on the page.
The 2010 edition of the Expand the Map! ActBlue page was recently kicked off. Senate Guru just made the first addition to the page since the kick-off with the inaugural members; and, that addition is none other than Louisiana's own Charlie Melancon.
The Republican incumbent, Sinning Senator David Vitter, is nothing but an embarrassment to Louisiana. From his "very serious sin" (which he still hasn't explicitly identified) to his tantrums in airport security areas to his turning away constituents from his town hall forums in order to pack the events with bussed-in Tea Partiers, Vitter has shown himself to be a hypocrite, a liar, a coward, and someone that all Louisianans should be ashamed of. Even when the match-up was just hypothetical, polling showed that a Vitter-Melancon showdown would be a close race. But Congressman Melancon needs our support!
Please, please, please help the 2010 cycle's Expand the Map! effort by sending Charlie Melancon (and these other highly deserving Democrats) a few bucks. $100 makes a huge difference, $25 makes a huge difference, $10 makes a huge difference! Hop over to the Expand the Map! ActBlue page and make your voice heard.
This is not just a contribution to Charlie's campaign. This is a contribution toward slowing and eventually stopping Republican obstruction in the U.S. Senate and ensuring that David Vitter will no longer be an obstacle to progress or an embarrassment to Louisiana. Thank you SO much!
This is what is wrong with the health insurance industry today ... the largest health insurer in the State of Louisiana, one that it can legitimately be said to have a near monopoly on private health insurance in Louisiana, (pdf alert) as they control 61% of the private health insurance market in this state, is featuring our Sinning Senator, an opponent of health care reform, to speak on health care reform.
Nor is it surprising that they have joined forces with the Sinning Senator, an acknowledged opponent of health care reform that would force Blue Cross Blue Shield to compete for consumers.
