Mike Bayham

Election 2012: Is It Time to Hang Up the Sweater Vest?

2012-01-22T13:07:00.000-08:00

CHARLESTON- I've supported Rick Santorum since August 2011 because he was the most credible conservative in the race for the White House not saddled with compromising personal baggage.

Beyond simply "rooting" for Santorum, I argued for his candidacy on the internet and on New Orleans radio shows and donated to his campaign three times...and I have the sweater vest to prove it.

Iowa provided the ardent social conservative with his entry into the presidential conversation. Though media pundits and party establishment types have discounted his impressive feat in the Hawkeye State by belittling Iowa Republican voters, I saw something else.

Here was a candidate who outlasted the "certain nominee" Texas governor Rick Perry and native Iowan and Minnesota US Representative Michele Bachmann to seize the conservative vote. Santorum didn't achieve this by merely moving into Iowa or living out of that state's many Pizza Ranches (think a western-themed Mr. Gatti's).

Living in a state doesn't give you an inside advantage for first place- just ask former Louisiana governor Buddy Roemer, who did precisely that for the New Hampshire primary and was rewarded with a paltry .38%.

Another story that did not make it out of Iowa was that Santorum, a Roman Catholic, managed to attract evangelical support over one of their own (Bachmann).

However Santorum ran into a stone wall in Charleston. The Pennsylvanian should have recognized the futility of his chances in yankee-conservative New Hampshire and went south out of Des Moines. Not that an extra week would have allowed him to overcome former House Speaker/neighboring Georgian Newt Gingrich in the Palmetto State, but it would have helped boost his numbers.

Gingrich has stressed that Santorum's vote is his vote, and his assessment is largely correct. Social conservatives range from simply distrusting ex- Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney at best to personally loathing him at worst.

And results have shown that Texas US Representative Ron Paul is not winning over voters who rank social issues as a priority. Paul's best shot at winning a state is when he gets Romney one-on-one in Virginia. That contest will be the truest referendum on what Republicans think of Mr. Inevitable.

The next battle is the Florida primary. Paul has already stated he intends to skip the Sunshine State and focus his resources on scooping up delegates (not necessarily victories) elsewhere. Santorum has defiantly declared he is going to fight in Florida, which in my opinion is a terrible idea.

Though Gingrich is chugging down to Florida with a head of steam, Romney's organization and legally unaffiliated "fan club" (better known as the million dollar PAC that has engaged in a dirty war against Gingrich) have not let grass grow under them.

As Florida Republicans are not as conservative as those in South Carolina (major understatement), the conservative field cannot afford to be splintered between Gingrich and Santorum. Especially since Florida is a winner-take-all state.

Second place in Florida gets a candidate not much more than LSU head coach Les Miles received for finishing second in the BCS.

The real danger is the calendar. While Romney was once again bedeviled by South Carolina (much the way New Hampshire frustrated Bob Dole in his three White House runs), losing badly there is thus far contained to not emerging as the de facto GOP nominee before Groundhog Day. Romney remains the favorite to become party standard-bearer.

Romney can make South Carolina a speed bump by winning the largest delegate haul yet in Florida before a string of contests prior to Super Tuesday that are very favorable to the business executive.

There's nothing like an eight-state Romney winning streak going into March 6th's ten contests to make people forget about Gingrich's first victory.

And if Santorum plays in Florida, he could be aiding yet another moderate's bid to beat a conservative (the more infamous example being his support for Arlen Specter over Pat Toomey in the 2004 Pennsylvania GOP US Senate primary).

Santorum has neither the organization nor the funds to compete in Florida's numerous pricey media markets. He can't sell enough sweater vests nor can the Duggar family drive their famous "Santourin Express" to enough counties.

I'm not saying Santorum should drop out; only that he should drop back.

A full monetary campaign investment in Florida would be strategic suicide and will end his candidacy before Super Tuesday.

Instead, Santorum should announce he is pulling out of Florida and encourage his backers to vote for the candidate who best represents their views. Santorum can use this time to raise money instead of wasting it, and focus on states and caucuses where he can win delegates or make a splash. For example, Gingrich is NOT on the ballot in Missouri.

The important part is to remain part of the discussion and in a position to fully engage Romney if Newt ends up running out of lives. Enabling Romney to win Florida by bleeding just enough votes off Gingrich will not help.

One doesn't need a poli sci degree to figure that out and you can bet a certain helmet hair professor will be delivering lectures on this subject soon enough.

While not conventional, there has been little conventional about Santorum's rise or this fluid campaign. The concept of running 50 state primary campaign sounds nice but the cost of doing so does not justify the sound-byte. Besides, show me a party nominee who has run a 50 state campaign after Labor Day in the past two decades.

Santorum's best hope to stay relevant is to stay out of Florida. Santorum supporters in the Sunshine State who don't want Romney to become the party nominee and wish to buy their candidate some more time should vote for Gingrich.

Whether or not the Santorum campaign wants to admit it, a vote for Santorum on January 31st is a vote for Romney.

Election 2012: South Carolina's Brawl for It All

2012-01-19T20:55:00.000-08:00

Iowa prides itself as being the lead presidential contest in the nation. New Hampshire is even more protective of its "first in the nation" primary. Republican candidates have stumbled in either one of those states and managed to win the GOP nomination.

The same cannot be said for the Palmetto State's "first in the south" primary. Since 1980, South Carolina Republican voters are batting 1.000 when it comes to picking the winners. And with every passing election cycle that their streak continues, South Carolina's perception as being the "must win" state looms larger on the horizon.

And so with the last presidential debate held prior to the Saturday vote, the Republican White House aspirants came out swinging.

Newt Gingrich- Clearly the winner, Gingrich's strategy of living off the land until the debates arrived in earnest proved to be farsighted. With his mastery of facts and biting wit, the debates have even the former House speaker's forte and he has used them to keep his teetering campaign afloat. Newt won the debate in its opening minutes with his response to CNN reporter and debate moderator John King's query about allegations made by Gingrich's second wife about his character and desire to have an "open marriage".

Gingrich knocked the personal question out of Charleston Harbor and over the walls of Fort Sumter.
The remainder of the debate was rhetorical tennis for Gingrich, fending off pokes by former US Senator Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania with some back and forth with ex-Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

The historian/amateur paleontologist is likely to win South Carolina on Saturday, temporarily containing the radioactivepersonal material at least for another week.

Rick Santorum- Give Santorum this much, he'll never be confused for Tim Pawlenty.

The recently declared winner of Iowa's straw poll/caucus aggressively went after each of the other three candidates, forcing his way into the political conversation. Santorum's biggest flaw is his lack of stage presence, in which the ardent social conservative says many agreeable things though in a forgettable manner.

Santorum is likely facing a fourth place finish on Saturday, likely ending his presidential bid. The Duggar Family can't drive their RV across Florida and Santorum can't sell enough sweater vests to bring in the money he needs to compete in multiple expensive media markets.

Mitt Romney- This week will either be the low point of his run for the Republican nomination or the beginning of the end.

Barraged by his fellow candidates, having had his Iowa victory reversed and the end of Texas governor Rick Perry's conservative splinter run have ended, if only momentarily, all of the inevitable talk and has brought Romney back to terra firm a in a state that bedeviled him four years ago.

A first place finish turns the remainder of the primary/caucus calendar into a mop up operation, second would maintain a slightly eroded lead in the Sunshine State. Third resrurects the whole "why don't they like me" discussion, a conversation Romney doesn't want to have.

Ron Paul- The lone Texan in the race as of 11:00 AM EST didn't really do himself any favors last night. Not, mind you because he said something counter-productive, but because Paul failed to seize the opportunity to stress that he is not just a one trick pony. His medical background as a doctor who has delivered thousands of babies would have been the perfect retort to Santorum's rickety foray against Paul on the issue.

Makes one wonder whether Dr. Paul has made himself too comfortable in his political bunker.

Election 2012: After Iowa

2012-01-05T22:17:00.001-08:00

The Iowa precinct caucuses are both meaningless and meaningful.

The first because no actual delegates to the Republican National Convention are selected. The vote total political junkies were jonesing over late into the wee hours are part of a straw poll. The actual selection of delegates to the county conventions, which then elect delegates to district and state conventions get lost in the straw poll hysteria.

The apportioned delegates shown on television screens are estimates that rarely play out at the national convention as the rest of the country dictates the political orientation of the Hawkeye State’s RNC delegates at a later date.

That said the caucuses do have a profound impact on the candidate field by often culling those who don’t perform well in the caucuses.

And that’s why it’s no longer uncommon for presidential candidates to pass on the predictable contest.

The Winners and the Losers

1) Rick Santorum- I don’t think anyone can accuse me of playing favorites on this call. Santorum has the distinction of being one of the few social conservative politicians who have complained about Fox News’ lack of fair and balanced coverage. After his Iowa surge, candidate Santorum finally earned a spot on the O’Reilly Factor (or the O’Romney Factor). The ex-Pennsylvania US Senator has finally emerged from the wilderness and has immediately become a major contender for the party nomination and at a minimum now a part of the national conversation. Santorum’s days of being stuck at the far end of debate panels are over though he must transition his campaign from retail to television quick.

2) Mitt Romney- The former Massachusetts governor won the caucuses by the barest of margins (8!) though due to the informal nature of balloting (and ballot security), it’s possible Santorum may have received the most votes or that Romney had won by a few dozen more (at the Drake University location where I observed the process, the precinct chairman attempted to go straight into voting before the Santorum representative was allowed to speak, drawing harrumphs from the attendees and the media section). Romney succeeded where he failed four years ago, limiting both his investment in Iowa and his expectations. Romney also fared well considering he was working New Hampshire while the rest of the field, sans Jon Huntsman, scrambled across Iowa. Romney’s gamble paid off. The downside is that word is being spread that Romney is a 25%’er…that being his support within the party is limited, a case with merit though the number is too low. Romney should be far and away ahead of the pack. He has the most money, name recognition, best organization and establishment support. To draw a paltry number against someone whose campaign was limited to standing on chairs and shouting his speeches in Pizza Ranches across Iowa is significant. Romney will smash his quarter-share in New Hampshire on Tuesday before being ushered back under that number in South Carolina. The nomination is still his to lose and Iowa 2012 was far kinder to his presidential ambitions than Iowa 2008.

3. Newt Gingrich- Instead of “Eye of the Tiger”, the Gingrich camp should have played Gloria Gaynor’s “I Will Survive”. The former House speaker was pummeled by Super PAC’s connected to Romney and Texas US Representative Ron Paul and saw his lead and confident boast of the inevitability of his nomination wither under the barrage. That said, Gingrich avoided a 5th place finish, which would have ended his candidacy. Without the friendly and free confines of a debate dais, Gingrich lost both his capacity to respond to the charges en masse and to swing back at the sources of the character bombardment. The media isn’t helping Gingrich’s cause by hosting the two New Hampshire debates over the weekend. South Carolina will mean more to Gingrich than New Hampshire.

4. Jon Huntsman- The wealthy former Utah governor and ex-ambassador to China saved his money and spent his time in New Hampshire. His crack about Iowans picking corn and not presidents won’t hurt him unless he’s nominated. Like I said, it won’t hurt him.

5. The Iowa GOP- Once again, the Iowa Republican Party and campaign operatives cleaned up fleecing candidates for their local expertise and vote brokering. Paul’s failure to win the caucuses also preserved the credibility of the caucus (whether you like it or not, anything Paul wins tends to go down in value, see the CPAC straw poll). Finally, Iowa avoided the trap of being labeled a state in the pocket of a parochial favorite by voting last the only native of the state in the race.

The Losers

1. The Ames Iowa Straw Poll- The first political contest on the presidential political calendar’s days of being the money fest are likely over. Not that there won’t be another one…there will. However it’s significance will take a major hit with the winner of the 2011 poll coming in last amongst the six candidates who competed in the caucuses while the winner of the caucuses chose to skip the event altogether. The extortion rates for land leasing will plummet (justifiably). Former Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty might very well go down as its final fatality.

2. Rick Perry- Perry spent millions, had a great message, was a good stump speaker for the most part and ran a professional campaign yet came in fifth place. The Texas governor would have been better off skipping both Iowa and New Hampshire, opening his campaign up in South Carolina. Granted had Perry not tanked in the debates, it might have been Santorum going home to reassess his campaign. Had he polled ahead of Gingrich, Perry would have been in a stronger position. I’ll concede Perry does have a chance at a comeback, but his odds are longer than those even Santorum faced four months ago.

3. Ron Paul- Anyone else notice the look on Rand Paul’s face during his father’s caucus night speech? It was as if the Kentucky US Senator was watching his political life flash before his eyes. To Paul’s credit, he broadened his appeal beyond the college campuses and attracted high schoolers to his campaign (Paul-Rats- a cross between Paulistas and mall rats). However judging by the personnel and financial investment in Iowa, Paul needed to finish no worse than second. By finishing third in the midst of a perfect storm, Iowa will mark both his high watermark and the beginning of the end of his campaign. Nevada and a handful of small states might nudge him to second place but Paul didn’t achieve the breakthrough he was counting on.

4. Michele Bachmann- As I said before, some poli comm. grad student looking for a thesis subject should look no further than the Bachmann campaign. Running as a native Iowan, being a high-profile legislative leader of an influential segment of the conservative electorate and as a congresswoman from a neighboring state, Bachmann should have walked away as an easy winner. But after Perry shanghaied her brief moment in the sun during the Ames straw poll, Bachmann never regained her balance and was relegated to quoting scripture at campaign stops to more directly appeal to evangelical voters, who stampeded to the banner of a Roman Catholic (!). Somewhere in Wasilla Sarah Palin is breathing a sigh of relief, seeing her rival as the GOP’s most prominent female face defeated and having avoided what could have been a professional trainwreck.

Iowa Notebook: Three Way Photo Finish

2012-01-02T20:50:00.000-08:00

DES MOINES- Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney closed out his caucus eve campaign with an impressive show of strength at a late night rally held in a promotional product warehouse inre no worse than thi a Des Moines suburb.

Romney has been the stalking horse for a parade of one time frontrunners who have either fallen out of favor with Republican voters or fallen out the presidential race altogether.

On Tuesday, Romney can help shorter the primary season with a big win in Iowa or resume his maid of honor position behind a new social conservative favorite.

Ex- Pennsylvania US Senator Rick Santorum is poised to emerge as THE social conservative candidate as will likely fare no worse than a competitive third. A win would transform Santorum's candidacy from one hit wonder to national candidate overnight though if Mike Huckabee's 2008 campaign proved anything, Iowa's coattails stretch southeast to South Carolina not northeast to New Hampshire.

A fourth place finish by Newt Gingrich cannot help but serve as a moral victory for the battered former Speaker of the US House of Representatives. Fourth is a ticket out of Iowa and back to the debate circuit where Gingrich can utilize free media to not only rebut the attacks against him by his opponents and so-called third parties but also go after the sources.

Fifth for Texas Governor Rick Perry would be a major setback for a candidate who entered the race by storm only to see his campaign fizzle in a number of bad debate performances. Perry is looking to go straight to South Carolina though with Santorum and Gingrich remaining, Perry will have a difficult time getting the wind back in his sails and money back in his treasury. A surprise third place finish by Perry would shake the race up, sweeping several candidates out with one blow but that seems highly unlikely.

US Representative Michele Bachmann has been coasting knowing that the end is near. Like Santorum she bet the house on Iowa though unlike the Pennsylvanian, Bachmann has a native angle that should have made her the heavy favorite. Instead she will finish only above ex-Utah governor Jon Huntsman who made a decidedly unstatesman-like crack about Iowa, declaring that they pick corn, not presidents.

Finally there is the wild card in every sense of the term, Texas US Representative Ron Paul. After taking a brief break from the camapaign, Paul hit the trail again, this time being joined by his US Senator son. Paul has made a substantial financial and organizational investment I Iowa and after experiencing some heady poll numbers, cannot afford to place below expectations.

A poor third place showing in Iowa could bode badly in New Hampshire and the libertarian might not have another top three placing until Nevada votes in February. Iowa might both be the high water point for Paul and where his bubble bursts.
Predictions - 1 Romney (due to the cities) 2 Paul (due to the money and manpower) 3 Santorum (thanks to evangelicals and no thanks to Perry and Bachmann) 4 Newt (credit fond memories of 1994 and strong debates, debit the establishment's jihad against him) 5 Perry ( Bobby Jindal maybe what keeps him above Bachmann) 6 Bachmann (someone should do a dissertation on this implosion 7 Huntsman ( pick this!)

Iowa Notebook: Bachmann v. the Philistines

2012-01-02T14:28:00.000-08:00

OKALOOSA- Minnesota US Representative and TEA Party champion Michele Bachmann made an appearance at the Jubilee Family Church on Sunday morning, delivering a personal spiritual testimony that had strong undrcurrents with the precarious position her once booming presidential bid finds itself in less than 72 hours before Iowa Republicans caucus.

Bachmann invoked the Old Testament story of Jonathan and his armor bearer in their divinely inspired attack against the Philistines, dropping a not so subtle reference to both the long odds she faces in what could be a fatal blow to her candidacy and the importance of faith in acting.

Bachmann also stressed her Hawkeye State roots, noting specifically that she is a seventh generation Iowan, something that had helped catapult her to winning the Ames Straw Poll last August before discussing in detail the moment when she found God.

The real boosting was done hy the church pastor who followed up Bachmann's talk with a sermon on the importance of character and voting for the candidate who best represents their values and not the most electable.

A few other notes about Bachmann's Jubilee appearance-

1) Though over one hundred people ere in attendance, many of the congegants walked out the church immediately upon the conclusion of the service with only a dozen or so sticking around to glad-handle with the candidate. Bachmann's Iowa campaign has been fraught with low attendance at recent campaign events, which is glaring contrast with the over capacity turnout she enjoyed in her Ames Straw Poll event.

2) Her advance team continues to bungle. A press conference was scheduled to be held outside the church after but a bitter cold wind complicated things.

3) A problem for Romney. At the back of the church was literature arguing how Mormons were not Christians. I would imagine this feeling is not contained within the confines of the Jubilee church and will not help come South Carolina, a state here evangelicals are a major segment of the GOP electorate and where Romney finished poorly four years ago.

Iowa Notebook: Does Nice Newt Finish Fifth?

2012-01-01T21:25:00.000-08:00

ATLANTIC- The Newt Gingrich campaign literally rolled into the Coca-Cola capital of Iowa (that's what the sign said) on New Year's Eve as the former House speaker fought to keep his once leading presidential bid viable east of the Mississippi River.

In a meeting at the Coca-Cola Bottling Plant store room, the Newt caravan pulled in only feet away from pallets of soda stacked three stories high.

The Gingrich was clearly under the weather, the 68 year old gave an expansive talk on his campaign, the barrage of attacks by the other candidates and their independently operating allies and the issues he intends to challenge President Barack Obama on if Gingrich secures the nonibation and survives Iowa.

Gingrich played down Tuesday's results stating that Iowans could send an interesting message by standing up to the cut-throat tactics employed against him by the party establishment. Gingrich also fielded a wide-range of questions from the audience seeking responses to the smears that have leveled his candidacy.

The crowd of 100+ seemed supportive and were present to cheer him on more so than to decide if they should caucus for him.

A few interesting notes from the event:

1) Gingrich went to great pains to soften his image, having his daughters and grandchildren on hand to meet with voters in addition to his wife. One accomplishment Newt touted was his role in allowing tenants in federal housing to have pets and the unveiling of his new campaign website "Pets for Newt". It almost seems that while Gingrich is running for president in 2012, his psyche is very much caught in the bad media days of the late 1990s and that he is more interested in how he is being perceived than winning a campaign.

It's as if he is more concerned with posterity than politics.

2) Stressed his refusal to attack fellow Republicans while trying to portray himself as a victim, which might be a strong contrast with his earlier image but is not presidential. And after the McCain debacle of four years before, the voters wan a fighter to take the battle for America to Obama.

3) Unlike other stagecrafted and overchoreographed campaigns, Gingrich invites a freeflowing dialogue with the voters at his events almost daring ir challenging them to stump him on something. Gingrich spoke without notes or teleprompter.

4) Gladhandling Gingrich. For a man who too often comes off like he doesn't care for people, Gingrich didn't leave until he shook every hand and posed for every picture request.

Iowa Notebook: Santorum Gets Showered With Evangelical Support, Glitter

2012-01-01T20:55:00.000-08:00

JOHNSTON- Former Pennsylvania US Senator Rick Santorum has emerged as the favorite of social conservatives disenchanted with the flailing candidacies of Texas Governor Rick Perry and Minnesota US Representative Michele Bachmann.

Financially limited and organizationally dwarfed by all of the other candidates, Santorum has relentlessly beat the bushes, cornfields and Christian Right community hoping his Iowa gamble will pay big dividends.

So far it appears it has making a late surge that even has former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney taking jabs at him.

Santorum distinguished himself as a leader for social conservative issues during his two terms in the US Senate and is parlaying that record against a field of better known candidates with questionable track records in this area while looking more electable than better financed contenders with similar cred o social issues.

Perhaps the ultimate endorsement of Santorum's strength as a social conservative came on Friday night in Johnston.

After making campaign stops across Iowa that day, Santorum went to close his day out with an Insight Bowl viewing party at a restaurant just north of Des Moines. The University of Iowa Hawkeyes were facing the Oklahoma Sooners.

Santorum entered the restaurant bedecked in UI black and yellow when a young man sporting a Santorum sticker dressed as if he were a Sunday school teacher hurled a cup of glitter at Santorum and shrieked "Stop the hate, taste the rainbow!" before running out of the eatery and absconding to his vehicle parked a few lots over.

Santorum didn't flinch, ignored the Rip Tayloresque assault on him and proceeded to his table to watch the game with friends, family and supporters.

If you can judge someone partially by the enemies he or she has, then it is little wonder why evangelical Christians and social conservative Roman Catholics are creating a surge of support for Santorum.

Iowa Notebook: Paul Cooks Up a Makeover

2011-12-31T17:24:00.000-08:00

Le Mars- The self-proclaimed "ice cream capital of the world" (by virtue of being the home of Blue Bunny Ice Cream) was an afternoon stop for Texas US Representative Ron Paul's barnstorm of western Iowa.

Leading in some Hawkeye polls, Paul attracted a crowd of over one hundred people to Le Mars Convention Center. Paul was relatively soft spoken in his address, covering many of his signature promises concerning an overnight reduction in foreign aid, the establishment of a new national monetary policy and shrinking the US military presence around the globe.

What was interest in was how he presented himself. Surrounded by a retinue of suit-clad aides, the Paul operation looked very bit part of the establishment they seek to overturn.

Waiting in attendees chairs were specific instructions concerning the process of the precinct caucuses (an indication that they're counting on the participation of first-timers) and paperback copies of The Ron Paul Family Cookbook(!).

Now let's delve into this unique piece of campaign literature.

Inside the pamphlet, which resembles a copy of a Thanksgiving edition of Better Home and Gardens, are recipes for Oreo Cake, Razzle Bo-Dazzle Pork Tenderloin, Sicilian Supper, assorted casseroles and other homemade culinary creations.

In between the recipes are family photos of Paul, a picture of the congressman while he ws in the service and Bible verses.

Something tells me this literature was not also dropped in the Iowa State University Student Union.

Paul has spent the last year trying to portray himself as a sound messenger of radical ideas. His setup at the Ames Straw Poll resembled a church picnic, complete with a wholesome looking family who handcrafted dresses out of campaign t-shirts (they also made the cookbook).

Paul made a point of stressing his commitment to the pro life agenda and touted the strong support he enjoys from active military. No mention was made of his opposition to the war on drugs.

There was some political hatchetry on the stop as one of the state legislators supporting Paul took not so subtle shots at Newt Gingrich's infidelities and stressed Paul's devotion to his wife Carol ( who is not only prominently pictured on the cookbook's cover but is listed as Mrs. Ron Paul).

Judging by his advertising, Paul sees Gingrich as his biggest threat to having the opportunity to face off with the candidate who personifies the political establishment: former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

Though he won delegates, Paul didn't carry a single state in his 2008 presidential bid and seems poised to claim the opening contest for the GOP nomination. He ran 5th four years ago with 10%.

His supporters in Iowa have increased and diversified beyond the conspiratorial and ganjistas. The crowd in Le Mars consisted of the elderly, young families and a smattering of young people. Take away the Paul signs and you would have thought it was a Huckabee rally.

In 1996, conservative commentator Pat Buchanan came within 3% of defeating Kansas US Senator Bob Dole. Buchanan's supporters consisted of religious evangelicals and anti-establshment types. It seems Ron Paul is trying to borrow a recipe from Buchanan's 1996 political cookbook by throwing a splash of pro life, Bible talk to his pepper steak.

Sympathetic to Newt But Still for Santorum

2011-12-28T19:24:00.000-08:00

Over the past few weeks, establishment conservatives (George Will, the National Review, et al) have increased the ferocity of their jihad against Newt Gingrich’s presidential bid.

It is surprising to see so much vitriol aimed at the leader of the national conservative counter-revolution after the country club wing of the party practically surrendered the White House to Bill Clinton and seemed to be in no hurry to end a GOP exile from control of Congress that dated back to the Eisenhower administration.

Is the anti-Newt frenzy sparked by a personal vendetta or concerns about his electability?

If the latter, I don’t understand the panic since the party has been represented by far worse than Gingrich in previous elections.

Take John McCain.

Please.

McCain championed a plan that increased the “established” media’s role in “interpreting” federal elections while simultaneously handicapping Republicans’ financial capacity to compete against Democrats, to say nothing of his campaign finance legislation’s infringements on the First Amendment.

But McCain has never let principle get in the way of a favorable write-up. And come 2008, we found out who was the real useful idiot to whom.

After emerging from a relatively brisk primary battle (it was over after Florida- the eighth contest on the GOP calendar), McCain promptly bided his time, not preparing for the general election or initiating a running mate vetting operation.

In a move that was tantamount to giving his Democratic opponent a spread, McCain stubbornly refused to recognize the obsolescence of matching funds and chose to not make the effort of competing with Barack Obama in general election fundraising, believing that the Democratic nominee’s recanting on an obscure pledge would trump a severe financial disadvantage.

At the end of the day, it could be said that Hillary Clinton worked harder to stop Obama from becoming president than the Republican nominee.

Gingrich would have to campaign in a powdered wig and breeches to be anywhere in the same zip code as the disastrous McCain campaign.

I have a tough time believing that the driving force behind the Republican take over of Congress would be any worse of a nominee than McCain, Bob Dole, Bush 41 or Barry Goldwater (who was agreeable in principle but disagreeable as a politician).

And to futurist’s credit he had the foresight to see exactly what George H.W. Bush would reap politically with his tax deal with the Democrats. That old man Bush has embraced Romney and recently publicly “tut-tutted” Gingrich for taking issue with the “Read My Lips” repeal exhibits the former House speaker’s conservative credentials.

That said Newt Gingrich is not my first choice for the Republican nomination. And he’s not my second either.

And if I find myself eventually supporting Gingrich in the course of the primary calendar, it will be because I consider him a superior alternative to others and not because he is a good candidate.

He’s not and that’s why I am supporting someone else not named Ron Paul or Mitt Romney.

Former Pennsylvania US Senator Rick Santorum remains the most consistent, credible and accomplished conservative in the Republican presidential field. Thus Santorum remains my choice for the Republican nomination.

Santorum was part of the Gingrich Revolution in Washington but unlike the movement’s leader, the young senator proved to possess the self-discipline to effectively advance conservative causes in the halls of Congress if not always in the limelight.

Though Santorum is a longshot, he’s also the best choice. As a conservative not tied into the system, I have no problem betting on the side that ends up losing so long as it’s the right side.

Santorum represents a very different visual for conservatism and of all the candidates seeking the GOP nod. In terms of his national image Santorum’s a blank slate who has not been unflatteringly framed by the media or by mush-mouthed debate performances or high profile gaffes.

And while nominating Santorum does not in itself lock up the Keystone State for the GOP, his presence on the ticket will make Pennsylvania competitive, taking the fight to the Democrats’ turf.

Santorum has wagered all of what few chips he has on a strong showing in the Iowa caucuses.

Due to the expectations game, he does not necessarily have to win that contest- just do better than Minnesota US Representative Michele Bachmann and Texas Governor Rick Perry.

Only one of the three self-described social conservatives will be going on to New Hampshire without a pronounced death rattle.

Iowa Republicans a huge favor on caucus day by not creating the Paul-Romney duel that will inevitably lead to the latter’s nomination by stepping up for Santorum.

My Choice for President

2011-12-07T19:44:00.000-08:00

It’s been many years since I’ve been excited about an announced Republican candidate for the presidency. And judging by the crop of the current field, it will be a few more.

In late 2007, I campaigned for ex-Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee. I knew he had no chance of being nominated, though I suspected he could make things interesting in Iowa. Furthermore, my support for Huckabee was intended to be a social conservative protest vote as the one-time Baptist minister was the closest thing to that in the race.

The person I wanted to see run in 2012 is New Jersey governor Chris Christie.

While he is not an ideal conservative, Christie is conservative enough and, pardon the pun, had the guts to challenge the entrenched special interests who have wrecked the Garden State.

Christie personifies the kind of boldness both the Republican Party and the country needs.

But alas, Christie isn’t running and worse yet has endorsed the last candidate not named Huntsman I would support in the primaries.

So I once again find myself in social conservative protest mode.

Ex-Speaker of the House of Representatives Newt Gingrich has largely resurrected his candidacy through the free medium of the debate circuit and watching the political corpses of better-funded and better-organized candidates float past him.

Though he possesses 100% name recognition amongst likely primary voters and is the smartest presidential candidate in the room, Gingrich carries personal baggage that might make his nomination an act of party seppuku.

And then there was the Scozzafava endorsement, when Gingrich backed the candidacy of Republican Party-endorsed moderate Dede Scozzafava over Conservative Party nominee Doug Hoffman in a special election for a New York congressional seat.

While conservative notables embraced Hoffman, Gingrich made waves lining up behind Scozzafava, defending his choice in a “finger wagging” internet post to conservative critics of the move.

What really made the Scozzafava endorsement toxic was her decision to drop out the race and support the Democrat over Conservative candidate. To Hoffman’s credit, he put out a statement asking conservatives not to hold Gingrich’s “toe the party line” position against him.

That said, the Scozzafava endorsement is unsettling in that when the base of the Republican Party was going in one direction, Gingrich chose to stand with the politically tone-deaf country club.

Congresswoman Michele Bachmann’s campaign has the distinction of its high-water point being in the same 24-hour news cycle that it crashed. After an impressive demonstration of strength at the Ames Iowa Straw Poll, Bachmann had the rug yanked out of her by a candidate that didn’t even show up. While I agree with Bachmann on many of the issues, there seems to be more showmanship than substance in her candidacy.

Texas Governor Rick Perry, the one who yanked the rug out from under Bachmann, went from being instant frontrunner to Texas toast. Though his hazing of Romney is appreciated, I just can’t get past “PerryCare’s” mandatory HPV vaccinations and the bumbling debate performances.

We’re going to need more than an arrogant ambler facing off against Barack Obama next November.

Ron Paul is the ultimate protest candidate, but I don’t want my social conservative protest statement to get caught up with 9-11 truthers.

And that leaves me with the individual I had hoped George W. Bush would have picked to be his running mate in 2000: the man whose name none dare Google.

Former Pennsylvania US Senator Rick Santorum is the only candidate who has unapologetically carried water and produced results for social conservatives.

Santorum is relatively telegenic and his youthfulness represents a departure for a party with a tendency to nominate “seasoned” (or “out of touch”) establishment candidates.

He’s won two statewide contests in a state that Democrats must win in order to reach 270+ electoral votes.

The two biggest knocks on Santorum are his blowout defeat for re-election in a terrible year for Republican congressional candidates (2006) and his endorsement of then-Republican/then-US Senator Arlen Specter against conservative Pat Toomey’s insurgent primary challenge.

But compared to the ideological gaffes and personal/political shortcomings of the rest of the candidates, I can easier look past Santorum’s.

Iowa will hold the GOP’s first actual delegate contest just after New Year’s Day and if Santorum doesn’t finish first or second in Iowa, his bid won’t leave the Hawkeye State’s frozen fields.

And if that happens it’s back to the drawing board for this social conservative. And perhaps a few more.

Until then, Rick Santorum is a presidential candidate I can support with a clean conscience.

Election 2012: Bachmann Scores Big at Ames Political Carnival

2011-08-16T19:48:00.000-07:00

Two carnivals were taking place simultaneously in the heart of Iowa this past Saturday.

The Iowa State Fair in Des Moines was celebrating the centennial of its buttermilk cow and hawking such delicacies as fried Oreo cookies, fried butter and the ever popular (and delicious) porkchop on a stick.

Just up the road on the grounds of Iowa State University in Ames a political carnival was held. Both had cover charges ($10 to enter the state fair, $35 to vote in the Ames straw poll) and both had interesting dining selections (though no porkchop on a stick was to be found, the grub was free in Ames so long as you didn’t mind waiting in long lines). Congressman Ron Paul even provided a ride of sorts (a large inflatable “Dollar Slide”).

Below is a breakdown of how the candidates fared and in keeping with the carnival atmosphere, what each served up to prospective voters.

US Representative Michele Bachmann R-MN/IA Clearly the big winner. The TEA Party favorite nosed out Paul to receive the most votes and received the big headlines for her triumph. Though victory in the straw poll is not necessarily a sign that a candidate will win the caucuses a few months later or the nomination, Bachmann had something going for her that the 2007 victor, ex-Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, never had: enthusiasm. Short of a major meltdown, Bachmann, who you’d never know represents a district in another state by her constant references to her Iowan background, is a heavy favorite to win the nation’s first delegate contest. Bachmann served up “meat sundaes”, lemonade, ice cream and country music star Randy Travis.

US Representative Ron Paul R-TX I know I lowballed Paul’s likely finish in the primer I penned though that was not out of disrespect for the feisty congressman nor his supporters (though it’s all too easy to harbor contempt for some of them when they are disruptive at conferences). Paul came in a distant fifth four years ago when his operation consisted of a largely empty tent and a horde of rambunctious out of state devotees.

The Paulista Ames 2.0 effort was a very different operation. Gone were the tinfoil tricorner hats and tatted up college students with the expanded earlobe rings; they were replaced by young men and women wearing suits in August (one Paul handler even sported a straw boater!) managing a multifaceted operation that was so organized that even the tent that dished out hot dogs had a professionally made banner advertising it. Five years of continual spreading revolution and launching full-scale straw poll assaults paid sizable dividends in Ames. Also of note were the supporters- instead of being heavy with college students, a large portion of those present for Paul included families (including one that had home-manufactured dresses out of Paul t-shirts) and older war veterans. You couldn’t discern the difference between them and say Romney supporters.

The Paul movement has broken beyond the kooks and the quad and almost pulled off an upset in a contest where the old trick of participants voting multiple registrations was blocked.

At a minimum, Paul won’t suffer the indignity of being shut out of debates as was the case in 2008 when FoxNews judged the quickly sinking Fred Thompson candidacy more viable than the well-financed Paul outfit. Aside from the aforementioned “money slide” and hot dogs, the Paul camp offered jugglers and Barry Goldwater, Jr.

Tim Pawlenty In what turned out to be a BBQ-laden Irish wake, the former Minnesota governor put all of his chips on Ames and crapped out. With Texas governor Rick Perry barging on to the scene that very day, Pawlenty made a big gamble. I’ll perform an autopsy later but the Famous Dave’s BBQ and Dairy Queen Blizzards were a hit.

Rick Santorum The former Pennsylvania US Senator- I find myself prefixing the word “former” a lot when referring to the 2012 GOP presidential field- claimed to supporters that his turnout went beyond expectations (which leads me to wonder if he expected to finish 7th or 8th). Considering his shoestring budget fourth place is respectable, but also bear in mind that “he whose named should not be googled” used buses to bring in people and has invested heavily in Iowa. With Pawlenty out, Santorum might be waiting for a Bachmann and/or Perry collapse to give him a sliver of a chance of breaking out the poll dungeon. Santorum had a country band and third of a pound hamburgers that proved worth standing in a long line to score.

Herman Cain The form…one-time Godfather’s Pizza executive had a modest set-up, a small tent with a stage that looked like the musician section of a hardscrabble Baptist church. The tent was SRO when the Herminator spoke and despite his not infrequent gaffes commands the hearts of many Republican activists but a smaller number of straw pollers. Cain kept the brand alive with his minimal investment and remains a part of the conversation. Naturally Godfather’s Pizza was served.

Rick Perry Banished from having an official presence for refusing to cut the Iowa GOP a check, the Americans for Perry borrowed a tent from another group and used it as the screening point for the Texas governor’s candidacy announcement. His people, Babs Janssen, Greg Marmalarde and their clones were clad in UT orange and Aggie maroon and white t-shirts. Beyond passing out flyers for Perry’s declaration of entry, the Holiday Inn-based squad slipped Aggie maroon pencils around asking Iowans to write the governor’s name in. More than a few did. Mission accomplished without great expense.

Mitt Romney To go from first to seventh shows the power of money. Last time Romney spent it and won; this time he didn’t and fell like a stone. The only time I saw Romney represented was on handmade posters carried by one-man armies decrying him as a RINO. One has to wonder if Romney is thinking about skipping Iowa altogether to avoid the ignominy of finishing second to yet another evangelical favorite and plant his flag in more favorable New Hampshire instead. It was about the only thing that worked out for McCain in 2008.

Newt Gingrich Worked the Iowa State Fair one day and then worked the straw poll area and didn’t trail Romney by too many votes. Newt will likely stay in the race until New Hampshire no matter how poorly the polls, straw, cooked and otherwise, portend. The historian in him won’t let him get out until then.

Jon Huntsman Invested in the Republican Leadership Conference’s straw poll in New Orleans and finished a “surprising” second place. But Iowa runs its polls different from Louisiana and the billionaire decided to take a pass. His campaign is reportedly in a tailspin after failing to get the jolt that Bachmann and Perry received being fellow late entires. Is he waiting on the Nevada caucuses to get started?

Thaddeus McCotter Last but certainly not least was the witty congressman from Michigan. He splurged a ton on location but not so much on vittles- two rough-looking ice cream trucks distributing bomb-pops. No more than a dozen or so people were in his area at any given time. McCotter didn’t do much speechifying (or as he put it “vent his spleen”) being content to strumming his guitar with the band he brought along. In New Orleans this writer consisted of half of his support; had I been able to vote in Ames, I would have consisted of just less than 3%. I guess I’m just ahead of the curve- the congressman’s words, not mine.

Sarah Palin Decided to make a surprise trip to Des Moines to visit the state fair the day before the straw poll. Unlike the declared candidates, Palin did not make a speech on the local newspaper’s “hay”box. The former Alaska governor was dressed casually and simply walked around the food booths while cheerfully accommodating the admiring throng’s picture and autograph numerous requests. Palin was not on the straw poll ballot though there were individuals present at the straw poll promoting her undeclared candidacy on home-made poster board signs. A Palin candidacy looks unlikely as there appears no great groundswell of support nor has she shown much interest in trading personal freedom and financially lucrative endeavors with unpaid campaigning and putting her children through another cavity search.

Election 2012: The Ames Debate

2011-08-11T20:46:00.000-07:00

Election 2012: Ames Debate

Nobody could have accused FoxNews of cuddling Republicans tonight as the panel asked pointed questions of the GOP presidential contenders, contrasting their rhetoric with their record.

Quick notes in order of “winner”.

Mitt Romney- The former Massachusetts barely had a follicle on his scalp molested. The frontrunner prior to the debate walks out of Ames a double-winner- he retains his front runner status while not blowing the cash on the Ames straw poll shakedown that did little to help him in the Hawkeye State’s caucuses.

Rick Santorum- If Santorum had been re-elected US Senator in 2006, he’d be a big part of the conversation. Instead the Pennsylvanian is putting all of his chips on Iowa out of necessity. Santorum focused on his commitment to bring back to America manufacturing jobs that have been sailing to east Asia for years, breaking out of his familiar social conservatism. He presented well when he was given the limelight, though obviously exasperated with so much attention being given to other candidates. Santorum’s performance might allow him to slip into the top three in the Ames straw poll. Santorum also had the quote of the night, contrasting leadership with showmanship.

Michele Bachmann- She got visibly steamed, mysteriously vanished from the stage and was called out on her thin record of actual accomplishments on Capitol Hill, but the Iowa-native (as the congresswoman eagerly points out) was given a gift in the form of a question about a comment (taken out of context) related to being submissive to her husband. No doubt many people found the query tasteless though Bachmann fielded it in stride. Bachmann’s expected first place finish in the straw poll was not upset but the congresswoman showed she doesn’t handle sparring well. That doesn’t bode well as a viable candidate and should concern even those who find her positions agreeable.

Newt Gingrich- Receiving a less than enthusiastic reception before he opened his mouth, the former speaker of the US House of Representatives also showed some thin skin though he built sympathy with the audience by criticizing Chris Wallace and the media in general’s obsession with inside politics. Gingrich’s reaction to a question about his campaign operation’s meltdown brought forth a comparison to Ronald Reagan’s angry rant when a debate moderator refused to accommodate a request during the 1980 New Hampshire primary. But poor posture and a seemingly permanent chip on the shoulder attitude didn’t inspire visions of a political resurrection.

Tim Pawlenty- Though the former Minnesota governor did not have the worst performance, Pawlenty needed to almost dominate. Instead he launched into a rickety critique of RomneyCare after a patronizing setup by the panelists and engaging in a back-and-forth with Bachmann. Pawlenty’s candidacy is sinking fast (and this is coming from someone who is sympathetic to it) and might not survive a fourth place Ames straw poll finish combined with Rick Perry’s entry.

Herman Cain- The populist black conservative candidate found himself fending off questions that imply he’s a religious bigot. His concession that he was not well-schooled on the particulars of Afghanistan further undermine his candidacy’s credibility.

Ron Paul- Same rhetoric, better fitting suit. Same over-eager supporters screaming like they’re at a pro-wrestling match that marginalizes Paul as a candidate. Surely his movement has to have a better pitchman.

Jon Huntsman- So former Louisiana governor Buddy Roemer and ex-New Mexico governor Gary Johnson get left out the debates but this guy is invited? Huntsman had an erratic delivery and seemed unprepared and unpolished. A poor introduction to Republican primary voters.

Election 2012: Will the Ames Straw Poll Play Widow Maker?

2011-08-09T21:36:00.000-07:00

The August straw poll in Ames, Iowa is the first unofficial contest on the presidential campaign calendar.

Though no delegates are on the line candidates have invested tens of thousands of campaign dollars on an event that is not much more than a shameless money grab by the Iowa GOP and the Hawkeye State’s political operatives.

The straw poll has had a winnowing effect on the Republican field. Four years ago former Wisconsin governor Tommy Thompson and Kansas US Senator Sam Brownback’s candidacies came to an end after disappointing showings.

Eight years prior, ex-Red Cross chief Liddy Dole, former Vice-President Dan Quayle and ex-Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander ended their White House bids after the straw poll.

Going into the 2011 gathering of Republican activists, buzzards are circling over the campaign of ex-Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty, who has yet to break out of the lower tier of candidates despite his organizational strength and relatively strong conservative and governmental credentials.

The Minnesotan’s geographic advantage was trumped by the entry of Congresswoman Michele Bachmann, whose candidacy began to surge in the polls during the same debate where Pawlenty failed to assert himself as the alternative to GOP front runner and ex-Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney.

Can Pawlenty survive a poor third place finish in Ames and Texas governor Rick Perry’s expected entry into the race? Probably not. Anything short of coming in second is going to put Pawlenty’s presidential aspirations on life support. Pawlenty is making a substantial investment in the straw poll and he needs to realize a significant return.

Otherwise, it’s a short drive north.

Bachmann is expected to win the straw poll; coming in second would be considered a disappointment, especially with Romney officially staying out of it.

Romney publicly said he would not participate in the contest- in contrast to the considerable sum he plowed into luxury buses to haul in supporters from across the state in 2007.

Romney is right to be leery about putting too many of his eggs in the Iowa basket as the wheels began to fly off his campaign in the cornfields at the hands of the underfunded but charismatic Mike Huckabee. The Baptist preacher/ex-Arkansas governor scored a surprising second place finish in the straw poll and then won the actual caucuses a few months later.

As expected Perry is looking to play the spoiler by ignoring the Iowa GOP chieftains and creating his own newsmaking events in the early states of South Carolina and New Hampshire. The Texas governor, who has been less coy about a presidential run, is expected to expound on his candidate status this weekend.

With the straw poll not expecting to generate any big news due to Romney’s absence, Perry’s media coverage is almost certain to steal some of Bachmann’s thunder without blowing the absurd amounts of money candidates spent on “renting” premium frontage.

The Ron Paul forces will once again make a show of force at the straw poll though it would be surprising if the libertarian finished in the top three. Since participants must be Iowans, the legion of Paulistas who travel across the country rolling up easy straw poll wins at other Republican events for their hero will be frustrated in Ames.

Despite having a large force of out of state volunteers on the ground (one of the images from the previous straw poll is that of random Paulists stoically holding their candidate’s signs in the midst of a large empty parking lot), manpower doesn’t equal votes.

Paul just nudged past Tommy Thompson in the 2007 straw poll by 2 percentage points to place a distant fifth.

For the increasingly shrinking campaigns of ex-Pennsylvania US Senator Rick Santorum, one-time Godfathers Pizza executive Herman Cain and ex-House Speaker Newt Gingrich, Ames won’t matter much as they’re already living off the land. However if any of the three were to slip past Pawlenty, it would be fatal to the Minnesotan’s candidacy while providing a second gasp of air in a political room that is running out of oxygen.

Since Congressman Thaddeus McCotter and former Utah governor Jon Huntsman are just launching their campaigns, they’ll be immune from bad news out of Ames but need to figure out a way to prevent their nascent efforts from being engulfed by Perry’s entry.

Note- I will be tweeting the results (mikebayham) of the straw poll and posting them on www.mikebayham.blogspot.com from Ames about 6 PM CST on Saturday.

How a Bill Became a Law

2011-07-06T18:30:00.000-07:00

The best scene in the Rodney Dangerfield classic Back to School was Dangerfield’s first day in business class where the professor outlined how a factory is constructed…in theory.

Taking issue with the “textbook” explanation, Dangerfield’s character, a successful Big & Tall haberdasher, laid out how it works in reality, warts and all.

Now most of us are familiar with the old stick figure sketches that appear in high school civics books showing how a bill becomes a law.

Several weeks ago I witnessed, or didn’t witness on one day in particular, how a certain bill became a law. And what happened didn’t look anything like the standard flow chart nor did it resemble the process as described in the “I’m Just a Bill” musical short from ABC’s School House Rock.

Though it would have been a hell of a lot more enjoyable if Jack Sheldon had provided the lyrics in his signature raspy voice.

Below is a point-by-point chronology how House Bill 509 was conceptualized, proposed, introduced, processed, almost aborted, rescued, advanced and finally made into law. Viewer discretion advised.

1) Louisiana Republican State Central Committee passes resolution in early 2011 calling for moving the Louisiana Presidential Primary to March to avoid losing half of the state’s delegates to the 2012 Republican National Convention.

2) As the filing deadline ticked down and furiously dialing away on my cell phone, I finally found a legislator who had a “vacancy” and was willing to sponsor the bill. During a fiscal session legislators have a limit on the number of non-fiscal, non-local bills they are allowed to introduce.

3) Bill language is drawn up and then prefiled in the House of Representatives.

4) Bill is then assigned to House and Governmental Affairs for consideration.

5) Bill goes to purgatory for a few weeks as I work to get the Louisiana Democrats on board. Over a dozen calls are placed to their officials and leaders in the hope of putting together the same coalition that passed the previous primary date change five years ago.

6) Finally someone with the state Democratic Party fields a phone call and punts to the matter to the Louisiana Democratic State Central Committee, which meets infrequently. The clock continues to tick on the session as the bill has not yet left committee.

7) Word gets out that the Louisiana Democratic State Central Committee is not expected to meet due to concerns about the rising Mississippi River. It becomes apparent that the Democrats have been stalling for weeks and have no intention to cooperate. With a Republican majority in both houses, the decision is made to have the bill heard before time runs out.

8) On the same day I am flying out of town, the bill is heard before House and Governmental Affairs. The chairman kindly allows for the bill to be considered first so I can then proceed directly to the airport. Minor technical amendments are added and the bill passes committee without exception.

9) The bill is reported from committee and then sent to a third reading and placed on the calendar with debate scheduled for a week later.

10) The bill passes 84-0 on the House floor.

11) Five days later the bill is sent over to the Senate, given two readings and then sent to the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee.

12) Reenters purgatory for two and a half weeks.

13) Bill is to be considered on the last scheduled Senate and Governmental Affairs meeting to vote on legislation. Joining the presidential primary bill that day are measures calling for the passage of a constitutional amendment regarding the federal debt and for placing a monument of the Ten Commandments on the State Capitol grounds. As the presidential primary bill is to be heard after these high-profile measures and that three of the legislature’s most partisan Democrats serve on the committee, I get a bad feeling how things are going to turn out. Witness card turned in before the meeting commences.

14) After much acrimonious debate on the aforementioned bills, the bill is called up for a hearing several hours later. The bill’s sponsor occupies one of the three seats at the testimony table with representatives of the Secretary of State’s office sitting in the other two. I am stuck sitting behind them.

15) After a line of questions posed by a senator who is favorable to the bill is completed, Democratic senator moves to have the bill deferred. By a 6-1 vote (four Democrats joined by two Republicans on a committee with a 5-4 GOP majority), the bill is deferred. No explanation is given. My witness card was apparently lost.

16) After speaking with one of the senators I am allowed to hurriedly address the committee after the fact. The bill is not reconsidered effectively killing it being so late in the session. Democratic opponent to the measure pipes up that it is merely deferred and not dead.

17) Bill sponsor claims he will tack the language on to another piece of legislation, but that bill is defeated. Options become limited.

18) While driving to New Orleans I start counting the days needed for a bill to get out of committee with time to make it back over to the house for concurrence (as another set of amendments are brought forth by the Secretary of State’s office AFTER the bill left the House of Representatives). Last shot would be a rehearing in committee.

19) Call is placed to a state senator on the floor who then meets with the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee chairman and requests that another hearing be held in light of the nature the bill was dismissed and the prospect of a $6,000,000 election being held of no value as the state GOP declared they would boycott the primary if it is not moved. A meeting is rescheduled only hours after the bill was deferred.

20) Emails go out to Republican activists from GOP leaders around the state to the Republican senators who voted against the measure in committee asking that they reconsider the vote. TEA Party activists join in as well.

21) Less than 40 hours later with all GOP members of the Senate and Governmental Affairs present, the presidential primary bill leaves the committee on a straight party line 5-4 vote. Hopefully the Republican Party and delegation has learned a valuable lesson on having so many partisan Democrats on a committee that handles reapportionment and other important political matters.

22) Bill is reported out of committee on Sunday.

23) On Monday, the last day to get House bills out of the Senate, the bill is referred to the Legislative Bureau for review.

24) Hours later the Legislative Bureau reports that no additional amendments are added and it is then passed to third reading and final passage.

25) Hours later with the rules suspended in order to move House bills out of the Senate that day, the bill is passed with bipartisan support (and bipartisan opposition) by a margin of 27-9. Three additional Democrats join three of their colleagues who voted against the bill in committee. Three Republicans who are not on the Senate and Governmental Affairs also vote against.

26) The next day the House of Representatives concurs with the bill as amended in the Senate 91-0.

27) The Speaker of the House signs the bill and sends it to the President of the Senate.

28) Senate President signs the bill.

29) Sent to governor for approval or veto.

30) Five days later, HB 509 is signed by Governor Jindal as Act 293

So there you have it, how a bill became a law in its full splendor.

Somehow the civics book forgot to include the partisan sabotage, grassroots political pressure, clock management and procedural maneuvering that are unmentioned key ingredients in the legislative process.

Perhaps Bismarck had it right when he compared the process of making laws to that of making sausage.

RLC Notebook: Paul Wins Straw Poll, Not Delegates

2011-06-20T06:17:00.001-07:00

There’s a big difference between attending a conference for the conference and attending a conference for the primary purpose of supporting your candidate in a straw poll.

To use a sports analogy, it’s like the difference between cheering for a player as opposed to the team he plays on. And that’s why there is so much animosity between Republican activists and Ron Paul activists.

The party regulars don’t consider the Paul supporters Republicans while the Paul supporters don’t consider the GOP establishment true conservatives.

And they’re both right to some degree.

That Texas Congressman Ron Paul won yet another straw poll is no shock.

This is the kind of activity that the Paulistas/Paulistinians (don’t call them Paultards- which has a vile implication) specialize in and with “school out” for the summer, the June conference date was a boon to the college student driven effort.

These kids (and they are mostly young people, not that this once 22-year old state GOP committeeman thinks there is anything wrong with that) aren’t hauled in or bribed into going. They foot their own bills beyond the registrations and make sacrifices to travel about the country.

Rather than chasing Green Day, U2 or Phish, these whippersnappers are following the most prominent advocate of the Austrian School of Economics.

And perhaps breaking some possession laws along the way.

The Paulistas should consider making straw poll/concert t-shirts complete with the dates of the conferences they attend.

Now what’s the benefit of the traveling political carnival?

I say nothing. An ardent Paul supporter almost turned blue in the face when I discounted the value of the straw poll strategy.

But it’s true: Paul wins straw polls but loses delegate elections. Badly.

Until Paul can devise a way to breakout beyond the older libertarian/younger college campus crowd, their champion will have to settle for paper victories.

Huntsman’s Propaganda Victory

"The result demonstrates that young conservatives are responding to his record of success in Utah, willingness to take the debt problem seriously, and foreign policy message," said a spokesman for former Utah Governor Jon Huntsman.

Really?

This absurd declaration would be slightly easier to swallow had Huntsman actually spoke at the event.

Let me clear something up right here: there was not enthusiastic groundswell of support for a moderate that many people, including the activists attending the conference, have not even heard of.

Huntsman has participated in no debates and his “tribute” to Ronald Reagan’s campaign kickoff with the Statue of Liberty in the background is yet to come.

There might have been more legitimacy in the crowds in the rafters that chanted “We Want Willkie!” at the 1940 Republican National Convention than there was for Huntsman shadow straw poll operation.

The Huntsman campaign had no visible presence at all at the conference; but they had one in the straw poll ballot box via wholesale purchase of registrations.

The gambit, which I am certain set someone back a lot of money, was intended to have a surprise showing for a candidate with low name recognition.

Huntsman did score some favorable press as the second place showing did seem to come out of nowhere but the billionaire ex-Utah Governor/Ambassador to China known for penning flowery effusive letters to President Barack Obama will need more than an orchestrated vote hauling operation to win the Republican nomination.

And he may very well be the one candidate who has much more to explain to conservatives than Romney.

As the Huntsman “surge” was a sham, one has to wonder if there are not less expensive ways to get a pop.

The Rest of the Field: The “Honest” Votes

What’s relevant about the Republican Leadership Conference’s straw poll is that it was onducted less than a week after the first major debate of the 2012 presidential campaign,

Former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, who in 2010 ran a much more aggressive and successful “vote haul” operation than Hunstman did in 2011, has decried the expense of participating in straw polls and his decline in the two conferences is significant.

After nudging past straw poll king Ron Paul in 2010, Romney received a relatively paltry 74 votes. But here’s the good news for Mitt, unlike in 2010 when the Romney camp was buying registrations for anyone with a heartbeat that would agree to support him in the straw poll, he had an honest showing at the 2011 RLC.

74 votes isn’t bad for a candidate not expected to do well in the south and made no effort.

Minnesota Congresswoman Michele Bachmann’s 191 straw poll votes are also probably “honest” when considering the reception she received by conference attendees and the major boost the plucky TEA Party favorite received from CNN’s New Hampshire Republican presidential debate.

Ex-Godfather’s executive Herman Cain, who spent very little on the event beyond having a hospitality suite off-site in a crowded hotel room, should also be proud of his 104 votes.

Texas Governor Rick Perry’s name was not on the straw poll ballot and the RLC organizers stated that write-ins were not accepted and would not counted. The policy caused some people in line who wanted to support Perry to become very irate.

It would have been interesting to see what support Perry would have received, even as a non-candidate, judging by the enthusiastic reception he received from conference attendees.

And My Vote Went To…

Michigan Congressman Thaddeus McCotter received my vote at the straw poll for two reasons.

First, I figured it would be the next best thing to abstaining. Secondly I felt obligated to express my admiration for having the guts to poke Romney on health care.

McCotter did the job that ex-Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty was unwilling to do.

Democrats Gut GOP Presidential Primary...With a Little Help from the GOP!

2011-06-15T22:44:00.001-07:00

One of my proudest political accomplishments happened five years ago when I cobbled together a coalition of political leaders from both sides of the spectrum to support moving Louisiana’s presidential primary to a date that would make the state’s delegate contest relevant.

It was the first time ever that the Louisiana Republican Party and the Louisiana Democratic Party had ever come together to support a piece of legislation.

The bill passed and both sides benefited from the increased media exposure, voter participation in the primary and candidate visits.

Louisiana mattered.

In the summer of 2010, in an attempt to “fix things”, both party national committees decided to bring order to the calendar chaos that led to so much front loading by state parties by passing rules reordering when states could have their caucuses and primaries.

The new rules protected Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada’s early status while establishing harsh penalties for states that wanted to hold their contests before the first Tuesday of March.

That concept was sound and a welcome innovation. However getting 50 states and several federal territories to get on the same page is a bit like herding cats. Especially since elections, as we learned from 2000, are conducted very differently amongst the states.

In some states the party controls the setting of election dates; in others the legislature. New Hampshire has vested its secretary of state with power to set his state’s primary date to assure that the Granite State’s can be first.

Louisiana’s primary date is set by statute. Or to phrase it another way, it takes an act of the legislature to change it.

A bill was drafted and introduced this session to bring Louisiana into compliance with both national parties. While the Louisiana Republican State Central Committee passed multiple resolutions endorsing the move, the Louisiana Democratic Party remained cryptically silent.

That is until Wednesday.

After the primary date change bill sailed out of the House of Representatives without so much as a dirty look, the legislation was ambushed before the Senate and Governmental Affairs Committee.

By a vote to 6-1, the bill was “indefinitely deferred”. When I argued that they killed it, I was corrected by a senator that there was a difference. However with the legislative session calendar ticking down to its last days, my phrasing stated the obvious while her term merely stated the “manner of death”.

Amazingly enough the bill was rejected without comment.

In several decades of watching politics I have never seen something defeated before a governmental body without explanation.

When I chased down one Democratic senator who had much to say about a resolution that endorsed the concept of a constitutional convention and asked for an explanation, I was greeted with a silent shrug of the shoulders.

Why would the Democrats engage in such petty politics?

And why were they joined by two Republicans in their silent derailing (the other Republican being Jody Amedee)?

Were Republicans simply asleep at the wheel and duped by Democratic partisans into providing them cover for their machinations?

Let me explain the fallout from this move.

First, the Louisiana GOP will look like fools this week when presidential candidates visit New Orleans to speak at the Republican Leadership Conference and read in the newspaper how the presidential primary bill was defeated for no stated reason.

Secondly, the Louisiana GOP will simply opt out of the primary and thus turn it into a meaningless $6,000,000 “beauty contest” with no delegates at stake. Four years ago the Louisiana Republican Party was mocked for having rules that denied former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee from having a single delegate because he “only” won a plurality and not a majority of the Louisiana GOP vote.

At least this time it won’t be the party’s fault, just the party’s senators when we are once again embarrassed.

Thirdly, Louisiana will draw less attention and thus fewer visits from Republican presidential candidates, who are going to spend time where delegates are at stake. In addition to the loss of attention, Louisiana would also lose the opportunity to educate candidates, perhaps a future president, about the federal issues that are important to our region and miss out on the promises that New Hampshire and Iowa are showered with every four years.

For a state struggling with a White House imposed oil exploration embargo and losing acres of land a day to coastal erosion, we need national figures to learn about Louisiana.

Fourthly, because the primary will be unofficial Republicans looking to participate in the caucuses that will be held in a handful of locations across the state.

When looking at the Picassos the legislature drew for congressional districts in the reapportionment session, someone who lives in Washington Parish might end up having to go to Alexandria. Also keep in mind we now have two districts that run from Arkansas to I-10.

Had the Republicans attempted to do this in 2004, state Democrats would have screamed bloody murder and accused the GOP of trying to deny the franchise to poor voters by burdening them with the expense of traveling to a caucus site.

I can imagine the outcry, the protests, the demagoguery, the lawsuits and maybe even a visit from the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division that would stem from that maneuver.

But since the Democrats won’t have a competitive primary as President Barack Obama will likely be unchallenged, they see an opportunity to kick the GOP in the shin.

For a party that has thus far been unable to field a candidate for governor, I suppose such cheap wins count as an accomplishment these days.

Whatever feelings of euphoria gained from this slight will be fleeting with the enmity and ill will that are the byproducts from this Democratic “victory” lasting.

Update: It’s Not Dead Yet

Senate and Governmental Affairs Chairman Bob Kostelka scheduled a rehearing on the bill for this Friday. If you know the individuals on the committee, please contact them and let your voice be heard. The senators’ contact info can be found at www.legis.state.la.us

Votes for deferral (no votes)

Karen Carter Peterson D-New Orleans
Lydia Jackson D-Shreveport
Rob Marionneaux D-Livonia
Daniel Claitor R-Baton Rouge
Jody Amedee R-Ascension Parish

Vote against deferral (yes vote)

Mike Walsworth R-Monroe

Absent

Jack Donahue R-St. Tammany Parish

The First New Hampshire Debate: Losers and Non-Losers

2011-06-13T21:56:00.001-07:00

As the title implies, there were no real winners in CNN’s New Hampshire debate between the field thus far of Republican presidential contenders.

Perhaps the location of the forum (it wasn’t much of a debate) was appropriate as Saint Anselm College was where in 2000 George W. Bush conceded the Granite State primary to Arizona US Senator John McCain.

The biggest non-loser of the night was clearly former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. Why? Because Romney was not challenged once by his fellow Republican candidates on his spotty record as a conservative.

Romney might as well have been reading from a Teleprompter and his aides could have handed out preprinted copies of his polished and well-delivered answers before the questions were asked. His frontrunner status both nationally and in the critical early primary state was not only preserved but likely expanded by the reluctance of anyone to lay a glove on Mitt.

For a candidate trying to create an air of inevitability, the first “debate” Romney deemed worthy of his participation was a major victory.

The second biggest non-loser was Herman Cain. The ex-pizza company executive solidified the niche he carved for himself in the earlier South Carolina debate with his sharp, concise statements. While Cain will not be the nominee, the former Godfather’s Pizza chief will be in the race well after better funded “more electable” rivals have been dispatched.

Finally the third biggest non-loser, Minnesota US Representative Michele Bachmann. Why? Because CNN said so.

The commentators didn’t exactly fawn over her (such public expressions of fealty are reserved exclusively for the Messiah-in-Chief), though the talking heads on the channel went through great pains to praise her performance and tout her potential.

Bachmann is a prolific fundraiser and a TEA Party favorite. She’s also a native Iowan and isn’t too proud to pander and cajole via pep rally-style rhetoric to win people over. Bachmann made the most of her opportunity to more or less announce she will be making a formal announcement about running for president, which wasn’t smoothly delivered but put the former governor of Alaska on notice.

The conventional wisdom is that Sarah Palin and Bachmann would cancel each other out on the same ballot and it’s apparent the three-term congresswoman is willing to play political chicken with Palin.

Bachmann repeated much of her opening address at the 2011 CPAC, which sounded more like a presidential stump speech then for good reason, once again advancing her three-legged stool of conservatism analogy (fiscal, social and security conservatives).

To her credit, the longer the debate dragged on, the better Bachmann performed.

Now for the losers. And dare I say the biggest one was the candidate I would vote for if I had to choose from one of the seven.

Ex-Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty missed his shot. CNN reporter and debate moderator John King did the job none of the other Republican candidates were willing to do: challenge Romney on his record.

When King asked Pawlenty about his previous use of the term Obamneycare as a critique of Romney’s health care record while he was governor of Massachusetts, the Minnesotan made like a golden gopher and burrowed away from the question.

Pawlenty’s punt showed both a lack of political instinct and guts. Does Pawlenty not grasp that his path to the nomination goes over Romney’s meticulously coiffed carcass?

With Texas governor Rick Perry poised to make a lack entry, Pawlenty’s window of opportunity to establish himself as a first-tier candidate is very narrow. Rather than challenging the front runner, by an inexplicable act of political pusillanimity reinforced it by avoiding a much needed discussion on why Romney should not be the party’s nominee.

Pawlenty’s one pop of the night was his vigorous comments on right-to-work but for the most part, the “other” Minnesotan lost an opportunity to make it a Pawlenty v. Romney fight and instead faded into the scenery.

Candidates who are polling in the low single digits can’t afford to remain as backdrop for long, even with good organizations set up in the early states. Especially if they lack a constituency. Sam’s Club Republicans can only do so much.

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich showed he had a pulse albeit weak. Newt came off like a cantankerous professor (himself?), did not dress presidential and scowled most of the evening. Monday was not the turnaround moment his campaign bid needed. Someone needs to tell Gingrich that the presidential nomination will be determined by voters and not via standardized testing.

In another incredible act of charity, former Pennsylvania US Senator Rick Santorum refused to go after Romney when his multiple-positions on that most black-and-white issue, abortion. Rather than boldly trying to create a presence for his candidacy, Santorum struggled to fit in his bland canned rhetoric into the tight constraints allowed by the CNN host.

Finally there was Texas US Representative and political cult figure Ron Paul. The libertarian somehow managed to come off crankier than Newt. Wore, Paul wore a suit jacket that looked too big on his small frame, which made him look every bit the septuagenarian he is. Though the feisty candidate was finally pried off the issue of monetary policy as time went on, Paul clearly lacked vigor.

If Paul was selfless, he’d pass the baton off to ex-New Mexico governor Gary Johnson, who has a similar constituency, and let a younger candidate with experience as a state executive borrow his impressive and energetic operation for an election cycle rather than monopolize it.

It’s not like Rand couldn’t get the keys back at the end of the day.

If the honor of “winner” had to be assigned to someone it would go to whoever passed on taking part in the debate and planned on jumping in the race later. What transpired at Saint Anselm didn’t inspire much confidence in the current crop of candidate selection.

Romney v. Romney

2011-06-07T20:58:00.000-07:00

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney formally kicked off a campaign for the White House that never really ended even after he withdrew at the 2008 CPAC.

Romney’s “departure speech” at the annual conservative conclave was intended to put an exclamation point on a presidential bid that was dogged by questions about his sincerity regarding conservatism and he did receive some benefit, winning the conference’s much ballyhooed straw poll despite no longer being a candidate when the results were announced.

With evangelical favorite and ex-Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee out of the running for the 2012 GOP presidential nod, Romney is the closest thing to a favorite in the Republican field.

Consider the following.

Romney will be well-financed (as he was in 2008) and is the lone credible Republican candidate who can put together the money to run a national operation in the primaries and caucuses while his fellow GOP rivals are compelled to live off the harvests of the early states.

In the fight for delegates, that’s very important. In crafting the perception of possessing momentum, even more so.

Romney also possesses the double-edged sword of being the man to beat. The benefit is that many Republican primary voters tend to gravitate to the “next in line”. With the exception of George W. Bush, every Republican nominee since Reagan had unsuccessfully sought the party nomination in a previous election cycle.

(For those keeping score at home- Reagan 1976, Bush 1980, Dole 1980 & 1988 and McCain 2000).

Democrats, to their credit, learned to avoid recycling damaged presidential candidates after Adlai Stevenson’s back to back blowout losses in the 1950s.

Romney will draw both votes from conditioned GOP establishment voters and attacks from rivals who know that the best way to open up to the path to the nomination is by knocking out Romney before March 1st.

Perhaps the greatest advantage Romney has is the party’s new nomination rules.

In an attempt to make presidential nomination contest a marathon instead of a sprint, both the Democratic and Republican national committees adopted rules that would regulate how states and territories can allocate delegates.

For example, all contests held between the first Tuesday in March and April 1st must allocate the delegates through a proportional system. States and territories that wish to have a “winner take all” assignment of delegates will have to hold their primaries and caucuses in April or later.

Short of a mass withdrawal of candidates the new rules will prevent the political equivalent of Mike Tyson’s once-trademark first round knockouts.

The most significant aspects of the “nomination reform” changes have to do with the preferential placement of four states and the protection afforded them.

Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina, ostensibly representing the nation’s four regions, are allowed to hold their contests prior to the first Tuesday in March. Any state that muscles in on the four’s privileged positioning will lose half its delegates.

For Romney the advantages of the rules are apparent. Romney not only governed a state whose media market envelopes New Hampshire’s most populous southern second but he’s also a property owner in the Granite State.

And New Hampshire voters tend to vote local.

In 2008 Romney overwhelmingly won Nevada’s caucuses. Unfortunately for Romney, McCain won the South Carolina primary the same day and thanks to the media’s decision that the Palmetto State contest was worth more than Nevada’s, McCain got the boost.

Romney is expected to fare well again in Nevada due to the state’s large Mormon population.

With two of the early four states seemingly in his corner before the contest goes national, Romney walks into the nomination fight with no shortage of weapons.

Romney also has no shortage of weaknesses.

One of the reasons why Romney didn’t win the 2008 Republican nomination, which on paper was his to lose, was because conservatives simply did not trust him. Not that they trusted McCain, but conservatives, particularly of the social variety, opted to punt in droves in the fight between Romney and the Arizonan by continuing to vote for Huckabee, who was dead in the water after South Carolina.

With nationalized health care being the biggest issue in the primaries (key word- primaries), Romney’s political liabilities grew exponentially with the advance of President Obama’s health care agenda.

One of the most telling signs that Romney is having trouble wrestling with the issue was the total omission of Obamacare from his prepared remarks at the 2011 CPAC. Romney may have been the only candidate speaking at the conference to not make a reference to health care.

With the next Republican presidential debate coming up next week, it’ll be interesting to see how Romney handles the departure from safe, scripted speeches and reacts to “live fire”.

While the myriad of not well-knowns continue to introduce themselves to the public, the front-runner will have much explaining to do over the next ten months.

Huck Shakes Up the GOP Field...By Exiting It

2011-05-16T21:49:00.000-07:00

The big news in the grand scheme of things isn’t that The Donald has renounced a bid for the White House.

Though Donald Trump had scored well in early polls, much of that support was comparable to Rudy Giuliani’s “front runner” numbers going in 2008- a mile wide and an inch deep.

The billionaire real estate developer-casino owner-television personality-titan of self-promotion sucked the oxygen out of the room with his high media profile and public heckling of President Barack Obama over his birth certificate.

Despite confident boasting that he would have won the GOP nomination had he sought it, Trump was likely facing a tough fight in the retail political centers of Iowa and New Hampshire, particularly with his aversion to handshaking.

With other candidates struggling for “air” (read: attention/media coverage), Trump’s first appearance in a debate would have been a dog-pile, as little-known contenders would have tried to establish notoriety for themselves by aggressively challenging The Apprentice star to back up with specifics some of his flippant policy positions.

It would have been far more entertaining television watching than La Toya Jackson shuffling about on random tasks.

Embarrassing setbacks in the first two states would have done no favors for the Trump brand, something that has generated loads of money just through the The Donald’s fame.

That said Trump did the GOP a major favor not carrying out his presidential flirtations further.

The big news you won’t read on TMZ is former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee’s decision to not make the race.

While Trump was hogging the spotlight, Huckabee was hogging the social conservatives.

The folksy Baptist preacher is making good money for the first time in his life between his television program on Fox News and book sales. Huckabee also relocated outside of Arkansas and has built a large house in the vicinity of Destin, Florida with a reported $3,000,000 price tag.

A presidential run won’t help him make the money needed to maintain that kind of manse.

Huckabee went from a minor candidate to the front tier of the Republican presidential primary fight with a surprise second-place showing in the 2007 Ames Iowa Straw Poll, a strategic victory that ended the presidential candidacy of Kansas US Senator Sam Brownback, who finished a disappointing third despite a major investment in the political carnival.

A few months later Huckabee overwhelmed former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney in the actual caucuses though the minister failed to parlay that momentum in the New Hampshire primary. Huckabee’s last hope to contend came in the South Carolina primary where he fell short behind US Senator John McCain.

Huckabee was handicapped in that contest by the presence of ex-Tennessee US Senator and actor Fred Thompson, who split the social conservative vote with Huckabee in the Palmetto State.

Huckabee facilitated John McCain’s nomination in 2008 by remaining in the race thereby denying Romney the social conservative voters he needed to overcome the Arizona senator.

Huckabee’s departure from the race opens up the field for social conservative candidates to pursue a critical segment of the Republican electorate he had a major hold on, particularly in the first caucus state of Iowa.

By bailing out, Huckabee erased the likelihood of the primary devolving into a duel between McCain’s main two rivals from the previous election.

With the former Massachusetts governor holding his niche vote from 2008 and Huckabee holding his segment of the Republican electorate, there wasn’t much room for one of the half-dozen or so other presidential candidates break out from the crowd.

Sans Huckabee, a social conservative alternative can now emerge out of Iowa or South Carolina to take on Romney, who is the lead candidate in 2012 for the GOP nod, on Super Tuesday.

By opening the field, Huckabee has done Romney a major disservice, which in a way is appropriate and as there was no love lost between the two from 2008.

Look for Huckabee to support not the candidate with the best social conservative credentials (ex-Senator Rick Santorum) but the candidate with respectable social conservative credentials with the best hope of stopping Romney in the primaries.

A Huckabee endorsement of ex-Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty would help him fend off US Representative and TEA Party favorite Michele Bachmann in Iowa. Huckabee’s support for Indiana Governor Mitch Daniels would go a long way towards mitigating the Hoosier’s infamous “truce on social issues” fumble.

Though Huckabee won’t be president, he has the potential to be kingmaker in 2012 if he plays his cards right.

Person of Interest: Rising Tide author John Barry

2011-05-15T20:56:00.000-07:00

Concerns about the rise in the Mississippi River and the possible “solutions” to the current test of the river levee system have dominated state news over the past week.

John Barry is a member of the Southeast Louisiana Flood Protection Authority and has written several books most notably Rising Tide, which chronicles the Great Flood of 1927.

The flood control commission member/author was kind enough to field some questions about the rise in the Mississippi River’s water level, where the water is coming from and the safety of the New Orleans area during this tense situation.

POI: How does the current rise in the Mississippi River compare with that of the Great Flood of 1927?

JB: It's actually considerably less on the lower portion of the Mississippi River. A great deal of the water is coming down is from the Ohio River. In 1927 the Arkansas River added an enormous amount-- currently it's less than 20% that.

POI: Why has there been a delay in the opening of the Morganza Spillway?

JB: I believe they were waiting for the trigger of over 1.5 million cfs to reach there.

POI: Where has all of the water come from, especially since Louisiana has been in the midst of a dry spell?

JB: Mostly from the Ohio River Basin.

POI: So heavy rains in Pittsburgh and Cincinnati affect the river here?

JB: Yes.

POI: Has the sudden rise in the Mississippi River created a need for the creation of additional outlets for the river water or does the current spillway system suffice?

JB: No, the current levee and spillway system is adequate.

POI: Speaking of spillways, who has the authority to open them: the local levee boards, the state or the federal government?

JB: The federal government.

POI: What area of the state is of the greatest concern right now with the sudden rise in the river level?

JB: The people most threatened are those that will be affected by the opening of the Morganza Spillway, especially those outside Morgan City.

POI: Is the New Orleans area in serious danger with the rising river level?

JB: Actually New Orleans is the safest area because of all of the diversions that can steer the water away from it.

POI: Let’s assume the worst happens. How would officials cope with the collapse of a section of the Mississippi River levee?

JB: They probably couldn’t. Closing a crevasse would be a nearly impossible task with a tiny sliver of opportunity to close a breach. That said once a breach got rolling, it could flow for weeks creating an enormous disaster.

POI: What effect will the opening of the Bonnet Carré spillway have on Lake Pontchartrain?

JB: Mostly the proliferation of algae blooms, changes in the lake’s salinity and fish populations. However the lake will recover rapidly.

POI: What effects will the opening of the Morganza Spillway have on south Louisiana communities?

JB: It would be hard for me to paint a scenario.

POI: How predictable is a crest in the Mississippi River?

JB: The Army Corps of Engineers has good estimates based upon when the crest passes each point along the river. When the level begins to drop, the decline will be slow. A river flood crest is not like one big wave; it's gradual.

Justice Is Achieved in Bin Laden's Final Moments

2011-05-02T21:47:00.000-07:00

On September 11, 2001 Osama Bin Laden brought his fanatical Islamist war against the West in an unprecedented attack on our shores.

Almost ten years later, the United States brought the war of vengeance to his living room in Pakistan.

Americans have not celebrated the death of an individual with such jubilation since Adolf Hitler’s suicide in the fuhrerbunker.

Osama Bin Laden wasn’t just an enemy; he personified evil, the greatest villain in the first decade of the 21st century.

When then-President George W. Bush launched a war of retribution against al-Qaeda and the Afghan regime that offered him safe harbor, Bin Laden had to live the life of a fugitive.

It appears Bin Laden wasn’t exactly roughing it as his last surroundings were not in a cave in the wilderness near the Afghan-Pakistani border but in a comfortable well-protected mansion in an upscale urban area not far from Islamabad.

For that our Pakistani “friends” have a great deal of explaining to do and exemplifies the need for the United States to take unilateral action and deal with the politics of upsetting diplomatic sensibilities later.

Apparently Pakistani officials were not so much concerned with an injury to national pride through the violation of their sovereignty but uncovering their complicity to aid and abet an international criminal.

Had Bin Laden not possessed a Leona Helmsley-like mentality that “only the little people” martyr themselves for Allah, he would have made a point of being taken alive and thus given his greatest forum yet to encourage uprisings and inflame the hearts of his fellow Islamic radicals.

The Navy SEAL team that killed Bin Laden spared Americans the specter of a circus trial that would have followed. Where should it have been held? What rights would he have had? Should Bin Laden appear before an international tribunal or an American military court? Not to mention establishing procedure.

Bin Laden did the world a favor by resisting capture and justifying the use of lethal force.

Bin Laden’s guilt was beyond doubt; he needed no trial, just a swift execution and a quick disposition of his remains in a place in an inaccessible location. Dropping his body off into the sea was ideal, though it’s a shame his body was afforded any religious courtesies en route to splashing down to a watery grave. Bin Laden’s remains should not have been shown the least shred of dignity.

Relatives of those who died on September 11th and Americans in general should take some satisfaction in this: moments before the fatal bullet hit him, the al-Qaeda terrorist mastermind experienced something similar to that of his organization’s victims on the top stories of the World Trade Center: absolute terror.

Those trapped between the jet fuel-fed flames that engulfed the Twin Towers’ midsections and the buildings’ roofs experienced the anguish that they would be dead in a matter of minutes before escaping the inferno raging around them by leaping to their death over a thousand feet to the concrete plaza below.

There’s the real justice: not just that Bin Laden was killed but that he was overcome with the same dread that a condemned man feels en route to the gallows. Bin Laden knew what was going to happen and that an American was going to have the honor bagging the trophy.

Also Bin Laden died with the knowledge that he did not get away with his crimes, that he suffered a brief spate of mental hell before transitioning to an eternity of spiritual hell.

While almost all Americans would have settled for a quick air strike if it would assure Bin Laden’s demise, President Barack Obama was right to authorize this particular action and wise to not pay a courtesy call to Pakistani officials.

The operation carried great risk and could very well have turned into another Desert One. The president should be credited for having the guts to pull the trigger.

Two decades of terrorist attacks and video taped taunts were trumped by American perseverance and military might. Though the pursuit was met with years of frustrations and feelings of futility, we didn’t give up and kept hunting.

While Bin Laden is dead, the al-Qaeda network isn’t. That said, its members and affiliates are more convinced today that the United States will relentlessly pursue them across the globe and charge into their legally protected sanctuaries. And that has to make people who claim a willingness to die for a cause to think twice.

America’s enemies should pay heed to the results of the Navy SEAL raid on Bin Laden’s Abbottabad compound.

Islamist terrorists might not understand western civilization, they comprehend determination and power and the United States projected both in the ten-year pursuit in the hunt for the terrorist mastermind.

Confederate Heritage's Long Retreat to Oblivion Continues

2011-04-14T21:50:00.000-07:00

Early Tuesday morning marked the sesquicentennial of the bombardment of Fort Sumter by Confederate forces under the command of P.G.T. Beauregard. The artillery action, which resulted in no loss of life on either side, proved to be the catalyst of what would become and remains the bloodiest military conflict in American history.

Though tens of millions of Americans are descendants of people who immigrated here after hostilities ended and thus have no familial connection to the conflict, the war remains controversial from its name (Civil War vs. War between the States, the latter being the sobriquet of choice for many southerners) to its symbols, most notably the Confederate battle flag.

With the continued rise of political correctness and the growth of societal hypersensitivity, a reasonable interpretation of the conflict along with recognition of the men and women who performed acts of valor on the losing side of history and public officials who defend their commemoration will meet their own Appomattox before too long.

Were those who fought and advocated for the Confederacy traitors?

In a bit of irony those who actually fought for the Confederacy were held in higher esteem by the very people they exchanged fire with than the latter’s ancestors, as if the once-existing animosity was passed down to later generations though not their perspective.

President James Garfield, a Union brigadier general during the battle of Chickamauga, appointed William H. Hunt, a one-time Confederate lieutenant colonel, as Secretary of the Navy in 1881. Charles Crisp, a Confederate lieutenant who spent time as a POW, was elected by his colleagues as Speaker of the US House of Representatives in 1891.

President William Taft appointed Edward Douglass White, a lieutenant in the Confederate army, chief justice of the United States Supreme Court in 1910.

It’s plain that the northern contemporaries of these one-time rebels didn’t consider them on par with the like of Benedict Arnold.

===============================================================

So why did the flower of the south don the uniform and accoutrements of a different country and bear arms against the United States of America?

Were they motivated by racism or a desire to see slavery, a system that many whites in the south had no connection with, continued if not expanded?

Or was it something else altogether, such as an objection to attacking a fellow southern state, as was the case of Virginia, which didn’t leave the Union until after refusing President Abraham Lincoln’s request that states furnish the federal government soldiers to put down the insurrection in the deep south.

Though the issue of slavery was at the heart of the war, it in itself was not the cause.

In Lincoln’s mind, maintaining the union was paramount and he was willing to both compromise and fight to keep it intact.

There were slave states that opted to stay in the Union on their own volition, including Delaware, as Joe Biden giddily pointed out on the campaign trail while quixotically trying to win southern votes.

Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation did not end slavery in the US, as the proclamation covered only Confederate territory not occupied by federal forces. In fact individual parishes in Louisiana, including my home community of Saint Bernard, are cited by name as excepted from this executive act of mass abolition, since slave labor that can work fields can also dig military trenches for Federal troops.

That said, Lincoln’s 8/11th measure on the matter gave him and the Union army greater moral authority in pursuing the war effort and undermined the Confederacy’s desperate attempts to gain recognition from anti-slavery governments in London and Paris.

Furthermore some of Lincoln’s rhetoric on race might sound like something one would expect to hear from the Kleagle of a Klavern than the Great Emancipator.

I don’t say these things to tarnish the 16th president, who I revere as a visionary and consider only second to George Washington in the pantheon of our nation’s leaders, but to underscore the importance of judging people of the past from the perspective of their times.

===============================================================

Support for promoting and preserving Confederate memorials has found no allies with prominent cultural conservative leaders.

Plaques related to the Confederacy on the Texas Supreme Court Building, which was built with money from the Confederate Pension Fund, were removed from the structure while then-Governor George W. Bush was campaigning for president.

Louisiana governor Bobby Jindal has not signed a proclamation recognizing Confederate history month, a perfunctory act that his predecessors, both Democrats and Republicans, regularly sent to the autopen machine without hesitation.

In South Carolina, Governor Nikki Haley was a conspicuous no-show at a concert held in Charleston to commemorate the 150th anniversary of the start of the Civil War, though the city’s 9-term Democratic mayor was not only present but also an active participant in the festivities.

And arch-conservative governor Bob McDonnell of Virginia, the state that hosted the most Civil War battles and home to the largest collection of artifacts related to the CSA, engaged in a bit of political correctness himself swapping out “Confederate History Month” as the title in a proclamation to the much watered down “Civil War in Virginia Month”.

The 21st century GOP has been no kinder to the men in gray than its 19th century version.

Such nuances often go unappreciated and won’t curry any more support from the electoral segment most delighted by these snubs and semantics.

Perhaps the greatest threat to preserving Confederate heritage is the irresponsible rhetoric of liberal political activists and commentators, who make outrageous and erroneous comparisons between the CSA and Nazi Germany.

Those who flippantly refer to the Confederate battle flag as a “southern swastika” know little about the Civil War and even less about World War II and the Holocaust.

===============================================================

Considering the role Fort Sumter and Charleston played in the Civil War, participation in events surrounding the sesquicentennial didn’t seem that impressive.

The centennial celebration Charleston hosted in 1961 was criticized for being too festive; in 2011, those handling events related to the anniversary went through great pains to emphasize that they were hosting a “commemoration” and not a “celebration”. At times it felt more like a funeral, perhaps appropriately so for a few reasons.

The first cruise to the shelled federal military installation on the 150th anniversary of the bombardment wasn’t sold out and less than 200 people were on hand near Charleston’s Battery green area for the 4:30 AM prayer service and concert that were held at the moment the first mortar shot of the Civil War was fired.

And those holding vigil along the seawall that runs across the battery to watch a reenactment of the cannonading later that morning had plenty of room. I remember thinking that I’d seen thicker crowds at third-rate Mardi Gras parades.

In 1975, President Gerald Ford of Michigan signed a Senate resolution restoring Robert E. Lee’s citizenship. Lee had applied for a pardon after the war ended though his paperwork was shanghaied by a bureaucrat and was never processed.

Ford heaped considerable praise on the man who is considered by military historians as one of the nation’s finest soldiers. “General Lee’s character has been an example to succeeding generations, making the restoration of his citizenship an event in which every American can take pride,” said Ford at the restoration ceremony held on the grounds of Lee’s seized home in Arlington.

I can’t imagine a future president showering such praise on any Confederate general or official today.

While witnessing the non-event in Charleston earlier this week, I wondered how the bicentennial of the War between the States will be handled in 2061, though I’m not optimistic about how things will be presented.

I suspect political correctness, reckless rhetoric and cultural cowardice by those who know better but do and say nothing will contribute to increased vilification of anything and anyone connected with the Confederacy. They will do to history what Sherman did to Georgia.

Those who fought for the Confederacy will be derided as at best misguided ignorant poor souls duped into fighting for the preservation of a racist oligarchy or at worst, forerunners of the SS.

Statuary Hall will be cleared of all offending memorials, which will then be exiled to the far corners of unvisited museums if not warehoused indefinitely.

The remaining visible shreds of the Confederacy escaping bowdlerization will consist of the mostly unrecognizable “Stars and Bars” and street and building names dedicated to obscure figures of the Lost Cause known only to history buffs and wikipedia.

===============================================================

While attending a conference in northern Romania in 2006 I remember seeing a large granite obelisk parked next to the outdoor seating of a restaurant. The monument was placed there by Austria to commemorate a major military victory by that country over Romania during the First World War. When Romania picked up the territory (through tough post-war Allied negotiations and not Romanian fighting skill), the victorious vanquished decided to leave the monument stand.

While the memorial stood as a reminder of an unpleasant part of Romania’s history, it was still a part of Romanian history.

While the Confederacy will find few fans and apologists in the nation at-large, it is still part of American history, even if not a popular part.

The Last "John Breaux Democrat" Jumps Ship

2011-03-31T23:37:00.000-07:00

After watching well over a century control of both houses of the Louisiana Legislature slips away through party switches and special elections that broke towards the GOP, the Louisiana Democratic Party suffered the ultimate indignity on Thursday with the departure from the party of one its most prominent in-state figures. Former US Senator and one-time de facto state party boss John Breaux made a surprise visit to his former stomping grounds in Crowley to announce that he is now a registered independent. “If I ran in a Democratic primary for Congress today, I doubt I could be nominated,” mused Breaux, who is retired from politics as a candidate though not from the political scene as one of the top lobbyists on the Beltway’s power corridor of K Street. During his time in Congress’ upper chamber was one of the most conservative members of his former party and was known for being able to work both sides of the aisle. When Breaux last sought office in 1998, he received a great deal of support from Republicans, including the Baton Rouge congressman he defeated to win a seat in the US Senate in 1986. Breaux, who resides in Maryland, cited his disenchantment with the Obama Administration’s energy policies and their impact on his native state and the overall tilt of the Democratic Party to far left. “Forget the spotted owl, the real endangered species is the Blue Dog Democrat,” said Breaux. “Increasingly conservative voters have thrown them out of office and replaced them with Republicans while those moderate Democrats who have held on are neutered by the party leadership in Congress.” “I knew that as a pro-life, pro-second amendment, business-friendly US Senator, I had a very limited future in the party. There was a leadership threshold I simply could not cross and that was frustrating to me when considering the money I raised for my colleagues,” lamented Breaux. Breaux’s defection wasn’t total since he did not embrace the Republican Party. “I have a lot of friends in the GOP though I could not bring myself to go that far. I’ve worked hard moving the Democratic Party forward from the Edwin Edwards-era and I still believe the Democratic Party is the party of the working man, though it’s also the party of elements that advocate reckless policies and positions that are bad for Louisiana and America,” said Breaux. Breaux won’t be missed by all Louisiana Democrats. Lynnda Kimball of Democrats for Progress, a liberal grassroots organization that is actively supportive of President Obama’s agenda, did not have kind parting words for Breaux. “He (Breaux) spent more time fighting for Texaco than working families,” said Kimball. “Breaux was (George W.) Bush’s favorite Democrat. That should say it all.” When informed of Breaux’s decision to become a registered independent, Vice-President Joe Biden, who served with the Cajun politician in the US Senate for 18 years offered the following statement: "John has been a friend of mine for many years and I thought he represented the state of Arkansas ably during his time in Washington. I enjoyed working with him on landmark legislation such as the Water Flume Regulation Act and the Whooping Cough Eradication Act. That said, I would like to wish him a Happy April Fool's Day."

Obama's "Feel Good" Rocket Attack

2011-03-22T21:04:00.000-07:00

.One really doesn’t need much of an excuse to want to see Libyan dictator Muammar Gaddafi blown to kingdom come.

Gaddafi’s regime through acts of terrorism is responsible for the murder of American servicemen and civilians. And the man Ronald Reagan dubbed the “mad dog of the Middle East” has reminded the world of his willingness to order the slaughter of his fellow Libyans for the crime of objecting to his four decades plus of iron-fisted rule.

And while working to destabilize Gaddafi’s grip on power is in itself unobjectionable concept, there are questions that need to be answered, specifically how long are we going to fire rockets into Libya and what’s the ultimate purpose?

A no-fly zone and a temporary bombardment via tomahawk missiles won’t be enough to bring Gaddafi down.

Gaddafi still wields control of the Libyan armed forces and while he won’t be able to utilize his air force and send tank columns to immediately suppress the insurrection, all the colonel needs to do is wait the West out.

Give Gaddafi a bunker filled with netflicks and a few months worth of Triscuits and he will emerge from the rubble wrapped in his favorite shower curtain still holding whatever grandiose title he has apportioned to himself after the West has lost interest in Libyan human rights.

Saddam Hussein survived not only a catastrophic military humiliation as his army was quickly driven out of Kuwait but also the domestic uprising that was supposed to have been enabled with a no-fly zone that didn’t work out so well for the rebels.

Those insurgents in Basra who were inspired to revolt against the Hussein tyranny after the Allied Coalition’s pummeling of the Republican Guard were rewarded with sadistic executions once Baghdad reasserted control of the south. That bit of history probably isn’t lost on either Gaddafi or the leading rabble-rousers in Benghazi.

Hussein wasn’t toppled by an indigenous rebellion but through a full-fledged American-led “boots on the ground” invasion.

Short of the US Marines once again landing on the shores of Tripoli, Gaddafi will be able to bide his time and maintain his position of authority.

It appears the Libyan adventure is currently limited to the standard liberal noble goal of merely “doing something”.

Sure some tanks have gone up in smoke and a handful of military structures have been wrecked, but the Libyan rebels are still nowhere closer to effecting regime change.

Right now the military action in Libya is not much more than then-President Bill Clinton’s cruise missile attack on Iraq’s intelligence headquarters in response to a busted Iraqi plot to assassinate former President George H.W. Bush during a visit to Kuwait in 1993.

Shock and awe it isn’t; the strikes have been more like an “Aw Shucks” offensive that has shown we care but not enough to do what’s required.

Gaddafi, not trusting his native military to do the dirty work of mowing his own people down, has shrewdly recruited foreign mercenaries who have a vested interest in the survival of the current government, since the checks are sure to stop coming if the dictator is killed or books a one-way flight to Caracas.

The Obama Administration’s all-too public grasping at a Libya Policy has exhibited indecisiveness, with America following in France’s rhetorical and military wake.

Yes France, the very country that refused to allow American jets to fly over their air space while en route to paying Gaddafi a surprise visit in 1986 in the form of a retaliatory strike after Libyan agents bombed a West Berlin discotheque frequented by American military personnel.

French President Nicholas Sarkozy was the first world leader to publicly call for Gaddafi’s ouster and it was a French warplane that struck the first blow against the Libyan military in the current operation.

So what’s the objective and most importantly, who is going to decide what it is?

Will it be regime change via direct action by the western powers or will the US limit its involvement to creating opportunities for the rebels or simply keeping Gaddafi’s forces at bay, at least for the time being.

Shall the US defer to the United Nations on setting the end game or is an agreement between Washington, Paris and London a broad enough consensus?

It’s much more important that we impress with our actions not Gaddafi & Co. but the individuals occupying high military and foreign relations posts in Beijing, Tehran, Pyongyang and Moscow, as the consequences of the Obama Administration’s handling of the Libyan situation will manifest themselves far away from the Sahara.

While Gaddafi is taking his lumps, others are taking notes.

NFL 2011: Greed 1 Fans 0

2011-03-16T19:46:00.000-07:00

There was a time when my world revolved around baseball.

It was during the late eighties, an era before the internet, 24-hour sports channels with constant sports score crawlers and automatic text messages giving inning by inning play.

In order to learn how my Houston Astros fared in their rainbow-bright uniforms, I would feverishly flip channels during the 10 PM news. When really desperate I would turn on an old shortwave radio to pick up an armed services channel carrying a game and hope that the commentators would pass a score along.

The first thing I would do in the morning when arriving at school was make a bee-line for the library to peruse the USA Today Sports section (which contained more finals than the Times Picayune).

I was pretty damned obsessed but I was cured by Donald Fehr, head of the Major League Baseball Players Association. The union chief called a players’ strike over owners’ plans to implement a badly needed salary cap.

While I do still love the game, the fire that was once a conflagration is now a votive candle for the passion I once had for baseball.

The union “won” and played resumed slightly delayed the following season though the game suffered. 1994 could have been one of the most special seasons in the modern era.

So it goes without saying that I am not exactly sympathetic to player unions.

There is a single exception.

The bull the NFL owners are trying to pull over the players is ludicrous. The owners are demanding a free billion dollars, a rookie pay scale that shifts the savings back to their pockets and not deserving players who signed on the cheap and have played above their compensation level and my least favorite aspect, the 18-game regular season.

What’s disgusting is how the league has dressed the latter up as “something for the fans”. Are they serious?

If the owners wanted to be generous to those who fill the stadiums, buy their merchandise and pay $4 for a fifty-cent bottle of water, they could bring concession prices down. But that’ll happen when Al Davis gets awarded the Nobel Peace Prize (though they’ve given it to less deserving).

Their “favor” would generate additional television revenue off of week three and four preseason contests that go largely ignored. The 18-game season was a gambit intended to win the fans over to the owners’ side, though their self-interest in the matter is so blatant that there hasn’t been a tidal wave of “thank you” notes pouring into team headquarters from fans.

And what are the players asking for? The exact same deal that’s worked out so well for one and all for the past several years. And if things are not going so swell as the NFL claims, then full financial disclosure proving that this billion-dollar entertainment juggernaut is somehow just scrimping by.

I think only the folks at Arthur Andersen could produce books that say that, if you catch my drift.

The owners will probably win the standoff. First, they have more resources at their disposal from either their accrued wealth or from their other business endeavors.

By contrast, I would imagine quite a few players have lived beyond their means in the expectation that they will make more later. Or in the case of the extremely naïve, that they will actually see the full return on their incentive laden contracts.

Secondly, the owners can control the debate better than the players. They also have their own in-house spokesmen and media operation (the NFL Network). As there are only 32 owners, it’s easier for them to get on the same page while there are thousands of players out there who have had trouble reining in their tweets during football contests. To say nothing about their equally loose-lipped agents, who are also feeling the pinch.

Though times will be tight, I think the players can win this war of wills if they have discipline, curtail their personal spending and have everyone saying the same thing and nothing more, reminding the fans that unlike 1987, the players are not on strike but are being locked out by management.

Sports talk radio has simplified this dispute as a fight between billionaires and millionaires; I don’t think that’s fair since not all players see the big money. It’s about trusting but verifying and not surrendering ground just because the owners think this is a capital time to get a larger piece of the pie at the expense of shorter playing careers and defiling impressive statistical achievements by some of the games greats.

I often ask myself why I spend so much money annually to watch something in person when I could watch the same thing from the comfort of my home for free…and in the case of my nosebleed seats, with a better view as well.

There’s something about being there. When I pay my $70 or so per game ticket, I’m not just there witnessing, I’m participating. I’m making noise to disrupt an opposing offense’s huddle or contributing my fair share of racket to make the other team’s defensive line jump early. I go there to not only give energy but to immerse myself in it.

There’s an intangible I get from attending Saints games that can’t be described and it can’t be bottled. It can only be experienced.

As the owners begin sitting on our hard-earned money and obtusely dig in for a protracted hold out, they run the risk of hundreds of thousands of fans starting to ask themselves why they spend money there and not somewhere else. If you’re the NFL owners, that lucidity is no good, since they make billions off of our emotions.

Kill the season and you roll the dice on killing the magic.

Just like the MLB players did in the nineties.

I know baseball isn’t the NFL; but a long standoff might make people half the fans they used to be and it might be possible to measure that in dollars with enough financial data.

Is it wise to haggle over an extra billion on the front end if you end up losing billions on the back end?
We’re about to learn how stupid everyone is, owners, players and fans.

Primary Relevance: Repositioning Louisiana's Presidential Contest

2011-03-11T05:41:00.000-08:00

The concept behind the original Super Tuesday was to give southern moderate Democratic candidates a cluster of simultaneous primary victories and large delegate haul as a counter-balance to the disproportionately influential Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary.

Tennessee US Senator Al Gore was supposed to be the beneficiary of a day when 12 southern states voted in 1988.

The concept when initially put into practice had mixed results with Gore winning only five primaries while Jesse Jackson won just as many due to the black vote consolidating heavily behind his candidacy.

However in 1992, with no major black candidate in the race, southern Super Tuesday worked as planned as DLC leader and Arkansas governor Bill Clinton swept the six southern states that held primaries on that day.

By 1996 other states decided to challenge the southern Super Tuesday’s catbird seat. Eleven other states leapfrogged the now six state southern bloc, which was anchored by delegate rich Texas and Florida.

In 2000, southern Super Tuesday wasn’t so super anymore. Thirteen states, including California (the largest) and New York (the second largest), held their contests on the first Tuesday of March, which was when the nomination was decided. All told, 32 states held caucuses or primaries before the southern bloc went to the polls. Southern Super Tuesday had slid from deciding the nomination to ratifying a previously determined decision.

The same was true in the 2004 Democratic presidential primary as well.

Later in 2004, I initiated a push to move Louisiana’s presidential primary to an earlier date motivated by the longstanding irrelevancy of the state’s delegate contest. Though moving Louisiana’s presidential primary to an earlier date was important, so was the “company we kept” since it wouldn’t matter how early our primary was scheduled if we voted on the same day as either Texas or Florida.

Because Louisiana has its state and local elections on a Saturday, we had the flexibility to juxtapose our presidential primary on a non-traditional date.

Though 29 states were ahead of Louisiana’s primary, including the 20 states that held contests a few days before on the date the national parties mandated to be the first contest allowed, the Pelican State only had to compete with Kansas’ caucus on that day. And with both party nominations still up for grabs, Louisiana voters participated in a record Republican turnout and the highest Democratic turnout since the 1992 presidential primary.

Southern Super Tuesday was no more. Texas moved their primary up a week with Mississippi being the last southern state to still hold their primary on the second Tuesday in March.

In an effort to once again reform the manner in which presidential nominees are selected and to avoid the legal games that played out in the Obama v. Clinton procedural drama, both national parties issued new rules for 2012.

Under the new plan, jointly adopted by the DNC and RNC, any state that holds its primary or caucus to select delegates to the national conventions prior to the first Tuesday of March will lose half their delegates.

For Louisiana, that’s not an option since a 50% reduction in delegates would make the contest not worth an investment by most candidates no matter how early its held.

Since serving as a delegate to a national convention is a greatly coveted perquisite by contributors and activists, this policy is intended to bring a degree of order to the current chaos, though in actuality the DNC and RNC have merely reassigned the front-loading to a slightly later date.

In perhaps the most meaningful reform enacted by the national parties, states that hold their contests between the first Tuesday in March and March 31st have to allocate their delegates on a proportional basis. Those states holding their delegate selection on April 1st or later can have a winner take all system.

It should be noted that Iowa, New Hampshire, South Carolina and Nevada received protected status under the new rules as those states are the only ones free to hold their contests in February without penalty.

Under the new rules, it’s likely that states will pile on the first Tuesday in March and April 1st. And as April 1st falls on a Sunday in 2012, the likely big election day will be Tuesday, April 3rd.

In fact it’s almost certain that both parties’ nominations will be decided by the latter date as large states will try to leverage their delegate strength under a winner take all system.

Unfortunately for Louisiana, which will be losing its second congressional seat in three censuses, neither state party has enough delegates to matter much in a winner take all system. In fact, an April date would result in our primary once again returning to the role of ratifying decisions made by other states.

However, by moving to the first Saturday allowed by the national parties in March, Louisiana would be holding its primary before the nominations have been wrapped up.

Most importantly, candidates will have an interest in campaigning here since the major contenders will be assured of leaving the state with something (unlike the controversial system in 2008 where Mike Huckabee received a plurality of the vote but not a single delegate).

With the Louisiana primary held only a few days after the front-loaded first Tuesday in March primary date, the nomination will still be undecided, thus candidates will have to spend time here and educate themselves about federal issues that affect our state, specifically energy production and coastal erosion.

The difference between having the Louisiana presidential primary on the first Saturday following the first Tuesday in March versus any date in April is whether we want our state to matter enough for presidential candidates to visit and make commitments on the federal issues that affect our state versus reverting to our previous role as an irrelevant amen corner.

WH 2012: Roemer's Running

2011-03-03T23:06:00.000-08:00

I should have laid a few euros down with an Irish betting house that a Louisiana governor was going to seek the presidency in 2012.

Never mind that it’s not the Republican everyone expected to throw his hat in the ring.

Buddy Roemer, who last won an election in 1987- and didn’t receive an actual majority in that victory, announced on Thursday afternoon that he was forming a presidential exploratory committee- essentially declaring his intention to seek the Republican nod for the White House.

Amongst the local politicos, Roemer’s announcement has generated more than a few snickers.

What little national standing Roemer achieved as governor came at the expense of being a political asterisk during the 1991 gubernatorial election, better known as the “race from hell”.

Some have asked how can a man who couldn’t beat out a klansman and a crook for a spot in a gubernatorial runoff win the presidency?

Fair question and one that Roemer is going to have to get used to answering as he strives to establish himself as a credible contender.

Roemer attempted a comeback four years later though finished fourth for governor, which was his last bid for public office.

So why is Roemer running?

Did he get bit by the presidential bug while serving as one of John McCain’s surrogates in 2008?

Or is this Roemer finally getting around to chasing an ambition of what “might have been” in 1996 if the 1991 election had had a happy ending?

Is this the Roemer equivalent of a middle-aged man buying the Harley his mother and later first wife wouldn’t let him have.

Before the unpleasantness of 1991 Roemer, along with neighboring governors Bill Clinton of Arkansas and Ray Mabus of Mississippi, were considered “new south moderates” on the rise though only Clinton remained in office in 1992.

I believe a large part of what’s driving Roemer is simply that the bookish ex-governor has something to say about the state of things in America and wishes to be a part of the discussion.

Should anyone take Roemer seriously?

First, the current GOP likely presidential candidate field is weak. Not as awful as the pool from 2008, but not strong either. Though former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney is the leading candidate, he doesn’t occupy the catbird seat that Reagan had in 1980, Bush had in 1988 or even Dole had in 1996.

Secondly, Roemer represents that rare breed of politicians who have had success in the private sector. One of the strongest arguments made for Romney by his partisans is the need for a nominee with business experience. Roemer has that minus the RomneyCare baggage.

Third, Roemer is a gifted orator. As a former governor, Roemer will enjoy the same courtesy the media afforded ex-US Senator Mike Gravel during his longshot bid for the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008. In other words, he’ll be a part of the conversation via debate invitations where the silver-tongued Roemer will have an opportunity to carve out a niche for himself.

Though those invitations will start to drop off if the Roemer campaign doesn’t pick up.

Roemer will have to make the transition from being an agreeable speaker to a viable candidate in either Iowa or New Hampshire. By the time South Carolina’s primary rolls around it will be too late.

Beyond his shaky record as a candidate, Roemer is going to have to make something happen on a shoestring budget as he limited donations to individual contributions of no more than $100.

By doing so, Roemer is making a play to become the campaign finance reform candidate. The problem is that “c-note” candidates don’t win. Ask Jerry Brown, who tried the same thing in 1992. Furthermore, the voters simply don’t care about the issue.

McCain mightily tried to make the electorate care when he unwisely stood by his pledge to accept matching funds while Barack Obama used to a weak justification to expediently jettison his previous promise to do so.

Of the 59,950,323 votes McCain received, I would wager that not a single one appeared in his column because of Obama’s decision to engage in unlimited fundraising.

And it should be noted that Karl Rove cited McCain’s refusal to financially compete with Obama as a reason why the Republican lost so badly.

Odds are that Roemer’s candidacy will come to little more than tilting in Iowa cornfields.

But the man who suffered the ignominy of losing to Duke and Edwards also handed the most skilled Louisiana politician since Huey Long his lone defeat four years before. En route to that victory, Roemer also vaulted over US Representatives of some standing, future speaker-elect Bob Livingston and Billy Tauzin.

The man who humbled Edwards started that race in last place with 2%. And like the 1987 contest, Roemer isn’t going into 2012 as the favorite.

Just a bit of disclosure here as I kicked in $100 to the Roemer effort via his website, www.BuddyRoemer.com. My first choice for president is currently a non-candidate, New Jersey governor Chris Christie- the only person on the radar that I think can defeat Obama, but more on that later.

While I don’t agree with some of the points he made in his announcement, Roemer is a smart guy who is going to make the early debates interesting. Furthermore, I hope he will shift his rhetorical gears to focus on economic matters that need to be discussed before a national audience.

A good presidential candidate should not neglect educating the public while in the pursuit of winning votes.

In the event I cover a Roemer event or interview the former governor, I will do so objectively.

News and Boos: The 2011 CPAC Notebook

2011-02-15T19:33:00.001-08:00

The American Conservative Union Foundation celebrated the success of 2011’s CPAC event, touted as the annual gathering of conservative leaders from around the country and more than a few from around the globe as well.

There’s no denying the muscle the event’s organizers flexed with over 11,000 registrants (not be confused with actual attendees- more on the difference later) and having hosted all but a handful of the candidates likely to seek the Republican nomination in next year’s primaries and caucuses.

Yet the piece of news that always gets the most publicity is the conference’s presidential and issue straw poll results.

And the winner is/was…

Not the guy who received the most votes.

Seriously.

One really can’t say that the CPAC straw poll is rigged. But it’s most certainly bought.

There was little doubt that Texas US Representative and outspoken libertarian Ron Paul was going to win the ballot, with only the percentage (30%) uncertain until the numbers were released.

The conference teemed with teens sporting Campaign for Liberty stickers, which might as well have read “Paul 2012” since the congressman founded the organization which beats the drum for Paul’s agenda when he’s not running for the White House.

The Paulistas (I don’t like using the negative sobriquet assigned to Paul supporters) have a knack for winning straw polls (aside from the one that seems to really matter in Ames Iowa) though have no such luck in winning actual primaries and caucuses.

Ex-Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who had a PAC presence that was also thinly veiled as a presidential campaign committee, ran second with 23%. The Romney folk also like to “invest” in straw polls, as was evident when free registrations, books and other swag were offered to attendees at last year’s Southern Republican Leadership Conference in New Orleans. I don’t have documentation that they tried doing the same thing at the 2011 CPAC but I think it would be a fair assumption.

In addition to handing out lapel stickers with a logo that one can just easily visualize on a campaign yard sign, the Romney people were also distributing “Believe in America” stickers that looked oh so similar to Barack Obama’s “Change you can believe in” placard from 2008. I don’t like where this is going.
Third place finisher and ex-New Mexico governor Gary Johnson garnered 6% and I did see his “investment” before my eyes as his PAC booth had a box brimming with pre-paid registration credentials. One has to believe they were not acquired for the purpose of ensuring a packed house for the Grass Roots Activists Two-Minute Panel.

Johnson was not as coy with his intentions with signs that read “Gov. Gary Johnson for President” and “Gary Johnson Rocks!”. Actually “someone” had these signs and stickers made as the beneficiary of such boosting pleaded ignorance on who would go through such great lengths on his behalf. The Johnson and Paul people are cut largely from the same libertarian cloth though the former tend to be far less intense than the latter.

The real winner of the straw poll, who also received 6%, was someone who didn’t even speak at the event and has renounced a run for the presidency in 2012: New Jersey governor Chris Christie.

Considering how much pandering and vote hauling that was happening at CPAC it’s impressive that a non-candidate would not only run third but also finish ahead of ten people who did participate in the conference and for the most part have higher profiles.

I’ll cover Newt’s “Acura” cake next time.

The Campaign for Catcalls?

Ex-Vice-President Dick Cheney was on hand to present his former boss/employee Don Rumsfeld an award. Unfortunately for both, they were not as appreciated by those in the audience as they are by conference’s organizers. Cheney and the former two-time Pentagon chief received resounding boos and catcalls throughout the presentation.

Prior to the presentation, a large walk-out took place, not motivated by a need to use the restroom though more than a few decided to stick around to voice their displeasure.

Most of the boos came from Campaign for Liberty supporters with a few having to be dragged out of the main ballroom for screaming “war criminal” and “draft dodger” amongst other taunts.
When I asked David Keene, the event chairman, about how Rumsfeld reacted to being treated like a heel pro-wrestler, Keene grinned that Rummy loved it.

The Incredible Shrinking Party

2011-02-01T19:58:00.000-08:00

July 16, 2005 marked a nadir for the Louisiana GOP. On that day, longtime Republican Secretary of State Fox McKeithen died from the severe injuries he suffered from a fall.

McKeithen was a unique politician, possessing what veteran politico Gus Weil called “a Democratic personality and a Republican philosophy”. McKeithen was the son of a two-term Democratic governor and won the office of Secretary of State as a Democrat before switching before the end of his first term.

McKeithen survived the disastrous 1991 election by a scant margin and was invited by Governor Edwin Edwards to rejoin the Democratic fold. McKeithen declined and would win re-election on three more times, including in 2003, when he once again was the lone Republican to win on the statewide level. After McKeithen’s death, Democrat Al Ater took over his post giving the party a monopoly on all of the statewide elected offices for the first time since 1988.

Governor Kathleen Babineaux Blanco had control of the legislature, with each house run by Democrats of her liking, and was headed to a likely re-election. On August 28, 2005 Louisiana was the exception to the GOP southern rule.

And then Hurricane Katrina hit and the Louisiana Democratic Party started to die shortly thereafter.

The first tumble was in February 2006 with the resignation of Insurance Commissioner Robert Wooley, who was succeeded by his deputy, ex-state representative Jim Donelon, a Republican.

In a special election that fall, Republican state senator Jay Dardenne won a special election to replace interim-Secretary of State Ater.

Things got progressively worse for the party in 2007. Recognizing the toll that her mismanagement of Katrina had taken on her political prospects, Blanco, with over $3,000,000 in her campaign warchest, announced she would not seek re-election.

Democrats, incredibly oblivious to Blanco’s weakness as a candidate, engaged in a mad scramble. The most logical candidate was Democratic US Representative Charles Melancon. The former sugar cane industry lobbyist had proven himself to be a strong campaigner winning two tough elections in a conservative district in a part of the state that provides the margin of victory for statewide candidates locked in close races.

But Melancon, whose aides had communicated that he was up to the fight, was unceremoniously trumped by former US Senator John Breaux.

Though a successful statewide candidate who enjoyed strong bipartisan support in his previous two reelection bids, Breaux faced in insurmountable obstacle: he wasn’t a resident of Louisiana anymore.

After a one-sided public debate on what constitutes Louisiana citizenship, the Breaux trial-balloon deflated as did his party’s chances of holding on to the governor’s mansion against Republican congressman Bobby Jindal, who was making his second try for the post.

Jindal scored 54% against eleven opponents, with only three of them being considered formidable. Jindal led his closest rival by 37 percentage points with the combined Democratic vote total being 30%, the party’s worst showing since Reconstruction.

Along with the Jindal landslide came a slew of new reform-oriented state representatives and senators. Despite lacking a majority in either house of the legislature, enough members of the GOP were elected to enable Jindal to anoint a Republican as Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Prior to state qualifying, incumbent state treasurer John N. Kennedy, another poitential Jindal opponent but whose relations with the state Democratic Party had been consistently stormy, joined the GOP.

Republican incumbents easily retained the offices of Secretary of State, Treasurer and Insurance Commissioner. A down ballot pick up truly underscored that these were different times when Republican veterinarian and state representative Mike Strain ousted Bob Odom for Agricultural Commissioner.

Though the post he held never registered high on the public’s radar screen, Odom was considered the de facto leader of the Louisiana Democratic Party by virtue of his tenure, which stretched back to the seventies, and his considerable influence on their state committee, which was greater than Blanco and Breaux’s combined.

2008 was a mixed bag for the Democrats in Louisiana. US Senator Mary Landrieu survived yet another tough re-election bid though John McCain lost his presidential bid in a rout, the Republican nominee won Louisiana’s nine electoral votes crushing Democratic candidate Barack Obama by a 59%-40% margin.

In congressional elections that were postponed due to Hurricane Gustav, Republicans narrowly held on to the Shreveport US Representative seat vacated by Jim McCrery and amazingly picked up the second congressional district when Joseph Cao, a refugee from South Vietnam’s fall to the Communists, ousted the scandal plagued Bill Jefferson.

The month before Republicans took back the Baton Rouge seat that they had lost to the Democrats in a special election earlier in 2008 making it the shortest hold by the party since Rick Tonry's term in 1977.

If Katrina was the death rattle for the Democrats in state government, the Obama Administration would serve as the jazz funeral.

Between the poor economy, his bold advancement of an agenda disagreeable to the Louisiana electorate and his mishandling of the BP oil spill on the public relations and policy (the drilling moratorium) fronts, Obama poisoned the political waters for his fellow Democrats in Louisiana.

Mocked by conservatives for his accomplishment padding “jobs saved” boast, there’s no question that Obama managed to save at least one job: David Vitter’s.

The same day Vitter achieved the most remarkable political resurrection since Edwin Edwards’ 1991 comeback, the GOP picked up the lieutenant governor’s office for the first time since 1992 and the US Representative seat from the Third District. The only glimmer of good news for the Democrats that day was in the minority-majority Second District, where political reality reasserted itself at the expense of Cao.

Though qualifying for the 2011 elections isn’t until September, the bleeding hasn’t stopped for Louisiana Democrats. Party switches by state legislators have given the GOP its first post-Reconstruction majority in the state House of Representatives and a special election for a vacant senate seat could provide a Republican majority in the upper chamber by the end of the month.

And if not then, the GOP will almost assuredly have majorities in both houses of the legislature after the state elections are dispensed with.

And now for the final insult as word has emerged that the final Democratic holdout in statewide office, Attorney General Buddy Caldwell, will change his party affiliation before the end of the week.

If Caldwell, who opposed ObamaCare in his capacity as attorney general, does bolt, the Louisiana Democratic Party will continue its devolution into what the Louisiana GOP was during the Charlton Lyons era- a regional entity, not a state force.

With 2011 not looking to fare any better for Democrats than 2010 and her capacity to deliver for her state undermined by the current Democratic White House, it’s unlikely Mary Landrieu will be a US Senator in 2015, either by her choice or that of the voters.

In 1972, new registrants were warned that if they joined the Republican Party, they would have no vote because almost all races would be decided in the closed Democratic primary.

Thirty-nine years later in a very different political environment it would seem that a Democratic politician with statewide ambitions has no chance.

SotU 2011: What Oil Spill?

2011-01-25T22:46:00.000-08:00

If you’re a gay marine or a Chilean miner, you got some love from the Big O on Tuesday evening.

But there was no love to be found for Louisiana and the gulfcoast in President Barack Obama’s 2011 State of the Union address.

The president’s speech was chock full of his trademark lofty rhetoric that also included references to renewable energy, the end of the military’s rules on gay servicemen and women, previously mentioned trade agreements and increased government spending.

Hell even sputnik made it in, though the mention was ironic since Obama has cut NASA’s budget.

Not even a year ago, an environmental catastrophe took place that claimed the lives of 11 offshore oil platform workers, dumped over 200,000,000 gallons of crude oil in the Gulf of Mexico that damaged our fragile wetlands, spoiled hundreds of miles of beaches and endangered the livelihoods of thousands of fishermen.

It was Three Mile Island on the bayou.

Yet the magnitude of the disaster and the plight of the out of work petroleum engineer, bankrupt oyster harvester and contaminated porpoise ended up on the cutting room floor of his speech writer…assuming it even got that far.

In a press release issued within minutes of the conclusion of the State of the Union, the Louisiana Republican Party pointed out that Obama’s 6,826 word address contained 184 words about the rescue of the Chilean miners yet not a single mention about the Deepwater Horizon disaster and the resulting environmental and economic fallout that followed the explosion.

Sure, the president found the time to curse the darkness of oil industry profits, but failed to use his annual big speech to light a candle about the need for the federal government to rebuild the Louisiana coastline, which had been chopped to shreds for decades to satisfy the nation’s energy needs and maritime commerce.

President George W. Bush was rightly criticized after his 2007 State of the Union when he failed to mention either Hurricane Katrina or the south Louisiana and coastal Mississippi communities still struggling to recover from the most destructive tropical cyclone in American history.

Will there be catcalls beyond the Louisiana border for Obama’s snub?

The Obama Administration’s lack of leadership and poor response to the oil spill is his Katrina. It is a milestone of failure for his administration that unnerved his liberal base that assumed they were getting competency along with hope.

Perhaps the most naïve in our state were hoping to hear something about an aggressive wetlands restoration effort that reverse coastal erosion that increases Louisiana’s vulnerability to hurricane storm surge. But that costs money, money that could be better spent in blue or purple states.

The president has callously exploited the environmental catastrophe to advance his anti-oil energy agenda and his administration has played legal and rhetorical games regarding the resumption of offshore oil exploration in the Gulf of Mexico, which has hurt the region’s economy while contributing to the escalation in the price of oil.

That Obama had the temerity to talk about Americans competing for jobs in the global market is especially galling, as his ideologically rooted energy policy has sent jobs overseas. The bureaucratic skirmishes involving exploration permits have caused oil companies to lose the confidence necessary to make substantial investments in domestic energy production.

Obama obviously hopes the oil spill with all of its negative press will simply go away. And to some degree it has, temporarily camouflaged by the continued bad job market. However it’ll be there to greet him at the voting booth and/or later in the history books.

Conservative media mocked then-candidate Obama for his 57-state flub while he was on the campaign trail. As president, Obama has governed as if there are fewer states in the Union as they are stars on the flag.

And we thought the picture of W peering out the window of Air Force One was in bad taste; at least Bush was looking in the direction of Louisiana.

End of an Error at the RNC

2011-01-18T21:25:00.001-08:00

After the nationwide Republican debacle two years ago, I thought the Republican Party needed to mix things up.

My first choice to lead the Republican National Committee was Newt Gingrich. While his time as speaker was marred with public relation blunder after another, nobody questioned his genius as the leader of the historic conservative insurgency.

After the party had gone stale with the public as George W. Bush’s administration drew to a close, I felt Newt, who was a better revolutionary than an administrator, was the right man to develop and execute the GOP Comeback 2.0.

However, I felt there was little chance of this happening. If Newt wanted the position of RNC chairman, I had no doubt he would have secured it from the committee members with only slightly more fuss as when the national GOP governing body rubber-stamps White House-anointed chairmen.

The question was a matter of Newt accepting it for financial reasons. The job would mark a significant pay decrease and would remove him from the numerous projects and organizations he plays a key role in.

Newt punted on the idea not along after grassroots types publicly entertained it.

My next choice was the ex-lieutenant governor of Maryland, who had just lost a bruising bid for the US Senate.

On first glance, Michael Steele seemed perfect as the antithesis of the past half dozen or so RNC chairmen. The Republican Party needed to turn the corner in this new political era, aggressively breaking out of the country club stereotype.

Before clambering aboard the Steele bandwagon, I put in a call to a Maryland political operative who had dealings with him to confirm my hopes.

Instead of doing that, my source dumped a load of stories of organizational mismanagement and cronyism that would negate whatever “pop” the GOP would receive for having its first non-traditional (i.e. white male) chairman.

I went from supporting Steele to backing “Anyone But”.

During the multiple ballots that took place at the first “free” RNC election since 1998, South Carolina Republican Party chairman Katon Dawson emerged as the primary rival to Steele’s candidacy.

And here was where the Republican establishment decided to act like Jesse Jackson.

A “well poisoning” campaign was launched to portray Dawson as the “klan candidate” for having been a member of an all-white country club in his homestate.

That Dawson publicly called for the facility to end its exclusivity meant nothing to the powers that be, arguing that a Dawson election would be “spun” negatively by the media in the aftermath of the historic Obama victory.

Lord, I thought, no wonder McCain lost.

These fools never learned the lessons/consequences of putting faith in media fairness and trying to accommodate the fickle fancies of the fourth estate.

And what was the result of this gambit where “public relations points” trumped competence?

The establishment once again displayed their political ignorance and got exactly what they deserved.

The man they helped elect by unfairly demonizing his principal opponent had become public enemy number one.

Though the Republican Party achieved great success in the 2009 and 2010 midterm elections, there was considerable debate concerning how much credit should be shared with Steele.

Money was largely steered around the RNC in 2010 and Steele proved to be gaffe prone when he wasn’t running the Republican National Committee in the same manner that Kwame Kilpatrick ran Detroit.

Sweetheart deals related to the 2012 Republican National Convention in Tampa, a number of marginal GOP losses that could have gone the other way through better funding allocation decisions and a debt to the tune of $21,000,000 are the indisputable legacies of an individual who was selected for the wrong reasons to head a national political party.

The best thing that could be said about Steele was that he actively engaged the local and state parties and the auxiliary organizations.

It’s unlikely any RNC chairmen visited with the national Young Republicans more than Steele, in contrast to Ken Mehlman, who “bothered” to speak to the national YRs for only a few minutes and referred to them as the College Republicans (a different organization) throughout his hurried visit.

Hopefully newly elected Republican chairman Reince Priebus of Wisconsin will not spurn the grassroots folks while bringing stability to the national party and reassuring contributors that their dollars will be responsibly spent.

The RNC doesn’t need another Michael Steele pulling the levers; but they don’t need another Ken Mehlman either.

Liberal Libels and Loughner's Madness

2011-01-12T21:13:00.000-08:00

Attention Paul Krugman: sick people with an inclination for violence can do terrible things.

Apparently someone with your expensive educational background, Nobel-lauded brain and Hollywood toilet-film supporting actor (appearing in that highbrow gem- Get Him to the Greek) doesn’t understand a concept so simple and plain.

Krugman, an economist by trade, has proven himself quite the leftist political hack in his bloviations on The New York Times editorial page, but then he pushed the envelope one nudge too far.

On January 9th, only a day after Democratic Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was seriously wounded by a point blank shot in the head and six others, including a nine year old girl who aspired to one day serve the public and a Republican-appointed federal judge, were killed by 22 year old Jared Loughner, Krugman took his own rhetorical shots.

The gist of Krugman’s screed is that conservatives are easily incited to violence through their demagogic media figures. Krugman goes on to accuse Bill O’Reilly and Glenn Beck of making jokes about shooting government officials while giving a pass to the left’s leading blowhard Keith Olbermann.

I find this ironic as Olbermann is perhaps the most hate-filled vitriolic television commentator outside of public-access cable, but back to the more educated slinger of vitriol.

Rather than go through the trouble of taking the time to discover who Loughner is or have the patience to learn of an established motive for the massacre, Krugman demonstrated he lacked journalistic professionalism and class by following Rahm Emanuel’s mantra of never letting a crisis go to waste to twist the tragedy to advance his political agenda and smear those who not share his philosophy, directly leaving the blame for the shootings on the doorstep of the GOP.

In doing so, Krugman not only libels the Republican Party (and thus its members) but by default elevates the shooter on the same level as the English knights who murdered the Archbishop of Canterbury after hearing King Henry II cry out “will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?”

Those with blood on their hands were malleable men merely following orders of higher-ups who didn’t watch what they said.

Loughner would only be too lucky to have Krugman testify for the defense.

What we know about Loughner NOW after the media’s fog of lies dissipated is that he was a drug user, a 9-11 “truther” and a nihilist.

Hardly the stuff of a card-carrying member of the Republican Party.

Loughner also believes that Christianity is a creation to better control society, which is a Marxist concept. But I don’t think philosophy had anything to do with what he did.

Loughner’s actions are merely the manifestation of his madness.

One former friend claimed that Loughner’s resentment of Giffords was in part to her being “fake”, a possible motive that harkens to another high profile murder that took place decades before outside the Dakota Apartments in Manhattan.

Psychiatrist Daniel Schwartz testified at the trial of Mark David Chapman that John Lennon’s murderer was driven to commit his crime because Chapman thought the musician was a phony.

Chapman made no secret of his self-identification with Holden Caulfield, the cynical, sanctimonious teenage character from the book The Catcher in the Rye. He even wrote a note saying as much in a copy of the book Chapman left to be discovered by the police.

Yet J.D. Sallinger was no more responsible for John Lennon’s death as Sarah Palin, Beck, O’Reilly, et al were for what transpired in Arizona.

Sifting for reason in this tragedy is a fool’s errand, yet that doesn’t stop the leftist media from mightily trying to discover where the flow chart connection is between Loughner and the TEA Party movement.

Liberals are inclined to believe that all that is evil in world is preventable, from poverty to sickness to bad weather to violence.

All that needs to be done is to better control society from eating certain foods, owning certain things, drive certain cars and most importantly thinking and saying certain things.

Conservatives, trusting tradition, history and common sense over Ivy League learning, know that this is simply not so.

The only thing that could have been done to stop Loughner is someone else there with a gun.

Jared Loughner, just as Charles David Whitman and Chapman before him, chose to do something terrible and senseless on January 8th, coaxed to act only his irrational inner demons.

It is absurd to even imply that a political action committee website with targets over competitive legislative districts contributed to the terrible violence. But such a theory was seriously offered for public consumption before being rejected on its merits, or lack thereof.

Krugman and his fellow exploiter of tragedy Clarence Dupnik, the sheriff who concocted that Loughner was motivated by the conservative media, have disrespected the slain and those who were scarred physically and emotionally through their own irresponsible comments by injecting partisan politics into the story.

Krugman’s caustic commentary doesn’t incite violence but disgust. Sane America sees what happened in Arizona as a senseless tragedy and not a soapbox to demonize political opponents.

Jindal Down in Poll. But Far from Out

2010-11-30T19:07:00.000-08:00

It seems that the S.S. Jindal has taken on some water according to the latest poll from Southern Media and Opinion Research survey on statewide officials.

Governor Bobby Jindal, who had spent a considerable amount of time on the campaign trail for Republican candidates across the country (Louisiana excepted) and has recently been touring the nation promoting a book he wrote on leadership, saw his poll numbers fall significantly, an indication that a sizable portion of the Louisiana electorate is not enamored with his out of state travels.

According to the SMOR data, Jindal’s approval rating stood at 55%, a six point dip since the last survey the Baton Rouge-based polling company performed in the spring. Matching Jindal’s popularity dip was the rise in his negative rating, which climbed to 43%.

Jindal’s SMOR poll numbers have tumbled considerably since the spring of 2009, where the governor enjoyed a high, if not unrealistically so, 68% approval rating with a 30% negative rating.

At first glance, the most troubling aspect of the poll for Jindal is that only 39% of respondents said they would definitely vote to re-elect him with 35% stating they would definitely vote for someone else. However, as 35% is about the state’s hardcore Democratic vote, that number isn’t as astonishing as it might appear. In fact it’s automatic opposition to any candidate with an “R” next to his or her name.

Jindal has been flayed in the local press for being out of state so much during very dire budget times with the most stinging hit coming courtesy of the LSU student government president who used mocking letters to the editor in newspapers in states that hold early presidential primaries and caucuses to slam the governor for his extracurricular political activities beyond Louisiana and for the expected severe hit to the state’s higher education budget.

The governor’s numbers have also been affected by the constant speculation that he will run for president, despite Jindal’s constant claims he will not be a candidate. Once Jindal’s bid for re-election as governor begins, concerns about his presidential aspirations, at least in 2012, will be quelled and resentment for his out of state travels will subside when people see him in Bunkie instead of Des Moines.

Jindal’s lower approval rating isn’t politically terminal. The governor has raised an astounding $8,000,000 after three years of constant fundraising in Louisiana and beyond. A challenger is going to have a hard time putting together even half that amount, especially almost exclusively in-state.

As one of the GOP’s rising stars, Jindal parlayed his celebrity status to attract dollars to his campaign from people in other states that normally wouldn’t care about who wins governor of Louisiana. Jindal’s Democratic “Opponent To Be Named Later” is going to have a hard time getting someone in Delaware to spend $1,000 on a photo op with him or her.

In all likelihood, Jindal will have the capacity to spend $2 defining his opponent for every $1 he or she spends just trying to build name recognition.

And who is the Democrat “Opponent to Be Named Later” going to be? The Baton Rouge Advocate recently did an article on potential Democratic challengers with none committing to the race beyond “consideration” and two in particular offering clever quips renouncing even the prospect of running.

And while first time candidate Caroline Fayard proved that quasi-self-financing with generous sums of money is one way to pole vault over better established politicians in the primary, the end result was being on the wrong side of a runoff landslide against a candidate she outspent by a wide-margin.

And I should add, that was for an office the public doesn’t really care about.

Jindal’s most vocal critic is a fellow Republican, State Treasurer John Kennedy, who has sparred with the fourth floor in the press over the budget.

Kennedy, who has the highest approval rating of the officials polled at 61%, is not expected to challenge Jindal, with a source close to the treasurer stating, “John has the job he wants”.

And though stern words have been exchanged between the two Republicans, Jindal is in no danger of losing his core GOP base- that being the same bloc of voters responsible for dispatching the last Republican governor that lost re-election.

Though Jindal’s poll numbers have fallen and might fall even further as the budget battle becomes more public and protracted, until he draws an opponent who can match his well-stocked warchest and convince Louisiana voters that had just overwhelmingly embraced the Republican ticket to swing back to the Democratic Party, the governor goes into the election year a heavy favorite for a primary win.

Seasons' Greetings, Gropings and Scannings!

2010-11-23T20:22:00.000-08:00

The day before Thanksgiving marks the busiest travel time in the country as millions of younger Americans return to their roots to celebrate with their families that most unique of our holidays.

But the route between their new home and their old home will be marked with traffic snarls and lines at the airport.

The former because we own so many cars (no need to apologize) and the latter because our country is so large and our population so mobile, passenger air service makes it convenient and in some cases necessary.

But in 2010, those lines at the airport are going to be longer. A lot longer.

And for that, we can thank Osama Bin Laden and his stooge disciples, the bumbling shoe and underwear bombers in particular.

The 9-11 hijackers utilized box cutters and fear that they were armed with something more potent to manifest their martyrdom and murder.

In December 2001, Richard Reid used something a more technical in his attempt: 10 ounces of C-4 plastic explosives hidden in his shoes. Thankfully, Reid wasn’t that bright. He apparently wore the shoes around, which either absorbed moisture or got wet in the rain, and thus he had trouble detonating the shoe bombs. Also deserving of credit are passengers and flight attendants who physically subdued Reid while in the act of trying to light the fuse.

Had Reid succeeded, the explosives would have done enough damage to bring down the transatlantic flight.

Mr. Reid is the reason why we must all shuffle about airport screening areas in our socks so our shoes can be checked through x-ray machines to see if they’ve been hallowed out.

Four years later British intelligence exposed a plot to smuggle explosives in gel form concealed in sports drinks on to transoceanic flights in an attempt to simultaneously blow up the planes while over the Atlantic. This plot was nipped in the bud before it was near execution and dozens of people were arrested. One of those conspirators had wide-ranging access at London’s Heathrow Airport.

They are the reason why we must buy mini-sized toothpastes, shampoo and mouthwash and stick them in zip lock bags if we don’t check baggage (something people try to avoid due to fees) and why if we’re thirsty, we have to pay near baseball stadium prices on bottled water and sodas on the other side of the security screening area.

And then there is Nigerian national Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, AKA the underwear bomber.

A child of privilege, the highly educated Abdulmu…no, he doesn’t deserve to be known by his name…he shall henceforth be referred to as the “panty popper”…decided to end it all for himself and 289 people on Christmas Day 2009 on a flight from Amsterdam to Detroit.

Unlike Reid, who tried to blow the plane up in front of everyone- perhaps a sign that he was hoping someone would save him from himself, the “panty popper” set his plan in motion as the Northwest Airlines Flight 253 neared Detroit away from prying eyes in the privy.

Once again, luck was on the side of the passengers as the explosive device didn’t work as planned with the “panty popper” setting his leg and part of the plane’s interior wall on fire.

A Dutch passenger tackled the would be martyr while flight attendants (who seem to provide more of a service than just providing people drinks) extinguished the flames. The “panty popper” had chemical explosives sewn into his underwear, which a standard metal detector would not pick up.

In other words, the “panty popper” used a smuggling technique not too far removed from that employed by my fraternity brothers who wished to secret whiskey in Tiger Stadium: liquids in plastic packaging hidden in an area nobody was likely to check.

And it is thanks to the “panty popper” we must all be zapped in a giant clear chamber that checks under our clothes, in our body crevices, douses with radiation and maybe makes us become sympathetic to the approaching out of space visitors looking to take over Earth.

It is this latest indignity that has people angry, as people tend to link radiation with cancer, with most people believing the alternative is letting a low level government employee getting to second base on us.

Well folks, I have some bad news: last week I got the Bruce Banner treatment and had to be groped anyway. In other words, it’s not an either/or.

Such treatment has led folks to angrily quote the Declaration of Independence, Sean Hannity, Edmund Burke and Ron Paul at high volumes in the presence of TSA workers, whom I imagine more than a few are happy to no longer be employed at Walmart.

In a recent column, George Will opined that the elaborately intrusive TSA screening system is theatre intended more to reassure than protect. To a degree he’s right.

Notice how the security policies come AFTER the failed or foiled attempts. In other words, the government agencies are reacting to and not anticipating for Al-Qaeda’s end around plays.

That’s the part that bothers me the most.

But it does provide a modicum of protection against the acts of terrorism by making things more complicated for the bay guys. Remember how easy Mohamed Atta & Co. had it, walking right on board with weapons? Now things are as complicated for the terrorists are they are for travelers.

No walking in with sharp objects (or knitting needles). No plastique (or silly putty for junior). No gel-based explosives (or hair gel for those who must have managed hair). And no chemical based liquid accelerants (or that bottle of Aquafina I bought at the Exxon for 99 cents).

And with the new scanners that can peep anywhere except our souls, no smuggling any of those things in an uncomfortable place. And I’m not talking about the backseat of a Volkswagen.

So if terrorists are largely prevented from running things through the actual checkpoints, then they need to expand their conspiracy…which increases the chances of a bust via someone with second-thoughts, a heavy conscience, a girlfriend who talks too much and/or a sleeper agent.

And the cost of this added layer of protection/irritation?

According to an AP story that ran on the frontpage of last Friday’s Wyoming Tribune Eagle (Cheyenne), $175,000 per scanner.

From my personal experience, removing every little thing from your pockets. Everything.

So your wallet, money clip, lucky fava beans, etc. makes it through the x-ray machine before you make it through the ray-gun booth. That had me sweating more than the microwaves running through my body.

According to the article in the aforementioned daily, there are two kinds of scanners: the millimeter wave units and the backscatter variety. The former emits a weak radiation that is harmless; the latter emits X-ray like radiation, which experts claim are insignificant.

How insignificant might you ask? It’s less radiation than one is exposed to during a dental x-ray or from flying in the plane itself, which receives a big dose of it from being closer to the sun’s rays.

Each machine can scan 350 people an hour. Optimally.
As the technology is new, the TSA people not overly skilled in its operation and travelers ornery, things don’t go so smoothly.

For example, while boarding a flight to Denver the early morning line at Moisant’s Southwest gate (one of the faster security lines) stretched to the gift shop. After waiting patiently, I finally went into the booth, was zapped and then I had to stand there. Two people ahead of me was a guy that needed to be checked, necessitating a male “toucher”. After he was give the once over, I was stuck standing in the booth as the next person head of me was female and needed to be vetted by a female so the first checker had to go back.

I was out of the booth when I had to wait again as, you guessed it, the male checker had to come back. After being patted down, I scampered to my flight gate with belt, possessions and shoes not in their usual places. My high “B” number made academic by the security gate delay as almost all of the other passengers were already on board.

Rather than having separate scanners for male and female with appropriate staff to do the mandatory body checks (which seems unnecessary since the scanner should pick up more than a hand feel), the TSA check was a Three Stooges operation.

So if you’re one of those people traveling this Thanksgiving week (or any other week in this new reality of ours), allow me to share some advice.

1) Add another hour, thirty minutes minimum, to your airport arrival. What used to take less than 30 minutes will take an hour, etc. The TSA isn’t familiar with the new machinery and you have to remove a lot more now, so that’s going to back things up.

2) Save the drama for your congressman. The TSA people don’t make the rules, they just clumsily enforce them. Rather than quoting the second hour segments of radio talk show hosts who rant about the TSA but fly on private jets, bear it (you’re not obligated to grin). If you don’t like it, don’t fly and/or write your congressman and US Senators. But please do not cause a scene. Making the family behind you miss their flight isn’t being patriotic just because you’re pissed off. Really. How much more different is being disruptive in the airport security line than it was for those anti-war protestors in San Francisco who unwisely decided to recklessly block thoroughfares to vent their spleens about George W. Bush? Not a whole lot. Blog. Write. Phone in your protests. But don’t go Patrick Henry on TSA workers unless you have a lawyer with too much free time on his or her hands.

3) If you request to not go through the scanner, expect to be thoroughly groped. The bomber who could be behind you in line doesn’t want to go through the scanner either, but for different reasons as terminal illness isn’t much of a concern.

While there are more ways for terrorists to strike at our country than simply bringing down planes, airports are a favorite target. And even the most comprehensive security measures cannot fully protect people. The precautions that have been put in place are not the best, but are simply the best available. However, the pre-existing screening devices and systems that were previously in place didn’t do the job and we can’t count on Al-Qaeda to always send in bumbling agents to do their bidding.

The Early Call: Landry to Win, Vitter, Dardenne Start Strong

2010-11-02T18:20:00.000-07:00

The early returns from Saint Bernard show that Republican Jeff Landry will cruise to an easy election in the Third Congressional District.

Landry won 70% of the early vote to Democrat Ravi Sangisetty's 30%.

Also starting with a lead are Republicans Jay Dardenne and David Vitter. Democratic Congressman Charlie Melancon, who represents Saint Bernard in Congress, received 35% in the first numbers reported. Dardenne ran ahead of Democrat Caroline Fayard, 60% to 40%.

The Early Call: Saint Bernard Parish Turnout

2010-11-02T16:42:00.001-07:00

Turnout in the suburban parish of Saint Bernard has reached 22% as of 6 PM. Black turnout is keeping on par with the average, a sign that a key component of the Democratic Party's base is motivated in the mid-term election.

The first results will be posted here at 8 PM.

Election 2010: Oh, How Far the GOP Will Go?!

2010-11-02T00:07:00.000-07:00

1994 was somewhat of a surprise.

While many Republicans expected the US Senate to swing to the GOP, not many people expected the party to retake of the US House of Representatives, which hadn’t been under Republican control since the early days of the Eisenhower Administration.

Though only 16 years removed, the world was a very different place. Information mainly flowed through newspapers, radio and television, with the internet being a novelty with rough graphics and slow speed.

But things are different now. Competition in the cable news realm and the expansion of their reach has denied the networks of their de facto monopoly of news on election night. Election results are posted real-time in some states and polling data is readily available from news and politics sites, with the most prominent being Real Clear Politics.

Political junkies in New Jersey can easily follow a US House race in Mississippi.

If video killed the radio star, than the internet ruined the surprise.

Now the political party on the ropes can hear the Jaws music playing as the dorsal fin advances towards the victim.

2010 will be the reverse of 1994. The US House of Representatives has been conceded to the GOP for weeks now, with only polished liars from the Democratic end arguing otherwise. They encourage their most die-hard supporters to stand, like Linus from Peanuts, in the pumpkin patch (or National Mall), awaiting the big surprise.

The problem for the Democrats is that the surprise took place just under two years ago after the American public that had voted in the presidential election with their dreams and aspirations without bother reading the fine print learned that Barack Obama had more than magic and rainbows in store for country.

While fudging on the details during the campaign, Obama promised change and by the eternal, he delivered much of it.

The American electorate was much like a tourist visiting a foreign country who opted to order something in a restaurant from a menu written in a language he did not comprehend. And when the toursit saw what the waiter brought out was not what he intended to order, the exasperated tourist sent it back, this time making a point to spell out EXACTLY what they wanted.

That’s precisely what’s going to happen on Tuesday. Steak-hungry voters are sending back Obama’s goulash that they have no intention of paying for.
In 2008, the voters wanted their spirits raised; in 2010, they want government spending lowered.

The Races

Governor

Right now, Republicans are projected to win governorships in states where the GOP has been shut out for eight years or more. The Great Lakes states of Wisconsin, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan are expected to elect Republicans on Tuesday, which are key battleground states in presidential elections. Iowa, Maine and New Mexico are also expected to elect Republican gubernatorial candidates to succeed Democrats.

Gubernatorial contests in Oregon, Massachusetts and Colorado have been classified as toss-ups, though Democrats hold the edge in recent poll numbers.

US House of Representatives

Perhaps Nancy Pelosi should consider making a cameo in the sequel to Zombieland as she’s technically already dead…at least as speaker.

District poll numbers have shown a likely take over of the 435-member chamber for weeks now, with the only question being the margin of control Republicans will possess.

Democrats have only three Republican seats in play. On the other side of the aisle, Republicans are effectively challenging six-dozen Democratic seats. Hardly an equal trade.

The GOP’s floor is a net 50 and their peak is a net 80; Republicans only need to net 40 seats to attain a majority. In addition to gain control of half of Congress, Republican candidates are in a position to knock out a few prominent Democrats, including Massachusetts Congressman Barney Frank.

US Senate

The election of Scott Brown in Massachusetts marked the first chip in the Democratic senate majority. There are going to be a lot more chips on Tuesday, with the question being will it be enough to attain 51 seats, since Vice-President Joe Biden would provide the tie-breaker for his party.

There are no Republican seats in the US Senate that are vulnerable while on the Democratic side, their majority leader might suffer an ignominious defeat at the hand of a TEA Partier.

The poll numbers have been contracting in the GOP’s favor over Halloween weekend. Pennsylvania, Washington State, West Virginia, California, Nevada, Illinois and Colorado are within reach by either party, though Republicans are expected to win most of them.

The GOP will have to win six of the aforementioned seven to win a majority. Democrats may retain control by a narrow margin or via tie. The big question is whether the Republican voter enthusiasm and momentum to close the margins. Even though Republicans won’t win in Connecticut and Delaware, closer than projected races could serve as an omen in races where Republicans either hold a slight advantage or are trailing the Democrats by the margin of error.

Also keep in mind as that much of Washington State votes by mail, it could be weeks before we find out which party controls the US Senate. I should also add that Washington State also has a bad past when it comes to close elections.

You’ve been warned.

Predictions

Nationally

GOP wins a majority of the governorships with 30, the US House of Representatives with a swing of 73 seats and the US Senate by one after Washington State finally provides its numbers in an environment of voter fraud allegations and missing ballots.

Louisiana

US Senator Vitter 55% Melancon 42% Others 3%

Lieutenant Governor Dardenne 57% Fayard 43%

Second Congressional District Richmond 52% Cao 45% Others 3%

Third Congressional District Landry 62% Sangisetty 38%

The Times Picayune Thorws Cao Under the Streetcar

2010-10-31T22:24:00.000-07:00

Republican Congressman Joseph Cao, who is already facing strong opposition from Pennsylvania Avenue and Perdido Street (New Orleans City Hall), can add Howard Avenue to obstacles he will have to overcome in his quest for a second term in the US House of Representatives as the Times Picayune has cast its lot behind Democratic state representative Cedric Richmond's bid for Congress.

The paper's position was a surprise, considering Richmond’s political baggage in contrast with the ex-seminarian's near pristine record in his brief time in office.

Why would the Times Picayune, an entity that dresses itself up as an advocate for reform and good government, come out against Cao? And yes, I use the word against because Cao is the incumbent and to support a challenger is tantamount to calling for his removal.

One longtime veteran of the journalism community speculated the TP was looking to bet on winners, hence they also endorsed US Senator David Vitter's re-election bid, as if they were trying to handicap a parlay.

Richmond is the heavy favorite as he possesses far more advantages than the incumbent even during this decidedly favorable political environment for the GOP- at least nationally. The district is majority black and even more heavily aligned with the Democratic Party and much of the New Orleans white political establishment has lined up behind Richmond.

However, I've seen where the TP has embraced hopeless candidates for office. Does the name Greg Marcantel ring a bell? The mayor of Jennings was the endorsed Republican candidate for lieutenant governor in 1995 and received 6% to finished in 4th place. Yet the Times Picayune backed his candidacy over three better-known, better-funded candidates, including then-Public Service Commissioner Kathleen Blanco.

Perhaps hedging their bets on the winner was a factor. But I think ticket balancing was their main motivation.

In their election recommendations, which appeared on Friday, the Times Picayune endorsed Vitter, Richmond and 1st District incumbent Republican Congressman Steve Scalise. They stayed out of the general election for US Representative in the sprawling Third District, which runs along the coast from Shell Beach west to New Iberia. They're also backing Republican Jay Dardenne for Lieutenant Governor.

So in terms of major elections the Times Picayune is with 3 Republicans and a Democrat. But that doesn't get them off the hook in the Second District.

If their endorsement Richmond was made because of concern that they will be seen not supporting enough black candidates and/or Democrats, it’s unacceptable.

The role of a credible media entity that makes endorsements, particularly one that is as established as the Times Picayune, is to reject populism and offer unbiased, sound counsel to the public, no matter what it does to their advertising page or circulation. They have the resources to investigate, research and present the most compelling arguments for ideas and candidates.

The editorial board or whoever calls the shots on endorsements at the newspaper should not deliberate in the same manner and cold calculation that a political organization utilizes when seeking to balance their election ticket.

Cao has already had to confront disappointment of being misled, rather LIED to by the President of the United States who preached about the need to work together regardless of party only to cut his first and only campaign ad against the man he called his favorite Republican.

Now Cao has been abandoned by the same entity that lectures political and government morality on a daily basis. And the media have the audacity to complain about the rise of cynicism by the public?

Joe Cao was both an unconventional Republican congressional candidate and congressman. How do you think this snub went over with him?

The Times Picayune's endorsement of Richmond should not be viewed as a reflection on Cao but rather a reflection on themselves. Though they possess all the power and influence that comes with buying paper by the ton and ink by the barrel, the Times Picayune has just lost all moral authority to wag their fingers as politicians.

When an entity like the Times Picayune endorses candidates, because of their reach, it goes beyond a mere blessing: they're facilitating their election. And when they should know better, the blame for sins committed by their candidates can be left at their doorstep, especially when the candidates they pick often cite their editorial endorsements as evidence of their good character.

And when it comes to a member of Congress, the Times Picayune won't be able to bury his mistakes in the same journalistic potter's field that they charitably call the "corrections and clarifications" section on page two, which is the hardest page to read in a newspaper

The staid Crescent City publication might end up regretting its endorsement of Richmond, just as they surely have of other unwise decisions such as their prior support for Edwin Edwards' first run for governor in the early seventies, the proposed Riverfront Expressway and Obama's presidential candidacy (how’d that drilling moratorium thingy work out for ya?!).

And so it is up to the voters of the Second Congressional District to do the job the Times Picayune is unwilling to do: act to prevent the rebirth of the New Orleans political machine by voting to keep Cao.

The Left Sends in the Clowns

2010-10-28T23:35:00.000-07:00

President Barack Obama and his allies have been very busy in the waning days of the 2010 congressional midterm elections.

When the President of the United States has not been accusing Republicans of “sippin’ on a Slurpee” (fine presidential rhetoric, non?), he encouraged Hispanic voters in a radio interview with Univision to “punish our enemies”.

Such spicy talk serves as the backdrop of comedian/television news parody host Jon Stewart’s “Rally to Restore Sanity” on Saturday, October 30th on the Washington Mall.

The event is largely a reaction to Glenn Beck’s successful gathering in front of the Lincoln Memorial in August to encourage Americans to once again embrace religion.

Where was Stewart’s conscience when such “civil” statements such as “Save Mother Earth, Kill Bush”, “Somewhere in Texas a Village is Missing Their Idiot” and numerous comparisons of the 43rd president to Adolf Hitler were commonly and quite casually dispensed by the Left during the previous administration?

Where was Stewart’s call to arms when a so-called mockumentary, Death of a President, which created a scene where Bush was murdered in Chicago, was released? Or when the “fantasy” film won the International Critics Prize at the 2006 Toronto Film Festival?

He was most likely yucking it up on camera with pithy wise cracks about selectively edited Fox News clips.

But this is a different time. A Democrat is in charge.

Republicans should be used to such duplicitous and partisan displays by Viacom, which owns both Comedy Central and MTV. The latter’s “Rock the Vote” campaign was blatantly directed towards recruiting new voters for Democratic candidates.

The network, which used to actually have music on it, showed their stripes when they sponsored inaugural balls for Bill Clinton in 1993 and 1997, but lost interest in hosting such social events on the eve of presidential inaugurations in 2001 and 2005. How curious.

When this blogger in 2000 put in a call to Viacom’s office to ask why young supporters of George W. Bush would not also be feted, I was told because a Republican won.

Apparently they were serious as MTV got back into the inaugural party business in 2009 after Obama was elected. If the president loses to a Republican in 2012, I think it would be safe to anticipate another capricious shift by Viacom on the matter. They might even blame the economy for the austerity measure.

Jon Stewart is a suave liberal smart aleck. Stephen Colbert is an obnoxious, self-promoting B-movie actor who mocks conservatives trough his latter day Archie Bunker-esque Republican caricature.

And while their programs are intended to amuse than to educate despite seamlessly shifting from fact to fiction to interview to jokes, they are hits with the Obama Administration.

President Obama recently made an appearance on The Daily Show that initially had people wondering if doing so was beneath the office of the presidency and immediately thereafter led the same to express wonder how the jokester managed to upstage the teleprompterless leader of the free world.

Vice-President Joe Biden and five members of Obama’s cabinet have also appeared on the satirical program and/or its spin-off The Colbert Report. Some might take it as a sign of The Daily Show’s influence; I interpret such appearances on these faux news shows as a poor reflection on the people charged with running the country.

The Comedy Central drop-bys are acts of pandering, as both The Daily Show and The Colbert Report are popular with the young people who helped put Obama in office in 2008 and who are also the same people struggling to find work in 2010.

And if it wasn’t for the fact that the owner of the WWE is a Republican (and candidate for the US Senate), an appearance on Piper’s Pit might have been penciled on the president’s schedule.

If the Garden State’s electoral votes end up being in play, will Obama have a backyard barbeque with Snooki and the cast of Jersey Shore to discuss the merits of Cap and Trade?

We’ve gone a long way, not necessarily in the right direction, since candidates- that’s CANDIDATES- Richard Nixon said “sock it to me” on Laugh-In and Bill Clinton played the saxophone on the Arsenio Hall Show.

Obama is expected to benefit at the officially “non-partisan” rally that is being pushed hard not just by Stewart and Colbert, but liberal blog queen Arianna Huffington and Oprah Winfrey, who endorsed and used her celebrity to stump for Obama during his bid for the Democratic nomination.

And the Christian Science Monitor reports that leading global warming alarmist Sheryl Crow will perform at the event. This sounds about as bipartisan as a Move-On protest at a Dick Cheney birthday party.

All of this is just part of Obama and the Democratic Party’s last-ditch multi-faceted attempt to gin up turnout.

Obama and Co. are supplementing their race-baiting rhetoric with the once abhorred street money that will once again flow in Philadelphia and other urban centers as the Democrats and their allied organizations attempt to win via truly retail politics.

Unions have already dumped tens of millions from the paychecks of blue-collar workers to protect their piece of the action.

And in their last gambit to inspire the youth of America who have obviously crashed hard from the heady euphoria of two years before, the Left is sending out clowns, sans punch and cake unless the Big O coughs that up at the last minute.

And thus a generation is being ripped off on both the front end and the back end.

Why Cao Matters

2010-10-26T20:35:00.000-07:00

If the political career of Joseph Cao comes to a sudden halt on November 2nd, he will have done more by himself than legions of other Louisiana elected officials before him to have changed the political culture and the rightfully assigned negative perception of Louisiana politics.

I first met Cao in 2007 while we were running for state representative in the same district. As his voter base and mine were different in the sprawling, gerrymandered legislative district our paths only crossed at forums. At the time Cao was a registered Independent, an affiliation shared by much of the TEA Party crowd who have involved themselves in the GOP in order to do the work that established Republican office-holders wouldn’t do.

As the last precinct reported, I ran third and Cao ran fifth so neither of us made the runoff, though the order didn’t matter much since, to paraphrase a saying from a certain movie that mocked NASCAR, if you’re not first (or second), you’re last.

After endorsing the same candidate in the general election (a Republican who himself fell short), we kept in touch, talking on the phone about the GOP and politics in general about once a month.

Then in May of 2008, Cao called to ask what I thought about the idea of him running for Congress. He’d be challenging the first African-American to be elected from Louisiana to Congress since Reconstruction in a majority black district and, despite the cloud of scandal that ominously loomed over him personally and politically, had won re-election by a landslide against a well-financed, credible black candidate.

Not one to mince words, I said he should do it.

It didn’t matter what the odds were. It didn’t matter what the city political machine would do during the election (or after balloting ended).

What mattered was that the voters of the congressional district had a real choice. What they did with that choice would be more of a reflection on them than the earnest Republican-convert.

Without going into the minutiae of how things played out (that’s well documented in the 2008 archives of my blog), Cao won a historic victory in a perfect political storm.

Since taking office Cao has carved a voting record that is more conservative than the people he represents, though not nearly conservative enough for most of his critics, who have sniped at him from districts far removed from the lower Ninth Ward.

Cao was elected as an unconventional candidate and went to Washington to be an unconventional congressman. Any political naiveté on his part should be forgiven and/or appreciated.

Cao broke with his party on a number of votes, particularly related to social programs that are utilized by his constituents, many of whom live below the poverty line and reside in neighborhoods no Republican activist would go door to door in without sporting a Brooks Brothers vest made of kevlar.

However, Cao has cast votes that no other Democratic replacement would ever wish to make. If the only conservative vote Cao made was against Cap and Trade, which I consider economic treason, political insanity and industrial redistribution, I would be satisfied as it would be more than a conservative should ever expect to come forth from the Second District.

Here are a few reasons to vote for Cao:

1) Life experience: Cao’s story is one of the most remarkable in American politics and is comparable to that of the late Tom Lantos. Cao was an adolescent refugee forced to flee the Communist take over of his country of birth (South Vietnam) while having to abandon his father to the reeducation camps of the Viet Cong. Before his father passed away a few days ago, Cao shared with me how his father was mentally scarred for life from that experience. It’s one thing for congressmen to bloviate for hours on CSPAN about oppressive regimes around the world; Cao knows their nature from personal experience.

2) Life experience, Part Deux: Cao had the misfortune of his home being inundated during both Hurricane Katrina and Hurricane Gustav. There’s no question that he has a vested interest in securing better flood protection for South Louisiana; he needs it!

3) He made the effort: Cao went to Washington prepared to work with President Barack Obama, who had carped much about working across the aisle to bring a new era of civility to the national government. Cao’s willingness to sit down with the president earned him the moniker of being Obama’s favorite Republican. Thanks to Cao’s naiveté, Obama has been exposed as a complete fraud, in which in the president’s mind the only good Republican is one out of office. The president cut his first commercial for Cao’s Democratic opponent, removing any illusion from Cao or anyone else that blindly bought what Obama was selling about the importance of bipartisanship. The emperor truly hath no sincerity.

4) Cao or Another cog in the political machine? Cao has busied himself with being a congressman, keeping his forays into other political realms at a complete minimum. The Democratic alternative to Cao is a machine politician being pushed by New Orleans City Hall, which under its new management has become active in virtually every race appearing on an Orleans Parish ballot. Cao is now having to fend off both the White House and City Hall for the crimes of being a Republican and occupying a piece of coveted political real estate. Cao’s defeat and replacement by a machine politician who will no doubt get himself involved in other elections would mark a regression for reform in New Orleans.

5) Cao Will Be Able to Deliver More for New Orleans: Let there be no doubt on this point, Cao’s odds of being re-elected as Congressman are far better than Nancy Pelosi’s chances of being re-elected speaker. Obama and other Democrats whined about the way the Republicans mishandled Hurricane Katrina and abandoned rebuilding New Orleans (the second part is a complete lie). What happened after Obama took office? The Second District, the most ardently Democratic in Louisiana, got the least amount of support from the stimulus bill! Talk about not putting your money where your mouth is. A Republican Congress would be hard pressed to do less for New Orleans than the Democratic Congress did. Especially since the incoming Speaker of the House of Representatives declared Cao was the future.

6) Cao Stepped Up While Richmond Stepped Out: No other Republican was willing to put his name on the ballot against Jefferson in 2008, but Cao did. Cedric Richmond also ran against Jefferson, though in the Democratic primary. Richmond flayed him in paid advertisements about how awful he was yet when Richmond didn’t make the runoff, he didn’t support the other candidate who faced Jefferson in that race nor did he oppose Jefferson in the general election.

Two years ago, the voters of Orleans Parish and Jefferson Parish chose to end the embarrassment. This is not the time to sow the seeds of future embarrassment by replacing a reform-oriented, hard-working congressman with a machine politician who will be on the opposite side of the new governing majority in the US House of Representatives.

For those conservative voters resentful of Cao’s less than sterling voting record, keep in mind that this race is bigger than a Beltway think tank’s tally sheet with the consequences extending to our state’s image and whether the old way of doing business in New Orleans is behind us or just waiting right around the corner.

For a conservative to vote for any other candidate but Cao would be illogical and irresponsible. The protest will fall on deaf ears and Democrats have been exposed around the country manufacturing faux TEA Party candidates in a scheme to siphon away votes from Republican candidates in tight races.

In 1960 there was a move by conservative delegates at the Republican National Convention to draft Arizona US Senator Barry Goldwater as an alternative to then-Vice-President Richard Nixon as the GOP’s presidential nominee.

Goldwater took to the podium to admonish the attempt to split the party in what was one of the closest (if not TOO close) presidential elections in American history, stating, “Let’s grow up conservatives. If we want to take this party back, and I think we can some day, let’s go to work.”

Anyone conservative who can’t see the national and local importance of re-electing Cao needs to grow up. Seriously.

There is no runoff as whichever candidate receives the most votes (50%+1 is not necessary under this election system) wins.

Though four candidates are on the ballot for US Representative from the Second District, a vote for only Cao means one less vote for Nancy Pelosi for speaker and a blow to the full re-establishment of the political machine in Orleans Parish. A vote for any other candidate, no matter what they claim to represent, is a vote for Cedric Richmond and all that will come with it.

Choose wisely.

Election 2010: Media Keeps Burning the "Witch"

2010-10-19T21:18:00.000-07:00

Attention Newsbusters!

I would like to drop a nickel on what might be the most insidious liberal news outlet on the web, AOL’s Politics Daily. You should consider posting a correspondent to monitor their news feeds on a full-time basis as the tone of the political articles penned by their writers is blatantly belligerent towards conservatives with a bias that is comparable to MSNBC.

Because it’s directed primarily at their 5,000,000 domestic subscribers- a number that has tumbled greatly since 2001, most people are unaware of the liberal propaganda AOL’s Politics Daily has been slinging as “news”.

But as a longtime AOL user, I see it pop up before my e-mail every day. I only peruse it to see what “spin” they attempt to lay on a story. What I’ve consistently noticed is that if it’s news that is bad for Republicans, they tend to leap on to the dog-pile yet if the news is unfavorable for liberals, they go through great lengths to find the silver lining.

AOL’s Politics Daily is a virtual “how to” on penning political propaganda.

Their most recent obnoxiously hostile piece directed at a Republican appeared yesterday, a story headlined “O’Donnell’s Constitution Question Floors Audience”.

You’d think the most vilified Republican US Senatorial nominee EVER would have quipped something along the lines of the gems regularly cast by New York Republican gubernatorial candidate Carl Paladino.

No such crassness was found upon inspection of the facts, no matter how the writer (whose name is not given!) twists them.

The smug article starts off “”where better to learn about the US Constitution than at a law school”? and then chronicles how Ms. O’Donnell was laughed at by the audience for asking the question “Where in the Constitution is separation of church and state?”.

The joke’s on the jackals disrespectfully guffawing at debate and the unknown author of the article as the words “separation of church and state” are nowhere to be found in the Constitution. Not even in the First Amendment, which is often cited as the location of the invisible clause.

Here’s the First Amendment in its full splendor: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceable to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances”.

And you’re not going to find “separation of church and state” in the other 26 amendments or in the Constitution’s original seven articles.

I’d be willing to bet most of those clucking at the debate have never read the Constitution pamphlet cover to pamphlet cover (which is 32 pages in miniature form). Because the words are used, or rather, misused so often everyone assumes they’re there. Instead, “separation of church and state” come from a letter Declaration of Independence author and then-President Thomas Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists Association in 1802.

Though not contained in a governing document, those words have found themselves in the minds and opinions of federal judges, the media and ACLU rhetoric.

So Ms. O’Donnell, who has been accused of being a witch, a crook, a tramp, a puritan and a political radical, was spot on in the debate yet mocked by a “journalist” who appears to be already in a pissy mood about the tidal wave of Republican victories that are expected across the fruited plain, save Delaware.

The story centered on the audience deriding Ms. O’Donnell through snickering her correct response rather than the facts that were relevant to that part of the debate.

Not leaving it at biased reporting, whoever was responsible for the article decided to kick it up another notch working in two snarky twitter cracks at Ms. O’Donnell.

Tim F. of, get ready, Dublin, Ireland- who has about as much standing to be consulted on a national race as Meghan McCain, tweeted that “It’s beyond hideous. My jaw has carpet burn. But I get it. Christine O’Donnell is doing some Joaquin Phoenix-like ‘I’m Still Here’ satire.” I’m sure that wit must win the hearts of all the lasses in the Temple Bar area.

And there’s self-proclaimed chocoholic Daniel K. of Riverside, California who tweeted “Yeah, the audience is laughing at you, not with you”.

Why these tweets were incorporated into an article is beyond whatever the comprehension of this writer who took a few courses in journalism at LSU’s Manship School except to convey what the AOL mystery political writer “secretly” thinks of Ms. O’Donnell.

The story should have been titled “Crowd That Failed H.S. Civics Rude to Candidate That Knows Better”. But I’ll see Arlen Specter delivering the keynote address at the next Republican National Convention before I ever read that far more accurate headline.

The media has done to Ms. O’Donnell what modern day school-age cyber-bullies have done to the socially awkward. Except they’ve largely gotten away with it.

Blatantly piling on top of a candidate who isn’t going to win isn’t going to retain for Nancy Pelosi her gavel or Harry Reid his job, as either majority leader or US Senator.

Even MSNBC is going to have a challenge making a Democratic victory in Delaware the story of the night as Republicans take back the US House of Representatives and reverse two election cycles in the US Senate in a single swoop.

But I’m sure the folks at AOL’s Politics Daily and their fellow travelers will give it their best.

Expect to hear the conjunction “but” a lot on the evening of November 2nd.

It's Spelled S-A-N-G-I-S-E-T-T-Y

2010-10-19T21:12:00.000-07:00

In last week's column, this writer made a reference to the Democratic nominee running for US Representative in Louisiana's Third District. Unfortunately, I misspelled Ravi's surname "Sangisetti".

It's spelled Sangisetty.

My apologies for the mistake.

The 49 State Republican

2010-10-13T19:56:00.001-07:00

Back in 2003 I supported Bobby Jindal for governor and backed him in his later congressional bids. When Jindal announced he was going to run again for governor in early 2007, I immediately lined up behind his candidacy.

Later on that year I decided to make a run for a vacant seat in the state House of Representatives. But there was a wrinkle: one of Jindal’s major opponents for governor not only lived in my home parish but was a registered voter in the very legislative district I was running in.

Having made my commitment to Jindal, I chose to do something many of my fellow politicos thought was unwise: I took out a newspaper ad sharing why this Saint Bernard Parish resident was voting for Jindal over the “favorite son”.

I wasn’t content to do the “quiet political thing”. I felt he was the best choice for governor in 2003 and my mind didn’t change four years later. After all, an important part of being a public official is making hard decisions that might not be very popular but could very well be in the same public’s best interest.

Unfortunately for me, I ended up missing the runoff by 35 votes. Did my decision to announce my support for Jindal over the local gubernatorial candidate cost me votes? Undoubtedly.

Did it cost me three-dozen votes that would have advanced me to the general election? Possibly.

Would I have done it all over again? Absolutely.

Though it might not have been the politically smart move, it was the right thing to do.

My community in particular suffered the consequences from the results of the 2003 gubernatorial election and it was time to put in office in 2007 the man who should have been elected the last time.

So in 2007, Mike Bayham stepped up to the plate for Bobby Jindal. And now Mike Bayham is waiting for the governor to step up to the plate for his fellow Republicans.

How can Jindal travel around the country talking about the need to elect conservatives to Congress to fight the Obama-Pelosi-Reid agenda while refusing to travel to Houma, Kenner and Chalmette to do the same for local conservative candidates?

Thus far, Jindal, through his spokespeople, have drawn a curious line in the sand demarcating that they will not get involved in Louisiana federal elections. Why? No comment.

The apparent reason is that he does not, and please pardon this crass political pun, want to climb in bed with the state’s junior US Senator. And while David Vitter has been called many things by his Democratic opponents over the years, stupid has not been one of them…with good reason.

Vitter is perhaps the most politically cunning Republican to emerge and might very well be the state’s smartest politician since Edwin Edwards.

Vitter and anyone else with a political IQ over 100 sees Jindal’s position for what it is, though candidate Vitter has publicly ignored the slight. At least until November 2nd.

But why is the Republican governor abandoning Congressman Joseph Cao, Third District US Representative candidate Jeff Landry and incumbent Secretary of State and lieutenant governor candidate Jay Dardenne, who lack Vitter’s political baggage but also his strong poll numbers and well-stocked campaign warchest as well.

Cao’s race is a Republican defense against a machine politician backed by New Orleans City Hall.

A Landry win in the Third District would be a pick up for the national GOP and one less vote for Nancy Pelosi for speaker.

A Dardenne victory would return to the Republican fold an office that hasn’t been occupied by a Republican since Paul Hardy left office in 1992.

While his voting record won’t be confused with neighboring Congressman Steve Scalise anytime soon, Cao has voted against the stimulus, cap and trade and ultimately opposed President Obama’s health care legislation.

Cao is also poster boy for the national GOP’s push to diversify their image with the general electorate and did Louisiana an outstanding service by taking out corrupt US Representative Bill Jefferson. The latter act contributed mightily towards helping change Louisiana’s image and political culture. Why isn’t Jindal raising money for Cao?

The Third District is unique in that it not only produced Vitter’s Democratic opponent for re-election this November, it was a safe GOP seat that went the other way in 2004 because of a split within the Louisiana Republican Party. As neither Hunt Downer nor Kristian Magar have endorsed Landry’s candidacy, there’s a possibility of a repeat if both unsuccessful Republican primary candidates try to spike Landry’s guns the last week of the election.

Here is a natural setting for a popular Republican leader like Jindal to step in to bring the GOP together so the mistakes of the past are not repeated.

The most bizarre neutral position is the lieutenant governor’s race. Dardenne is not only a state candidate (so Jindal’s federal embargo would not apply) but his election would free Jindal to pursue other ambitions later if so moved after re-election.

Beyond serving his own political interests, Jindal’s “Swiss-Stance” conflicts with the cause he claims to champion. If something unfortunate were to happen to a governor who spends so much time on airplanes he should be sporting a set of wings on his lapel and a Democrat held the office of lieutenant governor, then there would be an entire change of administration, personnel and governing philosophy.

Think about that for a minute. All of the millions of dollars Republicans in Louisiana sent to Jindal’s campaign and the tens of thousands of sweat equity invested in his political career by Republican activists wiped out due to a freak accident and, in the blink of an eye, replaced by an ideological opposite who has benefited from fundraisers hosted by ex-President Bill Clinton and who has not shied away from Obama.

But such a change goes deeper than who’s sleeping in the Governor’s Mansion.

Add in legislative leadership (since Speaker of the House and President of the State Senate are practically cabinet appointments by the governor) and the possibility of selecting a US Senator if either or both of the state’s US Senators left office early.

The GOP’s capacity to filibuster was changed with the death of Ted Kennedy. In the past ten years control of the US Senate has shifted by a single party change so I’m not engaging in wild political speculation here.

And then there’s support for the party. All of a sudden the Louisiana Democratic Party would have immediate control of patronage, appointments to commissions and their fundraising capability would receive a major boost.

And should we forget that it was from the office of Lieutenant Governor that Blanco spring boarded into governor?

Jindal’s neutrality in the state’s federal races borders on hypocrisy; his abstaining from the race for lieutenant governor is downright irresponsible.

I’ve heard a number of theories of why he’s staying out, ranging from the trial lawyers sudden embracing of him to a potential conflict with Indian-American fundraisers who backed Jindal’s runs for governor and are supporting fellow Ivy League Indian-American Ravi Sangisetti for Congress in the Third District.

Whatever the reasons are, they’re all bad excuses in the face of a potential political reality.

I’ll admit a conflict of interest being a Republican working for the election of other Republicans but watching Jindal hustle for Republican candidates in Wisconsin but not Louisiana would appear strange to even people who don’t follow politics closely.

I don’t know who’s giving Jindal this bad advice and I don’t know why the governor seems to be following it, but Jindal needs to start being Mr. Republican in Louisiana instead of just Mr. Republican in the 49 Other States.

Election 2010: Vitter-Treen, the Sequel!

2010-10-05T18:14:00.000-07:00

Election 2010: Vitter-Treen, the Sequel

Armed with the support and financing from the political establishment, a long-time veteran office-holder with high-name recognition and few apparent political negatives runs for a vacated seat in the US House of Representatives. He is opposed by younger candidates with less money and virtually no name recognition whatsoever beyond their respective bailiwicks.

Turnout for the race is light and it seems like the “blessed” candidate will easily emerge triumphant.

But one of the challengers somehow pieces together the financing to get his message out and runs to the hard right while constantly peppering the favorite’s credentials as a Republican and as a conservative.

In the end, the insurgent stuns the politirati by winning.

The story could apply to either the contest between former Governor Dave Treen and then ex-State Representative David Vitter for the seat that was previously occupied by Congressman Bob Livingston or the recent election between Jeff Landry and retired General Hunt Downer for the GOP nomination in the Third Congressional District.

The only differences are that Downer’s grandson didn’t get lost in the woods before the election and Treen never lost his lead until the night of the runoff.

Both elections were political textbook David v. Goliaths.

Like Treen before him, Downer by all means should have won the seat. He started off on top and began a continuous free fall after the first of Landry’s attacks appeared in people’s mailboxes and on talk radio.

Did Downer simply assume the Republican nomination was his and that he needed to marshal his money for the general election against a well-financed Democrat?

Did he not invest in a tracking poll that would have alerted him to his spiraling poll numbers?

Did Downer not appreciate the political landscape that demanded a strategy applicable to the environment?

The direct mail and electronic media offered by Downer’s campaign could be charitably described as bland or overly defensive. In the runoff, the message was just plain angry intended more to send his opponent into the general election with bruises than to salvage his candidacy.

Downer should have read Vitter’s playbook from 1999 and understood the political temperament of the most conservative voters who dominant the sliver of the Third District that are registered Republicans.

Downer made the mistake of running a generic campaign that plays well in a general election but doesn’t excite the party base voters who tend to be very conservative and distrustful of people who have been in government very long. Downer went into a sniping contest with a shotgun while Landry targeted a small segment of the electorate.

Granted this is probably the best argument against the closed primary as it encourages pandering to a particularly crowd for the nomination while ignoring the masses who will pick the actually winner.

Had this been an open primary, Downer would have undoubtedly run first and likely won the seat. But it wasn’t and you’d think a man with his military background would have applied the most basic principles of Sun Tzu into his campaign strategy, more precisely the terrain determines the tactics.

You could argue that his paid political advisors should have known better, but someone who has been in politics since Gerald Ford was president?

As the closed primary system makes its valedictory swirl down the toilet, it has claimed one last political casualty in Downer.

The GOP primary presented a more extreme political environment since the Louisiana Republican Party made the decision to exclude registered independents, though judging from the runoff margin, even the indies might not have been able to bail out a campaign that was almost TKO’d in the primary.

Had Downer sought the seat when Congressman Billy Tauzin retired in 2004, Vitter would not be facing Charlie Melancon in a US Senate race right now.

Though a year removed from an unsuccessful gubernatorial bid, Downer was well liked in the region and had his standing in the race overwhelmed by Bobby Jindal’s rockstar candidacy. Downer finished first in the heart of the district, Lafourche and Terrebonne parishes, and had room to grow.

Unfortunately for Downer, the congressman’s son jumped in which cut the former speaker of the Louisiana House of Representatives from the funds he needed to make the race.

Had this election been held two years later, Downer would have benefited from the return of the open primary, where running to the Right of Barry Goldwater doesn’t pay the same dividends as it does in a closed party primary- though there are no assurances that the Third District will still exist after reapportionment as population erosion trims yet another seat from Louisiana.

The Downer campaign proves that having the most endorsements, money and name recognition don’t make one politically invincible. Especially in a closed primary.

===============================================================

Dardenne Gets Help from Villere?

Republican Secretary of State Jay Dardenne caught more than his fair share of grief from State GOP Chairman and fellow lieutenant governor candidate Roger Villere yet it was Villere’s presence in the race might have set Dardenne up in a strong position in the runoff.

Though the underfunded Villere finished sixth in the field with 7%, by remaining on the ballot the party leader might have bled enough votes off of country singer and Republican Sammy Kershaw to allow Democratic Caroline Fayard to slip into the general election.

While some have tried playing the expectations game to dismiss his first-place showing, Dardenne will benefit from Vitter’s coat-tails in an election cycle where Republicans are expected to exert more influence than they typically do.

Had Villere dropped out two weeks before and endorsed Kershaw, the former would have given the singer’s candidacy additional credibility, publicity and likely moved most of his supporters in that direction.

A Dardenne-Kershaw would have benefited not only Jindal, who needs a Republican to win the post, but the state’s junior senator as well by further demoralizing Democrats in the state. Though at this writing, it doesn’t appear that the governor is going to be lending any Republican in Louisiana, including his own political interests, a hand in this cycle.

More later.

Mulligan #1- Fayard Running Second for Lt. Governor

2010-10-02T20:03:00.000-07:00

It appears that Democrat Carolina Fayard WILL slip past Sammy Kershaw for the second spot in the runoff for Lieutenant Governor against Republican Secretary of State Jay Dardenne.

Last minute media buys by Fayard and the support for ex-President Bill Clinton helped give the first-time candidate a last minute surge, overwhelming fellow Democrat and State Senator Butch Gautreaux.

First bad "call" since the Webb election in 2006 in Virginia.

The Early Call: Kershaw in Runoff

2010-10-02T18:58:00.000-07:00

Based on rural numbers and a split Democratic vote, it appeats country music singer Sammy Kershaw will finish second in the race for Lieutenant Governor.

Early Call: Dardenne to Runoff for Lt. Governor

2010-10-02T18:48:00.000-07:00

Powered by a large campaign warchest and high name recognition, Republican Secretary of State Jay Dardenne has made a runoff for Lieutenant Governor, likely to close the night in pole position.

Early numbers show a dogfight between country music singer and fellow Reublican Sammy Kershaw and first-time candidate Democrat Carolina Fayard.

Early Call: Landry Nominated

2010-10-02T18:34:00.000-07:00

Benefiting from a higher voter turnout, the endorsement of the third place candidate from the primary and hard-hitting negative attacks on Jeff Landry, retired General Hunt Downer improved on his disappointing showing in the primary but will fall short in the runoff with Landry winning the Republican nomination for the Third Congressional District's US Representative seat based upon early returns.

The Early Call Will Post Tonight

2010-10-02T16:19:00.000-07:00

Will be making Early Call's on the Lieutenant Governor, Public Service Commissioner and the GOP nomination for the 3rd Congressional District. Posts begin at 8:05 PM.

A Red Herring Amongst the RINOs

2010-09-30T23:09:00.001-07:00

My choice for the Republican nomination for president in 2012 will probably not be a candidate for the position.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie has shown the kind of tough leadership in an unfriendly political environment that should be emulated by Republican officials across the country.

Christie has upset the applecart so much with Garden State special interests that a leaked memo from the Bergen County Education Association (AKA a teachers union) mockingly prayed for his demise.

Christie is a rare breed of a high-profile conservative who actually holds a position of responsibility and has had to live with the consequences, political and otherwise, of his decisions.

The New Jersey governor supported moderate Republican US Representative Mike Castle for the GOP nomination for the US Senate in Delaware.

Does that make Christie a RINO? Let me answer that question with another: are Pat Roberston and US Senator David Vitter RINOs for supporting ex-New York City mayor Rudy Giuliani for president in 2008?

Republican political strategist Karl Rove, architect of George W. Bush’s political career, has been blasted as a RINO for not embracing Christine O’Donnell and for making jabbing critiques about her electability.

Rove and columnist Charles Krauthammer were correct in their assessments that the moderate Castle had a better chance of winning the seat in November. Polls taken before and after the O’Donnell-Castle primary have shown the GOP nominee trailing Democrat Chris Coons by a substantial margin.

And it would be reasonable to assume O’Donnell’s political philosophy is to the right of general political mindset of Delaware voters, who haven’t voted for a Republican presidential candidate since George H.W. Bush in 1988.

In 2008, with their senior senator on the Democratic ticket, the First State went to Obama with almost 62%. The highwater mark for a Republican presidential candidate in Delaware since the Bush-Dukakis race was in 2004 when W scored just under 46%, seven points behind Massachusetts US Senator and Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry.

The logic of the Castle backers, many of whom are more conservative than the candidate they championed, was that because he was more electable in a state that’s not known for voting for conservatives, Castle was a heavy favorite to win in the general election and thus would be in a position to provide more conservative than the Democratic alternative.

The position of the TEA Party crowd was half a loaf (give or take a bad vote now and then on a court nominee or Cap and Trade) wasn’t enough and that they would rather get behind a candidate who would be a good vote 100% of the time even if she had a 20% change of winning.

O’Donnell's underdog bid has become an intra-party red herring and a distraction for the conservative movement and the Republican Party at a time when the Democrats are on the ropes.

Like the Koran burning that wasn’t (or maybe was in the hands of less media savvy preachers), the O’Donnell controversy diverted attention from the Democrats' mismanagement of the economy, the problems with their national health care plan, out of control spending on the federal level, President Obama’s “own private Katrina” in the Gulf of Mexico and the other absurd policies Democrats have in-store for the country if they get another two years of full control of the national government.

Rather than behaving like Madame Defarge to anyone suspected of being a RINO, conservatives should focus their energy, resources and time on electing political insurgents in Alaska and Nevada. And if O'Donnell is their cup of "TEA", cut a check to her as well.

Instead of beating up on Rove and Krauthammer, neither of whom hold elected or party offices, the Right should channel their angst towards Harry Reid and the rest of the Democrats who rubber-stamped the Obama agenda.

That said, establishment types need to be cognizant that though the results of the Delaware GOP primary might not be smart politics, it’s the bitter harvest the Republican Party’s higher-ups had coming to them for the contemptible manner they have treated the base over the years. To paraphrase a certain retired Chicago pastor, the TEA Party has come home, to roooooooooooost. And they're a more powerful force within the GOP than the country club wing.

The “if you don’t have a check, you don’t matter” mentality was going to catch up with the GOPezzonovantes eventually. And it did in Delaware.

Just as Move On "bought and paid for" the Democratic Party, the TEA Party folks are gaining influence in the Republican Party.

As O’Donnell has received a tremendous amount of publicity, party leaders need to step up and support her candidacy. She has become the mascot of the TEA Party and snubbing her will be inferred as personally snubbing the legions of donors around the country who have filled O’Donnell’s campaign coffers to the tune of $1,500,000 since her nomination.

After all, the national Democrats have stood by far more discredited candidates than O'Donnell in the past.

If you’re really upset about the way the Republican establishment has handled O’Donnell, send a check for real money to O’Donnell and an envelope stuffed with monopoly money attached to a note to the RNC and a host of other Republican campaign entities that have wasted millions and millions of dollars on candidates who later switched parties.

The Curious Case of the Missing Endorsement

2010-09-15T20:54:00.000-07:00

Incumbent Republican US Senator David Vitter’s landslide primary win in the face of personal scandal that had driven less tenacious office-holders out of politics is a sign that he is likely en route to a second term in Congress’ upper chamber.

Vitter’s lockstep conservative votes on Capitol Hill have satisfied his electoral base and his prodigious fundraising and unfavorable political climate for Democrats, particularly in Louisiana, make him a heavy favorite on November 2nd.

Recently members of the media have picked up on something that missing from the Vitter juggernaut: the endorsement of Republican Governor Bobby Jindal.

Not that Vitter needs the formal and public blessing of the titular leader of the Louisiana GOP, yet its absence got journalists and politicos to talking and Jindal’s press office putting out qualified statements.

Governor Jindal has maintained over and over again that he will not seeking the presidency in 2012. Despite the national party’s recent shifting of the caucus and primary dates to later in the year, a Jindal presidential candidacy would have to be announced prior to his second inauguration if he stood for and won re-election as governor.

People should take Jindal at his word that he will not make a bid for the White House.

Now whether his second term as governor is cut short by an invitation to occupy the bottom-half of the GOP’s 2012 ticket, appointment as a cabinet secretary (Department of Health and Human Services being the most likely) or a campaign in 2014 for Mary Landrieu’s US Senate seat is up for speculation.

Jindal obviously doesn’t want to have to go on record lining up behind someone who admitted to a sin he won’t specifically describe even though everyone has a pretty good idea what it is.

You could say the squeaky-clean Jindal wants to avoid being stained by association and loathes the prospect a 2010 endorsement of Vitter being thrown at him at a time of his least convenience in the future, whether it is before a Senate confirmation hearing, vice-presidential vetting interview or a presidential run in 2016 or 2020.

It’s also been speculated that the state’s two most prominent registered Republicans aren’t the best of pals. Perhaps there’s good reason to think this.

Most people probably don’t remember Vitter’s “forgiveness” press conference that was held the same day Jindal officially kicked off his campaign for governor in Kenner, with the former overshadowing the latter. Perhaps Jindal still remembers it.

The latest official statement by the Jindal camp is that the governor doesn’t have any plans as of yet to involve himself in Louisiana federal races in 2010. This position has been nuanced a few times over. And while the Fourth Floor has staked a technically consistent position for the moment, Jindal might have only succeeded in painting himself into another corner.

There are two other congressional races of interest on the same ballot as Vitter’s re-election: the Second District, where incumbent Republican US Representative Joseph Cao has an uphill fight for re-election against Democratic State Representative Cedric Richmond and in the Third District, where either retired National Guard general Hunt Downer or TEA Party-favorite Jeff Landry will represent the GOP in a bid to retake the seat after Democrat Charlie Melancon held it for three terms.

The Third District presents the most complicated situation for Jindal as the Democratic nominee is well-financed Indian-American Ravi Sangisetty. A Union official remarked that the twenty-something year old, Princeton-educated Sangisetty is the Democratic Party’s Jindal. It should be noted that Sangisetty, while a political unknown, isn’t a crackpot candidate whose campaign is limited to paying his qualifying fee and going home.

On the contrary, Sangisetty has a well-stocked campaign fund in excess of a half-million dollars, which is going to be more than either Republican will finish their runoff with in October starts off the month-long general election with.

While Jindal’s overt help might not be welcome by the Cao campaign in the predominantly black, overwhelmingly Democratic Second District, the Republican nominee in the Third District is going to need the governor’s personal and financial support. That Jindal would be publicly opposing a fellow Indian-American is yet another headache for a governor whose first gubernatorial bid was powered by Indian-American donors from across the country.

And there’s the rub. If Jindal sticks with his position of remaining neutral in federal races, the governor manages to avoid embracing Vitter but publicly abandons a Republican congressional candidate who will desperately need his assistance, since it was a fractured GOP in 2004 that gave Melancon his thin margin of victory.

As the face of the party in Louisiana, the Republican governor is going to have to actively involve himself to bring partisans from both Downer and Landry’s camp together to avoid of a repeat of the Tauzin-Melancon-Romero debacle (or the Fletcher-Holloway-Alexander split from 2002).

Jindal needs to make what will be a difficult decision fraught with political consequences: endorse and support all of the Louisiana Republicans running for Congress in November; go with one and not the other, thus angering Vitter; or stay out entirely and bring his GOP credentials into question, leading people to wonder why Jindal will go to Iowa to help a Republican candidate but not Houma.

A fourth option would be Vitter letting Jindal off the hook, since the senator probably doesn’t need the governor’s endorsement to win a second term. It would be a nice peace offering in light of his raining on Jindal’s parade in July 2007.

Until Jindal comes through with an endorsement for Vitter, Louisiana Democrats are going to needle both the governor and the junior senator on the matter…not so much because it will torpedo the Vitter’s re-election bid (it won’t) but to make life awkward and difficult for both Republicans, though mostly Jindal.

If you can’t beat ‘em, aggravate ‘em.

Reviewing the Results from the Closed Primary

2010-08-29T21:45:00.000-07:00

Reviewing the Results from the Closed Primary
By Mike Bayham

All but one of the congressional party primaries were decided on Saturday night with the only one slated at this time to be decided in October coming less than a percentage point from being settled as well.

US Senate

Though both Republican incumbent David Vitter and Democratic US Representative Charles Melancon won their respective party nomination comfortably, it was the junior US Senator that had the more impressive showing.

In addition to garnering a higher percentage than his Democratic opponent, Vitter received more overall votes. In fact, more votes were cast in the Republican primary than the Democratic primary despite the fact that registered Republicans constitute less than a third of the state electorate while the combined Democratic and unaffiliated voter registration comprises the remaining two-thirds.

Almost 5,000 more Republicans participated in their party primary, a sign that the GOP electorate is fired up and, more significantly for Vitter, has moved beyond his “sin”.

Furthermore, Vitter swamped his combined opponents in every parish in the state, a boast Melancon cannot claim.

Unlike Vitter, who had an opponent of some political standing (ex-State Supreme Court Justice Chet Traylor), Melancon faced two unknowns who made little effort to challenge him for the Democratic nomination.

Yet Melancon’s two opponents fared fare better against him, even holding the congressman below 50% in five north Louisiana parishes (Grant, Lasalle, Sabine, Union and Winn), exposing a major obstacle to his chances of winning a statewide federal race in what will be the worst year for the Democratic Party since 1994.

Melancon’s relatively weak-showing is attributable to conservative voters that never officially left the Democratic Party casting protest ballots and a lack of enthusiasm for the election…and perhaps his candidacy.

Though Vitter’s general election poll numbers have consistently hovered in the area of 50%, the primary was an impressive show of strength by the Republican incumbent and a harsh reality check for his Democratic challenger.

Second District

New Orleans Democratic State Representative Cedric Richmond conducted his own demonstration of political power, winning his party nomination, comfortably avoiding the runoff despite the best efforts of a third-party campaign against him.

Just over 24,000 Democrats and unaffiliated voters hit the polls in the minority majority congressional district that includes most of Orleans Parish and part of Jefferson Parish.

Republican incumbent US Representative Joseph Cao doubtlessly was hoping that the contest would have gone to a second round, depleting Richmond’s campaign warchest and extending the assault on the state legislator’s image.

Richmond, who enjoyed the support of the city political establishment- including Mayor Mitch Landrieu and District Attorney Leon Cannizzaro, goes into the general election against Cao with momentum and has ample time to unify his party behind him and replace what he spent in the primary.

While President Barack Obama is a political albatross for Melancon, Richmond made being an ally to the White House a cornerstone of his campaign.

Cao will soon find himself in a “damned if you do, don’t” situation as the freshman congressman had already caught much grief from the Right for bolting the GOP caucus on a number of voters and is about to catch hell from Richmond for not being supportive enough of the president.

Even if unflattering stories about Richmond continue to dribble out, one should bear in mind that two years ago then-Congressman Bill Jefferson still managed to rack up almost 47% despite his many well-known transgressions.

The perfect storm that produced the environment for Cao’s stunning upset in 2008 doesn’t seem to be manifesting a second time, as a major third-party black candidate in the general election didn’t materialize at the close of qualifying nor was Richmond forced into a bruising runoff.

Third District

Last week, I observed that there appeared to be a striking parallel between the Hunt Downer and Jeff Landry primary fight and the Vitter-Dave Treen congressional election in 1999; that analogy almost played out to the full early on Saturday.

Downer had every advantage a candidate could hope to possess: high name recognition, backing from the big money men in the district and hailing from the population center and geographic heart of the sprawling Third District.

Yet in a low turnout, party primary, such assets don’t have the same value as in a high-turnout open primary.

With his credentials as a Republican and a conservative challenged (snubbing the Tea Party folk did not help) and his affiliation with the highly unpopular ex-Governor Kathleen Blanco advertised ad nauseam via a radio ad featuring thick Cajun accents, Downer not only failed to win the primary but ran a distant second to Landry, who came within 163 votes of a stunning first round knockout.

Landry’s aggressive campaign style and strategy exploiting the political realities of the closed primary proved to be extremely effective. Had Kristian Magar, the third candidate in the contest, either not run or underperformed in Iberia Parish, Landry would have locked up the GOP nomination.

Having carried every parish but Terrebonne, Landry is poised to win comfortably in the runoff while Downer has no shortage of holes to plug in his campaign, most significantly selling himself as a viable candidate to contributors who had already invested heavily in his campaign in the primary.

Downer also has to contend with the argument that staying in the race could endanger the GOP’s chances of taking the seat back from the Democrats. A division within the Republican Party largely hampered Billy Tauzin, III’s unsuccessful bid to succeed his father in 2004.

Republican leaders nationally and in south Louisiana might voice the opinion that Downer “call the Hunt” off for the sake of the party, which would further marginalize Downer’s position.

And as Downer struggles to refill his campaign coffers, Landry’s campaign treasury will benefit from a major windfall as contributors scramble to get on-board further doubling Downer’s problems.

The silver lining for Downer is that the runoff will take place the same time as the special election for Lieutenant Governor and school board, which will increase voter turnout- a benefit for the better-known Downer, though even expanded voter participation might not be enough to change a campaign picture that had been deftly framed by Landry’s effective negative advertisements.

Richmond Wins Democratic Primary Outright

2010-08-28T19:03:00.000-07:00

Based upon early returns, State Representative Cedric Richmond will win the Democratic Primary for the right to challenge incumbent Republican US Representative Joseph Cao in the November general election.

Landry to Run First, Downer Second

2010-08-28T19:00:00.000-07:00

Based early returns, Jeff Landry will run first in the Third District Republican primary. Retired General Hunt Downer will run second and Kristian Magar will finish a distant third.

Landry Runs Away with Absentee, No First Knock-Out for Downer

2010-08-28T18:37:00.000-07:00

Though Hunt Down turned in a strong absentee vote in his native Terrebonne Parish, Jeff Landry nearly broke even in neighboring Lafourche Parish in early voting in five other parishes, including a sizable margin in his native parish of Iberia.

Downer, who early on was considered the consensus GOP nominee, has been bled white by advertisements by Landry linking him with ex-Governor Kathleen Blanco.

Right now the only thing that looks certain is that Downer will not win the GOP nod in the first round and might end up running second. Downer could be a casaulty of the Republican Party's decision to block unaffiliated voters from participating in the party primary.

The Early Call, LA Primary 2010- Melancon, Vitter Win Primaries, Landry Leads Downer in First Votes

2010-08-28T18:12:00.000-07:00

Incumbent US Senator David Vitter and Third District US Representative Charles Melancon have won their respective party primaries.

With the Saint Bernard Parish absentee vote counted, Melancon has won 81% of the early votes cast while Republican Vitter secured 76%.

In the Third District GOP primary, insurgent Jeff Landry made a surprise first place finish in early voting over the better known ex-House Speaker Hunt Downer.

Landry took the absentee with 52% while Downer trailed with 36%, a sign that Landry's scathing attack ads had taken a toll on the candidate seen as the leading Republican candidate.

It should be noted that Landry is a common political surname in St. Bernard and that may have also contributed to his absentee lead. In the 2004 priamry for Congress, a minor candidate fared surprisingly well in Saint John the Baptist Parish despite not spending much money, which was attributed in large part to having the same last name as the area senator.

5

2010-08-26T23:33:00.001-07:00

I am going to start this retrospective on Hurricane Katrina by saying two words.

Thank you.

Thank you to the first responders, the local police and firemen, who stayed behind and performed to the fully to the oath they took when they put on their uniforms for the first time.

Thank you to a Canadian search and rescue team that left America’s neighbor to he north before Katrina approached Louisiana’s fragile shoreline and arrived in Saint Bernard Parish before federal officials did.

Thank you to the thousands of volunteers, from college students from the Maritime Provinces and to evangelical high schoolers from Oklahoma who gave up their vacation time to “muck”, gut and rebuild communities struggling to get back on their feet.

Thank you to President George W. Bush and the members of Congress from both parties who committed eleven figures of federal dollars to rebuild infrastructure and schools.

Though the federal officials initially in charge of responding to the disaster failed to adequately appreciate, prepare and execute immediate relief efforts and President Bush was rightfully criticized for a failure to demonstrate the kind of leadership that he displayed after the 9-11 terrorist attacks, there can be no denying that the president followed through on providing federal support for rebuilding the New Orleans area and the Mississippi Gulf Coast, even if FEMA officials continued to needlessly make the process excruciating.

The new administration might be around for the ribbon cuttings but it was the previous White House that secured the financing to start the reconstruction work.

A special thank you to those congressmen who stood up to the powerful shipping industry and finally closed the dreaded Mississippi River Gulf Outlet, the man-made channel that destroyed Saint Bernard and New Orleans East’s natural buffer from storm surges and acted as a freeway for storm surge that was deposited in people’s bedrooms many miles away from open water.

And finally thank you to the American taxpayers. It was your money that helped rebuild an important piece of our nation.

August 29, 2005 is a day that is etched in the hearts and minds of southeast Louisianans and coastal Mississippians.

However the date that is most relevant to me is August 27, 2005 and the 24 hours period that would follow waking up that morning.

And now a look back on the 24 hour period that would divide my life into two periods.

More often than I should, I replay in my mind things I could and should have done differently in advance of Katrina. Time was short for me as I had to return home from a political committee meeting in Baton Rouge whose leaders stubbornly refused to cancel the Saturday before the storm hit. (One individual who now holds a high position in the Louisiana GOP mocked how beautiful the weather was and how he wished he would have brought his golf clubs). Not walking out that meeting was one of those mistakes.

Upon getting home and helping my family move my bed-ridden grandfather from his house in Chalmette for the final time, I went to the townhouse I was about to move out of in two weeks and tried to figure out what I should do next.

How bad would the storm be?

The last hurricane to wallop Saint Bernard Parish was Betsy in the 1960s. As a child I would often hear my maternal grandparents talk about it and pictures of the floodwater it brought to the eastern part of the parish decorated the Parish Council’s committee room. Betsy was such a part of the local psyche that a local playwright produced a popular production centered around the storm and how locals coped with the aftermath (including with the bureaucrats that followed).

Long before those affected by Katrina would claim that FEMA stood for “Fix Everything My Ass”, Betsy veterans had declared that the SBA stood for “Sons of Bitches of America”.

For me, hearing tales of Betsy were the closest things that came to war stories.

However, Betsy had spared large parts of Saint Bernard, including the house I had grown up in. My paternal grandfather used to boast how the “celebrated” cyclone hadn’t even flooded his street. And the partially paralyzed octogenarian who was my father figure kept repeating as much as we carried him against his will to my uncle’s Lincoln Town Car.

Katrina would spare only five houses in Saint Bernard Parish, which had a pre-Katrina housing stock of over 25,000.

And Pop’s house would not be one of the five.

I’d also spend some time on Saturday evening trying to talk another equally stubborn grandfather into leaving his home, though fortunately the constant barrage of pleas and protests from his entire family meant he would not have to be carried out.

Though I am grateful to have gotten out of New Orleans before the storm hit, I guess it’s human nature to dwell on personal losses that seem small in the big picture.

In terms of possessions, I was somewhat fortunate…in that I only lost 75% of my worldly possessions. Everything else was plucked from the goop and quasi-salvageable, had escaped the rising water by inches or had been crammed inside my worn out Ford Escort, which I had shrewdly parked next to the Superdome. A lot of people in Saint Bernard weren’t that lucky.

Perhaps the most remarkable thing saved from the storm was a binder of baseball cards. Though I lost virtually my entire collection, I had taken one binder out the week before the storm, perused them and then lazily tossed them on the bed I slept in when I stayed by my grandfather’s house. The bed floated with the baseball cards though they’ll retain forever a slight but noticeable mold-musty smell to them, a permanent pungent reminder of my own private experience with the most devastating storm in terms of property damage in American history.

The stuff I miss the most were the photographs. With the exception of one book in particular (Machine Politics in New Orleans), I replaced the books I had lost to water and mold. The electronics that I lost didn’t matter that much to me since I owned tube-television, a VCR and a primitive DVD player, which were destined for the ash-heap of technology.

In what was probably the most humorous moment in my post-evacuation activities I spent some time meticulously re-arranging things on my book shelves, figuring the water in my area would be an unprecedented three feet. As eleven feet of water hit my abode, the scene was the equivalent of re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

“If only I had invested in some 16 gallon plastic bins”, is something I think whenever I dwell on something irreplaceable that I had lost. Right next to that is wishing I would have had more confidence in the strength of my second floor windows, as I “shrewdly” placed most of my valuables, photographs and other items on the ground away from windows that I thought for certain would be blown out. It turned out that the second floor glass held, though the foot of water deposited on my second floor made my efforts self-defeating.

My kingdom for some more time and plastic bins.

But for all the “d’oh’ moves I made, I was not devoid of luck.

First, I had the presence of mind to partake in one luxury before the deluge. Rocky & Carlos, my favorite restaurant and a landmark eatery in Chalmette, was still operating on Saturday night and there I would sup for the last time in Louisiana for ten days. A death row meal could not equal what that meant to me.

Second, that decision to park my loaded up Ford Escort by the Superdome? Brilliant move. Experience from Hurricane Andrew’s visit to LSU’s campus in 1992 taught me to avoid parking somewhere that would leave your car windows exposed to flying gravel from building roofs. Despite having a “W” sticker on the rear bumper and a hatchback that betrayed its bounty, the Escort was unmolested from nature, looter and Democrat. It even started and made the trip to Baton Rouge.

Third, there was one thing in particular I was determined to protect though I knew I couldn’t bring it with me, so I tucked a framed picture of me shaking hands with Ronald Reagan in a clothes closet on the top shelf. I got back to my place before the looters did.

Finally, there was my escape from New Orleans. Though the old Ford Escort made it out of post-Katrina New Orleans, its temperamental radiator would have never survived a pre-Katrina contraflow run to parts unknown. I just so happened to have a flight voucher on me that the good folks at Southwest Airlines were happy to honor on a late Sunday afternoon flight to Phoenix, where a fraternity brother and his wife lived. While playing Mille Bornes with friends and watching the hurricane the size of the Gulf of Mexico creep towards the Louisiana coast on the Weather Channel, I suspected that the flight I booked was going to get cancelled.

Fortunately Southwest JUST had a seat open up on the early morning flight to Arizona. Paranoia and persistence paid big dividends. Despite strong winds, the plane left New Orleans and I arrived at Phoenix’s Sky Harbor on the morning of August 28, 2005 a genuine refugee with bulging luggage containing the only possessions I knew for certain that I would still own in the next 48 hours.

Though I still held out for a shift in the storm’s trajectory that would somehow spare the New Orleans area the worst, life as I knew it would be forever changed and my memories would be divided between pre-Katrina and post-Katrina.

In a period of about 24 hours I went from standing inside the Lod Cook Alumni Center on LSU’s campus arguing with party hacks to standing the baggage claim of the Phoenix Airport.

Ironically enough I would end up sleeping through Hurricane Katrina’s worst. I hadn’t slept at all the night before and I was emotionally worn out from all that had transpired prior to arriving in Arizona though that night’s slumber would be the only uninterrupted rest I’d have for the next ten days.

My days would be filled with exchanging hundreds of text messages, arguing with my cell phone company about overages, fighting through jammed phone lines to get information out from those trapped in Saint Bernard Parish, quashing rampant rumors on the internet about the fate of those stayed behind, coordinating medicine drops and most significantly personally informing next of kin about the status of patients in Saint Rita’s Nursing Home, whose operators unwisely decided to ride out the storm.

The First Round of Louisiana's Final Closed Congressional Primary, Part II

2010-08-26T23:26:00.000-07:00

One strategy I was surprised the Democrats did not employ in their bid to unseat Republican US Senator David Vitter was to field credible candidates against the three Republicans who won their seats two years ago without a majority vote.

It just so happened that those three districts have the three highest concentrations of black voters in the state and that at a minimum, the competitive congressional races would drive up turnout that would have a trickle-up benefit to Democratic US Representative Charlie Melancon's candidacy for Congress' upper chamber.

But the embattled position of the Democratic Party nationally means they cannot utilize elaborate political schemes and has translated into token opposition to Republican incumbents in the First, Fourth, Fifth, Sixth and Seventh Districts, which is noteworthy since Congressmen John Fleming (4th) and Bill Cassidy (6th) both won their seats two years ago with less than a majority- and in the case of Fleming with the last ballot boxes trickling in. Things will be quiet for five Republican congressmen until reapportionment takes shape next year.

There are only two party primaries for the US House of Representatives in Louisiana, though they are in different districts.

In the Third District, three Republicans are battling for the Republican nod to face Democrat Ravi Sangisetty to succeed the seat Melancon vacated to run for the US Senate.
Short a collapse by the GOP and a bitter fight that spills beyond the primary (which isn’t unprecedented in Louisiana and in the Third District specifically), winning the Republican nomination should be almost tantamount to election.

Kristian Mager, Hunt Downer and Jeff Landry are the candidates seeking the Republican nomination with the latter two being the leading candidates. Downer has established name recognition from his decades in the legislature, a well-stocked campaign account and has the advantages of being from the geographical heart and population center of the district (Houma). However, Landry has run a spirited and aggressive campaign from the start, challenging Downer’s previous party affiliation and ties with ex-Governor Kathleen Blanco, whose popularity in the eastern portion of the district (that being the area most affected by Hurricane Katrina) is abysmal.

The race is going to boil down to whether Landry’s tacking hard to the right and constant swinging at the ex-House speaker trumps Downer’s aforementioned considerable advantages. In some ways, this race has striking parallels to the 1999 special election in the First Congressional District between ex-Governor Dave Treen and ex-State Representative David Vitter. Also does Magar pull enough votes to throw the race into a second round?

When the GOP banned independents from participating in the primary, the move had the most detrimental effect on Downer, who has a much broader base of support than Landry. If Landry prevails, the retired National Guard general could be the biggest casualty from the state Republican Party’s exclusivity position.

In the Second District, four Democrats are vying for the right to challenge Republican incumbent Joseph Cao in what is potentially one of the few new seats the national Democrats hope to pick up in what is increasingly looking like a tough year.

Of the four, state representatives Cedric Richmond and Juan LaFonta have the most name recognition though Eugene Green, an ex-aide to convicted former Congressman Bill Jefferson, has been rumored to have a hidden advantage through his old boss’s political network. I’ll believe that when I see it as Green as thus far conducted a virtually invisible campaign.

Richmond was the candidate to bet on from the beginning though scandal and controversy has followed him as negative story continue agonizingly drip upon his candidacy in the closing days of the primary. LaFonta, who raised six-figures though invested it in overhead, has only recently taken to the airwaves in a last minute attempt to exploit Richmond’s new-found weaknesses.

LaFonta has also not been shy about employing language that can easily be inferred to be divisive, with the slogan “Working Hard for OUR Community”, a reworked version of Sherman Copelin’s infamous “Fighting Them For Us”. I’m sure candidate LaFonta has a prepackaged “honorable” explanation for the slogan, that it somehow doesn’t mean what a cynical person who has followed city elections might interpret it to mean.

Despite the problems, Richmond maintains a number of advantages including the support of New Orleans District Attorney Leon Cannizzaro and New Orleans Mayor Mitch Landrieu. Richmond has also attempted to spin the reports of potential impropriety as simply a part of a grandiose conspiracy involving, and I quote, the Republican Party, the birthers, those trying to remove President Obama from office and the Tea Party folks to stop the most electable Democrat from being nominated. (while I cannot speak for other members of the cabal, I’ve never known my party to be so forward-thinking and clever in politics. Any GOP benefit would be purely accidental). And some of the sources could hardly be labeled Republican.

However, the touch of scandal shouldn’t be too much of a handicap on Richmond, considering that Democratic voters supported the renomination of Jefferson two years before by a strong margin despite his more circulated problems. If a freezer full of cash couldn’t stop Jefferson from winning his party’s nod, it’s doubtful Richmond’s mistakes will stop him in the end.

The big question is whether the contest goes to a second round, which would give LaFonta a second shot at the nomination while improving Cao’s still tough odds by further bloodying Richmond and making the leading Democrat less light in the wallet.

The Early Call Will Be On-Line Saturday Night

Checkout mikebayham.blogspot.com on election night around 8 PM CST as The Early Call makes projections based upon selected early returns before the mainstream media.

The First Round of Louisiana's Last Closed Congressional Primary, Part I

2010-08-25T22:20:00.000-07:00

While caucuses and primaries in other parts of the country have stirred if not shaken the national political establishment through denying renominations (and thus an early defeat) to a handful of US Senators and US Representatives, the results of this Saturday’s congressional primary won’t offer anything comparably newsworthy beyond the state line.

Before taking a look at some of the races of note, some trivia/points of interest:

1) This will be the last year of the closed party primary. Despite the pleadings of the leaders of the state’s major political parties, the Louisiana legislature passed and Governor Bobby Jindal signed a bill reverting the state back to the simpler and less expensive open primary.

2) The Libertarian Party will hold its first congressional primary in Louisiana as two candidates are seeking the right to serve as standard bearer in the US Senate general election, a highwater point of significance within the state for the nation’s leading “third party”.

3) And more than likely, this will mark the last time Louisiana elects seven members to the US House of Representatives, with national reapportionment trimming the state’s delegation by one for the second time in twenty years.

Now that that’s been dispensed, off to the races!

Third District Congressman Charlie Melancon faces two opponents with little name recognition and should overwhelmingly win the Democratic nomination for US Senate. Talk of a possible “spoiler” effect by conservative voters affiliated with the Democratic Party or registered independents (who can vote in the Democratic primary) to dampen Melancon’s final percentage will likely be doused by a spiked turnout in the Second District (New Orleans). Charlie Boy should rack up in the neighborhood of 80%. Anything less will further fuel his electability.

Melancon’s likely Republican opponent in the general election, incumbent US Senator David Vitter, is in no danger of being denied renomination despite having political problems, though unlike those that sank incumbent GOP congressmen in Utah, Alaska (?) and South Carolina, Vitter’s have little to do with ideological orthodoxy.

Vitter has two primary opponents though only former State Supreme Court Justice Chet Traylor has significant name recognition…and that isn’t very positive. Just as Vitter’s “sins” were well circulated amongst politicos well-before they exploded in the media, so were Traylor’s “family ties”. And it didn’t take very long for the general public to be made aware of the soap opera between the ex-jurist and a state legislator.

With Vitter’s political resiliency, overtly conservative political posturing and the enormous war chest he amassed, Traylor would have been an underdog; the airing of grievances by Traylor’s deceased wife’s ex-husband and children further diminished his credibility.

The real question in the GOP US Senate primary is how many voters, particularly women, cast protest votes for the third candidate who lacks both public ID standing and TMZ details.

If Vitter runs up the score on his end in the mid-seventies range, it’ll be a sign that the base is holding and that Melancon is going to have to pull a few rabbits (or whatever) out of his hat (or wherever) to compensate for a hostile national political environment for Democrats in a state that voted heavily against Barack Obama before his administration gave the rest of America new reasons to.

Conversely, a Vitter majority less than 70% would show that it might not be smooth sailing to November. Vitter has a higher threshold to meet because the GOP primary doesn’t factor in independent voters, who were banned by the State GOP from participating in the vote despite the fact that voters not affiliated with a political party constitute a critical part of the GOP’s electoral majority and are the fastest growing affiliation in the state.

With Nick Accardo (the third Republican) an unknown and Traylor a non-entity beyond his political base in northeast Louisiana, the Republican primary will largely serve as a referendum on Vitter.

After Saturday, the junior senator will have a good idea how far he has gone from the dark days of the summer of 2007.

The Latest Tear to the Constitution

2010-08-04T22:36:00.000-07:00

If you believe in the importance of having an ethical judiciary, you should be disappointed.

If you are a California voter that cast a ballot to define marriage as being between two people of opposite sexes, you should be angry.

If you believe in the separation of powers, which unlike the so-called constitutional “separation of church and state” is actually in the U.S. Constitution, you should be furious.

Judge Vaughn Walker, who is chief judge of the northern California federal judicial district, threw out Proposition Eight, which received over 7,000,000 votes and a majority of ballots cast on the very day the Golden State overwhelming supported the election of Barack Obama to the presidency.

Walker, who was appointed by President George H.W. Bush, ruled that the state constitutional amendment restricting marriage to individuals of opposite sexes was unconstitutional citing that it violated due process (the 5th amendment) and equal protection (the 14th amendment).

The ruling is the product of an individual occupying a position of great power with an active imagination, a fanatical belief in what is just and no sense or fear of accountability.

It should be noted that even a relatively elastic amendment like the Civil War era 14th obviously had limits as it was necessary for the Constitution to be amended again to expand voting rights to women.

Under Judge Vaughn and the plaintiff’s logic, an amendment to the constitution spelling out women’s suffrage was superfluous as it and a host of other “rights” are implied already in the 14th amendment.

Implied is a good way of describing it since the word “marriage” nor any reference to the legal bonding of a two people is mentioned anywhere in the Constitution. One would think that this gray area should be a matter determined by the states (see the oft-forgotten 10th amendment).

In fact a better argument could be made why the 10th amendment declares the matter none of the federal judiciary’s business than one establishing how the 5th and 14th amendments are applicable. But the Left has demonized that constitutional clause with the same ferocity it has savaged a certain grandmother in Alaska.

There’s also the matter of a serious conflict of interest as Judge Walker is a homosexual and is a potential beneficiary of his own ruling.
Government acts arbitrarily all of the time. Especially on the national level.

Washington tells states that they won’t receive highway money if they don’t have a speed limit or if they permit people under the age of 21 to drink at a bar.

Owning a gun is a constitutional right; marriage is not. States have their own rules on how many days a couple has to wait before tying the knot and if a blood test is required.

If marriage is indeed a constitutional right possessed by all individuals, then why are there polygamy laws on the books? And continuing down this slippery slope, what’s to prevent close relatives from marrying each other? And age limits?

Are their “rights” less than that of two unrelated men or women who want to tie the knot?

Theoretically, that depends on whom you ask. And then how many likeminded people elect representatives sympathetic of that opinion who then pass laws, or in matters that seem to be in conflict with the Constitution or are important enough to enshrine in original governing document, pass a measure by a super-majority and then ratified by a super-majority of welfare-distribution centers better known as states.

Or you can take the liberal legal equivalent of a Dukes of Hazzard short cut and simply appoint a judge to create rights (or deny those explicitly codified as such) via fiat.

Liberals generally respond to the “polygamy/incest” argument that follows their own logic as being a standard conservative retort on the issue of same-sex marriage and then proceed to loudly challenge the integrity of traditional marriage advocates, comparing them to George Wallace or some other long dead politician of a distant era.

Government decides what’s too fast and obscene and what’s clean enough water and air.

The details that define our culture and acceptable quality of life come from the people, who may embrace, reject or amend the heritage they inherited. Elected government officials are charged with the authority to enact laws within the confines of organic law that reflect society, the essence of a democratic republic.

In California’s case, the people have a right to take things into their own hands, at least until a judge feels differently.

Judge Walker’s ruling is hardly the final word on that particular case and the matter of same-sex marriage in general.

And to disagree with the New York Times’ gushing reaction to the ruling, it’s neither historic nor a landmark decision. It’s a speedbump on the road to higher courts and a poor reflection on the man who should not have heard the case and the latest judicial excess by a branch of government with a tendency to not just break laws but make them as well.

Perry v. Schwarzenegger will be appealed to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, where it will in all likelihood receive an amen from that collection of notoriously liberal jurists, and then to the U.S. Supreme Court, where it will be decided almost single-handedly by moderate associate justice Anthony Kennedy, who sits in the middle of an evenly split, ideologically polarized body.

Judge Vaughn’s decision is a reminder of why the federal judiciary figures prominently in election campaigns and how great of a threat an unelected body of lawyers can be to democracy and constitutional government.

Exorcising Open Primary Superstitions

2010-07-14T11:54:00.000-07:00

With the stroke of his pen, Governor Bobby Jindal will bring to an end Louisiana’s two-election cycle experiment with closed congressional primary.

State party leaders on both sides of the ideological spectrum and sitting members of Congress (for good reason…at least for them) argued for retaining the system; legislators seeking to close a gaping fiscal hole in the state’s finances viewed the closed primary as a luxury expense the state could ill afford.

Two points of contention critics of the unique Louisiana electoral system usually cite was its deadbeat father (Democratic Governor Edwin Edwards) and the election that two decades later resulted in his fourth term as governor.

Addressing the first point, it matters less who its initial champion was then how the change played out.

Back in the early 70s, Edwards intended to concoct a formula to somehow make the Republican Party less relevant in state elections though his gambit backfired.

Even from behind prison bars, the governor who sired the open primary claims the move was one of his biggest regrets in politics as the open primary contributed to the growth of the Republican Party in Louisiana.

The main argument cited by those opposed to the open primary is that it produced the “Race from Hell”, AKA the 1991 gubernatorial runoff between Edwards and ex-Klan leader and state representative David Duke.

But that claim is not only flawed, it’s a cop out for the electorate and the political parties that set the scene.

Duke and Edwards did not appear in the general election via spontaneous combustion; the voters, not the open primary, put them there.

Most people forget that Kathleen Blanco’s first bid for governor was in 1991 when she offered herself as an alternative to the controversial Edwards; she gained no traction and droped out leaving Edwards with a monopoly on the Democratic side, thus assured of a spot in the runoff.

On the Republican end, state party leaders manufactured Congressman Clyde Holloway’s candidacy as the conservative alternative to what was only the second governor to be affiliated with the GOP since Reconstruction.

If the Democratic establishment could be rightfully accused of being content being represented by default by a man many Louisianans viewed as the mascot of all that is flamboyant and unflattering about Louisiana politics then the Republicans were guilty of engaging in a sloppy political seppuku by scorning a gift personally wrapped by no less of a party figure than President George H. W. Bush.

It was one of those instances, none to rare, where the state GOP swapped the elephant silhouette with the image of Wile E. Coyote as its logo.

But the target of their Acme scheming didn’t help his own cause either as there’s no guarantee that Governor Buddy Roemer would have won the GOP nomination that year in a closed primary, especially since much of his support in the open primary came from pro-reform white liberals.

The clumsy manner in which the governor conducted his party switch, the poor salesmanship of his rejected tax reform plan, stormy relations with the legislature and most importantly his vetoing of anti-abortion legislation had far more to do with his third place finish than the “system”.

Had Roemer just let the proposed abortion restrictions become law without his signature, the fissure within the party would not have been as severe and his re-election would have been academic.

Ironically it was the open primary that paved the way for the politically moderate Roemer to ascend to the governor’s mansion in 1987. A close primary would have produced a match between Edwards and Republican Congressman Bob Livingston.

If anything, closed primaries, especially under the schematic that was just scrapped, was more likely to produce a polarizing general election, as Republicans unwisely blocked registered Independents and unaffiliated voters from participating in theirs while the Democratic electorate is heavily weighted with black voters.

There were other devils in the details of the abandoned closed primary, one in particular being that the party primaries are held in late August, the peak of hurricane season. This year’s, which will be the final run of the closed primary, will be conducted the day before the fifth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina.

Two years ago, state elections had to be postponed when Hurricane Gustav delayed the primaries a month, resulting in December general elections in the Second and Fourth congressional districts.

But even if meteorological events were not factors, primaries held on the heels of the general election unfairly favor incumbents (i.e. the reason the congressional delegation was satisfied keeping things as they were).

Assuming a primary goes to a second ballot, the party nominee challenging an incumbent (likely renominated without opposition) starts what is roughly a month-long general election period without money and with a fractured base.

This is precisely what almost cost the Louisiana GOP the vacant Fourth Congressional District, which had been held by the Republican Party since 1988. Only the rock-ribbed conservative First District (Jefferson-Saint Tammny) has been occupied longer by Republicans.

And, in the event Governor Jindal does not make a bid for the US Senate in 2014, a contentious primary battle under the existing closed primary rules would make unseating Democrat Mary Landrieu a formidable, if not impossible task, as the incumbent could sit on a six-year old warchest while her opponent would have to financially start from square one a mere thirty days before election day.

Yet the Louisiana Republican Party stood by- correction- implored legislators to retain a recipe for disaster in the event Landrieu seeks re-election.

With the open primary, Landrieu will have to spend her campaign money the same time as everyone else does, which is precisely why then-Elections Commissioner Suzie Terrell came within a hair of upsetting the incumbent in 2002.

When the closed primary became reality, there was no stampede to Voter Registration offices by conservatives who retained Democratic or Independent affiliations to join the Republican Party.

State GOP leaders were befuddled by the difference between a registered Republican and a Republican voter; the former makes for a good statistic but the latter is more valuable as they’re the ones who put Republicans in public office, regardless of what their file card with the Registrar of Voters office says they are. Some states don’t even have party registration.

The closed primary was a bonanza only for political consultants, who got to receive checks from as many as three elections in lieu of the maximum of two under the open primary while costing the state treasury an additional $6,000,000 per cycle.

Finally there is the most disagreeable part of the closed primary: a majority didn’t necessarily rule.

A candidate only needed to secure a plurality, which opened the gates to qualifying “reindeer games” as dummy, shill or spoiler candidates could (and did) play kingmaker.

Just because Louisiana’s election system is different from most of the other states doesn’t necessarily make us behind the times; it could make us pioneers for embracing a better and more economical way of practicing democracy.

Obama's Reichstag Oil Spill

2010-06-15T21:39:00.000-07:00

On Tuesday evening, the 55th day since the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig exploded in the Gulf of Mexico, President Barack Obama took to the airwaves ostensibly to inform the nation about what his administration is doing in the face of the worst environmental disaster in American history. But in lieu of offering a solution, the president devoted a significant amount of time to trashing BP, lecturing like Al Gore and passing the “tar ball”.

The latter is ironic for a man who mocked the previous administration’s response to Hurricane Katrina on the White House website the very day the 44th president took office.

For much of the past month and a half, the president seems to have been a man in search of an “ass to blame” then intent on plugging a hole or containing the oil slick and when he hasn’t been slinging blame, the president has been rhetorically slinging BP’s money around without the capacity to actually back up the financial obligations he casually assigns to them.

BP will deservedly pay a steep price for whatever negligence, willful and unintended, that contributed to a catastrophe that threatens a way of life for generations of fishermen, Louisiana’s fragile wetlands that act as the state’s first line of defense from a hurricane’s storm surge and countless species of marine fauna that inhabit the Gulf of Mexico and coastal marshlands.

But publicly bitching about BP isn’t solving problems plaguing the gulf coast and its certainly not presidential leadership, something the voters hoped (thought?) they were getting.

And to make matters even worse for the Louisiana economy, the Obama Administration handed down a double-whammy by suspending deep water oil exploration.

Offshore oil drilling involves considerable risk, just like coal mining. President Obama should be aware of this since he delivered the eulogy at the memorial service for the 29 mine workers who were killed in the Upper Big Branch mine in West Virginia.

Despite the pleadings of those who know the risks all too well, a diverse group that includes Louisiana Republicans and Democrats, the Times Picayune (the New Orleans newspaper that endorsed his presidential candidacy), offshore oil rig workers and fishermen, Obama remains irresolute on the moratorium, ignoring the fact that there are offshore rigs dotting across the gulf providing America the energy she needs.

Adding enormous insult to injury for Louisiana during his nationally televised address, the president had the audacity to invoke the environmental damage done to Louisiana’s coastline in part from the oil industry without offering succor.

Something that would help Louisiana would be for the president to get behind US Senator Mary Landrieu’s push to accelerate offshore oil royalty payments from the federal government as such funds would be dedicated to fighting coastal erosion.

But Landrieu’s allies on her side of the aisle are not inclined to send back to Louisiana oil dollars that could be better used to construct senior living centers in Medford, Massachusetts.

The refusal by the Democratic White House and Congress to embrace this measure of “economic justice” underscores their sincerity and begs to question the wisdom for a “red state” like Louisiana to send Democrats to Washington if they are unable to coax their colleagues to deliver for the state, when having a seat at the table doesn’t even entitle one to scraps.

Obama’s knee jerk deep water offshore policy is an example of the Obama Administration not letting the plight of the people get in the way of good policy.

Not missing the opportunity to parlay this crisis into winning converts to an impractical energy agenda, the president spent a sizable portion of his address deriding fossil fuels and the need to pursue alternative energy, though oil isn’t going to be significantly replaced as a critical component in the American energy fabric in our lifetime, no matter how many tens of billions the president casually throws against the wall or how many ludicrous taxes and trade schemes his rubber stamp Congress enacts.

Or for that matter how many more tens of billions the president makes for the House of Saud and Hugo Chavez by restricting our ability to supply ourselves with our own oil.

By the president’s words and actions, it’s abundantly clear that this crisis in a part of the country that didn’t vote for him isn’t as much a problem to be solved but a talking point to be used to advance a political agenda.

Early Call: Moreno Wins

2010-05-29T18:29:00.000-07:00

Based on the sample of results that have been reported The Early Call is projecting Helena Moreno the winner in the 93rd district state representative race.

Updated Numbers: Moreno Wins White Vote Heavily

2010-05-29T18:25:00.001-07:00

The McGehee School boxes comes in strong for Moreno, winning it 197-36.

The big question is how Moreno performed in Louis Charbonnet's boxes.

Moreno-Perry Runoff: First Numbers, Close But Leans Moreno

2010-05-29T18:13:00.000-07:00

The first numbers are in. Precinct 1-1, where James Perry won in the primary, Helena Moreno carries the box 16-11. Precinct 1-5 59-33 Moreno. Precinct 1-2 went to Moreno 33-11. Perry had handily carried both boxes in the primary, indicating a close race but promising for Moreno.

Mayor Mitch: A City United

2010-05-03T21:33:00.000-07:00

Launching his administration with an eloquent, Kennedy-esque address to the invitation-only gathering on the steps of historic Gallier Hall, Mitch Landrieu assumed the reins of leadership of a city still struggling to recover from Hurricane Katrina and a myriad of quality of life problems that were present long before the devastating storm system made landfall in 2005.

The younger Landrieu entered office not by being the lone man standing in a divisive election but supported by one of the broadest political mandates a non-incumbent has ever received.

The new mayor carried every neighborhood in the city and lost only a single precinct in his primary victory, carrying into office the votes and hopes of New Orleanians of all races, ideologies and incomes.

Only two other mayoral elections in the past 100 years are on the same level of importance as Landrieu’s win: Chep Morrison’s smashing the Ring’s decades of near-monopolistic control of city government and “Dutch” Morial’s election, marking the beginning of African-American ascendancy in city politics.

The greatest asset Landrieu has is the mandate he received at the polls as no one segment of the community put him in office.

It’s easier to govern when you win by a landslide than it is when victory comes by a sliver. Rather than having to work to build trust with voters on the other side of a 50-50 split that he has their best interests in mind, it was the voters who threw the keys to City Hall to Landrieu by virtual acclamation, signaling that they already trust him to do what’s right for the entire community.

To be the recipient of that level of support in a city known for its deep internal divisions is both humbling and sobering.

It’s also the best protection to have when someone marches into the City Council Chamber and makes the absurd accusation that transparency in government is a racist concept meant to hurt minority contractors. How Landrieu reacts to the political demagoguery invoked concerning policy and appointments will be an omen of what kind of leader he is going to be.

Landrieu will have eight years (a second term is practically a certainty- no sitting New Orleans mayor has lost a re-election bid since 1946) to utilize his vast experience in government, political courage, intellect, personal resilience and oratory skills to develop and sell to the public solutions to what ills the city.

Quick band-aid fixes will work about as well in addressing New Orleans’ long festering problems as the temporary levee plug along the Industrial Canal’s Lower Nine side during Hurricane Rita.

Sympathy for the Devil

2010-05-03T21:19:00.000-07:00

I am tempted to wager that there’s a better chance of the Orleans Parish School Board renaming a school for a Confederate general than the ex-mayor.

Clarence Ray Nagin’s mayoralty started off with much promise but suffered from disasters, natural, rhetorical and appointive. The Nagin era has been hammered on the front pages of the Times Picayune and the sides of Krewe d’Etat floats.

That said, here are a few highlights of the Nagin Administration:

1) The demise of Orleans Parish political machines that were largely responsible for the culture of corruption in City Hall and the wrecked public school system started with Nagin’s election in 2002. And once in office, Nagin did not set about creating a new machine (unlike the beatified Morrison).

2) The Big Four housing projects were demolished during his administration. If only Nixon could go to China then only Nagin could stand up to the professional protestors that wanted these high-density/crime havens of death and despair reopened.

3) New Orleanians finally found the guts to stand up to City Hall. Anyone remembered all of those protests about corruption, crime, etc. during either Morial Administration? Didn’t think so. Why? Because Nagin apparently had thicker skin than anyone that’s held the office and was not inclined towards political vengeance. For the first time, calling out the mayor didn’t feel like the equivalent of taking on the mafia. Be sure to remember this one.

4) Nagin showed more maturity dealing with President George W. Bush than Governor Kathleen Blanco and a number of other Democratic officials. While Blanco’s staffers were worrying about HWKRST (How Would Karl Rove Spin This?), Nagin didn’t let his party affiliation get in the way of working with the one man who could do the most for the city’s recovery.

5) He warned us about Kimberly Williamson Butler. But the voters elected her Clerk of Criminal Court anyway leading to missing evidence and election machines being delivered to polling locations late.

6) He cursed for all of us. While the Times Picayune has had some fun posting a Nagin comment soundboard, the mayor’s exasperation broadcast across the globe during the worst of Hurricane Katrina’s aftermath expressed the frustration we all felt with the storm, the Army Corps of Engineer’s levee system (and shipping channels that contributed to the collapse of the former) and the incompetence of the state and federal governments’ response to the storm.

7) Hollywood South. Before it became K-Ville, New Orleans was a new hub for the movie industry and had a big cheerleader in the mayor. Don’t think having the mayor’s support matters? Try getting the permits needed to close streets with City Hall against you. Film shoots garnered the Crescent City publicity and provided jobs for workers of all skill levels, from lighting technicians and caterers to extras.

8) He brought people together. It took mass disaffection with Nagin’s mayoralty to get many voters beyond race. For the first time since 1978, the city’s racial demographics alone were not the primary reason why a particular candidate was elected mayor. Nagin, who didn’t shy away from acting like an African-American version of Roswell Thompson, attempted to motivate black voters to act to keep the “franchise”; that kind of talk fell on deaf ears in 2010.

Ray Steib Elected Judge

2010-05-01T18:36:00.000-07:00

In the Jefferson Parish judicial election, Ray Steib has defeated Debbie Villio for judge. It would appear that the big push by Jefferson Parish sheruff Newell Normand backfired.

Perry, Moreno Runoff in District 93

2010-05-01T18:28:00.000-07:00

Projection based upon sample of results, James Perry will run first with Helena Moreno finishing second in the race for state representative in the sprawling legislative district vacated by now Senator Karen Carter Peterson. School Board member Thomas Robivhhaux ran a strong third with former representative Louis Charbonnet running a poor fourth in the western precincts.

Endorsements in the May Day special elections and The Early Call Tonight

2010-05-01T07:27:00.000-07:00

Helena Moreno for State Representative District 93- Electing reform-oriented politicians should always be a priority for New Orleans voters as each victory means one fewer cog in the city political machine. Helena demonstrated her commitment to improving the political culture of Orleans Parish when she was the lone Democratic candidate for Congress to oppose then-incumbent Bill Jefferson’s re-election in the general election. None of the other Democrats who thought Jefferson was a big enough problem to challenge at the polls had the guts/integrity to help finish the job in either the Democratic primary’s runoff or the general election. There is no Republican in the race.

Ray Steib for Jefferson Parish Judge, Section 2, Division A- While Mr. Steib has not demonstrated very good political judgment as a candidate, needlessly attacking fellow candidate Don Klotz’s character in the primary (there was no chance of Klotz beating Steib out for a spot in the runoff), there is little question that Steib would do the best job as judge and is not a part of an emerging political machine in Jefferson Parish.

The Early Call- I should have projections up in both races before 8:30 PM. Check www.mikebayham.blogspot.com for updates after 8:00 PM.

The Need to Return to Election Normalcy

2010-04-27T22:14:00.000-07:00

Starting in 2008, Louisiana conducted elections under two different systems: a closed party primary for federal races and an open primary for all other elections.

Under the rules of the closed primary for federal (US Representative and US Senator), each of the state’s political parties had the option of allowing registered independents and those voters who don’t have a party affiliation (in the eyes of the Secretary of State, there is a distinction) to participate in their primary.

The Louisiana GOP’s State Committee resoundingly voted to keep their primary exclusively for registered Republicans, while the Democrats, sensing a public relations coup, happily welcomed independents and unaffiliated voters to participate in theirs. More on that Republican committee vote later in this column.

Now before I delve into the complications, absurdities and the cost to the taxpayers of the closed primary system, allow me to discuss politics.

John McCain, the Republican Party’s presidential nominee, carried the Pelican State with 59% of the vote yet less than one-third of the Louisiana electorate are registered Republicans. Obviously independents, unaffiliated voters and registered Democrats crossed over to create this in-state landslide.

The GOP bosses and committee members ignore this reality with their insistence of “party purity” in the closed primary. While the Louisiana Republican State Central Committee’s 114-5 vote endorsing the closed primary was seemingly overwhelming, two things should be mentioned. First the RSCC consists of over 200 members; hence barely a majority were at the meeting. And some of those “votes” were proxies (members who handed their votes to someone else) and not the votes of members actually present.

Furthermore, over 70% of the RSCC was elected without opposition. Though its members serve on the governing board of the Louisiana Republican Party, one should not automatically assume that this mostly unelected body actually speaks for Louisiana’s registered Republicans.

In addition to insulting independents and unaffiliated voters, a critical cog in the Louisiana Republican Party’s electoral coalition, by shutting them out of the GOP primary and thus allowing them to participate in the Democratic primary, they’re creating a “moderating” effect by supporting more conservative Democratic candidates.

In other words, the independents and unaffiliated voters are saving the Democrats from themselves while the Louisiana GOP hides behind their ideological ramparts.

This scenario played out in the special election to replace Congressman Richard Baker in the Baton Rouge’s 6th congressional district, where a centrist Democrat, Don Cazayoux won his party’s nomination while ultra-conservative Woody Jenkins won the GOP nod. To nobody’s surprise, the Democrat won the general election in a fairly conservative congressional district.

But the closed primary’s can giveth and taketh. Another quirk with the system is that a candidate needs to only garner a plurality (the most votes as opposed to a majority) to win an election. Since the closed primary’s return, Louisiana has elected four congressmen without a majority, including Cazayoux and the Republican who defeated him later on in 2008.

The closed primary allows for political manipulation and chicanery to determine the outcome of a congressional election because a candidate does not need to win a majority.

Candidates have the option of skipping what could be a two-election primary, since a candidate DOES need to win a majority of the vote to receive his or her party’s nomination. A candidate can avoid the hassle and expense of winning a primary fight by simply qualifying for the general election as an independent or be nominated by one of the minor parties that have ballot access, such as the Greens or Libertarians. These candidates are in a position to play spoiler to a major party nominee (see ex-Congressman Cazayoux).

And there’s the potential for lawsuits as precinct commissioners could (and I’m sure have) accidentally allow people who shouldn’t vote in a particular primary or block someone from participating who is allowed to vote in a particular primary.

While permitting only Republicans to vote in the Republican primary and allowing Democrats, independents and unaffiliated voters to vote in the Democratic Primary might seem like a simple concept, the possibility (or rather probability) for confusion is ripe, especially since elected local offices under the open primary are voted on the same day!

You could very well have a case where someone is elected party nominee by more votes than there were eligible votes cast. While this is hardly unprecedented in Louisiana, the practical complexities of this system invite controversy.

Finally there is the best argument for scrapping the closed primary: its $6,000,000+ price tag.

Louisiana is in the midst of a nine-figure budget crisis. By scrapping the closed primary (which could require up to three elections) and going with the open primary (no more than two elections), the state could save a considerable amount of money that could go towards plugging the budget hole and off-setting cuts to hospitals and higher education.

Though the leadership of the Louisiana Republican Party boasts about being conservative, there is nothing more conservative a Republican can do than to save money from being needlessly spent.

The only winners with the closed primary are political consultants, since they stand to make money off of three elections instead of two in an open primary.

The closed federal primary is one luxury that Louisiana cannot afford.

Jindal Taps Tauzin for Lt. Governor's Post

2010-03-31T22:29:00.000-07:00

On late Wednesday evening, Governor Bobby Jindal announced that former south Louisiana US Representative Billy Tauzin R-Chackbay was offered and has accepted the soon to be vacated office of lieutenant governor.

“I’m excited to share with the public that one of Louisiana’s most able representatives in Washington has decided to once again serve the people of our great state as lieutenant governor,” said Jindal from his fourth floor office in the State Capitol.

“This is going to be a tough legislative session requiring that I spend time in Baton Rouge. Yet as governor, I have obligations that require me to leave the state at times for economic development and to meet with federal officials in Washington. With Billy stepping up as lieutenant governor, I can stay at home to work on the people’s business while he can handle the out of state business.”

Tauzin served in the Louisiana House of Representatives for two terms before winning a special election as a Democrat to succeed David Treen as US Representative from Louisiana’s Third Distirct. Tauzin had made an unsuccessful bid for governor in 1987, finishing fourth behind fellow congressmen Buddy Roemer and Bob Livingston.

Tauzin was a leading conservative Democrat until 1995 when he switched parties and joined the GOP during the Republican’s first year in control of the US House of Representatives since the early days of the Eisenhower Administration.

Tauzin did not seek re-election in 2008 after overcoming severe health issues and accepted a leadership post in PhRMA, a major pharmaceutical trade group. His son, Billy Tauzin, III unsuccessfully sought to succeed his father in Congress.

Tauzin recently decided to step down from his lucrative PhRMA position, possibly as a precursor to accepting the lieutenant governor’s post though the ex-congressman’s name had not been widely circulated as a possible candidate for the office.

The Chackbay native was present at Governor Jindal’s announcement declining to discuss his appointment at length. “I’m honored by Bobby’s expression of confidence in my ability to work for Louisiana’s interests. And as they say down in the bayou, ‘jour d’imbecile d’avril heureux!’”

Which is French for "Happy April Fool's Day!"

Autopsy on the Jay Batt Campaign

2010-03-10T21:27:00.000-08:00

If you’re a regular reader of this column or was one of those checking out “The Early Call” on Saturday night, you are already aware of the record-breaking time I projected ex-Councilman Jay Batt’s defeat in his bid to get back in city government.

Originally, I had posted three other precinct checkers across District A, in the riverbend, uptown, midcity and lakeview areas to call in results though I ended up calling them up and telling them not to bother 15 minutes after the election end.

The first set of numbers I saw in one precinct in Lakeview, the most Republican area in New Orleans, told me the whole story. Though Batt had won the box, he had done so by about 16 votes. He fared just as well (or rather poorly) at a neighboring station.

While en route to the next cluster of precincts, where poll workers provide transparency in elections by posting the numbers outside the door of the voting location, I called up Batt supporters that things weren’t looking well.

As I approached the door of the largest concentration of voting boxes in Lakeview with a pen and notepad in my hand, my eyes scanned the numbers, though I didn’t bother writing any of them down.

Batt had broken even.

I put my pen in my pants pocket and retrieved my cell phone from my other and told my fellow number crunchers to head back. The election was over even though Batt led most of the precincts I had checked.

Batt had carried precincts with a bare majority that virtually any Republican would win by 2 or 3-1 margins.

Here’s an example:

Precinct 4-17A, a box that went to John McCain, who had some of the worst numbers for a GOP presidential candidate in Orleans Parish in decades, handily carried it with 79%.

Batt lost that box by 5 votes…and it was hardly the exception as many other GOP precincts either gave Batt a slight majority or a loss. As you can imagine, Batt didn’t do well at all in Democratic precincts.

So how can one nitpick what a candidate did wrong when he got beat by a 62%-38% margin?

After all, it might be easier to find out what he did right.

That said, here’s an outsider’s view on how a well-financed Republican candidate got thrashed in a council district that has historically elected Republicans, at least until 2006.

1) Failure to consolidate the Republican vote. The first symptom of defeat was Batt’s lukewarm showings in Republican neighborhoods. Though the district is not a solid GOP district (it voted heavily for Barack Obama in 2008), the turnout dynamic favored a Republican, especially after Claude Mauberret dropped out of the assessor’s race, putting more pressure on Susan Guidry’s campaign to fire-up the Democratic base on her own. Though he made the effort, Batt failed to effectively play the Republican card with GOP voters despite his solid cred in this area, having played a major role in Joseph Cao’s defeat of Democratic Congressman Bill Jefferson and being the lone councilman who actively opposed Kathleen Blanco’s bid for governor in 2003.

2) Running on endorsements vs. testimonials. Batt received several high-profile endorsements from popular political figures Sheriff Marlin Gusman, Councilwoman Jackie Clarkson, District Attorney Leon Cannizzaro, etc.) yet they had little effect on his candidacy. The mailers I saw simply contained file photos of the endorser with a forgettable effusive quote on why Batt was great. Batt relied heavily on endorsements in his unsuccessful re-election bid in 2006, going so far as putting the Alliance for Good Government, the Times-Picayune and Bobby Jindal’s endorsements on his yard signs. Yet the same strategy that didn’t work last election should not have expected to do much this time. Rather than simply using endorsements and names, Batt should have used testimonials laying out what Batt had done specifically as a councilman while working with his endorsers in government. Furthermore, endorsements have little impact in big races or local races of interest; high-profile endorsements matter most in low-profile contests that are sandwiched in between more interesting elections.

3) Neutralizing “Anybody But Batt” First. The candidate had to know they weren’t going away and he should have launched his campaign actively engaging their charges and refuting them. Instead, the anti-Batt brigade defined his candidacy peppering him with criticism throughout the campaign with the least threatening aspect of their effort being their ABB signs in Mardi Gras colors.

On another note, I was surprised that the City of New Orleans would pick up the signs on election day, since technically candidate signs aren’t supposed to be on neutral grounds and right-of-ways at anytime. I don’t see how the city can pick and choose what signs get picked up and what signs are allowed to stay up.

4) The De Facto Incumbent in Denial Though he no longer held office, Batt was being judged by the voters as an incumbent official from his time on the council. While there were zoning votes that stirred his determined third-party opposition from his last campaign, Batt did not put his tenure in office in perspective. The issue I felt should have defined Batt’s candidacy was the former “residency rule” that used to be in effect that ostensibly was aimed at keeping city employees residing in Orleans Parish but in practice was used to chase away experienced people from the police department. That rule was symbolic of how political games and corruption have contributed to a decline in the quality of life in New Orleans and Batt had more to do with its repeal after Hurricane Katrina than any other councilman.

5) The Failure to Anticipate Why the Batt campaign didn’t see the return of “Dancing Jay” and plan on countering it is lost on me. How they didn’t see Batt’s backing from the city’s sundry political organizations being thrown back in his face with white voters equally so.

6) Wasted Money. Someone really need to tell me the benefit of those WBOK radio spots or LIFE, IDEA or YAPA ballots going to voters who aren’t inclined to vote for a Republican. Or why a candidate with 100% name recognition needed to spend dough on high-priced billboards.

I make no apologies for personally supporting Batt, though I wish he could have done a better job selling his candidacy to the voters. There have been a lot of bad people who have served in public office in Orleans Parish over the years that did more harm than good to the city, though Batt was not one of those individuals.

Batt was the kind of councilman who could vote for reform-oriented policies without crying while justifying his vote to race-baiters who didn’t think anything was wrong with the city on August 28, 2005.

The Batt campaign is proof that while having a large warchest is helpful, money cannot always buy love or the affections of the electorate and even if you have campaign finances to spare, they should always be spent wisely for maximum effect.

Batt had the misfortune of running afoul people who were willing to back up their grievances with him with time, resources and almost fanatical dedication to the cause of keeping him out off the council. And they showed they could carry a grudge over a long period of time.

Guidry wins

2010-03-06T18:24:00.000-08:00

Guidry wins the election. Democrat Susan Guidry has won the District A seat on the New Orleans City Council.

Republican Jay Batt underperformed in the GOP stronghold of Lakeview barely carrying precincts he had handily won in the primary.

The first Lakeview returns: Guidry wins

2010-03-06T18:00:00.000-08:00

Early Lakeview returns are bad for Batt., wining the former Batt strong precinct by a bare majority, indicating that Susan Guidry will likely win the race.

The Early Call on District A, New Orleans

2010-03-06T17:55:00.000-08:00

With the assistance of Paul Besse, Robert LoGreco and Nelson Cantrelle, III, the Early Call will have multiple precincts to sample this evening on the District A race with a projected "projection" time at 8:30 PM CST. Check in for updates over the next hour.

Bye-Reggie-Bye?

2010-02-24T21:55:00.000-08:00

The New Orleans Saints Super Bowl parade might have been the last time celebrithete running back Reggie Bush donned a Saints jersey in the Crescent City.

Due a staggering $8,000,000 next season under the terms of Bush’s contract, the Saints front office has two choices: pay the cameo superstar or cut him. Trade is not likely an option not because Bush is unwanted by other teams, since his talents are certainly coveted in addition to the marketing bonanza that follows the 4th year player that has yet to make a Pro Bowl but because nobody else would want to assume the running back’s contract.

A renegotiation/restructuring of Bush’s contract is improbable; not because of his stats but because of his stature. Stars like Bush, due to pride and/or perception, don’t take pay cuts. And if they have to settle for one, it’ll be with another team.

One source I won’t identify who is very familiar with the Saints organization mentioned to me just before the playoffs that Bush’s departure as a virtual certainty because the running back wants to return to the west coast, the location of his roots, his interests and his girlfriend.

Bush played high school football in San Diego and moved up the Pacific Coast for college at USC. And though Bush has played professionally in New Orleans, it’s apparent that he has immersed himself in the Crescent City like other Saints players have. Bush isn’t the adopted local icon quarterback Drew Brees is and never will be.

Number nine has supplanted all of the professional sports legends before him owns this town, just like George Brett owns Kansas City and John Elway owns Denver; Reggie Bush just works here.

That said, I don’t mean to discount his charitable work in New Orleans, which has not been inconsiderable, as Bush was donating money to entities struggling to recover from Hurricane Katrina before he had inked his deal with the Saints.

But New Orleans just isn’t his city; and it’s not Kim’s either.

Saints fans shouldn’t take it personally. Nola just isn’t home.

Bush has no shortage of options beyond the Saints. Even with limited play in 2009, Bush was a major contributor to the Saints offense as a running back (averaging a career high 5.6 yards per carry), receiver (7.1 yards per reception) and as a distraction (see the high level of productivity by the other receivers). Bush also scored a combined 8 touchdowns rushing and receiving, including the spectacular “fleur-de-leap” against the Miami Dolphins that made the cover of Sports Illustrated.

The one area where Bush was largely a bust this season was as a punt returner. Bush averaged a meager 4.8 yards per return with two fumbles and no touchdowns. The 2008 season was Bush’s best as a punt returning with a 13.5 yard return average and having taken 3 back for touchdowns.

The divisional playoff game against the Arizona Cardinals was unquestionably his finest in the 2009 post-season; Bush's play in the NFC Championship against the Minnesota Vikings and against the Indianapolis Colts in the Super Bowl were let downs by comparison.

While Bush isn’t a durable player, he is capable of making exciting plays on a limited basis, selling jerseys and attracting klieg lights.

The most natural fit for Bush would be his hometown of San Diego, which is close to LA, USC and KK. Conveniently enough, the Chargers are shorthanded at running back with the release of LaDainian Tomlinson, one cannot help think in part anticipating the arrival of Bush as a free agent.

The second most logical option is a reunion with his former college coach Pete Carroll, who made a hasty departure up the coastline to Seattle.

While Bush will be dearly missed in the Big Easy, the Saints will have an opportunity in the draft to pick up a player that could partially (key word) supplement the dynamo gap left by Reggie’s departure.

The Saints may already have one part in place with the probable return of wide receiver Rod Harper, who impressed the Saints front office and fans with two punts returned for touchdowns in the 2009 preseason but spent all of the regular season either inactive or on injured reserve.

Talk of Tomlinson’s possible singing by the Saints, publicly encouraged by his old Chargers team mate and good friend Brees, wouldn’t replace what Bush takes with him. If anything, Tomlinson’s addition would more probably be an indication that running back Mike Bell’s days with the Saints organization are numbered as the two share a similar running style.

Bush has been a valuable player for the Saints and his contributions to the team on the field, off the field and from a marketing perspective cannot be denied nor discounted.

But Reggie isn’t worth 8 mill. And Reggie isn’t taken a nickel less from the Saints.
Leaving general manager Mickey Loomis with no other choice than, for the second off-season in a row, to cut a popular running back from the roster.

The only question is when.

And so the ReggieWatch begins.

The Greatest

2010-02-23T20:27:00.000-08:00

Saints fans that preceded the creation of a Who Dat nation and those who joined the Second Line after the NFL tried a hostile takeover of said nation reveled together as the New Orleans Saints, viewed by many- particularly locals- as a cursed franchise, quickly made the transition from being the leaving the unenviable company of four NFL franchises that have never appeared in a Super Bowl to joining the elite 18 teams that have won the big game.

Locals made the transition from living vicariously through post-season play through the Manning boys to chanting their desire to see the eldest of the Super Bowl winning quarterback brothers on the ground.

That part made me happy.

Why? Because in my not so humble opinion, rooting for the Mannings in the playoffs when the Saints have finished with a usual below .500 record reminds me of how Americans root for the country of their ancestors after the USA is quickly eliminated in World Cup soccer.

Not anymore. Never again.

I was standing in a nose-bleed row in the Saints painted end zone when cornerback Tracy Porter picked off the “prototype”, the man the national sportswriters pant over and took the football to the opposite end zone.

Hopping. Screaming. I was hugging the other Saints fan in my decidedly blue section. The New Orleans Saints are going to be the World Champions.

Sure there was time on the clock for a quick-scoring, professional rallying team like the Indianapolis Colts. But for the first time, this ball of nerves for a Saints fan didn’t see the Black and Gold seizing defeat out of the jaws of victory.

No more curses. No more jinxes. The gris-gris was on someone else.

To quote the little old lady from Poltergeist, this franchise is clean.

Unlike my previous game reviews, I’m not going to break the game into detail.

The first half was a snoozer and despite the steep price I paid to sit in a steep seat, I was almost asleep. The unseasonable cold didn’t help matters.

One thing stands out from the first half. The Saints defense finally arrived when they forced the Colts to punt with 46 seconds left in the second quarter. With the time left the Saints offense got far enough down the field for kicker Garrett Hartley to put up three points to somewhat compensate for the Saints failure to score on their previous drive, when they were first and three near the Indianapolis end zone.

And then there was AMBUSH, the play Saints head coach Sean Payton planned on calling before Carrie Underwood belted out the national anthem.

Punter Tommy Morestead’s surprise on-side kick stirred me awake after The Who’s performance and marked the beginning of Super Bowl play by the struggling Saints. The Colts defense was in disarray as the Saints made five consecutive plays including running back Pierre Thomas’s 16-yard touchdown reception.

Tight end Jeremy Shockey also got some redemption after the Super Bowl snub by his former employers with a touchdown reception combined with wide receiver Lance Moore’s reception for a two-point conversion (credit a Payton challenge) that put the Black and Gold ahead for good.

Though it was into the Four Quarter, the Colts experienced fear for the first time. And second-year cornerback Tracy Porter smelled it and where Colts quarterback Peyton Manning was going, stepped in front of it and ran back for 74 yards the greatest pick-6 of his young career and in the history of the four decades old Saints franchise.

Saints fans in the stadium formerly known as Joe Robbie and a host of other corporate names erupted in unison as those hundreds of miles away on Bourbon Street and 7 miles down river in living rooms in Chalmette.

They were living in the moment even the youngest Who Days never thought they would live to see. The Saints were world champions. And quarterback Drew Brees, whom many felt was wrongfully denied the league’s MVP award after sports journalists gave it by a landslide to the Colts quarterback, received the Super Bowl MVP award ironically at the expense of Manning. Talk about poetic justice.

I remember chatting with a fan of the Tampa Bay Buccaneers not long ago about the ups and downs of his team just in the past decade. The Super Bowl win in 2003, the mid-season collapse in 2008 and how they never got back off the ground in 2009.

He shook his head and said that the worse thing that could have ever happened to the Buccaneers was winning the Super Bowl. I stood shocked for this Saints fan could not fathom in his wildest imagination how such a concept could exist.

But the Buc-a-roo held firm, saying the win set a bar that was too high and the expectations game plagued the franchise and its Super Bowl winning coach Jon Gruden- who I might add has been giddily cheering for the Saints with almost as much fervor as Bobby Hebert.

If the current Saints organization were to do their best impersonation of the Ditka-Kuharich era, the Black and Gold faithful will stand by this team, its management and its coaches for having achieved what not long ago was the seemingly impossible.

Fans might wince at bone headed trades, draft picks and backfiring triple-reverse trick plays, but what owner Tom Benson, general manager Mickey Loomis, head coach Sean Payton, defensive coordinator Gregg Williams, Brees and the rest of the roster have given New Orleans and its people- those residing in south Louisiana and those scattered across the country by Katrina and better job opportunities cannot be taken away and will always be appreciated no matter what may come.

Who Dat?

We Dat!

Reading into the 2010 CPAC Straw Poll

2010-02-22T22:16:00.001-08:00

One-time Libertarian presidential candidate and current Republican US Representative Ron Paul of Texas pulled an upset when he finished first in the CPAC’s presidential straw poll with an impressive 31%, outdistancing former Massachusetts governor and 2008 presidential candidate Mitt Romney, who came in second-place with 22%.

Romney ran first in last year’s CPAC straw poll with 20% and also came in first in 2008 after he ended his presidential campaign at the annual gathering of conservative activists while Paul far outperformed his previous placings, running 4th with 10% in 2008 and 3rd in 2009 with 13%.

So what can be read into these results?

Not to throw a pail of cold water on Paulistas but the CPAC straw poll is hardly reflective of the electorate that will determine President Barack Obama’s principal opponent in 2012.

For example, a majority of CPAC straw poll participants were 25 years old or younger while individuals above the age of 55 cast only 10% of straw poll ballots.

And there is the gender gap: roughly two out of three participants in the CPAC straw poll were male.

Also former Alaska governor and GOP 2008 vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin and ex-Arkansas governor Mike Huckabee, both favorites of social conservatives who poll near the top of all scientific Republican surveys, fared poorly.

Neither Palin nor Huckabee addressed the conference, with the Baptist minister questioning the conference’s legitimacy despite the presence of former Vice-President Dick Cheney and a number of other national party leaders and federal and state officials.

Huckabee accused the event of being hijacked by libertarians and described it as “pay-for-play” venue where candidates can buy positioning for the straw poll.

Though the CPAC results in no way reflect the field of play in any state caucus or primary awarding delegates in 2012, the straw poll is relevant.

CPAC is as close to an annual national event for conservatives, with the regional Republican leadership conferences being more representative of the party faithful. And even those are hardly ideal political barometers.

One of the big criticisms about the 2006 Southern Republican Leadership Conference straw poll was how the results reflected parochialism rather than how Republican state and county leaders truly felt about President George W. Bush’s potential successor.

The 2006 SRLC was held in Memphis and packed with Tennessee Republicans so it should not have surprised anyone that the big winner was none other than Tennessee US Senator Bill Frist.

The Paulistas can rightly point out that the 2010 CPAC event is indicative that young Republican activists are embracing Paul and his fiscal conservative message, as the Texas congressman jumped by 18 points with roughly the same age-range dominating participation.

Romney’s second-place showing earned him a front-page story in Monday’s USAToday but also revealed that his standing with the CPAC crowd has slipped. Romney went through great pains to portray his unsuccessful 2008 run in the same light as Ronald Reagan’s failed 1976 bid. Ending his candidacy at CPAC in 2008 was supposed to reinforce his conservative credentials. It seems that gesture quit paying dividends last year.

Perhaps fiscal conservatives are starting to finally vent their displeasure with Romney’s universal health care legacy while serving as governor of Massachusetts now that ObamaCare has become the defining issue separating the national parties.

If that is indeed the case, Paul could potentially do to Romney from the fiscal conservative angle in 2012 what Huckabee did to Romney from the social conservative side in 2008.

One of Paul’s mistakes from his 2008 campaign was his refusal to engage his opponents, instead running against “the establishment/the system/the Matrix”.

This put him off on a remote island, shunned by media outlets and his fellow candidates. And in politics, the cruelest insult is to be ignored. Romney could be the perfect fall guy Paul needs to make his bones that further establish his credibility/legitimacy.

Though he didn’t get the same press Paul and Romney did, outgoing Minnesota governor Tim Pawlenty should be satisfied with the CPAC results. The low-key state executive who has never been accused of being a mesmerizing orator received a respectable 6% to finish in 4th place just behind Palin and besting better known GOP figures such as Huckabee and ex-House Speaker Newt Gingrich.

Pawlenty showed that he gained some traction with those rare CPAC “swing voters”, those being attendees who didn’t already have their mind made up about 2012 before they registered for the 2010 conference.

Early Calls

2010-02-06T18:43:00.000-08:00

Landrieu elected Mayor. Council races called include Stacy Head in District B, Kristin Palmer in District C, and Cynthia Hedge-Morrell in District D.

Other Races Called

2010-02-06T18:30:00.000-08:00

Based upon early returns, Paula Brown and Tracy Davillier will be elected to judgeships. Marlin Gusman will be reelected Sheriff and Clerk of Criminal Court Arthur Morrell will be reelected. Coroner Frank Minyard will also be reelected. Claude Mauberrep will oppose Lerroll Williams in a runoff for Assessor.

District A: Batt, Guidry go to runoff

2010-02-06T18:27:00.000-08:00

Former GOP Councilman Jay Batt will face Democrat Susan Guidry in runoff. Batt polling roughly 60 percent in Lakeview. Republican candidate Virginia Blanque is running even with Guidry in GOP boxes, indicating she will finish third once predominantly Democratic precincts report.

Councilman-At-Large: Fielkow leads at-large voting,

2010-02-06T18:24:00.000-08:00

At-Large Councilman (and former Saints executive) Artie Fielkow leads voting in Lakeview precincts. Republican candidate Craig Sonnier leads Jackie Clarkson in Lakeview. Cynthia Willard-Lewis runs last amongst major candidates.

Mayor's Race: Landrieu Teeters on Outright Win

2010-02-06T18:22:00.000-08:00

Lt. Governor Mitch Landrieu runs first in primary, nears securing majority. Landrieu is polling 60 percent of white vote, while Couhig and Georges running even in Republican boxes.

The Super Bowl

2010-02-04T22:48:00.000-08:00

There’s no way I could possibly dress up the title of this column. No hyperbole or jacked up adjectives could do it more justice.

The New Orleans Saints, after four-decades of frustration and inching progress towards the goal of every NFL team, will compete in America’s biggest sporting event.

There are so many angles.

Some believe the game’s relevance is rooted in Katrina and what all of us New Orleans folk “went through” (President Obama’s pity-reason for rooting for the Black and Gold).

But this Katrina evacuee, victim and returnee doesn’t think the story of the Saints’ first appearance in the Superbowl should be about Katrina.

Tens of thousands of Saints fans packed the Superdome, and before that Tulane Stadium, prior to August 29, 2005. Those Saints fans came back to the dome in 2006, mostly to demonstrate their love of a team that has given its fans little to cheer about in the existence of the franchise.

That the Superdome has been sold out through season tickets every year since the Saints returned to New Orleans had nothing to do with Katrina and everything to do with the ownership’s commitment to putting a quality product on the turf.

The Tom Benson era started off with much promise with four playoff appearances and five winning seasons in the first seven years under new management. Sports management guru Jim Finks was hired as general manager and help mold the Saints into winners for the first time.

But when Finks’s health deteriorated, so did the team. Between 1993 and the start of the 2006 season, the Saints organization had one bright spot: winning its first playoff game in 2000.

Compelled by NFL Commissioner Paul Tagliabue to return to the battered Crescent City, Benson and general manager Mickey Loomis gutted and rebuilt the team, from head coach down to quarterback and along the way picked up the team’s first certifiable celebrithete with the second overall pick of the 2006 draft. More so than even the signing of quarterback Drew Brees, selecting USC running back Reggie Bush was the first real signal in the post-Katrina world that Benson wanted to win.

The Saints front-office, recognizing the economic realities of a metropolitan area still struggling to recover, developed a ticket pricing structure and the fans responded.

General manager Loomis was as aggressive in free agency in 2009 as he was in 2006, turning the Saints secondary from its Achilles heel to its defensive strength. Head coach Sean Payton showed maturity adopting a more conservative and balanced game plan, abandoning the aerial circus of calling pass after pass and utilizing the team’s talented yet unrecognized running back committee undrafted free agents Pierre Thomas and Lynell Hamilton and Denver Bronco castaway Mike Bell.

Now there’s the real story of the NFC Champion New Orleans Saints. No hurricane drama. Just a well-put together team that never gave up regardless of the deficit and fed off the energy of the league’s most passionate fans.

The Peyton Angles

I found myself turning off the radio the other day as a national sports talk program had worked my last nerve. For that particular program…or rather any given sports radio program not originating from Louisiana, the story for the sports media is Peyton Manning. I can think of one hell of a Peyton angle but they never really dwelled on it.

For them it’s about adulation of an individual that is one of the greatest to play the position. On this count, I’m partial to Brett Farve on this but Peyton is young and talented enough to beat many of the grizzled veteran’s records.

I could understand the Peyton obsession back in 2007 when the talk was whether Peyton would be denied enshrinement based upon his lack of post-season success and a Super Bowl ring. But Peyton got his jewelry and their reserving a place for his bust in Canton.

But why are they still talking about him when the pressure is now on Saints quarterback Drew Brees to win the big one in order to for his name to one day join the gridiron’s immortals?

Because he hails from a small and often denigrated media market, Brees will likely have to win a Super Bowl, if not two, to get to the Hall of Fame.

The real Peyton angle is that he will be facing off against the team his father Archie led in the seventies and early eighties and whose name prominently hangs on a banner inside the Superdome.

Who would have thought thirty years ago that the only thing stood between the Saints and their first Super Bowl victory was a scrawny adolescent in the stands watching his father run for his life from the opposing team’s defensive line?

The Breakdown

The Indianapolis Colts offense is what the Saints used to be prior to 2009: over-reliant on the pass.

Throw in that Peyton Manning ranked seventh in interceptions with 16, the ball-hawk Saints secondary only need to pick the Colts quarterback off twice to put Indianapolis in a hole they might not be able to climb out of.

That said, Manning has one of the best offensive lines in the NFL and the Saints have a lackluster pass-rush that will give the Colt general ample time to safely get the ball off to the open receiver of his choice.

Can the Saints’ secondary cover tight end Dallas Clark, the best in the business, and wide receiver Reggie Wayne? If they can, then they’ve practically shut down the Colts offense.

The other piece of good news for the Saints defense is that the Colts were dead last in the league at rushing. For a squad that has given up big running scores throughout the season, the Saints run defense should perform better than they have against teams with a more establishing running game.

And finally there is the most talked about ankle in the world, owned by Colts defensive end Dwight Freeney. Freeney, who had 13.5 sacks in the regular season, won’t be at his best even if the Pro-Bowler sees action, which is good news for Drew Brees’s award winning offensive line.

The Colts defense isn’t as stout against the run, ranking 24th in the NFL allowing 126.5 rushing yards per game. They’re better against the pass, ranking 14th surrendering 212.7 yards in the air per game. However the Colts defense is far stingier when it comes to points, giving up the 9th fewest in the NFL, 19.2 per game.

Brees commands the best offense in the NFL and will test a good but not great Colts defense. With ample targets for number Nine and a hobbled if active Freeney, Brees should have a great day if he does a good job protecting the football when the Colts defense gets penetration. Better to take a sack than give the ball up.

The Oddsmaker

USA Today oddsmaker Danny Sheridan has the Colts as a 5 point favorite. No surprise here. Peyton Manning is the prototype for a quartback and the Colts won their conference championship with greater ease than the Saints. Also keep in mind that had the Colts not pulled their starters, they would have finished the season no worse than 15-1, with the one loss coming from having to play in the middle of a blizzard in Orchard Park, NY.

My Prediction: Saints Win!

Since I believe the Saints will win and the Black and Gold are the underdogs, take the points.

Without writing a lengthy passionate screed, I would like to briefly state four reasons why I believe the Saints will win:

1) The Saints will be healthier with two weeks rest as the bye periods have been a blessing.

2) The Saints are hungrier. That they haven’t been there before isn’t necessarily a bad thing. Brees knows his place in NFL history and his spot in Canton are on the line. Tight end Jeremy Shockey was denied the opportunity to play in his previous team’s Super Bowl appearance; he intends to make the most of this chance. Reggie Bush, who will likely be peddling his services elsewhere next season because of his salary, could not have a better stage on which to audition for new prospective employers. Defensive end Will Smith, who was snubbed out of a deserved Pro Bowl invite/bonus, sees this as his opportunity to make a statement to his peers. And free safety Darren Sharper wants another line for his Hall of Fame resume. Sabremetrics it’s not but I stand by the above cited intangibles.

3) The Saints have overcome the most hurdles, and I’m not talking about Katrina. Look at who the Saints have beaten this year: two teams that played in conference championship games (New York Jets and Minnesota Vikings) and three hall of fame quarterbacks (Kurt Warner, Tom Brady and Favre). While the Saints barely defeated the Vikings, the Colts had a few close calls against lesser opponents in the regular season.

4) Balance. Running back Pierre Thomas is going to introduce himself to the free world on Super Sunday.

In closing, I have only this to say: WHO DAT!

The Early Call Returns! Maybe...

2010-02-04T19:26:00.000-08:00

Pending a possible last minute run to South Florida (WHO DAT!), The Early Call will PROBABLY return on Saturday night.

Check out this blog for updates. Since 2006, The Early Call has only been wrong ONCE (damned Jim Webb) in making projections based on early returns from strategic precincts.

Stay tuned!

Endorsements (And Some Commentary) in the City Elections

2010-02-04T19:23:00.000-08:00

Jay Batt for District A Councilmen have to make tough decisions. Jay’s made them and paid for them, rightly or wrongly. One of the things that has amazed me about the district, particularly in the Carrollton area, has been the number of “no-this” and “no-that” signs. New Orleans has been justly accused as a city allergic to change, progress and development. Neighborhood and parochial matters aside, there is ONE thing that stands out about Batt- it was because of his efforts the city’s self-destructive residency rules on first-responders was finally scrapped. It’s not good enough for District A to select a “good vote”; they need to have a leader in that spot. What few reform measures that have advanced in the city generally originated from District A council members, including term-limits (thank you Peggy Wilson).

That Batt has lost twice for this seat and threw his hat in the ring again knowing he’d be targeted again by unmovable critics speaks of his humility and dedication to the city and the area. I fully encourage District A voters to support his bid to return to the council.

Stacy Head for District B If the full authority of supreme elector of Orleans Parish was vested in my hands, Ms. Head would be mayor. The Crescent City’s reigning frozen-food internet critic has courage, integrity and resilience.

Cynthia Hedge-Morrell for District D She fought for Holy Cross High School and she was the swing vote on ending the residency rule on first-responders. Her errors in other areas are largely insignificant in the big picture.

Austin Badon for District E Consistently supported reform legislation in the House of Representatives.

At-Large No endorsement from me personally but I will mention the Greater New Orleans Republicans endorsed the incumbents, Jackie Clarkson and Arnie Fielkow. I would also like to add that Congressman Steve Scalise has endorsed Clarkson. I’d love to see the Louisiana GOP condemn the state’s most conservative congressman for that “sin”.

Mayor Once again, I won’t endorse anyone but I will point out some harsh realities.

Republican mayoral candidate Rob Couhig has expressed support for the reappointment of Jim Letten as US Attorney. So has Mitch Landrieu.

That said, Paul Prudhomme couldn’t cook the poll numbers enough to come up with a scenario where Couhig makes a runoff. Furthermore, there is ZERO doubt that Landrieu will not only be in a runoff (if there is a runoff) but will also lead the field, doing no worse than falling just short of winning mayor outright.

And John Georges has no chance of making a runoff so long as Couhig’s name is on the ballot as the white anti-Landrieu vote (however big THAT segment is in Orleans Parish) is hopelessly split.

Finally, Georges’s “stand-up routine” before the DPEC did two things: boosted Couhig and Landrieu’s white numbers and killed his chances of being elected mayor.

This might not be pleasant for Republicans, but that is reality.

I’d also like to mention that a runoff between Landrieu and Henry will probably be the ugliest and most racially charged campaign since the Morial-Mintz runoff and perhaps worse than that since it’s going to require a whole lot of demagoguery by Henry and the usual suspects of “the men of God crowd” flanking him to pull this one out in the second round.

The voters in Orleans Parish have an opportunity to skip a whole lot of unpleasantness and settle the mayor’s race in the primary. Choose wisely.

Assessor Not a peep out of me in this one either but if you really wanted to piss off the Times Picayune, the same rocket scientists that endorsed Barack Obama for the presidency, then a vote for Claude Mauberret would do the trick.

Judge Civil Court, Division J The Greater New Orleans Republicans endorsed Paula Brown, an African-American candidate who enjoyed support from the National Rifle Association (!) in her previous bid for the bench. I think highly of Ms. Brown and believe she will do an admirable job. However, I’ve known Stephen Chestnut for a long time and can personally vouch for his integrity. I would vote for Stephen Chestnut.

State Senator, 5th District Question: what do Irma Muse Dixon and Karen Carter Peterson have in common? They’ve both lost congressional races to “Dollar” Bill Jefferson. Gosh it’s nice that I don’t have to preface Jefferson’s name with the title “U.S. Representative”. I’ve known Karen for a long time and she’s not the radical Jefferson has made her out to be in the 2006 congressional campaign. Carter-Peterson would be the most effective for the district in the upper chamber. Granted I’m not making an endorsement, just sayin’.

Predictions in the New Orleans City Elections

2010-02-04T18:40:00.000-08:00

Just a few prognostications...don't hold me to any of them. I have a sizable bet riding in only one race.

New Moon Over New Orleans

Powered by a strong absentee vote and a backlash against the Nagin Administration that transcends race, Lieutenant Governor Mitch Landrieu will win the office that unsuccessfully pursued in 1994 and 2006.

Business consultant Troy Henry, as the consensus black candidate, will run second followed by John Georges, whose inroads with the black community could not compensate the loss of white support stemming from his harsh comments about popular US Attorney Jim Letten. Rob Couhig, the lone Republican in the race, will finish fourth, fair housing activist James Perry fifth and former judge Nadine Ramsey placing sixth.

Projected percentages:

Mitch Landrieu 50%
Troy Henry 24%
John Georges 13%
Rob Couhig 7%
James Perry 3%
Nadine Ramsey 2%
Others 1%

Fielkow, Clarkson Re-elected

At-Large Council members Arnie Fielkow and Jacquelyn Clarkson will be returned to office in the primary due to the election only featuring three major candidates. Because all the candidates run on one ballot and the electorate can cast two votes, Fielkow and Clarkson will benefit from the second vote distributed by black voters to the two incumbents whose first choice was Cynthia Willard-Lewis, while Willard-Lewis is expected to receive little crossover support from white voters. Lewis would have benefited from a second black candidate of stature on the ballot and stronger Republican candidates splitting the white vote. Four years ago, Clarkson failed to lock up her initial bid for councilman-at-large in the primary because of a split white vote involving two Republican candidates and a two other significant white Democrats.

Batt, Guidry Go to the Second Round

Former Republican Councilmember Jay Batt will face Democrat Susan Guidry in a runoff. Batt has had to contend with opposition from not just the other candidates in the race but also the Anybody But Batt group that spoiled his bid for re-election in 2006 and the Democratic incumbent council member who beat him last time, Shelley Midura. Helping Batt this time around is a repopulated Lakeview area.

Other Council Races
Council member Stacy Head, who in my not so humble opinion OUGHT to be mayor, will be re-elected in District B.

Kristin Palmer, after narrowly losing a bid for District C four years before, will be elected the council over Republican assessor Tom Arnold. Though Arnold has been a long enduring figure in Algiers, he has sustained too much bad publicity from articles in the Times Picayune and his campaign has struggled to gain momentum.
District D voters will return Cynthia Hedge-Morrell. This will be a third term for Morrell, who was elected to post pre-Hurricane Katrina after then-incumbent council member Marlin Gusman was elected criminal sheriff.

District E voters have six candidates to choose from. The district, hit hardest by Hurricane Katrina, includes New Orleans East and the lower Nine. Conventional wisdom says that state representative Austin Badon and former Senator Jon Johnson will be in a runoff, assuming one of the two doesn’t win the spot outright despite the crowded field.

Upset Special: Mauberret to Be Shut Out Runoff

The Times Picayune, who has made punishing assessors that opposed the office’s consolidation newspaper editorial and beat writing policy, will claim another skin on Saturday assessor Claude Mauberret finishes in third place behind Erroll Williams and Janis Lemle.

It should be noted that Williams was recently endorsed by US Senator Mary Landrieu, a peculiar move considering the obscurity of the office Williams is seeking, Landrieu’s own high office and of course the fact that her brother is on the same ballot for mayor. The Times Picayune article that heralded the endorsement made reference to the possibility that Louisiana’s senior senator might have been fulfilling a political deal, as her brother is on the LIFE ticket, which is closely affiliated with Williams and former mayor Marc Morial.

Lemle has the backing of the Times Picayune and the “I Quit” political group that targeted assessors for defeat in the previous election in a bid to jump-start consolidation of the offices.

You Best Your ASSessor There’s Media Bias

While the “high-and-mightys” at Howard Avenue have endorsed many candidates in the city elections, the trifecta the Times Picayune is pushing the hardest are Landrieu, Lemle and Palmer.