Oops, that's my number (Senator Vitter)[MULTI-MERGED] (1 Viewer)

[SaintsFan11]

I think a love child with a sex worker would bring Vitter down within a week, if proved.

If there is a New Orleans angle at all I don't think he can survive. He flat out denied there was a connection, even as two N.O. prostitutes boarded a plane to L.A. to collect their reward money from Larry Flynt for ratting him out.

If nothing comes of it, he survives. If something does come up, he's out.

 

[B-Rich]

1. Keep in mind that as for appointments after resignation - Vitter got to Congress because he wa appointed after Livingston's scandal resignation

Actually, Vitter was NOT appointed; he won the seat in a special election which included an open primary (against a horde of candidates including such notables as Dr. Monica Monica) AND a runoff against Dave Treen.

 

[Mr. Blue Sky]

If there is a New Orleans angle at all I don't think he can survive. He flat out denied there was a connection, even as two N.O. prostitutes boarded a plane to L.A. to collect their reward money from Larry Flynt for ratting him out.

If nothing comes of it, he survives. If something does come up, he's out.

- See, the problem here is that a lot of ya'll are assuming there is a semblence of accountability among Vitter, Dubya and their crowd... These guys think they are untouchable- and I'm starting to think they might be right...

 

[SaintsFan11]

- See, the problem here is that a lot of ya'll are assuming there is a semblence of accountability among Vitter, Dubya and their crowd... These guys think they are untouchable- and I'm starting to think they might be right...

It's not just Dubya and Vitter's crowd, but also Jefferson, etc., etc..

Still, I think that the state party will demand his resignation if his denial of being a patron of the New Orleans Madam was a bold face lie..

All mention of his name has apparently been removed from Jindal's website (except maybe a statement regarding the current scandal), among other Republicans. He is the highest ranking elected Republican in Louisiana and they can't afford to have him as the face of the party if they are serious about winning the Governorship and taking over the Legislature, let alone beating Mary Landrieu. Plus, I have noticed that the Republicans tend to have more party discipline than the Democrats. If the leadership makes up their mind, the rank and file usually get in line.

 

[jimwnola]

Right now, if you got to the websites of all the big local news people, WWL-TV, WWL radio, Fox 8, ABC 26, WDSU,there is no mention of Vitter on any of the websites as a story today. If you go to nola.com (The Times-Pic website), another story about Vitter is their headline. Seems like something else is going on (i.e., seems personal), if one news source goes with another headline, when all the others don't make any mention of Vitter as a top story today.

 

[RJ in Lafayette]

I have always enjoyed the comments of Elliot Stonecipher, the Shreveport political analyst and demographer who is both very articulate and quite conservative. But Stonecipher was on WWL during the 7 pm hour and just lost me. I can understand the Democrats enjoying immensely the scandal and piling on. But Stonecipher was suggesting that a liberal media was responsible for the timing of the news, at one point saying that "left of center" ABC had the telephone numbers for the Washington madam months earlier. Again, he lost me.

However, he was suggesting that this scandal is about two Louisiana Senate seats--Landrieu's in 2008 and then Vitter's seat in 2010--as well as control of the Louisiana legislature since Vitter was going to be actively involved in campaigning for Republicans running for the state House and Senate this year. Regarding Mary next year, her problems will be Hillary and the state's changing demographics. In 14 months, people in Louisiana are not going to be talking about David Vitter. They are going to be talking about Hillary Clinton.

Though I disagree with Stonecipher's theories, which have surprisingly the hint of conspiracy, I agree that the Times-Picayune has been piling on. There is something over there going on. I can think of 10 stories where the investigating reporting resources of the newspaper would be better spent.

 

[TPS]

>>Dr. Monica Monica

I voted for her once on name alone. :rock:

>>Though I disagree with Stonecipher's theories, which have surprisingly the hint of conspiracy, I agree that the Times-Picayune has been piling on. There is something over there going on. I can think of 10 stories where the investigating reporting resources of the newspaper would be better spent.

You are a biased Republican regardless of what you say (and I realize not a moral conservative). Somone will convince the Louisiana voters that Mary is the only shot we've got for any clout in either chamber of Congress. She already delivered the most money we'll ever get via the oil royalties bill which should be a hallmark of her campaign. And her amendments yesterday to pull the troops back to Afghanistan as a matter of policy vs. continuing to spend $500,000,000 a day in Iraq on a war against someone who didn't even attack us will resonate with people who can see beyond their own noses (this does not inlcude any Bush apologist on this site).

Mary may have a problem if Hillary sews up the nomination, but it's not really going to matter for anyone except Louisiana. As of now, the Democrats will steamroll in 2008 and will have larger majorities in both the house and senate regardless of whether Hillary gets the nomination or not. People are tired of the Rove engineered crapola we've been forcefed the last 6 1/2 years. And they don't care if it's a conservative or liberal democrat - both were elected in 2006. It's going to happen again. The backlash against this overreaching administration can not be ignored. And it won't be. If idiots in Louisiana vote to overthrow Mary, we are the ones who lose. The Democratic Party will be strong for the next cycle. It's just not going to mean anything for a state which is likely to lose another congressional seat and already has 1 Republican Senator and 5 house members. We'll be nothing but a bunch of freshman and sophmores ranking low with poor committee assignments and Richard Baker who achieves nothing year-in and year-out.

Anyone don't like the truth? Vote against Mary in 2008 and watch it like an electric drill coming for your eyeballs baby.



TPS

 

[TPS]

>>You are a biased Republican regardless of what you say...

Left off the Just looking to smoke you out for some commentary RJ. That's for sure. You're one of the best.

TPS

 

[RJ in Lafayette]

My friend, you smoked me out.

Am I biased? Yes. In that I have an opinion on many political issues, I have a bias as to most political issues. Am I a registered Republican? Yes. Am I terribly partisan? Not really. At least not terribly so.

Steve, where you and I disagree is the relative importance of Mary Landrieu being re-elected. The window is closing on how much Washington is going to send to Louisiana.

I don't particularly like or dislike Mary--strangely, the same attitude I have towards David Vitter. When it comes to foreign policy decisions, both have been generally supportive of the Bush administration, though Vitter more so than Landrieu (and some who spend time on the EE board know I am highly critical of Bush with regard to foreign policy and defense issues).

When it comes to appointing Supreme Court justices, I am very conservative and would prefer a Repulican senator. When it comes to whether I would like to see the state Democratic party weakened by the loss of a US Senator, I have to say yes. When it comes to whether I want a US Senator with friends in high places (that is, the White House), I have to say yes. And when it comes to whether I generally like the idea of having senators from different parties, I have to say yes.

And on a lot of issues, there isn't much difference between how a moderate Southern Democrat votes and how a Republican votes. Am I voting for Landrieu in 2008? I don't remember whether I voted for her last time, and I honestly don't know whether I will be voting for her in 2008. It depends on several things. November 2008 is a long way off--for Landrieu and the presidential contest--though Hillary as the nominee is going to kill Landrieu.

This is the first time (I think) Mary is running in a presidential election year. It is going to make a difference in 2008, just as Vitter running in a presidential election year allowed him to win in the first primary.

I will say this: I am much more interested in the 2007 elections--who becomes governor and the composition of the state legislature--than I am in the US Senate seats. The Louisiana GOP has had its share of failures and problems. But on the whole--I repeat: on the whole--if you are for progressive, honest government emphasizing business and economic development in Louisiana, you have to generally favor in state government--I repeat: in state government--Republicans over Democrats.

My eye is on the 2007 elections in Louisiana much more than who we send to Washington. If we are going to overcome not just the 2005 hurricanes but our failures over the past generation, it is going to come down to what we do rather than how much money Washington sends us.

 

[MLU]

Mary is a lock. You have to screw up horribly or retire to lose your spot as a Louisiana Senator...

 

[TPS]

>>Steve, where you and I disagree is the relative importance of Mary Landrieu being re-elected. The window is closing on how much Washington is going to send to Louisiana.

But it's mega important. Because in the US House and the US Senate, the only way you move up the ranks is via seniority. I posted a link to an explanation of Seniority in the US Senate in a thread about 3 weeks ago. It's critical even. The posh assignments, seats and your rank in certain committees goes a long way to what you can do for the state. Look at our last 3 who had a shot to make it big (4 if you want to count William Jefferson who I think sat on House Appropriations) - Senator John Breaux, Representative Billy Tauzin and Representative Bob Livingston. Livingston couldn't keep his zipper up, and Tauzin and Breaux sold out for posh lobbyist jobs. Livingston was in line to be speaker of the house due to his tenure. Mary sits on Approprations and Armed Services (gets super high marks for her work with them as well - as an aside, one part of her amendment would have mandated = time homeside for time served in Iraq as it's supposed to be).

The only way you gain power is through attrition. And she'll be in her 3rd term which generally puts you on the cusp of bigger things. Once you get to be the ranking member (or even 2nd) in your respective party, you start chairing subcommittees and possibly even the committee itself. You get to steer legislation that directly affects your constitutents. It's one of the reasons that the citizens of Ohio lost out when they threw the Republican out in favor of Sherrod Brown and why the citizens of South Dakota lost out when they threw out Senator Daschle. It's just the way it works.

Unfortunately, Representative Jefferson and his scandals (if convicted) will cost us major clout in the House. Representative Melancon is only in his 2nd term as is (I think) Boustany. Baker is in a multiple term, but he's not really become the player that other senior house/senate members were for whatever reason. So we're left with one Freshman Senator who has had a completely undistinguished first term both as a majority and minority senator, a bunch of first and second termers in the house and Mary who's got a shot at a 3rd term in the Senate which could be valuable for the state depending on assignments. If you want me to dig up that other thread with the link explaining why seniority is so important and how it affects assignments and power, I'll dig it up.



TPS

 

[Broad St. Saint]

So we're left with one Freshman Senator who has had a completely undistinguished first term both as a majority and minority senator, a bunch of first and second termers in the house and Mary who's got a shot at a 3rd term in the Senate which could be valuable for the state depending on assignments. If you want me to dig up that other thread with the link explaining why seniority is so important and how it affects assignments and power, I'll dig it up.



TPS

The other thing that you didn't mention, though you no doubt know it, is that you get more goods in the majority than in the minority. And the GOP has twice as many Senate incumbents to defend in '08 than the Democrats -- plus the GOP has potential retirements in VA and CO which both have Dem governors and Dem junior Senators -- making it likely, regardless of the Vitter situation, that the Dems keep the Senate until Jan '11 -- Landrieu would be in the majority as well as in her 4th term.

 

[jimwnola]

I don't believe in any conspiracy; I just think there are people with the Times-Pic that really don't like Vitter and are treating him harsher than candidates who are more to their political leanings. The Times-Pic is not that liberal of paper in the world of journalism, but certainly not a fan of Vitter.

 

[muzzy]

"He's just an ***"

...BUT WILL THEY FORGIVE THE PRESS CONFERENCE?
July 19, 2007 XXXX 21:46:15 CDT

The G.O.P. seems ready to forgive Senator David Vitter's "sinful past." But a gloomy consensus is forming within the Republican party concerning a more recent event. The timing of Vitter's most recent press conference has high-level Republicans seething with anger. Vitter scheduled his most recent press conference on the same day that Congressman Bobby Jindal officially launched his gubernatorial bid.

When THE DEAD PELICAN asked top Republican sources about Vitter's reasoning, the answers were not pretty.

"He's just an ***," said one Republican source and former Vitter supporter.

Rest of article: http://www.thedeadpelican.com/vitterconference.htm

 

[champ76]

Somone will convince the Louisiana voters that Mary is the only shot we've got for any clout in either chamber of Congress.
TPS

God help us.