The Pat Culverhouse Show

Robo calls make nasty automatic

2007-06-18T12:34:00.000-07:00

The campaign to propel Republicans into the majority in Louisiana’s House of Representatives apparently began with a vengeance last week. One message to voters across the state who happen to reside in legislative districts where Republican challengers are taking on Democrats — especially incumbent Dems — targeted what robo-callers said was a “vote to raise taxes,” insinuating Democrats had determined that neither tax breaks, cuts or credits would pass their voting machines.
In our little sanctuary in Minden, the call registered Wednesday on our answering machine and declared incumbent Democrat Jean Doerge (who is being challenged by Republican school board member Ronny Broughton) had “just three hours ago” turned thumbs down on tax relief and specifically mentioned the dreaded Stelly word, designed to create gnashed teeth and a vote against perpetrators of that tax-neutral generator of additional millions for the state. Doerge, the automated call claimed, had voted to raise taxes on the citizens of Louisiana.
We thought it a bit odd that anti-tax relief votes would have preceded the third — and this time successful — legislative ballot on HB3 which had languished short of its needed 70 votes twice prior on the House floor. The robo-calls which apparently hit many districts in the state had a very short lag time, so the script must have been delivered earlier in the day.
Checking with some legislative bill watchers, we learned indeed that no negative votes on tax bills were registered Wednesday prior to the HB3 presentation. Instead, according to Speaker of the House Joe Salter (a Democrat, if that makes any needle fluctuation on the truthometer), only two bills concerning taxes were presented and both passed by large margins. One of those, the long-suffering HB3, passed 104-0 — with no changes — and created more than a few raised eyebrows. But, more on that later.
Perhaps the calls referenced several procedural votes where state Rep. Hunter Greene, a Baton Rouge Republican, and a couple of other Republicans tried to move some tax-cut bills which had been tied up in the House Ways and Means Committee onto the floor. Those motions, perhaps five or so, were all voted down principally along party lines. Those votes, according to more than one experienced follower of legislative activities, had absolutely nothing to do with voting against tax relief as claimed in the calls.
Some believe those calls were originated by a new political action committee, Louisiana Committee for a Republican Majority (LCRM), the reported brain child of Republican U.S. Senator David Vitter and the money child of such notables as Boysie Bollinger, Joe Canizaro, Paul Dickson, T.A. Barfield and Michael Polito. Also included among the speculated list of involvees in Houston, Texas millionaire Bob Perry, he of Swiftboat fame from the 2004 presidential election. (Hopefully, this Louisiana model is run more carefully than it’s Texas cousin which was created by former U.S. Congressman Tom DeLay.)
It’s said the LCRM intends to raise between $2.3 and $2.5 million in targeted districts across the state in campaigns under the catchy “Operation Clean House” theme to replace Democrats. More than one campaign watcher said the robo-calls most likely are just the beginning, and some Democrats believe misrepresentation, distortion or flat-out lie will be a common thread in Campaign ‘07.
“The calls that went out Wednesday were absolutely misrepresenting what happened on the House floor,” said one long-time Democrat campaigner and activist. “If this is an indication of what’s to come, it won’t be pretty in several districts across the state.”
But, according to our source, the misinformation won’t go unchallenged when the facts are either ignored or twisted to make good campaign fodder.
“We do not intend to let (Republicans and the LCRM) go merrily along their way using the Internet, phone banks, advertising...whatever, to spread false information and outright lies,” the source said. “It’s one thing to lay someone’s record out in the open for everyone to see...that’s to be expected if you’re an incumbent at any level. But, just because you happen to be a Democrat, that does not mean you have to put up with the distortion we saw in these phone calls. Anyone doing this will be held accountable, and they should be prepared for what happens.”
What this all means, fellow voters, is that Louisiana politics won’t change just because some politicians are wrapping it all in a neat package called reform. Nothing about many of the campaigns will see reform except the manner in which the “messages” are delivered. One person’s truth is another’s distorted facts. The trick will be telling the difference.
And, back to the final passage of HB3. Word is that nothing changed in the language, nor in the dollar amounts presented in the original bill which failed twice to get it’s needed 70 votes. Our question: What moral victory was won by the Republican super minority, and what message went out to both voters and countless officials who saw their projects twisting in the political winds?
Perhaps a robo-call or two could answer those questions for us.

Fairness is in the ear of the listener

2007-05-21T14:29:00.000-07:00

There’s plenty of hot airtime on several political talk shows over this “Fairness Doctrine” thing. Apparently, some of the more conservative hosts are just a tad miffed that a move seems to be afoot in the Congress to demand of major media outlets that equal time be given “all points of view” which, naturally, means those on the left side of the political spectrum aren’t happy with the popularity of shows which tilt to the political right.
If there’s a real problem with fairness, we must believe — in all fairness — that those who take to the airwaves with political philosophies which lean left just don’t seem to be able to attract a sizeable audience. Air America, that great progressive radio experiment, has dipped its wings before dropping like bomb, and to the great consternation of progressives, Limbaugh, Hannity, O’Reilly and a number of others seem to be merrily soaring on the updraft of the political right.
One is hopefully forgiven for believing that the major difference is that most Americans — politically speaking — seem to be more conservative and moderate than liberal. We know that’s a bitter pill for George Soros to swallow, but the primary backer of moveon.org and left enough candidates needs to understand that fact. Even we who claim the Democrat donkey as a part of our logo life often find ourselves at odds with the party leadership which wants us all to believe that “moderate” is the most acceptable political tag in this country.
Current Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, one individual whose voting record speaks for itself, continues to dispute the “liberal” tag when applied to her. During an interview with Tim Russert, Pelosi was quick to discount the dreaded L-word, claiming she is a “moderate” in the classical sense. We admire Ms. Pelosi (forget the cards and letters, please), but the classical sense of which the good lady speaks is classically off base.
Returning to the fairness question...our little radio talk show has apparently stepped on the nerve of some listeners who don’t believe fairness is extended to all. The irony of that claim is evident by a couple which we would love to mention (names withheld to protect the guilty).
One, from a Republican friend, points out that we “...seem to take great pleasure in bashing our President and any other member of his administration. Don’t you find it a bit strange that Democrats can find nothing good about Republicans and nothing bad about their own. Even when discussing the Louisiana legislature, it’s apparent that you Democrats believe Republicans are the problem even though they are not the majority which has given us poor roads, high taxes, an educational system that’s in disarray, a healthcare system that’s unhealthy and insurance problems no other state ever dreamed of.”
Then, we have this from a fellow Democrat. “I wonder if you really are a Democrat when I hear all the things you say about you own party. If I hear correctly, the national party has no conscience and the state party has neither a plan nor the guts to try and find one.”
Apparently we’re doing something right if both sides believe we’re picking on them. Now that’s what we consider a Fairness Doctrine.
Seriously, though, we’re watching with caution what’s coming from the national scene where talk radio is concerned. It would be a really nasty thing, indeed, if talk radio found its voice censored to the point that independent thought and natural disagreement found itself the baby which happened to be thrown out with the wash.
Liberals and conservatives need to be heard. It’s no one’s fault but their own if marketability is more attainable for one than another. Maybe some talkers should listen as much as they move their lips. Those who want a genuinely honest discourse on the major issues facing our states and nation are the ones who should be making the noise if “fairness” is disappearing from the airwaves.
We find it more than a little ironic that it’s those who listen least to the people are the ones who are attempting to take steps to mandate what the people hear.

This legislature: reform minded or reelection driven?

2007-05-08T06:37:00.000-07:00

There’s more than a little talk of reform now that the fiscal session of Louisiana’s legislature is in high gear, but some around the state are wondering whether the reform is genuine or if it’s more likely fodder for the cannons of lawmakers who will soon find themselves embroiled in reelection campaigns.
As of Friday, more than 900 bills had been introduced in the House, while Senators had marched to the calendar to mark 328 pieces of legislation. That’s a hefty number to be sure, but so many more will be coming that the previously mentioned numbers will soon seem insignificant. So far — the dreaded Stelly Plan excluded — few have been targeting what some good government types might consider real reform.
Speaking of Stelly, it seems a slight bit ironic that the bill’s originator — former state Rep. Vic Stelly of Lake Charles — apparently has been heard denying his “plan” was ever designed to be revenue neutral. That, of course, has caused some who remember the drumbeat of the 2002 stump campaign across the state hyping the “nothing but neutral” constitutional amendment. Even a larger dose of irony — Stelly was an alleged tax-hating Republican when he authored, advanced and actively campaigned for the “tax exchange.”
When adopted by the state’s voters in ‘02, the plan eliminated the state’s 3.9 percent sales tax on groceries for the masses and residential utilities. Certain tax filers also saw the rate drop on the first $25,000 of their reported income. Taxes were raised by reducing the following tax bracket to cover more income at six percent rather than four, and it stopped excess itemized deductions on state income tax forms. Hardest hit by the “revenue neutral” plan were those families with more than $50,000 gross income and a mortgage with interest payments.
Several polls have indicated that state voters are more than a little miffed about the Stelly Plan, and would love to see major provisions, including the “tax swap” features, eliminated or seriously overhauled. In fact, some of those who voted for Stelly reportedly have been targeted by prospective challengers. In our little corner of the world, Billy Montgomery has been identified in both political ads and by one columnist as “the deciding vote” in moving the Stelly Plan into law.
One may be forgiven for reminding some that Montgomery’s vote was only one of the two-thirds needed in the House to allow the voters to decide in November, 2002. One truth, however, is that the largest majority of that two-thirds told constituents that Stelly would benefit the largest percentage of the state’s households. Today, that story is changing as campaigns for the Legislature begin to take shape.
Bills to alter Stelly have been filed and will soon be hitting Taylor Townsend’s committee (Ways and Means) where the the chairman (Townsend) has promised to make sure the baby isn’t thrown out with the wash. Translation: We may overhaul the taxing structure, but not at the expense of all that nice revenue which has found its way into the state’s funding mechanisms.
And, it will be interesting to listen to debate on the revised Stelly as legislators attempt to strike a balance between cutting into the surplus (estimated around $2 billion in some circles) and giving something back to those who give most...the great unwashed who will soon be casting those dirty ballots.
It is, also, a shame that Stelly’s parts are now undergoing a scrubbing only because of the aforementioned surplus. One would hope that plans by several Republicans which have been seeing a goodly portion of ink would have been offered simply because Stelly wasn’t exactly all it was hyped to be. If it’s a little bad now that we have lots of money, wonder how it would be at all bad if our budget was “revenue neutral.”
The giving back is significant in some of the bills filed. A pair of Republicans (Michael Walsworth and Jim Tucker) suggest allowing itemized deductions on state income tax forms to the tune of a $270 million give-back to state filers. Another piece by (Republicans, again) Tim Burns and Gordon Dove would revert to pre-Stelly tax brackets at a return-to-giver windfall of $320 million. And, legislation offered by new Republican Billy Montgomery would make both changes at a return to the state taxpayers of $546 million. Tidy sums, all. Mayhaps the authors are trying to make up for the sins of one former Republican lawmaker.
Whether the legislature goes along with the public’s wish for “reform” will be determined by the shape of the Stelly give-backs. And, we can watch the campaign ads of the future to determine just who we can thank for getting us a little of our money back...for now.

Lions tremble when the mouse roars

2007-04-23T14:08:00.000-07:00

Does anyone find it the slightest bit unusual that in a state where, among registered voters, Democrats outnumber Republicans and other registrants by a substantial margin yet it’s the Republicans who have Democrats on the run?
We won’t bore you beyond tears with the numerology, but stats as of April show Louisiana with more than 1.5 million registered Democrats, 691,000 and some Republicans and 612,000-plus registered as “other.” Yes, Virginia, Democrats outnumber Repubs more than two to one and maintain a fairly healthy margin over the combined totals of all those registered.
And still, it’s Republicans who have put the Democrats on the run with a mixture of attack ads, attackier web sites and editorials plus a mixture of news stories which show the state’s majority party in — what one might kindly call — the state of confusion. It would not be inaccurate to say Republicans are feeling their oats and are flexing muscle which ordinarily might be shown by a party healthily in the majority.
This steroidian push derailed the infant campaign of the Democrats’ “formidable candidate” John Breaux, considered by many in the party as the premier roadblock to Bobby Jindal’s steamroller to Baton Rouge. With a series of ads targeting “Lobbyist” and “Maryland resident” John Breaux, complete with satirical songs and videos, Republicans put the bite on the leading Dem contender even before his campaign could choose an appropriate bumper sticker. The heat was turned up on Attorney General Charles Foti, resulting in a non-opinion on Breaux’s eligibility and a Breaux withdrawal from contention.
Looking down the gun barrel, Lt. Gov. Mitch Landrieu shifted dramatically from a “will if Breaux doesn’t” candidate to a “finish what I started four years ago” candidate for reelection. Of course there are potential Dem candidates Chris “I’m Considering It” John (who has suddenly found himself carrying the dreaded lobbyist tag in some news stories) and Richard “Looking At It” Ieyoub, but both men seem to be as much seeking a reasonable way out as they are looking out for a sudden barrage from Republicans who are poised to go for the jugular.
And, the remaining statewide Democrat with name appeal — state Treasurer John “Waiting for Mary” Kennedy — removed any speculation early on when he announced his bid for reelection in ‘07.
And, while Republicans are gnawing on the Democrat rump roast, a couple of their own are finding a place on the mutilate menu. Democrat-turned-Republican-about to turn Democrat Walter Boasso received a pretty good smackdown when his candidacy was ignored when the state Republican Party decided to break with a tradition which reserved endorsement when more than one candidate was in the field and hand the “favored by” tag to Jindal.
Then, in response to a Verne Kennedy poll commissioned by potential Republican candidate John Georges, party leadership led the charge to discount both the pollster and the potential candidate. In a statement, Republican Party of Louisiana chairman Roger Villere noted, “I have to seriously question any poll that shows Bobby Jindal losing ground, specifically when the results were commissioned and paid for by one of his opponents.”
More pointedly, on a Republican leaning web site, Georges was painted as a “New Orleans millionaire insider” who had pulled “another business-as-usual, sleazy political trick on the people of Louisiana.” Further commenting on the Georges poll, the site believes, “The status quo in our state capitol appears to be in panic mode about the prospect of having new leadership.”
If Republicans are so anxious to devour their own, Democrats should be more than a little prepared to take intense heat (translated: dirt and mud under the guise of “exposing” one’s record).
Then there’s poor Foster Campbell. For some reason, Campbell — the only announced Democrat with a modicum of name recognition — has received less than a cordial welcome into the race from his party leadership. Even with the withdrawal of Breaux, and the apparent foot-dragging of John and Ieyoub, Campbell gets little applause from his party. In a news conference, head of the state Democrats — Chris Whittington — called Campbell “the only strong announced candidate.”
At some point, Democrats statewide are going to have to accept the fact that Campbell is in the race and is running to win. A little help would, most likely, be appreciated. That little help, however, would take more than a handful of old fashioned guts, and that seems to be one thing lacking among Democrats in leadership right not.
Someone, at least, thinks Campbell may be the leading Democrat in the race and the same old, tiresome, “typical Democrat” labels are already being attached to the Public Service Commission member.
In an article in The Times Picayune, Campbell was described by the writer as “left leaning.” Later in the same news story, Southern Media pollster Bernie Pinsonat said of Campbell, “he's the worst guy they could send out there against Jindal," because of what he said is Campbell’s image as a “tax-and-spend Democrat.”
There you have it. Campbell leans to the left and never met a tax he didn’t like. Seems someone needs to recheck the records of his time in the state Senate. Campbell made more noise on behalf of the average Louisiana resident than Republicans care to remember.
Another label which Campbell cannot shake is “populist.” He is, in some circles, referred to as a “Huey Long-type” lawmaker, a label that is sure to scare the heck outta any potential voter. Maybe...maybe not. Campbell just may be thinking that a populist has a chance with Louisiana voters who believe too many of their candidates give only lip service to the average citizen and hip service to those who finance campaigns.
One thing Campbell hasn’t forgotten...Democrats still outnumber all other registrants, and a key piece of that Democrat advantage are black voters. Black Democrats number 838,000, and that means Republicans would have to turn out around 70 percent of their registrants (and all would have to pull the R lever) to offset roughly 55 percent turnout by blacks who would, most likely, go overwhelmingly to the Democrat. Can’t happen? That’s what they said in Shreveport.
Jindal continues to lead by a huge margin in the polls. Consider, however, that state legislators go into session in one week. How the Rs and Ds get along in Baton Rouge could shape future numbers. The mouse may have chased the cat into a hole in April, but it’s still a long time ‘til October.

Democrats: Third and goal from the 50

2007-04-16T14:00:00.000-07:00

John Breaux doesn't want the gubernatorial campaign to be about citizenship, and he likewise doesn't want to be in court just weeks prior to the election. He ain't running for governor.
Mitch Landrieu wants to "finish the job he started four years ago," and will run for a second term as Lt. Governor. He ain't running for governor.
Now what, Democrats? Who carries the party's mail against the juggernaut that is becoming Bobby Jindal? Choices are gettin' fewer, and so are the prospects of a united party in the upcoming '07 chase for the mansion.
With Breaux and Landrieu sitting on the sidelines, that leaves only Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell and New Orleans "activist" Rev. Raymond Brown as the only announced Democrats firmly in the race. And, with the party's self-imposed rule of not endorsing a single candidate if multiples are in the contest, it looks like the rudder has not only come off the ship, the wheel's been ripped off and tossed overboard.
There are alternatives in the netherworld of Louisiana politics, ala Democratic, but those are singularly unattractive. Perhaps the second most sought-after candidate (behind Breaux and ahead of Landrieu) was U.S. Rep. Charlie Melancon. He reportedly was approached in Washington during Mardi Gras season, but gracefully declined. We say gracefully but, if the truth is known, he most likely was muscularly influenced by the national party. You see, Democrat Melancon was elected in a district which has favored Republicans for many year. Billy Tauzin had represented the district, and it was thought his son would continue the name and party tradition. But, up popped the devil in the form of Melancon, and that was a single seat the national party cherished. In all liklihood, a successful Melancon run for the governor's seat in his home state would have opened the door for another Republican to move into the D.C. pool of Republicans on the House side, and that was something Pelosi and Party could not tolerate.
Suffice it to say, Melancon's out and staying that way.
Other hopefuls with more than a pitance of name recognition who would certainly consider a state party courting are former U.S. Rep. Chris John and former state attorney general Richard Iyeoub. To run under the auspices of the party, though, would be sorta stretching the field even more. John, in his last campaign, failed to push now-Sen. David Vitter into a runoff. Ieyoub's last try turned sour when he failed to edge past Kathleen Blanco into a runoff with the same Jindal he would be tackling in a race which is beginning to show an amazing lack of Democratic enthusiasm.
Like it or not, Democrats are going to have to take a long, hard look at Campbell. The oft-described populist has a solid record on the PSC, and some of his issues have rung well with the overwhelmingly rural constituency across his large district which covers north Louisiana from the Texas to Mississippi lines. Yeah, we know...it's that pesky oil processing tax that seems to throw up the wall between powers that want to be and powers that are, but Democrats have to do more than scratch their watch and wind their behinds if they are to keep Jindal in sight.
State Democrats are facing third and goal from midfield, and it's only April. Imagine where they'll be if July rolls around and there's still no party favorite who has something close to a winning record to place before the voters. Talking to many long-time, hard line Dems, we hear more and more talk of offering up more a sacrifice than a candidate. The question, though, is are the money-givers interested in roast lamb?

Love those informative websites

2007-04-11T07:49:00.000-07:00

Two websites, each slamming the perceived leader of opposing parties in the governor's race, are up and running with yummy tidbits a’plenty.
If you’re looking for anything dirty on John Breaux, type in www.breauxisnotabovethelaw.com and there’s just what you’re after.
If, on the other hand, Bobby Jindal is the target of your non-affections, visit www.aboutbobby.com and there you are.
At the bottom of the home page on the Jindal site is a line which says the site is "paid for by the Louisiana Democratic Party — not authorized by any candidate or candidate’s committee." Likewise, Breaux’s slamfest contains a similar claim — "paid for by the Republican Party of Louisiana."
At least there’s honesty in disclosure, if not content.
Voters who believe they’ll be educated by either site also believe in the tooth fairy. If there's anything better than watching a couple of kindergarteners fight over a crayon, it's watching sophisticated political parties give us "facts" we should know about the opposition.

Play nice, boys and girls

2007-04-10T08:38:00.000-07:00

With three weeks remaining before our hired hands head off to Baton Rouge for the final legislative session leading up to election ‘07, one might expect Larry the Cable Guy’s “get’er done” attitude to be high on everyone’s agenda.
After all, it’s legacy time for a governor who isn’t running for election and roughly 60 legislators who can’t run again (that pesky term limits thing). Toss into the mix the 20-somethings — those term limited in one chamber who are seeking to cross over into another — and one might led to believe worthwhile legislation and a friendly, bi-partisan session just could be possible.
Won’t happen. Already, there are clouds building on the horizon which indicate things could be as contentious during this regular session as was witnessed during the not-so-special session of last year.
Just a few examples:
• There’s roughly $2 billion (depending on who you believe) in surplus allegedly hanging around in the state treasury, and there are plans for how to spend it “wisely” coming from both sides of the aisle. At the top of the list is raises for the state’s teachers and support personnel, increases in supplemental pay for public safety workers (police, fire fighters, EMT, etc.), state employees and higher education personnel. Gov. Kathleen Blanco has proposed a $600 million-plus education package, but that will hinge on whether or not everyone who casts a vote believes there really is that large a surplus.
If there is, you’d better believe legislators will support raises of sorts (one must consider the large voting blocks which would be impacted), but there will be plenty of competition to get collective hands on chunks of dollars to be delivered back home (into individual districts) and some of the proposed spending packages will be unique, to say the least.
Watch for someone to point out that Blanco’s proposal, which would mean about $2,400 extra for teachers, comes on top of a teacher raise of another $1,200 which would come from a predicted increase in the Minimum Foundation Program (MFP), the vehicle which drives educational spending. That little double hit is surely to draw attention from some legislators with special constituencies to appease.
• Tax cuts are the subject of numerous pre-filed bills, and coupled with those proposals are plans to overhaul the dreaded Stelly plan. In fact, some Stelly adjusters are coming from legislators who cast favorable votes to put the idea to the voters. High on the revamp list is the portion which deals with income tax deductions. Some polls indicate voters are inclined to be a little miffed at their electees who thought the plan was a good idea, and the heat could be on whether a remodeled version emerges from this session or not.
Some believe certain legislative delegations are using the tax cuts to assist specific areas and constituents, which would dilute the impact of savings for every Louisiana resident (as opposed to citizen) and could even result in no benefit at all to a large portion of the electorate. Even a measure to increase the Homestead Exemption from $75,000 to as high as $150,000 is on the table. That would certainly put someone in an enviable position if, say, someone was seeking another four years at the government trough.
• Health care is a critical area of need, but there’s no specific plan coming from either Democrats or Republicans which covers all the state’s un- or under-insured. Republicans reportedly are offering an idea which would private sectorize health plans, but would still leave hundreds of thousands of Louisianians without or woefully short on benefits.
Blanco received the support of U.S. Senator David Vitter to spend more than $70 million to buy land and hire architects to begin planning for a teaching hospital (definition: charity) in downtown New Orleans. The Blanco plan would also deliver $226 million in federal money to LSU, contingent on the university developing a business plan of how to run the facility. It’s a move which could face a major challenge, however, since — in another measure addressing the perceived need — the state senate rejected a proposal which would have given LSU a $300 million federal block grant.
Vitter reportedly does not favor giving LSU the $226 million, and the debate has yet to begin in earnest. For her part, Blanco believes the new hospital will significantly help in efforts to “redesign” Louisiana’s healthcare system. Perhaps the legislature will tackle the issue head-on, but don’t bet on it.
Undercurrents are already picking up speed as the session approaches. From both Republicans and Democrats, we’re hearing tones which leave us to believe contention will be the cornerstone of the upcoming meet. Republicans reportedly still do not favor any raising of the spending cap, while Democrats are sounding like a majority which cannot effectively deal with the new super minority. Republicans are convinced they can become the majority party in the House after 2007, and Democrats seem to be struggling to find a strategy to fight off that challenge.
Caught in the middle is the governor. While sounding like a politician who is stepping aside “for the good of the state,” she finds herself about to face a legislative session without the power of a presence with which the opposition must deal and behind which the majority must rally. With the governor’s mansion in the balance, don’t expect a harmonious couple of months in Baton Rouge.
Louisiana voters will most certainly be paying attention to the games when the regular session gets underway. If we expect our boys and girls to play nice, we’re expecting more than this session can deliver. There’ll be rhetoric enough for two campaign seasons, and spin machines will be working overtime. Most likely, the best we can hope for is minimum damage.
If change is in the air politically in Louisiana, it needs to begin the last day of April. Surely, it’s not too much to ask.

Thanks for the kind remarks

2007-03-27T07:14:00.000-07:00

We genuinely appreciate the kind remarks about our radio show, and we hope you will continue to listen. Beginning Monday, April 2, our broadcast area will increase many times over with our move to simulcast at KASO 1240 AM and KBEF 104.5 FM. Time for the conversation will be the same, 6-7 p.m. Monday through Friday. We also hope to have streaming audio up and running by the time the show kicks off, but please be patient if we do not. It's in the works, and the station folks in Minden continue to seek servers. Look forward to hearing from you.

Let the good times begin

2007-03-23T14:11:00.000-07:00

Louisiana's 2007 gunernatorial campaign just took on the twist of all twists. Friday, John Breaux declared he will be a candidate for Govenor if state Attorney General Charles Foti (a fellow Democrat) delivers a favorable opinion. Rep. Eric LeFleur, D-Ville Platte, chairman of the Democratic Legislative Caucus will ask for the legal opinion from Foti since, as a private citizen, Breaux does not have the necessary standing to request such a ruling. Foti's opinion will be just that, an opinion, and does not carry legal weight.
To say challenges will be filed is as obvious as Cajuns loving crawfish.
Republicans have been running ads attacking Breaux since his name surfaced as a potential candidate after Gov. Kathleen Blanco's numbers continued to languish in the Louisiana loo. Those ads will now be considered gentle compared to what will surely come. Also, watch for columns, ads and gutter talk to begin centering on Foti and his connection to Breaux through the same political party. Heck...the popular Foti may even draw a little opposition if he rules in favor of Breaux.
Sometimes the fun in reading what candidates and assorted politicos have to say is reading between the lines. According to the story in the Times Picayune, Breaux said one of the reasons he's decided to run if the AG says it's OK is, "(Republicans) have encouraged me to be a candidate” by running the attack ads which have not only challenged Breaux but his son. It doesn't take much imagination to read a not-so subliminal challenge into that statement. What Breaux is really saying, in our opinion, is, "OK, Bobby and Louisiana Republicans, you want a fight, you got it."
It might be wise for those who've had a tad of nasty fun at Breaux's expense to check their kevlar. As a student of politics and political battles, Breaux has had some very good teachers. Sometimes the danger of firing the first shot is, those who do the firing make the assumption they own the only gun in the fight.
Let the good times roll.

Now what?

2007-03-21T08:39:00.000-07:00

Hardly a minute had passed after Gov. Kathleen Blanco's announcement that she would not seek a second term before experts across the state began analyzing who had gained and who had lost, who was happy and who was running. That speculation continues, and most of it surrounds the mysterious John Breaux, who has been tagged as both the Democrats' best chance of turning back Bobby Jindal, and the carpetbagger from Maryland who the good people of Louisiana will repudiate.
That's pretty bold speculation from both sides considering Breaux hasn't opened his mouth about his plans where Louisiana campaign '07 is concerned. There's about as many saying he will do it as there are saying he won't, and couldn't even if he wanted to (residency requirements and all that, ya know).
There is, according to insiders, a swing factor in Breaux's decision, and it isn't the probability of a court challenge, nor is it the absolute that everything with a door — White House, house house, camp house, hen house, outhouse and dog house — will be opened to see if anything skeletal falls out. It's not even the likely attack on his son's lobbying activities for companies and countries at the heart of issues which Breaux may have broached while he was a member of the U.S. Senate. Some are saying one of the keys to his decision lives at his same Maryland address...his wife.
There is talk among some who know the Breaux family that his wife, Lois, would love to see her husband run. It would mean taking up residence in Louisiana, and that would not hurt the feelings one bit of the Mrs. While there's financial security in the D.C. corridor for John, there are some things which may carry equal weight, such as how much the missus allegedly misses Louisiana. And, as we all know, if mama ain't happy, nobody's happy.
This may be just a little more talk surrounding an interesting situation, but there are those who believe Breaux is considering family options just as strongly as he's considering all others. He says it will be a "couple of weeks" before any decision will be made, but there's still that pesky little John Breaux for Governor web site just waiting to be chocked full with information.
Let's say Breaux does toss his hat into the ring. Who feels the "thud" more than Bobby Jindal? No one comes to mind right now, not even fellow Democrat Foster Campbell who would compete with Breaux for the core constituency. With Blanco, Jindal had a very simple campaign to run and his numbers showed it. Breaux, however, will be a different animal. There will be little Katrina baggage for Jindal to attach to the candidate, and there will be no overwhelming negative numbers to stick to the popular Breaux. The former Senator will also be able to match Jindal's fundraising prowess, and Louisiana could well become a battleground of the national parties which would mean Democrats might enjoy a momentum edge.
Jindal's best hope is that Breaux will opt out, which means he would meet a field which might not include any more Republicans than Walter Boasso and John Georges, and no big names other than Campbell and Chris John, the former U.S. Congressman who absorbed a pretty good thrahsing from David Vitter.
There would, most likely, be a bevy of Democrats — including every term limited legislator who has no real job — to dilute the vote even more.
The "now what" factor in the race now centers in Maryland. The "what now" piece of the puzzle, if Breaux does decide to run, will land squarely in the courts. It's a good bet that both Republicans and Democrats are already working on their briefs, and that's not a reference to wedgies.
Reminder: Our radio show is moving. Beginning Monday, April 2, we will be simulcast on KASO AM 1240 and KBEF 104.5 FM, originating from Minden. In Shreveport and Bossier (Caddo and Bossier parishes), the FM signal is strong. Tune in and let's keep the conversation moving along. There's plenty to talk about.

Moving on with radio

2007-03-12T13:02:00.000-07:00

There comes a time in everyone's life, personal and professional, when a move may prove to be just what the doctor ordered. We certainly hope so, because there's a move ahead and we hope you'll come along for the ride.
For the past 18 months, we've broadcast our little political talk show on SuperTalk1340, KRMD. It's been fun and the experience we've gained has been beneficial. Now, we have an opportunity to expand the reach of our show by a multiple of many.
Beginning Monday, April 2, we will be broadcasting from our almost hometown radio station. Our show will be simulcast (for those of you in Leton, that means both at once) on KASO AM 1240 and KBEF FM 104.5 in Minden. Staffers at the station also are making steps toward getting the show on streaming audio for those of you who prefer the web. We will still be broadcasting from 6 until 7 p.m., so that stays the same.
The biggest difference is the reach of the stations. The AM station will cover most of Webster Parish and will take in Haughton to the west and almost to Homer in the east. It's the FM station which has us excited. KBEF 104.5 will give us coverage of just about all of Caddo Parish (some hilly areas in the north will find a little static, as will some of the downtown area of Shreveport), but we've found the signal to be strong in all of Bossier, Webster, Claiborne, Bienville and Red River parishes. Signal reach also covers danged near all of DeSoto along with large portions of Lincoln, Jackson and Natchitoches. Listeners in Farmerville, Ruston, Jonesboro, Natchitoches and even (on good days) Alexandria have answered inquiries about hearing the station.
To say our reach will increase dramatically is an understatement. We are really looking forward to the move, but we hate to leave the many friends we've made at SuperTalk. With no exceptions, everyone there has made us feel welcome. It's not their fault that the signal has limited reach, and we need that additional listenership for many reasons.
Please continue to listen, and if you've been caught in the static, come hear what you've been missing.
By the way...phone-ins will still be welcome as we now extend our conversation on politics to a regional audience.
Look forward to you hearing us, and to us hearing from you.
Thanks.
PC

Democrats lurching leftward, and we ain't tick-led

2007-03-12T13:01:00.000-07:00

The problem with being a yellow dog Democrat these days is the size and number of ticks one finds attaching themselves to the thinning skin while obediently heeling at the master’s feet. And, there’s the problem of whether we Dem canines should trail to the left or the right of said masters.
Perhaps the biggest tick of all currently infesting the large portion of we who would love to remain securely in the fold — even if we must assume the buttock portion of the Dem dog — is that well-oiled (and increasingly oily) machine, MoveOn.org. That, of course, is the George Soros funded, very left leaning group which merrily inserts (or tickbites) itself to whatever may impact the greatest number of “mainstream” issues.
There’s a case in point, which has conservative and moderate Democrats squirming over whether any potential presidential contender has — testicularly speaking — enough nerve to pick a point and stick with it. if that point seems to be contrary to those who heel to the left. The case involves the Nevada State Democratic Party and its recent decision to pull out of a scheduled August 14 presidential debate co-hosted by the party, the Western Majority Project and (gasp, dread, shiver) Fox News Channel and Fox News Radio.
It’s the Fox involvement which sent MoveOn.org-ers into an orgasmic frenzy of petition signing and spittle spattering. Calling the network a Republican propaganda machine (one of the nicer tags) and a promoter of out-of-touch right-wing thought, the MoveOn.org folks demanded the withdrawal of Democratic sponsorship and further ordered all Dem hopefuls to stay away.
First to get the hint was John Edwards, the champion of poor folk nationwide who finds those demon rich advantage-takers from the comfort of his 28,000 square foot home in the hallowed forests of Carolina. Here, it may be interesting to note that contender Edwards was also the first to follow MoveOn orders to apologize for voting to send troops into Iraq, a move which shows Edwards indeed does have the intestinal fortitude of an amoeba.
Following suit soon after in the drop out mode were the big two of Barak Obama and Hilary Clinton. Many found it particularly interesting that Mrs. Bill would drop out when considering that Fox birthmaster Rupert Murdoch spent, and raised, a multimillion bit of pennies sponsoring a fundraiser on behalf of the former First Lady who desires to be First Person in the White House. The obedience to orders of the top three Dems seeking nomination has many party heretofore faithful wondering who’s leading whom.
Particularly disgusting to many local and long-time Democrats is the fact that falling off the independence wagon for the sake of the far (out) left wing of the party comes on the heels of a pair of pandering political performances non-parallel by Obama and Clinton at black churches in Selma, Alabama recently. Speaking from pulpits only a few buildings apart one Sunday a couple of weeks ago, both Obama and Clinton trotted out the worst attempt at a Southern accent since Martin Sheen played Robert E. Lee. The usual eloquence with which Obama reaches out to crowds disappeared as he claimed to have been “in Selma befo,” invoking the cadence of an evangelist. Clinton, meanwhile, monotoned nasally as she quoted from a James Cleveland hymn.
In describing their performances as right pitiful, one is being gentlemanly, Southernly speaking of course.
Yielding to MoveOn.org on the Nevada debate issue has created a gargoyle whose appetite can never be quenched. Next, in all likelihood, no Democrats can debate in Southern states since MoveOn certainly believes they’ve yet to sufficiently apologize for slavery. No debates featuring the leading candidates can be held in Texas since those good ol’ boys at the Alamo were so nasty to those of Hispanic heritage who were merely trying to put down a rebellion of land-grabbing gringos. And certainly, we can never participate in a debate in any state which industrially adds greenhouse gases to an already globally warming environment. To meet MoveOn standards, green states only need apply.
By swaying with each wind that blows, the top three Democrats — from which the party’s 2008 nominee will likely come — are making long-time party faithfuls wonder if perhaps it’s not time to look across the aisle to see if anyone over there possesses the necessary equipment to stand firm in the face of fringe elements in the party. Most likely, we’ll find the same characteristics cased in different faces.
Somewhere there’s a candidate whose views have remained constant, and who seeks to serve more than the most vocal, the best connected and those who can fill the campaign war chest. If you happen to find him/her, let us know. So far, the best alternative for a trustworthy public servant we’ve discovered still has one semester to go in high school.

Seaux, Breaux readi 2 geaux?

2007-03-08T09:14:00.000-08:00

Like the homecoming queen trying to decide between the quarterback and the all-star running back as her escort to the big dance, John Breaux is still playing it coy with Louisiana Democrats and the voters. It's deja vu all over again...same song (will he or won't he make one more run for his U.S. Senate seat), second verse (will he pass up that Senate for a run at the Governor's chair in '03) and speculation is running even more rampant.
Today (Thursday, March 8), a story in the local press quote Breaux "supporters" and insiders who believe he's still looking seriously at getting into the race, but there's the same old contingency — the incumbent must decide not to seek reelection. With her numbers still hanging around the lowest denominator for impetus, Gov. Kathleen Blanco is playing it just as close to the vest as Breaux. She maintains that she has a message to deliver and $3 million at her disposal with which to get that message to the voters. Gov. Blanco still says she's going to be a candidate, but adds that things change. Apparently that is intended to mean she can still change her mind.
This entire episode seems to boil down to the stuff which sends conspiracy theorists into orgasmic fits. Is Breaux allowing his name to be floated to shoo away potential challengers on the Democratic side? If so, he is overlooking or underplaying Foster Campbell, the populist Public Service Commissioner who has hired a pair of big guns in Alan Stonecipher and George Kennedy to be a part of his campaign. And, by the way, don't take that "populist" label lightly. In a recent statewide column, a writer referred to Republican Bobby Jindal as the kind of "populist" candidate which voters were seeking. Strange bedfellows, indeed.
Is Breaux's continued mention intended to give legislators on both sides of the aisle a not so subtle hint that working with the current governor is critical for their political future? Maybe. Breaux could be sending the subliminal version of the message we've all heard as children when dad said, "OK, straighten up. Don't make me come down there..."
Just to make the cheese a little more binding, we now hear from an assistant Attorney General that Breaux would most likely overcome a challenge to his "citizenship" in Louisiana, one alleged Constitutional prohibition against his entering the race. As the aAG pointed out, the courts have historically come down on the side of the candidate when a residency challenge was tossed down against a politician who moves out of state, then decided to come home. Looks like that tidbit means Breaux can run, if he decides to do so.
Nothing, speculatively speaking, will change before or during the current legislative session, which begins in April and concludes the end of June. After that, who knows. We doubt seriously if even Breaux's closest friends have the real answer.

Just for the heckuvait

2007-03-02T08:52:00.000-08:00

Since every other news site in the world is keeping up, why shouldn't we give you a...
BRITNEY SPEARS UPDATE:
Pop princess Britney Spears has been offered an opportunity to ressurect her failing career. Now that she’s sporting a shaved head, she’s been offered the lead in a remake of the popular television series, “Kojak.”
A script has already been developed which would have the lollipop-sucking detective, played by Spears, investigating a suspected murder in a rehab clinic.
“If this proves as successful as we think it will be, there’s the possibility Ms. Spears will be asked to star in a new Broadway production of ‘The King and I.’ Of course, she would play the King of Siam, the Yul Brenner role. Negotiations are underway to land Paris Hilton for the part of school teacher to the king’s children, Anna. It’s gonna happen,” said Hollywood insiders involved with both projects.

Isn't it great to know that soon Kevin Federline won't be the only Spears working!

What the voters perceived as truth came at an inconvenient time

2007-02-26T13:47:00.000-08:00

Al Gore’s now Oscar-winning little film, “An Inconvenient Truth,” carries a convenient title when one considers Saturday’s outcome in one local race for the state legislature.
District 4 voters decided a current office-holder (Shreveport City Council member Calvin Lester) didn’t need to replace a current office-holder (Shreveport Mayor Cedric Glover, who was term limited in Dist. 4 anyway), and it could be a couple of inconvenient truths which determined the outcome.
Preparing to square off in the runoff (set for next month) are Patrick Williams, who picked up the endorsement of The Times, and Larry Ferdinand. Both Williams and Ferdinand are experienced local officeholders, with Williams previously serving on the Caddo Commission and Ferdinand occupying a past seat on the city council.
Some “experts” are expressing only a hint of surprise that current councilman Lester finished third, and a distant third at that, in the District 4 contest. Williams latched onto more than 40 percent of the vote while Ferdinand finished in the mid-20s. Lester polled in the very low 20s, finishing just under 200 votes behind Ferdinand. For an incumbent city councilman entering his second term, that has to be a tremendous disappointment.
When filing deadline ended a couple of months ago, Lester was considered the odds-on favorite to garner at least a runoff spot. He had just been re-elected to a second term on the council, and his second win put aside memories of a cliff-hanging win in his first go ‘round. But the inconvenient truths which may have led to his rapid fall from favor may indicate that voters aren’t going to be as forgiving as in the past.
While District 4 voters were in the early stages of deciding on their candidate, word hit the press that Lester was facing severe discipline from the state bar association. According to reports, candidate/councilman Lester faces charges which could lead to a three-year suspension of his license to practice law in the state. That latest pronouncement came atop other brushes with ethics problems, many of which came to light as he sat in his council seat.
Word on the street just days before the election centered on charges which might be filed in the future, but nothing came to light publicly. Whisper campaigns, however, are a powerful small district tool, and a couple of District 4 residents said Lester’s star was falling at a critical time — the final 72 hours. The inconvenient truth...whatever the rumors may have been, the fact that Lester had widely publicized ethics problems only added fuel to the fire.
Another inconvenient truth: Lester’s first victory came with the assistance of white Republicans in his district. Although the numbers are not overwhelming, they proved to be enough. This time, however, his white voters went for the two frontrunners. In fact, one Republican letter in the district endorsed Ferdinand; another group of residents sporting an “R” on their registration card indicated Williams was their choice.
Inconvenient or not, while voters in the friendly confines of his council district may have been supportive, the truth is that Lester’s problems were perceived by his broader constituency in Legislative District 4 as more than they were willing to overlook.

Who's in with the "in" crowd?

2007-02-06T07:56:00.000-08:00

State Sen. Walter Boasso has finally ended the suspense with his announcement that a "formal" announcement of his intentions to run for Governor will be forthcoming. While his candidacy can be described as dark horse at best, it still puts a minor strain on the state's Republicans who had hoped that only Bobby Jindal would bear the standard in the fall. Campaign '07 won't be a "Vitterized" affair for Republicans, and word from the friendly confines of south Louisiana continues to filter northward that at least one more Republican — albeit a non-household name — is still wanting to take a shot at the Baton Rouge hot seat.
Even more interesting is continued speculation that Gov. Kathleen Blanco won't pull the trigger on another term. Fueling that speculation is the interest being shown in the upcoming by some Democrat heavyweights, not the least of which is former head of the state Democratic Party, Jim Bernhardt, top dog and possessor of the key to the bank of the Shaw Group. If this year's run for the governor's seat is expected to be an expensive one, Bernhardt will not be short on ammunition.
Another prominent name among Democrats who's being urged to consider a run is U.S. Congressman Charlie Melancon. Despite his new-found status as part of the majority (and holder of a couple of plum committee assignments in D.C.), and despite his protestations that he's happy with where he is, Melancon could be enticed to make an off-season (meaning he would not have to give up his seat to enter the campaign) run if there were no incumbent in the race. Money, of course, would be no problem for Melancon. Although he's not as well-heeled as Bernhardt, national party members do not want to see this governorship escape the fold. There needs to be some well-established means for credit-taking just in case New Orleans recovery begins to roll forward, and nothing would look better on an '08 resume for the nationals than a Democrat who's making things happen in this state.
A pretty good political guru believes Jindal won't run as well this time around as he did in the '03 elections, even if a seriously damaged Blanco is his opponent. That is fuel for speculation. What many other prognosticators do have in common is their belief that Jindal will have a pretty tough time against a well-organized, well-financed, well-known and politically clean (sorry Barak) Democrat. The question of the moment: will the state Democratic Party ask (translated: demand) that Blanco step aside for the good of the party or will they stand muted in the face of opposition to the incumbent from within her own party?
Already, one name recognized Democrat (at least in the northern corridor of the state) is in the process of tossing his hat into the ring. Public Safety Commissioner Foster Campbell continues to talk like a candidate, walk like a candidate and travel like a candidate. All that remains is for Campbell to sign on the dotted line and begin raising money. Whether or not some "experts" will believe it, Campbell is a threat to Blanco's primary base of support (blacks and those in the lower and middle income brackets) and could be the one person who widens the crack in the levee which will pour other Dems into the race.
Give all this another 60 days or so to shake out. We'll most likely know which way the breezes are blowing about legislative session time in April, and the indicators will almost certainly be pointing in one direction or the other following that session.
And, if the past special session is an indicator, legislative Republicans may have as much to say as mainstream Democrats about which Democrats are in the race.

The cat's outta the leaky bag

2007-01-22T09:32:00.000-08:00

One of the worst kept secrets of this young century is now official...Bobby Jindal will take a second shot at Louisiana's governor's chair. His announcement, "After much prayer and consultation with my wife..." indicates he will not begin the long and arduous campaign until this summer because "...people grow weary of the barrage of charges and counter charges." Amen to that one, brother.
Jindal also says he wants to avoid the "...D.C.-style politics with mudslinging, and instead focus on solving the problems that our state faces." That, of course, is a hope which will only partially be realized. There most likely will not be the D.C.-style politics, complete with mudslinging. Instead, we can look forward to good ol' fashioned Louisiana-style politics and the accompanying mudhauling and dumping which is an integral part of the game we citizens have come to love and enjoy.
With Jindal's "official" announcement comes a couple of questions which will be answered in the pertnear future; will state Sen. Walter Boasso continue to dip his toe into the political waters and become another Republican in the race for Gov. Kathleen Blanco's redocrated office, and will an as-yet undecided term-limited Democrat decide to switch parties and get into the race. If so, will that heretofore unidentified do so just to toss a monkey wrench into the well-oiled Republican state machine? That is, according to the southern rumor mill, a very distinct possibility. Names, of course, are being withheld.
Another question making the rounds now that Jindal has declared is whether or not his candidacy will chase off a couple of high profile Democrats who are allegedly being courted to enter the race despite the fact that Blanco is the party's incumbent (an interesting fact in itself...that members of her own party might be considering taking a shot at the governorship). We continue to hear that John Breaux, former U.S. Senator and current mega-bucks-earning lobbyist, is the preferred choice of some high-ranking Dems in the state, and that U.S. Rep. Charlie Melancon is being urged to consider jumping into the race. That may make good conversation, but don't look for either to pull the trigger.
And there's one more Democrat out there who would dearly love to get into the governor's race, but don't look for state Treasurer John Kennedy to make that move. There are still vibes that Kennedy would switch to the Republican party (if asked) and challenge Blanco, but he will not make that switch to take on Jindal. Instead, watch Kennedy's body language when the time comes to decide which R will slug it out with our senior U.S. Senator, Mary Landrieu. Kennedy just may be the party's banner carrier.
Back to Jindal...he's polling mightily against Blanco, and even tossing prospective (?) candidate Foster Campbell into the mix doesn't knock Jindal below 56 percent. A Campbell candidacy does, though, take Blanco from a disappointing mid-30s rating to roughly 31 percent. That, friends, does not bode well for the incumbent.
It's still a long time until we go to the polls. Until then, we're going to be bombarded with claims and rebuttals, credit taking and blame assigning. Here's hoping Louisiana voters do a little background check on all the candidates. If we listen to the campaign stump language, we're gonna be more confused that Edwin Edwards at sentencing time, and almost as disappointed.

Discipline in District 4?

2007-01-09T12:34:00.000-08:00

One of the oldest adages in politics reminds potential candidates to maintain their discipline at all times. After all, the sage reminds us, discipline is an indicator of leadership qualities. Well, discipline has to be one of the things on Calvin Lester's mind as the race to replace now Mayor Cedric Glover in House District 4 unfolds. Unfortunately, the discipline Lester faces could ring a deathknell to his fledgling campaign.
Before the ink had dried on Lester's announcement speech, word came from the Louisiana Attorney Disciplinary Board that the group is recommending his license to practice law be suspended for three years. That recommendation now goes to the state Supreme Court for action, and the Court usually follows the guidelines set by the board unless mitigating circumstances are shown. In this case, it appears there is no wiggle room for the recently re-elected city councilman. Lester is accused of failing to disperse money from his clients to pay certain expenses following settlements. To be fair, his explanations for failure to do so did not meet the smell test either to the casual observer or to the several members of the disciplinary board.
Lester already has been barred from practicing law in federal court, a punishment handed down without challenge from the Shreveport attorney.
Other problems faced by the District 4 candidate have been well documented, including a case involving the state ethics committee. If timing is everything in the political arena, the timing of this latest episode could not have been worse. Lester had to be considered one of, if not the, frontrunner in the campaign which will end at the polls on Feb. 24. He is one of four individuals running to fill Glover's unexpired term, and none of the other three candidates should be considered a patsy. Included among the opposition is Larry Ferdinand (an experienced politico with existing ties in Baton Rouge), Reginald Johnson and Patrick Williams, themselves no political neophytes and hard workers to boot. Lester already faced a pretty tough battle, but he was generally considered one half of a runoff picture in the district. This latest news may have put the kabosh on his plans.
Some folks in the prognosticating business are saying Lester may have found a final nail in the coffin of his political ambitions, while others are pointing to the resurrection of Joe Shyne's career and the reelection of William Jefferson as evidence that the black community seems willing to forgive some indiscretions among its political leaders. Still others are saying the roughly 30 percent of white registered voters in that district will most certainly turn its eyes to one of the other three candidates. If that's true, it leaves four candidates fighting for 66 percent of the black registered voters, while only three candidates can look with some hope toward that 30 or so percent of white voters.
Lester's biggest hope is that the Supreme Court won't hand down its discipline prior to Feb. 24. If it doesn't, he still may be considered a strong contender for a runoff spot. If, however, the Supremes do bring on the punishment, Lester's campaign may be shaken before it's stirred.
Whatever the circumstance, District 4 may be the first chance for Shreveport to prove that it isn't New Orleans, and its candidate with the problem is no William Jefferson. This one will be interesting to watch.

Ho--Ho--Ho

2006-12-22T09:34:00.000-08:00

From our family to yours, here's hoping you have the Merriest Christmas and the best New Year ever. Thanks so much for making the blog fun to do, and for listening to the radio show. We're looking forward to hearing from more of you as time goes on. We're blessed, and you're the reason.
Thanks, and may God bless you one and all.

A House divided cannot serve

2006-12-18T13:59:00.000-08:00

There are lots of support groups around the country, and more are popping up every day. Apparently there’s room for others, and one is screaming for a well-intended psychotherapist to step into the breach. Right here in our little piece of America, we’d like to suggest another program to deal with addictive behavior displayed by some elected officials.
Symptoms seem most pronounced when certain of the aforementioned gather in groups of, say, 105 or a few less, depending on whose schedule conflicts with the public’s business. Observers of the group tell us addictions fall into distinct categories (with, of course, sub-categories a'plenty) including, but not exclusive of: (1) an intolerance of individuals whose name is oft followed by one of two specific non-vowels, i.e., R or D, (2) a compulsive need to travel and vote in a pack and (3) an obsession with finding someone to blame, other than those with matching consonantic suffix, of course.
The recently adjourned anything-but-special session of our Legislature shows just how necessary this support mechanism will be over the next few months. A defining time in our state’s political history most certainly will be that period beginning with the adjournment of the recently completed get together and concluding with the opening gavel of the Legislature’s next regular session scheduled — quite appropriately — to kick off in the Spring of ‘07. Both Mother Nature and the houses of legislation in Baton Rouge will be just itching to shoot forth all things new for our observation.
If this past session taught us anything, it’s that Louisiana is definitely a two-party state, and that the party often just begins when folks gang up with their own to stand in the corner and confab. Forget that Democrats still maintain a significant lead in the lower chamber — 41 Republicans occupy seats in the House — and pencil into your consciousness that some pieces of legislation require a super majority or two-thirds vote for approval.
"We have arrived," House Republican Caucus Chairman Jim Tucker of Algiers said. "I think we showed the governor that we are a force she will have to deal with."
Indeed. Tucker and his loyal troops (including a couple of newcomers to the Republican fold) managed to turn back on three occasions Gov. Kathleen Blanco’s floor leaders and followers in their efforts to uncap the state’s constitutionally imposed spending ceiling. A force to reckon with? Absolutely, and the governor may be forced to use force in dealing with her fiesty opponents. Were the Republican slapdowns a display of fiscal responsibility? Perhaps. Did the R-types unveil even more cracks in the armor of an already wounded governor? Most certainly.
And, least some should forget...this is the second time in the last couple of years that Repubs in the House have managed to snuff out a Blanco plan which required the vote of a super-majority. Remember the cigarette tax hike plan of ‘05? So should have Blanco when considering her proposed spending programs with last fiscal year’s surplus and Republican body language heading into the session. A bemused spectator may wonder if the governor’s advisors were caught napping.
Republicans have returned to their safehouse districts with the unified message that Blanco’s “10 days of Christmas” session failed because of their solid stance for fiscal responsibility. One must remember, however, that claiming credit often is like picking a rose: thorns can be involved. Some of that fiscal restraint may have put teachers, state employees and a wide assortment of public safety employees in near riot mode. What some view as being responsible may be viewed by others as being responsible for failing to realize just how important five months can be when it comes to a larger pay envelope.
Some observers are saying Democrats bemoan the partisan nature of the session. Former speaker, now chairman of the Appropriations Committee Rep. John Alario, D-Westwego, complained of something brand new.
"We've always looked at issues, not decided things along party lines,” Alario said following adjournment. Sorry, chairman, that won’t wash. Everything was pretty cool in Red Stick when those pesky Republicans couldn’t muster the numbers to qualify as a super minority. Can you say bipartisan negotiations, boys and girls?
Speaking of negotiations, other observers in the Capitol are hinting that Republicans came into the session (a) as folks who wanted to be anywhere else and (b) with a laundry list of tax breaks which they declared essential if removing the spending cap were to be considered. No negotiations, just OK the tax relief (mostly for business, some say) or watch the cap remain firmly in place. To date, Republicans we’ve heard say this isn’t true. Fortunately, results of the de-fib-orator are not admissible in court.
Several commentators and news outlets throughout the state have declared this session of the special Legislature a complete failure. Both parties can take either credit or blame. There’s plenty to go around, and it’s bipartisan. With Campaign ‘07 looming, lots of folks are saying the next regular legislative session will be equally, if not more, contentious. If so, one must wonder if it’s a purposeful thing with Republicans seeking to further damage the governor and Democrats attempting to show the honorable opposition as nothing but a block of “aginners.”
We remind our Republican friends that shooting cripples can be easy, unless the cripple can shoot back. Remember: not every vote that comes along will require a super majority, and not all legislation makes it through committee.
Our Democrat buddies should also consider: paying back payback doesn’t set well, especially among those who do the paying. Even getting even ain’t what it used to be.

Opening salvo?

2006-12-12T08:57:00.000-08:00

Heard an interesting radio ad Monday afternoon on a local talk station. Apparently Jay Murrell is keeping his promise to consider challenging Billy Montgomery for the Senate District 37 seat being vacated this term by Max Malone. In his ad, Jay is introducing himself and alluding to movers, from one party to another and from one district to another, and to those who violate the spirit of the term limit law. It's a not-so-veiled shot across Montgomery's bow since he qualifies on all counts.
We're also hearing of a phone survey going on within the district, apparently paid for by Murrell, with questions directed at name recognition among other items. Murrell, a Republican, has said he intended to test the waters and take a hard look at numbers. If those numbers seem to balance, he's in the race.
That's going to make it all the more interesting. For some time now, we've heard a "real" Republican would be getting into the race to challenge Montgomery, who switched to the R-party a couple of months ago. That switch has brought howls from within some corners of the Caddo Parish Republican party, and plenty of air time from Moon Griffon. If Murrell does toss his hat into the ring, that would make three Republicans who would be seeking Malone's vacant chair. Former state representative B.L. "Buddy" Shaw is telling folks he's definitely in the race, and as a former office holder in the district, he certainly would bring along a core base of supporters. Another Republican which had been mentioned as a potential candidate — Nancy Victory — reportedly has decided not to give the race a try this time.
But the question will certainly be: how will Republicans in the district (which features a substantial number of registered Democrats) determine which of the three R candidates will gain their support, and how will that support be courted? If the campaign boils down to a heated review of Montgomery's record, a tactic Murrell has said would likely be the most effective, the entire race may become a battle royal. That type of bloodletting, as you may remember, thrust Malone into the 37 seat three terms ago when two well knowns cut themselves to pieces while Malone sat back and reaped the reward.
About the only mystery remaining in District 37 is whether or not a "real" Democrat will sneak into the race. With three Republicans battling among themselves, that D could stroll into a runoff with an opponent who's been severely crippled by his fellow Rs. We're keeping our ears to the ground, and our eyes on the poll numbers.

Rumble in Red Stick

2006-12-05T14:45:00.000-08:00

That little mushroom cloud hanging over Baton Rouge has grown larger in the past 12 hours, and there's a special session riding on whether the major combatants in this growing battle are inclined to flinch. Using his power as chairman of the Legislature's Revenue Estimating Committee, Senate President Don "Doc" Hines has blocked the use of $827 million in surplus funds to build roads and other projects. That money is one half of the cornerstone on which Governor Kathleen Blanco has set her course for the special session which is to begin Friday.
Hines said that since the final budget analysis from 2005-06 has not been printed, he would not vote to recognize any surplus amount, claiming to do so would violate state law. Many pundits and observers are saying this is step one in Hines' promise to "get even" over the state bond commission's failure to guarantee half the cost of the proposed $135 million sugar cane syrup mill in Bunkie. Although Hines said he wasn't mad following the 9-4 vote against state guarantees, our good friend — the Ol' Perfesser from the Kollege of Political Knowledge — isn't buying it. Perfesser says his sources in Baton Rouge say Hines is livid over the syrup mill and what he sees as a betrayal by the Governor. Hines, sources say, was one of the most surprised individuals in the room when the committee voted thumbs down on the project. In his mind, a promise was made and violated.
Apparently, all it takes to turn a positive vote of around 8-5 to a negative was the switch by Blanco and some of her administrative cohorts on the bond commission.
Why the sudden turnaround which Hines sees as a betrayal? Apparently the '07 gubernatorial race has as much to do with it as anything, Perfesser says. For more years than anyone can remember, Hines and former state Senator Foster Campbell — now Public Service Commissioner and all but announced candidate for Governor in '07 — have been strong allies. That translates to Hines' support for Campbell in the race, because in his political world, Hines is loyal to those who have staunchly supported him. Reportedly, Blanco pulled the plug on the syrup mill to remind Hines that all things have their consequences. Now, sources say, Hines is "getting even" for someone "getting even" over his lack of support for the one who made him President in the Senate.
This, according to the Perfesser, has set the stage for a political war which hasn't been seen in the state capitol since the days of Earl K. Long, and it's just beginning. The big question now is will the special session be sabatoged, and if so, by whom.
The good news: the combatants have until Friday to work it out. The bad news: the combatants have only until Friday. It's coming to s showdown.

Who gets it when Hines gets even?

2006-12-05T07:19:00.000-08:00

Unless you've been living in a cave, you know by now the state Legislature heads into special session Friday. That is, unless Sen. Noble Whittington manages to pull off a coup and get 20 of his partners to move for adjournment after the Leg. is gaveled into session.
Perhaps the most interesting sub plot of the session, though, could be whether or not Senate President Don "Doc" Hines of Bunkie follows through on his promise to "get even" for the state bond commission's refusal to pass a favorable recommendation on guaranteeing half of the $135 million cost of a proposed sugar cane syrup mill in his home town. Following a 9-4 turndown of the bond guarantee, Hines told a reporter the following day, "“I’m not mad about the syrup mill; I’m just going to get even, that’s all.” The question that begs an answer: with whom will Hines get even, and what will "even" cost?
Gov. Kathleen Blanco was initially criticized for wanting to hold off on a special session until after the first of the year. Now, she's catching heat for calling the session (a) for 10 days only to consider spending roughly $1.6 billion is surplus from two fiscal years, (b) calling the session BEFORE the end of the year and (c) asking Legislators to switch their Christmas shopping time for 10 days in Baton Rouge. Not so surprisingly, some Republicans who had petitioned for the special session are now wondering if it's a good idea. Often, a governor is sorta like an umpire..only half the people are happy with your calls, and it's not always the same half.
As Senate president, Hines wields a load of power when it comes to handling his governor's legislation. He may be able to kill or permanently damage many of Blanco's proposals. The governor is talking about pay raises for teachers, state employees, law enforcement officers and others; she's looking at returning insurance premium dollars to state residents; infrastructure needs could be addressed under another proposal...all these could be held hostage if a hostile Legislature is led by one who wishes to get even.
Hines really has little to worry about. He is term limited (as are about 43 percent of those who will be called into session), and that means no "get even" from the great unwashed. This session could indeed be very special.

Times endorsement: Hope or fear?

2006-11-06T09:13:00.000-08:00

If you read Sunday's Times, you found two endorsements for Cedric Glover. On the editorial page, a well-written piece gave the why for the endorsement. "In a racially balanced city, too many view cross-town neighborhoods with wariness, when a little talk and empathy would reveal a common desire for a better Shreveport. We believe Cedric Glover offers the best blend of skills and credibility to lead and inspire Shreveport to its better nature over the next four years."
The front page endorsement, not so well masked as a news story, was not what we would identify as a call for unity. In her lead paragraph, Times reporter Michelle Mahfoufi wrote, "Images from the Ku Klux Klan's night rides and other intimidation tactics to keep black voters from the polls still haunt 88-year-old Maggie Roberson. It's the reason she's never voted. "It got so bad. Every night and morning I'd turn on the TV and two or three of them got killed," Roberson said."
Unfortunately, the Times seems to be rallying black Shreveport around the sordid past and not the promising future on which both Cedric and Jerry Jones have campaigned. The front page piece (one of two; the other hyping actors and activists supporting Glover) insinuates the "white demon" which lies just under the surface of Shreveport could resurrect itselt at any moment, and only a black administration can fairly represent a "racially balanced" city.
Is the paper's endorsement the push which Cedric needs, or is it one more effort to put white Shreveport on a guilt trip all the way to the voting booth?

What is an attack ad?

2006-11-02T07:14:00.000-08:00

Much ado is being adoed over the Jerry Jones ad (now pulled from the airwaves) putting Cedric Glover's record on display. Seems like most of the criticism is coming from those who remember Jerry's promise to keep the campaign clean. What's your opinion? When candidates use an opponent's record as a campaign tool is that an attack ad, a negative ad or merely an information ad using public records which are fair game?
Just about every political consultant with whom we spoke said the ad could do one of two things: either those on the fence in an area which is considered convervative will tilt toward Jones, or Cedric's core constituency will be energized and the race will become tighter. Another comment from a couple of the consultants centered on the wording of the ad. The consensus is the generality of the ratings from LABI and Family Forum doesn't do enough to explain why Cedric is "anti-business and anti-family." Our friends in the consulting business say specifics in an ad about an opponent's record is a must.
Also, the timing of the ad is questioned. As you know, that ad has been pulled at the request of the local police union. Now that it's off the airwaves, it's easy for Cedric's supporters to say the ad was being viewed in a negative manner and was forced off the air by public opinion. True or not, that could be the message on the streets. In the opinion of many, the best time for that type of ad is a couple of days out — say, newspaper on Sunday...radio Monday and Tuesday. That would give little or no time for response and impact would have been maximized.
Negative ads or informational material put to the public...which is it? We'll know Tuesday.