More Woes For David Vitter

Vitter's pair of Wendies-- the deranged-looking one is the official wife

If I had to bet which Republican incumbent senator is mostly likely to be (officially) working on K Street next year instead of Capitol Hill, I'd still bet on Richard Burr, the hapless, confused and unloved North Carolina extremist. That said, David Vitter's race to re-election got considerably more difficult last week. Friday was the filing deadline for Louisiana's bizarre primary system-- and it could have hardly have turned out worse for Vitter. I'll get into that in a second; first a little background.

What's keeps Vitter from being just another garden-variety hypocritical corporate shill disguised as a conservative in one of the most conservative states in America (Louisiana managed to give only 40% of its vote to Obama in 2008, less than Texas, South Carolina, Georgia, Mississippi or Tennessee) is that he has a long, sordid history as a sex addict. He's been caught again and again with prostitutes, including one incident where his personal peccadillos-- a penchant for wearing diapers, soiling himself and being spanked-- was exposed and for which he went on TV and begged forgiveness, after his wife, Wendy (same name as one of his most notorious prostitutes) threatened to do a Lorena Bobbit on him.

For a while it looked like porn star Stormy Daniels would challenge him in the Republican primary, but her trial balloon never took off, and until last week it looked like Vitter would have no serious obstacle to re-election, his Democratic opponent being just a mangy old Blue Dog who no self-respecting Democrat could must much enthusiasm for. (Charlie Melancon has one of the worst voting records of any Democrat in Congress, consistently siding with big corporate interests against working families, just like David Vitter always does. I mean, what kind of a debate would they have? Arguing about who's more opposed to healthcare reform, who's more opposed to Choice, who's more anti-gay, whose record is more destructive to the environment, who's a worse shill for Big Oil? (To be fair, Vitter is actually worse than Melancon on everything, Melancon being just Republican-lite while Vitter is a party-line hack. Nonetheless, the Democrats would have been better off finding someone whose case for election is a little stronger than "I'm not as bad as Vitter.")

So, until last week, his pockets bulging with corporate cash, it didn't look like Vitter would have much of a problem. He's still screeching for more drilling and still trying to protect BP after what it has done to the families along the Gulf Coast. He voted against extending unemployment benefits even to workers who have been put out of work because of BP; Republicans call these people lazy drug addicts.

And then a ton of bricks got dropped on Vitter's head. On Friday, just minutes before filing closed, he suffered two devastating blows: One of America's, let alone Louisiana's, most far right legislators, Rep. Ernest Wooton, switched his party affiliation from Republican to unaffiliated and jumped into the race as an independent; and at the last second a respected and very well-known Supreme Court judge, Chet Traylor, another far right extremist, got into the Republican primary. Hard-core Republicans-- especially the churchy folks in the northern part of the state who are still unhappy about Vitter's randy nature-- now have someone else to vote for, one in August and one in November.

Chet Traylor, from Monroe, was the last candidate to register for a congressional election, and his entrance can change the tenor of the race. Traylor retired last year from the state's high court after more than 12 years as a justice, and he carries name recognition and political ties in northeast and north-central Louisiana.

Traylor said he was encouraged to run by Republicans who are dissatisfied with Vitter, who was named as a client in a 2007 prostitution scandal.

"So many people want a different choice than what we've got right now," Traylor said.

Sixteen challengers qualified in the Senate race, hoping to keep Vitter from a second term, mainly lesser-known candidates and many without party affiliation.

Even if he can't beat Vitter in the Aug. 28 GOP primary, Traylor can force Vitter to dip into his multimillion-dollar campaign fund well before the Nov. 2 general election. That would drain cash from Vitter's campaign and take away dollars the incumbent senator had hoped to spend fighting his main Democratic challenger, U.S. Rep. Charlie Melancon.

So who are these two, you're wondering. Are they better than Vitter? Alas, as hard as it may be to imagine, they're probably worse! Wooton, a former sheriff, has made a name for himself in the state legislature as a sociopath and dangerous gun nut. Last year he introduced a bill to allow students and faculty to carry concealed weapons on college campuses, a bill that even Louisiana couldn't countenance. Despite Wooton "softening" the bill to prohibit guns at sporting events, it was defeated 86-18. This year he was one of the primary supporters of a bill to allow concealed guns in churches. It passed in the state House and failed in the Senate. Wooton was widely quoted in Louisiana media as having said: "I want to see in the Bible where it says you can't bring a gun to church." Alas no one asked him for a photo of a caveman cowboy dismounting from his dinosaur to go worship Jesus, matchlock musket in hand.

Some people would claim Traylor is not as nuts as either Wooton or Vitter. But not all people. Traylor may be a respected judge in northern Louisiana, but in most of America he'd be looked at as a hopelessly reactionary crackpot, who wrote the 5-2 decision of the court in 2000 that upheld the state's sodomy law, reversing a ruling by the state's court of appeals.

• Traylor's opinion says that "any claim that private sexual conduct between consenting adults is constitutionally insulated from state proscription is unsupportable [sic]," citing Bowers v. Hardwick, 478 U.S. 186 (1986), which rejected a federal privacy challenge to Georgia's sodomy law. Traylor also contended that if particular conduct was truly consensual, it would be "impractical to enforce the statute against the participants," since they would have both participated in illegal acts and "there would be no victim to file charges and institute a prosecution."

• Louisiana’s sodomy law, also known as the “crime against nature” law, has been a part of the state’s jurisprudence for 195 years. The court ruled that the privacy clause in the state constitution does not protect what it called "immoral acts." “Simply put, commission of what the Legislature determines as an immoral act, even if consensual and private, is an injury against society,” Justice Chet Traylor wrote for the majority.

I guess with a circus like this, even a revolting Blue Dog like Melancon can look like the least of all evils.

Send Barrow Home-- From A Labor Perspective

A re-match could come out very differently in 2010

Louie is a union member (Millwright, Local 256) in Savannah, Georgia and reader of DWT.  After experiencing the political betrayal of working Americans, he has resolved to expose corporate politicians posing as friends of labor, supporting candidates whose actions don't contradict their words.  He is active in the Savannah Regional Central Labor Council, and maintains their website. We've been corresponding about his congressional district's heinous Blue Dog, John Barrow, and in honor of Labor Day, I asked him if he'd write a post about how local Democrats and union members are seeing Barrow these days, after he was rescued from a tough primary battle with help from both Obama and labor unions only to turn around and stab the president's agenda and working Georgia families in the back. Just looking at substantive votes for the current session, Barrow is one of only 2 Democrats from strongly Blue districts to vote overwhelmingly more with the Republicans than with his own party. With that in mind let's hear what Louie has to say about his Representative:

As each day passes, more and more Georgians are finding themselves in agreement on one thing: John Barrow cannot be trusted, and needs to go.  And as each day passes, time is running out for a successful campaign against him.  Somebody needs to step up to the plate and run. Now.

At this point, he's sweating. He wants to be everything to everyone, trying as hard as he possibly can not to say anything that can be used against him in a television commercial.  When your bottom line is staying in power, and two of your big supporters are the opposing forces of big business and organized labor, picking a definite side can be tough.

For evidence of this, look no further than the Employee Free Choice Act, HR 1409. This is one of those issues where a politician's just got to pick a side.  In this age where news travels as fast as youtube or a blog allows, this is no good.

Diane Feinstein found this out earlier this year when she reportedly came out against the EFCA.  She was quick to back peddle, revealing she was not "completely" against the bill. Thanks, Dianne, glad to know you've got our back!

When Barrow refused to co-sponsor the same bill he promised a Georgia labor group he would support "in any form," the group's leadership was not pleased. Without Barrow's unconditional support of EFCA, "not one dime" would go to his 2010 campaign. Mr. Barrow spoke of possible "improved language" for the bill (i.e. removing its effectiveness), and tried to console the angry union members he would indeed support the bill, once again "in any form" it took. He could say that to a room full of union members without fear of offending his friends at the Chamber of Commerce and the Business Industry Political Action Committee (BIPAC).

Arlen Specter recently encountered the same situation in Pennsylvania.

This writer wasn't consoled. 

As far as Barrow's behavior on the EFCA, let's look at the good and the bad of it.

In 2007,  Barrow kept his promise and voted for HR800.  He also voted against the 3 Republican attempts to amend the it (Though it is interesting to see where Feinstein and other Democrats stood):

King (Iowa) Amendment

Foxx (NC) Amendment

McKeon (CA) Substitute Amendment

Info on the Amendments are here

Despite his "Yes" vote on EFCA in 2007, (as reported in this blog) Barrow voted for a "motion to recommit" on the EFCA, which would have killed the bill.

House Committee on Rules on The Motion To Recommit. From the site: "This motion is traditionally the right of the Minority and gives them one last chance to amend or kill the bill." And here's Barrow's vote on the record.

In researching the matter, I came across this blog. Specifically:

I remember last year when Blue America was trying to help Georgia state Senator Regina Thomas oust reactionary Blue Dog John Barrow, we ran into some surprising difficulties. Here was a politician who has shown again and again that his sympathies are, at best, very conflicted between the special interests and the interests of working families and yet he has always counted on easily duped and somewhat politically naive organized labor to underwrite the part of his campaign that the special interests don't.

For example, in 2007 Barrow signed on as a co-sponsor of the Employee Free Choice Act and, in fact was among the 228 Democrats who voted for passage on March 1-- all but two Democrats. However, Barrow didn't totally let down his Chamber of Commerce anti-union supporters either. Just moments before the final vote, the House Republicans tried killing Employee Free Choice with a motion to recommit. Barrow and a dozen other reactionaries joined 189 Republicans in voting for that motion, which would have killed the bill. This year Barrow and most of those reactionaries, at the urging of the Chamber of Commerce and other Big Business interests, have refused to co-sponsor the exact same bill. The other anti-union Democrats who voted to recommit in 2007 and refuse to co-sponsor this year, are Dan Boren (Blue Dog-OK), Joe Donnelly (Blue Dog-IN), Brad Ellsworth (Blue Dog-IN), Baron Hill (Blue Dog-IN), Jim Marshall (Blue Dog-GA), Harry Mitchell (AZ), Collin Peterson (Blue Dog-MN), Heath Shuler (Blue Dog-NC) and Gene Taylor (Blue Dog-MS). Counting Barrow, that's just 10. What about the other 3? The other 3 Democrats who voted to kill Employee Free Choice, Tim Mahoney (Blue Dog-FL), Nick Lampson (Blue Dog-TX) and Nancy Boyda (KS), were defeated at the polls in November-- no thanks to organized labor, which cluelessly supported each of them-- $239,250 for Mahoney, $245,000 for Lampson and $193,800 for Boyda.

And last year labor unions donated $231,500 to Barrow, one of the most reactionary, anti-working family Democrats in Congress, who, although he represents a reliably Democratic district, regularly crosses the aisle on core issues to vote with the GOP. What was especially frustrating is that Regina Thomas is a staunch supporter of organized labor, not just in words but in deed. She wasn't given one thin dime by an Inside-the-Beltway labor movement thoroughly co-opted by the Democratic Party Establishment incumbent protection racket. Barrow, as well as other reactionary special interest Democrats, were also collecting money, quite openly, from one of organized labor's bitterest political enemies, far right Republican Party front group, BIPAC.

Despite winning by narrow margins in each of his elections, its clear Barrow's money (literally) is on business.  If he is forced to vote for a toothless, watered down version of EFCA, he may and then use that to sweet talk the donations and campaigning out of labor in 2010.

After multiple, (unacknowledged) hand written letters, emails and phone calls, his Washington, DC office dropped a bomb.  When asked if a vote on "that card check bill, about the unions" came up today (this was on September 1st)

You probably won't be surprised to know that Barrow's Washington office confirmed that he will "definitely not" vote for EFCA "without a compromise."  When asked how he would vote if the bill came to the floor today, the spokeswoman said he would vote "NO".  Really?  "That's right, sir. He would vote no."  That was yesterday.

I saw Mr. Barrow at a business group-sponsored town hall on health care.  He reaffirmed he was against any type of 'public option,' among other things like clean energy.  Afterward, I confronted him about the flip flop on EFCA.  I told him he had not responded to several hand-written letters, emails, calls I made about the issue.

He put on his dancing shoes and his nose grew too.  "I'm trying to get a compromise where the secret ballot is preserved," he said.  He implied his interns could make mistakes, and denied his interns would "phrase it like that. (i.e. "he would definitely vote no""  Not to be bullshitted further, I cut him off. 

ME: "1409, as written.  The same bill you co-sponsored in 2007.  If it came up today, YES, or NO."

Barrow: "well.... that depends on if it really came up today,"

Me:  "yes or no?"

Barrow:  "We are working to make a compromise that can pass the senate that preserves the secret ballot..."  (Count Barrow in the "EFCA destroys the secret ballot" camp).

He then turns to another questioner.

Me:  "So as written, you would vote yes or no?"

Barrow:  "I think I answered that... if there was no other choices.... and the vote really did come up today... I probably would be inclined to vote yes"

And there it is, as clear and direct as ever.

If a Democratic challenger needs any more ammunition against Barrow, look no further than his own voting record against his own party.

So Georgia:  The rumblings against Barrow are rising, but need to evolve into a progressive candidate to challenge him. Tighten up, because time's wasting!

-Louie
Local256news@gmail.com
Savannah, Georgia

I've been staying in touch with Sen. Thomas and gently urging her to run again. Until there is a Democratic candidate in the race, we're promising to use our Bad Dogs ActBlue page in the fight to retire John Barrow.


UPDATE: Louie Isn't The Only Workingman Speaking Out Against Blue Dogs Today

A union pipe fitter in Baton Rouge, Michael Day, published an OpEd in the Louisiana Advocate about the Employee Free Choice Act and what the political impact is likely to be for Blue Dogs.

These so-called “Blue Dog Democrats,” who are riding the fence on this issue thinking that they are helping themselves politically, I think are mistaken.

What good is a blue dog if it growls and barks the same bark as a foaming-at-the-mouth, rabies-infected red dog?

I vote Democrat primarily because of the party’s strong commitment to collective bargaining and other workplace issues.

I can’t understand a good Democrat having a problem supporting a bill such as the Employee Free Choice Act that levels the playing field between employees and corporations and puts the choice of joining or not joining a union in the hands of working men and women.

Americans voted Democrats into a 60-seat, filibuster-proof Senate and an overwhelming majority in the House, and what good are they if they can’t use the power.

I voted for change that I could believe in, not change that I can’t notice.

The Blue Dog Democrats should understand that the Employee Free Choice Act is about jobs, mostly theirs. I would never vote for a Bill Cassidy or, God forbid, a counterfeit David Vitter, but I can go fishing on election day.

And, in case you're unaware of the Senate race shaping up in Louisiana, that was a shot against hack Blue Dog Charlie Melancon.

Louisiana's Sordid Senate Contest Is Starting To Shape Up... Badly

There may be hope for Louisiana... but probably not

Yesterday one of the Senate's worst corporate money vacuums, Louisiana reactionary and DLC cupie doll, Mary Landrieu, reassured her allies at the Monroe Chamber of Commerce that she will work to defeat meaningful health care reform. She had gone to reassure them she would vigorously oppose climate change legislation but when someone asked her if there were any circumstances that would make her vote for the public option her reply was:

"Well if working families paid give me the kind of money I get from Insurance companies ($404,731) and the Medical-Industrial Complex ($1,299,372), I might consider throwing them a bone." “Very few, if any. I’d prefer a private market-based approach to any health care reform that would extend coverage.”

Louisiana's other senator, David Diapers Vitter, is at least as bad as Landrieu when it comes to supporting ordinary working families, even if he isn't as successful a whore to corporate interests as she is. He's gobbled up a mere $252,026 from the Insurance Industry and $1,089,530 from the Medical-Industrial Complex. Not many people can match Landrieu when it comes to extracting cash from corporations and lobbyists in return for her votes selling out Louisiana families' interests.

Vitter, because he's a sleazy sexual predator and serial liar, is in trouble with the state's voters and yesterday a very conservative Blue Dog, Charlie Melancon, announced he would take on Vitter. What a choice! They are both so wretched that I would never consider voting for either one of them under any circumstances. The independent candidate in the race, Bob Lang, appears to be even more of an extreme right-wing fool than Vitter, Landrieu or Melancon and he's flirting with secessionism in his whacky campaign.

"This country, in my opinion, is on the verge of a financial calamity and changing from a constitutional republic to a socialist/communist form of government. If the United States Congress and president continue to spend in such an insane manner and borrow at least half of everything we spend, that will be a guaranteed recipe for national suicide and nation failure.

Citizens who believe in a small and sovereign federal government, a strong sovereign state government and all of the power in the hands of the people have to come forward now to stop this out of control socialist train that is flying down the tracks at warp speed."

Louisiana's only hope: porno star Stormy Daniels, who hasn't made a decision yet whether or not to descend into the filth and much of Louisiana politics, but is considering a run against Vitter to help clean up government and raise the level of the state's morality-in-politics.

Melancon is a typical corrupt Blue Dog who sells his vote to whichever corporation pays the most. He vociferously opposes the kind of health care reform his hard-pressed congressional district's residents so desperately need-- medium income $34,463-- but he's taken in a sweet $164,435 from the Insurance Industry and another $284,452 from the Medical-Industrial Complex. Expect that to ramp up a bit now as he reiterates his adamant opposition to the kind of health care reform that would benefit his own constituents. The House Energy and Commerce Committee took a look at how their health care bill would effect LA-03, the folks who live in Houma and Cajun Country, as well as in the suburbs east of Lafayette and the report makes it clear that few Americans have more the gain than these folks in southern Louisiana-- especially the elderly and small businessmen.

America’s Affordable Health Choices Act would provide significant benefits in the 3rd Congressional District of Louisiana: up to 11,000 small businesses could receive tax credits to provide coverage to their employees; 3,000 seniors would avoid the donut hole in Medicare Part D; 350 families could escape bankruptcy each year due to unaffordable health care costs; health care providers would receive payment for $146 million in uncompensated care each year; and 115,000 uninsured individuals would gain access to high-quality, affordable health insurance. Congressman Charlie Melancon represents this district.

• Help for small businesses. Under the legislation, small businesses with 25 employees or less and average wages of less than $40,000 qualify for tax credits of up to 50% of the costs of providing health insurance. There are up to 11,000 small businesses in the district that could qualify for these credits.

• Help for seniors with drug costs in the Part D donut hole. Each year, 3,000 seniors in the district hit the donut hole and are forced to pay their full drug costs, despite having Part D drug coverage. The legislation would provide them with immediate relief, cutting brand name drug costs in the donut hole by 50%, and ultimately eliminate the donut hole.

• Health care and financial security. There were 350 health care-related bankruptcies in the district in 2008, caused primarily by health care costs not covered by insurance. The bill provides health insurance for almost every American and caps annual out-of-pocket costs at $10,000 per year, ensuring that no citizen will have to face financial ruin because of high health care costs.

• Relieving the burden of uncompensated care for hospitals and health care providers. In 2008, health care providers in the district provided $146 million worth of uncompensated care, care that was provided to individuals who lacked insurance coverage and were unable to pay their bills. Under the legislation, these costs of uncompensated care would be virtually eliminated.

• Coverage of the uninsured. There are 134,000 uninsured individuals in the district, 22% of the district. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that nationwide, 97% of all Americans will have insurance coverage when the bill takes effect. If this benchmark is reached in the district, 115,000 people who currently do not have health insurance will receive coverage.

• No deficit spending. The cost of health care reform under the legislation is fully paid for: half through making the Medicare and Medicaid program more efficient and half through a surtax on the income of the wealthiest individuals. This surtax would affect only 1,700 households in the district. The surtax would not affect 99.3% of taxpayers in the district.

Pray Stormy Daniels gets into the race, the only candidate with both a sensible head on her shoulders and a sense of ethics. In fact just pray for Louisiana in general.




UPDATE: Another Solution For Louisiana?

The Louisiana Weekly claims that General Russell Honoré, the hero of the Hurricane Katrina rescue operations, is considering a primary challenge to Vitter-- and that he's "more than 50% sure that he will run." BayouBuzz granted confidentiality to "one very senior Louisiana Republican" who predicted that Honoré would beat Vitter. "All he has to say is 'Stuck on Stupid', and Vitter is toast." 

UPDATED UPDATE

Honoré is denying he ever said anything about running and that he's not-- at least as of now. Stormy! Stormy! Stormy!

Could 2010 Bring An Independent Caucus In The Senate To 4?

We've seen enough of these 2 clowns

In 2006 I figured that one of the best ways progressive bloggers could be of service would be to help drum up some kind of challenge to Nebraska's arch-conservative Ben Nelson, a putative Democrat who has been voting with Republicans on substantive issues for years and years. According to ProgressivePunch Nelson has voted more frequently with Republicans on crucial votes, both this year and during his entire career, than any other Democrat. Worse yet, his current year's cumulative progressive score is actually closer to those of Republican senators like Olympia Snowe, Susan Collins and Arlen Specter than it is to any of the next most conservative Democrats, Evan Bayh, Blanche Lincoln and Max Baucus! But I couldn't find any allies who wanted to take on Baucus and the sensible decision was to try-- successfully, as it turned out-- to elect enough Democrats to win back the House and Senate. That year, with endorsements from anti-Choice groups, the NRA, the US Chamber of Commerce, the viciously anti-union BIPAC and all kind of groups that always back conservative Republicans, Nelson took 64% of his state's vote against a hapless Republican multimillionaire from Wall Street, Pete Ricketts, even winning votes from 42% of Nebraska Republican voters. Next time Nelson is up for a possible primary is 2012.

Last year I was gung ho to back races against conservative Democrats Mary Landrieu (LA) and Mark Pryor (AR). Instead the netroots yawned and got behind right-leaning Democrats like Kay Hagen (NC), Mark Begich (AK), Mark Udall (CO) and Mark Warner (VA). Next time any of them, despite atrocious voting records, can be held accountable is 2014.

This year Arkansas' corrupt corporate senior senator, Blanche Lincoln, is up for re-election-- and fairing increasingly badly in approval surveys. She has vowed to join the Republicans to filibuster the Employee Free Choice Act, she has come out against climate change legislation, and she has been a prime behind the scenes operator in replacing progressive initiatives in health care reform with the self-serving agenda drawn up by her generous campaign donors among CEOs and lobbyists from Big Insurance. This week, according to the Arkansas Times she told demonstrators at a health care town hall in Benton County that she opposes the public option because "We cannot afford it" and then went on citing Republican talking points prepared by Insurance Industry lobbyists about how the post office and Medicare are screwed up. Although Blue America has been running cable TV spots about her anti-health care positions few among progressive groups-- most of whom say they hate her-- are interested in helping. [If you'd like to, that link in the last sentence is the place to do it, by the way.]

Labor unions and progressive groups have scoured the state looking for a plausible Democrat to challenge Lincoln in a primary. More than a few Democratic office holders dislike her and abhor her corruption and her conservatism but, so far, no one has had the cajones. We've been talking with the Green Party candidate who drew 20% against Pryor last year and there's a chance she might do it. Far less plausible for progressives-- at least at first glance-- is Trevor Drown, an earnest and straight-talking former Green Beret who's never run for office and is mostly known for having spoken at a wingnut tea party. I called him up and asked him if he's a teabagger. He isn't. Nor is he a Republican-- and like many independents has very low regard for the GOP. He turned down Republicans asking him to run against Lincoln on their ticket. He's an independent-minded problem solver who is essentially non-partisan. If he's elected to the Senate, is he going to vote with the Democrats on key issues more frequently than Lincoln? Possibly, but I'm not fooling myself about the likelihood of Drown, though a union member (Teamsters) himself, turning into a Jeff Merkley or a Bernie Sanders. But I'll tell you what the differences are that I see between him and Lincoln:

1- he isn't corrupt and he won't have his head up the asses of every corporate CEO waving a check under his nose;

2- he genuinely cares about ordinary American working families and will look to put their interests ahead of the special interests;

3- no matter how he votes on issues, he won't be working behind the scenes to undermine progressives within the Democratic caucus-- since he won't be in the Democratic caucus;

4- no one trying to persuade him about the merits of a progressive stand on an issue is going to face a closed mind or a door closed to all but corporate donors.

At his new Dare To Make A Difference website, Drown a fascinating blog that bills itself as the philosophical third party opposition to the two-party system. They cover everything from the Working Families Party, the Socialist Party and even the Communist Party to the Conservative Party, the Libertarians and The Whigs and currently is covering the races of two independent former Republicans, Lincoln Chafee and Tim Cahill, respectively running credible campaigns for governor of, respectively, Rhode Island and Massachusetts. I want to go in entirely different direction though: south-- from Arkansas. That would be Louisiana.

Louisiana's big election next year is the junior senator seat, currently held-- very tentatively-- by extremist Republican hack and hypocritical whore monger David Diapers Vitter. Democrats must be salivating at the prospect of knocking off a mindless obstructionist like Vitter and they appear to be putting up someone nearly as reactionary, corporate shill and Blue Dog, Charlie Melancon. An ice-cream man before getting into politics, Melancon boasts to his constituents that he's anti-choice, anti-gay and pro-gun. Republicans are so happy with him that they didn't even bother to run anyone against him last year, even though McCain took the district with 61%-- a significantly higher percentage than Bush won in 2000 or 2004.

I've been more interested in the independent race of adult film actress Stormy Daniels, which is probably not going to happen. This week, however, another Independent, one who sounds, in some ways, something like Trevor Drown, officially declared that he is running for the seat. Bob Lang is also a combat veteran and a strong defender of the Second Amendment. He doesn't seem nearly as open-minded about the issues facing the country and from what I can gather, this one really could be a teabagger.

"This country, in my opinion, is on the verge of a financial calamity and changing from a constitutional republic to a socialist/communist form of government. If the United States Congress and president continue to spend in such an insane manner and borrow at least half of everything we spend, that will be a guaranteed recipe for national suicide and nation failure.

Citizens who believe in a small and sovereign federal government, a strong sovereign state government and all of the power in the hands of the people have to come forward now to stop this out of control socialist train that is flying down the tracks at warp speed."

Like Drown he's a committed Christian but unlike Drown he's an anti-Choice fanatic and a xenophobe. I have a feeling he'd like to bring back the gold standard and he's running a campaign at least partially based on Vitter's moral failings: "I give you my word," he tells voters, "that I will not embarrass the citizens of Louisiana with immortal [though I think he means immoral] behavior while serving as your U.S. senator. I humbly ask for your vote on Nov. 2, 2010." Gee, I hope Stormy decides to run!

YES! Louisiana Will Have A Real Choice In The Race For U.S. Senate

When one of Louisiana's more successfully corrupt political hacks, Bill Tauzin, became an official lobbyist for the pharmaceutical industry-- within moments of having ushered Bush's colossal bailout for that industry through Congress, a catastrophe for average taxpayers and Medicare users but a career-maker for Tauzin-- his son, Billy III, expected to be crowned to succeed his daddy as the congressman from Cajun Country-- an extremely backward and swampy district south and west of New Orleans. But the 2004 election was strange. Billy III lead 6-man primary with 84,680 votes. When the general election rolled around, he only wound up with 57,042-- and was beaten out by right-wing Democrat Charlie Melancon with 57,611. Republicans mounted a vigorous challenge to Melancon-- even though as a Blue Dog he mostly voted with them-- but Melancon prevailed with 55%. Last year the Republicans didn't bother and Melancon won his third term with no opposition.

While Melancon was winning re-election, though, Barack Obama didn't even have a change in one of the most racist and reactionary districts in the Old Confederacy. It was one of just a tiny handful of districts where Obama actually underperformed both Gore and Kerry! What a hellhole but the national Republican Party has been looking at the district and thinking, "this place smells like us; we should get it back." So they decided to go after Melancon again and have promised big financial support to anyone who would take him on. Two far right sociopaths, failed gubernatorial candidate and ex-House Speaker Hunt Downer and state Rep Nickie Monica (R-LaPlace) have both been both nosing around.

Because Melancon votes with the GOP so frequently, what progressives there are in the district are unenthusiastic about re-electing him and Republicans would just as soon have a real Republican instead of one who calls himself a Democrat. So now Melancon is thinking about running for David Diapers Vitter's U.S. Senate seat. Some think he would be more likely to defeat the deeply wounded Vitter statewide than retaining his House seat in a district that is regressing, socially, back to the pre-literate stage of human development.

If a match-up between a super-corrupt religious right fanatic and whoremonger, on the one hand, and a craven anti-working family Blue Dog on the other hand, doesn't excite you, think about Stormy! That's Stormy Daniels, adult film star and native of Baton Rouge, who is considering running for Vitter's seat as an independent. She's smart and witty and possibly as well known as either Vitter or Melancon. Stormy is finishing a book, Storm Blazer: Stormy Daniels and the Issues of Responsibility and embarking on the second phase of a listening tour to hear what voters in Louisiana want from their representatives in Washington.

With DSCC sources confirming, off the record, that Melancon is in, it is likely that the Republicans will easily pick up his congressional seat-- the district does smell like them-- and there's no telling what would happen in a three-way race between Vitter, Melancon and Daniels. I know I'd vote for Daniels in a second-- twice if I could!

ONE OF CONGRESS' MOST REACTIONARY DEMOCRATS IS EYEING THE LOUISIANA GOVERNOR'S RACE

Charlie Melancon's congressional voting record is one of the absolute worst of any Democrat's. He has voted with Bush and his far right supporters again and again and again and is someone big corporations know they can almost always count on to betray the interests of consumers and working men and women. He voted for the shameful right wing bankruptcy bill, for making a repeal of the estate tax permanent and against the rights of consumers to get fair representation in courts against big corporations. Overall, only 7 Democrats have voted more often with the Republicans than Melancon. Looking at a wide package of legislative bills impacting middle class Americans that came before Congress in the last 2 years DMI gives Melancon a big fat F.

With the even more reactionary Republican congressman Bobby Jindal getting ready to toss his turban hat into the ring for next year's Lousiana gubernatorial race, incumbent Governor Kathleen Blanco (whose Katrina ratings are nearly as dismal as Bush's; mostly because she allowed him to push her around) is wavering about running again. A recent GOP poll shows Blanco losing substantially to Jindal, who nearly beat her last time.

If Blanco bows out, her friend and ally Melancon will probably jump in. Melancon, who just won his second congressional term-- running on an anti-choice, anti-gay platform-- was only elected in 2004 (eking out a 500 vote win) because of a bitter split in Republican ranks and because his eventual Republican opponent, Billy Tauzin's ridiculous son Wilbert Tauzin III, has a criminal record too disgraceful even for Lousiana politics. Last month Rahm Emanuel made retaining Melancon's seat a major DCCC priority (Emanuel being extremely partial towards Democrats who vote with Bush on crucial bills). Melancon beat his Republican opponent this time 75,000 to 55,000.

In 2010 Louisiana will probably lose a House seat because of the post-Katrina diaspora and in all likelihood that seat will be the 3rd district, the one currently represented by Melancon, pictured above with Governor Blanco.