Candidates on attack In 2003’s close governor’s race, the margin of defeat for Republican Rep. Bobby Jindal may have come from a television ad run by his opponent and now Gov. Kathleen Blanco in the final days of the campaign where a bitter old man who had worked in health care accused Jindal while he headed the state’s Department of Health and Hospitals of making the state’ health care worse. This was despite loads of evidence that Jindal’s leadership had produced a more efficient, better system of care in Louisiana – but given the last-minute appearance of the ad and Jindal’s inability or unwillingness to set the record straight, the ad proved effective. In 2007, about a month before the election, an opponent of Jindal’s this time, Democrat state Sen. Walter Boasso, wants to see if lightning somehow can strike twice as Jindal threatens to leave Boasso and all other gubernatorial candidates in the dust. This time it’s a bitter woman complaining about how she held Jindal responsible for her brother being ejected from state care. But, four years later, the commercial may end up hurting its progenitor more than its intended target. As inane as the 2003 commercial was, to the untutored it at least seemed plausible as the angry old doctor spewed vague, generalized, unverified venom. Coming so close to the general election runoff date it gave Jindal little time to set the record straight, and Blanco was running neck-to-neck with Jindal. But in 2007’s version, Boasso decided he had to strike a month before the primary election given Jindal’s huge lead, leaving Jindal plenty of time to respond (he already has, pointing out his accomplishments as DHH head and the praise heaped on him by the media for his performance), and the specific circumstances of the case leaves all but the most dense viewers wondering about its credibility. Essentially, the old woman makes it sound like Jindal was a meanie who just up and decided personally to throw her retarded brother out on the street just because. In fact, the court case cited in the ad, John B. McNiece v. Bobby P. Jindal, Secretary of the Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals (docket number Civ.A. 97-2421, decided by the U.S. District Court of the Eastern District, Louisiana on Aug. 26, 1998), shows it was an intra-agency dispute between parts of the department, one part making a ruling on McNiece’s condition that said he had a right to reside in a state institution, the other overruling it which the court said broke federal law. That’s all there was to it. As titular head of the department, Jindal’s was the name on the case, likely his only connection to it. In fact, Jindal probably never even knew of the incident until the suit was filed; the secretary of the department by its own documented processes (at least at present) is not involved in the disposition of any of these cases at all. …
Read More...

Just yesterday, a shameful, desperate TV ad attempting to mischaracterize Bobby's record and personally attack his character hit the airwaves. Walter Boasso released his new insulting attack ad after announcing that he would "do whatever it takes" to get elected, and we are now seeing that approach in full force. Let's not forget, these are the same folks who ran the ad attacking Bobby's Christian faith just a few weeks ago...now they have an ad calling him "heartless." Apparently, doing "whatever it takes" includes lying, deceiving, mudslinging, and just plain Character Assassination. The truth is that Bobby's strong record on improving health care in Louisiana is indisputable. His work at DHH not only won him the endorsement of the Times Picayune and accolades by the Baton Rouge Advocate, but Senators John Breaux and Mary Landrieu also personally praised his service. Bobby was able to create savings in our health care system by rooting out millions of dollars worth of waste and abuse. This made him some powerful enemies and they have been after him ever since. When Bobby took over DHH all the experts agreed that Louisiana was headed toward a health care meltdown that would have jeopardized the lives of thousands of patients across the state. Bobby came in and fixed the problem on the backs of many who were gaming the system - thereby securing health care for those who needed it most. Just as we did when they attacked Bobby's Christian faith, we have launched a quick and direct response to the lies and misinformation in this most recent Boasso attack ad. Today, we began airing a new TV ad titled "Stand Up" which you can view online here. We know Walter will do 'whatever it takes' to hold onto the old corrupt system of the past that he has benefited from for so long, but this won't stop us. Bobby is committed to ending the corruption in our state, no matter how many smears, lies, character attacks, and personal insults are hurled his way during the old corrupt gang's do-whatever-it-takes attempts to hold onto power. Thank you for your continuing support. I have included some articles below which speak to Bobby's strong record of accomplishments in health care. Timmy Teepell Campaign Manager Bobby Jindal 2007 - - - - - - - - - - - - Bobby Jindal Has Strong Record of Improving Health Care Times Picayune Endorsed Jindal, Citing His Good Work at DHH. "The (New Orleans) Times-Picayune endorsed Jindal in its Sunday editions, saying Jindal 'has a track record of success' and is 'someone who can make things happen.' The newspaper credited Jindal with wiping out a $475 million deficit and cracking down on Medicaid fraud when he was the secretary of Louisiana Department of Health and Hospitals." ("Poll: Blanco, Jindal tied at 18 percent." AP. 9/20/03.) ADVOCATE: Before Jindal, DHH was "Racked By a Chronic Funding Crisis And Tainted by Scandal." "Bobby Jindal Took Over A Department Of Health And Hospitals Racked …
Read More...

Senate rejects bill to regulate how long troops spend in combat Louisiana’s Democrat Sen. Mary Landrieu did it again, voting to undercut a strategy to create a sustainable ally out of Iraq, calling into question her political judgment, even her motives. In July, as did every present Senate Democrat, Landrieu voted for cloture to allow passage of an amendment to next year’s defense appropriations bill that would have had the practical effect of sabotaging the military strategy that promised progress towards winning the battle in Iraq, and a step towards winning the war against terrorism. The amendment would have shortened lengths of tours of duty, making fewer soldiers available for war prosecution thus gutting the plan of Republican Pres. George W. Bush to increase troop strength in Iraq to weaken armed resistance born mainly of adventurism by America’s enemies. That failed. Over the next two months even as evidence of increased political success in Iraq government’s improving its democratic and civic capacity to lead a stable country was small, militarily demonstrable and substantial progress was made. Last week the report by the overall operation commander and by the ambassador to Iraq confirmed both points. Militarily speaking, with minor qualification the “surge” was accomplishing Bush’s goal. But instead of supporting an effort beginning to pay large dividends, Democrats decided to make another attempt at undermining the policy, today bringing up the same amendment in a slightly different way in a parliamentary sense, but which still required the same three-fifths majority as did the July cloture vote. Once again, the move failed but, yet again, with all Democrats and a few mistaken Republicans, Landrieu was on the wrong side of the vote. At the very least, one must wonder about Landrieu’s political judgment on this issue. After the testimony which led to the optimistic assessment, Landrieu brushed off this most valid and reliable data on the situation with “today’s testimony does little to assuage my conviction that a change of strategy is needed in Iraq …. and it is clear that our nation's priorities continue to be misdirected.” In other words, Landrieu employed the old liberal political playbook: if the facts don’t fit your worldview, change the facts. This attitude disserves Louisianans and Americans. At the very worst, Landrieu is letting politics interfere with her judgment. Democrats have invested themselves in America’s defeat because they know their liberal ideology fails. Unable to compete in the arena of ideas with the conservatism expressed largely by Republicans, they can win elections only by discrediting Republicans in claiming the war was a GOP idea (even as most of them, including Landrieu, voted to support the president in prosecuting it) and cannot be won, and then having defeat occur even if they have to engineer it themselves – because if America wins, Democrats end up further discrediting themselves. Shame on Landrieu if she has bought into this …
Read More...

Alabama logo Shirts, Ties, jeans and gifts are available at FanTheFire.com/Alabama
Read More...

$1 billion surplus forecast for La. Gov. Kathleen Blanco was quick to take credit where none was deserved, and her Commissioner of Administration Jerry Luke LeBlanc was nimble enough to throw up a smokescreen, regarding Louisiana’s projected $1 billion surplus from this past fiscal year. The higher-than-expected amount, which only can be spent essentially on one-time items, came from three main sources: the avalanche of federal recovery dollars still coming into the state, record-high oil prices, and an unanticipated lack of desire of the state’s citizenry to take an insurance tax credit to offset state-mandated increases in homeowners’ insurance. Even as Blanco said the surplus came from “Our [administration’s] economic development efforts … taking root statewide,” anybody with any sense can note these things operate entirely independently of state government policy – unless one considers that Blanco’s ineptitude in dealing with recovery from the 2005 hurricane disasters delayed the reception of federal funds that only now are showing up in last year’s totals. (Blanco made this disingenuous remark while on a trip to Spain, illustrating her idea of economic development policy – throw billions of dollars in quixotic quests to bring business to the state, rather than forgoing legal bribery in favor of real, substantial tax cuts for business and individuals and regulatory reform.) LeBlanc chimed in that the latest projection served to vindicate Blanco against complaints during the last legislative session that her free-spending ways on new programs and recurring program increases would prove to be unsustainable: “We felt all along that this could be sustainable.” This means he missed the point entirely: the surplus money here is for non-recurring commitments; no figures were given on expected recurring revenues in this fiscal year. (Perhaps Blanco will be able to take credit for some increase next year as well. Because her administration pulled a fast one by ignoring federal government regulations on the Road Home Program and overspent federal money on it, the state has put the federal government into the position where it probably will cough up as much as $4 billion extra. This means, when all is said and done, there exists perhaps another $500 million the state can rake off extra in the form of taxes that is one-time revenue in nature. No doubt Blanco revisionists will style this as part of the “sustainable” economy.) Of the worthy items out there to which the surplus needs dedication by the next governor, perhaps paying off debt which has reached record levels under Blanco is the best choice. At least the forgone interest payments from early retirement can be used to mitigate her recurring spending increases otherwise unaddressed by this recent forecast which continue to threaten the state’s fiscal health, despite what Blanco and LeBlanc want the public to believe. (If you'd like to have Prof. Sadow's column mailed to you, go to http://www.between-lines.com and click on "Join the mailing list!" on …
Read More...

Statement by LA GOP spokesman Michael DiResto on new Walter Boasso TV ad attacking Bobby Jindal's character and healthcare record It's awful that the state Medicaid agency made an erroneous determination in a Medicaid eligibility case, but Walter Boasso's attack on Bobby Jindal is simply over the top, off the mark, loose with the truth, and hideous. What's really shameless is that Walter Boasso, for his own political gain, would exploit one family's painful Medicaid eligibility dispute to demonize Bobby Jindal and distort his outstanding service to the people of this state. Two days ago, when discussing the attack ads he planned to use against Jindal, Walter Boasso was quoted by the media saying "We'll do whatever it takes." It's now clear what Boasso meant – that he's apparently willing to throw basic human decency by the wayside in his grab for power. The real story of this campaign is the depths that the Jindal attackers are willing to go to assassinate his character, to distract voters from the issues and the attackers' own lack of vision, and to find ever lower ways to make this one of the dirtiest campaigns in the nation's history. First they distorted Jindal's Christian beliefs to try to exploit religious bigotry, and now they exploit one family's personal tragedy to distort Jindal's record of compassionate service. The first attack backfired, and so will this one. The pathetic part about Boasso's attack is that he thinks he will get away with using the same trick on the healthcare issue, to deceitfully demonize Jindal as uncaring, that went uncorrected four years ago. Not this time. As the saying goes, fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me. The difference this time is that the people of Louisiana know Bobby Jindal better than that, have seen his commitment to improving their quality of life in action, have witnessed his record of accomplishment firsthand, and they won't be fooled again. The bottom line is that, contrary to the insinuation made about this unfortunate case in Boasso's ad, it cannot be said to have resulted from cost-cutting policies pushed for by Bobby Jindal during his tenure as state health secretary. And while this case certainly deserves sympathy from us all and understandably provokes anger and sadness from those involved, the allegations in the ad against Bobby Jindal's record are simply misplaced and the accusations about his character are just inappropriate. As for the specific claims in the ad itself: First , the ad makes an emotional charge that Bobby Jindal threw someone "out on the streets." Not true. While the Department of Health and Hospitals is responsible for determining patient eligibility for Medicaid coverage at nursing homes, it is the responsibility and ethical obligation of every healthcare provider in the state, including the nursing home involved in this case, to act as the first line in making sure that every patient is safe and accounted for. If no contact is made to inform the family …
Read More...

Mayor urges new gender, race goals for Alexandria Alexandria's Democrat Mayor Jacques Roy is advocating mandates to government procedures to increase the number of minority/disadvantaged contractors participating in city business. But before anything is done, policy-makers there need to review the results of Shreveport's disastrous Fair Share program. This fiasco, created by Democrat then-Mayor Keith Hightower, was in the news this summer when some members of the City Council bitterly complained about how the contractor for the delayed Convention Center hotel appeared not to live up to the program’s standards. Its purpose is to set numerical targets of “disadvantaged” – defined as majority non-white and female-owned – businesses in receiving contract work from the city. For this project, the general contractor Walton Construction said it would adhere to a 25 percent goal of subcontracting – not in the contract itself, but in an addendum agreed after signing of the original contract. Turns out Walton may or may not have achieved that. Maybe, because they insist they got just about there with their final computations. Maybe not, because only days, even weeks before reporting of the final numbers, they appeared far short of the goal and it seems impossible that there was enough work left that, even if quickly subcontracted out, it could bring the aggregate to the latest “official” figure. This has gotten particularly Calvin Lester and Joe Shyne, black Democrats on the Council, aggravated, and in the ensuing argument about whether the city should sue Walton, or whether it even has legal authority to do so, distracts from the central issue at hand: the concept of Fair Share is absolutely ludicrous, built on false premises, and should be dismantled immediately before it wastes any more taxpayer dollars. Hightower conjured up the thing in order to get the likes of Shyne to support the idea of building a convention center and hotel – which needed every vote they could get from the Council to become unfortunate realities. It rests on the unsustainable argument that there is some sort of discrimination against these “disadvantaged” enterprises which is why set-asides get deemed necessary. Because discrimination structurally cannot be proved to exist, legally the city could not force the contractor to set aside the agreed-upon 25 percent, it just promised to do so, with the legal power of that promise uncertain. (Legally, a “disparity study” must be undertaken to show that a governing entity’s rules specifically discriminate against a certain group, before a quota-based set-aside legally can be enacted. These exercises are rife for abuse, because many political demagogues will assert that any discovered numerical difference demonstrates this – instead of undertaking a detailed examination of the actual procedures and history involved. Hightower prevented any quantitative disparity study ever from going forward.) In other words, Fair Share was supposed throw business to “disadvantaged” firms they otherwise wouldn’t get for reasons of illegality or because of past discrimination that made them less …
Read More...

Political Horizons for September 16, 2007 It’s a shame one member of the Louisiana media feels so threatened and insecure about how well he is doing as a journalist that he resorts to inflammatory name-calling and paranoiac musings to mask this – which must question his credibility to cover accurately and impartially the current election campaign One Mark Ballard of the Baton Rouge Advocate, head of its capital bureau, apparently did not like that criticism (that I will take his word for that there was, since I listen so infrequently to talk radio and did not read of any) heaped onto the mainstream media about its reporting “questions about [Republican gubernatorial candidate Rep.] Bobby Jindal’s campaign tactics and strategies.” If it were in reference to a poorly-reasoned, factually-challenged editorial The Advocate had published criticizing Jindal for not having as many debates as it liked (to which Ballard may or may not have contributed, as he writes both for the news hole and the editorial page), that public was response was more than deserved. (In fact, the only criticism I have seen of Ballard’s writing comes from Michael DiResto of the state’s Republican Party on a blog. And none of that was personal in nature, just a well-reasoned critique of the content of some recent columns by Ballard not even including anything about recent campaign tactic criticisms.) Rather than moving on, in a recent opinion piece that attempts to link Jindal’s addition of a “debate” to that editorial (he didn’t ask Jindal whether it had but implies it had something to do with that decision), he described those who presented the critiques on talk radio and writing on the Internet as “Internet and talk radio terrorists.” Ballard seems blissfully unaware that around the world, some engaging directly with U.S troops, real terrorists with real weapons are killing people. To compare those with a different opinion than his to actual murderes not only dishonors U.S. soldiers and others who have died by terrorist activities, but obviously is an insensitive, deeply offensive labeling of innocent people exercising a fundamental right that Ballard apparently believes should be reserved only for his writing. Maybe it’s a sense of paranoia that explains why Ballard so disregards good sense and courtesy. His “terrorist” label appears in the first sentence of the column; towards the end of it he writes (probably as a response to asking whether Jindal would do this) that “Jindal said he would ask his supporters to cease attacking those raising questions about his policy ideas, provided his Democratic opponents do the same.” Note that he makes it sound like Jindal controls an army of radio hosts and bloggers, with who the candidate is in regular contact directing their activities – which, it appears in Ballard’s mind, must have been given marching orders to rip into Ballard’s stuff. It’s a campaign apparatus of which I haven’t heard, and it’s probably news to Jindal, too. Typically, such …
Read More...

Briefing Book As I noted in the previous posting, Louisiana’s media can be selective in its political coverage to the point of inadequately informing the citizenry as evidenced by its failure to ask pertinent questions concerning Sen. Mary Landrieu’s relationship, if any, to indicted campaign finance fundraiser Norman Hsu – an error of omission. Unfortunately, some other recent stories appearing in the state’s press show the media makes errors of commission that likewise fail to assist the public in its quest for knowledge to help it make electoral decisions. One recent example about which I wrote deserves re-emphasis. The Baton Rouge Advocate editorialized that Republican gubernatorial candidate Rep. Bobby Jindal’s agreeing to fewer “debates” than it desired had a negative impact on information for voters, which I demonstrated was a shoddy argument at best and at worst displayed rank bias against Jindal who looks likely to agree to about as many debates as he did in 2003. Yet incumbent Democrat Agriculture Commissioner Bob Odom has agreed to none – and yet we hear not a peep out of The Advocate condemning Odom. Another recent subject I covered also deals in part with an Odom action. The Blueprint Louisiana organization has released a reform agenda that mostly hits the mark, yet major office candidates, even those like Jindal strongly identified with reform, have not formally endorsed it, with one exception – Odom, whose political career is the antithesis of reform. Just by way of illustration, one part of the agenda deals with ethics reform, yet Odom has been plagued with past charges, some still pending, not only of misuse of power but outright corruption in office. Yet Louisiana media to date have not pointed out this obvious contradiction (see this typical reaction). Nor do they bother to question other dubious claims apparently when Democrats are involved. So when it is reported that the Louisiana House Democratic Caucus also said is supported the Blueprint Louisiana agenda, the media seems not at all curious as to how the voting record of many members of the Caucus shows the exact opposite of this stated intent. For example, almost every House Democrat supported SCR 76 last legislative session to rebuild New Orleans’ charity hospital in a fashion far more grandiose than the agenda’s health care plank would recommend. But when something involves Republicans, oddly the media suddenly becomes interested in connecting the dots to find inconsistency – to the point that they do it in the wrong way. Thus, we get a report that Jindal criticizes higher state spending while arguing for more spending, including federal dollars that he supported in his present position, in certain policy areas, which is called a “seeming contradiction” – compounded, it is argued, because much higher state spending in the past couple of years has been courtesy of federal dollars for recovery. It’s nothing of the sort, because the writer in this instance doesn’t …
Read More...

The story that U.S. Senator David Vitter (R-LA) hoped would go away refuses to die. This week Hustler publisher Larry Flynt announced that former New Orleans prostitute Wendy Ellis, also known as Wendy Cortez, passed a polygraph test administered by an international lie detector expert, Edward Gelb, former President of the American Polygraph Association. Cortez claims that she had a four month paid relationship at a French Quarter hotel with Vitter in 1999 while he was a State Representative. The polygraph test showed she was telling the truth. According to Mr. Gelb, the chances that Cortez is being untruthful are less than .01 percent. Flynt held a news conference with Cortez to provide more information about her claims. These accusations are nothing new to people who follow Louisiana politics. Starting in 1999, reports begin to circulate that congressional candidate and then State Representative David Vitter was a client of a local prostitute named Wendy Cortez. According to GOP State Central Committee member Vincent Bruno, who worked in the campaign of Vitter’s opponent, former Governor Dave Treen, Cortez approached him and other Treen volunteers with her claims about a relationship with Vitter. She was upset that Vitter was campaigning for Congress on a family values platform, while paying for her services on the side. Eventually, Treen decided not to use the salacious information in his campaign and Vitter was elected. Despite Vitter’s election to Congress, the prostitute story persisted. It was brought up during a 2002 interview that I conducted with Vitter on my radio show. He was asked directly about his relationship with Wendy Cortez and he denied it. In a 2004 radio interview, Vitter was confronted about the relationship once more and he angrily refuted the charge. His most recent denial occurred on July 16 at a Metairie, LA press conference standing next to his wife when he claimed that “those New Orleans stories” were untrue. He did admit to a “very serious sin” and did not deny that his phone number appeared on the call list of the D.C. Madam, but he refused to address the New Orleans stories. At this point, Vitter needs to clear up this situation. His constituents need to know the truth. He owes it to the people who are paying his salary and those who he represents in the United States Senate. With this new revelation, Vitter faces a crucial leadership test. Will he continue to stonewall or will he address the accusations? It seems at least plausible that Vitter was involved with Cortez and possibly other prostitutes in New Orleans and was engaged in this type of behavior both in New Orleans and Washington D.C. In responding, Vitter does not need to go through hoops for Larry Flynt, and take his lie detector test; however, he does need to be honest about his activity. If Vitter admits that he frequented prostitutes and had a problem, but sought counseling from his priest and forgiveness from his wife, then the voters of Louisiana will …
Read More...