The candidates for Governor of Louisiana faced one another on state network television and for many, it might have been the first opportunity to watch all of the candidates in the same room.Without doubt, the man on the spot was Bobby Jindal because he can win the election in the first round or could be forced to face more than fifty percent of the voters during the next election who preferred another candidate or who are not willing to vote for him during this primary.
Should Bobby Jindal not be elected on Saturday, obviously, the next big question will be whom will be in the runoff.
During the CBS debate, on Thursday, the public was able to engage in an electronic town hall meeting and listen to the candidates make their major pitch on a variety of issues.The range of topics included corruption, economic development, I-49, Road Home, racism, and so many other topics filled within a one-hour format.While there was more brawn than blood during the debate and while many might have wanted to see more personal interaction between the candidates, the debate gave the audience a chance to see the next Governor in action facing the public.
Approximately fifty percent of the voters are either voting for Walter Boasso, John Georges or Foster Campbell or they are undecided.There are many undecided voters particularly in the Southwest part of the state and even in areas such as Shreveport and Monroe.By Saturday night, those who are going to vote will do so and will have made a gut-wrenching decision knowing that Louisiana can be a great state and hoping that one of the candidates who was in front of the cameras will have a chance to be a great governor.
So, now it is up to the voters, you.We’ve had a debate or perhaps a forum two days before the polls close. Bayoubuzz wants to know what you thought about the candidates’ responses.Trying to remove style from the discussion (although style of a Governor is indeed important), which candidate appeared to make more sense to you?Based upon the debate, which candidate understood the facts and best shared his vision?Which candidate provided the best workable solutions?
Bayoubuzz will be placing more content on its front page with more stories, sound clips, videos of the presentation ( so check often) but first we would like to hear from you.What do you think about the responses from Thursday night’s statewide debate? Tell us below on our Buzzboards.
Also, listen tomorrow at 8 a.m. on WGSO Radio at 990 AM, http://www.wgso.com to hear Publisher Stephen Sabludowsky and Radio host and Bayoubuzz columnist, Jeff Crouere go head-to-head and discuss Thursday night’s debate.
So with all the Votes in Jindal gets 54% of the vote. I guess Dan, Diaperman, and Audrey, will be eating crow considering all of them predicted that Jindal wouldn't get over 50% I belive Mrs. George said he would get betwwen 36-42 Percent and both Diaperman and Dan said 42% tops. Concrats to all of us that voted we voted with our minds we supported our candiates with our hearts.To those you you who DID NOT VOTE... YOU HAVE NO ROOM TO COMPLAIN about who will be in the Governors mansion! Written by Ole Jarhead
on 10/21/2007
So with all the Votes in Jindal gets 54% of the vote. I guess Dan, Diaperman, and Audrey, will be eating crow considering all of them predicted that Jindal wouldn't get over 50% I belive Mrs. George said he would get betwwen 36-42 Percent and both Diaperman and Dan said 42% tops. Concrats to all of us that voted we voted with our minds we supported our candiates with our hearts.To those you you who DID NOT VOTE... YOU HAVE NO ROOM TO COMPLAIN about who will be in the Governors mansion! Written by Ole Jarhead
on 10/21/2007
congratulation Professor Written by Diaperman
on 10/20/2007
Professor, you said to RhettsWife: <But, you cannot judge a person on race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, or national origin. Those are inexcusable.> A large part of Bobby Jindal's Republican Party's platform is discrimination against folks because of their sexual orientation. David Vitter's criminal act of hiring a prostitute was overlooked because she was female. Larry Craig, on the other hand...well we all know that because he was seeking homosexual sex...that's another story. How do you back a party which participates in the inexcusable judging of a person because of their sexual orientation? Written by Harvestmoon
on 10/20/2007
Professor, When a company is applying for a toxic waste site and they pay Jindal 50 thousand dollars I wonder if they are supporting him are paying for future support for their waste site.No Bobby should not set down with a company that was run out of Louisiana before.No Jindal should not turn anybody neighborhood into a waste site.
Now as far as oil companies they have over the years tried to clean up the business,so why would jindal, now want Louisiana to be a toxic waste site for other states.But dear professor if you are claiming Jindal is supporting running the oil companies out of Louisiana,that would mean Jindal and Campbell are in the same boat.The oil companies are our last big business,so I would think twice before trying to run them out of the state. Then again why have we made them clean up their act if Jindal is turning our state into a toxic waste site. Btw Bobby Jindal has not spoken to his voters,but he is quick to jump and talk for the out of state money. Now please look at changing Vitter if your worried about the diaper being full. Written by Diaperman
on 10/20/2007
Well, I probably won't be posting until after the results are final. So, I'll say this now. I've enjoyed debating with you people. We've disagreed, and even sometimes gotten into downright arguements. But, for the most part, we've been civil (at least, no death threats were made!). Tomorrow, some of us will win and some will lose. Whichever side I'm on, I've enjoyed it. This is the process I live for. A Democracy is about disagreement and reconciliation. Tomorrow, most of the candidates who don't win will say that they fully support the winner and will work with that person to better Louisiana. I think we will all get along as well as can be expected on here and move on to other issues. I look forward to tomorrow, and all the tomorrows after that! - - - Except for you, RhettsWife. I still believe that you are racist. I think that your continued insistence upon calling Bobby by his Indian name is race-baiting. That is completely out of place, and unforgiveable. You can put down on a person because of their morals, their stance on issues, or anything else. But, you cannot judge a person on race, sex, religion, sexual orientation, or national origin. Those are inexcusable. Therefore, I do not forgive you. But, I doubt that you are sorry, anyway. So, I hope that you have a nice, bitter life. Written by Professor
on 10/19/2007
DiaperIsFull - I don't know, I can't explain why they would want to put in a landfill there. I doubt that Bobby did either. However, he was willing to sit down and listen to them. Is there something wrong with meeting with them? No. So, let's talk about the cash. Are you saying that a waste company cannot donate to a politician? If you're saying that a politician should not accept it, then that's what you are saying. So, we're to tell a waste company that they are excluded from the political process? That they cannot try to influence the government to their side? I can't believe that's what you're advocating. - - - Look at Campbell. He's demonizing the oil and gas companies. They've ruined our coast. They don't pay for it. They've exploited our resources, our cities and our people. They are the bad guys, and now they're gonna pay. However, if I remember correctly, our very own Tony G. is paid by them. So, are we to tell Tony to return every paycheck he gets? - - - I understand that waste is a little different than oil and gas. But, a waste company doesn't just create a dump for nothing. They pay for it - heavily. Where does thta money go? Schools, roads, infrastructure. Is it a fair price to pay for some land being ruined? I don't know. I'm not an ecologist or an environmental engineer. But, I sure would sit down and listen to those people if they approached me. - - - But, I know that nothing I've said will convince you. Basically, I've wasted my breath (or fingertips, in this case). You're going to go vote for someone else tomorrow. OK, that's your right. But, your candidate is not going to win. Written by Professor
on 10/19/2007
Professor please explain to me the Logic of Bobby Jindal taking 50,000 from supporters in Littleton, Colo. to put in an industrial waste landfill. Now in the year 2000 Mayor kip holden helped stop this same company from putting in this waste site,but Jindal is quick to get involved with them. Now please also notice that near Alsen are the Ronaldson Field construction landfill and the PetroProcessors Superfund hazardous waste sites. Now please show me the Logic of putting a toxic waste site so close to our state capital and how making alsen another hazardous waste site going to help Louisiana.Now Jindal is the one who has hide from talking about the issues so please do not blame anyone but Jindal if he does not win.Do we really need another Governor being bought and paid for by out of state companies,especially ones who see Louisiana as a dumping ground and nothing more.
Written by Diaperman
on 10/19/2007
Professor please explain to me the Logic of Bobby Jindal taking 50,000 from supporters in Littleton, Colo. to put in an industrial waste landfill. Now in the year 2000 Mayor kip holden helped stop this same company from putting in this waste site,but Jindal is quick to get involved with them. Now please also notice that near Alsen are the Ronaldson Field construction landfill and the PetroProcessors Superfund hazardous waste sites. Now please show me the Logic of putting a toxic waste site so close to our state capital and how making alsen another hazardous waste site going to help Louisiana.Now Jindal is the one who has hide from talking about the issues so please do not blame anyone but Jindal if he does not win.
Written by Diaperm
on 10/19/2007
Diaperman - the reason we've gotten quiet is because we realize that it is useless to argue. You refuse to listen to logic and sense. Our response to your ramblings will be seen tomorrow night. - - - Cholly, thank you for presenting the best and most logical arguement I've yet seen for someone voting for Boasso. Thank you for thinking about it, even if we disagree on the candidate. - - - RacistWife, do you not understand the difference? In the SCHIP vote, each and every Congressman had told the Democratic leadership how they were going to vote. If every single citizen in Louisiana were to tell Jindal how they were going to vote, and he had a few thousand to spare, I'm sure he'd tell a few people that they could miss the vote if they had important prior obligations. Oh, BTW, I like your forum. Do you and the 3 other people registered there have fun together? hahahaha - - - Dan, were you in Jindal's Washington office for the past few weeks? Since they are barred from the campaign, do you think that they were sitting around doing nothing? Don't you think that they "might" have met with Baker's office to see why Baker was so adamantly against SCHIP? - - - Oscar, please allow me to help with your conflict. Or, rather, allow me to paraphrase Rob Couhig. In a $12 million campaign, a mere $50,000 does NOT buy you a vote. It doesn't even buy you preference. It buys you lunch. It buys you access. It means that you can sit down with the future governor and present your plan. That's it. - - - See you all tomorrow evening! Written by Professor
on 10/19/2007
Another thing to notice about Bobby Jindal. Just six months ago if one person said they did not like Jindal,six or more people would jump all over them. Now notice even Bobby Jindals best supporters have started to become silent. They know Bobby has failed to show any real leadership in these last couple of months. The $50 thousand dollars from the out of state company to put an industrial waste site less than twenty miles from our state capitol is an insult to all the people of Louisiana and even worse for the poor people in the little town of alsen. Written by Diaperman
on 10/19/2007
Nat, obviously, I think your coments are always very thoughtful. I think Bobby Jindal is not perfect. he is not as bad as some of these people make him out to be, nor is he as good. He will hover around 50 percent--from 47 to 53. Face it, half of the state are certain about others or just uncertain about Jindal. I will say that whether he wins straight up or not, he should have debated. He has wonderful ideas, but has some philosophies some do not embrace. I think that some people are just not ready to give him the keys, but believe he will ultimately drive away as the winner. We shall see. My 2 cents worth. Written by Phil Compass
on 10/19/2007
Gosh, after reading all of these blogs, I sure hope Jindal gets more than 20% of the vote tomorrow. I am getting very nervous. I thought he could possibly win in the first. then I thought he might get in the mid to high 40's. Then I got so concerned after reading the same 6 people all opposing him everyday on this blog, I was at least sure of the mid to upper 30's. But now, after all of this and with the horses at the starting gate, and the piling on and overwhelming support for others, I just hope Jindal can get over 20%. I am really getting depressed. Written by Nat
on 10/19/2007
I didn't appreciate Jindal presenting Boasso's idea about votech education in high school as if it were his (Jindal's) own last night. Written by Harvestmoon
on 10/19/2007
I made up my mind a long time ago to vote for State Senator Walter Boasso. I was impressed immediately after our first meeting in Baton Rouge at the Capital Senate chamber. Since I first made that decision, he has done nothing to make me regret that decision.Let me make the case for and against him as we move along. First of all, he doesn't appear to have done anything bad enough to merit this office. He certainly doesn't have much experience in government, but you could argue that his relative inexperience might be an asset in bringing opposing sides together. At least he doesn't have a lot of scars that would prevent him from considering anyone's point of view. More than any candidate, I believe that he could work among all of the disparate parties to bring them together for Lousiaiana. I know that as we near gridlock in Baton Rouge, an excellent mediator will be needed. He's been in both parties sincerely, I believe, and he shouldn't be bound by party intransigence. He probably wouldn't be nearly the micromanager that Jendal would be, but I believe that adjusting the status quo is hardly enough of an agenda for the next Governor. With his size and appearance, Boasso projects a kingly mien that is great enough to include many differences heretofore unmanageable. He has sold his business before entering this test which to me represents and magnifies the seriousness and the ethical intent of his candidacy. He certainly has the political assets to make his case as a politician and at the same time demonstrates his will and ability to get things done as a leader. I believe that Senator Boasso has the best vision of what needs to be done and that vision emanates from his experience in business. He has been chosen by nature to enter the fray and if successful to take us beyond the hurdles where we have failed before. His candidacy is a great gift. I hope that we are serious enough about our future to recognize the gift and to accept it! Written by cholly b
on 10/19/2007
It is interesting to note that some people claim that Jindal's vote wasn't necessary to override the veto. Well, dears, he is now claiming that every vote of every citizen is needed in the election tomorrow. He needs the votes of the citizens but he does not need to vote on all the bills which come before the house. We do note that he and his wife at least voted in this election for governor. Yes, Pi, every vote does count. Written by RhettsWife
on 10/19/2007
Bobby Jindal was supposed to have all this clout, at least that is what his campaign and the media told everyone in 2004 and 2006. He was supposed to be going to washington with political capital to spend to get Louisiana what it needs.
If the job of being a Congressman is just to cast votes, then all of you who brought up the fact that the override vote was short by more than the 4 missing votes would be correct.
But the job of a Congressman is to work with other congressmen and use your clout to convince them to support the legislation that you also support.
Bobby Jindal has consistantly ignored this portion of his job. Look at the CAFTA vote. Instead of trying to convince people to vote against it, Bobby Jindal just sat in a corner and let the bill pass. Once the bill had enough votes to pass, jindal then cast his vote against CAFTA. So, instead of working against the bill, he sat and let the bill pass and then voted against it so he wouldn't alienate louisiana industry that would be hurt by it.
And the same thing goes for this override vote. Instead of working to get his peers to support the legislation he claimed to support, he just sat back and did nothing.
If Bobby Jindal was a leader, he would lead others to vote with him. Bobby Jindal is obviously not a leader... and we need a leader to be our next governor. Written by Dan
on 10/19/2007
I think JIndal has a lot of personal strengthws and would make a good governor. Just being a Rhodes Scholar is not enough. Look at David Vitter. Jindal is a very intelligent, well spoken person. His view on the repealing the hate crime scares me. I also want to know why he did not give back the 50 thousand dollars bundled which seems to get around the law and for a racially-sensitive dump, at that? But, he certainly would make a good impression for the state. So, call me conflicted. Written by Oscar
on 10/19/2007
I thank you for your compliments. You know that in my first involvements in politics I often campaigned, hating the opponent and lording my own candidate. It is the perspective of age that has given me what I hope is a deeper look into an arena where many claim that there is no depth whatsoever. Today, I simply have no hate left nor even visceral dislike for any candidate. In a lifetime, I have learned to respect the representatives of any group of survivors no matter who they are. I have learned to respect the surviving as a class! The fact is today that I really do appreciate any fool who is willing to bear the cross of candidacy much less the ultimate demands of the officeholder. Without them we would be leaderless. It is within this light added by the years that I speak. I will not vote for Bobby Jindal in this cycle even though I voted for him before. In a way, this may be my apology to him for going my separate way. I think that Bobby is one of the finest prospects for Louisiana governance in my lifetime and in no way do I want to disparage him or his candidacy or his campaign. It is grand that we have him as a choice and hopefully as a future choice. He certainly has much to offer this state and its people, but it is in the realm of the much maligned politics that one mirrows his experience to the electorate demonstrating his ability to lead at the present moment Just as the storms that batter our shores shape us and make us what we become, so the arena of politics showcases us to the public in the best light possible and raises us or keeps us from our mission. There are no losers in the ring of politics even for those who never opt again to run, their life is so enriched by the experience, that they owe the electorate a debt of thanks for inviting them. Defeat is only the chastising hand of God that prepares us best for His impossible missions. Bobby will mature to meet a maturer electorate in the future if he loses. If he wins he will painfully grow even faster, for he will be forced to make the heartbreaking choices that those at the head of government are always on a daily basis forced to make. He or she will take the blame for the depredations of nature and the hatred of other nations. Whatever the dicision that we make, I want to thank all the candidates for getting in the ring, for the bruises, and the black eyes that they suffer. For the charred pride, and the boiled blood of political participation. I once asked a lady to make ten calls to voters on behalf of the candidate we were supporting. On the first call, she encountered the wife of the Mayor of the nearest town. The mayor's wife was quite opinionated and not of our persuasion. The lady slammed the phone into the receiver and I think that it was the last political act that she ever performed. Thank you candidates for defending the notion of government to millions with only the authority of the yet ungoverned to do so. Written by cholly b
on 10/19/2007
All of the candidates have very good virtues and values. All of the candidates have faults. I was proud that Boasso stood up for making an error during the session. He took responsibility. I think Jindal showed that minorities can love America and Louisiana but he was blessed with a great brain. NOt everyone, white, black or any other color are so blessed. I think he could have showed more compassion. But, I do give him tremendous credit in overcoming bias which is the American dream. The question is whether he can bring the people together or if he is going to be run by the outside. I think he was right when he said that Congress should pay for the Road Home. Now, if only we can get David Vitter to agree since vitter said we had all the money we needed. Georges has also taken advantage of the American dream. Written by Lonny Davison
on 10/19/2007
Nat, dear, we have continually focused on issues and have used our satirical statements to indicate that Mr. Jindal is clearly phony and his political connection is all that he has as credentials and that he has done litte, if anything for the ordinary citizens of this state, during his tenure in these positions. Your focus on what you perceive as our "racism" appears to be your attempt to lessen our remarks on this forum. That is your right and it is our right to call Boasso, Fatso; Campbell, Mr. Oil Issue; and Georges, Big Nose. Now speak to the issues and not to the alleged racism. Mind you, dear, we came up the hard way and we were taught to respect all regardless of their color, their religion, their sex. You may call us children of immigrants for that is what we are and proud of it and determined to carry on their tradition for seeking justice and truth. Written by RhettsWife
on 10/19/2007
Dan, It's above you. I'll leave it at that. Written by NAT
on 10/19/2007
Nat: Do you think Bill Gates just "had" his money all the time? No. He worked from nothing (like Boasso) to make millions. Yes, Gates made more money. But that does not diminish from Boasso's successes in life. Jindal is the same old same old. He is showing that Louisiana under Bobby Jindal will have a huge "for sale" sign on it and the way to make your purchase is to contribute to his campaign. It's a new Louisiana Purchase for 2007, but this time the people buying it are the special interests who believe Bobby will hand Louisiana to them on a silver platter. Written by Dan
on 10/19/2007
R's Wife. I did not know you were speaking for others and that you represented a group on this blog. But, since you you are telling me "us" and "our" I guess that is the case. Let me make this clear, my dear, you are the only person I have seen resort to the use of Piyush and eventually PI. Only you. Only you have resorted to the appearance of this candidate with selective phrases such as today's "perpetual, phony smile". Only you. Only you seem to think this candidate is wearing a prepetual smile, when any objective person would see no more so than any other candidate. Only you, perhaps inadvertantly, seem to have some sort of reason to focus on Jindal's appearance. Perhaps, you might want to do some soul-searching to see if this is some sort of latent, hidden characteristic( only a suggestion on my part), as you have continually demonstrated this tendency. Don't misunderstand, my dear, it may not be as blantant as a noose hanging from a tree, or the length of a person's nose, but something constantly draws you to Jindal's appearance or heritage. Maybe you can work on that during the next four years and be aware on the next go around. Just a suggestion. After all, why look at a lifetime of a young man's accomplishments when it is so easy for you to bring up his appearance? Written by Nat
on 10/19/2007
Nat, dear, your continued charge of bigotry is the only thing that you dare to say about us. You are wrong, dear. Our basic issue with any candidate is the quality of leadership that the candidate can give. Mr. Jindal, Bobby, or his given name Piyush (which we have developed into the nickname of Pi) cannot accomplish true leadership for this state. He cannot speak to the people in a public debtate at this time. If there is a runoff, then maybe he will do so and then maybe we will go with him at that time. At this point, Nat, dear, we cannot. His history alone of political patronage, and that is what it truly is, from Foster and his cohorts, and his lack of representation of his constituents at this most important time, indicates to us that he cannot be this state's leader. We have seen too much of this patronage in our experiences and we will no longer tolerate it. Written by RhettsWife
on 10/19/2007
Cholly, Thank you for demonstrating legitimate thought on this blog. Your comments, generalizations in scope, are very true historically in our state, as proven by our constant tendencies to elect "real" people, "common folk just like me", as in he/she "came from the bottom up and understands me" types. And in this case, you do speak volumes about the inherent prejudices concerning many opposed to ever voting for someone that looks like Jindal. It's real, even though he was "man" enough to refuse to be divisive when the commentators pushed him on that issue last night, and when he refused to play the "victim" role in this election( I was so proud of him for that, last night). Unfortunately, those searching for that "bottom up" mentality candidate fail to recognize none of these candidates overcame that problem more than Jindal, coming from an immigrant family, looking different,and having to constantly achieve to be accepted. Yet, so many are so used to his accomplishments he has made it easy for them to forget where he started from in life. We passed up a real gem 4 years ago and we will forever pay the price of losing so much and so many because of that decision. Fortunately, I believe so many are like me........."fool me once, shame on you.....fool me twice, shame on me". Written by Nat
on 10/19/2007
Thank you all for your comments and true debate. For those who have made allegations, I ask that you back them up with links to sites or post them with documenation. As far as the comment about the "liberal left", that is insulting. Perhaps the question should be is there no talk radio or other non-mainstream media website that is not rightwing right? This website is right down the middle--not left and not right. As mentioned before, we take all sides with writes of all political positions. Also, you have every opportunity to have input as anyone else and speak your mind. You are not edited. In fact, if this web site is to raise issues against or in favor of all candidates, it is the information we seek, not the politics. I for one have not decided who I will vote for. Does that make me a "liberal left"? No, I rather listen to all of the arguments and make a decision so I can be fair. Speaking of fair, I ask that you also watch the interviews I conducted yesterday before and after the debate of ALL of the candidates. I think they are very insightful and hopefully you will find them to be so also. The link is http://www.bayoubuzz.com/News/Louisiana/Politics/Governor_race/Louisiana_Governor_Election__A_Portrait__4931.asp. I hope we take this election seriously and I really do appreciate all of your comments since you have participated in a very inmportant process--discourse on the issues. I even thank those who mischaracterize this website which has a wonderful audience, I hope due to its being fair and honest.
Written by Stephen Sabludowsky, Publisher of Bayoubuzz.com
on 10/19/2007
Why can't you be objective. Is there no publication in Louisiana that is not liberal left? Written by Bob D.
on 10/19/2007
I think that Bobby Jindal is running against endemic defeat built into the electorate that he has not been able to effect into his column. This is the reason for his camping out in north Louisiana, and such recognition of the problems are to his credit. The vote that he received in his first campaign was probably the most that he is capable of receiving. I think that race has little to do with it. I voted for Bobby against Blanco despite his skin color and with a little apprehension that I might be castigated for voting for a foreigner with Black skin. The one thing that I could not do was vote for a Catholic female with a Cajun accent that hailed from a section of the state which had foisted Edwin Edwards onto the political frontier as the heir apparent to Huey Long's legacy.
The endemic defeat that he butts his head against is more rooted in his party allegience and that party's split personality. The division between the Evangelicals and their lording of the party apparatus and the business Republicans and their pursing the pulse of state party politics has not abated over the years and is still the friction that often prevents Republicans from dominating elections in this state. When Bobby put his campaign into the hands of the Evangelicals, he aligned with them and while he lost but a few of the stalwarts of the Party, the loss of any is crucial. It is the dissonance between the Evangelicals and the RNC that has long been a source of division. Woody Jenkins overcame that obstacle and the Evangelicals waged a spirited campaign against Landreau which could easily and perhaps should have been rewarded wih victory. The television that they have produced in this campaign is to me mediocre at best although the quantities of its unavailing message would be envied by any politician.
Bobby's own personal assets and liabilities limit his appeal in a state where the Cajun heritage likes the frankness and humor of an Edwards quip or gibe instead of the innate seriousness of a Treen or Jindal. The somber face of the Evangelicals does not help Bobby here. The absence of humor suggests hubris, and this is where the rightwingers have habitually fallen in previous elections. It is one thing to demand righteousness over a congregation, but to impose it over an institution as complex as state government has historically failed as demonstrated by the failure of Prohibition.
The final inherent flaw of the campaign is that in the choice of corruption as a theme is ultimately a campaign for the status quo. The elimination of corruption in the state government would ultimately help all economically according to their pitch, but while it might affect the temporal wealth for a select few of the political cadre, it could cause consternation within the Republican Party where the recognition of such frailties is seldom realized. There is a lot of wealth in our state, but it is not distributed evenly among the populace and poverty is still a virulent problem here. It was the great appeal of Long and Edwards that they campaigned on changing the status quo and raising the downtrodden to higher status, echoing the Biblical God's promise to raise up the poor and tear down the mighty. Many here are more receptive to that uplifting message than to the message of better government. Even within the Evangelical community the bite of poverty makes many of their adherents receptive to such a promise of redistribution rather than the raise all boats promise of better government.
Written by Cholly b
on 10/19/2007
Where is Abbott and COstello when you need them? Who needs them when the same handful of blog participants can be counted on for hilarity. There's the constant prejudice of the R Wife who has insisted on displaying her inate bigotry by constantly referring to Jindal as PI, to make sure to let us know his heritage is an issue with her, and today her "perpetual, sickening smile" comment. And the other handful of regulars that simply cannot relate to real accomplishments of the magnitude performed by Jindal in service to our citizens. I can accept you can only relate to the level of providing groceries to convenience stores or growing pine tress or cleaning containers with "Tide", and you actually believe that qualifies you to meet on the world stage with heads of state and CEO's of IBM or Nissan or Microsoft. I can accept you could not understand about the importance of having experiences of working on the national level as a presidential appointing on healthcare issues, second in command, or having worked with the congresses and building relationships or having your own peers in congress select you as the leader of the freshman class, in addition to already experiencing working for the entire state post-Katrina and knowing the statewide leaders already as a result of that. Of course, I dare not mention how nice it would be to actually have a really smart governor unlike the previous PAW PAW Foster and MAW MAW Blanco, someone that people can actually walk away from meeting with as our leader and thinking, wow, that guy is really, really sharp. I mean, who could possibly want the highest IQ and youngest governor in the entire country representing Louisiana. I accept you'd rather have that great intellect Walter Boasso or the born with a silver spoon in his mouth Georges. Hey, Walter can always bring a teeny box of Tide with him as his trademark when he tries to converse with Bill Gates( that should impress Gates), and John could make sure the Edwards cronies are in the meetings with him and they can make sure everyone knows what it takes to do business in Louisiana. By the way, I do appreciate Georges having a master's degree in hot dogology and video pokerology. That should serve him well when he takes his Edwards crony mission to compete for business with the two fastest growing economies in the world, India and China. I'm sure he will just wow them with his extensive background. I am so glad to be in that 50% plus one vote crowd that actually understands a real resume' and not deterred by desperate commercials put out by people claiming to be qualified to administer and manage my state, that wouldn't be qualified for a mid-management position in a major corporation. Either this Saturday or in another month America will see that the majority of its voters went for a clean, honorable, workaholic, intelligent, different looking, family oriented,highly educated, well-rounded person that any state would be proud to call their governor. Get use to it, even though it is above your level to grasp. Written by NAT
on 10/19/2007
I don't know if its true, but I do know that Georges didn't lie about the $50K Jindal received from the Colorodo company (and people related to it) that wants to open a toxic waste dump north of Baton Rouge. That is a highly questionable donation. So it makes me wonder what other questionable contribution Jindal has taken. The lump sum of Jindal's contributions just proves to me that he is bought and paid for and will owe many favors. Written by Dan
on 10/19/2007
But, is the ad true about ICF? Where is the documentation? Written by Clarence
on 10/19/2007
Anyone see the Georges ad that claims Jindal has taken campaign contributions from lobbyists for ICF (the road home corp.)? Written by Dan
on 10/19/2007
RhettsWife fair enough....great point!! I agree 100%! Written by JT
on 10/19/2007
Robert: Actually you are partially incorrect. It is against the law for someone to have sole ownership of multiple LLCs and then use those LLC's to make multiple maximum contributions. Now, if the LLC's are owned by more than one person (like a spouce) then perhaps it would be legal. AND if the person owned multiple C-Corps, it would be absolutely within the law for that person to make the maximum contribution personally and from each of t hose corporations. Basically, if you are wealthy the only limit on campaign contributions you are allowed to give is the number of corporations you own. And I have seen situations where someone has one corporation own a business that runs boats (for whatever purpose), and then another corporation owns the boat, and another corporation does this and another corporation does that and all the corporations make the maximum contribution possible. I have been talking about this for a long time now and I am glad others are jumping on the bandwagon. Written by Dan
on 10/19/2007
Fair enough Clarence. No one's perfect, including all four of these guys, and they all chose to take the shots. But part of my search is the actually reasoning behind voting for one of the others...I don't see much of "this candidate will do this or improve that"....if you're on this site looking for a reason to vote FOR George, where is it. There's a bunch of "Bobby's a Rat", but if you're undecided, what's swaying you TO another candidate outside of the post about Bobby...i guess that was my point (not made very well). If you're against Jindal fine, but why are you voting for one of the other three???? Nice guy, good haircut, pretty suit...I'm actually interested in reading that!!!! That would constitute a debate or a conversation about the canidates. Written by JT
on 10/19/2007
JT we would agree in some respects with you. We want change. We have stated why we support one over the other at our forum site http://rhettswife.createforum.net/rhettswife-about127.html
We may not be total in our analysis but we tried and that is what we have asked all people to do. We can no longer be taken by our noses by the politicians and led to the voting poll. We must stand up and take a stand and go into that voting booth on our own and make our own choice.
We hope to see that happen. Written by RhettsWife
on 10/19/2007
LT, I understand what you are saying, but I think that what you are seeing is a vote for Jindal does not necessarily mean a vote for change. With 10 to 12 million coming his campaign, from big businesses and insurance companies (especially after what many have gone through with Katrina and Rita) and the latest revelations of his taking money from a toxic waste dump from Colorado, I think you are seeing voter uncertainty, not bashing. I think we want to vote FOR, it is just that some of us are not sure who that FOR is. None of the candidates are far from perfect and they all have virtues. But nobody is a savior and it is not bashing to discuss with others who could be the best person to vote for. Written by Clarence
on 10/19/2007
Reading most of the posts it's sad to say that in Louisiana elections....we get what we deserve! Is it bashing to state the fact that we are last in most desired rankings? If you think what we've had in office works, vote for more of the same....if you don't understand what i'm talking about, and that's over 51%....we get what we deserve again! AND we'll stay where we are in those rankings! You got to change the recipe to change the flavor!! We should try and vote for a candidate, not against another one. Bashing Bobby is fine, but where are the accolades for the others instead? Why are you voting for them????? I'm trying to figure out where the bitterness is coming from?? All these men want to better the state!!
I'm just hoping for a 4 year chance, if it doesn't work, we can go back to the "good ole boy or girl" recipe! Written by JT
on 10/19/2007
Nat last night showed why Jindal missed so many debates,the more he talks now the more votes he loses. He did take money from a out of state company who has plans to build a industrial waste site,just north of Baton rouge in a little town of alsen. He has called people crooks but he has not filed one complaint with the state attorneys office as he would required to do if he was telling the truth. The only thing he got right last night was saying he agreed with Walter. The people are seeing Bobby Jindal as a flip flopper,and nothing more. Written by Diaperman
on 10/19/2007
Well, dears, we are living in a fantasy world if we believe what we simply saw last night on that forum. Nat, dear, your world is the biggest fantasy of them all. People are beginning to see Jindal is not all that he is made out to be. He is merely a packaged political figure with only politics as his background and a perpetual sickening smile on his face. We will stick with Mr. Georges come hell or high water. We have been through one but not the other yet. For a better Louisiana and a new Nouvelle Orleans. Written by RhettsWife
on 10/19/2007
This is so humorous, waking up this morning and reading all of the postings below. One would think Jindal will be lucky to get 20% of the vote, based on those. Incredible. I feel so bad for Bobby. To think, all of the pollsters are so wrong, all of the postings below must be so right, Bobby is so corrupt, so unethical, so overated, so this and so that. Wow. Oh wait! That is just fantasy land below. Such idiocy. Such legitimate unawareness of reality. What planet are you people from? Do you not know that there are tons of realists out there that have watched this young man start out at 24 and proceed to build the finest resume' of service and accomplishments, from voluntarily accepting the role in turning around a bankrupt medicare system to voluntarily accepting the role in running the entire LSU system to honoring us with his performance as the nation's number 2 man in a major role, to serving us in congress in his only elected office in our most crucial hours? And you want us to "gamble" on one candidate whose claim to fame after stepping into a family fortune and sells cigarettes, hot dogs and cokes and provides video poker machines, or ine who raises cattle and pine trees, or one whose experiences made him wealthy by cleaning out containers. My goodness, what could you possibly be thinking? You really do not live in the real world. Yeah, I could sure see Walter Boasso having a concincing technology conversation with Bill Gates, or I could sure see John Georges(with his surrounding support team of Edwin Edwards people) having a serious meeting with the premier of China or the President of India. Get real! WHo are you people? Geez! Written by nat
on 10/19/2007
You are right. It was a forum, far from a debate. They should mix it up but I blame the TV stations and Mr. Jindal for not allowing it. I mean, one debate. There is another thing that I am confused about Mr. Jindal. he says the US is the greatest country in terms of our justicial system and when asked about discrimination against him, he again said being a minority, he said the country was the greatest country, but he is always bashing Louisiana. We are the worse in the nation, this and that. When asked about discrimination against him, I think he should have said, yes, I have felt it and it hurts. When asked about the dual judicial system, he should have said, yes, I know it and it hurts. Instead, he praised the US. Well, I agree we have a great judicial system and a great country and I am not asking him to moan, but, I just detected an insincerity within him. There was nothing personal about things I would think he would be personal about. It was like he was too smooth and did not want to anger the North Louisiana people who voted against him due to his color and did not want to anger the whites who have a different view on Jena than the blacks. I just did not sense anything inside. No feelings. Just smooth. This is not a criticism, it is just the way I feel about those issues and his responses. he did say how much he loved this country and how much he was like everyone else and if that is how he feels, that is great. But, not everybody with a different color feels the same way and I did not detect any pain from him on that issue. Written by Dignity
on 10/19/2007
Listen, this was not a "debate" it was a forum. WHich is why it was boring. In an actual debate, candidates would be allowed to spar with one another and really expound upon their differnces. We CAN NOT accept this 30 second soundbite crap. And you know why there have been three forums instead of many, open debates? Because Jindal REFUSES to go into that setting. And frankly, I really don't want a Governor who backs down from such a challenge. And why should he be afraid? According to him, he has a 1000.5 plan for everything. Boasso will tear him apart in a real deabte if given a chance in a run-off. We deserve a run-off. Written by For Boasso
on 10/19/2007
Also, while I did not like bobby Jindal focus on corruption and economic development because I don't think that is the greatest impediment to bringing in big companies into this state, I did like his emphasis on increasing trade schools. I also liked Walter Boasso's answer about using the infrastructure of the river and the rail and improving the trade with China. I think he said it would light this state up like a Christmas tree. I am not crazy about John Georges using the Lt. Governor to be in charge of economic development. cultural economy perhaps, but not economic development. Written by Lonny Davison
on 10/19/2007
And, on the Saints issue, I found it offensive that Foster Campbell kept using the word "rob" regarding the Saints and Tom Benson when he is so against using the word "corrupt". Written by PracticeWhatYouPreach
on 10/18/2007
I think that Mr. Jinal really pulled a boner. Here we are talking about Jena and he talks about having an imperfect judicial system but the best in the world. Yes, I know he was quoting Governor Blanco who said that she was relying upon the justice system, but she also was not in the middle of a debate. The other candidates appeared much more understanding of dual justice system. It was like watching George W. Bush looking at his watch during his debate. Governor Blanco did go and talk to the parties involved but she also said that the justice system was independent body. I think had I been Bobby Jindal, I would have showed more compassion and maybe that is the reason that he was asked about whether he was ever discriminated against. Written by Doris Clark
on 10/18/2007
Lonny, Robert would not pull this out of the "air" which as we know is probably polluted for both parties..However, being a Democrat, I will say that the Republicans are shrewder at it.....and don't get caught as often,,,,
But it looks like, Mr. Ethical Jindal will have to run under "other pretenses" in the run off........and if it continues to show "his true colors", he will be denied entrance to the Governor's Mansion again.........
Sure is REFRESHING, Lonny and Robert, to see both of you using your own names.
I have disdain and pity for those who talk out and feel they have to hide behind anonymity!
If Jindal is doing what Robert says, he may be within the law, but he is a hypocrite BIG TIME,,,and when the public finds out, he will lose big time. Written by Audrey George
on 10/18/2007
Yea, it's funny that Bobby Jindal did not name any "corrupt" people on the stage when his commercials had Boasso and Campbell as corrupt. But, I am not sure why Campbell and Boasso would not discuss their total worth. Georges did and so did Jindal. Why such a mystery? Written by PracticeWhatYouPreach
on 10/18/2007
Robert, you are making a very serious allegation. Not that I do not believe you. Do you have a link to that or post the information? Also, are the democrats doing the same thing? Written by Lonny Davison
on 10/18/2007
A small but dedicated group of wealthy Republican supporters have apparently decided they are willing to violate the spirit and possibly the letter of Louisiana's Campaign Finance Disclosure Act (CFDA) to support the Republicans on the October 20th ballot. A detailed examination of Jindal's campaign finance reports submitted through September reveals that 100 limited liability companies (LLCs) controlled by only 28 individuals contributed more than $500,000 to Mr. Jindal’s second campaign for governor. Since it is possible for one person to own many LLC’s and since a corporation has the legal status of a person, it is possible for an individual to multiply his campaign contributions by having each LLC contribute the allowable amount. If a person has six LLC’s, then he may contribute the amount for each of them, plus one for himself, or seven contributions. In effect, such an approach circumvents the legislation governing contributions and is clearly available only to those who have considerable wealth. it is more than a little distressing that Jindal, whose campaign trumpeted ethical politics, has accepted so much ethically questionable money. It reinforces the emerging perception that Republicans are trying to buy this fall's elections and bend the rules to do it. The trumpets are just sounding brass!
Written by Robert Desmarais Sullivan
on 10/18/2007
The candidates were cordial to one another and they did not beat up on Bobby Jindal. Had the format been different, they would have been more lively. I thought it was interesting that Bobby Jindal did not identify anyone as being corrupt. I also thought that Georges played it really smooth by saying he suspects something was wrong with the 50 thousand dollar contribution from the Colorado firm. I feel that Jindal did not hit a homerun but most of the candidates seemed to want to be positive and present themselves positively. I thought the question about the budget was excellent with good follow up by the questioner. Foster Campbell was very predictable but his plan is easy but the big issue is whether he can get it through the legislature and then the courts. I thought it interesting that two appellate court judges would give an opinion since the case could be presented in their courts. Written by Phil Compass
on 10/18/2007
42 percent of the vote would be stunning. I think you are right about not getting the black vote. I think he lost that with his comment on Bayoubuzz that he is in favor of repealing the hate crime law. I think that the debate was boring. It did not allow the candidates to really discuss the issues. But, at least it was a debate. But, I do think that the debate was issue oriented. I am not sure how much of the I-49 answer was for political purposes since North Louisiana is up for grabs. think about it. Which is more important--a better evacuation route or linking to Arkansas? I am not sure why one of the questioners kept asking Jindal if he was discriminated against. Any idea? Written by Clown
on 10/18/2007
Jindal get`s 42% of the vote at most and then he will lose in a run-off with Boasso. Jindal has become to much off a flip flopper, and in a run-off people are going to learn about the money he is taking to let a company build an industrial waste dump in alsen.I also say he will get less than 10 percent of the black vote.
Written by Diaperman
on 10/18/2007
The candidates for Governor of Louisiana faced one another on state network television and for many, it might have been the first opportunity to watch all of the candidates in the same room.
