I am now very afraid of David Vitter.I am also very ashamed.
I have publically wondered why the Democrats, the GOP, David Vitter and US Senate hopeful—Congressman Charlie Melancon had not given a statement concerning the very controversial and embarrassing Justice Bardwell incident.The Democrats and Melancon have since made comments denouncing the actions of the Louisiana Justice of the Peace.
Today, for really the first time ever, I am serious beginning to question whether David Vitter is not a completely racially insensitive and not playing to the most ugly element of our state’s population for the purpose of being re-elected.
More than that, I am now wondering if I want to be in the same state as a US Senator named David Vitter.
According to the Washington Post, “Vitter’s spokesman also seemed to suggest that asking for comment on Bardwell isn’t legit, and took a hard shot at blogger Mike Stark, who has been publicizing widely-circulated video of Vitter dodging questions about the judge. Vitter spokesman Joel DiGrado emails me this:
“First, Sen. Vitter thinks that all judges should follow the law as written and not make it up as they go along. Second, it would be amazing for anyone to do a story based on this fringe, left-wing political hack’s blog — he’s been handcuffed and detained in the past over his guerrilla tactics.”
By his spokesperson’s words, I believe based on the Bardwell affair and Vitter’s statement, David Vitter is essentially saying that he would have said “follow the law” in cases involving the most sorry era of modern US history—the days of “Separate But Equal” and “Jim Crow”.At that time, the law and the way of life was segregation in many states in America.
I believe the now David Vitter as a US Senator, then, would have turned his head away from separate water fountains, separate hotels, back of the bus for blacks and separate everything.
During the 20th century prior to the civil rights movement and key Supreme Court cases, tens of thousands believed in their heart that it was socially better to separate the races.Some state officials actually attempted to block access to government facilities for blacks. Were they mean hearted?Perhaps.Were they simply following their conscience?Perhaps.Were they just following the law?Perhaps. However, the end result was that blacks were denied their dignity and their liberties to pursue their inalienable rights provided under the constitution.
Thus, the Supreme Court spoke and schools and then other institutions became integrated.It took courage then to change and it takes courage now for some government officials and candidates running for office to say that Bardwell’s action was totally unconscionable, indecent and absolutely to be condemned.Did the civil rights movement and the Surpreme Court cases cure society?No.In some ways it hurt blacks and whites.But, without those justices and the Presidents and Congress that followed, blacks would still be second-class citizens.
David Vitter could have said he totally disagreed with Mr. Bardwell but he was going to let the legal process handle itself. He could have said many things to distance himself from Justice of the Peace Bardwell and still say he is going to follow the law. In fact, he could have filed legislation that could have pre-empted any such action in the future.Mr. Vitter knows all about legislation.He filed Amendments after amendments regarding ACORN and illegal aliens. He has also been the anti-Obama and has proudly and regularly been campaigning on these issues. David Duke could not be prouder.
For the record, I am not excusing certain actions of people associated with ACORN.I am not advocating rights for illegal aliens.Nor am I going to defend President Obama on various pieces of legislation.
But, when you put it all together, ACORN, illegal aliens, Bardwell, I believe this U.S. Senator who hails from the same district as David Duke now can only be viewed through the spectrum of racism.
Mr. Vitter, I am glad you were not a U.S. Senator back in the 1950’s.Our society has grown by leaps and bounds since then.However, by your words today, it is very clear that you are putting your political expediency above what is fair, decent and courageous.If Bardwell is your vision of America, then God Save US All.
From the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
Today, with pressuring mounting on Louisiana Justice of the Peace Keith Bardwell to resign due to his racist actions, Senator David Vitter finally broke his silence on the issue but refused to either condemn Bardwell's actions or ask for his resignation.Earlier this month, Keith Bardwell refused to marry an interracial couple on grounds that he thought it would be detrimental to the couple's children and because he didn't believe most interracial marriages last.Bardwell went so far as to say "I'm not a racist.I just don't believe in mixing the races that way...I have piles and piles of black friends."Since then, Bardwell has been rebuked by Republicans and Democrats across Louisiana, including Governor Jindal and Senator Landrieu.Today, after 15 days, Vitter finally broke his silence and commented on the situation, but all he offered up was that he thought "judges should follow the law."
"David Vitter's failure to condemn Keith Bardwell says all you need to know about David Vitter," said Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Communications Director Eric Schultz. "To compensate for his own experience, Vitter has moved fast and furiously to the fringe of his party and is now squarely outside of the Louisiana mainstream.
Louisiana's next Senator will be someone who works toward building a better future for all Louisianans, not someone too weak to take a stand against offensive conduct by an elected official."
Vitter's likely 2010 opponent Rep. Charlie Melancon (D-LA) thinks the justice should resign. Here's his statement:
"Justice Bardwell's actions regarding interracial marriage reflect poorly on Louisiana, and I believe Justice Bardwell should resign his post. It's the responsibility of justices to follow and enforce the law, not interpret it to their own liking. Justice Bardwell has allowed his personal beliefs to interfere with his duty to uphold the law."
Ahhh, let me quote Confucious: "He who cut fart in church sits in his own pew"... Nothing interesting about that, but we are turning into one smelly country.... Written by
on 10/30/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I was using the word in the context of the ancient Chinese curse: "May you live in interesting times." Written by kpf
on 10/30/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I fear you to be correct Kp... But I do not think 'interesting' would be the correct description of what is about to come about.. We need to stay on guard to ensure that we are not led down the gauntlet that the cattle are led down on the way to the packing house.... Written by
on 10/30/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I think the polarization has just only just begun in earnest. Interesting times ahead. Written by kpf
on 10/29/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Skimmed over your comments there Kp.... Funny thing is I see the mantra "REDUCE OUR CARBON FOOTPRINT" being aired all over the place... Interesting little coincidence is; "PEOPLE ARE CARBON BASED UNITS"..... I would wonder what game is really afoot? I do so much like the story of the Trojan Horse..... And Pandora's box is a rather neat tale as well... I think the games have only really just begun in earnest... Written by
on 10/29/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
It is of no matter as I am quite unimportant. If I were then I would be (take your pick) "wrong thinking" " a Neanderthal" "dangerous" "a racist" - or some other "bad person" as any who disagree with the welfare state loving anti-capitalist America haters must - of course - be. Oh, I left out “excessively greedy” (my personal favorite) and “desiring to keep the poor, poor” – and .... let’s not forget for the truly brain dead: “wants to raid the Social Security Trust Fund.” Written by kpf
on 10/28/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
How dare you blaspheme the new left religion? Written by
on 10/28/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Oklahoma City is to the right as the Unabomber is to leftist environmentalism - namely the action of one (or a few) individual(s) which should not condemn ALL those who share the same core belief BUT who do not advocate violence. Did you not recognize the difference between Martin Luther King and the Black Panthers? Same end in mind, different means. As far as global warming goes, there are questions that aren't being asked. Such as "can we actually achieve the desired limits and maintain our standard of living (maybe we need fewer people - aka limits on family size as in China)"? Does "cap and trade" actually make sense (many environmentalist groups say it does not)? There are scams associated with global warming - by people who intend to get rich without "helping the planet" one bit. There are also forces who intend to see wealth shift from the United Styates to Third World countries under the guise of "Global Warming Initiatives." So I see no need for any unilateral action by the U.S. while China and India have - since Kyoto was originally proposed - built hundreds of coal fired power plants. We have no obligation to ruin our economy when we can burn fosile fuels cleanly while building nuclear power plants to "save the planet" from global warming. No need to rush and suffer economic hardship; no need for this at all. Written by kpf
on 10/28/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
She's too leftist to worry about offending Jewish people. They are oppressors of people of color, just like Republicans. Thought you realized that. Written by
on 10/27/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Yeah, but how do you know she isn't shopping for Hanukkah? Oh wait a minute, to say something like that I might possibly get branded as being anti-semitic or something... So I didn't say that.... Written by
on 10/27/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
She's slipping. That should be Kwanzaa/Christmas shopping. Equal rights are equal rights. Written by
on 10/27/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Ahhh, KJ's shopping genes must have kicked in... Written by
on 10/27/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
argh... going Xmas Shopping before all the good stuff is gone. ~~~ ~~~ ~~~ Written by KJ
on 10/27/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Scientific illiteracy? T-dub, you cut me to the quick.... Hey T-dub, do you know how to figure out the sex of a chromosome? Easy, and any monkey could give you an example of how it is done being as they routinly peel bananas, you pull away its genes.... Gee, I wonder if those observations fall under the nature or the nurture clause? Written by
on 10/27/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
So speaks the person that is mesmerized by Po-Boys in New Orleans or 'Bengiets in the French Quarter' especially if someone else is buying it for her - - Ha-ha-ha-ha-ha-ho-h0-ha-!!! Written by
on 10/27/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
"because a lab mouse does not enjoy his handout "... Mort, don't bring "family" into the picture. Written by KJ
on 10/27/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Will a lab mouse bother to traverse a maze if the food is perpetually placed directly in front of his nose? Now I know this does not reflect an actual model of the welfare state. That's because a lab mouse does not enjoy his handout more if he knows that it was taken from a another mouse that did have to traverse the maze for its sustenance. Written by
on 10/27/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Millions more lives have been destroyed in the democratic party's dependency ghettos than were lost in Oklahoma City. The violence may appear more direct and heartless, but in terms of damage to humanity, there is no comparison. Written by
on 10/27/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Kerry, as attractive as they may sometimes be, not everything can be reduced to a "the left and the right are both wrong" arguments. Just now, for example, you made a false equivalency - global climate change is significant, and it's humanly caused. If you value science, then you take it where it leads you - the overwhelming majority of climate scientists agree on this one - no matter what the political implications may be, or who may be using it for their economic interests. And in terms of right-wing vs. left-wing extremists, the difference between them in this country is Oklahoma City. I'll take the radical left ANY DAY over the radical right. TW Written by Tee Dub
on 10/27/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
In France, if you sue someone to collect money and lose, not only do you not collect BUT YOU ALSO may have to pay for the other side's legal fees and expenses. France does have some good ideas. As far as scientific idiocy goes, the scientific idiots on the right deny evolution, where the scientific idiots on the left believe in "global warming" - which is actually a "wealth redistribution" scheme where the U.S. economy becomes less competitive with other nations; basically your typical scam by the big banking/multinational corporate interests who desire to bring prosperity to the world by lowering our standard of living. Our government is selling us out, and has been since the end of WWII. Written by kpf
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Dear God help us all. Subsequent to my post you have it all on display - the "minds" of Louisiana's conservatives. No wonder that douchebag Vitter will get re-elected. I bet Jacob Salzbach throws up a little bit in the back of his throat when he reads this drivel. And it's not just "doubts" about biological evolution expressed here (which would be bad enough). No, Smitty doesn't even believe in existence of enzymes; that's how marked the scientific illiteracy is among this ragtag bunch of losers. Pathetic. TW Written by Tee Dub
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Poor republicans are crying over animals and name calling because they know Vitter has proven that he is not a leader. Poor little Vitter running from the media once again. Written by Cry over this
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Hey t-duhb..... did you know that enzymes are things invented by biologists that explain things which otherwise require harder thinking? Middle Skool, now that was a funny there CN!!!!!!! He probably contemplates that stuff while he is playing with his playskool building blocks... Written by
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Hey crybaby; """"it is sad that republicans mock equal rights as something to be associated with animals."""??? Nah, I don't think so, but then again I am not the expert on that, so I went to the zoo to see if I could gain some additonal insight, anyways I talked to the zookeeper about equal rights and he told me a story; "One day while making his feeding rounds among the various cages he noticed that the orang-utan was reading two books - the "Bible" and "Darwin's The Origin of Species". In surprise he asked the ape, "Why are you reading both those books"?
"Well," said the orang-utang, "I just wanted to know if I was my brother's keeper or my keeper's brother." So, I don't know, I guess the equal rights question sort of reached an impasse or something like that.. Oh, by the way, the zookeeper was a democrat. Written by
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
TW, had a bad day at the middle school? Written by CN
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Hey T-duhhhhbbb, did it ever occur to your astute analytical abilities that "in Science the credit goes to the man who convinces the world, not to the man to whom the idea first occurs." Secondly, did it ever occur to you that the first part of the word analytical is "Anal"? No, t-dubb, I am not trying to imply that you are analicktical at all, but you do seem to be sort of restricted.... Try prunes dude, they are good fruit... By the way, did you know that it has recently been discovered that research causes cancer in laboratory rats? Now those were some real astute individuals that realized that... Speaking of lab rats, those things are getting smarter and smarter every day... Must be evolution or something, anyways I overheard one lab rat say to another lab rat "I've got my scientist so well trained that every time I push the buzzer, he brings me a snack."... I put all those down fer ya there tdub cuz we luves ya and it saddend me to think that " You quit blobbing or blahhing or blogging or posting or whatever you call it just because it's so g.d. depressing to read humorless posts from unthinking conservatives.""" That's all Folks!!! Written by
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
T-duhhhhhhb, so nice to see you rejoin the gang... In seeing your reappearance I thought of a joke I saw.... An unemployed biologist got a new job at the zoo.... They offered him to dress up in a gorilla's skin and pretend to be a gorilla so people will keep coming to the zoo... On his first day on the job, the guy puts on the skin and goes into the cage. The people all cheer to see him. He starts really putting on a show, jumping around, beating his chest and roaring.... During one acrobatic attempt, he loses his balance and crashes through some safety netting, landing square in the middle of the lion cage! As he lies there stunned, the lion roars. He's terrified and starts screaming, "Help, Help!"..... The lion races over to him, places his paws on his chest and hisses, "Shut up or we'll both lose our jobs!"
Written by
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
This is funny to watch republicans try to change the subjet of a racist justice of the peace not following the law. Sad that republicans call democrat hypocrites when David viiter called on others to speak out to the media then turns around and runs and hides from the Media once again. Senator Vitter could be a real leader and speak up on this but he prefers to hide like thief in the night. Why are all of you so afraid of asking Senator Vitter to speak out like a real leader ? Written by Cry over this
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Tee Dub endorsing public policy tailored to religion. How utterly evangelical! Written by
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Just French MUSLIMS? You mean France doesn't grant equal rights for bigamy with a blind eye to religion. How unfrench! How republican! How can you defend such a discrimatory government policy, teabagger? Written by
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Meets the Tee Dub litmus test. If it's OK in France, it's good for America. Written by
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Maybe we libs are tired of stupidity? I know that sometimes I just have to "put this blog down," just because it's so g.d. depressing to read humorless posts from unthinking conservatives. Sorry, y'all, but it's simply NOT funny to equate same-sex marriage with humans marrying animals at any time, anywhere. Not. funny. at. all. And you all can't accuse me of not having a sense of humor. Even people who don't agree with me know I'm a pretty funny guy. I'll touch that bigamy question - France allows French Muslims to have more than one wife. If that works for them, then I don't see why it wouldn't work for us. How's that for consistency? Are we done gloating now? TW Written by Tee Dub
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Why don't you be a little more afraid for the people there Steve? Common sense, a sense of values or fairness really don't have any place in your decision making processes or rants now do they? Written by
on 10/26/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
The libs won't touch that bigamy question. That's because gays and lesbians are liberal, but bigamists are generally not so, and the libs hate mormons for their conservatism. I guess the libs feel that since mormons oppose gay rights, then they don't deserve equal rights themselves. So much for their "non-judgmental" credo. So the libs don't believe in equal rights for conservatives, only for liberals. It's hilarious to expose their hypocrisy and watch them run for cover. Written by Carla
on 10/25/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Get a grip liberals you have no sense of humor, great post WB! Written by NC
on 10/25/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
it is sad that republicans mock equal rights as something to be associated with animals. This is about a interracial couple who was denied equal rights from a elected official but I guess republicans in the land of duke figure they could just move on to some where else than expect their officials to treat all people equally. Written by Cry over this
on 10/24/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
"Why can't a man marry a man AND a woman? What's more equal than that??? "...LOL, Smitty--- then "your" life would be perfectly balanced:):) Written by KJ
on 10/24/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Cry over this, what makes you think the person you blah about wanting to marry a horse isn't a democrat? In fact, that person may even be a woman... That could makes sense, no? Written by HORSE SENSE, YOU AIN'T GOT NON CRY BABY
on 10/24/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
So enlightened demcocrats draw the lines on equal rights. The state obviously has no law against interracial marriage, as should be the case. But until state law changes the responsibilities of Justices of the Peace, then Bardwell is entitled to live under the law as it currently exists. Fix the law, don't use the matter as a political ploy. But as moral positions continue to be removed from the body of law, then you are in no position to assume that practices, currently seen as bizarre or fringe, will not eventually be allowed. For instance, why should the government forbid bigamy? If an individual feels that he/she can enter into a special relationship with more than one spouse, why should the government interfere with those rights? As the government retreats from its "marriage is between a man and woman" rules, why not retreat from its "marriage is between only 2 people" rule? Is either rule more fundamental? Does the state have any civil reason to implement either? It's just a number, right? The state cannot limit the number of children you bring into a family, right? Where is its grounds to limit the number of spouses? Don't get me wrong, I'm not a mormon, been to Utah one time. Just trying to illustrate that equal rights, separated entirely from moral yardsticks, has no limits. Equal right today means a man can marry a man or a woman can marry a woman. Why can't a man marry a man AND a woman? What's more equal than that??? Written by
on 10/24/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Sad how the thought of equal rights for a interracial couple to be married by a elected official in Louisiana instead of being told to go else where makes republicans think of marrying animals. I hope David Vitter speaks out because it will be shame to find out that he does not support equal rights for everyone. Written by Cry over this
on 10/24/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
This is the new Amerika. Horse lovers have rights, too. It is not up to the majority to dictate what species you mate with. Written by
on 10/23/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Oh my, that's a great idea. I really love my horse and no one will marry us. Maybe there is hope after all! Written by NC 17
on 10/23/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Why not take this progressive enlightenment to the next stage? Why even have the antiquated institution of marriage at all? I mean it's just a civil manifestation of ancient religious customs, right? The government's role should be to just create a partnership at the Secretary of State's office. Get rid of this religious intrusion into government with all the love, honor, and devotion stuff. Separate church and state. Let's be consistent here. All that emotional hoodoo, judeo-christian guilt trip has no place in the secular government of modern-day America. Written by
on 10/23/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Why is Vitter hiding from the press again. Vitter silence is beginning to look like he wishes to return to the days where people are not treated equal by their elected officials. Written by Cry over this
on 10/23/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Randall, what the JP did was against the civil rights of this couple. Just because they had the opportunity to get married elsewhere is not important. Suppose a hotel said to this couple, sorry, I won't let you stay here. I am in good conscious and I think it would be of best interest of the people of society that you not stay here because interracial relations do not last and we should not condone it. That would be a horrible thing and a violation of these people's civil rights. Evem of the couple could go down the road and stay in another hotel, their cirvil rights would be violated. What you are suggesting is that it is fine to prevent people from living in a dignified way and have access to the same conditions as everybody else due to their race. That is the thinking of the Old George Wallace before he became enlightened. Now suppose that type of practice was duplicated in restuarants, schools, public buildings, get the drift? This is not Soros thinking, this is American mainstream. It is not Moveon, it is right on. If you want our society to go backwards, that is your choice, many of us are happy that we do not live in that type of society any more. That type of thinking has been repudiated for decades, but, people like you want to bring back the Jim Crow days. What a pity. Written by Louis
on 10/23/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
To equate Justice Bardwell's decision with Jim Crow laws sounds like something one would expect to hear from groups to the left of MoveOn.org or George Soros. First, there are are justices of the peace to whom the couple could have gone other than Bardwell--they would not therefore be denied the opportunity to be married. Secondly, Mr. Bardwell did not condemn nor criticize the couple--he said that in good conscience he could not do something that he felt would have negative ramifications for any potential offspring. I have witnessed negative and hurtful comments toward biracial children myself. Thirdly, many religions refuse to recognize marriages outside of their faith and openly denounce, roundly criticize and not only ostracize and condemn but rather excommunicate their faith members who marry outside their faith. Are they inherently and overtly bigoted, racist, intolerant, and hatemongers using the same logic--mainstream denominations, not cults. Should individuals be compelled to do that which is unconscionable because society deemes it to be politically correct? Whatever happened to freedom of conscience, thought and religion. Fourthly, Mr. Bardwell did not wish to make it a publicity stunt--the couple did. They could have gone to another justice of peace--Mr. Bardwell is not the only justice of the peace in the parish and he suggested the couple do just that--the couple chose to make it a matter of publicity.
To equate this with those who are open and ardent supporters of hate organizations like the KKK and the Nazis is ludicrous. Even if Mr. Bardwell is in violation of the law, which there is much ambivalence at best and no evidence at all at worst, he suggested another justice of the peace so as to be true to his own convictions. There are cogent and respectful arguments to made on the other side, but all I have heard thus far is insults, demagoguery, cries of bigotry and name-calling. Perhaps the bigotry and demagoguery is for the most part on that side. Written by Randall
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
"Steve -- you have become an agent of racial hatred and I'm calling you down for it.".........and, Jacob- you are like sand in my underwear. Written by KjunLady
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Giving Vitter past record of lack of good judgement and habit of hiding from the media this is a fair question for him to answer. Vitter seems quick to throw stones at others but then he runs and hides from answering simple questions.
Please Vitter be man enough to support this man or call for him to resign. I truly hope you do not support this type of racial attitude. Written by Cry over this
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
The newspapers throughout Louisiana are beginning to think that this is a very important issue. It is one way to define Louisiana and define a candidate. It is not the ohly issue, but it is a big issue. Also, a column from the very conservative Dead Pelican says it all and really explains why Vitter is not saying anything. And he implied that Melancon ran away from townhall meetings. This is why Vitter won't talk about this issue. What a hypocrite.
This is the relevant part of the column from the publisher:
"It's a predictable campaign ploy. They know that no issue inflames people more than race, and that Vitter's answer will be wrong no matter what he says. How's that possible? Because interracial marriage is a contentious issue about which there is widespread disagreement, even within the black community." I guess all of those newspapers who are wanting the elected officials to speak out are just part of a "left-wing conspiracy"
Written by Clark
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
No one but political hacks can possibly care what Vitter or Jindal or Obama have to say about this. None of them have any jurisdiction over a Justice of the Peace in Tangipahoa parish. There is something wrong with America when people are so concerned about Vitter's sex life or his opinion of a fringe thinking JP out in the countryside. Just like we shouldn't give one dam about what Obama thought about the Cambridge police arrest. Until a majority of Americans begins to evaluate politicians based their performance in the jobs they are elected to do instead of the games they play after work and in the media, then our country and our quality of life will keep declining. Bottom line, the swing votes in our elections come from stupid, manipulated voters. They are the ones determining our fate, and the politicians are well aware of it. Written by
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Makes you wonder how Vitter can do anything when he spends all his time running away from questions. Please quit running away Vitter and let us know where you stand on this question. It is not illegal to support this justice of the peace but be man enough to either support him or call for him to step down. Written by Cry over this
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
-----""""We will have a new functioning Bayoubuzz very soon which will rectify this current problem.-----""" Gee Steve, you rectum?
Written by
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Now all of a sudden you are afraid? Sheesh Stevie, what have you been doing for all these years? Shaving in the mirror with lights off or something?? Written by
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Vitter is running for re-election on an anti-Obama platform. He expects to win the votes of people like Keith Bardwell who have a problem with children of an interacial marriage(Obama). To condemn Bardwell or call for his ouster would lose him those votes which he desperately needs to hold on to his seat. Written by David Quidd
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
David Vitter runs away from telling us his unlawful escapades. He won't face reporters about any issue dealing with the Madams. He decided to take the fifth. First he says a health plan was great and then he runs away from it. He runs away from cameras asking him about his opinion on the Bardwell incident. And now, he runs away answering a straight forward question. Until he explains to us his views on whast he means by following the law in the context of this case, I also feel he would run civll rights into the ground, if he had the chance. He has the chance to explain if he stops running away. Written by Run David Run
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Where is Vitter hiding now and why is he not speaking out about this ? Senator Vitter please speak out so we know where you stand on this ? Written by Cry over this
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Forgive me Clarence, I skipped your first question about whether anyone has control over what Google does. The answer is "yes," web site owners, developers, designers, and webmasters all are able to manipulate the "Google Page Rank Algorithm" to their benefit. Have you noticed how many times articles on Governor Jindal on this site are entitled "Louisiana Jindal"? Or "Louisiana Landrieu"? Those are among the most frequent keyword searches used to identify web content on those two public officials. Google makes keyword searches that have been run against their search engine available -- I have used them elsewhere myself -- and I am in no doubt that Steve knows how to use them as well. Improving your site's rankings on Google is a matter of some skill, since there is more than just keywords involved, but I cite those examples just to give you an easy and quick look at something you will recognize. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Well if Steve allows an open discussion about race Clarence, then that should include truth, shouldn't it? And the truth is that Vitter's spokesman said that Vitter's position is that the law should be followed. And the law is that interracial couples can marry. But Steve somehow takes that statement as an indication that Vitter thinks just the opposite. That's imagining racism, rather than demonstrating it. Once you introduce charges of racism into the mix, and there are few ways more effective in the internet age of doing that than getting a page 1 ranking at Google, you have the element of hatred in the mix. And the page rankings at Google DO MATTER as a factor in the profitability of BayouBuzz.com. I'm an internet applications developer and I can tell you that I have sat down with clients to discuss search engine strategies and how they can bring profits to an enterprise on many an occasion. Steve has stoked the flames of racial animosity for both political and personal financial gain. That is awful and no, I will not get off it. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Boy Jacob, are you losing it? You think that anyone has any control over what Google does? What is wrong with having an honest debate about race in this state. You know that Steve allows open discussion over race, not one-sided discussion and you seem to be one of the biggest responders. There is a big issue between Steve and David Duke. Duke hates blacks. Just about all of his writings are about them. He was also a member of the Klan and I believe a Nazi. Steve allows everyone with all views to talk about all issues. Also, I see tht CNN does a complete series about race and hispanics. Does that make them racist? While you google, check out the national news stories who have written about this Bardwell issue. Check out the national news stories that have written about Sen. Vitter and prostitution. Even the Wall Street Journal. Get off of it. Oh, perhaps you might want to check out Vitter and Obama on Google. There are over 2.5 million entries. So, if anyone is trying to profit off of Obama, I wonder who that would be? Written by Clarence
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Buddy, see Loving v. Virginia, U.S. Supreme Court decision of 1967 which struck down all of the so-called "miscegenation laws" of the states as a violation of the constitutional protections provided under the 14th Amendment. If Vitter says the law should be followed and Loving v. Virginia is the law, then Loving v. Virginia must be followed. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Jacob, cite us exactly what the law says about interracial marriage. Prove to us that Senator Vitter believes that the Justice should have followed the law and that the law mandates that a Louisiana Justice of The Peace marry an interracial couple. You are so certain about what the law is and what Senator Vitter said, so go ahead and prove it. Written by Buddy
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
No Buddy, strict constructionism is NOT code for reversing the changes made by the civil rights movement. It is a call to recognize that the law means what it says, not what someone interprets it to be. And what the law says right now is very clear -- interracial couples can marry. Or do you suggest this is not what the law says? Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I think it is very clear. Senator Vitter had a chance to be very specific about his feelings regarding a very important issue in the state. He must be responsible for his spokespeople. They are the closest individuals to the elected officials. they follow elected officials just about whereever the officials go. I saw the video of Senator Vitter being questioned yesterday about this issue. Senator Vitter skirted the issue then. After that, the various newspapers started to question Senator Vitter. Senator Vitter responded to the Washington Post but his office would not respond to a reporter they did not like. The spokesperson as all spokespersons know exactly what their boss thinks and says. In this case, the spokesperson specifically answered a very specific question from the Post. With the back drop of racial bigotry, possibly conflicting state and federal law, and national media looking down upon us as lunatics, it was time for our high-elected officials to render their opinions about an issue that borders on outright racism. Even Governor Jindal was outraged. Senator Vitter through his spokesperson said follow the law, not make up law. That is code for strict construction. It is code for reversing changes made in the civil rights movement. Based upon Senator Vitter's apparant constant battering of minority-related issues, I think it is clear he is playing to the right wing. Then, with Senator Vitter saying follow the law to a racially-charged event, it is only natural that any reasonable thinker would believe that Senator Vitter would have allowed the same type of practice then in the fifties as he appears to be approving of now. If Senator Vitter believes Justice Bardwell was wrong and has broken the law, let Senator Vitter speak out. If he does not, I think Senator Vitter does not want to alienate his base of right-wing voters. I think as things stand now, with Senator Vitter's comment, he would have approved racism back then by following the law that was in existance of the time of our national nightmare. The ball is in Senator Vitter's court. Does he believe Justice Bardwell broke the law? Should he be punished? I also am waiting for Senator Vitter to clarify what he meant because it really looks to me that he would have approved of Jim Crow. I am glad that Governor Jindal felt otherwise and spoke out clearly. I am also glad that one web site and one columnist put the democrats, the republicans, Charlie Melancon and Senator Vitter's feet to the fire on this issue. From all of his columns on this issue, he did not show favortism, he challenged all of them. We need to know where our major public officials stand on important issues. Senator Vitter said he had about 20 health care forums. He said it showed courage. Now, he is definitely showing something else. Senator Vitter, what is your views on this issue? Written by Buddy
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
For all of you; go to Google right now and enter the keywords (without the quotes) "Senator David Vitter" to see what I am talking about. This is FIRST. This is what Steve wants. He is very web savvy and knows how to use racial animosity to profit from it. Just like David Duke. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Flo, allowing a diversity of views and opinions is not the test of fanning the flames of racial hatred here. Are you aware that by turning up the volume on this thread Steve is profiting by increasing his page hits? Do you know how this affects this site's rankings with search engines? What does that say about his motivations? And let me be frank that I wish David Vitter would speak more clearly on this issue as well. But none of that defines the nature of what Steve wrote in his article. That is the issue. Steve has falsified the truth in this instance and, as a consequence two things have occurred: 1. He has inserted racial animosity, which is a form of hatred, to the intended detriment of David Vitter, a candidate he opposes; and 2. He has profited from the increased traffic to his website, which raises his page hits and gets him noticed by search engines. And he has done both of these without addressing the obvious falsification I referenced. When you raise the specter of racism, you need to have your facts straight and I am convinced that Steve knows he does not, but that he is simply enjoying the noise. You should consider what this says about the kind of electoral politics we have in Louisiana. One side in the U.S. Senate race knows that it has no chance -- this is the background of the recent SMOR poll -- unless it can fan the flames of racial hatred. I have worked in the past against racial hatred and I'm ready to get back into it again, if that is what it takes to stop it from reoccurring. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Flo, while I may agree with the general tenor of Stephen's argument and sided with Jacob, I must say your remarks are also on point. That is what makes this site so interesting, the variety of opinions and the ability to state your own. To Stephen and his staff, a long overdue, Thank You. Written by
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Jacob, talk about obsession and hate, If anyone has been allowing a multitude of views, even yours, it is Steve. David Duke only allows one view. His and his fellow haters. I am sure your blog will be as obsessed as you are. Your idea sounds as you are really just wierd. I am a Vitter supporter, but, I also feel he needs to explain his views on this issue. Then, we will all know where he stands on racial tolerance. Senator Vitter is very clear on the issues that matter to him. I support him on health care. I am concerned about his morality and hypocrisy. I just think that he is the better of the choices. But, he also scares me on his latest statement and it needs clarification. Jacob, you are now the one who appears to be going overboard. I read liberal and conservative web sites and they are just one-sided. With Crouere, Jim Brown, Sabludowsky, Tidmore, the black professor at SUNO, the conservative professor in Monroe, and more, it is the only site I know of that really allows diversity of opinions. But, if you want to be obsessed and hateful, go ahead. Just let me know if Senator Vitter is paying you. I hope not. I want to vote for him but that sounds nefarious. I think David Vitter is above that. Written by Flo
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Jacob, dear, this time I would agree with you. Stephen, I think you should reconsider your article. Take a long look at the entire situation and then clarify it. Yes, there are those who are still living in past times and it is disgusting. Many of us in those past times did things that were considered to be wrong under those existing laws. However, all we can do is to follow the law as it now exists and if we disagree, challenge our representatives to make the necessary changes. In other words, be a citizen, Written by RhettsWife
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Lois, it's very simple. Vitter's spokesman spoke. Vitter's spokesman said that Vitter's position was that the law should be followed. The law as it now exists says that interracial marriage is legal. Vitter's position therefore cannot be anything other than supporting the law of interracial marriage. This is the kind of hatred that has me preparing a blog site right now, because no later than tomorrow afternoon I am going to publish a third entry, after my introductory post and a second article on the recent poll, that will deal with Steve as a purveyor of hatred. He's enjoying this right now, but since hatred must be opposed -- and this is racial hatred being fanned by Steve right now, which really puts him much more in the same boat as David Duke for benefiting from the fanning of the flames of hatred than Vitter ever was, since Vitter and/or his spokesman sought to calm racial tensions by urging the law be followed -- I am going to do it. Those of you who hate Vitter and continue to try to twist logic to suit your ends can go on and on. In the light of day you cannot get around Vitter's call that the law should be followed. Steve -- you have become an agent of racial hatred and I'm calling you down for it. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
KPF, some things are more important than your or our pocket books. Who we are as a people is a lot more important than whether you have a cadillac or a Ford. That is why it is so obnoxious that Vitter seems to prefer to take us back to the fifties by using the rhetoric--follow the law. Maybe he should be brave and tell us what that law is, if he knows. It has little to do with his sexual actions. That "sin" has everything to do with his own credibility, not who he stoked or what he did. Written by JohnW.
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
The left seems to be unable to speak on their programs honestly (healthcare for the indigent WILL cost working taxpayers more, as but one example) so they instead take any instance of an outrageous statement or act by anyone on the right and blow it up to distract from their agenda. Transparent, and not very "intellectual" - kind of lame actually. BTW, ACORN or any other private entity (right wing political organization, mortgage lenders, banks, corporations, foreign governments, etc) should not get a dime of the taxpayers hard-earned wages unless the individual taxpayer donates that dime to this private entity. Vitter and the GOP are .. um ...60% or so as guilty as the Democrats are on taking taxpayer dollars, so this taxpayer will vote to reduce the Democrats power in D.C. -not because of any trait (racist, sexual predators, hypocrites, murderers, or WTF ever they may be) the GOP "collectively" has, but simply because the Democrats are ignorant with money (see: California). That simple. Vitter sinned, did he? Burn him at the stake, I don't give a $#it. I still will vote to shift the power come the 2010 elections. Anyone but the Democrats. Oh yeah, it seems many "moderate" Democrats are not following the game plan of Obama and the Democratic leadership; good, sounds like we ARE being heard. Wise of them to ignore their far-left "divisive" "wrong thinking" and "dangerous" extremists who are giving their party a bad name and moving centrists to "hold their nose" and vote GOP in the midterm elections.. Written by kpf
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Let's be honest. About 60 percent of the whites in this state voted for David Duke. About 55 percent of the whites voted for Duke in the Governor's race. It is the minorities who have been dispersed more than whites after Katrina. The recent poll by SMOR shows that La. is a very conservative state. Vitter knows that. He is not about to lose his base, even on an issue of great importance, the soul of the people of Louisiana. Just look what is being said about us across the nation. That was the Washington Post that wrote the story about Vitter. Vitter does not want to lose the election or his base. Thus, he hss taken a position which is easily interpreted as being callous to blacks. The nub is Vitter is a coward, won't really speak up unless it is about an issue with which his base agrees. At least Gov. Jindal took a stand. This is an important issue because it defines this state. Why else would the national media pick up on this story? Use your brains. Written by Clarence
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Jacob, I do not know you but you sure don't know what you are talking about. You say "Vitter's spokesman said the Senator's position is that the law should be followed. That can only mean that Vitter supports the legality of interracial marriage, since that is the law as it exists today." I thought you said earlier that we could not tell what Vitter thinks because it was his spokesperson talking. Do you know exactly what Vitter thinks? Not if we follow you logic since according to you, only his spokesperson spoke. I agree with some of these other writers. If there is ambiguity, let Vitter clear the air since he would have caused any confusion by his spokesperson's statement. You also say "And Steve's position that Vitter's attitudes today would have cast him as a supporter of Jim Crow segregation is more than merely flawed, since he enters the discussion after falsifying Vitter's position today." I totally disagree. Steve said what he thinks based upon what he thinks Vitter has done in the past and the email statement that was in response to a very specific question. Steve was giving his opinion and I think based upon the facts, that opinion has merit. Blame Vitter's spokesperson for speaking out of step if there was any mistake. I don't think there was. I also challenge Senator Vitter to speak out specifically against Bardwell and even author legislation against given the JP discretion. You also say "That can only mean that Vitter supports the legality of interracial marriage, since that is the law as it exists today" Then, why didn't Vitter say that Bardwell should be in jail for breaking the law of the land. Why did he not even say that Bardwell broke the law of the land? Based upon what I have been reading, Bardwell probably broke federal laws but the state law gives the JP discretion. However, if there is ambiguity in the law, I think this Senator who wants to be from a progressive state should be speaking out on the issue. I think he was intentionally vague which left the haters (probably like you) believe he was with them on this issue. So, let Vitter speak out and clarify and then we will know exactly how he feels. Does he think Bardwell should resign? Does he think Bardwell has broken the law and should be arrested? Does he think that Bardwell should be punished? Sn. Vitter is a US official for Louisiana. He sets the tone for the state. Just as Jindal spoke out, Senator Vitter should speak out. then, we would know absolutely what he feels. Then, we will see if Vitter feels as strongly about Bardwell's actions as even Jindal feels. Vitter is very good at writing legislation that appeals to the right wing. Obviously, you have bought into it. Also, speaking about lying and hating, didn't Vitter lie to his wife and all of us about the prostitutes while professing to be a family values man? but, then he said, he sinned. About what? He did not speak out then either, did he? He has deliberately skirted the issues on every subject I can think of. Also, for almost a year, all Senator Vitter has done is scream about Obama. Non-stop. I would call that an obsession of hate. And due to that obsession, he just happens to have raked in about four million dollars. Vitter hates Obama. Why don't you go after Vitter and his own hate. You really seem confused and even hypocritical. Vitter should say without ambiguity that he is against denying interracial marriages and that Bardwell was wrong. That would take guts. Vitter does not have them. He wants to win and wants to play to people who sort of agree with Bardwell. Written by Lois
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
If Vitter has so much respect for following the law , why did he get busted with a hooker ? The man was wrong not to marry these people no matter what loopholes were in the law. Written by Cry over this
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
You ducked the issue too Outraged. Vitter's spokesman said the Senator's position is that the law should be followed. That can only mean that Vitter supports the legality of interracial marriage, since that is the law as it exists today. And Steve's position that Vitter's attitudes today would have cast him as a supporter of Jim Crow segregation is more than merely flawed, since he enters the discussion after falsifying Vitter's position today. That is how the "hate card" is played. First; the lie, then the hate. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
The "pussification" of America continues. Personally, the judge was wrong in my opinion. But he did not have to marry them and he chose not to for whatever lame excuse he gave. Why give this clown any more air time? Using this as a platform to attack Vitter is shameful, get a grip Steve-O. What Melancon doesn't use spokesmen? Hell he doesn't even have town hall meetings bedause he would have to mingle with us low lifes. The judge was wrong, go get married at another JOP, tell everybody what a dimwit this guy is. People know the judge is wrong so more people may not go to him. Be careful where you tread, we are getting to the point to where if you disagree with a person that "wronged" person can have you fired or demand you resign all in the name of political correctness. And Steve, we know you hate Vitter quit grasping at straws. Written by CN
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
If you think Steve targeted Vitter on this issue, why did he go after the Democratic Party, the Republican Party and Melancon for not speaking out on this issue all this weekr? Sharon, what proof do you have that this is a Melancon thing? How nonsensical of you. You probably are going to tell us that Melancon wrote the press statement on Vitter's behalf just so Vitter can appear as he really is. Also, Sharon, you said, "The young couple had a right to expect that when they presented themselves with license to marry, they would be married. I am sure that they did not know that the JP could under the law refuse." Just think if Vitter had said that. Then, it would not have been fair to believe that Vitter would follow the law during the Jim Crow Days. All of the rest of the state major leaders have been very specific on how they felt. It is a very reasonable interpretation that Vitter would have turned his head and accepted the Jim Crow laws. They were the law of the land at that time. He could have spoken out against the JP just as Jindal did and he did not and has not. At least you did. Written by Outraged
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Get well soon, Tee Dub. Whatever illness you have has made you enter a post that is about 50% accurate and unbiased, a new standard of excellence for you. Old SS plays your usual role of distorting a few scattered facts into an attack on his enemy. Of course, you made up for rationality with the second half of your post, but that part is really insignificant due to its predictability and absurdity. Written by
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Why is it that Vitter is quick to write legislation dealing with illegal aliens, ACORN, and incessantly slam Obama but he would not write an amendment to right a wrong in Louisiana? He is playing to the racist vote. It is very clear. Again, Vitter has a chance to go on record if he wants to speak about the issue. He hid from a reporter earlier during the day. Then, his spokesperson respond with an email. His reporter speaks for him. You are just trying to get your cake and eat it too. Let Vitter out his spokesperson. If he does not, it means he totally agrees with the spokesperson, which I think he did anyway. You seem Washington worldly. You know that spokesperson do not speak for their bosses unless their are directed. Vitter has, is and will continue to try to garner the racist vote. He is trying to Willie Horton us. That is obvious from all of his campaign literature I get. Vitter knew what was going on with his spokesperson. In the very rare chance he did not, let him correct the record. I dare him. Written by Alicia
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Tee Dub that was a low blow even for you but never mind. I don't believe in separate drinking fountains or anything of the sort. Interacial marriage is legal. The young couple had a right to expect that when they presented themselves with license to marry, they would be married. I am sure that they did not know that the JP could under the law refuse. I only found out that he could because of this incident. I have not been able to find any direct quote from Vitter and I do not believe that his spokesman's comments constitutes anything other than saying that Vitter respects the law. The legal wording in a law/bill is critical. In this case discretion is allowed under the law. So the law allows for a JP to interject his personal view into his job performance. Rewrite the law. This is just another attempt by Melancon's champions to interject race into this election. That is what is shameful. There are plenty of issues to discuss. There are lots of voting records to examine. There is the politics and policies of two parties to discuss. Which is better for Louisiana? This is just another distraction. Written by Sharon
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Jacob, you are just wrong. Vitter did speak out. Through his spokesperson. These politicians give statements all of the time and the news media are right to say this is the position of the politician. The spokesperson did not just get the statement from the air. He said what Vitter thinks. You are suggesting that Vitter wanted Bardwell to marry these two people? If so, then, why did he not say so? He cculd have easily said, I detest what Justice Bardwell did and he should follow the law which is to marry these people without discrimination. Or he could have said, I totally disagree with Bardwell and I feel the legal system should follow its course. He said neither. Through his spokesperson, he said, follow the law. That type of strict construction doublespeak would mean that blacks would be third-class citizens if we just followed the law back in the fifties. You are wrong your logic is flawed. We should be pleased that at least Governor Bobby Jindal spoke up. Vitter just wanted to capture the racist vote and it seems like he is doing a good job. Written by Alicia
on 10/22/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Lester, you are missing the point. If Vitter's spokesman said that Vitter believes the law should be followed -- and that is what is quoted secondhand in this article -- then that can only mean that Vitter supports the upholding of the right of interracial couples to marry legally, without impediment from those who administer and enforce the law. To contest that this represents Vitter's viewpoint requires one of two things; either show that Vitter has stated that interracial marriage is illegal or that Vitter has stated that a Justice of the Peace is legally empowered to deny couples the right to marry if they are of different races. There is nothing of the sort offered here. Quite the contrary, what is presented says that Vitter supports the law as it now exists, which can only mean that he supports the legality of interracial marriage. For that reason, Steve's presentation is a falsification of the truth of Vitter's stance on interracial marriage and the Bardwell affair. And even beyond that, Steve must explain his title for the article, which is that Vitter "speaks out" on the Bardwell affair. There is no direct quote from David Vitter whatsoever in this article. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Hey Jacob man, you you are darn wrong, dude. Vitter spoke through his spokesperson. I agree with one of those other guys on this here board. The article was on the Washington Post. That's where Vitter lives right? If the spokesperson got it wrong, Vitter had plenty of time to say hey, this stuff is just wrong spokesperson, dude. I agree. The spokesperson said what Vitter thinks, not what he think Vitter thinks. So, here I am, waiting for Sen. Vitter to tell us that his spokesperson is wrong or is right. Otherwise, as far as I'm concerned, the racist tag sticks. The Vitter dude could have slamed the JP. Just like Jindal. Instead he took a powder. What happend to Vitter who blasted everyone for everythng? So, I'm counting....one second, two seconds.... counting, waiting for Vitter to tell me if his dude spokesperson made it up. If the spokesperson lied or got it wrong and Vitter really cares about civil rights, do you think he will fire his spokesperson. Yep, I am counting, dude. Three seconds, four...five seconds... Written by Lester
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Regardless of what "White American" Cajun Tsunami says, JOP Bardwell is wrong and I totally disagree with his decision (and basic reasoning process) --- yet like Cajun Tsunami (CT) --- he is also a White American. Okay, so 1 out of 17 white Louisiana voters went for Obama. That means absolutely nothing IF you consider the percentage of black Louisiana voters who went against Senator John McCain. Remember, CT, "all's fair, blah, blah, blah"). I would have voted for Colin Powell, Walter Williams or Thomas Sowell. These men are black and are of outstanding intellect --- and much smarter than Obama. I'd like to very strongly suggest that Cajun Tsunami educate himself/herself on what people (of any party) think and why they think the way they do --- before irresponsibly tossing around totally dumb, unfair and ignorant "racist" or "racism" labels. CT's obvious racial judgments and thought process --- as shoddy as it is --- deserves to be ignored. Just as skin colors differ, so do reasonable political and philosophical differences. In conclusion, it is truly unfortunate that CT has so little regard for --- and understanding of his/her fellow white Louisiana voters who voted for Senator John McCain. Written by William C. Bradshaw
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Justice Bardwell's action are in direct conflict of his oath that he took upon swearing in as a Justice of the Peace. Regardless of his personal opinion his duty is to serve the public. If he cannot do so it is time for him to resign. I will not speculate or judge him based on his bias for I have not been judged myself. I do however find his actions in this matter unprofessional and well below the expectations I have for a public official. Our Founding Fathers made the laws of the land stating, "All men are created equal". Written by Anthony "Tony G Gentile for US Senator
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Alicia, even if we take Vitter's spokesperson's words as showing Vitter's attitude it still says that the Justice of the Peace should have married the interracial couple since that is the law today in 2009 and the spokesperson said should be followed. Steve's offering of this statement as suggesting approval of the denial of the right to marry by that JOP is flat out false. And again, what is more important here, is that Steve entitled this article "Vitter Speaks Out on Bardwell Affair" which is also false. There is no quote from David Vitter which addresses the Bardwell affair. None! And I think this also shows just how little Vitter's opponents, which obviously includes Steve, have to throw at him, so instead they must falsify -- there is no other word for it, this is what Steve has done -- the truth in order to create controversy. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
From the Washington Post, quoting Vitter's spokesperson “First, Sen. Vitter thinks that all judges should follow the law as written and not make it up as they go along. This is a statement his spokesperson said about what Sen. Vitter thinks. Not what he thinks that Senator Vitter thinks. If the spokesperson is wrong, Senator Vitter should make the clarification. Otherwise, it is only fair to assume that is actually what the Senator thinks. Then, the spokesperson said "it would be amazing for anyone to do a story based on this fringe, left-wing political hack’s blog — he’s been handcuffed and detained in the past over his guerrilla tactics.” Pardon my ignorance, but Senator Vitter admitted to what? Having sex with a prostitute? Isn't that against the law? Vitter must have thought that he might have broken the law when he decided to try to take the 5th Amendment during the criminal trial of the DC Madam. I guess Vitter's spokesperson has it out for "liberals" who are handcuffed. he probably loves conservatives who violate the law and get off due to the time limit or not testifying. I imagine those guys like his boss have great credibility. Written by Alicia
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
You are right to be ashamed of Vitter,,,,,,,,as a White American, I am very, very ashamed of the fact that only one of 17 white Louisiana voters voted for President Obama!
Vitter knows that a large number of his White constituents: Republicans and other parties are just as racist as Justice Bardwell,,,,,,who gave this State another well-deserved "black eye"!
So much for Louisiana's Racists and Un-Christian citizenry. We were all created equal in God's eyes, but a large number of Louisianians will not ever accept that holy truth.
And thanks, Steve, for being more and more non-partisan. Looks like some of your "long time readers" will start tearing you up!
All's fair in love, war, politics, and journalism! Written by Cajun Tsunami
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I am not from Louisiana. I came across this site. From the column and this discussion, I am shocked. I cannot believe that there really is a website that is not like the rest of you hicks. Most of Amreica just laughs at Louisiana and for good reason. You are constantly embarassing yourselves and we love it. Keep it up. I say Vote for Vitter. We can use the comedy in America during these troubled times. Written by Rodney
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I must disagree with those defending Senator Vitter. Steve should be praised for speaking out for human rights and decency. Governor Bobby Jindal, a conservative Republican went a lot further than Steve in terms of the Justice of the Peace. Jindal wanted Bardwell to leave office. Vitter had a chance to say he opposed Bardwell. He failed to do that. Anybody who thinks that Senator Vitter's statement was not done with the knowledge and approval of Vitter is foolish. Also, if Senator Vitter did not approve of the statement from his office, he should have distanced himself from it earlier since it was in the Washington Post before it was on Bayou Buzz. Or, he can distance himself from it now. Senator Vitter had many days to talk about the issue and failed to do so and instead we get a statement about “following the law” when it comes to a repugnant act by Bardwell. I agree with Steve. If we had followed the law in place during the fifties, blacks would still be third-class citizens. I think Steve talked about the issues here not personalities. If anybody has played the race card, it is Senator Vitter. He is making money and gaining power by constantly pounding on ACORN (blacks). ACORN has made mistakes and should be punished for those mistakes but he has been using the issue to beat up blacks and to raise money. He is making money and gaining power by beating up illegal aliens (Hispanics). He is making money and gaining power by beating up Obama who happens to be black. What is emerging is a pattern of money, power and racism on Vitter’s part. He is playing to your anti-black and anti-Hispanic yahoo’s heart strings. Instead of you defending this Senator, why aren’t you saying that you are outraged by Bardwell’s behavior and now by Vitter’s lack of concern for the people who were abused by this Justice of the Peace. It was not just these two people, it was society who was abused by the Justice and now by Vitter. Something tells me that most of you who are defending Senator Vitter here would also be willing to look the other way just as so many in our society did before the civil rights movement. From your logic and tone, it seems that you would rather defend Bardwell, defend denying black basic civil rights and would want us to go back to separate but equal. I believe any decent person would do just what Bobby Jindal did. You and Vitter are the ones who seem to have no shame. By the way I read the other columns on this issue by the writer. You remember that Steve was very critical of the Democratic party and Congressman Melancon for being silent. You might think it is Vitter bashing, but Steve was equally upset at Vitter’s opponents. He said so in his columns. Didn't you read them or do you just take what you want to take and weave it for your own purposes. The difference is, it appears that Jindal, Melancon and the Democratic party do not want to turn their collective heads back to Jim Crow. It seems that Vitter and some of you would have no problem doing that if it means that the Senator gets re-elected. Written by Outraged
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
This is an after-work-hours political mugging on your part Steve. You waited until after his offices would be closed so that you could publish your slander -- and this is slander -- so as to get it in the news cycle before Vitter can respond. Shame on you Steve! Shame! Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Your hatred for Vitter has overcome your intelligence!!
first, u gave us Stormy Daniels for weeks and then when she was arrested-this site never mentioned it again. Then Tidmore gives us the Honoroe story--which was B.S.
Now, you line up with Dem.'s and Charlie Boy and a left wing blogger who has been arrested himself...
I'm ashamed that this site has become so one sided.
Steve has become a spokesman for the La. Dem. party and it seems his hatred for Vitter has colored everything he writes. It is story after story about how bad Vitter is. LOL !! Get over it.
So much for balanced journalism Written by Denise
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Stephen, I'm loathe to admit it, but I think Jacob's right about the meaning of Vitter's spokesperson's statement. That's how I interpreted it when I first read it. But at the same time, it's pretty clear that "John" Vitter doesn't want to rile up his yahoo base. And here's what Sharon would say about separate drinking fountains for the races - "They don't have to drink at that particular fountain - they can always find another one!" TW Written by Tee Dub
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
So where is Vitter's statement? Nowhere. An alluded-to statement from his spokesman which is not even quoted there is hearsay about hearsay. Where is Vitter's statement? Your title says "Vitter Speaks Out on Bardwell Affair" yet there is not even one quote. And for the spokesperson to say that "judges should follow the law" in 2009 clearly means that he should have married the interracial couple, not the opposite as you suggest Steve. This comes very close to bordering on venom. I am ashamed to see you play the race card. Written by Jacob Sulzbach, Lafayette, La.
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Bardwell should be condemned and forced out of office. However, I too oppose groups (of any ideology) such as ACORN being granted taxpayer money; I too think illegal aliens are a problem; I also oppose leftist policies such as those of President Obama. As far as your assertion that we who have these beliefs are racists - that is your intolerance on display. Where are those on the left who can debate and justify Obama's policies? Instead all we see are assertions that those who oppose his policies are "racist" or "ignorant" or "divisive" or "dangerous" - I guess denigrating opposition is easier than debating ideas. Quite lazy and nothing to be proud of though. Written by kpf
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Vitter has shown he has the guts to stand up for what is right and to put people in their proper places. Just like Vitter and his hooker, no laws were broken and no one knows the Law better that Senator Vitter. Notice the Hooker went to jail and died there but not one charge was ever filed against Senator Vitter. Vote Senator Vitter and be proud of Louisiana. Written by Please re-elect Vitter
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
It is my understanding that the current law allows a JP to choose not to perform a marriage. So no law was broken and Bardwell did not break his oath of office. Melancon's comments don't make any sense if no law was broken. Jindal, Melancon, Landrieu and Vitter can say that they do not agree with Bardwell, ask him to resign, and best of all should demand that the law be changed to not allow any JP to refuse to marry anyone with a lawful license. All over this country there are those who use their good offices in a manner that does not please me but the law is the law. If you don't like the law, change it but don't use the actions of one man for political posturing. Written by Sharon
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Forget the error in grammar. Vitter has shown his true roots. I agree. Shameful. It is not something I will easily or quickly forget. Written by Lawrence
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
Due to current changes being made to Bayoubuzz's technology, we are unable to correct a few grammatical errors we found after this column was published. I personally apologize. We will have a new functioning Bayoubuzz very soon which will rectify this current problem. Written by Stephen Sabludowsky, Publisher of Bayoubuzz
on 10/21/2009
REPORT SPAM OR ABUSE
I am now very afraid of David Vitter.
