Five years ago, when he defeated Democrat Chris John in the primary to become the first Republican in Louisiana elected to the United States Senate since Reconstruction, David Vitter positioned and marketed himself as a “family values” candidate. He ran a brilliantly entrepreneurial and effective campaign, no doubt about it.
During his first few years as a United States Senator, Vitter and his wife spearheaded the Louisiana Committee for a Republican Majority (the LCRM), an organization that funneled money and endorsements to hand-selected Republican candidates, with the hope of gaining Republican majorities in the Louisiana House and Senate. Ultimately, Vitter, his wife, and the LCRM failed, and believe it or not, Democrats still represent the majority.
To many, it may seem meddlesome for a United States Senator to involve himself so directly in local elections. For those of us in Louisiana, it harkens back to the Kingfish. But unlike Huey, David Vitter’s LCRM was unsuccessful, and, for the most part, they’ve retreated into the backdrop.
Now we face a decision about re-electing David Vitter as our United States Senator.
So, let’s be honest:
Unfortunately, Mr. Vitter has become a statewide and national embarrassment.
As it turns out, Senator Vitter, a man who once rallied for the impeachment of President Clinton on the basis of his affair with Monica Lewinsky, had a predilection for prostitutes. “Clinton should resign as well and move beyond this mess,” Vitter said at the time.
When Vitter’s personal phone number turned up in the records of D.C. Madam Deborah Jean Palfrey, he quickly took to the stage and admitted to a “serious sin,” offering no other specifics and refusing to answer questions about similar “sins” in New Orleans. To be sure, Mr. Vitter has never specifically denied these accusations, though he decided not to take the advice he offered President Clinton and resign from office.
Remember, Louisiana elected Mr. Vitter, in large part, on his platform of family values, a platform that was publicly and irreparably destroyed.
Today, it seems, Mr. Vitter believes he can avoid criticism and win re-election to the United States Senate by running as a hard-line ideologue.
He’s not the “family values” candidate this time. He’s the candidate who runs commercials featuring ominous looking hispanics as a way of scaring people about illegal immigration. He’s the candidate who supports lawsuits that would challenge the President’s birth certificate. Instead of admitting his own faults and humanity, David Vitter is running a campaign built on fear, divisiveness, and subtle bigotry.
A few months ago, the prevailing, “inside the Beltway” wisdom was that anyone who opposed Vitter didn’t need to spend money in order to remind people about the whole D.C. madam/prostitution scandal, as if it was a fait accompli, as if voters didn’t need to be reminded about how this scandal completely undermined his credibility and effectiveness. Apparently, however, voters are in need of a refresher.
Seriously, can we be honest about David Vitter?
But most importantly, despite the prostitution scandal, Louisianans should review Mr. Vitter’s record on its merits: What has he championed for Louisiana? What has he returned to our Great State? How has he collaborated with our delegation in order to effectuate change? What has David Vitter really accomplished?
There are politicians who believe their job is political and ideological, and there are politicians who believe their job is practical and results-oriented.
To me, Mr. Vitter fashions himself as a partisan ideologue, instead of a champion for Louisiana.
And he still hasn’t been honest about his “serious sin.”
So, again, can we be honest about David Vitter?
CenLamar 
great try,,,,,,,,,,,,,but, not good enough to make me vote for a liberal. There are many liberal Republicans, by the way, but David is not one of them.
I was not trying to convince you to vote for a liberal. Vote your conscience, of course.
William, your logic is flawed. As I understand your comment, you would vote for ANYONE as long as they not liberal, especially, I assume, if they were the only conservative running. Please prove I am incorrect. What about, as asked in the post, Vitter’s actual record?
Thanks Lamar…
I always find it interesting when a pompous, self-righteous, arrogant and insufferable Liberal Democrat has the unmitigated gall to engage in a juvenile attempt at character assassination on a man that “we the people in his district ” (more Democrats than Conservatives according to your count) elected to simply represent our conservative interests in the US senate with his votes in our stead. We did not elect him to serve as our spiritual leader or personal role model. I find your feigned and hypocritical “moral indignation” to be totally offensive and insulting to my intelligence, and I’m sure to the intelligence of the majority of voters in David’s district, especially when one considers that your precious Liberal Democrat party is the anti-God party of abortion on demand, late term abortion (infanticide), perpetuating the enslavement of a segment of our society for the sake of votes (Welfare) and a complete litany of other morally despicable offenses.
Allow me to share the following perspective with you in a brief poem:
I carry a rock in my pocket; I call it the “first stone.”
I keep it there to remind me that I am never alone.
The rock is always with me, though its’ never been thrown,
Because I know the sins of others may be different, yet no greater than my own.
God says that “ALL have sinned and fallen short.” Yet he loves the sinner, just not the sin. Be guided accordingly. David is our representative in the US senate, not our pastor or spiritual leader. He has my vote as long as his voting record remains firmly Conservative.
Kind Regards,
Al
Al,
Let me get this right: You call me a “pompous, self-righteous, arrogant, and insufferable Liberal Democrat,” accuse me of engaging in a juvenile character assassination, claim that I belong to the “anti-God party of abortion,” infanticide, and slavery… and then, you share a poem about the importance of not throwing stones at people because “all have sinned and fallen short”?
Priceless. Just priceless.
Thanks Lamar…
Yes,that’s correct.
As a Liberal Democrat, you know your party’s position – (planks) and history on the referenced subjects, as should anyone who stays current on accurate news. Exactly which of my statements would you like to challenge me on ? Feel free to prove me wrong if you can.
I want to know why you think you are entitled to a cheap shot, unchallenged free ride on your attempt at character assassination on David Vitter, when it is his voting record that should be of concern. Care to compare your boy Melancon’s record with David’s ? Apparently, a bunch of those predominantly “Democrat” voters that you counted in David’s district have a decided list to starboard in their political thinking.
As regards the poem that I sent you, this was simply sharing a learning experience that I went through myself a number of years ago. I found myself being unfairly judgemental at times, and while walking through the yard one weekend I looked down and saw a small rock, which I picked up and proceeded to ponder. I sat there and did some introspective mental review for quite some time, and the brief poem came to me during that time. I carried the rock religiously for months and adjusted my attitude during that period. I’ll send you one if you’d like. Still priceless ?
Kind Regards,
Al
😀
In other places across this great land of ours, perhaps there are constituencies that may find novel the concept of voting for the “lesser of two evils.” In Louisiana, we simply know no other way. I once cast a vote for every slot on the ballot except Governor, because the choices were Duke and EWE. Before that, I voted for Duke (against an admittedly “not that bad” Bennett Johnston) in a protest vote – and hoping he would not be elected.
Voting for Vitter over Melancon will be child’s play compared to some electoral choices I have made as a Louisiana voter. That is part of the price we pay for our jois de vie.
Al,
First of all, David Vitter doesn’t represent a “district,” and he doesn’t just represent the conservatives who voted for him. As a United States Senator, he represents the entire State of Louisiana.
Second, I’m not sure why you believe this post amounts to a “character assassination.” I get the fact that you like Senator Vitter because of his conservative voting record; it is a sentiment shared by many Louisiana Republicans, no doubt about it.
But I’m not interested in playing a game of moral equivalencies in an attempt to ignore or excuse the giant white elephant in the room, particularly with someone who begins with the premise that Democrats are anti-God.
Honestly, I find the entire thrust of your argument to be purposely diversionary. How dare I link to the news stories about and video coverage of Mr. Vitter’s tacit admission that he was a client of the DC Madam! Character assassination! I mean, really? The single largest story in Senator Vitter’s career, the subject of weeks of coverage in the national media, and unfortunately, for many Republicans and Democrats, the thing for which he is best known.
Pointing this out is somehow “character assassination”?
Pointing out that Mr. Vitter publicly supported legal challenges to the President’s birth certificate, that his most recent television commercial is about promoting a sense of fear and anxiety, that Mr. Vitter has increasingly become a partisan ideologue. That’s “character assassination”?
You have every right to express your support and cast your vote for Mr. Vitter. But the faux outrage, the whole how dare you post something about the SINGLE largest news story in Senator Vitter’s career, and the absurdity of labeling this post as a character assassination– frankly, it doesn’t make your case for Mr. Vitter any stronger or more convincing.
It looks like a nakedly diversionary attempt to change the subject and turn the tables on me. For what? For being a Democrat?
If anything, it serves as an implicit, perhaps unwitting, acknowledgement that conservatives like you recognize the real toxicity and potential vulnerability of Mr. Vitter’s “serious sin.”
Thanks Lamar…
And you are correct, on my erroneously referring to “districts.” Sorry about that. I tend to think of David representing the more Conservative leaning northern part of the state (district), with Mary Landrieu tending to represent more of the Liberal leaning southern (district) residents. Mary has certainly never represented my feelings with her votes, and perhaps you feel the same way about David and your feelings. If so – fair dinkum.
My reference to character assassination stems from the fact that you seemingly wanted to slam-dunk David for pursuing the impeachment of Bill Clinton – President of the United States – after he was caught being serviced in the Oval Office of the White House, which is (owned and supported by the taxpayers), yet David Vitter’s sin was somehow greater in your mind than Bill Clinton’s. Sorry, but your logic here eludes me. And yes, I definitely like David Vitter because he is a dependably solid Conservative Republican. Dang son, I could probably learn to like Nancy Pelosi if she were a solid Conservative Republican ! OK, so that might be stretching it a bit, despite the amount of single Malt Scotch available, but yes, I will always vote for Conservative candidates that share my values and standards, and vote them.
I’m not interested in playing any games regarding moral equivalencies either, but if a Republican and a Democrat both pee in a punch bowl at a party and get caught, why should the Democrat be excused and shielded, while the Republican is exposed and repeatedly excoriated ?
Frankly, you may interpret my statements however you wish, since the facts remain the facts, despite interpretation by Lamar, rather than subject to same. Seems to me like the Monica Lewinski oral-atory in the Oval Office was about the headline grabbing apex of Billy Bob’s tenure as well, yet you appear to want this excused and brushed aside in your obvious diversionary efforts at deflection.
Quite frankly, my friend, I FULLY SUPPORT David’s and EVERY OTHER pending legal challenge regarding Obama being a usurper. I have to produce a certified copy of my birth certificate in order to get a passport, yet he gets to be president of the United States based on his “word,” which we all know by now doesn’t mean jack doodle. And yes, I’ll be happy to itemize 25 or 30 examples for you if you wish. Look for the Republicans to become bipartisan shortly after the Democrats do. “Bipartisanship DOES NOT MEAN AGREEING WITH DEMOCRATS !! You may want to tape this on your bathroom mirror.
Lamar, with all due respect, I have no “faux outrage.” ALL of my emotions are quite genuine. I was a Navy Hospital Corpsman when LBJ was in office during Vietnam, for your perspective. Trust me when I tell you that I will vote for David Vitter, as will everyone in my family and everyone that I know – save for two, and they aren’t worth knowing. (Smile) You, of course, may vote for Charlie Melancon and every other Democrat that you may legally choose to support. I’m not trying to make a case for David Vitter… his voting record is his case. That he exercised poor judgment on a few occasions is not. Confidentially, I will admit that over my 65 years to date I have exercised poor judgment on a few occasions as well. How about you ?
Again, you may interpret my statements, clothes on or sans garments; however you choose – your call. Conservative like me – a 65 y/o Caucasian male, college educated, US Navy veteran, Vietnam era, father, grandfather and businessman for over 40 years and staunch Southern Redneck Conservative Christian Republican fully understands that the real threat to our nation and political process comes from the ill-informed and inexperienced of your ilk. And I do not mean this as a personal slam, but rather a collective observation and assessment.
Oh yes, do you intend to challenge me on my statements regarding the Democrat party or other issues ? Just curious. I noticed you avoided addressing them.
Kind Regards,
Al
Al,
David Vitter called for President Clinton to resign from office because of his improper (but not illegal) affair with Monica Lewinsky. Those were his words, not mine. But when David Vitter was caught in the middle of a major prostitution scandal (which was, in fact, illegal) Mr. Vitter refused to resign. You should be reminded that Mr. Vitter’s office is also owned by and paid for by the American taxpayer.
And, for what it’s worth, I never made a judgment on who committed the greater “sin.” I simply pointed out that the same man who called for Clinton’s resignation on the basis of his affair has publicly and defiantly refused to hold himself up to the same standards.
Sir, I respect and appreciate your service to our country, but with all due respect, it is difficult to accept your comments about people being “ill-informed and inexperienced” when, in nearly the same breath, you imply that the President of the United States could be a “usurper.” Frankly, considering the vast body of evidence that proves Mr. Obama’s citizenship and the fact that his birth certificate HAS been made available, I find such an implication not only ignorant and inappropriate but also supremely disrespectful of the integrity of the Office of the Presidency.
If you wish to publicly support Mr. Vitter’s candidacy, I suggest that you stay away from the bone-headed conspiracy theories and focus, instead, on making the case for Mr. Vitter on his own merits.
Anywhere in there did you see Vitter committing perjury or suborning perjury? Or engaging in work-related misconduct that would get most of us “little people” discharged, like engaging in sexual relations with a subordinate, on company time, on company property?
I’m a little upset that the powers-that-be decided to “suicide” the DC Madam, but I’m sure that was a bipartisan effort, so I guess we shouldn’t politicize a heinous crime like that. I wish we had a better choice than Vitter. Somehow, I don’t see the Democrats regretting Clinton as their nominee in 1992 or 1996.
Ace, again, I don’t think it’s necessary to play a game of moral equivalencies. Suffice it to say, I think most employers wouldn’t think twice about firing an employee who sought the services of prostitutes and arranged those “affairs” on “company time.”
Also, it seems like a big stretch to me to suggest that the D.C. Madam was “suicided.” Perhaps you mean this figuratively.
And one more thing, somewhat unrelated to your last comment, but when did Charlie Melancon become a liberal? He may be a Democrat, but Melancon’s always been as middle of the road as one can be. This attempt to make him seem like a Nancy Pelosi-loving, far-left liberal is absurd. The guy’s a pro-life, “pro-gun” Blue Dog Democrat, and Vitter’s campaign is making him seem like Barney Frank. It just doesn’t comport with reality or with his voting record.
Charlie will be at the Soul Food Academy on Monroe Street Tuesday at 2 pm according to the Town Talk. The report states that he will discuss 1-His job creation plan, 2-Cutting taxes, and 3-Investing in small businesses. Wonder if he has cleared this with “Nancy” and “Obama”?
All moral issues aside, what has Vitter done for Louisiana? You never see him pushing for anything the state needs, just jumping on every Tea Party issue with both feet. Everyone up there, Rep. or Dem. is a whore for lobbyists and special interests, so you may as well get someone who brings home the bacon. Criticize Landieu all you want, but at least she works hard to benefit Lousiana.
As a voter, it sure was hard to hear him stand in our pulpit and talk about “Family Values” back in July. Sure, we all have sinned…no question there… However, if his platform for running is “Family Values”, I think it is fair to view his past to determine what type of family values he has. He has shown me the definition of “Family Values” and that does not align with my definition. No sir, you will not get my vote. Lets call a rat…..a rat….please do not insult my intelligence by giving it another name.
Oh, and its not because Lamar the “liberal Democrat” swayed my opinion. Its because I have eyes and ears in my head.