State Sen. Walter Boasso announced his intention to run as a Democrat for governor, marginally increasing the chances of that party to win the governor’s mansion this fall, and reducing the zero the chance that a liberal will occupy the office.
Unitl now, the party’s main hope had been Public Service Commissioner Foster Campbell, an idea which must have blanched in the minds of moonbat liberals who enthuse in baby-killing, work to defeat America at all costs, and delight in perpetrating the myth that the majority of Americans enthusiastically support the oppression of (approved liberal: read “non-Asian”) ethnic minority members – he’s just an liberal economic populist. Their problem is Boasso is even more off the reservation than Campbell.
According to his voting record the past two years, Boasso is a semi-reliable conservative (with conservative/reform scores of 66 in 2005 and 60 in 2006). Because of that, while a switch may make him more likely to win heads-up in a general election runoff with Republican frontrunner Rep. Bobby Jindal, by cobbling together moderate Democrats, voters from the GOP disaffected with Jindal’s almost impeccably conservative record, and conservative Democrat racists, black and white, that cost Jindal the 2003 tilt along with hate-Jindal-at-all-costs blacks and white liberals, he’s not likely to make the general election runoff to get in position to do so in the first place. Instead, most of those black votes will go to Campbell, and enough wingnut liberals will support Campbell to push him to the runoff where Jindal will annihilate him.
Which is why, more than ever, expect state Democrats, goaded by the national party, to wage a scorched earth campaign against Jindal. They’ll let Boasso spend his own funds to promote himself, but liberals’ real agenda will be to prevent Jindal from winning and that’s the task on which they’ll spend their money. Jindal is living proof of the invalidity of their ahistorical, illogical, dehumanizing liberal ideology, and national Democrats who understand this cannot afford to allow such a potent candidate to grow as a political force that can have an impact on national politics. This course of action becomes easier because Boasso’s deep pockets allow him to fend for himself, and they do not want to support a conservative – mirroring their national policy regarding the war on terror: criticize real solutions but offer nothing realistic or beneficial on their own.
Thus, the biggest impact of a Boasso switch is that against Jindal opening the floodgates to a vicious attack agenda the likes of which Louisiana, or perhaps the country, never before has seen.
Jeff:
ReplyDeleteI think people will remember their poor choice in the last election and realize they would have been much better off with Jindal folowing the hurricanes than a crying Kathleen Blanco. I don't beleive Boasso will be an easy sell in the northern portion of the state either. His yat sounding accent and "big boss" appearance coupled with his single issue candidacy will not sell well up north of Aleck. I beleive many in north Louisiana will feel that New Orleans may be better off after the hurricane and are gald for the dimnunition of power of the democratic "voter plantation" that was New Orleans. Most people in this state have to agree that we'd be better off now if Jindal was governor throughout these crises.
Jeff,
ReplyDeleteIt is hard to believe that any reputable university in the country would allow you the opportunity to teach young people about political science.
Your arguments rely on inflammatory and divisive hyperbole. Who delights in the death of infants, Jeff? And name one relevant American Democrat who "delights" in the oppression of minorities.
To the entire LSU system, do you consider this type of rant "scholarship"?
Your belief that Democratic "racism," both white and black, led to Bobby Jindal's defeat in the 2003 Governor's race is laughable, particularly considering that you bill yourself as a political scientist, who (ostensibly) should know about voting trends, demographics, and empirical data.
Your rabid and vapid partisan rhetoric, buttressed by flimsy scholarship, should be a cause of concern for anyone who cares about the reputation of LSUS.
The notion that Louisiana Democrats believe in an ahistorical, illogical, and dehumanizing ideology is both insulting and alarming, alarming because it reveals an underlying absurdity about your personal political views, which, no doubt, you carry into the classroom, a place which is supposed to encourage the open and free exchange of ideas.
I encourage all people interested in the academic reputation of the Louisiana State University system to call for your dismissal.
Most of the "scholarship" in this essay is self-referential, which renders it redundant and therefore useless. You may argue that your blog posts are not scholarly essays, but when you present yourself as a professor of political science, your readers have certain reasonable expectations about the quality and veracity of your scholarship. As an LSU Law grad, I am ashamed this post is tied to the LSU system.
ReplyDeleteTo my "liberal friend;" you illustrate perfectly the moonbat liberal response to Jindal as noted in the post: emotional without logic, bereft of historical understanding and the knowledge that comes with it. Note my publication dealing with the racism behind votes against Jindal in the 2003 election: http://www.bepress.com/forum/vol3/iss1/art5/
ReplyDeleteWingnut #2, you also should take a look at that. It will give you perhaps your first idea about what real scholarship is all about, since by your comments you obviously don't know the difference between an opinion piece and scholarship. Which makes me ashamed that you got an advanced degree from the very state system that awarded me mine.