Comments on: FBI: LA State Senator is Money Laundering — Did AP Mention He’s a Democrat?

By: Michael S. Clark

Michael S. Clark — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 03:00:50 +0000

â€œOh, my nephew works with great grandfathers second cousins son.â€

Should read “Oh, my nephew works with Insert Politican Name Here’s great grandfathers second cousins son.” It was misunderstood as code.

By: Michael S. Clark

Michael S. Clark — Mon, 29 Oct 2007 02:55:28 +0000

Ideology has nothing to do with what sites I visit. Some I visit because they are insightful, some because they are amusing, and some like this one that are both amusing in their ignorance, but in dire need of some kind of voice of reason and logic from someone with knowledge of the topics. I do not post on just anything, but only things that I am personally involved with or have extensive knowledge and experience with such as this one.

I live in Louisiana, born and raised here. Firstly, the (D-LA)’s are not Democrats, at least not what anyone outside of LA would call a Democrat. They are more extreme versions of Lieberman. LA reps and senators both Dem and Repub vote 95-100% along the Repub/Conservative party line.

Louisiana is also the state ranked #1 in political corruption. I’m not saying this is a fault of Repub/Fake Dems, I tend to think it is just an LA problem. People here have elected David Duke (R-KKK) and Edwin Edwards (Corrupt Dem – Catholic). Not only that, but even after dealing with two terms of corrupt Edwards, the ignorant majority of LA still voted for him and elected him two more times.

People here (for the most part) do not vote on issue stances, experience, intelligence, competence, skill, education, voting records, or in Edwards case… histories of corruption. None of that matters to the majority vote here. The majority voting block of LA consists mostly of rural-living middle-aged to elderly, bible-belt religious, and for the lack of a better word…. hicks. These people only care about connections and name clout. If you were to walk around asking people who they are voting for, they do not just tell you who, but how their family tree connects in some way to the person they voted for as the reason why they voted for them. “Oh, my nephew works with great grandfathers second cousins son.” “Oh, he’s a Gautier! The Gautier’s have a big business in Marksville and are one of the oldest families in town.” These are reasons you will get for who voted for who.

What I am getting at is, Louisiana is not a valid place to compare to the rest of the US. Maybe you could compare it to Alabama or Arkansas, but thats as close as your going to get. Although, with election of Jindal, we might actually be seeing a change in Louisiana… one could only hope.

By: loboinok

loboinok — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 20:30:43 +0000

This site has two filters Michael. If your comment contained more than two links, profanity or spam like comments, the filters got you.

If your comment was among several hundred that I sort through, I probably missed it. Happens.

As for the rest of your comment… What compels one to frequent sites that they ideologically oppose, believe to be untruthful and censors their comments?

By: Michael S. Clark

Michael S. Clark — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 18:55:07 +0000

LoL. I had a decent sized comment on this subject and Louisiana politics, but it seems I’ve been censored. Truth seems to be adverse to this sad little sites agenda.

By: Increase Mather

Increase Mather — Sun, 28 Oct 2007 11:07:26 +0000

No surprise here. These “reporter” kids get out of J school after being taught that they are the fourth branch of government. So they ACT as a kind of political party…but always liberal.

Just how it is.