Monday, October 13, 2008

State GOP Pointlessly Threatens Own Membership

I really don't see the point here:

With more than two dozen prominent Republicans publicly backing incumbent Democratic U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu over her GOP opponent, state Treasurer John Kennedy, the state Republican Party is considering ways to discipline Republican officials who endorse Democrats, the head of the state party said Saturday.

When high-profile elected Republicans endorse Democrats, it "sends the message that we are not united," state GOP Chairman Roger Villere said. "It confuses the Republican message. . . . We are not looking to punish people, but we don't want this to develop into a trend."

Speaking with reporters after the quarterly meeting of the party's governing body, Villere said several party leaders want to adopt a formal mechanism to censure GOP officials who break with the party's candidates. He said passing a resolution "without teeth" simply to sanction a Republican who backs a Democrat, as party leaders have in the past, "doesn't make sense."

This is really rich stuff from Villere. Which confuses the Republican message more?

1. Is it that high level GOP officials endorsed Mary Landrieu?
2. Or is it that the feckless state GOP leaderships couldn't find anyone willing to run against her until the criminal rogue Karl Rove convinced a Democrat to switch parties and totally reverse nearly every major position he's held for the last decade or so?

Aren't conservative activists pretty unenthusiastic about the Kennedy campaign? Aren't they more frustrated with the professional GOP establishment that put him forth than with the popularly elected officials that have logically determined that the Kennedy campaign is a lost cause not worth spending money or time on?

And to threaten retaliation now, in October?

Wouldn't it have made more sense to bully the caucus into supporting Kennedy when, I dunno, they announced the guy's candidacy?

Meanwhile, the biggest irony of the Villere threat is that the message your average Louisiana voter gets as a reader is:

A lot of Republicans aren't happy with John Kennedy. They're not united. Most of the Republicans I voted for are actually endorsing Mary Landrieu. She must be pretty centrist and effective after all.

I really don't think the Landrieu is liberal meme resonates with the general electorate any more than it does with the facts, particularly with weather vane John Kennedy as the supposed alternative.


And this doesn't even begin to explore what Villere means when he speaks of "the Republican message." Perhaps someone could ask him exactly what the Republican message or platform is these days because I'm not sure he knows.


Adrastos has a great recap
of Neely Kennedy's abysmal debate performance last night.

Is Mr. Villere absolutely positive that he won't be voting for Mary Landrieu himself?


jeffrey said...

Neely is toast. Landrieu has barely survived her previous two elections. This is the one that finally nails the seat down for her.

Now... about that other Senate seat.

Melancon is obviously in. Do you think that he would benefit from your Mayoral coattails in Orleans Parish?

E said...

Charlie and I are old friends and I'm very excited for my turnout machine to help Orleans Parish drive Melancon's inevitable victory over David Vitter.