In 2015, John Bel Edwards scored a direct hit on the gubernatorial aspirations of then US Sen. David Vitter with his now famous “prostitutes over patriots” TV ad that sank Vitters’ campaign by informing voters that the senator had ABANDONED A VOTE honoring US war veterans in favor of waiting for a call from a prostitute.
For all intents and purposes, it was the death-knell for the Vitter campaign.
Luke Mixon, who is challenging incumbent John Kennedy (who, ironically, succeeded Vitter) would do well to follow the Edwards example.
You see, Kennedy on Wednesday of this week (July 27) likewise abandoned war veterans, though it was not for pleasures of the flesh so much as it was just another example of marching in lockstep with the demented Repugnantcan policy of funding the war machine while screwing (figuratively, not literally) veterans.
Kennedy was among 42 Senate Repugnantcans who blocked an otherwise bipartisan bill that would expand health care access for military veterans exposed to the Army’s own toxic burn pits in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Just in case you missed it, here it is again: John Neely Kennedy turned his back on US military personnel just when they needed it the most.
Oh, he wasn’t alone, by any means. Every. Single. Repugnantcan. Member. Of. The. Louisiana. Congressional. Delegation. Voted. No.
Every. One. Louisiana’s House Repugnantcans – Steve Scalise, Clay Higgins, Mike Johnson (the Marine veteran with the tattoo), Julia Letlow, and Garret Graves – each voted No last March 3 even though the full House passed the Promise to Address Comprehensive Toxics (PACT) Act.
Some promise.
Democrat Troy Carter was the only Louisiana member to keep the promise by voting for the bill.
In Wednesday’s vote, only eight Repugnantcans had the cajones to buck the party: Marco Rubio of Florida, John Boozman of Arkansas, Chuck Grassley of Iowa, Jerry Moran of Kansas, John Hoeven of North Dakota, Shelley Capito of West Virginia, Susan Collins of Maine, and even Lindsey Graham of South Carolina. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska took a walk and didn’t vote.
Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York was among three Democrats voting No.
Only 34 Repugnantcan House members broke ranks to vote for the bill last March.
It’s worth repeating that none of the Louisiana Repugnantcans had the courage to stand up to the party and support our veterans who need medical attention for damage done by the open-air combustion of trash and other waste in burn pits that is a common practice of military operations, the environment and soldiers’ health be damned. Among the materials incinerated in burn pits were human waste, paint, metal cans, food waste, unexploded ordnance, lubricant products, plastics, rubber, wood with the use of jet fuel as an accelerant. Service members who were exposed to these toxic chemicals are often plagued with life-threatening diseases and illness.
The measure was considered essential to provide increased health care services and disability benefits for veterans suffering from exposure to the burn pits. It would have streamlined the VA’s chronically snail-paced review process to recognize toxic exposure as a cost of war.
It goes without saying that the vote, seen largely as Repugnantcans’ obsession with revenge for being outplayed by Democrats earlier in the week to win passage of a $740 billion package that will increase taxes on the wealthy and invest in climate change and health care. In other words, it’s the same old tit for tat game played by oversized egos while what’s best for the country again manages to be relegated to back-of-the-bus status.
The outrage sparked by the vote and the ensuing thoughtless FIST BUMP between Ted “Cancun” Cruz (R-Texas) and Steve Daines (R-Montana) may have caught cocky Repugnantcans off-guard. Sen. Kristen Gillibrand (D-New York) was MORE THAN A LITTLE BLUNT in calling the action “total bulls**t. This is the worst form of politicization I’ve literally ever seen.”
Actually, Sen. Gillibrand, it’s merely validation of what writer Mark Leibovich said in his caustically humorous examination of the nation’s Capital in his book This Town: Washington is “predicated on the perpetuation of conflict, not the resolution of problems.”
One of those veterans of the wars in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria is Luke Mixon, a graduate of the US Naval Academy who flew more than 3000 flight hours over 17 years, earning three Air Medals in the process. He is a graduate of the prestigious Strike Fighter Weapons School, aka TOPGUN and completed his military service as Commanding Officer of the Navy’s F/A-18 Squadron based in New Orleans.
Among other things, Kennedy “actively blocked efforts to get Hurricane Laura and Ida victims necessary resources to recover from the storms, he has stalled critical funding to upgrade our crumbling infrastructure, and he even voted against funding to support Louisiana families,” according to Katie Bernhardt, chairperson of the Louisiana Democratic Party. “We could not be happier to see a decorated veteran step up and answer the call to serve his country once again by fighting back against failed Sen. John Kennedy.”
Yes, Bill Cassidy also voted against the bill to help veterans. He deserves scorn as well.
But he’s not up for reelection this year; Kennedy is.
So, if Luke Mixon is smart and has a taste for going for the jugular, he will rip a page from the John Bel Edwards Play Book and fully exploit the fact that Kennedy chose “Party Politics over Patriotism.”
Louisiana Voice 
“Majority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York was among three Democrats voting No.”
Why did Schumer and the other two Democrats vote NO on the bill?
John Sachs, from what I have read, Chuck Schumer changed his vote from “Yes” to “No” so that the bill could be brought up again. Apparently, if he had not changed his vote the bill would not have been able to be brought up.
Lyndaingram, I think you are correct. There is a motion that can be made to bring the bill back up. The motion is: “Mr. Speaker, I move to reconsider the vote by which the bill passed”. At least, that’s what it is here in Louisiana. But, in order to make that motion you have to be on the prevailing side. Here in Louisiana, it’s often used to get an important amendment on the bill.
Mixon would also do well to focus on Kennedy’s lack of legislative accomplishments. I won’t say Kennedy hasn’t authored any legislation that has even made it out of committee but if he has I couldn’t find it in the limited search I did. But I did come across Senate bill S.3653 Protecting Federal Funds From Human Trafficking and Smuggling Act of 2022 which Kennedy authored and introduced in Finance committee earlier this year. It “directs the Director of the Office of Management and Budget to require the disclosure of violations of Federal law with respect to human trafficking or alien smuggling, and for other purposes.” Because Deep State pedos, I guess. It seems to me a good campaign could get some mileage out of a few examples like that.
Great article! I have challenged older Top Gun wanna be’s to name their favorite scene in the new movie. Gosh, we are getting old. I agree with your suggestion and I simply cannot grasp how the Repugs push the right wing bullshit, push religious zealouts, and then want tax cuts for the rich. Well, maybe I have answered my own questions. We must get to work and do the right thing. Go Top Gun. ron thompson
This is the first I’ve heard of a candidate challenging old Senator Sound-bite. Looks like an easy choice.
Didn’t you forget to mention the Democrats added billions in completely unrelated projects into this bill, knowing Republicans would be vilified by people like you if they voted against the vets? I see them as courageous in voting against unnecessary Dem pet projects that libs thought they could slip through under the guise of helping vets. Politics at its worst by the Democrats!
There’s no shortage of one-sided talking points making this claim, but there is a gaping absence of evidence to back it up. And this morning it appears that there has been a complete reversal by GOP senators. Apparently, the bill is being fast-tracked for another vote.
No such “billions” exist; no such “unrelated projects” exist. What the liars are calling a “budget gimmick” is the language calling for mandatory funding, What they said they wanted was an amendment making funding part of the appropriations process every year where it can be sliced and diced to nothing or dropped altogether. To excuse their utter bankruptcy they claim fighting for funding every year is better for vets than mandatory funding, Now they just want a way out and Schumer is going to give them one, allowing a vote on the amendment which will fail then passing this same exact bill with the same exact wording they just voted against so they pretend they aren’t utterly bankrupt. Meanwhile voters like you are clueless. You swallowed the first helping of propaganda they served you and that’s the sum total of what you think you know.
And Tuesday evening the Senate passes the legislation 86-11 with the exact same language as before and no amendments. Because there never was any pork in the bill nor did it authorize unrelated spending, It was just a stunt by utterly bankrupt “Republicans” in a snit because their own tactics were used against them, who then had to tuck tail and run because their bullshit excuse is indefensible.