Jindal to GOP: No Apologies, No Surrender
Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal stood before 1,200 of the well-heeled GOP faithful at a Tuesday night fundraiser and declared:
The time of introspection and navel gazing is officially over. We need to stop worrying about the past, about fixing the Republican Party and worry more about fixing our country and helping to chart our country’s future.
Bold words from a young man who may be attempting to grasp the fallen GOP standard and rally the party under his banner for 2010 and beyond.
His speech, given at a National Republican Campaign Committee event, served two purposes. First, he was attempting to rehabilitate himself following his poorly received response to President Obama’s State of the Union message. To that end, Jindal joked that given President Obama’s policy against torture, “it is now illegal to show my speech to prisoners at Gitmo.” The crowd tittered but there were few laughs. The fact is, even his supporters felt Jindal could have done a lot better in his prime-time debut, and many more thought his appearance was a disaster. The episode appeared to be too fresh in many people’s minds for them to respond to the kind of self-deprecating humor attempted by the Louisiana governor.
No matter. People will eventually forget that speech as most forgot Bill Clinton’s debut at the 1988 Democratic Convention, where, as keynote speaker, he droned on and on until many in the audience were calling on him to quit the stage.
What ever happened to him?
But the primary goal of Jindal’s appearance was to put himself in a strong position should he choose to run for president in 2012. To that end, he gave the Republicans exactly what they needed: a coherent, positive agenda to promote and, more importantly, a reason to be proud of their opposition to the president’s spending and tax plans.
The Democrats had been making much political hay from the idea that the GOP was hoping the president would “fail,” advancing the notion that Republican opposition to Obama meant that they wanted people to suffer and the American economy to go into a meltdown. Jindal rightly dismissed this meme as a “gotcha game,” while unapologetically declaring that opposing the president and the Democrats was the right thing to do:
“The right question to ask is not if we want the president to fail or succeed, but whether we want America to succeed. Make no mistake: Anything other than an immediate and compliant, ‘Why no sir, I don’t want the president to fail,’ is treated as some sort of act of treason, civil disobedience or political obstructionism,” Jindal said at a political fundraiser attended by 1,200 people. “This is political correctness run amok.”
Since conservative radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh said that he hoped that Obama would fail, Republicans have been pressed by Democrats and the media about Limbaugh’s comments.
Jindal, a potential 2012 presidential candidate, told the Republican audience he would “not be brow beaten on this, and I will not kowtow to their correctness.”
“My answer to the question is very simple: ‘Do you want the president to fail?’ It depends on what he is trying to do.”
Before you jump on the Jindal bandwagon….let’s just remember a few things.
His dismissive treatment of “something called volcano monitoring” is still echoing in people’s ears, even as Mount Redoubt is belching out smoke in Alaska…
Also…if he’s laying the groundwork for a presidential nomination, perhaps he shouldn’t be encouraging people to cheer on failure.
I’m just a civilian, not an elected pol with presidential aspirations, and even I can see millions of lefty crybabies thinking it’s their patriotic duty to ruin President Jindal’s agenda. Is this something he wants to endorse?
Is this something that conservatives want to endorse?
Sadly, he has no chance to become President. He’s too intelligent, too wonky, too Beta-male, and too honest and competent. Image is more important than substance.
I correct myself: If the economy is suffering hugely, as it very well may be, he has an outside chance.
Jindal’s lack of presence seems to be an issue. Nevertheless, ‘twould be interesting to see him debate Obama, whose speaking gifts will have long lost the charm and power of novelty by 2012. Would Jindal calmly, wonkishly, good-naturedly deflate the Messiah? Who knows, Obama’s old supporters might be sick of their torrid affair and long for someone who’s simply nice to come home to.
My God, is this the best we can do?
Sometimes you just need to support a candidate, worts and all. That is why the dems beat us. Everyone knew Obama was a fraud, but they backed him without question. Republican candidates face just as much criticism from the right as they do the left. Dem candidates do not have to face this. If we are going to take this thing back, we need to quit looking for that “perfect” candidate, which does not exist, and pick our horse and run with it.
I think Obama will win no matter who the Republicans run against him. Despite a steady stream of disasters and gaffs, Obama’s approval numbers are still high. At RCP he’s 61%, and at 70% + in New York State and North Carolina.
The media might write the occasional critical article about him but they will never abandon their Messiah.
The public must be drinking some powerful “Kool-Aid” because just about everybody has lost their retirement 401ks along with equity in their homes. The turn out at the tea parties should be in the hundreds of thousands rather than in the hundreds.
We only have one eloquent speaker on the Right, and that is Rush Limbaugh. The soccer moms hate him and always will. We need another Churchill to beat Obama. Sorry, Jindal is no Churchill.
We need a Daniel Hannan but unfortunately he can’t run.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/Daniel_Hannan
Jindal is worth a look, but he is far from the only viable candidate to run against The Messiah in 2012. Add him to the list of persons to be considered. That is fair and prudent. And, at the same time, keep looking. Maybe we need a General, again?
I like Jindal. “Presence” does not impress me. Look up our Founding Fathers or any President prior to the 20th Century – very few of them were particularly handsome or had “Presence.” What they had were brains, convictions, and energy.
Grow up people. Electing charismatic idiots is what got us here.
Herb: If Obama fails to get his massive tax and spend plans passed into law, I will be cheering loudly.
I Give Up:
My God, is this the best we can do?
Mar 26, 2009 – 1:10 am 5. Don:
Sometimes you just need to support a candidate, worts and all. That is why the dems beat us. Everyone knew Obama was a fraud, but they backed him without question. Republican candidates face just as much criticism from the right as they do the left. Dem candidates do not have to face this. If we are going to take this thing back, we need to quit looking for that “perfect” candidate, which does not exist, and pick our horse and run with it.
Dear I Give Up (liberal troll).
Read the comment below yours. And yes, please do give up and go away.
It’s about time a Republican didn’t try to soft-peddle conservative values and refused to kow-tow to the PC police in this country. The lefties are not one bit ashamed of their desire to turn this country into a welfare state. Has Obama apologized once for his pro abortion stance or any of the other far left policies he advocated? No, he is busy implementing them. Thank you Bobby Jindal for being honest.
———————————————-
Who is John Galt?
Jindal is a good start. At least SOMEONE in politics is starting to speak out, soccer moms may hate Rush Limbaugh, but when they can’t afford the gas to bring the kiddies to all the games, the Messiah’s halo won’t seem so bright. No one is safe from the community organizer.
A vote for Mr Jindal is a vote for a second Obama term as President. Sarah Palin is a viable candidate, Bobby Jindal is not.
To Friendly Girl,
Could you elaborate on your comment? Why is Palin viable, and not Jindal? I like both, would vote for either, but what is the reason for saying Jindal is not viable?
We don’t have much of a choice. The ones in Washington DC have their tails between their legs and running for cover. Much of the rest are gutless wonders. There are so few in this country that would put country before their own concerns. I haven’t given up hope for the party, but I do not see much on the horizon.
Pops in Vienna,
If you truly believe Rush Limbaugh is the only eloquent speaker on the right, then you clearly have not been listening to Mike Huckabee.
@16 Mike Huckabee is a stuttering fool who can barely make a sentence of peach.
Geee I wonder why we would want volcano monitoring? Who knew American had volcanos on it.
idiot.
Cap’n O, Gov. Huckabee lost any support I might have been willing to give when he ran his “I’m a good Christian just like you” campaign. I find it crass and insulting when Democrat black/female/hispanic/etc. politicians use their demographics as a reason to vote for them, it is only fair to hold the same degree of revulsion for a Republican Christian playing the same game.
Newt – Jindal, 2012?
Formidable.
Debating now is a little fruitless, the issues pressing the agendas of 2012 will tell more about who is viable. Who knows what obstacles we may face then, we may need a real Hawkish leader, or a economical conservative, etc…
Marc 19, makes a good point but I’ll add that it will be the issues in 2010 that will drive the election. Remember these presidential campaigns drag on for two years now.
I’d love to see Jindal, Palin, Huckabee, et al elected as president but I doubt they have the mo-jo to make it happen. I’m very concerned about the RNC. This Steele guy does not impress me. It wouldn’t surprise me if the RINOs persuaded him to run some old hack just because it’s his “turn” (Bob Dole & John McCain).
Obama came from out of nowhere. I am hoping that there’s a Republican equivilant out there. The UK has found Dan Hannan. I hope we can find ours.
‘….then you clearly have not been listening to Mike Huckabee.’
Being an ‘eloquent speaker’ can carry one only so far when one is fettered by baggage. Many moderates and Indies simply are not going to support Huckabee. Ditto Mitt Romney. This is a big part of the dilemma the Republican Party faces with regard to truly viable candidates. Personally, I hope for a dark horse, with a real chance of dethroning ‘That One,’ to emerge upon the scene.
Thank you Bobbcat for backing me up.
The GOP needs to clean the proverbial ‘house of ill repute’ and get some hard core conservatives to replace the RINOsaurs with folks who have owned businesses small or large [whatever] but, know how to ‘manage’ money and people.
We don’t need a ‘task-master’…we need someone who has worked and struggled themselves and knows what it is like to be the ‘little guy’.
The lawyers who become ‘career politicians’ need to scoot their arses to the end of the gravy train.
Let ‘em eat DIRT.
Eh…
I must say I like Piyush Jindal.
BTW, that’s his real Indian name: Piyush, that he changed it to Bobby, and converted to a Christian Catholic from his parent’s Hinduism, could be ascribed to political expediency, don’t you think? So what?
I will take anything, Hindu, Zoroastrian, Jew like Lieberman, Christian, fundamentalists or not, even Cuban Santeria, but not Islam my friend, there I draw a line, for this hateful so-called religion only has my deepest contempt.
“My answer to the question is very simple: ‘Do you want the president to fail?’ It depends on what he is trying to do.”
So what if Mr. Bobby Jindal does not love the TelePrompTer as much as our President. So what, I like what he has to say, and do you know why? I feel the same way.
I would vote for him. I liked his prime-time speech and who knows, he may have wrote it himself without any speech writers.
There are some really good writers on Pajamas Media and they could write a speech for him, and it is good to hear the truth.
‘…get some hard core conservatives….
When you say the above, what exactly do you have in mind. The ‘RINOsaur’ phenomenon only partially explains why the Pubs have been unceremoniously relegated to the wilderness. They have yet to give full consideration to the value of some pertinent issues (reproductive rights, LGBT rights) which are of paramount importance to groups of people whose votes are necessary in order for the Republican Party to dominate both sides of PA Ave.
Yes, talking about that big tent……….
Maybe we can all have a grassroots movement to draft Gen. David Petraeus to the role of Republican nominee come 2012. O-bobo doesn’t have respect for the general and the military anyway. The general’s finest hour will be when he slam dunks the Fool on the Hill in 2012. As a former serviceman, the general will have and has my vote.
20. Pops in Vienna
Alles klar?
Pops, allow me to disagree a little here, no offense, OK, as I like your posts:
“Obama came from out of nowhere. I am hoping that there’s a Republican equivalent out there. The UK has found Dan Hannan. I hope we can find ours.”
Obama did not come out of nowhere. He is the expected result, alas, the perfect product of the muddling of the waters in the US and the raise of the frustrated, the poor/frustrated, the Alinsky-trained community organizers, the Bill Ayers and Reverend Wrights and Father Flaeglers. Those with grievance against the white majority, against the so-called rich, real or imaginary, the Bernardine-Dorn-Michel-Obama-Ophra-Winfrey crowd. Obama is the pestilential emanation of the dark soul of the US. An empty suit with a previous drug problem.
I am sure, reason prevailing, Jindal, Palin, Pawlenty can do much, much better, but…will reason prevail?
President Petraeus, I like the sound of that.
From an outsider (UK), Jindal is not impressive. A number of folks touted him during the last Pres election as an up and comer, including Glenn Reynolds. I don’t see it. He is not distinctive, he has no USP and I can’t see him appealing to swing voters. He is not an impressive speaker, and seems to shrink in front of the camera. Thats not good. I’d be on the lookout for better Pres material than this.
Jindall ruined any chances of winning the presidency anytime soon with that awful speech. Not only did he come across as slimy and condescending, he also showed America that he has no good answers for the problems we face. He used Hurricane Katrina, a symptom of failed Republican leadership at the Federal level, to argue that we should not rely on the Federal government to save us. As in, let’s kill the family guard dog and then, when we are later victims of a robbery, argue that we simply cannot rely on guard dogs to keep us safe. It’s nonsense. That, along with his complete ignorance on the importance of disaster monitoring, just shows that a President Jindall would be woefully unprepared for office and the responsibilities it requires.
Obama 2012 without question.
Jindal’s (or anybody non-white’s) chances have been damaged irreperably in the near term by Obama. I put my money on Sonny Perdue in 2012.
I want to hear from the candidate who talks about reform. The commander-in-chief is the top cop of the executive branch who is to uphold and defend the constitution. There are plenty of foxes running lose in the hen houses of Washington and Wall Street stealing our nest eggs. I submit the imaage of T. Roosevelt who made it to Mt. Rushmore as both a reformer and a progressive.
I wonder what basket with a cobra in it has Mr. Jindal’s birth certificate hidden away.
A republican with a pair! Will wonders ever cease!
“slimy and condescending”? You mean like scratching his nose with his middle finger?
“failed Republican leadership at the Federal level” I’m sorry, but that was the incompetence of an idiot named Ray Nagin. Who got a pass for some reason? Guess why???
“woefully unprepared “? And Obama?
See, I’m still not sure about Jindal. But how can you be such a hypocrite? It’s as if you were speaking about the O… You described him to a T…
Support anyone you wish, but at least be honest.
Yep, ole’ Bobby has violated the Chromo-Meteorologic Corollary – “when a natural disaster is bearing down on a “blue” state, the federal gov’t must assume that the local response will be akin to getting Jim Morrison to finish a concert set after he downs a double-fist worth of depressants, chased by three liters of Jack Daniels.” Basically, the blue state response is to seek the lowest elevation, grab the food stamps, and prepare the molotov cocktails and shopping carts for the looting.
#34 MIDDLEMAN : PROBABLY THE SAME COBRA THAT ATE YOUR BRAIN.
Here’s the Republican field:
Jindal – zero chance . . . too wimpy . . . bad speech cooked his goose
Palin – zero chance . . . too folksy . . . will go down in flames when questioned, lots more abuse of power/ethics issues on the way
Huckabee – zero chance . . . too Christian . . . inconsistent on tax issues
Gingrich – zero chance . . . too arbitrary . . . three marriages, ethics violations
Sanford – zero chance . . . too boring . . . worst speech ever at a convention
Steele – zero chance . . . he’ll be lucky to last until Easter
Romney – 1% chance . . . too creepy . . . they don’t come any whiter that Mitt, Mormon thing will make Obama’s Muslim thing look like a christening, flip flopper on abortion
There you go. Maybe Rush or Joe the Plumber don’t look so bad after all. Have fun. See you in 2016.
deguello,
Probably ate Palin’s as well. Thank goodness we have stem cell research back on track so I can grow me a new one.
Mere wishful thinking, but one name would cause liberal sphincters to permanently sieze – Petraeous. No way he would – he’s not into self-flaggelation, but man-oh-man would he make Pres. Giggles look like a buffoon on a debate stage. I’ll spell it in all-caps : PETRAEOUS. See, “one of your own” just crapped her pants!
rdkng07 says: “But how can you be such a hypocrite? It’s as if you were speaking about the O… You described him to a T…
Support anyone you wish, but at least be honest.”
There’s nothing dishonest about anything I wrote. The fact that you need to drag President Obama into the equation just illustrates the huge inferiority complex of the GOP. Obama is getting done exactly what he wanted to get done as president and has used his extraordinary intellect and excellent abilities as a communicator to do it. What has Jindal accomplished lately, besides alienating voters and making himself a laughing stock?
I agree with #31 Steve P. (although I hate to).
Poster #30 pretty much summed it up with Jindal. If his candidacy every got serious, the press, indeed, would be turning over baskets to show he was really born in India. Look for Dan Rather to appear on a CBS special with documents leaked by a confidential Indian source.
We aren’t going anywhere until the Republican Party gets its act together. What’s Michael Steele been doing other than making horrendous gaffs on national TV? Why are all the former presidential candidates missing in action? While they may not have a chance of getting elected themselves, they certainly could stir things up. Romney could blast away at the economy, Giluiani on national security and Palin on good old fashion morals. It’s sad that Limbaugh, Hannity and Savage have to carry the water for a moribund political party.
We need to catch up with the times. Why weren’t the CPAC speechs on YouTube? Where’s THE conservative website providing information and videos to interested people?
No matter who runs on the Republican ticket in 2012, it needs to be someone older and more experienced than Jindal. Obama’s greatest flaw is that his ambition far, far outstrips his abilities. Obama’s never had to work in the private sector, so he’s never encountered real-world limits on what he can accomplish. Unfortunately for Jindal, he’s even younger than Obama, and while he’s been successful as a public-sector administrator he has no private-sector experience (that I know of). His best bet is to remain governor of Louisiana, run it well, and take public-speaking classes (or quietly hire a fire-and-brimstone Baptist minister to tutor him). His time will come, if he doesn’t screw up.
The way for Republicans to succeed in 2012 is to run a centrist business leader, one not closely connected to Wall Street. He (or she, substitute pronouns as desired) should be older than Obama, but not by as much as McCain was. He needs to be hawkish on fiscal responsibility, hawkish on security, and moderate on social issues. Of last years batch of candidates, Romney comes closest to this pedigree; unfortunately for him, his past as a corporate raider alienates too many, and his history as governor of Massachusetts also demonstrates that he will have difficulty overcoming a left-leaning legislature.
Who would I nominate? I’ve got no idea, but the party had better find someone soon.
Steve P,
When you typed “..as president and has used his extraordinary intellect and excellent abilities as a communicator to do it..” you weren’t touching anything metal, were you? Just checking. Now, I know you’re not laughing at Obama, but believe you me, we sure are! writing to Chirac as president of France; DVD gift-gate; half-empty cabinet; foreign policy blunders of epic scale; his teleprompter has a blog, for God’s sake! You, my man, are one seriously deluded dude.
We aren’t going anywhere until the Republican Party gets its act together. What’s Michael Steele been doing other than making horrendous gaffs on national TV? Why are all the former presidential candidates missing in action? While they may not have a chance of getting elected themselves, they certainly could stir things up. Romney could blast away at the economy, Giluiani on national security and Palin on good old fashion morals. It’s sad that Limbaugh, Hannity and Savage have to carry the water for a moribund political party.
Single best post here
The “hang with him at all costs” approach won’t work in 2012. Acting like you don’t see what everyone else does not make you principled.
Nixon lacked charismatic but he exuded competence whereas McGovern was neither principled or competent: easy choice. Lincon exuded principle and decency and Reagan principle and charm. Even George Bush was trusted for ensuring the safety of the US that everyone believed and no one was willing to give up for a medal-disarding, wind-surfing, french-speaking John Kerry.
Dole (1996) and McCain exuded nothing but a confused sense of why they had been nominated. Maybe to oppose the “other guy,” but not for any clear reason. Unable to articulate why anyone should vote for them, it became a test of charisma and they lost it. That will happen again unless the GOP finds someone able to explain why voting for the GOP is better than the other guy. Jindal seems to be closer to McCain than the winners.
A GOP candidate has to be believable in 2012: that means some level of acomplishment, some proof of competence and some reason to believe him/her to be a principled candidate.
Such people exist, even if the present political class cannot imagine anyone from outside the current office holders as President. The GOP should be looking for them and grooming them. It won’t find them in the tired old pols who think the purpose of their candidacy is to win an election for themselves.
Now really isn’t the time to look at the presidential elections (President Petraeus). We must be looking at the house and senate races. There are a lot of dirty democrat’s hands in this mess, as well as republican, but the anger in 2010 will be at the democrats. The battle this year is at the grass roots level. Americans are angry at the ineptitude of our congress and leadership that is shaky at best.
Thanks #46!
#45, Everything you say is true but it doesn’t matter because the media will overlook all of it. Yes, it is hypocracy, but that’s what the MSM is all about.
That’s why I think there will be a very diligent investigation into where Jindal was born even if he produces a certifide birth certificate. The MSM will have 100 lawyers in India looking for someone to say they were present when little Bobby was born.
Obama went to a racist church for 20 years but it was Romney’s and Palin’s church going that was questioned.
42 Steve P: “Obama is getting done exactly what he wanted to get done as president”
Yep! God Bless him for exposing the Fascist Party for what it is… It’s doing so much damage to the image of the Democrat Party it wouldn’t surprise me at all if the leaders, such as Pelosi and Reed, start pressuring him to resign in order to save their established power. The question is, will they do this before or after the 2010 electoral season.
So far as Bobby Jindahl… smart as he is, Sarah Palin is still the 8000lbs Pitbull in the room.
Bobby Jindal didn’t win election in California, New York, Illinois or some other multi-culti let’s-elect-the-dark-skinned-guy state. He won in Lousiana, and he won after the Democrats had tagged the Republican Party as heartless in the wake of Katrina (unless they moved it, New Orleans is still in Louisiana).
The federal government isn’t anybody’s “guard dog.” Guard alligator, maybe. Ready to eat the people it’s supposed to be guarding. Jindal advocates federalism, just like the Founding Fathers. Those who look for the national government to solve local problems don’t understand federalism. The states have their roles, the national government has its role, and in times of crisis those interests merge. Federalism is about cooperation, not pre-emption, and Jindal understands that. Federal response to Katrina was poor, but local preparation and response was practically criminal. Jindal said so, and in the state most affected by Katrina,he was elected governor.
Jindal can get a speech coach to get him past the surface problem. Ask Bill Clinton about disastrous entries on the national stage. But unlike Obama, Jindal has depth. In a debate, without a teleprompter, Jindal would eat Obama alive. I think Palin is wonderful, but Jindal has the advantage of an academic record that makes Obama’s look amateurish. They can’t throw “ignorant hillbilly” at Jindal. And unlike Obama’s, Jindal’s academic record is public and readily available. Except for mystery degrees, where are Obama’s actual academic records? Jindal turned down full scholarships in the Ivy League for both medical school and law school, and studied international relations in England instead. This man is no local bumpkin.
We’re a long way from the next Presidential election,and much can happen between now and then. For now, I’m with Jindal.
Ah folks, 2012 is in the distant future. Who knows what is going to happen. We have no idea what kind of person, what issues or what calamity will rule the political waters.
Personally I like wonkish, quiet speaking leaders who actually know something and make sense to charismic, charming leaders. Jindal is young and life is long. He makes a great leader for a future lifetime of commitment.
P.S. I am sure he will share his birth certificate, his college transcript, etc., unlike zerobama.
I’d have a hard time voting for anyone who admitted participating in an exorcism.
“Jindall ruined any chances of winning the presidency anytime soon with that awful speech. Not only did he come across as slimy and condescending, he also showed America that he has no good answers for the problems we face. He used Hurricane Katrina, a symptom of failed Republican leadership at the Federal level, to argue that we should not rely on the Federal government to save us.”
Hey, liberal troll, nobody buys your nonsense. People like you keep insisting that the Republican Party has to ‘go mainstream’, failing to understand why we have two political parties in the first place: because of two vastly different, competing ideas of how to solve problems that face this country.
All around me liberals are laughing and saying “where’s the Republican alternative” when there are Republican alternatives suggested every day. They even occasionally make the headlines, but always in the form of “Obama ignores Republican alternatives” or “Democrats reject Republican addenda and changes” or “Democrats seek to freeze out Republican opposition”. Boehner has offered alternatives. Jindal has offered alternatives. Gingrich has offered alternatives. There was even a Republican council created to pitch a completely alternate approach to saving the economy – one that has actually been proven to work – and it was simply ignored by both the Messiah and the media that is in his thrall.
And as for Katrina: I’m from Louisiana. Louisiana takes 100% of the blame for that fiasco. You do realize that Katrina didn’t even hit New Orleans, right? New Orleans flooded because the levees failed. They were warned for YEARS that those levees would not sustain flood waters from a Cat5 hurricane. They were told WEEKS in advance of Katrina’s approach. Yet the local (Democrat-run) government did NOTHING to get the people out. Yet somehow they were able to make this a federal government failure (BDS anyone?) as if it’s the responsibility of the federal government to personally truck out each person who refuses to get out themselves.
Mississippi was actually hit by Katrina. Mississippi received LESS federal attention than New Orleans. And Mississippi came through relatively well.
“I’d have a hard time voting for anyone who admitted participating in an exorcism”
Right, but a guy who goes to a church where he is told “white people created AIDS to destroy the black population” – that’s water off the duck’s back.
I thought Sarah Palin was going to be the frontrunner in 2012. I guess the GOP decided it needs somebody “browner” to compete with Obama.
Considering the fact that Americans are sick of having jobs and businesses outsourced to India, I think it highly unwise to have an Indian as a frontrunner for POTUS…unless of course the plan is to bring half a billion Indians into the U.S. within the next four years.
@55. AtheistConservative:
Attendance ≠ Participation
Someone who actually participates in exorcism is essentially a witch-doctor. Jindal is not national office material by any stretch of the imagination.
That being said, please, by all means put Jindal on the ticket with Palin for 2012. It would be the most entertaining political self-immolation in recent memory.
Peace.
DS
Margaret Thatcher is supposed to have said, “First you win the argument, then you win the election.”
Besides scheming and plotting, debating tactics and stretegems, maybe the GOP needs to figure out what vision it has, OTHER than the same one in use for the last, oh, 30 odd years.
Aside from policy wonks and political junkies, the GOP will be lost in the wilderness until it can convince regular Americans that it has a plan to :
1. Reduce the deficits- seriously, reduce the deficits. The GOP lost its credibility on this issue, and until they can honestly say, “We will cut this program or raise that tax”, they will be seen as just blowing smoke on “fiscal responsibility”.
2. Win or get out of the wars- the big debate within the military is whether we should pursue a counter-insurgent strategy of nation-building (roads, infrastructure, hearts and minds stuff), or a counter-terroism strategy of just hitting and containing Al-Quaida- which side is the GOP on?
3. Restore the economy- most ordinary people have no clue whether bailing out the banks is a necessary evil, or just a stupid evil. But most ordinary people would ask, how does lowering the marginal tax rate mark any change in policy from what we have had over the past decade?
In essence, the GOP and conservatives need to explain clearly why the past 8 years didn’t bring peace and prosperity; when I hear people explain that well, Bush wan’t a real conservative, they sound like leftists explaining that well, Stalin wasn’t a REAL Communist, that if he had been, by cracky, Russia would have been a paradise.
First, win the argument- then you will win the election.
Sonja: Your comments are uninformed as well as racist. Jindal is not new on the scene – look him up on Wikipedia. He already has considerably more executive experience than our President.
ChipD: I must say, you make a lot of sense.
Unfortunately the election will focus on what each candidate believes about abortion, evolution vs. creationism, nativity scenes, and other such topics.
I think during the last election we were more worried about Palin’s clothes and Obama’s a-hole buddies. Things like the financial crisis, borders, language and culture got overlooked.
Jindal’s gaffes cost the GOP party
more and more (potential) votes at
each juncture!
“In essence, the GOP and conservatives need to explain clearly why the past 8 years didn’t bring peace and prosperity…”
I’m not sure what you mean by this. I did quite well financially in the last 8 years, and only felt poor after the Obama crash. I was also at peace, no bombs or planes blew me up after 9/12.
Anyway, I do believe our first priority has to be 2010 congressional elections. We have simply got to put some reins on this lunatic.
“Sonja: Your comments are uninformed as well as racist.”
I second that.
That’s worse than Joe Biden’s “7-11″ comment.
Points for Karin# 62.
I see the stock market is going back up. If it continues to go up and is at a respectable level around the 2010 election, the Republicans are going to have a hard row to hoe. If people see improvements with their 401Ks, they may be inclined to stay the course.
I think most economists predict we’ll see improvement by 2010, with or without Obama’s meddling. Of course, if things are good, he’ll get all the credit along with a profile in courage for enduring the slings and arrows of impatient people back in March 2009.
Obama will do everything to keep us out of any military engagements, no matter how worthy the cause. Poland should be worried.
So, I think Obama will come out of this fairly well (damn it). With more gray hair, but fairly well.
In the meantime, Republicans need to sort out who they are and what they stand for. It wouldn’t hurt to find some good candidates either.
For 2012, I like Palin, Jindal and Pawlenty.
Repubs and Conservatives are nasty to one another too often. I hope we can get our ducks lined up by the next election instead of imitating the circular firing squad the left perfected during the 70′s and 80′s and which we now have ownership of.
If Limbaugh is so great, why are there fewer Conservatives in Congress now after he’s been talking for 20 years? He’s a good tree shaker but I think we lack good legislators.
56. Sonja: “I thought Sarah Palin was going to be the frontrunner in 2012. I guess the GOP decided it needs somebody “browner” to compete with Obama.”
I thought Hillary Clinton was going to be the nominee in 2008, but I guess the Fascist Party decided they needed someone browner to appease Iran and Hamas…
58 ChipD “Besides scheming and plotting, debating tactics and stretegems, maybe the GOP needs to figure out what vision it has, OTHER than the same one in use for the last, oh, 30 odd years.”
Hey, Chip, here’s a clue for you:
Danial Hannan, MP, to Gordon Brown
donttreadonme writes: “When you typed “..as president and has used his extraordinary intellect and excellent abilities as a communicator to do it..” you weren’t touching anything metal, were you? Just checking. Now, I know you’re not laughing at Obama, but believe you me, we sure are! writing to Chirac as president of France; DVD gift-gate; half-empty cabinet; foreign policy blunders of epic scale; his teleprompter has a blog, for God’s sake! You, my man, are one seriously deluded dude.”
The fact that you would even list the DVD gift issue as a “-gate” clearly illustrates who is the really deluded one grasping for straws here. “-Gates” are not even reserved for blunders but rather for actual scandals, like, oh, i dunno, lying the country to war, wiretapping every citizen regardless of criminal activity, promising to fund No Child Left Behind and then failing to fund it. Giving a box set of some DVDs hardly counts as a “-gate”. Maybe it’s a dumb gift idea, but imagine the phony outrage you crazy wingnuts would be seething with had Obama given an expensive gift during this economic crisis? Michelle Malkin would be shrieking about how the country is in crisis and the elitist president is further draining our treasury to send expensive trinkets to socialist European leaders. But that’s because you’re all just a bunch of hypocritical phonies who will use anything at all, even a stupid box of dvds or a laugh to jusify your insane and pathetic hatred of our president.
And don’t ever forget that the only reason we have the “-gate” suffix is because a slimy Republican president committed an act of treason against our electoral process and had to resign in disgrace.
Steve P: “But that’s because you’re all just a bunch of hypocritical phonies who will use anything at all, even a stupid box of dvds or a laugh to jusify your insane and pathetic hatred of our president.”
Ooo… the passion! Feel better now that you’ve tongue lashed your opposition?
The truth is this, Obama is hard to hate. He’s such a characature of himself it’s like watching a production of the Three Stooges with Il Duce playing all three parts.
1. Herb: “… His dismissive treatment of “something called volcano monitoring” is still echoing in people’s ears, even as Mount Redoubt is belching out smoke in Alaska …”
The issue on volcano monitoring was one of an earmark on a omnibus spending bill. The proper place to fund such activity would be in a science and research bill, not some earmark that gets no review whatsoever.
Relax until 2011. Pick a candidate a year before the election. Otherwise you will burn out. Meanwhile, be nice to people and help the Country to get ahead. You will be refreshed for 2012.
Hey poster #39, one of my own:
You’re a big reason why I hate Democrats and Liberals. Basically you’re telling us Republicans are all crooks or some other BS. Now the part that really really gets me is how blind you dumb asses are in that you fail to see that Democrats are EVEN BIGGER CROOKS! A Treasury Sec’y that can’t pay taxes. A President associating with a pastor racist, and a domestic terrorist. Several other members also having tax and ethics issues. One of your own? Does that mean you’re just like Charlie Rangel? Yeah Charlie denies any wrongdoing like a good Dem does so that useful idiots could continue voting their crooked asses in. Repubs are crooks Dems have excuses? They’re all crooks! Open your eyes and widen your field of vision. The Dems are going to destroy America and then they’ll probably blame it on the Republicans. To see how screwed up America will be just look at how screwed up California is under the leadership of Nancy Pelosi and the rest of the ultra-liberals. Billions in the red and they can’t drill a drop of offshore oil. Entitlement, environmentalism an anti-military attitude and radical social changes are the left’s agenda and it will fail miserably.
“2010: a Race Riot Odyssey” may be playing in neighborhoods all across California. An 8.0 earthquake may be welcome compared to the social and economic disaster that’ll hit California. So, one of my own, when you tell me how crooked Republicans are I just have to laugh hysterically. BTW I am a registered Democrat.
In 2012 I am hoping for a Clinton vs. Petraeus match. Teleprompter Won has never had the same job for more than a couple of years, right? Clinton v. Palin is what the repubs are hoping for in my part of flyover country.
Jindal is inteligent and has morals. What morals does Obama have?
72. Harry: . . . I was commenting on Republican candidates, nothing else. You want to go off on a rant about Democratic corruption, there are plenty of opportunities here on PJM to do so. In fact, pretty much every blog posting is a chance to do that. Let’s not talk about which side is more corrupt, unless you want me to go into a long, detailed and colorful screed about airport bathrooms and congressional pages and assholes named Duke.
Now, as to the Republican candidates, I outlined my views. Who do YOU think has a snowball’s chance of winning in 2012? Let’s hear some even-handed analysis of Republican contenders. I won’t wait, because frankly I don’t think you’re up to the task.
Oh, I almost forget . . . all that stuff you’re whining about is Bush’s fault anyway.
@67 Wancow-
I watched Daniel Hannan’s speech, and I do agree with him- he makes a very cogent, well thought out case that the EU bureacracy is a bunch of self-serving interests, wasting the British taxpayer’s money.
What this has to do with the American GOP’s lack of message and focus, is, well, self explanatory. The fact that the only message one can deliver from the GOP is of a British politician making a case against the EU, is stunning, and really sad.
And I say this as one who proudly and strongly supported Reagan and conservative causes until the mid-1990′s.
As a native of New Orleans our local democrate Mayor Nagin & Gov. Blanco failed then the President. Gov Jindal did& does a great job as politcal wonk may be that is wahat our country needs is a politcal wonk not some media star. Give him tim he is only 40 give him time
57. David S:
————-
Can I get a “hell yeah” brother? And then there’s that clergyman who laid his hands on Palin. The same guy who accused a woman of being a witch in some village in Africa.
Palin/Jindal 2012. ROTFLAO!
Old Soldier #8: “I like Jindal. “Presence” does not impress me. Look up our Founding Fathers or any President prior to the 20th Century – very few of them were particularly handsome or had “Presence.” What they had were brains, convictions, and energy.
Grow up people. Electing charismatic idiots is what got us here.”
I agree. And what’s the point of nominating a republican leader on the basis of electability who isn’t in tune with conservatives? Jindal has finally called the Democrats on their crap, something the opposition should have been doing for a long time. What’s the point in debating whether he is the right leader? He is leading.
#10: Good call Terry!
Own…
You think this is the only post of yours I’ve read?
That’s all you talk about, how incompetent and crooked Repubs are. You a typical liberal with typical liberal views. My goal is to get people like you to expand your mind a teensy bit and start thinking of the corruption from the other side but you still don’t get it! YOU NEVER WILL. If you refuse to believe one side is corrupt your thinking is corrupt. There aren’t many strong candidates but two who stand out in my opinion are Huckabee and Gingrich. As a typical neo-liberal you’re overly cautious about candidates with Christian values. I doubt Huck would have us going to back to blue laws. Actually there are areas in Blue (democrat) states that still have blue laws on the books. Gingrich would be my first choice because he is intelligent. I like the way he thinks. I want substance not glamor. Obama is all about glamor.
Some other thoughts:
Palin – as governor I give her more experience than Obama who was a senator. Governors are as much executors as they are legistlators. She was only a running mate yet was put on equal footing with Obama by the MSM. Totally rediculous. MSM gave her zero credit.
Jindal – Don’t know much about him and he certainly didn’t impress me with his SOTU rebuttal. The Republicans shouldn’t force ethnicity merely because Obama is black (actually half black/ half white).
Steele – Another hopeful and I believe has more potential than Jindal. Remember Jindal is governor of a very corrupt state. Duh and you thought Katrina was all Bush’s fault. I wonder how close Illinois is to Louisiana in corruption. Must be close, just look at how corrupt the Chicago syndicate is. Oh is that where Obama started in politics? But you liberals just keep voting for the same crooked system.
Anyway who knows which Republican will stand out 3 years from now. They have a lot of work to do. With an abyssmal leftist press to deal with they are in a deep hole. Mainstream America must speak out and demand equal time and balanced reporting. A Republican who can get that message across will be in the pole position for the next Presidential election.
Steve P:
Obama’s “extraordinary intellect”?? Is that what you said?
Maybe when you stack him up against yourself or Nancy Pelosi, but if anything has become apparent in the past two months it’s that O ascendancy is strictly affirmative action. Another thing that has become apparent is that he will be gone in 3+ years and will have set the progressive agenda back so far it will be a generation before it gets rolling again. And this is without a domestic terror attack.
Well, let’s look at it a bit differntly.
Which GOP candidates should all us wingnuts avoid like the plague?
Well, find out who oneofmyown, middleman, SteveP,
vivo, and David S like. They will be the toxic ones. The rest will have a fighting chance.
Peacemaker
Steve P.,
I think I finally understand the contextual use of “-gate” now. Thanks, man. OOOkkk, so you actually being able to fire enough neurons to compose a semi-coherent thought could be called “Dumbass-liberal-posts-on-PJM-gate,” yes? BTW, you saying “maybe the DVD gift idea was dumb..” is real progress. You may be able to steer away from the cliff in time, who knows? The next big step will be to tear up that Americorp application. Good luck with that.
Pat J,
This is the great Obama speaking. Keep up the great work with the PJM posts. Brevity is the soul of wit, after all. Now, I want you to prove your loyalty to me… run as fast as you can head-first into the thickest wall you can find.
82 Dave . . . I like em all, Dave. Right now I can’t decide between Newt Romney or Sarah Jindal.Maybe I’ll split the difference and go with Rudy Huckabee.
He chose Bobby for himself as a child because he liked the Brady Bunch. He converted to Catholicism in high school. I guess he could have been thinking about politics this early. Anyway, I like him.
Jindal is all substance. Unfortunately for this country its most of its populace only wants style in a political candidate. The MSM feasts on public humiliation of anyone, especially anyone innocent of any wrongdoing who questions their authority. And if that person happens to be a political figure all the more frenzied the destruction becomes. Personal destruction of a public figure has become the sport du jour, much like the ancient Romans throwing the Christians to the lions. So many members of our society have become so debased and sadomasochistic that they too feast on the personal destruction of others–witness the many reality shows currently in production. More than ever it will take immense intestinal fortitude to run for a high office in this country, or a very, very thick skin, or both. Back to Jindal: I would love to see him oppose Obama in 2012. I pray that he does.
The professional trolls here today are causing me to be rolling on the floor gagging because they’re so nauseatingly brainwashed. Brave New World. 1984. Hello. Obama and his puppeteers will do themselves in very shortly. Implode time. It will probably be a sex scandal. I’m guessing a homosexual one. Involving most of the White House and Cabinet puppeteers and puppets. Or perhaps soon a whistle blower, who will manage to not be murdered before he or she gets to the stand, will reveal the illegal drug usage cabal in the White House and Cabinet. What was Obama high on during the 60 minutes interview? Marijuana, alcohol, prescription anti-anxiety meds?
Ms. Apprehension: “Unfortunately for this country its most of its populace only wants style in a political candidate.”
That’s not true: dissing the voters in that way is what the democrats did in 1980 when Reagan won. People like you that sneer at the voters drive me up the wall.
The unwashed voters you disdain voted the GOP into congress in 1994 because they wanted a substantive change. They ignored better-dressed, more facile Gore for the slower-talking, less impressive Bush because he seemed to have substance where Gore had the more graceful and stylish presence; same in 2004 when they rejected a war vet, wind-surfing and french speaking democrat.
The voters approved of Bush’s stance on Iraq, ignoring all the “betters’ who just knew Bush was wrong. Unfortunately Bush and the GOP decided to major in “domestic corruption and incompetence” and when the economy fell apart, no on on the GOP side has exuded the slightest competence. Then the GOP put up McCain, who could not explain why he was running, what he would do, what was happening or even how many houses he owned.
Its no surprise Obama was elected. He’ll do it again too if the GOP puts up is a governor who thinks the GOP’s reason for being is to…..to…..uh…..oppose democrats? have lobbyists kiss our feet?….What was it again?
If Jindal can’t explain why free enterprise and freedom go hand in hand, and why government is the problem not the solution, he will lose. He’ll deserve to lose. And it won’t be the fault of the voters.
Actually, I was expressing disdain for washed voters. Jindal can and will explain all kinds of issues, and, without a teleprompter. He really is super intelligent, unlike President Training Pants who won’t release his school transcripts.
88. ROTFG/Rollingonthefloorgagging:. . . ” Obama and his puppeteers will do themselves in very shortly. Implode time. It will probably be a sex scandal. I’m guessing a homosexual one.”
I find the relationship between your name and your claim an interesting one. I hear homosexuals often find themselves rolling on the floor gagging. I’m thinking you find it “interesting” too,but you’re just not ready to give it a voice. In time, little man, in time.
Meanwhile, perhaps you can give me some examples behind to your prediction – for some reason i can only recall airport bathrooms and congressional pages and of course dear Senator Vitter getting diapered by a Bourbon Street hooker. Or maybe Glenn Murphy Jr., chairman of the Clark County Republican Party, who was arrested for
lowering the pants of a young man while he was sleeping and trying to give him oral. Or Bob Allen, Member of the Florida House of Representatives and Florida Chairman of John McCain’s Presidential Campaign – offering an undercover cop $20 to allow Allen to blow him in a men’s room in a public park.
What is with you people? Kind of puts the comments of “rollingonthefloorgagging” in a whole new light. Calling Dr. Freud Calling Dr. Freud!
If there was an election today, right now, I think Huckabee would beat Obama.
Palin would not beat him. Jindal (I do like him though) would not beat him. Huckabee would beat him.
I know many of you do not know Congressman Ted Poe, but start reading his web-site. He is one of a kind, the kind that folklore is made up about.. He is a modern day Theodore Roosevelt, and I say this just because of what he did as Judge, and a few things heroic he has done as Congressman too. He went over there and saved that girl that was beat and hurt in Iraq as a Congressman………………He is the one that the Media seems to love, all Media when they interview him. He is not a smooth talker, and he sounds like a cowboy to me, but all the more for the media to love.
I do not know him personally, just through the Internet and the media coverage of him, but he would make an excellent President and I think he would be hard to beat……….
I could be wrong, I’m only guessing, and I already told you I am a fan, because I started getting news letters from his web-site, a long, long time ago. I like this one, he’s a keeper.
I can’t have John Wayne, so I want Ted Poe.
I like Bobby Jindal and I agree with him, so do not call him names…..
“If there was an election today, right now, I think Huckabee would beat Obama.”
———
I hate to channel Beavis and Butthead, but all I can say is “EW heh heh heh, Yeah. heh. Heh heh heh heh. Heh heh heh heh heh. Mm yeah. Heh heh heh heh heh.”
The GOP is the party of dumbasses.
I see that oneofmyown is whistling Dixie again.