WaPo: Jindal asked not to be vetted for “less-than-stellar” McCain campaign
posted at 4:00 pm on November 10, 2008 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | regular view
Jindal was approached by McCain forces to gauge his interest in the vice presidency and told them he was not interested in being vetted due to his desire to continue on with his current job, to which he was elected just one year ago.
While the official reason that Jindal took his name out of contention was his lack of a desire to leave the Louisiana governorship, there was also real trepidation within his political inner circle that Jindal might wind up as the pick — McCain was attracted to his comprehensive health-care knowledge — and be caught up in what they believed to be a less-than-stellar campaign that could pin a loss on Jindal without much ability to change or control the direction of the contest…
The end result — intentional or not — is that Jindal, should he run in 2012, will be free of any taint of President George W. Bush or McCain.
Ruffini wrote a smart post back in July about the perils of being a losing VP, which I think would have held true this time for everyone except Palin. She’s so remote geographically — and politically, aside from the energy issue — that being on the ticket was her only way onto the national media’s radar. (A Senate run would have forced her to challenge a Republican incumbent.) That said, I think she’s right about this and that it’ll be a problem for her going forward, at least vis-a-vis Obama. The One’s chief rhetorical asset on the stump was that his is a new way of doing things, whether that’s true or not; Palin, by virtue of having been on the ticket this year, will by definition be spun as something retrograde in 2012, especially in light of what I said over the weekend about the economy and national security trumping culture war as key issues. Huck will be the candidate of blue-collar economic populism; Jindal will be the candidate of health care reform and, per his hurricane prep in Louisiana, emergency preparedness; Palin will be the candidate of … pro-life? Not enough to win a national election, especially if The One’s first term goes reasonably well, but on the upside she has plenty of time to develop her credentials in other areas.
Exit question: Is Mitt seriously not running? Seriously?
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »
Why is it that we’re so gung-ho on Jindal and yet ready to put Palin as Secretary of Energy until she gains experience? I believe they’re both in the same boat experience-wise. Energy independence is a matter of national and economic security and that’s where Palin excels. Putting her in a Secretary position until she gets more experience and saying she’s still young makes me pause and say “hmmmm.” She’s older than Jindal. I don’t think we should look at youth as a bad thing for either of them. I just sense some double standard.
Oink on November 10, 2008 at 4:40 PM
The Republicans have spent quite a bit of time and energy grooming Jindal, so no doubt he’ll be on a ticket. But it would behoove someone to help him a bit with his stump speech. He’s definitely not as awful and wooden as an Al Gore or a Dick Cheney, but he’d just benefit from lots more practice. If he decides to run in 2012, I’d recommend his campaign to rely heavily on townhalls until he gets his sea legs.
As for Palin, she’s a natural at campaigning. I’m just afraid that some of the 2008 stuff is going to stick. She has lots of repair work to do if she wants to run in 2012.
Illinidiva on November 10, 2008 at 4:41 PM
case in point, Ron Paul is against all the Free Trade agreements we’ve signed. NAFTA, CAFTA, WTO…he calls them “Managed Trade” and that real free trade is simply not charging Tarrifs on imports and then in la la land the 3rd world nation we are dealing with will return the favor instead of giving their nation an advantage by charging Tarrifs on US imports.
he beleives all war is bad and evil. Its the same reason he is against the Death Penalty, he beleives the Govt. “Use of Force” is evil in all cases. He takes princples he wants to apply Domestically and wants to apply it to the International arena, which is INSANE.
he’s also getting away with lying about the founders, constitution and history of the GOP.
jp on November 10, 2008 at 4:42 PM
Her manifesto could be radically different to McCain’s. Who knows.
The big priority has to be making DeMint minority leader in the Senate and getting rid of Boehner in exchange for Pence, McCotter or heck – Ron Paul :D
lodge on November 10, 2008 at 4:42 PM
Jindal seems to have great judgment. He realized that the disgusting filthy grime left from associating with McCain would be difficult to wash off, if at all. Also, I would assume if he screws up something he won’t blame his “handlers”.
nottakingsides on November 10, 2008 at 4:42 PM
I don’t fault Sarah for saying Yes to McCain. She jumped on board and did what she could to drag Grandpa Simpson across the finish line, and took a beating for her effort. I commend her for that. And Jindal saying ‘No’ may have been shrewd in retrospect, but that doesn’t sit exactly right with me. I’m looking for more than shrewd. Team player and fighter are also worthwhile attributes.
Oh well, we can speculate all we want about how great Jindal would be, and how great Palin would be, but neither has run in a national Presidential primary so we just don’t know how they will fare over the long haul of a Presidential primary. That they would both be great in office does not mean they can get elected. For example, the guy I thought looked great before this last primary season started actually flopped when the voting started, and the guy at the bottom of my list won the nomination. I still haven’t figured out how that happened. Point is, the best candidates don’t always get nominated. I would venture that nominating the strongest candidate is the exception rather than the rule, for both parties. I hope they both run; and if we’re lucky, one of them will get the nomination.
james23 on November 10, 2008 at 4:44 PM
When energy prices rise America is going to have to turn to its Energy producing states like Alaska to bail it out.
Im sure the democrats believe all the hot wind out of Washington DC will produce enough energy for America but Alaska is the state best suited to become a bigger player in US politics.
Palin can ride that wave into the leadership roll.
Jindal has show too much willingness to go along to get along. Anyone else remember his unwillingness to veto a Legistlative pay raise in Lousianna ?
William Amos on November 10, 2008 at 4:44 PM
worked OK from 1776 til Korea.
lodge on November 10, 2008 at 4:44 PM
I claim ignorance which is why I put a ? in there. I know little – perhaps nothing – about him other than he promotes himself using homemade signs on freeway overpasses.
Mr_Magoo on November 10, 2008 at 4:44 PM
no it really didn’t, we never, ever did what he suggest. quite the opposite actually.
jp on November 10, 2008 at 4:46 PM
I absolutely love Jindal and my very vote after turning 18 was for Piyush “Bobby” Jindal as governor when he ran against Kathleen Blanco. He has done a pretty awesome job so far as governor and come 2012 he will poll pretty well. The only major drawbacks are that his birth name is Piyush, which i’m sure the dems will love to constantly bring up to make him seem foreign. and the fact that he was apparently apart of an exorcism back in the early 90s.
But I am hoping for 2013-2020 to be Palin/Jindal then 2021-2028 to be Jindal/i don’t really know yet.
MFn G I M P on November 10, 2008 at 4:46 PM
Bobby Jindal or John Thune are the GOP`s best shots at there being a conservative in the White House in 2012. Sarah Palin could, but she must undo the damage caused her between now and then.
Romney and Huckabee need to check their egos and stand down for the good of the party.
I would be happy with any combo of Jindal,Thune, Palin.
Old and crusty won`t cut it anymore if the Repubs want to regain power. Time for young guns such as Cantor,Pence, Paul Ryan and others to step up.
It is also important that the GOP cultivate the women (Palin, Marsha Blackburn,, Michele Bachmann,Cathy McMorris Rodgers,etc.)for positions of power along with Hispanics (Mario Diaz-Balart) and African Americans (Steele, JC Watts, Blackwell) or else they will continue to be left behind.
Of course if amnesty comes about we won`t see another GOP Prez in any of our lifetimes.
Rockshine on November 10, 2008 at 4:47 PM
This is still AMERICA and anyone can be President. Reference last Tuesday’s results.
However, if the Republican Party does not move away from Beltway Elitism and back to the party of Ronald Reagan, it will not win another Presidential Election.
Your can pontificate using big words and platitudes to justify Elitism, but you are making an argument that will restrict the party’s growth.
The average American eventually will see through a con job. That is why Jim Bakker fell, that is why Americans support drilling for oil, and that is what will bring down the POTUS-Elect.
If Bobby Jindal is a good candidate, he has plenty of time to prove it to the American people.
kingsjester on November 10, 2008 at 4:47 PM
I am so glad that Jindal was not chosen. He would have had a loss around his neck. He is one of the smartest Conservatives we have, unlike Mr.RINO McCain. I think I’ll contribute money to defeat McCain in his Senatorial bid. We need to expunge this party of all the moderates that are weighing us down and leading people to question conservatism.
jacobnyc on November 10, 2008 at 4:48 PM
John Kasich
bluejacket on November 10, 2008 at 4:48 PM
Goldberg had a decent piece on him and the ideological roots(Rothbard) last year, before the Newsletter fiasco came out.
The Tradition of Ron Paul
Rothbard was a lunatic, the reason Lew Rockwell and company are off their rockers is because they follow his lead. They beleive America is the “Evil Empire” of the world, the Soviets were not….s
jp on November 10, 2008 at 4:49 PM
-Thomas Jefferson.
But what the hell, that Jefferson guy was a retard.
lodge on November 10, 2008 at 4:49 PM
Folks I know who’re in-the-know down in LA seem to appreciate Governor Jindal, thus far.
Christien on November 10, 2008 at 4:50 PM
Fixed.
Dee2008 on November 10, 2008 at 4:51 PM
Yeah, ’cause “Barack Hussein Obama” just screams “Anytown, USA,” don’t it?
CDeb on November 10, 2008 at 4:52 PM
The little I’ve seen of Paul, he seems kind of wonkish to me. Can’t we find a solid conservative who also has enough star power to get people excited?
Dee2008 on November 10, 2008 at 4:53 PM
MAGOO:
The word you’re looking for is Czarina.
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on November 10, 2008 at 4:55 PM
Allah, as usual, you sound like a nattering naybob of negativism about Palin. She is the candidate of energy independence, lower spending, and a whole array of social issues. You cannot foresee the future so you have no idea what the issues of the day will be in three years.
WillT on November 10, 2008 at 4:55 PM
Jefferson went to war over Trade routes against Islamic Barbarinism. His rhetoric never matched reality, and one thing that gets confused with the founders is taking quotes of there and ignoring the politics of the era(Hamilton vs. Jefferson).
They were against specific alliances at the time, in practice there were never against all alliances no matter what. (Hamilton/Washington/Federalist wanted to ally with Britain over France, Jefferson and Madison wanted to side with France…they fought it out rhetorically and otherwise).
we also traded around the globe with the military from their day on. Its a enlightenment fantasy that if you simply trade with people, peace follows and pacifism rules. This is not based in reality or history.
aside from that, Trade itself is very “Interventionist”, since the dominant nation dictates the type of Law and terms that will be used and it pushes Cultures against each other. Pat Buchanan has a more logical position if you want to be isolationist.
Walter Russel Mead’s “God and Gold” is an excellent book on the topic
jp on November 10, 2008 at 4:57 PM
Jim DeMint
Sadly, I foresee whoever gets the nomination in 2012 will only be destroying their presidential ambitions. Obama is a Reagan for the left. He is charasmatic enough that he will be reelected without serious difficulty. We will pull out of the recession as part of the normal cycle, but he will get credit. Our best bet is to focus in 2012 on regaining seats in Congress, a la 1994. Then look toward regaining the White House in 2016. All of the above candidates will still be viable. In ‘12 we will nominate a sacrificial lamb. Romney, Huckabee, or McConnell will do. McConnell preferably, as we might be able to get him out of the senate as a result.
gl_thecatholic on November 10, 2008 at 4:59 PM
Jindal/Palin ‘12!
daryl_herbert on November 10, 2008 at 5:00 PM
he’s not a conervative either.
Ron Paul called Ronald Reagan a traitor and left the GOP in 1988 and ran as a kook in the Libertarian Party. He only came back to get elected and has since then underminded the party and promoted himself and what amounts to Paleo-libertarianism
jp on November 10, 2008 at 5:01 PM
Look, in the beginning, the US was a weak bastion of liberty in a sea of tyranny. There were no other governments worth fighting to save, and the US couldn’t afford to get roped into a fight between the major powers.
None of that has been true for a century.
Trade and peace depend on the strength of the US military.
Count to 10 on November 10, 2008 at 5:01 PM
Even Reagan said his greatest failure was the deficit.
lodge on November 10, 2008 at 5:03 PM
Unless somebody’s got a crystal ball I think we should chill a bit on the “predicting the future pres. nominee” posts.
Remember what they were sayin about Hilary after Bush won his second term. Many a pundit believed SHE would be “the one”…and we all see how that turned out lol
All I am saying is that a lot can happen in four years so lets sit tight a minute while we get the parties priorities back on track first
TR-808 on November 10, 2008 at 5:05 PM
While working in a Louisiana congressional campaign I heard the same thing about Jindal.
Kermit on November 10, 2008 at 5:05 PM
I disagree. If he does half of what he campaigned on, this recession will be long and very ugly. We could even wind up in a depression. He’ll get away with playing the Bush card for a year, maybe even 2.
But if we’re still facing massive deficits, high unemployment, and an ever-expanding federal government come 2012, he can’t run a re-election campaign bashing his predecessor and asking the voters for another 4 years to turn things around.
Doughboy on November 10, 2008 at 5:06 PM
Magoo: She could be appointed at energy Czar(ess)
———————————————-
The word your looking for is Czarina.
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on Nov 10,2009 at 4:55PM.
Grue in the Attic:Or, energy Czar(ette)from
the word (Dudette),
or,energy Czar(aCuda)! haha:):)
canopfor on November 10, 2008 at 5:06 PM
I don’t have a big problem with Jindal, but jeez, he’s got one (1) year of executive experience. Let’s quit trying to prove our coolness by promoting minorities to their level of incompetence. I remember the Weekly Standard endorsed Colin Powell in their first (!) issue. How did that work out? Let Jindal prove his worth before putting him a P/VP ticket.
Kenno on November 10, 2008 at 5:08 PM
Maybe he was too busy attending exorcisms to campaign.
Vernon Hardapple on November 10, 2008 at 5:10 PM
Oops,sorry Magoo,should be an energy Czar,not at energy
Czar.Ugh:)
canopfor on November 10, 2008 at 5:10 PM
ROMNEY/JINDAL ‘12
iamse7en on November 10, 2008 at 5:10 PM
GEAUX JINDAL!
Christien on November 10, 2008 at 5:11 PM
Actually Czarina is the correct feminine version of the word Czar, as long as you use that spelling. If you go with the alternate, Tsar, the feminine is Tsarmina.
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on November 10, 2008 at 5:13 PM
Foreign Policy Lessons From Fighting Muslim Pirates
only difference between back then and now, is now we have ability to do so called “nation building” and actually remove a regime completely in the Nuclear and 9/11 world we live in now.
Jefferson actually wanted to send the military in and take Canada and Cuba, but didn’t. He did buy Louisana purchase however.
“Empire for Liberty” is the true Jefferson Legacy. He was not a Pacifist and apologizer to America’s Enemies that Ron Paul and Lew Rockwell and the Far-Left are today
jp on November 10, 2008 at 5:13 PM
Czaracuda, I have to admit I like that one :D
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on November 10, 2008 at 5:14 PM
“Why is it that we’re so gung-ho on Jindal and yet ready to put Palin as Secretary of Energy until she gains experience?”
Because she is a woman with a forceful spirit.
I truly believe it is as simple as that.
TexasDude on November 10, 2008 at 5:15 PM
he hated his Foreign Policy, he prefers the far-left(Chomsky variety).
he also ran on a Drug legalization platform in 1988(all drugs) and claimed the Bush family were a big Drug Cartel family.
there are enough conservatives that hate Paul to keep it from happening, but if Paul ever got any real traction the Media would eat him for dinner. He has the type of questionable associations and racist path Obama had and then some. The Media would tear him to shreds if he got traction and they could no longer ignore.
jp on November 10, 2008 at 5:16 PM
I’m glad Jindal stayed in the bayou state. We need him here and so far he is doing a good job.
He has vast experience in the health care industry and is now getting full executive experience.
When/if he runs for POTUS they will crucify him, just like they tried to do when he ran for Governor.
Time will tell- but he’d be great in the White House.
kareyk on November 10, 2008 at 5:17 PM
Good god, Allah! Palin’s issue has been about energy and energy independence. She’s a Governor of an energy state that supplies about 20% of the Nation’s domestic oil supply. She’s the candidate of national energy and indepdence, and reform. Not pro-life. Pro-life is Palin’s *personal* belief.
Criminy!!
Allah, nice of you to continue with your low-brow approach against Palin ever since she came aboard 9 weeks ago.
Holy moly mackeral!
Kokonut on November 10, 2008 at 5:18 PM
Tzetzes on November 10, 2008 at 4:36 PM
iamse7en on November 10, 2008 at 5:10 PM
He turned down RNC chair. I hope we haven’t seen the last of him.
thecountofincognito on November 10, 2008 at 5:18 PM
anybody comparing Ron Paul to Thomas Jefferson needs to buy a clue …
He greatly expanded Presidential power through the Louisiana Purchase
He supported helping the French Revolution
He fought pirates in Northern Africa
joey24007 on November 10, 2008 at 5:19 PM
Ron Paul was not able to secure his party’s nomination, because he alienated the fis-cons and national security hawks. We cannot pursue isolationist trade agreements and foreign policy. As for his economic ideas, he predicted the crisis but his solution was Austrian economics. He was not able to convey his ideas or offer solutions, though. Just “switch to gold” and “get out of everywhere – they hate us for meddling in their lives.” Unfortunately, some of our enemies would still hate us, if we weren’t meddling. I guess we’re about to see.
chunderroad on November 10, 2008 at 5:19 PM
Romney is the most qualified and would do enormous good for our country. Unfortunately, the “I want someone just like me” mindset that is taking over the Republican party means all his successes are now held against him. He does have a large base of support in the financial conservative/business owner branch of the party, so I hope he makes another run.
JA on November 10, 2008 at 5:20 PM
“especially if The One’s first term goes reasonably well, but on the upside she has plenty of time to develop her credentials in other areas”.
“If the one’s first term goes reasonably well” is a notion so far-fetched and irrational it’s unworthy of further comment.
Basilsbest on November 10, 2008 at 5:21 PM
he also went into Tenn., and forceably removed Native Americans, killing some and shipping the rest off to midwest.
jp on November 10, 2008 at 5:21 PM
Actually Czarina…
Grue in the Attic on Nov 10,2008 at 5:13PM.
Grue in the Attic: Czar,Czarina.The correct spelling!
I did not know that.He he:):):):)
canopfor on November 10, 2008 at 5:22 PM
Knew it, sharping the knives to tear the man down. Plan to see many more of these juxtapositions between Jindal and Palin where you show her to be less then stellar. Yet, once Jindal puts his hat in the ring say around 2010, you’ll be all over him like white on rice. I expecting a Palining of Jindal to come forthwith because no true conservative must seep through the cracks. It’s in your choices for quote of the day, right? More moderate candidates like McCain because tacking left is so much better than tacking right. Bet you agree with Krugman too. Obama has an economic mandate. Full steam ahead.
Sultry Beauty on November 10, 2008 at 5:23 PM
They would tear him to shreds and pin his baggage to the GOP. Don’t need that kind of thing when your trying to repair damage whether real or imagined.
thomasaur on November 10, 2008 at 5:23 PM
problem is this crank is out there claiming He, and only he, is truly standing for the ideals of the founding fathers and the Constitution.
its the byproduct of everyone ignoring him, what they are missing is some are listening.
jp on November 10, 2008 at 5:24 PM
Palin will be the candidate of Life (after what should be an over-reach on “Freedom of Choice” bill) as well as the candidate of ENERGY and DRILLING.
ttime500 on November 10, 2008 at 5:24 PM
He supported Star Wars but opposed Lebanon (as Reagan did) and Grenada.
I’m not willing throw his brilliant ideas on economics, liberty, borders and the constitution under the bus just over a disagreement over Grenada or Iraq or whatever. It’s time to put domestic policy first.
lodge on November 10, 2008 at 5:25 PM
It’s way to early for crystal-ball gazing. Everything will depend on the success/failure ratio of the next four/eight years, and who can position themselves to sieze opportunity, like Reagan did with the Carter years disaster.
Jindal is wise to distance himself from McCain. I hope Palin is smart enough to do the same, soon.
Nichevo on November 10, 2008 at 5:27 PM
anybody comparing Ron Paul to Thomas Jefferson needs to buy a clue …
joey24007 on November 10, 2008 at 5:19 PM
In fairness, both are politically done.
Laura in Maryland on November 10, 2008 at 5:27 PM
what about gov. blunt from MO? he’s young. governors, governors, governors. get it?
btw, whatever happened to JC Watts?
kelley in virginia on November 10, 2008 at 5:28 PM
Learn something new every day ;)
*eats*
Grue in the Attic on November 10, 2008 at 5:29 PM
Romney can’t win the nomination because the evangelicals won’t vote for a Mormon. I worked hard for him in the primaries, and phone banking responses indicate that if he had been Christian we would have President Mitt right now. It’s not right, but that’s where we are at.
Huckabee needs to stay on TV.
gl_thecatholic on November 10, 2008 at 5:29 PM
Its never to early to start something … do you know how much money will be needed in the next election cycle?
joey24007 on November 10, 2008 at 5:29 PM
Ron Paul is not a nationally viable candidate for POTUS. It’s nothing personal against his sane suporters it is just a fact. We’re really, really sorry bud.
thomasaur on November 10, 2008 at 5:32 PM
Being a Catholic will probably help him. Plus, since he is more on the conservative side, it should help him with evangelicals too assuming a Huckabee type doesn’t take that vote away in the primary.
Sapwolf on November 10, 2008 at 5:32 PM
Several times now people have posited our chances in terms of issue (Jindal on healthcare, Palin on energy, etc.) Yest we just lost to a man with ZERO issue qualifications. Zero accomplishments and ZERO firm proposals.
Why dowe think we have to compete on issues and policies and allow the other guy (The Obama™) to run on rhetoric and concept?
johnsteele on November 10, 2008 at 5:36 PM
Little Green Footballs’ Charles Johnson quote on 11/09/08 8:22:11 PM comment post: “If Jindal is the nominee (in 2012), I will do everything I can to see that he’s defeated”.
……..looks like we have another Andrew Sullivan on our hands.
rock the casbah on November 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM
I thought that he did thumbs down the pay raise per his campaign promise.
Sapwolf on November 10, 2008 at 5:37 PM
Regarding Charles Johnson shooting down Jindal, what was his reason?
Is he simply another atheist Hitchens wannabe or is he some kinda evangelical ‘the pope runs the world’ goofball?
I’m asking because I don’t read LGF, and have not read Charles.
Sapwolf on November 10, 2008 at 5:40 PM
Great point. The candidate must be charsmatic. Palin has it. I don’t know if Jindal has it yet.
Sapwolf on November 10, 2008 at 5:41 PM
Because the opposition has control of the MSM. If they could be trusted to cover candidates on an even plane I would agree with your premise. We know after the past election that is not going to happen.
thomasaur on November 10, 2008 at 5:41 PM
Of course it doesn’t. The only difference is that the media, liberals, and even McCain himself castigated anyone who tried to make his name seem foreign and god forbid anyone bring up the Hussein middle name.
Now you tell me that the media would do the same thing for a conservative candidate? Plus, Barack sounds a lot more normal than Piyush.
MFn G I M P on November 10, 2008 at 5:42 PM
Geeze, Allah, wouldn’t you say that her biggest issue to run on is energy independence? She is the pro-life candidate by virtue of her biography alone. She never did anything as a governor that would lead one to think of her as either pro-life or pro-choice. She governed as libertarian on social issues. And I think you also overlook the fact that Palin can honestly run as a fiscal conservative and reformer. Stop believing the propaganda and look at her actual record.
ramrocks on November 10, 2008 at 5:46 PM
Jindal is awfully young and the truth is he probably had his doubts that a Republican would win this year. It has nothing to do with how stellar McCain’s campaign was or was not. What is his hurry? 2012 would be better timing for him.
Terrye on November 10, 2008 at 5:51 PM
Charles Johnson is flipping out over the Intelligent Design mini-controversy in LA.
Jindal should squash this one really quickly so it doesn’t became a Sarah Palin banning Harry Potter urban legend.
Illinidiva on November 10, 2008 at 5:55 PM
Sapwolf – Johnson has latched on to the opinion of the fevor swamps that Jindal is too close to the religious right. While Jindal has done some serious flirting with the RR, much of this was required to counteract the very ugly racial hate campaign perpetrated by the Dems in 2003. Clearly, his chief reputation in Louisiana is that of a nerdy management type -although he is increasingly being seen as an extremely tough, shrewd & skilled politican.
rock the casbah on November 10, 2008 at 5:57 PM
CJ lost his mind atleast back around the time of Ben Stein’s documentary.
the most important thing in the world to Charles Johnson is for Darwinism to be taught in schools along side no other alternatives, especially those he can label “Creationist”.
now he has the bright idea for the GOP to get rid of the Evangelica base, you know about 30 Million voters wich would bail for good if they give up social conservative issues.
jp on November 10, 2008 at 5:57 PM
Darwinsism = gospel to Charles Johnson, all dissent is blasphemey. Schools should only teach Darwinism, even if taxpayers don’t agree.
CJ is a Tyrant, he should stick to being a Jihadist Gadfly. Same for Hitchens
jp on November 10, 2008 at 6:00 PM
Creationism. Charles is on a jihad against anyone with the slightest whiff of it surrounding them. And speaking of jihad, he’s also on a bender against such as Robert Spencer, accusing him and others of advocating “genocide.”
There’s nothing wrong with being an athiest. There are many good conservatives of that genre. It’s when athiesm becomes a religion that the militancy begins.
(Disclaimer: I have no intention of sticking around for a discussion of the pros and cons of athiesm. This is simply a comment from an pseudonymous commenter who does not do religious discussion/flame wars. Make of it what you will, and feel free to do your own research on the subject of Charles Johnson’s wars.)
Nichevo on November 10, 2008 at 6:02 PM
Shows you how smart Jindahl really is…
right2bright on November 10, 2008 at 6:11 PM
As a disclaimer, he banned me from commenting because I defended Jindal. No big deal – i didn’t really comment anyway. It’s funny though because i’m an atheist and agree with him on creationism. But if you’re going to fight for Obama over Jindal in 2012, then there is no getting around the fact that you’re a full-blooded socialist.
……..If you refuse to link to DailyKos, then LGF should be off the list as well.
rock the casbah on November 10, 2008 at 6:16 PM
Palin/Jindal Jindal/Palin 2012!!!!!
Tim Burton on November 10, 2008 at 6:18 PM
Why are people pushing Palin? She has a 0% chance of winning a national election.
Romney and Jindal are good choices. I’m sure other contenders will step forward. But Palin and Huckabee need to go as far away as possible.
therightwinger on November 10, 2008 at 6:21 PM
Palin/Jindal 2012
+8
Capital Mess on November 10, 2008 at 6:24 PM
I’ll leave the LGF discussion alone…
The fact is, though, that creationism is a political third-rail, Jindal grabbed it, Palin has been careful enough to avoid it. Sure, it buys you some cred with the evangelicals, but it’ll send all the moderates running the other direction as fast as they can go. Jindal’s still damaged goods from that one as far as a national campaign goes.
The incompetence of the McCain campaign allowed the press to paint Palin as some sort of social-conservative darling, and that’s a problem. That’s not her governing record (as opposed to her personal beliefs) in Alaska, and that’s not how to get the White House back. Will she be the one that can sell the party core on pushing the pro-life agenda a few lines down the platform?
As I see it, if the GOP wants to be the Party Of Life, it’s walked away from the swing voters who may not like abortion but are sick of it being such a high-profile issue. At that point we’re a permanent-minority party unless and until the Dems screw things up worse than Bush has.
JEM on November 10, 2008 at 6:25 PM
Big Purple Baseballs should be de-linked from any site that want to retain credibility.
corona on November 10, 2008 at 6:27 PM
therightwinger – Palin is not Huckabee. Go look at her record. Far from it.
The media has painted her into that corner, but that’s not how she’s governed.
It will take time for her to dig out from under the pile of media manure that the McCain incompetents let fall on her, and whether she elects to make the effort is up to her.
JEM on November 10, 2008 at 6:27 PM
the thing about jindal and creationism is that the bill he signed didn’t force schools to teach creationism. it simply gave individual schools and school boards the choice to incorporate creationism into their curriculum if they so choose.
Now I am a fundamentalist/creationist and I am anti-forced creationism teaching in schools. With that being said I support Jindal’s position on the issue.
MFn G I M P on November 10, 2008 at 6:31 PM
Well I do like Jindal. I really do.
And if this is correct, then one has to really admire his instincts as well.
However…
I really wish..really really REALLY wish that someone would..I dont know…muss up his hair or something.
Throw some dippidy doo in there.
Or maybe get him to work out a little bit, or something.
He just needs to be a little bit of work on the presentation bit. As he is now, He reminds me of the Van Wilder Sidekick, “TAJ”.
Again…I dig him. He just needs some updating.
“”Want to park da pourpous! You know? I wanna take it to the car waaaaaash, bebe and get it waxed!”
Yeah….Jindal definitly needs updating.
Jindal 2012, I can get behind.
“Taj” 2012…..uhmmm not so much.
Handel on November 10, 2008 at 6:36 PM
……..looks like we have another Andrew Sullivan on our hands.
That Charles Johnson has a serious aversion or allergy on something called “Intelligent Design” that Jindal approve of (as in to allow critical thinking discussions in a science classroom without fear of reprisal or get fired) that he’s being a simple a.h. on that one issue.
Charlie needs to grow up and see the bigger picture regarding Jindal.
Kokonut on November 10, 2008 at 6:36 PM
uh here is another Bobby Jindal accomplishment:
http://www.bayoubuzz.com/News/Louisiana/Government/Louisiana_Governor_Jindal%E2%80%99s_Ethics_Reforms_Gets_Major_Ranking__7795.asp
ousoonerfan15 on November 10, 2008 at 6:44 PM
Kokonut – I have an allergy to teaching ‘intelligent design’ as science.
Doesn’t mean I’d rule Jindal out as President, but my view is that it’s an issue that will chase away the set of voters that the GOP can’t win without.
Personal opinion on the ‘right’ GOP platform:
Stem-cell research – equivalent to organ donation, a sacrifice for the greater good.
Abortion – an evil, but a lesser evil than the exertion of Federal authority necessary to ban it nationally; it’s a state issue.
Intelligent design – no Federal money will be expended supporting it but otherwise it’s up to the states.
JEM on November 10, 2008 at 6:45 PM
Romney is mormon. Mormon’s don’t bet, so we don’t have to worry whether or not he is a betting man.
mmoran0226 on November 10, 2008 at 6:52 PM
She gave McCain a 12 point swing after the convention. If Romney were the pick, there would have been no swing.
V15J on November 10, 2008 at 6:53 PM
i’ve never gotten the abortion is a state’s choice thing. I’ve always viewed abortion as murder so in my mind there is no problem with a federal abortion ban.
MFn G I M P on November 10, 2008 at 7:11 PM
Let’s not over-hype Jindal so early in the process, it will only lead to disappointment. In general, Bobby Jindal has done a credible job but there have been some bumpy patches too that are a concern. He certainly wasn’t a fiscal conservative when he was ready to sign off on the LA state legislatures plan to raise their salaries by what was it? Something like 270%. His administration certainly could have done better in the post Hurricane Gustav/Ike food stamp debacle (personally I don’t see why so many people were eligible in the first place). Finally, and this is one of my main complaints against Obama, Jindal really doesn’t have national experience in security and defense issues.
highhopes on November 10, 2008 at 7:26 PM
The state’s rights Constitutional argument aside, there will never be a federal ban on abortion- too much of an agenda to allow women to kill off life for their personal convenience. I’m in favor of a state-by-state approach so that at least some life is saved rather than holding out for a ban that will never happen. In fact under Obama, my guess is that the Feds are going to begin funding the killing again.
highhopes on November 10, 2008 at 7:30 PM
There is no “taint” to running and losing. The one silver lining in McCain’s decision to not attack on Wright or go nu-ku-lar when the MSM smeared Cindy, Sarah, and their kids is that he ran an “honorable” campaign. The smears on Palin are not going to stick — most have been debunked already — and she has a nice cozy place in the hearts and minds of many conservatives.
For pity’s sake, STOP SPREADING THIS MYTH! WHY do you think of Palin as a “pro-life” candidate? Is it because she’s a mom of a Down syndrome child?
Yah, AP, that’s right. She’ll have time to bone up on energy issues, budget cutting, government reform, and executive management… OH WAIT, SHE ALREADY HAS THOSE THINGS!
Keep painting Palin with the soft, family issues like abortion while ignoring her other qualificatios and it will sure be hard to argue that you are not being a sexist pr1(k.
I like Jindal, but to act like the Republicans can run him as the “health care” president when conservatives do not want universal health care and it is not our big issue is CRAZY. Oh, and emergency preparedness is a major issue for a Presidential platform? What are you drinking?
Y-not on November 10, 2008 at 7:30 PM
I disagree. Romney would have provided the swing when the market tanked and Congress was handing out billions to AIG while the company was spending hundreds of thousands on boondoggle “conferences” for top management.
highhopes on November 10, 2008 at 7:32 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 2 3 Next »