Hot Air Mobile
Home The Vault Gear About
Hot Air -- get your fill


Rush: If you think Jindal reeked last night, I don’t want to hear from you again

posted at 6:10 pm on February 25, 2009 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly

Sounds like Ace and I are now Republican personas non grata. As are an awful lot of commenters in last night’s megathread, I might add.

That’s okay. One of these days Andy Levy and I are going to start a secular, hawkish, (mostly) libertarian third party. You’re all welcome to join.

So, where are we? We as conservatives are in the wilderness, and many of you are hopeless. So we have a guy, Bobby Jindal, 37 years old, first time on the national stage, shows up last night to make a response to The Messiah. All he did was articulate what we believe. All he did was articulate opposition to what Obama is doing, with the obligatory when he’s right, we’ll work with him, just like we worked with Clinton on NAFTA, just like we worked with Clinton on welfare reform after we brought him in. These things happen. It doesn’t mean that we lose our distrust. All Bobby Jindal did was tell us what conservatism is; he used his own life story to do it; he talked about the American people making the country work. He had it all. Now, he may not have done it in the same stylistic way as Obama. I can understand the Democrats trashing the man, just as they trashed Sarah Palin. They are mean-spirited, heartless, horrible winners. But the people on our side are really making a mistake if they go after Bobby Jindal on the basis of style.

Because if you think people on our side, I’m talking to you, those of you who think Jindal was horrible, in fact, I don’t want to hear from you ever again if you think that what Bobby Jindal said was bad or what he said was wrong or not said well, because, folks, style is not going to take our country back. Solid conservatism articulated in a way that’s inspiring and understanding is what’s going to take the country back. Bobby Jindal’s 37 years old. I’ve spoken to him numerous times. He’s brilliant. He’s the real deal. I’m not coming here to defend him, he doesn’t need that. We’re going to have to figure out what we want. Do we want to have somebody in our party who can sound as smart as Obama regardless what he says and convince people to vote for us, or do we believe in a set of principles that defined this country’s founding and will return it to greatness again?

Answer: Both, and it’s amazing that a guy who worships the Great Communicator and whose own net worth has reached nine digits on the strength of his communication skills would pose that as an either/or. Jindal will shake this off but the fact remains that he blew an opportunity to turn himself into a breakout star a la Obama at the 2004 convention. He’s touted as a sort of boy genius, but a boy genius should have been able to figure out a way not to be actively bad, even if it meant being merely boring. He couldn’t, so his image took a hit. What’s the problem with admitting that? If he was doomed to fail because of the setting — and he surely wasn’t doomed to fail as badly as he did — he should have adapted by changing it and doing the speech in front of a small audience (or a big one). He’s supposed to be the solutions guy, right?

Not a big deal either way, but I’m not sure why it’s heresy to take a dim view of this. Special exit quotation for all the Dittoheads: “People who don’t believe in God believe in Obama. Agnostics, atheists, because believe me, a planeload of atheists on a jet on the way to Hawaii and three of the four engines go out, the atheists start praying to who? God. Not the ocean, to save ‘em. Everybody believes in God at some point, but not until they face their mortality. Everybody does. They have some God. Very few people think they’re it. Obama is one. I think when Obama prays, it’s to himself.”


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: 1 2 3 ... 8

Bobby was just on Hannity and he was AWESOME.

And he’s only 37?

Heck, now we have two with more accomplishments than the Magic Marxists …. successful GOVERNORS, not a marxist retard.

ex-Democrat on February 25, 2009 at 6:12 PM

Yes get out of the party please. Take your God hating somewhere else please.

inchdeep on February 25, 2009 at 6:12 PM

I’ll join your party with Levy.

DaveS on February 25, 2009 at 6:12 PM

Yes get out of the party please. Take your God hating somewhere else please.

Sweet.

I’ll join your party with Levy.

Sweet.

Allahpundit on February 25, 2009 at 6:15 PM

Pffft. Nobody was really down on Jindal per say. It was how his speech was presented that sucked. Get off the high horse Rush. Constructive criticism is a good thing.

Guardian on February 25, 2009 at 6:15 PM

Levy is for open borders. No thanks on joining his party.

Mark1971 on February 25, 2009 at 6:15 PM

He’s touted as a sort of boy genius, but a boy genius should have been able to figure out a way not to be actively bad, even if it meant being merely boring.

Thank you.

Laura on February 25, 2009 at 6:16 PM

“People who don’t believe in God believe in Obama. Agnostics, atheists, because believe me, a planeload of atheists on a jet on the way to Hawaii and three of the four engines go out, the atheists start praying to who? God. Not the ocean, to save ‘em. Everybody believes in God at some point, but not until they face their mortality. Everybody does. They have some God. Very few people think they’re it. Obama is one. I think when Obama prays, it’s to himself.”

Probably didn’t sound as it was intended. It’s not that all those who don’t believe in God make a god of Obama; it’s that everyone has a god. I think that’s fairly true. Ask an atheist or an agnostic to affirm something, and they sudden;y start sounding strangely religious, unless they are utter nihilists. I’ve never met an absolute nihilist.

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:16 PM

Saying the guy had a bad night is hardly “going after him”. Bobby needs teleprompter practice. Not a big deal. Rush should calm down about constructive criticism of the rebuttal.

myrenovations on February 25, 2009 at 6:17 PM

Bobby didnt fail at all. The message was GREAT, delivery just wasnt the best.

ousoonerfan15 on February 25, 2009 at 6:17 PM

I think when Obama prays, it’s to himself.

Obama praying: “Oh Dear wonderful, merciful, heavenly me… would I please grant me the strength to tear down the walls of capitalism that have plagued the children of my world, made in my image, for far too long. In the name of the me, and the I, and the holy obama. Amen.”

BPD on February 25, 2009 at 6:17 PM

This is why I stopped listening to that windbag a long time ago…

Wyznowski on February 25, 2009 at 6:18 PM

Rush is as blind as the rest of the party now. The GOP needs some fresh blood stat. Rush does nothing but read Drudge headlines every day and steal material from Savage (specifically term “trickle up poverty” used by Rush the very next day Savage coined it).

The guy is lame now, and I have listened to him since 89 and even stalked him at an airport to get a photo and autograph on one of my Conservate Chronicles (google it new kids). Now he is so caught up in the lame conservative celebrity scene that I can’t respect much of what he does.

Rush had the opportunity to be OUR Soros and actually accomplish some change in direction of this country, instead he barely works to simply make the payments on his Gulfstream. Country is not first with this guy anymore.

ClassicCon on February 25, 2009 at 6:18 PM

Rush wasn’t defending Jindal’s delivery, but rather the substance of his speech (the former of which was bad, the latter of which was good). He even alludes to that if you read the whole thing:

Somebody told Bobby Jindal to act like he was talking to first graders last night. I don’t know who advised him to do it. That can get fixed. But don’t throw this guy overboard, and our side is doing this, and it is a huge mistake. If we’re going to start throwing genuine conservatives overboard for some of these specious reasons, we deserve to get our butts beat every election.

thirteen28 on February 25, 2009 at 6:18 PM

Rush is wrong on this one. The medium is the message. He knows that better than anyone.

keep the change on February 25, 2009 at 6:18 PM

Ace has the right of it. Americans don’t elect nerdly looking guys. Sad but true.

Of course, a lot of people never really leave the high school mentality behind.

TheUnrepentantGeek on February 25, 2009 at 6:18 PM

Rush was right. To choose style over substance reveals ignorance.

Nelsa on February 25, 2009 at 6:18 PM

Rush is oversimplifying. The criticisms of Jindal’s speech last night were not limited to merely style. having read, as well as watched it, I was dissapointed by the content, which failed to make a clear case for opposition to the stimulus based on traditional Republican values such as fiscal responsibility and limited government. On the other hand, I was very pleased with his interview with Viera. He didn’t engage in any sweeping oratory like The One, but he made strong points that ordinary people can understand and get behind.

Dead Hand Control on February 25, 2009 at 6:19 PM

Yes get out of the party please. Take your God hating somewhere else please.

inchdeep on February 25, 2009 at 6:12 PM

Oy vey. Yes, let’s start driving people out of the party because of their (non)religious beliefs. We’ve got members to spare.

Jindal will shake this off but the fact remains that he blew an opportunity to turn himself into a breakout star a la Obama at the 2004 convention.

True, but I’d point you to the first Democrat elected president twice since FDR, Clinton, who gave what was described as the most boring speech in convention history in 1988. A few years later he was president.

amerpundit on February 25, 2009 at 6:19 PM

Rush is just saying to quit eating our own…I agree…the MSM will do a fine job trashing them without our help.

winston on February 25, 2009 at 6:19 PM

Levy is for open borders. No thanks on joining his party.

Mark1971 on February 25, 2009 at 6:15 PM

Whats Jindals view of border control ?

the_nile on February 25, 2009 at 6:19 PM

You’re all welcome to join.

Will there be beer? My vote is not for sale, but I am a fan of the barter system.

trubble on February 25, 2009 at 6:19 PM

You’re all welcome to join.

Only if I can practice religon or spirituality in caves!

upinak on February 25, 2009 at 6:19 PM

Anyway, there’s room in “conservatism” for atheists, agnostics, Buddhists, Musilms, Jews, whatever. I think that’s fairly self-evident. I think there’s more distaste in the Republican party for the overtly religious than for the non-religious. I hear more about purging religious “kooks”, or at least distancing the party from its religious elements, than I do about “converting” the non-religious.

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:20 PM

Rush, Bobby and Hussein are being interviewed for a job/position. The interviewer asks to see their birth certificates…Rush and Bobby step forward and present theirs. Hussein looks down at his shoes.

JoeySlippers on February 25, 2009 at 6:20 PM

That’s okay. One of these days Andy Levy and I are going to start a secular, hawkish, (mostly) libertarian third party.

You can”t do it soon enough to suit me if that will stop you from posting on HA.

apoole on February 25, 2009 at 6:20 PM

Rush was right. To choose style over substance reveals ignorance.

Nelsa on February 25, 2009 at 6:18 PM

And pretending that 40% of the voting poplation doesn’t do just that is beyond naive. If you don’t account for it in some way you get…Dole…McCain…etc…

ClassicCon on February 25, 2009 at 6:21 PM

“One of these days Andy Levy and I are going to start a secular, hawkish, (mostly) libertarian third party.”

Third? Don’t know that you’d finish that high.

(I know. “Third party” is a figure of speech.)

I’m afraid we’re pretty much stuck with the same two, for the foreseeable future. Whenever an alternative seems to arise, whether on the right, or center, or left, one or the other major party will torpedo it. Look what the Republicans, via Pat Buchanan, did to the Reform Party after ‘92 and ‘96, and how the Democrats sent Cynthia McKinney in to destroy the Green Party, just because they blamed the Greens for Gore’s loss. (Not that I shed many tears for either of those parties.)

notropis on February 25, 2009 at 6:21 PM

Ace has the right of it. Americans don’t elect nerdly looking guys.

TheUnrepentantGeek on February 25, 2009 at 6:18 PM

We just did.

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:21 PM

I think Jindal is an extraordinary man with tremendous potential. And I love Rush. But Jindal was not good last night.

The speech itself was fine. In fact, I’d wager that many nonpartisan observers who only read his and Obama’s speech would think that Jindal gave the better one.

However, Jindal even at his best tends to answer with an essay when a “yes” or “no” would do. His answers, like his sentences are too long, and he speaks too quickly. It can be an effort to follow him. And last night, his delivery was particularly bad.

If I could, I’d hire a speech or acting coach for Bobby. It would not matter if he was, say, a doctor. As a doctor he could sound like Daffy Duck and it wouldn’t matter. But communications skills are vital for a politician.

DarkKnight3565 on February 25, 2009 at 6:21 PM

TheUnrepentantGeek on February 25, 2009 at 6:18 PM

Ace has the right of it. Americans don’t elect nerdly looking guys. Sad but true.

Actually, Americans will elect whoever is perceived to best correct the perceived shortcomings of the previous president. With Bush->Obama it was “eloquence”. With Carter->Reagan, it was optimism. For Obama->Jindal, it could well be geeky specificity on policy matters, by the time this is all over with. The American people aren’t going to be looking for a rhetorical illusionist next time around… they’ve been there and got the t-shirt.

DaveS on February 25, 2009 at 6:22 PM

I am a huge Rush fan, but Rush is not always right (Just 97.8% of the time, as he himself will often confess on his show).

Although I think Jindal stinked last night, I also think he as a bright future in the GOP. He is not presidential material yet, but perhaps in 2020.

And good luck with a secular, hawkish, liberatarian third party. I predict you might break 0.4% in a national election; just like the Libertarian Party of today usually does.

In other words, irrelevant.

Norwegian on February 25, 2009 at 6:22 PM

Whats Jindals view of border control ?

the_nile on February 25, 2009 at 6:19 PM

Voted for the fence, voted for preventing the tipping off of Mexicans about the Minutemen Project, voted for government services in English only, and voted for English as the official language of the United States. Here.

amerpundit on February 25, 2009 at 6:22 PM

Whats Jindals view of border control ?

the_nile on February 25, 2009 at 6:19 PM

http://www.ontheissues.org/Governor/Bobby_Jindal_Immigration.htm

According to this, pretty damn good.

Mark1971 on February 25, 2009 at 6:22 PM

Oh great, another let’s beat each other up because what I believe is better or more correct than what you believe thread. You better look around folks and decide who is really going to back you up. I bet it would be impossibleto give a speech that would unify. Just stupid. I can’t even express my disappointment.

Cindy Munford on February 25, 2009 at 6:22 PM

Jindal did blow it, that shouldn’t even be up for debate. So let’s fix it and move on. He said the wrong thing (a big sloppy kiss to Obama, took entirely too long to make the point that Americans can achieve whatever we decide to achieve) and DIDN’T make the point that the Democrats are running the country into the ground for future generations. And he said it in a patronizing, obnoxious way, like we’re a pack of morons he’s patiently trying to educate. That storytime at the library demeanor has GOT to go. In years of Jindal-watching I’ve never seen that before and I hope I never do again. So, sure, it’s all fixable, but for pity’s sake acknowledge the problems so they can be fixed!

Laura on February 25, 2009 at 6:22 PM

Jindal:
Great in interviews, not so good at speechmaking.
Palin:
Great in speechmaking, not so good in interviews.

jgapinoy on February 25, 2009 at 6:23 PM

You’re all welcome to join.

Yeah, I’d join, provided the GOP turns away from capitalism.

Achilles on February 25, 2009 at 6:23 PM

Mark1971 – his immigration stance is a BIG part of why we wanted him in office, especially after Katrina when NOLA had a huge influx of illegals.

Laura on February 25, 2009 at 6:23 PM

Awww, Allah feels slighted by MahaRushdie?

Rush is basically right, Allah. Once you start seeing your life flash before your eyes as the engines of an airplane start to go out one by one, you’ll be praying…to somebody or something. What are the odds you’ll be calm in a plane load of passengers screaming and praying thinking, “Ah, well, I’m not going to remember any of this. It’ll be *poof*, that’s the end of it.” Or will you not pray for a little boy related to you dying on a hospital bed hoping that little prayer will work?

Learn to stop dissing on Palin and Bobby using your subtle “snarkiness” in HA because of their religious orientation. Nice little jab at subtle religious discrimination? You and Charles must be brothers of a past life. Oh, wait! You don’t believe in that either.

Oh well…

Kokonut on February 25, 2009 at 6:23 PM

Republican evangelicals though can’t win. They’re taken for granted as pawns when the Republicans win national elections; they’re singled out as scapegoats when Republicans lose.

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:24 PM

You don’t get nerdier looking than Obama. How did he, uh, get elected?

“People who don’t believe in God believe in Obama.”
Heh. Cute.

tuffy on February 25, 2009 at 6:24 PM

Bobby was just on Hannity and he was AWESOME.

And he’s only 37?

Heck, now we have two with more accomplishments than the Magic Marxists …. successful GOVERNORS, not a marxist retard.

ex-Democrat on February 25, 2009 at 6:12 PM

I posted a comment on the other thread that I heard him on it also and thought he was just awesome.

What are the chances of getting a link to that interview for Hot Air guys?

hawkdriver on February 25, 2009 at 6:24 PM

What he said was great, he was actually great…the setting was terrible, they need to have the right “setting”, it just didn’t show off what and who he was.
Sorry Rush, but it has been proven, substance won’t win…you need that little “it” factor. That’s why Mitt lost, he has substance, just no connection…Palin has it, McCain doesn’t.

right2bright on February 25, 2009 at 6:24 PM

Hey, guess who made a Bobby Jindal/Slumdog joke?

If you guessed Helen Thomas, try again. Looks like Coulter will be on Rush’s crap list.

SnarkVader on February 25, 2009 at 6:24 PM

Bobby Jindal is a governor at the relatively young age of 37 because he has unshakable principles and the will to take risks.

Conservatism needs risk-takers. It is possible that you will succeed. It is okay to fail. But it is unacceptable to sit on your butt and simply complain.

Restore Our Liberty

pugwriter on February 25, 2009 at 6:25 PM

Achilles on February 25, 2009 at 6:23 PM

I should actually have said “In the situation that the GOP turns away from capitalism and embraces interventionist polices for their economics.” “Provided the GOP turns away from capitalism” sounds weird.

Achilles on February 25, 2009 at 6:25 PM

Answer: Both

Follow question: How?

Hold auditions?

spmat on February 25, 2009 at 6:25 PM

Laura on February 25, 2009 at 6:23 PM

Really? I mean, I heard about the illegal alien influx, but I didn’t know it was a big campaign issue.

amerpundit on February 25, 2009 at 6:25 PM

I think Rush’s point, which you missed because you decided to make it about you, is that the substance of what he said should trump the style in which he said it. Obama sounded great but said outrageous anti-capitalist things and what Jindal spoke of was solid conservative values that has been missing from this party for about a decade. People are soon going to be craving authenticity and tire of slick showmanship and that was his point. No one critiqued the substance of what Jindal said but the way he said it, which demonstrates the shallow stupidity of our commentators and the public. This isn’t about you Allah, its about the dumbing down of our commentators and the public. If we are really at the point where it doesn’t matter what you say but how you say it, why bother with even fighting Obama in 2012 if the new criteria is aesthetics and not substance?

nswider on February 25, 2009 at 6:25 PM

Yes get out of the party please. Take your God hating somewhere else please.

inchdeep on February 25, 2009 at 6:12 PM

You can”t do it soon enough to suit me if that will stop you from posting on HA.

apoole on February 25, 2009 at 6:20 PM

Guests trying to oust the host. I call it: creeping sharia.

laelaps on February 25, 2009 at 6:26 PM

Yeah, get back to me when the Libertarians actually win something more than one Congressional seat.

StevefromMKE on February 25, 2009 at 6:26 PM

Interesting people still call Jindal a “boy genius.” Folks I know in Louisiana said “He’s The Man” after Gustav. But I guess lives are on the line when rebutting Barry.

Christien on February 25, 2009 at 6:26 PM

Allahpundit on February 25, 2009 at 6:15 PM

Allah, I think you agree with me that it’s stupid to think there has to be separate parties according to theological beliefs.
Though we disagree on theology, I’m happy to be on your side in political issues.

jgapinoy on February 25, 2009 at 6:26 PM

I’m starting to get weary of Democracy.

Aristotle on February 25, 2009 at 6:26 PM

Laura,

Jindal may have “blown it” though not that bad really. Completely salvageable here. At least he wasn’t in a gotcha moment with Charlie and Couric. That’ll never happen. He’s too smart for that and we have 3 years to go til things start a rockin’ and rollin’…if there is a United States by then.

Kokonut on February 25, 2009 at 6:27 PM

American Power tracked-back with, “Obama Echoes Reagan in ‘81: Came the Revolution?”:

http://americanpowerblog.blogspot.com/2009/02/obama-echoes-reagan-in-81-came.html

Donald Douglas on February 25, 2009 at 6:27 PM

And good luck with a secular, hawkish, liberatarian third party. I predict you might break 0.4% in a national election; just like the Libertarian Party of today usually does.

In other words, irrelevant.

Norwegian on February 25, 2009 at 6:22 PM

LOL…absolutely. I would invite those Republicans who think religious people are an albatross around the party’s neck to go out and start their own party. That would be pathetic.

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:27 PM

I think when Obama prays, it’s to himself.

“We are the ones we’ve been waiting for.”

Disturb the Universe on February 25, 2009 at 6:27 PM

Kokonut on February 25, 2009 at 6:23 PM

And the sign said Long haired freaky people, gays, atheists, people not impressed with Palin, people who disagree with Rush, people who are moderate on some issues, and whites who voted for obama need not apply.

GOP population 10 million and dropping. Salute!

Bradky on February 25, 2009 at 6:28 PM

Yes get out of the party please. Take your God hating somewhere else please.

inchdeep on February 25, 2009 at 6:12 PM

You understand what an atheist is, right?

I’m a Christian who is absolutely convinced that God exists – beyond a shadow of a doubt, I will add – and I have to say “Get out!” isn’t the best attempt one could make at ministry, evangelism, or advancing the future of the Republican Party.

But maybe that’s just me.

capitalist piglet on February 25, 2009 at 6:29 PM

Hackwatch: Conservatives/GOP-ers who try to spin Jindal’s performance as anything better than it was..are hacks. Ugh, I have to go to bed.

- Amanda Carpenter

What a liberal elitist.

e-pirate on February 25, 2009 at 6:29 PM

Jindal was too nice to Obama. He needs to rip the socialist to threads. Bobby is a great conservative and no one denies it. His sperch was good but I’m not going to faint. Palin when she hit the scene was superb. The MSM went out of their way to destroy her as well as the McLame campaign.

jencab on February 25, 2009 at 6:29 PM

Actually, Americans will elect whoever is perceived to best correct the perceived shortcomings of the previous president. With Bush->Obama it was “eloquence”. With Carter->Reagan, it was optimism. For Obama->Jindal, it could well be geeky specificity on policy matters, by the time this is all over with. The American people aren’t going to be looking for a rhetorical illusionist next time around… they’ve been there and got the t-shirt.

DaveS on February 25, 2009 at 6:22 PM

Interesting point, but I still contend that a certain minimum amount of charisma is necessary.

And Obama doesn’t look geeky. It’s pleasant to tell yourself that, but that’s clearly not the general opinion.

TheUnrepentantGeek on February 25, 2009 at 6:30 PM

Hopefully, Jindal just goes away and stops pretending he’s another real republican.

Notorious GOP on February 25, 2009 at 6:30 PM

If we viewed a bunch of liberal pukes debating the veracity of a certain opinion of Sam Seder or Randi Rhodes or that idiot Ed Schultz….we would mock them. I love Rush but he’s a frigging entertainer. His screed about Jindal was predictable because it’s part of his act/narrative. I thought Jindal was OK, not awful but I don’t need Rush to validate my opinion.

AYNBLAND on February 25, 2009 at 6:30 PM

I listened to Jindal on Hannity too. He was great!
My only complaint with Jindal was that he brought up the past performance of Republicans and why they lost elections.
We have to get over that. It was two years ago. McCain kept doing that as well.
That was the past. It’s a new Republican party! But either way,, it’s salesmanship/public relations 101! You don’t volunteer or keep reminding your customers about bad past performance! The media would love to get Republicans to keep talking about why they were losers!
Fine,, but Republicans have got to stop reminding the public that Republicans “lost the people’s trust, let people down and were thrown out of office!”
What do they expect the public to think?? “Oh, hey I forgot you guys were a bunch of losers! Thanks for reminding me!”

JellyToast on February 25, 2009 at 6:30 PM

Pffft. Nobody was really down on Jindal per say. It was how his speech was presented that sucked. Get off the high horse Rush. Constructive criticism is a good thing.

Guardian on February 25, 2009 at 6:15 PM

Really? I read almost all 20+ pages of posts last night, and many of them were not constructive. I understand disappointment in communication skills. But come on, if you’re one of the ones saying, “We’re screwed” because Jindal looked stiff, than please stop posting because that is not constructive at all.

mauipundit on February 25, 2009 at 6:30 PM

Rush is wrong on this one. The medium is the message. He knows that better than anyone.

keep the change on February 25, 2009 at 6:18 PM

So true, let’s not get carried away with Jindal.

Firebird on February 25, 2009 at 6:31 PM

GOP population 10 million and dropping. Salute!

Bradky on February 25, 2009 at 6:28 PM

At least most of those know what they stand for. At some point there has to be a point of demarcation; I don’t buy “if you can’t beat them, join them”. I don’t friggin’ care if it’s 1 million and dropping. I’m still not a liberal.

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:31 PM

I think Rush went a little overboard, but I get where he’s coming from. Jindal is the real deal. But a whole bunch of folks on here last night were bitching about how awful he was(as if it’s even possible to knock a SOTU rebuttal out of the park) or how the topics of exorcisms or intelligent design will derail any shot he has at the GOP nomination.

What do you people want? The party is finally returning to its conservative roots and embracing what got them elected in 1994 in the first place, and most of the posts are filled with complaints about Specter, Collins, and Snowe. You think they betrayed us? Fine. Then we’ll deal with them when they’re up for re-election. Same with every other RINO. But can we at least rally behind the ones who are walking the walk and not crucify them for every little misstep or lackluster speech or interview they give?

Doughboy on February 25, 2009 at 6:31 PM

style is not going to take our country back. Solid conservatism articulated in a way that’s inspiring and understanding is what’s going to take the country back.

Sometimes you forget what you said a second ago. It’s ok.

radiofreevillage on February 25, 2009 at 6:31 PM

Like I said last night on Jindal’s performance–
Substance: A+
Delivery: C-

jgapinoy on February 25, 2009 at 6:31 PM

Got to agree. Ace, AP–would have been better if you’d kept your negs. to yourselves. AP now gleefully spouting that Republicans criticizing Jindal…and enjoying every minute of it. Is this what you intended?

jeanie on February 25, 2009 at 6:32 PM

Bradky on February 25, 2009 at 6:28 PM

Something’s happening here. What it is ain’t exactly clear. There’s a man with a gun over there, telling me I got to beware. It’s time we stop, hey, what’s that sound. Everybody look what’s going round.

Conservatives unite! We have a country to preserve.

kingsjester on February 25, 2009 at 6:32 PM

We’re one month into Obama’s presidency. Jindal will have plenty of time to make his case. So will Sarah Palin, T-Paw and all the others who want to take on The One.

Mr. D on February 25, 2009 at 6:32 PM

That’s okay. One of these days Andy Levy and I are going to start a secular, hawkish, (mostly) libertarian third party. You’re all welcome to join.

We might finally be at a point when a strong third party could make sense. The republican coalition, by it’s current makeup, is producing mostly democrat-lite candidates which will find it increasingly difficult to unseat the real democrats. On the other hand, the Democrats have become so much a party of the extreme left that it might be possible for alternate parties to start pealing away at their coalition.
Conservatives might be more effective focusing on individual politicians of either party who reflect their values and making them inexorably accountable for defending conservative interests.

neuquenguy on February 25, 2009 at 6:33 PM

Hackwatch: Conservatives/GOP-ers who try to spin Jindal’s performance as anything better than it was..are hacks. Ugh, I have to go to bed.

– Amanda Carpenter

What a liberal elitist.

e-pirate on February 25, 2009 at 6:29 PM

LOL…isn’t that what the MSM has done for Obama since he first appeared from the sky in glory?

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:33 PM

Levy is for open borders. No thanks on joining his party.

Mark1971 on February 25, 2009 at 6:15 PM

Ditto.

AZCoyote on February 25, 2009 at 6:33 PM

I am a huge Rush fan, but Rush is not always right (Just 97.8% of the time, as he himself will often confess on his show).

Norwegian on February 25, 2009 at 6:22 PM

As of the latest audit he’s up to 99%. Hey, Allahpundit, what’s your accuracy rating?

Just wonderin’

RadioFreeUSA on February 25, 2009 at 6:33 PM

TheUnrepentantGeek on February 25, 2009 at 6:30 PM

Interesting point, but I still contend that a certain minimum amount of charisma is necessary. … And Obama doesn’t look geeky. It’s pleasant to tell yourself that, but that’s clearly not the general opinion.

First of all, Jindal clearly has at least the minimum requisite charisma. He got elected governor in Louisiana.

Secondly, I wasn’t saying Obama looks geeky… I’m saying that after Obama, the American people may be looking for a policy wonk rather than hyper-eloquence and a photogenic friendliness to magazine covers.

DaveS on February 25, 2009 at 6:33 PM

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:31 PM

Define conservative. Heck define liberal while you are at it.
And simply saying “Me” doesn’t count.

Bradky on February 25, 2009 at 6:33 PM

C’mon AP, join the club, You get a free toaster :P.

FontanaConservative on February 25, 2009 at 6:33 PM

Sounds like Ace and I are now Republican personas non grata. As are an awful lot of commenters in last night’s megathread, I might add.

I listened to his show, and this needs context.

His gripe today was the idea of purging people based on presentation. That’s not to say, he didn’t say what he said; what it is to say is that he added context to it to walk it back to what he really meant.

Spirit of 1776 on February 25, 2009 at 6:34 PM

style is not going to take our country back. Solid conservatism articulated in a way that’s inspiring and understanding is what’s going to take the country back.”

Sometimes you forget what you said a second ago. It’s ok.

radiofreevillage on February 25, 2009 at 6:31 PM

And checkmate. Nicely done.

TheUnrepentantGeek on February 25, 2009 at 6:34 PM

Wait, so according to most here the same GOP that orchestrated Dole, Bush, the 2006 disaster, and McCain are now on the ball with Jindal. I don’t care how great the guy is, the GOP WILL F’ IT UP. Bank on it. Get the nerds behind the scenes out of the sting pulling positions and start from scratch.

ClassicCon on February 25, 2009 at 6:34 PM

That’s okay. One of these days Andy Levy and I are going to start a secular, hawkish, (mostly) libertarian third party. You’re all welcome to join.

No thanks. A political party started by Andy Levy will inevitably be overly focused on cat-related issues. Most of his party platforms will be nothing more regular party platforms except with cat puns… like “Campaign Felines Reform” or “Illegal I-mew-gration.”

SteakRules on February 25, 2009 at 6:35 PM

Ahahaha. Take that, Allah. Ace has a pass because of how rarely he mentions Palin.

bwahaha.

jimmy the notable on February 25, 2009 at 6:35 PM

nswider on February 25, 2009 at 6:25 PM

+1

mauipundit on February 25, 2009 at 6:35 PM

No one critiqued the substance of what Jindal said but the way he said it, which demonstrates the shallow stupidity of our commentators and the public.

Well, David Brooks DID critique the substance, but then again, we’re not talking about a critique from the right.

thirteen28 on February 25, 2009 at 6:35 PM

GOP population 10 million and dropping. Salute!

Bradky on February 25, 2009 at 6:28 PM

I wonder what Bradky’s message to Dietrich Bonhoeffer and others in the Confessing Church would’ve been. “Get with the program, dudes! You’re swimming against the tide!”

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:36 PM

We just did.

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:21 PM

Hm, I disagree. Obama’s fitness (basketball, gym, etc) was accentuated in the election. He ran as a sort of good-looking charismatic athlete. Not a geek.

Spirit of 1776 on February 25, 2009 at 6:36 PM

His gripe today was the idea of purging people based on presentation.

Yeah, but it’s a straw man. That was my point at the end of the post. No one’s talking about “purging” Jindal, let alone for one bad speech. It’s a simple matter of expectations having been high and then being dashed. He’ll need to do better next time.

Allahpundit on February 25, 2009 at 6:36 PM

Bobby could have used Odopey’s excuse and said “I was tired from spending a week in Hawaii sleepin, surfin and suning”

The Gov. will be fine it’s People that nit pick a persons Charisma that need the help. petty, very petty.
Reminds me of all the dipsticks on the left that whined about everything Palin.

ajmontana on February 25, 2009 at 6:37 PM

JHC
When did the world become exactly like an idol show and or monday night football? I want someone with real answers. There is nothing wrong with Rush if you listen to him and can comprehend what he is saying.

lexa on February 25, 2009 at 6:37 PM

steal material from Savage (specifically term “trickle up poverty” used by Rush the very next day Savage coined it).

So I wasn’t the only one who noticed that. Actually all of em steal material from Savage. It’s pathetic… really.

And none of them including this blog mention Savage or anything about him. I am from the Soviet Union originally and I came to this country to escape the evils of communism, and the treatment Savage is getting is similar to the treatment dissidents received in the former USSR. They are IGNORED. It is as though they do not exist.

Borislav on February 25, 2009 at 6:37 PM

Define conservative. Heck define liberal while you are at it.
And simply saying “Me” doesn’t count.

Bradky on February 25, 2009 at 6:33 PM

Disingenuous. We both know them when we see them.

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:37 PM

ajmontana on February 25, 2009 at 6:37 PM

define dipstick….

upinak on February 25, 2009 at 6:38 PM

Ahahaha. Take that, Allah. Ace has a pass because of how rarely he mentions Palin.

bwahaha.

jimmy the notable on February 25, 2009 at 6:35 PM

He also gets a pass because the ratio of laughs/groans for him is MUCH higher than yours, Allahpundit. You just reek of loathing for pretty much anything. I have a hard time believing there’s a happy moment in your life. At least Ace makes me laugh once in a while.

jimmy the notable on February 25, 2009 at 6:38 PM

We just did.

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:21 PM

Hm, I disagree. Obama’s fitness (basketball, gym, etc) was accentuated in the election. He ran as a sort of good-looking charismatic athlete. Not a geek.

Spirit of 1776 on February 25, 2009 at 6:36 PM

Gahhh. He’s a pencil-neck, I don’t care how many three-pointers he can sink.

ddrintn on February 25, 2009 at 6:38 PM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 ... 8


You must be logged in to post a comment.