Jindal, McDonnell attack Obama, Supreme Court decision on ObamaCare

posted at 10:00 am on June 29, 2012 by Ed Morrissey

The RNC just concluded a conference call for the national media with two high-profile surrogates for the Mitt Romney campaign — Governors Bobby Jindal of Louisiana and Bob McDonnell of Virginia.  Both men have been prominently mentioned as potential running-mate choices for Romney, and both pledged today to fight the implementation of ObamaCare in their states.  Jindal especially insisted that his state would never implement the exchanges or the Medicaid expansion, while McDonnell hedged on the latter, saying that Virginia would have to “evaluate” the program.  “Our hope,” McDonnell explained, “is that we will have a new President and Congress in 125 days.”

McDonnell told reporters that Obama has had “a rough 24 hours in Virginia.” Lost in the shuffle yesterday was a decision to block off-shore drilling in Virginia, which McDonnell reminded participants would cost the state jobs.  On top of that, McDonnell said, ObamaCare is already “hurting the ability of small businesses to hire people.”  The law would impose “$2.2 billion in unfunded [federal mandates] on Virginia” alone, McDonnell said, and it also “represents one of the largest tax increases on the middle class that we’ve ever seen.”  McDonnell said that he’s going to have to figure out where to find that $2.2 billion if ObamaCare isn’t repealed, and “to replace ObamaCare, you’ve got to replace Obama.”

Jindal expects that the Supreme Court decision won’t help Obama politically.  “I expect that opposition to this bad law will escalate,” Jindal said, and blasted the court for keeping it in place.  “The court should have protected our constitutional freedoms,” Jindal told reporters on the call, “but it was the President who forced this law on us.” The decision leaves the door wide open to more federal assertions of power over individual choice.  “What’s next?” Jindal asked.  “Taxes on people who refuse to eat tofu or drive a Chevy Volt?”

The celebratory attitude of the Obama administration on this bill and on other entitlement programs shows how much out of step Obama has become from mainstream American experience, Jindal also claimed. “Success used to be measured by how many people we could get off of the government dole,” Jindal said.  “There used to be a stigma associated with government assistance.  Now we celebrate it.”  The entitlement expansion under ObamaCare and other federal programs is “unsustainable,” Jindal said.  “We’re going to see more people riding in the cart than pulling it.”

Both men gave a good accounting for themselves as surrogates, and potentially as running-mate choices.  Jindal seemed more at ease in the conversation, and expressed the most passion, getting off the best attack lines.  He neatly sidestepped a question about whether Romney could make the tax argument when his own law in Massachusetts had a penalty component as well, but don’t be surprised to see that issue keep coming up.

Breaking on Hot Air

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

“Our hope,” McDonnell explained, “is that we will have a new President and Congress in 125 days.”

Well, they won’t be sworn in until January, but we get your point.

:)

itsnotaboutme on June 29, 2012 at 10:03 AM

“I expect that opposition to this bad law will escalate,” Jindal said

I sure hope so. Even my wife’s FB friends, affectionately known as the “hens”, reacted to yesterdays ruling. These are mostly apolitical women, but even they know what it means.

Lost in Jersey on June 29, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Whoever rips Obamatax hardest gets to be VP!

forest on June 29, 2012 at 10:07 AM

McDonnell told reporters that Obama has had “a rough 24 hours in Virginia.” Lost in the shuffle yesterday was a decision to block off-shore drilling in Virginia, which McDonnell reminded participants would cost the state jobs.

The President was only making things fair, since he blocked Jindal’s Louisiana from drilling, too.

itsnotaboutme on June 29, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Don’t worry guys, Mitt Romney has our backs.

Notorious GOP on June 29, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Their anger is misguided. CJ Roberts just had to side the other way and it would be over.

Obama/Roberts ’12

inthemiddle on June 29, 2012 at 10:08 AM

I’d be proud to have either one of them as a VP. I live in VA so I know a lot more about McDonnell, and while I don’t agree with everything he’s done, he’s been a good governor. He’s brought a lot of jobs to the state and had to make a lot of tough choices. VA has been better off with him as a leader.

scalleywag on June 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM

No one in politics knows more about healthcare than Jindal. I expect his stock to rise.

GOPRanknFile on June 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Please stop making Jindal happen. For the love of Pete haven’t we been through enough? Just let it go man.

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 10:10 AM

Whoever rips Obamatax hardest gets to be VP!

forest on June 29, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Sounds good to me. The VP needs to be an attack dog, not some milquetoast “safe” pick who hovers in the background at rallies and does nothing but sings Romney’s praises during interviews.

That’s why Paul Ryan and Bobby Jindal are my two top choices. Both are brilliant, well-versed in the details, and can go after Obama and his agenda without sounding hyperpartisan or mean-spirited.

Doughboy on June 29, 2012 at 10:11 AM

No one in politics knows more about healthcare than Jindal. I expect his stock to rise.

GOPRanknFile on June 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Quoted for truth.

I’m actually surprised that we haven’t seen him on the trail as much as we have Ryan and Portman. Makes me wonder if Romney was waiting for this shoe to drop before letting him loose.

Gingotts on June 29, 2012 at 10:11 AM

“Our hope,” McDonnell explained, “is that we will have a new President and Congress in 125 days.”

It’s actually 129 days…got my Obama countdown clock {a birthday gift from my 11-year-old} right here next to my computer.

JA on June 29, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Their anger is misguided. CJ Roberts just had to side the other way and it would be over.

Obama/Roberts ’12

inthemiddle on June 29, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Sure, because with enough time, money and effort, we can get Roberts to change his mind. /

lefties would love for us to waste time harping on roberts and not bother with the only branches we can actually hold accountable.

Lost in Jersey on June 29, 2012 at 10:12 AM

“The court should have protected our constitutional freedoms,” Jindal told reporters on the call, “but it was the President who forced this law on us.” The decision leaves the door wide open to more federal assertions of power over individual choice. “What’s next?” Jindal asked. “Taxes on people who refuse to eat tofu or drive a Chevy Volt?”

Jindal nailed it!

That’s exactly why Roberts stabbing us in the back was such a disaster. Even if Obamacare is fully repealed, the precedent is still set for the gov’t to tax us for any reason as Jindal pointed out.

ALso, Glenn Beck pointed out this morning how Ann Coulter nailed it on Roberts. She wrotein 2005 how these appointments to the Court about guys we know little about often ends very badly!

LevinFan on June 29, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Their anger is misguided.
Obama/Roberts ’12

inthemiddle on June 29, 2012 at 10:08 AM

Have you actually read what Roberts wrote, Cupcake? Your side lost yesterday.

Del Dolemonte on June 29, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Ann Barnhardt has called this site a “faux conservative” web site. I always wanted to be a faux. barnhardt.biz

retiredeagle on June 29, 2012 at 10:15 AM

retiredeagle on June 29, 2012 at 10:15 AM

Barnhardt’s a birther.
Eff her.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 29, 2012 at 10:16 AM

No one in politics knows more about healthcare than Jindal. I expect his stock to rise.

GOPRanknFile on June 29, 2012 at 10:09 AM

Agreed. This is one of the first things I said yesterday. I hope Romney is listening.

txmomof6 on June 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM

The fact that Romney trotted out Jindal and McDonnell first on such an important issue leads me to believe it’s down to these two in the veepstakes.

DRayRaven on June 29, 2012 at 10:18 AM

Please stop making Jindal happen. For the love of Pete haven’t we been through enough? Just let it go man.

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 10:10 AM

What’s your beef with Bobby Jindal? He’s probably one of the best Governors in the country!

Steve Z on June 29, 2012 at 10:19 AM

ALso, Glenn Beck pointed out this morning how Ann Coulter nailed it on Roberts. She wrote in 2005 how these appointments to the Court about guys we know little about often ends very badly!

LevinFan on June 29, 2012 at 10:13 AM

Lawrence Auster at View from the Right nailed it on several occasions in 2005. His website has all the posts about Roberts being another Souter. Paul Ryan said this morning on Bill Bennett’s show that Roberts’ thinking was illogical. Bennett was disturbed too. All conservatives should be disturbed by this instead of trying to twist it into some kind of victory. We lost and we lost big.

TxAnn56 on June 29, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Barnhardt’s a birther.
Eff her.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 29, 2012 at 10:16 AM

Indeed. Barnhardt isn’t the sharpest tool in the shed.

GOPRanknFile on June 29, 2012 at 10:19 AM

The idea that Romney is incapable of making the argument due to Romneycare is a moot point.

Romney will repeal Obamacare. Obama will implement Obamacare. Period.

kevinkristy on June 29, 2012 at 10:21 AM

A comment a tad off range, but here it is:

This term, “surrogates,” is creepy. It suggests a wet nurse companion or someone along to act on someone else’s behalf because they’re more in need of helps than others, like an attendant or seeing eye dog or such.

Gotta’ find a more appropriate word to describe associates and especially potential V.P. individuals. Because calling people such as Jindal and McConnell and all the rest “surrogates” suggests something resembling squishy jello.

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 10:22 AM

Del Dolemonte on June 29, 2012 at 10:13 AM

You make the assumption that he can read..

wargamer6 on June 29, 2012 at 10:22 AM

Look, we’ve been screwed, so it’s time to circle the wagons and regroup.

First, this monstrosity has to be repealed or nullified. I’m not a huge Romney fan, but since we KNOW that O won’t repeal his baby, Romney is the only other choice for President. Voting third party will do nothing but ensure another 4 years of Dear Leader in the White House…ultimate disaster.

Next, we need to get that majority in the Senate and keep the majority in the House. This is where we can be most effective on the local level.

This has to be repealed. Then I think that we need to push for a new amendment to limit the taxing authority of the government over entities and people.

If Romney and the RNC are worth anything, then they need to hammer home to the public that their taxes just got raised by the liar who said that there would be no taxes raised on families making 250k or less. Since the MSM is in the pockets of the Dems, then I hope that they buy a TON of advertising, in PRIME time in all 50 states. Hopefully they will do this and make the commercials simple enough for the mouth breathers who voted BO into office to understand.

That said, I am volunteering for Mitt…although I’m in a republican enclave in the Houston area…I’m willing to go to the purple areas of this town to work. I’m not going down without a fight.

Gettycorn on June 29, 2012 at 10:22 AM

Ed says it’s bad. Cozmo says it’s good. J.E. says it’s bad. Dol Delmonte says it’s good. Jindal says it’s bad…

Dongemaharu on June 29, 2012 at 10:23 AM

Let’s see those surrogates and Romney himself drive home the point over and over that while people were losing jobs, home values, homes themselves, their retirement, and businesses were shutting down left and right during 2009, O focused like a laser on taxing those very citizens who were hurting and all their progeny.

LetsBfrank on June 29, 2012 at 10:23 AM

Lawrence Auster at View from the Right nailed it on several occasions in 2005. His website has all the posts about Roberts being another Souter. Paul Ryan said this morning on Bill Bennett’s show that Roberts’ thinking was illogical. Bennett was disturbed too. All conservatives should be disturbed by this instead of trying to twist it into some kind of victory. We lost and we lost big.

TxAnn56 on June 29, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Exactly, denial does strange things to people!

LevinFan on June 29, 2012 at 10:24 AM

I have been saying it for a long time. Jindal is the best choice.

McDuck on June 29, 2012 at 10:24 AM

Jindal was great on O’Reilly (with Laura) last night.

He said Roberts was trying to impress the editorial pages of the NY Times and WaPost.

kevinkristy on June 29, 2012 at 10:25 AM

What’s your beef with Bobby Jindal? He’s probably one of the best Governors in the country!

Steve Z on June 29, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Apparently he’s not eligible. (He is eligible)

We need someone to pound on ObamaTax, Jindal can do that. It is not about “what state does he help win” at this point, this is an election about the principles of conservative vs. liberal governance. I think Jindal can make that case for us.

Bluray on June 29, 2012 at 10:26 AM

“Jindal is sort of dark skinned, isn’t he, I mean for a top slot?”

-average lib

Bishop on June 29, 2012 at 10:26 AM

That said, I am volunteering for Mitt…although I’m in a republican enclave in the Houston area…I’m willing to go to the purple areas of this town to work. I’m not going down without a fight.

Gettycorn on June 29, 2012 at 10:22 AM

I’m right there with ya! I’ve challenged my 912 group to do the same, why can take this here in NH!

LevinFan on June 29, 2012 at 10:29 AM

He said Roberts was trying to impress the editorial pages of the NY Times and WaPost.

kevinkristy on June 29, 2012 at 10:25 AM

I think he was trying to call their hand. Somebody yesterday said he was playing bridge not chess. Time will tell on that. In the meantime it is up to us to repeal ObamaTax through the legislative process.

txmomof6 on June 29, 2012 at 10:30 AM

With Healthcare now escalated up to the Economy for the One/Two punch, Romney would be a fool not to select Jindal as his running mate.

The planets are aligning to make Romney’s choice for him.

Romney/Jindal will also get the base fired up, attract Catholics, emphasize competence compared to O’s amateurism, etc. etc.

etc.

Do it Mittens and you can make it to the White House….

but don’t be building any elevators for your cars at the WH.

KirknBurker on June 29, 2012 at 10:30 AM

Another SC thread for the Diaper Brigade to stink up?

Didn’t something else important happen in D.C. yesterday?

Hmmm, now what was it?

Oh yeah, the Attorney General of The United States was charged with criminal and civil Contempt of Congress for the first time in history.

I guess even on a “Conservative Blog” the efforts to find out who authorized the murder of Brian Terry, Jamie Zapata and 300+ Mexican citizens isn’t considered important enough to warrant more than one mention on the front page.

Flora Duh on June 29, 2012 at 10:31 AM

It’s gotta be Jindal or Rubio and it needs to happen quickly. Someone inspiring has to carry the torch for the next four months to drag Romney over the finish line.

AmeriCuda on June 29, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Jindal versus Biden in a debate? O_O Boy howdy that would be fun.

Bishop on June 29, 2012 at 10:31 AM

“Jindal is sort of dark skinned, isn’t he, I mean for a top slot?”

-average lib

Bishop on June 29, 2012 at 10:26 AM

And Catholic too. You know those Southerners won’t like that either right? /clueless lib

txmomof6 on June 29, 2012 at 10:33 AM

This term, “surrogates,” is creepy. It suggests a wet nurse companion or someone along to act on someone else’s behalf because they’re more in need of helps than others, like an attendant or seeing eye dog or such.

So you’re saying “surrogate” is perfect for O’s mouthpieces, especially when referring to Bill Clinton?

LetsBfrank on June 29, 2012 at 10:33 AM

Jindal was great on O’Reilly (with Laura) last night.

He said Roberts was trying to impress the editorial pages of the NY Times and WaPost.

kevinkristy on June 29, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Props to Jindal for that. I have the utmost respect for those not afraid to speak the truth.

LevinFan on June 29, 2012 at 10:33 AM

…Paul Ryan said this morning on Bill Bennett’s show that Roberts’ thinking was illogical. Bennett was disturbed too…

TxAnn56 on June 29, 2012 at 10:19 AM

Yes, yes it is, ESPECIALLY since in the rebuttal decision it’s pointed out just to what extent the ACA contains declarations that it’s not a tax in it’s contents.

It was created in the Senate (which defies it being “a tax” if for no other reason than that, the Senate doesn’t have authority to create taxes), then passed on to the House, it was argued by the Left who created it as “not a tax” and promoted extensively by Obama as “not a tax” and the contents of the Act itself declares that it isn’t a tax and does so many hundreds of times.

Roberts SHOULD have — to make his point there about taxation versus the Commerce Clause — CORRECTLY cited the Act itself versus the changing arguments before the Court about it by the Obama Admin. (first it wasn’t a tax, then when grilled about the differences by the Court itself, the Obama Admin. changed his argument to suggesting it could be a tax, hmmm…), anyway, Justice Roberts like Kennedy, Thomas, Alito should have acknowledged the difference and importance of differences between taxation versus the use of the Commerce Clause, and then declined to support the ACA as either given that the Act itself declares so many times that it isn’t a tax.

Roberts really “created” contents by declaring it a tax. Because, to repeat, even the Act itself declares that it’s not a tax.

I cannot in any way follow Roberts attempt at logic there. He’s inserted his “REINTERPRETATION” there in order to force an illogical conclusion.

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Look, we’ve been screwed, so it’s time to circle the wagons and regroup.

First, this monstrosity has to be repealed or nullified. I’m not a huge Romney fan, but since we KNOW that O won’t repeal his baby, Romney is the only other choice for President. Voting third party will do nothing but ensure another 4 years of Dear Leader in the White House…ultimate disaster.

Next, we need to get that majority in the Senate and keep the majority in the House. This is where we can be most effective on the local level.

This has to be repealed. Then I think that we need to push for a new amendment to limit the taxing authority of the government over entities and people.

Gettycorn on June 29, 2012 at 10:22 AM

And after that we need a couple more REAL conservatives on the SC to overturn this horrible precedent of a new interpretation of what a “tax” is.

Animal60 on June 29, 2012 at 10:34 AM

Wait’ll you see states raising income taxes, and likely other taxes, or states without income taxes implementing them in order to pay for the unfunded mandates the ObamascareTAX puts on states, as McDonnell mentioned Virgina will be saddled with $2.2 billion. I live in a state with multi-billions in unfunded pension obligations that just made $1.6 billion in Medicaid cuts with a dopey governor who is now looking forward to expanding Medicaid under the ObamascareTAX. Where’s that gubmint money coming from?

stukinIL4now on June 29, 2012 at 10:35 AM

This term, “surrogates,” is creepy. It suggests a wet nurse companion or someone along to act on someone else’s behalf because they’re more in need of helps than others, like an attendant or seeing eye dog or such.

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 10:22 AM

Weird. Your connotation is so strong. But it just isn’t what the word means — it means deputy.

Axe on June 29, 2012 at 10:36 AM

What I can’t follow as to what Roberts concluded is that the Act was passed through Congress as “not a tax” — it was voted on NOT as a tax but as a “right” or extension/use of the Commerce Clause.

There has not been any vote on the ACA as a tax, no permissions, then, granted by “the people” via Congress to consent to this tax, to agree to it, to even acknowledge it as “a tax.”

So declaring it yesterday as “a tax” in order to squeek it past the Constitutional test as Roberts has done is irrational in relationshp with the Act itself as it exists before the Court.

Noting that there was never any question that Justices Sotomayor, Kagan and Ginsberg would go along with the Act regardless of argument against it.

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 10:38 AM

The court should have protected our constitutional freedoms,” Jindal told reporters on the call,

According to Roberts, he’s an un elected congressmen-lawmaker, that can rewrite laws to make them constitutional then vote for them (By finding congress un limited power to tax, that only exist in his imagination). His duty is to rewrite law from the bench not decide if a law is constitutional or not.

ACA is the law of the land, and it’s never going to be repealed.

Dr Evil on June 29, 2012 at 10:38 AM

Many have said the Tea Party will rise up on this decision, so does romney put a conservative tea partier on the ticket as VP, or does he blow it and go the jindal ineligible route? The Tea Party inroads could be romney/Sarah Palin 2012 !!!!!

Mr. Sun on June 29, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Jindal versus Biden in a debate? O_O Boy howdy that would be fun.

Bishop on June 29, 2012 at 10:31 AM

Indeed. It would be fun watching just for the inevitable ‘hey, didn’t I see you working at the 7-11?’ off-color remark from Plugs.

changer1701 on June 29, 2012 at 10:40 AM

He neatly sidestepped a question about whether Romney could make the tax argument when his own law in Massachusetts had a penalty component as well, but don’t be surprised to see that issue keep coming up.

Ed,

This narrative is being used by almost 80% of the liberal commentary over at the Washington Post. Most of it is repetitive copy and paste.

They (the liberals) are also denying fervently that this IS NOT A TAX.

Rovin on June 29, 2012 at 10:40 AM

LOL at some conservatives still believing that the so call conservative party, ie GOP, is really representing them. If that were still remotely true ask yourself this question…How come every time conservatives believe they have won they still end up losing?

bgibbs1000 on June 29, 2012 at 10:41 AM

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 10:22 AM

Weird. Your connotation is so strong. But it just isn’t what the word means — it means deputy.

Axe on June 29, 2012 at 10:36 AM

I address the perception of the word, colloquially, as it’s perceived based on it’s sound and “practical” understanding.

“Surrogate” SUGGESTS those concepts I previously defined.

The general public, general use and recognition of vocabulary ISN’T in the legal, administrative-bureaucratic shuffle of terms.

Even the legal profession is educated to use practical, direct language when communicating concepts and to avoid the flowery and more-institutional terms that, though they be actually correct as to descriptors, are less approachable to the general public.

“Surrogate” suggests an auntie-cat who nurses the kittens when the mommy needs a break, a helper, a stand-in as I earlier described.

I KNOW the word’s definition as you refer to it there but it’s not what the word “suggests” or brings to mind in common use.

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 10:42 AM

Jindal was great on O’Reilly (with Laura) last night.

He said Roberts was trying to impress the editorial pages of the NY Times and WaPost.

kevinkristy on June 29, 2012 at 10:25 AM

Roberts has expressed concerns about the Court’s reputation.

Yesterday, he muddied the Court’s reputation.

itsnotaboutme on June 29, 2012 at 10:43 AM

it means deputy.

Axe on June 29, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Then why not use the word, “deputy”?

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 10:43 AM

They (the liberals) are also denying fervently that this IS NOT A TAX.

Rovin on June 29, 2012 at 10:40 AM

Then they’re fervently affirming that Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, the Democrats in Congress, are liars.

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 10:45 AM

What’s your beef with Bobby Jindal? He’s probably one of the best Governors in the country!
Steve Z on June 29, 2012 at 10:19 AM

You don’t think the same people who have finally, finally destroyed this country wont have a hard time ripping this guy to shreds through sheer ridicule? One night of focus on Daily Show and Jindal’s done. Please.

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 10:51 AM

This term, “surrogates,” is creepy. It suggests a wet nurse companion or someone along to act on someone else’s behalf because they’re more in need of helps than others, like an attendant or seeing eye dog or such.

So you’re saying “surrogate” is perfect for O’s mouthpieces, especially when referring to Bill Clinton?

LetsBfrank on June 29, 2012 at 10:33 AM

See what and who you think of at the use of that word?

That’s my point.

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 10:51 AM

it means deputy.

Axe on June 29, 2012 at 10:36 AM

Then why not use the word, “deputy”?

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 10:43 AM

Because it’s a synonym for deputy, and deputy has other connotations.

I didn’t mean to go to the parking lot over this Lourdes. :) Sorry. I don’t think of any of the things you think when I hear “surrogate” — and you felt them so strongly that it creeped you out a little, and I chirped up to just … it was just a passing thought.

Not the week for passing thoughts.

Skip it. :)

Axe on June 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM

And, in the off-chance Romney wins, and then fails to deliver…what then?

Is anyone thinking that far ahead?

Cleombrotus on June 29, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Whoever rips Obamatax hardest gets to be VP!

forest on June 29, 2012 at 10:07 AM

Sounds good to me. The VP needs to be an attack dog, not some milquetoast “safe” pick who hovers in the background at rallies and does nothing but sings Romney’s praises during interviews.

That’s why Paul Ryan and Bobby Jindal are my two top choices. Both are brilliant, well-versed in the details, and can go after Obama and his agenda without sounding hyperpartisan or mean-spirited.

Doughboy on June 29, 2012 at 10:11 AM

Is there such an animal as triple dittoes? I am with you both.

Both of these governors understand the harm that the Obama administration and the Dem partisans have inflicted on their states, and they have the wisdom to perceive the negative effects on the rest of the nation.

onlineanalyst on June 29, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Mr. Sun on June 29, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Birthers have no business in the Tea Party.
Now-Why don’t you run along and snuggle up to your life-size Alex Jones blow-up doll.
Romney/Jindal 2012!

annoyinglittletwerp on June 29, 2012 at 10:55 AM

You don’t think the same people who have finally, finally destroyed this country wont have a hard time ripping this guy to shreds through sheer ridicule? One night of focus on Daily Show and Jindal’s done. Please.

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 10:51 AM

The guy has a better academic pedigree than most people in the media, I think he’ll be fine.

Bluray on June 29, 2012 at 10:57 AM

And, in the off-chance Romney wins, and then fails to deliver…what then?

Is anyone thinking that far ahead?

Cleombrotus on June 29, 2012 at 10:54 AM

Yeah. You have a conservative VP who we can primary against Romney. That is why someone like Jindal who be a great pick.

Bluray on June 29, 2012 at 10:59 AM

I didn’t mean to go to the parking lot over this Lourdes. :) Sorry. I don’t think of any of the things you think when I hear “surrogate” — and you felt them so strongly that it creeped you out a little, and I chirped up to just … it was just a passing thought.

Skip it. :)

Axe on June 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Melodramatic.

Already explained my unease with the word. If I read a memo and viewed an org. chart and read RULES AND REGULATIONS from various Titles and such, I’d not blink at reading “surrogate” but in the context of colloquial speech (what most people engage in, use and understand), the word has OTHER CONNOTATIONS beyond what the actual definition and use is that you identify.

That’s my only point. Which I made a while ago up-stream here. I agree it’s not worth intense discussion…

I would encourage the GOP to get going with more approachable language for the voters, is my incentive there.

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 10:59 AM

Bishop on June 29, 2012 at 10:26 AM

Trying to win the top spot back after Ed did such a good job of Trolling in “A Modest Proposal.”

chemman on June 29, 2012 at 11:00 AM

You don’t think the same people who have finally, finally destroyed this country wont have a hard time ripping this guy to shreds through sheer ridicule? One night of focus on Daily Show and Jindal’s done. Please.

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Lol if it’s easy to ridicule Jindal, then it’ll be even easier to ridicule just about anyone else. Maybe we shouldn’t run anyone at all? The media tried to ridicule Reagan but the American people saw right through it when the media’s characterization didn’t match what they saw in Reagan. This will be the same for Jindal. If you’re so scared of Stewart, then that says it all, considering the people that watch Stewart are the ones who aren’t likely to vote for the Republican ticket anyway.

GOPRanknFile on June 29, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Why is RomneyCare even an issue ? Good Lord. The people of the state of Massachusetts WANTED it. And if Romney had done nothing, they would have enacted it regardless.

Forcing something on an entire nation that DOES NOT want it is completely different than passing state legislation that the people of the state DO want.

deadrody on June 29, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Lol if it’s easy to ridicule Jindal, then it’ll be even easier to ridicule just about anyone else. Maybe we shouldn’t run anyone at all? The media tried to ridicule Reagan but the American people saw right through it when the media’s characterization didn’t match what they saw in Reagan. This will be the same for Jindal. If you’re so scared of Stewart, then that says it all, considering the people that watch Stewart are the ones who aren’t likely to vote for the Republican ticket anyway.

GOPRanknFile on June 29, 2012 at 11:02 AM

Yeah really. seems like concern trolling to me. Since when do we care what elitists like steward, colbert, or snl thinks??

Wow!!

LevinFan on June 29, 2012 at 11:05 AM

Mr. Sun on June 29, 2012 at 10:39 AM

Birthers have no business in the Tea Party.
Now-Why don’t you run along and snuggle up to your life-size Alex Jones blow-up doll.
Romney/Jindal 2012!

annoyinglittletwerp on June 29, 2012 at 10:55 AM

Most people I know involved in the Tea Party encourage anyone to participate, from among a variety of opinions.

I think it’s a mistake to operate in fear in reaction to the nasty, crazed accusations of the Left — the whole “birther” pejorative is a Leftwing attack on the Tea Partiers and for the Left’s reasons of discrediting inquiry and the Tea Party itself.

It’s more a Libertarian thing to attend to Alex Jones not a Tea Party-associated thing. Many Libertarians I’ve read and heard are far more Leftwing than the Tea Partiers, certainly than the GOP/general Republican, so…

I like Jindal as V.P., always have. As to the “natural born” requirement in the Constitution to be a member of the Executive Branch, it’s not explained in the Constitution and since it isn’t, people reasonably continue to argue about/discus it. It doesn’t mean they’re some separate race or alien invader for doing so.

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 11:06 AM

Lol if it’s easy to ridicule Jindal, then it’ll be even easier to ridicule just about anyone else. Maybe we shouldn’t run anyone at all?

I don’t find much to anthing about Jindal that is ridicule-possible. Man is an intelligent, well intentioned, astute and able man operating at current in the political. His wife’s lovely, his family values are admirable…not a thing there to ridciule about the guy, in my view.

People who try to ridicule him are just talking trash.

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Axe on June 29, 2012 at 10:53 AM

Happy TGIF!..:)

Dire Straits on June 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 11:08 AM

Mrs. Jindal is more than ‘lovely’-she’s every bit his intellectual equal. Think Milton and Rose Friedman.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM

And nary a word about Sarah Palin who was one of the first to stand against this travesty of justice by a handful of politically appointed lawyers?

Don L on June 29, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Nobody sane is arguing against health care reform, but the leviathan that is the PPACA is a monstrous government expansion/power grab that benefits mostly those who don’t have to live under its draconian taxes and regulations. Proponents of the Supreme Court’s decision to uphold the law argue that it will provide health care to millions who currently don’t have it, but there are still tens of millions who will not be covered, and most of them are working adults. There are provisions in the law that many people like, such as children on their parents’ health insurance to age twenty-six. But the more this 2000 page monstrosity sees the daylight, the more we find ourselves taxed, and taxed, and taxed for the privilege of being herded into a health care system that will increase costs, necessitate delays of service, and potentially codify denials of treatment.

We are taxed on our income, our investments, our inheritances, our purchases, and now, the SC says it’s constitutional to tax us for what we don’t buy. Whose interest does it serve to tax people for something they don’t do? It most decidedly is not in the interest of the person being taxed. How the Court could find an individual government mandate, with the full weight of the IRS behind it, to buy something that we either don’t want or don’t need is beyond the pale of nanny state intervention into personal freedom. What shall they tax us on next, the fact that we didn’t buy broccoli this week or that we didn’t join a union (yes, that’s all of you in states that have no “right to work” laws)? What happens to people like my son, who is twenty-two and works full time but doesn’t have full benefits through his company? He can’t really afford health insurance (he is currently on his father’s policy) and doesn’t qualify for Medicaid, so he will be taxed because he works for the wrong employer and isn’t poor/unemployed. Again, whose interest does it serve to burden a population with such as this, and at a time when the country can least afford it? It most decidedly is not in the interest of those who are stuck with the tab.

If this law is so good, why was it necessary to pass it hastily, in the dead of night, behind closed doors, excluding Republicans from meetings and votes, using the nefarious process of “reconciliation,” a misnomer for “end run around the people?” This is a 2000 page bill, for which innumerable regulations have yet to be written. Those in Congress who were being forced to voted on it admitted that they hadn’t read it. Even then Speaker Nancy Pelosi said we would have “read it to find out what’s in it.” What?! Health care reform had waited for years and years, and suddenly it was wise and careful to pass an enormously complicated bill without so much as having read it? Really?! There are those of us out here in the voting public who are quite well informed and well educated who would have been happy to review the bill and publish an opinion on it. Why was it not posted and vetted by the public for 72 hours prior to a congressional vote, as President Obama had promised during his campaign? Because Democrats knew exactly what would happen if it was posted; public opinion was already against it. Pelosi was right in that we would have pass it before we could find out what was in it because they sure weren’t going to tell us ahead of time.

So, unless Republicans can gain a majority in both houses and in the White House and repeal the PPACA, we are doomed to the already failed socialist policies under whose weight Europe is currently collapsing. Why do we continue to try this experiment “just one more time” to see if we can get it right? Why do people not learn the lesson of history that government, left to its own devices, can only grow and expand until it has complete control over people’s lives? Well, this comes pretty close. Those who are in favor of this law will change their opinion pretty quickly once they are on the receiving end of an IRS audit for non-compliance because they thought it was all going to be “free.” Check out the number of new IRS employees who are being hired to enforce this law. If this is such a great law, why would it need such vigorous enforcement against a citizenry it ostensibly benefits? Again, whose interest is being served to throw the full weight of the government against ordinary citizens for breaking a law with which they can’t comply? It most decidedly is not in the interest of those citizens who have to live under the weight of its oppressive mandate.

College Prof on June 29, 2012 at 11:16 AM

Lourdes on June 29, 2012 at 11:06 AM

Agreed. Never understood the desire to mock one’s most ardent allies.

Cleombrotus on June 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Gotta finish getting ready for work. Since I’ll be off the ‘Net after work until sundown tomorrow, for Shabbat-I’ll catch y’all then.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Gotta finish getting ready for work. Since I’ll be off the ‘Net after work until sundown tomorrow, for Shabbat-I’ll catch y’all then.

annoyinglittletwerp on June 29, 2012 at 11:18 AM

Have a good one!

changer1701 on June 29, 2012 at 11:22 AM

Happy TGIF!..:)

Dire Straits on June 29, 2012 at 11:15 AM

please God — just 3 days on Ted’s. :)

Axe on June 29, 2012 at 11:24 AM

Axe on June 29, 2012 at 11:24 AM

LoLz..:)

Dire Straits on June 29, 2012 at 11:28 AM

You don’t think the same people who have finally, finally destroyed this country wont have a hard time ripping this guy to shreds through sheer ridicule? One night of focus on Daily Show and Jindal’s done. Please.

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 10:51 AM

Jindal would actually be quite effective going on Daily Show. Obamacare is the worst for young, healthy people…like the kind that watch that show. It forces them to over insure themselves to pay for others. They are going to have to have coverage for many things they won’t ever need. Roberts made that case during the oral arguments. It’s about time they wise up.

monalisa on June 29, 2012 at 11:55 AM

Jindal, McDonnell attack Obama, Supreme Court decision on ObamaCare

…Bless you boy’s!…DO NOT STOP…!!!

KOOLAID2 on June 29, 2012 at 12:09 PM

What’s your beef with Bobby Jindal? He’s probably one of the best Governors in the country!
Steve Z on June 29, 2012 at 10:19 AM

You don’t think the same people who have finally, finally destroyed this country wont have a hard time ripping this guy to shreds through sheer ridicule? One night of focus on Daily Show and Jindal’s done. Please.

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 10:51 AM

If Governor Jindal is on the ticket, we will see an explosion of disgusting racism on the Left, and that should be no surprise as the Left is the historical home of racism. That might be illuminating however.

We will also see sudden interest from the Left in the constitutional qualifications for the office of the president and the meaning of ‘natural born citizen’. The Left has no problem with the hypocrisy of this, they live in an ocean of hypocrisy.

Governor Jindal is a good man, truly intelligent, unlike our empty-credentialed Jackass president.

slickwillie2001 on June 29, 2012 at 12:10 PM

I’m thinking the reason McDonnell hedged is because he’s hoping he’ll be on the winners’ slate in November and the new VA gov. can “evaluate” the issue.

mrsknightley on June 29, 2012 at 12:26 PM

I give up. Your own GOP ridiculed Jindal’s SOTU rebuttal speech in 2009 only after Stewart mocked it relentlessly. Not to mention he’s probably not even constitutionally qualified. Yeah, the MSM won’t pick up on that. Some people just want to be lied to – carry on. Nothing’s changed. Just a minor bump in the road yesterday. We fight another day!

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 12:43 PM

I give up. Your own GOP ridiculed Jindal’s SOTU rebuttal speech in 2009 only after Stewart mocked it relentlessly. Not to mention he’s probably not even constitutionally qualified. Yeah, the MSM won’t pick up on that. Some people just want to be lied to – carry on. Nothing’s changed. Just a minor bump in the road yesterday. We fight another day!

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 12:43 PM

So your admitting your real problem is that you don’t think he’s eligible (He is eligible).

One more time, whats your alternative?

Bluray on June 29, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Bluray on June 29, 2012 at 12:50 PM

Jindal was not born of 2 American parents – they were naturalized *after* his birth. Does that really mean nothing anymore? Well, I guess that question is moot after the events of June 29, Constitution RIP. Or the election of Obama. Kidding. I’m sure there are a lot of lovely people, great Americans, who while capable, don’t meet the requirements set by law to be President.
IMHO (maybe not so humble) the only thing that will not only save the Republic but humanity at this point in history is God. Well, maybe a peaceful coup to remove Obama the lawless tyrant, but really this is a problem of all of our own making. This is much bigger then the President. We get the government we deserve. *shrug*

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 1:06 PM

While I don’t share quiz1′s misgivings, consider this:

If Obama challenged the candidacy of Jindal in court, and (as it would inevitably happen) it reaches the Supreme Court…

does anyone, after yesterday’s events, have any confidence that Obama’s view would not be upheld?

Scott H on June 29, 2012 at 1:37 PM

Jindal/West 2012 because America deserves to be saved and Obamacare needs to be repealed.

Pragmatic on June 29, 2012 at 1:58 PM

Rush Limbaugh has been on a 3 hour whinefest ..I got it in the first 20-30 minutes. Going on a whinefest for so long is getting old. I finally turned it off… We have work to do and need to move towards November. We do not have the time for a pity party…Rush you sound like a whiny liberal…

DVPTexFla on June 29, 2012 at 2:24 PM

The entitlement expansion under ObamaCare and other federal programs is “unsustainable,” Jindal said. “We’re going to see more people riding in the cart than pulling it.”

Because God forbid that there be freeloaders who expect the rest of us to pick up the tab due to their irresponsibility. If only there were some kind of mandate to prevent that…

Amazing claptrap, even from Kenneth the Page. The GOP really needs the American people to stay ignorant, at least through November.

Drew Lowell on June 29, 2012 at 2:36 PM

JIZYA TAX - kill, tax or convert infidels!

Pole-Cat on June 29, 2012 at 2:39 PM

I don’t know about you guys, but this ad came up on the same page as a video linking to this post. Clever.

manwithblackhat on June 29, 2012 at 3:18 PM

I give up. Your own GOP ridiculed Jindal’s SOTU rebuttal speech in 2009 only after Stewart mocked it relentlessly.

Lol yes because we all know the Republicans take their cues from Jon Stewart. This shows how little you follow politics. Right after Jindal rebuttal, Hume, Krauthammer, and many people on the right panned his performance. I wonder if they had a chance to call Stewart before their analysis? If you’re going to make things up, at least make it somewhat credible.

Not to mention he’s probably not even constitutionally qualified.

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 12:43 PM

And there it is. Haven’t you embarrassed yourself enough?

GOPRanknFile on June 29, 2012 at 4:03 PM

GOPRanknFile on June 29, 2012 at 4:03 PM

Oh please. You should very well know this is a legitimate issue. Why don’t you go moneybomb Romney again. I’m sure he’s working so hard right now to craft a strategy out if this mess. And save us from the world’s debt. The guy who wrote Obamacare. And states over and over that he supports the mandate.

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 4:40 PM

Oh please. You should very well know this is a legitimate issue.

For people who read WorldNetDaily, it is. Not one constitutional scholar or law professor that I know sees this is a legitimate issue.

Why don’t you go moneybomb Romney again.

Umm okay. You make it seem like there’s something wrong with financially contributing to a political campaign, but hey whatever works for you.

I’m sure he’s working so hard right now to craft a strategy out if this mess. And save us from the world’s debt.

He sure has experience with it. He took MA from a $3 billion deficit to a $1 billion surplus.

The guy who wrote Obamacare. And states over and over that he supports the mandate.

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 4:40 PM

I never claimed he was perfect. Saying he wrote Obamacare is a tad disingenuous, no? He never supported a national mandate. With that said, do I agree with him? No, but every candidate has a flaw. I’m sure even the one you support(ed) does.

GOPRanknFile on June 29, 2012 at 5:00 PM

Umm okay. You make it seem like there’s something wrong with financially contributing to a political campaign, but hey whatever works for you.

Some people want to be lied to – I fully suspect you are one of them. I mean, you’re rank and file right? There’s much more at stake for some people than who “wins” the next election cycle. Some people are actually considering the real possibility of how to keep their assets in light of the forced mandate, which starts Aug 1, to subsidize the annihilation of millions.
Disingenuous? Well, whatever. I’ll remember this conversation, many I’ve had with people who refuse to see the writing on the wall, good Americans such as yourself, when President Romney starts talking about working within the system to replace Obamacare with something different. After all it was rank and file who said repeal…..AND REPLACE.
And yes, Romney has voiced support for an individual mandate many times. Pay attention. It’s probably already too late.

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 7:15 PM

Jindal or West for VP. They both have extensive executive experience, Jindal as governor and West in the military. Both are from the south, an area where Romney can probably use some help. Both are unafraid to speak the truth with passion.

Common Sense on June 29, 2012 at 8:01 PM

Some people want to be lied to – I fully suspect you are one of them.

Wow I didn’t think someone could peg me so perfectly. /

There’s much more at stake for some people than who “wins” the next election cycle.

There is always much more at stake than who wins the election cycle. I don’t think anyone would dispute that. The question how do we achieve those things. If your decision is to vote against Romney, which, no matter how you look at it, helps Obama, then that’s your call. If that’s your method by which you mean to accomplish your goals, then so be it. However, I think that’s illogical and you’re making a grave mistake.

GOPRanknFile on June 29, 2012 at 9:28 PM

GOPRanknFile on June 29, 2012 at 9:28 PM

I never said I wasn’t voting, however, I am now firmly of the belief that voting in the hopes that Obamacare will be repealed is futile. There is a lot more to this than whether or not I think Jindal is the man, but it is my opinion that picking Jindal as VP is ridiculous. I guess we’re all entitled to one.

quiz1 on June 29, 2012 at 10:26 PM

Comment pages: 1 2