Jindal at CPAC: Be the Party of More
posted at 7:51 pm on March 15, 2013 by Mary Katharine Ham
I must confess to being a longtime fan of Gov. Bobby Jindal, having written to defend him even in his darkest hour— the day after his State of the Union response. He’s a smart guy who’s overcome cultural and political obstacles to be elected a second-term governor Louisiana with 66 percent of the vote in a race with nine opponents. But mostly I like that he’s demonstrably made Louisiana a better place to live and work.
I wish he’d talked more about that today. Jindal’s speech to CPAC was not a stemwinder or designed to be a crowd pleaser. It was more of an overview and light critique of the movement, in the style of a Mitch Daniels more than a Rick Perry. I like those kinds of speeches, though they’re sometimes better read than delivered. Jindal started off by reading a few of his Gridiron Dinner jokes, confessing that he was pilfering from himself but acknowledging the crowd might like something different after CPAC’s 70 political speeches.
The thrust of his speech, which some read as a contrast if not a rebuke to Paul Ryanism, is that focusing on the everyday crises of Washington, D.C. and the budget numbers too much is playing entirely on the opponent’s turf, conceding the idea that the nation runs on Washington and the capital is the hub of its existence. Instead, Jindal suggests focusing on the real economy of America, not the “phony economy” of Washington. I actually think the two can easily be complementary, and that educating people about how out of hand Washington is is part of turning them on to the idea of getting it out of their lives. But he’s right about falling into this uninspiring trap:
If our vision is to better manage the disaster that is the federal government, you can count me out. I won’t sign up for that. (I don’t want to) slow-manage the decline of America. That’s why we have Democrats.
Yes, the message must be more than that, even while it educates on Washington’s failings. “We’re not going to simply win elections by pointing out the failures of the other side,” he said. Jindal’s pitch today: Be the party of MORE. Democrats only offer more government, but we offer more prosperity, bigger American dreams, more success for everyone.
I assume the contrast he’s subtly drawing with Ryan will become complete nearer to 2016 when Jindal finishes his pitch by touting the successes in the “real economy” of himself and other Republican governors across the country. The speech didn’t quite make that landing today, mentioning school choice in Louisiana only briefly, but I look forward to hearing more in the future.
Related Posts:
Breaking on Hot Air
Bobby Jindal: Paternalistic, big-government liberalism is the biggest loser here
Super Nannies: EU bans olive oils, Germany ponders Autobahn speed limit
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
Former Club for Growth leader Pat Benedict Arnold Toomey..
Unavailable for comment.
PappyD61 on April 10, 2013 at 6:45 PM
Facepalm…
KCB on April 10, 2013 at 6:46 PM
Pfffttt Entitlements, come on, like… You weren’t expecting us to do anything meaningful about that right? This is not the hill to die on. Immigration isn’t either. Time for Amnesty baby!!! Neither is health care. Obamacare is law of the land!!! Re-election though, that’s the hill to die on fo’ sure! -RNC/Country Club Establishment Class
Raquel Pinkbullet on April 10, 2013 at 6:48 PM
Hey Justin Greene –F-U! I did not have much fun in the 60s like many other veterans. I contributed over half a million dollars (pv) to social security. I has three children, all hard working professionals. You have insulted me and many of my generation with your putrid generalizations.
Old Country Boy on April 10, 2013 at 6:50 PM
No wonder why we can’t have anything nice.
rbj on April 10, 2013 at 6:50 PM
Seriously what’s the new playbook ?? Run to Obama’s LEFT? Heck in 2016 we may run that MSNBC communist nut Harris-Perry…And the RINOs will all be circling the wagons but so what about principles, she’s the MOST ELECTABLE!!!!
Raquel Pinkbullet on April 10, 2013 at 6:50 PM
It’s important that we help the GOP regain power at any cost though. #winning
Kataklysmic on April 10, 2013 at 6:56 PM
Idiot.
Not to mention is one perfect example as to why I don’t give to political parties nor associations…
…individual politicians only, if ever….
ladyingray on April 10, 2013 at 7:03 PM
They will sell their souls and lose anyway.
VorDaj on April 10, 2013 at 7:03 PM
All the arguments against the Federal Reserve’s money printing to facilitate our government’s overspending have been countered by the types like Krugman with “look at how low our inflation is, see printing/digitizing money doesn’t have negative consequences!’
And republicans want to facilitate more of this with lowering the cpi standard even more? If obama had to contend with an inflation measurement as measured when Carter was in office, he would not have been re-elected. The malaise we are in would not be sugar coated with rigged statistics. (see what they did to CPI in the nineties to take out food and energy.) THIS IS BS! And it will just go to screw over the prudent in the middle class who saves their money and won’t be able to find a good interest rate. Get your head out of your behinds, republicans.
Chubbs65 on April 10, 2013 at 7:04 PM
Really, am I really supposed to keep voting Republican because if I go third party it is a sure win for the DEMS? Looks to me like I’ll gets Dems for all practical purposes regardless of if it is an R or D following their name on the ballot. Screw that.
flyfishingdad on April 10, 2013 at 7:07 PM
Is it too late to become a Whig?
KS Rex on April 10, 2013 at 7:08 PM
SHADDUP!!!!!!
Resist We Much on April 10, 2013 at 7:11 PM
Ugh. Hard for the GOP to remain credible on entitlement reform when they attack Obama for offering a tiny step in that direction.
Moron.
changer1701 on April 10, 2013 at 7:11 PM
The party could always be resurrected. The name’s not a sure fire attraction though.
hawkeye54 on April 10, 2013 at 7:12 PM
Apparently Obama isn’t so liberal after all. He’s proposing social security reform without any significant deal from Boehner on the table. If the GOP is serious about deep entitlement reform, Obama is your man. You can’t say the same about Reid and many other Dems. Hopefully this opportunity won’t be wasted. In any case, the true colors the GOP will soon become clear.
Bernie Sanders and others on the left are going ballistic also, but I don’t think anyone saw this attack coming from the right.
bayam on April 10, 2013 at 7:13 PM
What state is he from, and where is his district?
INC on April 10, 2013 at 7:14 PM
I’ll just add this to my list of “Why I’m NOT a Republican” reasons.
Maybe I can wedge it in there somewhere between Toomey’s fold on firearm background checks and the latest immigration “reform” backroom deal.
Socratease on April 10, 2013 at 7:14 PM
Absolutely embarrassing. May as well be done with the GOP.
Raquel Pinkbullet on April 10, 2013 at 7:17 PM
Tell a big lie, Herr Goebbels.
tom daschle concerned on April 10, 2013 at 7:17 PM
Right on Waldo!
Obama is already working on killing old people via Obamacare.
This merely supplements his push to ‘carousel’ us so he can INVEST more in the children (and solar panels).
I say….demogogue it all the way to a Senate majority in 2014.
Then we can get down to serious and moderate reduction of the rate of growth of entitlements.
KirknBurker on April 10, 2013 at 7:21 PM
Shocked by the discussions of reducing inflationary payments to Social Security beneficiaries? Well, TIME TO WAKE UP! For DECADES, we’ve sat there while they gave that money away on Social Security expansion into dependent and disability benefits, knowing all the time we were all living longer on the benefits than the system was designed for. And we kept ELECTING the people who did this.
THE MONEY HAS BEEN SPENT! On our watch. Do we older folks take the hit, or do we simply crush the following generations under unrecoverable debt? Those are our ONLY choices; deal with it!
michaelo on April 10, 2013 at 7:29 PM
We find ourselves in a sad state of affairs. I mean, politics, like everything else around us, is based on optics and emotion. Hey whatever feels good and looks good – do it. El Presidente wants to “show” he is doing something meaningless on entitlement reform which really amounts to nothing and both the left and the right are up in arms. Shees – we are $16 trillion in debt and this budget does nothing to address the deficit.
All these political moves are for optics and emotion. We can’t count on any politicians – Repubs or Dimwits to provide solutions to real world problems. And we just keep on bending over and taking it dry.
We don’t even get a cursory, hey you may feel a little discomfort. We just constantly get the rug pulled out from under us from leaders we thought represented us. We are screwed – pun intended.
rsherwd65 on April 10, 2013 at 7:30 PM
Last straw number 643
motionview on April 10, 2013 at 7:32 PM
Agree 100%. My Mom raised three kids, for part of the time as a single mother, through no fault of her own, and when it was hardly fashionable. Most of that generation worked hard, and contributed mightily to the post WWII miracle that was the U.S. economy. Justin Greene needs to shut his pie hole.
Mr. Arkadin on April 10, 2013 at 7:37 PM
Up to this point, we right-wingers have been told that we need to vote GOP no matter what because the Democrats are even more leftist and destructive. Greg Walden had better be one hell of an aberration, because if he isn’t, we’ll be told that we have to vote GOP because the Democrats are too right-wing-socon for the country in 2016 at the rate that things are going.
OK, maybe not, but having the ever-more-moderate GOP suddenly running to Obama’s left is a little shocking.
Aitch748 on April 10, 2013 at 7:43 PM
Thank you for that, but my generation (Gen X) knows we’re going to get the brunt of it, and I think most of us have pretty much resigned ourselves to it. I don’t know a soul in my age group who thinks they’re going to collect SS or Medicare, or who thinks we’ll get to retire as our parents are doing now. I’d rather get slammed than throw my mother under the bus, or see my daughter’s generation get hit.
Laura on April 10, 2013 at 7:45 PM
Why do I suspect that Obama’s proposals to “reform” entitlements involves severe means testing of “wealthy” seniors.
Doing this turns them into pure socialist wealth redistribution programs. They were originally sold to voters as “everyone pays in and everyone get benefits from” programs.
So if people who pay in may now not qualify for benefits these programs become socialist soak the “rich” redistribution schemes. Which is what the socialists would have liked them to be from the beginning. It took many decades but Mission Accomplished.
Forward, comrades!
farsighted on April 10, 2013 at 7:54 PM
What a joke of an organization
WisCon on April 10, 2013 at 8:22 PM
Seriously, bro?
cdog0613 on April 10, 2013 at 8:38 PM
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
just priceless!
#Obamaproposedweopposed will be the catch line for 2014/2016..
Are you guys really that stupid? Can we do mental health ck before qualifying to run for office? /
lol..just don’t know how to say yes. I wonder some days who is the real threat to America.
Can.I.be.in.the.middle on April 10, 2013 at 9:51 PM
I say….demogogue it all the way to a Senate majority in 2014.
Then we can get down to serious and moderate reduction of the rate of growth of entitlements.
KirknBurker on April 10, 2013 at 7:21 PM
Yes, I’m sure after the GOP takes back the Senate with mediscare, the first thing they’ll get to work on is entitlement reform.
To put it somewhat bluntly, you are the problem here.
RINO in Name Only on April 11, 2013 at 3:24 AM
There won’t be one word against the 1300 Federal entitlement agencies. I guess we are not suppose to know about these.
mixplix on April 11, 2013 at 2:09 PM