What the Choice of Bobby Jindal for the Republican Response Means
Posted by Andrew Tobolowsky on 02.25.2009
It's all about values...
Bobby Jindal was chosen to deliver the Republican response to Obama's state of the union address, at this critical juncture in our nation's history. What does that mean?
Two Things:
1) The Republican party is not as dumb as recent events have tricked some of us into thinking.
That sounds condescending, I know, but let's not kid ourselves. The idea that Sarah Palin is qualified for anything over the depth of mayor of a medium sized town (which is basically what Alaska is, except with more anarchists), is a laughable one. Conservs, although I know many of you are ready to flame me already, remember what David Foster Wallace said—"That other people can see things about you that you yourself cannot see, even if those people are stupid"—and take this advice. The worst thing that could happen to your party in these next four years, even more than the economy recovering completely, is John McCain dying. All across the country even many erstwhile conservative homes will be filled with the sound of people saying "Jesus Christ, thank God he didn't win that election" and "what were those guys THINKING putting us in danger of THAT. Those bastards!". Although my guess is she shot herself in the foot with that SarahPac thing, and refusing to speak at certain Republican benefits. It's unlikely that Republican higher-ups saw her as more than a tool, and now that she's really gone rogue I doubt they'll have much to do with her.
And the Michael Steele thing, mentioned in a recent column of mine is just weird. It's not my fault it's weird. It's weird.
But Bobby Jindal is an incredibly smart, talented individual. The exact right man to answer Obama. I don't agree with pretty much a single thing Jindal says, but it doesn't matter—I don't need opposition I agree with, I just want opposition I can respect. You have to respect Jindal's intelligence—and you have to respect his integrity. No Rick Perry "The bailout is awful, can we have more money" for him. Lousiana will suffer in the short term for it, but if Republicans are right, he's going to come up smelling like roses. One of the only ones who will. That's courage of your convictions.
2) It's laying down the plan for 2012.
Bobby Jindal is a family values republican. Unlike many of these, and no I am not mincing words, he comes off as smart. It sounds like I'm being a douche, and in a way, I am—but it's always been my opinion and I've always stated it that the Republican party would be much better off if the people championing their values weren't so awful. Is that so bad? Wishing my supposed enemies more competent representation? Jindal, as I say is that.
But the way I saw it, after the last election the Republican party had two options, expressed by the presidential and vice presidential candidates respectively. More centrist, more right. More enlightened or more "values". And clearly, they went values. It's an interesting choice, but it seems like they've made it.
Again, I really admire the way they went about it. A terrible idea would have been Palin, but just as bad would have been Huckabee. He's what they want—he believes what they believe, and he's intelligent, sincere, and articulate—but he is still old news. In politics, if you're touched by failure, the stink stays on you. See Edwards, John. IF that's the way the Republican party chooses to go, there couldn't have been a better choice. Smart, talented, principled—and fresh. And they're launching him at just the right time and on just the right issue.
Very, very well done.
Now as anyone who pays attention to what I write about knows, I don't exactly agree that the conservative party is making the right move by going more conservative. The idea, then, is that there is, SOMEWHERE a massive conservative voting bloc which for whatever reason was not accessed in the last election. Given that the "real" Conservative candidates couldn't even win the primaries last year—couldn't even come close—this seems, just logically, unlikely.
I mean, not only did the Liberals get the MOST votes in the election, the two leading conservative candidates, Romney and McCain, were the MOST liberal. Am I crazy or does this idea of this silent values majority, as terrifying as it is to most liberals, seem tenuously supported at best?
You'd have to suppose that they exist, but sat out the primaries. You'd have to suppose that they exist but weren't scared enough of Obama to come out for McCain even WITH Sarah Palin. You'd have to suppose a lot of things—it seems to me, anyway. But then the extent to which I am a political EXPERT is that I am an unpaid columnist for a political website. So I should probably be taken with a grain of salt.
The Republicans are apparently comfortable with supposing either that this values bloc does exist and can be reached, or that it is at least not repugnant ENOUGH to mainstream America that someone from that side of things could capitalize on public uncertainty regarding the bailout IN ADDITION to picking up the values votes, if they're talented enough—and in that they may well be right. And they certainly couldn't have made a better choice.
Frankly, I'm just happy. Two, smart, talented people battling it out for the nation's approval. That's how politics should BE lads! It could always be like this!
(Although I will say that when I heard Jindal speak I thought he might have been trying to sell me a used car. But we'll see how important that is...)
Posted By: mpn (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 12:35 AM
Yeah, I know what you mean about the "stink" of "failure" being all over Huckabee -- like it was all over Reagan. Such failure -- number one rated weekend cable show in total viewers and demo; NYT best seller; 2 political reports daily on ABC talk radio. This guy is a walking political informercial. You are looking at the 2012 candidate should he choose to run.
Posted By: guest (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 12:43 AM
Just saw the great Jindal, and his response was very, very weak. He just doesn't have much of a personality. If you think he can challenge 0bama, you're smoking something. If he were to get the nomination in 2012, his crowds would be about the same size as McCain's, on average about 2,000. Palin, on the other hand, had thousands and even tens of thousands who would stand in line in the rain for hours to see her, without the attraction of a free Bruce Springstein concert, and free food. Her crowds were so loud that they would make the risers on which the national media sat actually shake. Big crowds translate into lots of volunteers, and lots of donations. Palin outdrew McCain, outdrew Biden (average crowd 1,000), and many times outdrew 0bama.
Anyone who underestimates that woman is a fool.
Posted By: greg (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 12:47 AM
Jindal is a muslim who claims to be a Christian - just another BO. We won't make the same mistake the dems did. Piyush Jindal will never be our nominee.
Posted By: Greg (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 01:00 AM
Doesn't anyone in the Republican party ever look around and say "Jesus, why do I have to sit with THESE assholes"?
I mean, what IF Jindal was a Muslim? Who gives a shit? He's not, of course.
Hey, I like Huckabee as a person. I just think in general if you get shown up in an election people stop looking at you. From 10% in an election to candidate would be quite a jump....
Posted By: Andrew Tobolowsky (Registered) on February 25, 2009 at 01:06 AM
Greg, you are a dumbass. Jindal was raised a Hindu and became a Catholic a long time ago. He's Indian, not fucking Persian.
Get a life douchebag...
Posted By: Chris Connolly (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 01:15 AM
I don't understand why Republicans like Huckabee. He raised taxes, promotes nanny state policies and is a religious bigot.
Posted By: Chris Connolly (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 01:18 AM
"Jindal is a muslim who claims to be a Christian - just another BO. We won't make the same mistake the dems did. Piyush Jindal will never be our nominee."
His is not a muslim, and your are not a Republican.
Posted By: ruhroh (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 01:20 AM
fact - palin has real accomplishments, so does jindal
fact -obama has no accomplishments , he is incompetent, has tendency to "vote present", is a confirmed radical, and has weak leadership qualities and it is already showing with his tax cheats, lobbyists and even plain old pay for play criminals, weak foreign policy and that generational theft porkulus act and his economic fear mongering etc.
so why is palin and jindal smeared and obama lauded?
those who are not obamabots should and will ask that .
Posted By: sfernando (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 01:29 AM
Chris Connolly,
What happened to your Conservative/Libertarian BS article?
Posted By: Guest#9113 (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 02:12 AM
"fact - palin has real accomplishments, so does jindal
fact -obama has no accomplishments , he is incompetent, has tendency to "vote present", is a confirmed radical, and has weak leadership qualities and it is already showing with his tax cheats, lobbyists and even plain old pay for play criminals, weak foreign policy and that generational theft porkulus act and his economic fear mongering etc.
so why is palin and jindal smeared and obama lauded?
those who are not obamabots should and will ask that ."
FACT--sfernando believes Obama should sit on the back of the bus, shouldn't be our president, and has an IQ lower than Forrest Gump's....
Posted By: Guest#1444 (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 02:15 AM
I've been a registered Republican since 1988, but I'm so ashamed of what this party has become that I swear I'm switching parties.
Jindal has an Ivy League education, yet he gave a lame campaign speech instead of anything resembling a response to Obama's remarks.
Posted By: vugirl (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 03:29 AM
Andrew, great line about "used cars"!
Posted By: The Great Capt. Smooth (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 05:36 AM
fact -obama has no accomplishments , he is incompetent, has tendency to "vote present", is a confirmed radical, and has weak leadership qualities and it is already showing with his tax cheats, lobbyists and even plain old pay for play criminals, weak foreign policy and that generational theft porkulus act and his economic fear mongering etc.
Fact: Obama is President, anyways.
Says more about 1) your party and 2) this country than you want to believe.
Posted By: Hello! (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 06:33 AM
Obama has no accomplishments? Didn't he become President which is a bigger accomplishment then being govenor, I could be wrong I only teach Poli Sci.
Token, I mean Jindal is still going to take most if not all the bail out money. I also loved Jindal's comment about Lousania weary taking money from the government. Gee, wasn't a Republican president at that time and isn't New Orleans in terrible strites even with him as Governor. This guy is not going to be nominee in 2012 if his no taking the money, but really I am taking the money position is what he is basing his career on.
Posted By: AFan (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 07:08 AM
Bobby Jindal basically went over the same points he gave in the Obama response on Sunday at Meet the Press, but he didn't come off as so scripted or planned. And who's idea was it to not give Jindal a podium? It seemed a bit silly for him to walk so stiffly to the cameras.
Posted By: Kevin (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 07:30 AM
Good piece, Andrew. You put to words, especially your Palin analysis, some of the stuff that had been floating inarticulately in my head.
I always like to read a column that explains to me what I'm thinking :)
Jake
Posted By: Jake (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 07:58 AM
Jindal was raised a Hindu?!?!
Thats like 1/2 muslim. ALlaaahHHh!!!!
All kidding aside he will never win the primaries, no matter how good he is. Republicans especially more southern value oriented ones, will never vote for no curry curry.
Posted By: hhhh (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 08:12 AM
i think the repubs saw the writing on the wall with palin after the 08 elections. she represented the old stereotype of the gop. she was uneducated, back woods, if it aint white it isnt right candidate.
with america becoming more diverse by the minute, that doesnt translate well on a national stage. jindal is everything palin is not.
Posted By: rey (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 08:32 AM
Was it just me, or did Jindal's tone come across like he was talking to a Kindergarten class?
Posted By: MydniteSon (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 08:54 AM
Wow, 1444. Fernando made some arguably true points about our president and you responded by calling him a racist. You perfectly personified the problem with the modern Democrat party.
Posted By: ChErikS (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 09:29 AM
sfernando needs to educate themselves on what "voting present" meant in the Illinois state senate and how its a common place vote an Ill. state senator makes while they are waiting for a particular legislation to be amended. Hint: EVERYONE in that particular state's senate voted present as much as Obama. Its just the way things work there while they are working on getting a bill into its final form. The rest of your right wing garbage doesn't even deserve to be dignified with a response so I'll just ignore it.
Aside from that, Jindal seemed like a big fake last night. He contradicted himself several times and put off this really weird Mr. Rogers vibe. I don't think anyone is very intimidated or worried about him right now.
Posted By: TC (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 09:36 AM
Thanks Chris, RuhRoh, Vugohr, hhhh. I mean that. Like I say, I want an opposition I can respect. Both sides have some repudiation to do to try and get there, but throwin' ol' Greg out is a good start...Disagree with me, but it's way more respectable when it's not racist, or homophobic, or whatever you call the version of racist that's against non-Christians...
Posted By: Andytobo (Registered) on February 25, 2009 at 10:24 AM
Andy,
No problem. I personally don't care if someone is Catholic, Mormon, Hindu, Jewish, whatever, as long as a large segment of their religion doesn't want me to "convert or die". Hell, I'd vote for an atheist if they were the second coming of Madison, Jefferson or Reagan.
Posted By: Chris Connolly (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 10:42 AM
I complement you for a well written article.
But you are wrong. I like Bobby Jindal, most Republicans do. He is a future star. But he's way to young to be POTUS. And frankly, his speech last night was not his best. But, there's a difference between making speeches and governing. And Bobby is a good Governor.
On the other side, Obama can talk IF the teleprompter works, but has ZERO experience, and ZERO accomplishments. Hint: getting elected ISN'T an accomplishment!
As for Governor Palin, she will be the next President of the United States. She is one of the most competent Chief Executives in the nation. Her state is well run, and unlike, most has a budget SURPLUS, which is mind blowing, since Alaska has no state sales, or income tax!
Sarah Palin is the only governor in any of the 50 states who knows how to compute the Net Present Value of Cash Flow and relate it to a state's budget.
Alaska gets 90 percent of it's income from the sale of oil and natural gas, that is co-owned by the state and the Alaskan people, and the price is quite volatile.
And yet, Alaska is in great shape financially.
Meanwhile, most other Governors preside over horrific deficits and have stable and predictable tax bases.
Palin is a proven leader with an actual resume:
City Council Woman, Wasilla, Alaska
Mayor, Wasilla , Alaska. Two terms, term limited out.
President of the Alaska Conference of Mayors.
Chairman. Alaska Oil And Gas Conservation Commission. The largest oil and gas regulatory board of it's kind in the nation. STRONG ETHICS REFORM
CURRENTLY:
Governor Of Alaska.
Chairman of The Interstate Oil And Gas Compact Commission. As voted in by other Governors.
Chairman. National Governors Association's Natural Resource Committee. As voted unanimously by the other 49 Governors.
Palin is a recognized authority on energy, and environmental issues.
Vice Chairman. National Republican Governor's Association.
Commander in Chief of the only National Guard in the nation that is on permanent deployment.
The 49th Missile Defense Battalion of the Alaska National Guard is the unit that protects the entire nation from ballistic missile attacks.
As Governor of Alaska, Palin is briefed on highly classified military issues, homeland security, and counterterrorism.
As Governor Palin's position as CIC is rather unique, she has a rather high national security clearance as well.
She's also the Commander-In-Chief of the Alaska State Defense Force (ASDF), a federally recognized militia incorporated into Homeland Security's counterterrorism plans.
Governor Palin has more experience as a chief executive, than Bill Clinton became President.
And Arkansas doesn't have much foreign trade. Alaska is a huge exporter, and Governor Palin has worked on many foreign trade deals.
Posted By: Gary (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 11:21 AM
Tobolowsky - you mentioned all the candidates being liberal, even the Repubs. True enough. What you fail to mention is that the media is soo leftist and no longer report news - they create it and/or shape it to their own ends.
That's how the Repubs got stuck with Methuselah (yeah, that's right - stuck).
Good choices like Thompson and Hunter were buried because they would've won when the real silent majority came out to play.
-MDB
Posted By: MDB (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 11:40 AM
greg (Guest)said
"Just saw the great Jindal, and his response was very, very weak. He just doesn't have much of a personality. If you think he can challenge 0bama, you're smoking something. If he were to get the nomination in 2012, his crowds would be about the same size as McCain's, on average about 2,000. Palin, on the other hand, had thousands and even tens of thousands who would stand in line in the rain for hours to see her, without the attraction of a free Bruce Springstein concert, and free food. Her crowds were so loud that they would make the risers on which the national media sat actually shake. Big crowds translate into lots of volunteers, and lots of donations. Palin outdrew McCain, outdrew Biden (average crowd 1,000), and many times outdrew 0bama.
Anyone who underestimates that woman is a fool."
------------------------------------
Greg, I agree with everything you said!
Palin 2012!
Posted By: PH (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 11:41 AM
Mr. Tobolsky you are right. You should be taken with a grain of salt. You just don't get it. I like Jindal and he represents one of several excellent Republican candidates for the future, but compare that speech of his to what Sarah Palin does and it's no contest. She would blow him off the stage. You like many elitists think Governor Palin is not qualified. You have obviously not studied her political career. As Mr. Benet states in his recent biography, "Do not underestimate Sarah Palin". The political horizon is strewn with political opponents who did. You will represent those opponents in the future. Anyone who watched the Vice Presidential debate held before one or the largest TV audiences ever has to see that she is a force to reckon with, a force of character, intelligence, superior fiscal acumen and last but not least charisma.
Posted By: Thomas McMahan (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 11:51 AM
Do conservatives really care what a Democrat thinks is best for the Republican Party?
Palin/Jindal 2012!
Posted By: bardsmith (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 11:51 AM
Palin would have a been a great idea. However, I did get a breath of reviviing from Bobby's response. He reminds everyone who might still be in their stupor from the address, just where government SHOULD be in our lives, and sadly, that it will overtake our lives in the next four years.
Posted By: Vicki Chris (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 11:59 AM
Gary said:
"HINT: Getting elected is not an accomplishment"
*sigh*
That's why your side has been losing representation for two years straight, now. I think you just broke my brain.
Posted By: Hello! (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 12:04 PM
Why is everyone so hung up on speeches? Who can walk the walk? Well, Sarah Palin can do both, thank you very much. Obama is all pretty words and lies and the media loves him for it, lies and all. I don't want a professor/community organizer running this country by committee, I want someone who has proven principles.
Posted By: Rightway (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 12:10 PM
MDB,
I don't know about Thompson, but seriously, Hunter would have been a good choice?
Duncan "Let's shoot Mexicans dead and electrify ths fence" Hunter?
That's like saying Mike "Throw me a big rock in a lake" Gravel would have been a good choice for the Dems.
Posted By: Brandon Crow (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 12:17 PM
Jindal was chosen by house republicans. If you notice he was not chosen to the alfalfa club dinner. When all is said and done Sarah will be the chosen one. Again thanks for keeping her in the news. She doesn't have to say anything and you write and when it's bad it is all good for us.
Posted By: badger (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 12:19 PM
I love it.
Obama spells out his fiscal policy agenda which is most expansive and expensive in the Nation's history, yet 411 crew devotes their considerable analytical skills to a speech by the Governor of Louisiana.
Posted By: AdmChesterMynutz (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 12:20 PM
The ALASKAN political landscape is littered with opponents who misjudged Sarah Palin. Also, a lot of caribou parts.
I never denied, and never will, that Palin has a lot of appeal for CERTAIN people. I doubt in a very extreme manner that this could ever amount to more than 20% of the country. There's nothing there. There's what people want to hear, when she can figure it out, and the typical "gee whiz, I don't know about you guys but I sure am tired and sore" bidness. You can't talk up Palin's credentials, because we know them and we're not impressed. And it's not like that's just because of the Dem media. Chris Buckley, son of Will Buckley, founder of the National Review and at that time the back page columnist for it endorsed Obama out of disgust with Palin. Kathleen Parker, another National Review cat as well. Palin is just awful and out of her league on every major issue facing this country. No resume is going to make most of us say anything but "she's got a good resume for someone who sucks".
And before you say that's close-minded, keep in mind that Obama now has on HIS resume "President of the United States" which most people would consider pretty good executive experience--a little bit better than President of the National Council of Mayors or whatever. Do you feel like he's NOW more qualified for high office than she is, or do resume's only matter when you're trying to justify Palin's lack of appeal to most of America.
Hey, that's just my opinion as, again, an unpaid political columnist. I think there's nothing there---and I think the myth of this "real silent majority" has very little LOGICAL support.
I promise, to everyone, that if it turns out I'm wrong, if this voting bloc does exist, if it does sweep Palin to victory in 2012 (God Forbid) I will be the first one to write a column repudiating myself.
Posted By: Andrew Tobolowsky (Registered) on February 25, 2009 at 12:28 PM
Admiral, I ain't an economist and I ain't an economical expert. I wasn't even talking about Jindal's speech, which frankly was pretty flat--but Jindal himself.
Hey, if you want to write a column on Obama's economic plan, I will sponsor that happening. It's for a better man than me to do.
Posted By: Andrew Tobolowsky (Registered) on February 25, 2009 at 12:35 PM
It takes real effort for me not to become physically aroused when I hear republicans defending and promoting Sarah Palin for 2012. And I finally got to see and hear the great Bobby Jindal last night. It was like Forrest Gump pretending to be Mr. Rogers. Oh Lord please let them run Palin/Jindal in 2012. Pleeeease?
Posted By: Windu (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 12:36 PM
Hey, Obamanation morons, as usual, you can't see the forest for the trees! Governor Palin doesn't have to run for President to be dangerous to the Dems, that's the least of your problems! The REAL danger to you IDIOTS will be her ability to draw crowds, campaign for congressional seats, and win back the Congress! She is much more dangerous as a campaigner for republicans at all levels of government. Frankly, I can't wait:-))
Posted By: attagirl (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 12:54 PM
Jindal is brown, and to all the redneck Repubs, in the South or not, will think of him as a terrorist, don't kid yourselves. I saw a documentary on HBO made by Nancy Pelosi's daughter and I was amazed at the ignorance of so many people at some of McCain's rallies. Those people would never support a brown man. Muslim or not, they all look the same to them.
Posted By: Foolio (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 01:08 PM
Please Mr. Tobolowski,
"Mr. Obama has on HIS resume POTUS. It's true that it is on his resume. But it is clear that he has never administered anything. He can't get an adequate cabinet together, he passes without any of the bipartisan process he espoused the worst financial disaster in history, he lets Nancy Pelosi and Mr. Obey run wild without any control. He's going to cut the deficit in half after adding a trillion dollars to it. I'm sorry! He gives a good speech. But aside from speaking ability he's a big disappointment. I give him a C- so far.
If he continues this course (and I honestly hope he does better) Sarah Palin will be there in 2012
Posted By: Thomas McMahan (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 01:34 PM
Andrew, read your rebuttal, frankly, your blog is much more analytical.
For one, checking off POTUS on the resume means nothing. Jimmy Carter has that on his resume as well, and he is one of the greatest failures in human history! In fact, most of this financial problem started with him and his social experiment known as the "Community Re-investment Act".
Obama, along with his employer at the time, ACORN were knee deep in this as well. Maybe you should read Dr Stanley Kurtz and his reports on Obama, ACORN, and their thuggery:
Now as for President of the Alaskan mayors, no, that isn't much of a title, or a resume enhancement, to uneducated people.
But for people who actually understand leadership and it's skill set, those kind of thinks say it all.
Governor Palin is consistently chosen by her PEERS, other mayors, other Governors, to LEAD THEM in various efforts.
That my friend tells you all you need to know. Again, she is the leader on energy for the National Governor's Association. That's not a ceremonial position.
She was chosen unanimously.
She was chosen unanimously by other Governors to Chair the Interstate oil And Gas Compact Commission, which is a coalition of states that work on issues related to energy and the environment. Again, her peers, other Governors, chose her to do this.
And of course, the Republican Governors chose her to be Vice Chair of their group. A leadership role.
Name me just ONE thing Barrack Obama has ever been a leader on.
The guy did nothing as an Illinois Senator, other than send money to his ACORN buddies, Rev Wright and Father Pfleger's Churches, and help funnel monies from the Woods Fund.
He certainly didn't do anything as a United States Senator. I mean after 143 days, he went AWOL to run for POTUS! Basically abandoned the job!
Again, I would think someone who wrote such a well presented blog entry could understand the difference between Palin as a real leader, and Obama as an empty suit.
When your peers consistently choose you to lead them, you are a leader!
One last thing, Saracuda, is a born leader. Palin got that nickname in high school, because of her aggressive play on the basketball court.
She helped take the team to the State Championship. During the game, she hurt her foot, and still played, turning that into a fracture. She scored the game winning point.
She and Todd still own a commercial fishing business, and she will still go out when she can, and work right along side the guys hauling in the catch. Those are big fish, too.
Once two boats collided in rough waters, her hand was crushed between the two boats. She went to the doctor, and was back at work the same day.
This is what leaders do!
Posted By: Gary (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 02:28 PM
Fair enough, fair enough.
Posted By: AdmChesterMynutz (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 04:03 PM
You know , there is room in the GOP for Palin and Jindal. They both are the future of thr Republican Party. Most everyone I know are fans of both.
Posted By: Becky (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 04:09 PM
Palin runs a state with an estimated population of 700,000.
700,000? Houston has a estimated population of 2.2 million.
I guess Bill White could be the President too then. Let's look at his resume.
Graduated Harvard University magna cum laude WITH a degree in economics.
Graduated University of Texas School of Law.
Administrator on the Board of Directors for the Baylor College of Medicine.
Plaintiff lawyer from 1979-1993 with Susman Godfry, LLP. Eventually became a partner at said law firm.
U.S Deputy Secretary of Energy from 1993-1995.
Chairman of the Texas Democratic Party 1995-1998.
President and CEO of WEDGE Group, 1997-2004
Mayor of Houston Texas, 2003-current.
Well hell, that looks like a damn fine resume too, sign me up!
Bill White for President in 2016!
Posted By: DSJ (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 05:03 PM
B. Crow,
So Duncan said "Let's shoot Mexicans dead and electrify this fence"?
Wow, I hadn't heard that before.
What a good idea.... I knew there was a reason I liked him.
Hunter/Palin, Palin/Hunter in 2012!!!!
-MDB
Posted By: MDB (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 05:25 PM
what an idiot . Keep speculating you dope and realize you have no idea or insight when it comes to politics and I'm sure other things
Posted By: Guest#4118 (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 06:06 PM
I see nasty racist comments on here from the liberals. Hypocritical? Yes.
You just like to start trouble--go get a job and pay some taxes that your party is desperate for.
Posted By: tiredofbull (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 06:07 PM
Sarah Palin may have "refused" to speak at some Republican events. How terrible. She decides (unlike Obama who was a an elected offical who never served but instead ran for President for two years)to actually stay in Alaska and GOVERN it. She has actual job responsibilites and unlike being one of 100 (like Obama) the buck stops with her as the highest ranking politican in the state. She can't be flying all over the country for two years campaigning when she has a state to run....wait that is what Obama did. But he did not have a whole state resting on his shoulders so he had plenty of time to kill. She just can't please you people. If she were to be speaking a lot you would say she was being a pest by always wanting the spotlight. If she stays in Alaska and does her job (as she has chosen to do) she is not being a good republican? Please. Good thing she is a different politican and wants to help and work for the people who elected her to run their state. She is laying low, leading her state and preparing. Good thing all the liberals are planning to under estimate her. They hate her so much because she draws such big crowds. If she was not a threat, they would leave her alone.
Posted By: Deb (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 06:27 PM
Oh, Deb, we don't hate Sarah Palin because she can draw large crowds, we just don't like her because we don't agree with her at all. On anything. Ever. Also, she reminds us too much of our former President, gee golly don't you know. And that, in my mind, is not a good thing.
Posted By: DSJ (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 06:47 PM
And man, when are people going to stop talking about Obama like he's a do nothing Senator. He's the freakin' President. Guess what. That now trumps everything that Palin has ever done.
Oh she was the Mayor of Wasilla and Governor of Alaska?
Stop. Barack Obama is President of the United States of America. The ENTIRE country. Not the states that voted for him, not the cities that voted for him, not the Blue States of America, but the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.
Oh she is Commander in Chief of the Alaskan National Guard?
Stop.
President Obama is the Commander in Chief of the United States military.
People want to talk about what he did. But what he is doing now being the leader of this country.
Game, set, match.
Obama's resume > Palin's resume.
Posted By: DSJ (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 06:58 PM
MDB,
Are you serious? Are you even trying to be serious? Your purposeful dissonance is amazing, and sadly, indicative of the far right wing of the Republican Party. It doesn't matter what anyone says, you pick at something, twist it to your needs, and completely ignore everything else.
In your "logic," I suppose Mike Gravel actually said "throw me a rock in a lake."
Hunter/Palin 2012? In the cavalier and irresponsible words of your God-Man president, W, "bring it on!"
Wait--why humor your delusions. Duncan Hunter will get as close to sniffing the nomination in 2012 as he will come to sniffing Sarah Palin.
Posted By: Brandon Crow (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 09:13 PM
After reading your post Crow I must admit,I had a special feeling run up my leg.Poor illegal aliens.
Posted By: Chris Mathews (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 09:58 PM
I would like to sniff Sarah Palin
Posted By: John (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 10:29 PM
I live in Louisiana. Every 'accomplishment' Jindal touts is a fraud. He says he's cut taxes 6 times, but he hasn't. Our taxes are exactly the same. Not renewing a bad, outmoded tax is not the same as cutting it, Bobby. He says he shrunk state government and cut employees...this is a flat out lie. Since he's been governor 4200 MORE state employees have been hired. His 'hiring freeze' consists only of him having to approve personally any hiring. He says he's reformed ethics, and he did manage to get some new rules put on the books, with absolutely no way to enforce them, or even penalties. A rule with no enforcement is merely a suggestion. He wouldn't even veto a 300% raise the legislature voted themselves until he was threatened with being recalled about 3 months after he was elected. Thing is, I'm a conservative Republican, and this is now the mouthpiece of my party? No, thanks. Jindal is very smart, but like Clinton, he's spineless and goes whichever way he thinks will garner him the most popularity. Our former governor, Kathleen Blanco, was almost Bushly incompetent, but she was more of a leader than Jindal. Jindal is all show, and no go. I love Rush Limbaugh (well, his show), but I sure do wish he'd get off the Jindal bandwagon. I have no doubt Jindal is a true conservative, but his nuts float when he sits in the tub. If he's ever going to challenge Obama, he's going to have to discover some passion, some intestinal fortitude, and he's going to have to build up real accomplishment, and not this smoke and mirrors bullshit. Obama has the same problem, but he, at least, has some passion, and gives a good speech. And in today's America, that seems to be enough.
Posted By: Journeyman (Guest) on February 25, 2009 at 10:55 PM
Hey DSJ, you are caterwauling about the population of Alaska, and how it's so small she can't be POTUS, I guess you never heard of DELAWARE, huh?
DELAWARE, the state that Joe Biden is from has roughly the same population, and I bet you think HE is qualified to be POTUS, huh?
You liberals make this too easy!
The fact is, Palin is more experienced now, that Bill Clinton was when he stepped into office in 1993.
Her budget is 3 times that of Clinton's Arkansas, and unlike Arkansas, Alaska does a LOT of foreign trade. So she has experience in negotiating trade deals.
In fact, she just negotiated the largest infrastructure deal in history with Canada. Something Alaska has been trying to do for decades.
Again, I'll compare her to Biden, who also comes from a sparsely populated state.
And again, I bet you think he's qualified, and yet he has ZERO Chief Executive experience. None, zip, nada.
Palin has 16 years worth.
The size doesn't matter. It's what you do with it. And Palin has been wildly successful in Alaska.
And what about Barack Obama?
He has zero accomplishment. No legislation with his name on it even. He was of no consequence whatsoever in the Illinois Senate, and abandoned the job of US Senator 143 days in, to run for POTUS.
This is like hiring a kid to sweep the floor at McDonald's and in a couple of weeks making him the store manager!
Again, head to head, Palin beats him.
She has something you can't learn, and you can't buy. Good old fashioned common sense.
Posted By: Gary (Guest) on February 26, 2009 at 03:20 AM
Dude (or dudette) that's the best piece of comedy I've read today!
There's a difference between checking something off on a "to do list" or resume, and actually accomplishing something.
Name me one thing he has actually accomplished. And getting elected means nothing. I'm talking about something MEANINGFUL he has done at any job he has ever had, ever.
I could write a book on things Palin has actually DONE.
As Mayor of Wasilla she improved the city, and helped get it ready for rapid growth. She also oversaw the process of building the town's first indoor sports center/conference center.
As the Chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission Governor Palin took a keen interest in ethics. Lots of issues both in the business, and her agency. It's a well known fact she cleaned house. But she also stood toe to toe with top executives from Exxon-Mobil, Conoco-Phillips, and BP. She helped change the relationship between the companies, and the state, for the better.
Kay Cashman's book: "Sarah Takes On Big Oil" is a must read. It tells you all about it. You can read some of it at www.petroleumnews.com
Inside the commission, there were issues as well. A quick trip to Wikipedia will give you more details, but both the Chairman of the Republican party, as well as the former Republican Attorney General were involved in some questionable deals.
Both were forced to resign, not only from the commission, but from the party. The Chairman was hit with the largest fine of it's kind, in the state's history.
The AOGCC is the largest regulatory body of it's kind in the nation. It regulates oil and natural gas production. handles leasing issues, environmental issues, and the like.
And somehow you left off the fact she is GOVERNOR of Alaska. Obama tried that as well.
Her accomplishments as Governor are long. Strong ethics reform. Incredible fiscal management. Strong reform of the oil companies.
On the other hand, Obama, who has the most corrupt administration in history, instead of being a crusader in Chicago's corrupt system, wallowed in it. Embraced it, became part of it.
The only "accomplishment" he ever had was his work at ACORN, where he trained the thugs to go harass bankers and shake them down for these bogus loans that would eventually cause our economy to implode.
I posted a link earlier to the work of Stanley Kurtz, Senior Fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center. You should take time and read the file on Obama.
The bottom line is there isn't anyone out there that has Palin's chops. She will be the next President, unless Obama gets impeached first. At any rate on 1/20/2013 She'll be POTUS
Posted By: Gary. (Guest) on February 26, 2009 at 03:42 AM
Gary, try telling the 43 other guys who were elected President of the United States it means nothing.
You said "Obama, who has the most corrupt administration in history"
Are you talking about the current administration? The one that has been in office for a month?
And you also said "The bottom line is there isn't anyone out there that has Palin's chops"
Her? Because she ran a small state, was Chairman of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission, and Mayor of Wasilla?
Why not Charlie Crist? The guy runs a very large state, was that states former Attorney General, a former Florida State senator, former Deputy Secretary of the Florida Department of Business and Professional Regulation and a former lawyer.
How is Sarah Palin better than Charlie Crist to be President? Because she was a mayor too?
You talk like being the Mayor of Wasilla and the Governor of Alaska is the same as being President, and it's not.
Charlie Crist can also talk to the media so, you know, he's got that going for him too. Oh and guess what, he's close to a foreign country too. Foreign policy. Boom. Crist in 2012.
One last thing, you said Obama has "ZERO Chief Executive experience. None, zip, nada."
By my calculation, he's got a little over a month. ZING!
Posted By: DSJ (Guest) on February 26, 2009 at 01:29 PM
Hey unpaid political commentator! You stated that because NOW that Nobama has "President of the US" on his resume that qualifies him to run this country. You couldn't be further from the truth. Truth be told, Nobama had ZERO executive experience prior to January 20. Who, out of the four major party candidated for the two highest offices in this country had the actual executive qualifications that are needed to run this country? Sarah Palin, that's who! You need to have experience to run this country. President is not a position you can learn by the seat of your pants or through on the job training. It requires executive experience. What executive experience does Nobama have...NONE. I wouldn't trust him to lead a Boy Scout troop, yet he's the Commander-in-Chief. He was the least qualified of ANYONE who campaigned over the past two years. The only reason he won is because the left-wing MSM LOVED him. Hell, Chris Matthews has a man-crush on him and I think Keith Olbermann does too. You should have heard them talk about Nobama on election night, they were running out of positive adjectives to describe Nobama (oh, that's right, you probably were watching the Socialist Broadcasting Network...oops, I mean MSNBC, on election night). Anyway, I hope your happy with your socialist choice, as for me, I'll keep my guns, my freedom and my money. You can keep the change.
Palin/Jindal 2012
Posted By: d's nutz (Guest) on February 27, 2009 at 05:09 PM
STAY CURRENT