Jump to content
THE BROWNS BOARD

Proof that Bobby Jindal is a smart conservative


Guest Aloysius

Recommended Posts

Guest Aloysius

He was smart enough to stay the hell away from the McCain campaign (h/t Ross Douthat):

Jindal: Never Vetted for VP

 

Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, who has emerged as one of the hottest names in national Republican circles since John McCain's defeat last week, was never vetted as a vice presidential pick, according to sources close to the Pelican State chief executive.

 

Jindal was approached by McCain forces to gauge his interest in the vice presidency and told them he was not interested in being vetted due to his desire to continue on with his current job, to which he was elected just one year ago.

 

While the official reason that Jindal took his name out of contention was his lack of a desire to leave the Louisiana governorship, there was also real trepidation within his political inner circle that Jindal might wind up as the pick -- McCain was attracted to his comprehensive health-care knowledge -- and be caught up in what they believed to be a less-than-stellar campaign that could pin a loss on Jindal without much ability to change or control the direction of the contest.

 

Some McCain insiders fretted privately that Jindal was too young -- 37 -- and too inexperienced (he had been a congressman since 2004 and was elected governor in 2007) to provide a stark enough contrast with Barack Obama. Of course, experience wound up being a less important factor than many people thought as McCain chose Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.

 

The end result -- intentional or not -- is that Jindal, should he run in 2012, will be free of any taint of President George W. Bush or McCain.

 

Jindal's future as a possible presidential candidate will be on display Nov. 22 when he visits Iowa to speak at a dinner for the Iowa Family Policy Center. He is also expected to stop in Cedar Rapids to view flooding damage.

 

Will he run? That remains to be seen. But in an interview with the David Broder of the Washington Post for the Dean's Sunday column, Jindal certainly sounded like a candidate.

 

"To succeed," Jindal told Broder, "we have to be the party of change, we have to root out corruption in our own ranks and we have to be the party of solutions."

 

That sounds suspiciously like the foundation of a national platform centered around reform, no? We have said for months -- keep an eye on Jindal. He is a comer.

 

By Chris Cillizza

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched an interview of jindal last week, he is well versed and stellar on where the republican party needs to be, he states that they need to get back to what worked best and that was conservate view points, he also brought about that he felt that McCain just like Bush have moved to close to the middle and had even crossed over to liberal view points which upset many of the undecided voters.

 

The Republican party needs to stop kissing liberal asses and move forward with conservative view points and practice what has made the republican party strong thru the reagan years. And what made them popular during the Clinton years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And he has the resume to boot.

 

Graduated Brown in 3.5 years with a duel degree. Graduated Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar with a Graduate degree. Worked for McKinsey, turned around LA Medicaid as Dept of Health Secretary, a post he took at the ripe old age of 24. Executive Director of the National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare under Clinton by the age of 27. President of the University of Louisiana System (16th largest in the U.S.) at 28. Appointed by W to be Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation of Health and Human Services. Elected twice to Congress and now Governor of LA at 37 years old.

 

Until he starts carving out a more explicit national platform, it's difficult to say how strong a candidate he would be. But he's got the education, intelligence, and experience to throw around with anyone in national politics, the President elect included.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt he's a very smart and supremely accomplished guy.

 

The religion thing (extraordinarily religious, believes in Creationism) will do doubt hinder his chances and his overall appeal.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Aloysius
Graduated Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar with a Graduate degree.
Two fun facts:

 

[*] Jindal isn't the first major Louisiana politician to receive a Rhodes scholarship. A once promising young senator by the name of David Vitter also received a Rhodes. But I'm guessing that we won't be hearing any stories about Jindal exorcising his sexual demons. Instead, we'll hear about him exorcising other people's demons. Literally.[/*:m:2ehxw9w2]

 

I wonder if the McCain campaign actually did Jindal a solid by declaring Rev. Wright out of bounds. That could help Jindal deflect any negative attention about the exorcism story.

 

Until he starts carving out a more explicit national platform, it's difficult to say how strong a candidate he would be. But he's got the education, intelligence, and experience to throw around with anyone in national politics, the President elect included.
Definitely, though Obama's a much better writer.

 

Maybe Jindal should hire Bill Ayers to write a book for him. Or maybe he can get Brent Bozell to assume the role his father played for Goldwater.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No doubt he's a very smart and supremely accomplished guy.

 

The religion thing (extraordinarily religious, believes in Creationism) will do doubt hinder his chances and his overall appeal.

Nah.

 

icon_lol.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tupa his hard right stance on religion will not hurt him?

 

The national general election is not won anymore by each side base. Its won by moderate independents and new voters. His not so moderate stance on religion will hurt, as to how much that would depend on how extreme his views are.

 

The guy has the intellectual chops hopefully he will be smart and not run in 2012 but in 2016. IF Obama does well with our economy and Iraq/afghanistan he is going to to stampede ANY republican.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can think whtever you wish, DH, but the simple fact is your boy lost partly because of the ultra right wing nut he chose for his runningmate. I'd be fine if the GOP kept making that same mistake.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And he has the resume to boot.

 

Graduated Brown in 3.5 years with a duel degree. Graduated Oxford as a Rhodes Scholar with a Graduate degree. Worked for McKinsey, turned around LA Medicaid as Dept of Health Secretary, a post he took at the ripe old age of 24. Executive Director of the National Bipartisan Commission on the Future of Medicare under Clinton by the age of 27. President of the University of Louisiana System (16th largest in the U.S.) at 28. Appointed by W to be Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation of Health and Human Services. Elected twice to Congress and now Governor of LA at 37 years old.

 

Until he starts carving out a more explicit national platform, it's difficult to say how strong a candidate he would be. But he's got the education, intelligence, and experience to throw around with anyone in national politics, the President elect included.

Can't wait to see how that gets downplayed in 4 years. icon_eek.gif

 

A real Rhodes Scholar wouldn't really believe in creationism... icon_e_wink.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A real Rhodes Scholar wouldn't really believe in creationism... icon_e_wink.gif

 

Leg: Leave that shit to the left-wing's version of DieHard, T, Bunker, etc.

 

Intelligence has nothing to do with it. Well, it kinda does. Here's how. This is one of those tricky scenarios when there was a huge car wreck at the intersection of Intelligence Ave. and Belief Boulevard, and the mess that is Creationism (i.e. disbelief in scientific facts even though one is ultra-intelligent and learned)...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm supposed to believe that gun control and abortion arent real issues, but Creationism in public schools is?

 

He'll throw away some line about Creationism having nothing to do with the Presidency and reasonable people will move on. He wont be writing, signing, or influencing any laws about public school biology. If that changes, maybe this will become an issue. Of course, even if it does, I have a sneaking suspicion that most voters that could vote for either candidate are going to be more persuaded by things like the economy, foreign policy, health care, immigration, etc. But that's just me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Toop, nobody sane claims gun control and abortion aren't real issues. Of course they are. We just have different thoughts on them. But I understand they are real.

 

And the hyper-religiousness doesn't scare me in the classroom nearly as much as it scares me on things like foreign policy and social issues. Why Thomas Jefferson's feelings regarding the separation of church and state have been throw out like yesterday's garbage bothers me to no end. A man as religious as Jindal cannot separate the two.

 

Example: if I were President, and there was a "separation of Fantasy Football and state" doctrine, there'd be no way for me to separate the two...I'm in too deep.

 

As is Bobby, religion-wise.

 

Notice I didn't bring up the exorcism.

 

Until now. icon_e_smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A man as religious as Jindal cannot separate the two.
Where did you get your knowledge of his personal religious beliefs?

 

Toop, you know I haven't spoken to the man personally, but reading up on things and being the insightful fella I am, I can easily come to this conclusion. But one needn't be as smart or well-read as I am to obtain the information necessary to reach the conclusion I came to, one only needs to visit his Wikipedia page. icon_e_smile.gif

 

Jindal was a Hindu, but converted to Catholicism in high school.

To me, this act shows an extreme affinity for religion.

 

He has also offered his religious testimony before Baptist and Pentecostal congregations.

See above.

 

In an essay Jindal wrote in 1994 for the New Oxford Review, a Catholic journal, Jindal narrated the story of a personal encounter with a demon, in

which he participated in an exorcism with a group of college friends.

Ok...and we rip on a guy for busting a couple of rails in college?

 

Bobby Jindal has a 100% pro-life voting record according to the National Right to Life Committee. He opposes abortion without exception.

Morality based up religious beliefs.

 

He opposes embryonic stem cell research and voted against increasing federal funding to expand embryonic stem cell lines.

See above.

 

And my favorite of all...though not really a religious dig.

Jindal voted yes on making the PATRIOT Act permanent
Link to comment
Share on other sites

To me, this act shows an extreme affinity for religion.
At this point I just started assuming that your post was sarcastic.

 

He is a Catholic with a Pro-Life voting record. So far we have a completely average Republican. Being Pro-life will not keep someone from becoming President. I dont think I'm breaking any news here.

 

He had a strange encounter in college that he doesnt feel capable of explaining well (if I remember the conclusion of the article well). The last time he discussed it was when he was 22 years old.

 

This leads you to believe he cant separate religion and foreign policy? C'mon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

He is a Catholic with a Pro-Life voting record. So far we have a completely average Republican.

 

You're right. He's probably no more religious than the other guys trotted out in his stead.

 

I guess this is the problem I have with the GOP as a whole...too dominated by Catholicism and Catholic principles.

 

And I really have no answer to your foreign policy statement, just that pervasive Catholicism (and religion altogether) scares the crap out of me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this is the problem I have with the GOP as a whole...too dominated by Catholicism and Catholic principles.

 

You get a pass, mz the pussy, but - for your information - Catholics have always been and continue to be the 'red headed step-child' of Christianity.

 

Look at N. Ireland and how the Anglos have treated Catholics. Pick up a copy of Trinity by Leon Uris - an excellent read.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I guess this is the problem I have with the GOP as a whole...too dominated by Catholicism and Catholic principles.

 

You get a pass, mz the pussy, but - for your information - Catholics have always been and continue to be the 'red headed step-child' of Christianity.

 

My bad, John. This stuff confuses the heck out of me. icon_redface.gif

 

It's really a problem I have with organized religion as a whole, than one religion singled out...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Intelligence has nothing to do with it. Well, it kinda does. Here's how. This is one of those tricky scenarios when there was a huge car wreck at the intersection of Intelligence Ave. and Belief Boulevard, and the mess that is Creationism (i.e. disbelief in scientific facts even though one is ultra-intelligent and learned)...

 

Ok, but I don't see Creationism simply as a "disbelief in scientific facts.." Actually, quite the opposite. In terms of simply comparing intelligent design vs macro evolution, it becomes apparent that siding with Macro ev. isnt so much siding with Science, but a (perhaps coincidental? icon_e_wink.gif ) faith-like belief in probability. In it's most basic form, probability is a numerical possibility that an outcome can happen, not an outcome will happen. e.g. heads/ tails theoretically is 50:50, but almost never works out that way and it takes an nearly infinite sample size to reach that absolute figure.

 

So, I look at something like a Gross Anatomy course (meaning only what you can see with your eyes) and then something like Statistics/Probability course and think that intelligence begins to favor one over the other. And then when you add the Physiology aspect that is typically taught with Anatomy (with all of the metabolic pathways and homeostatic mechanisms that the human body utilizes) and the messy accident at the intersection looks more like a car stalled trying to cross a set of train tracks.

 

Summarizing: Scientists estimate the planets age at around 6 billion and the universe at 10-15 bil years. I don't think that is enough time to perfect the process of muscle contraction (and all of the mechanisms that are involved) much less get from nothing to where we are today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...