Join 3,442 readers in helping fund MetaFilter (Hide)


I don't want to go to there
February 25, 2009 12:27 PM   Subscribe

While the world may be abuzz with talk of President Obama's first (sorta kinda but not really) State of the Union Address last night, others are comparing Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal -- who, in his response (part 1, part 2) scoffed at high-speed rail and suggested that monitoring volcanoes is somehow a bad thing -- to, um... well, just check it out for yourself.

The speech even got low marks from Fox News, and Rachel Maddow was predictably speechless. The best response (or most inappropriate, depending on your point of view) of the night, however, might actually belong to Chris Matthews.
posted by hifiparasol (274 comments total) 20 users marked this as a favorite

 
Meh. If the GOP is dumb enough to put Jindal on the ticket in 2012, they deserve the humiliating defeat that will result.
posted by Krrrlson at 12:30 PM on February 25, 2009 [10 favorites]


Ahhh. Politics the subtle art of talking to someone while making it seem you're talking with them (even though your not) and not at someone.

The Kenneth The Page comparison is absolutely hilarious and in terms of inflection, dead on.
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 12:31 PM on February 25, 2009


The "Americans Want Bipartisanship" Myth
posted by odinsdream at 12:32 PM on February 25, 2009 [11 favorites]


Seriously, LOL.
posted by gnutron at 12:33 PM on February 25, 2009


You've got to give the Republicans this: they stay on message, regardless of context or logic. Society could be in the midst of a zombie apocalypse and the GOP would be wringing its hands over the government giving out shotguns rather than giving tax cuts to shotgun makers.
posted by Bromius at 12:33 PM on February 25, 2009 [184 favorites]


The Bobby Jindal/Kenneth the Page comparison is cracking me up.
posted by MrMoonPie at 12:33 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I can't imagine living in a world where I don't end up voting for the Democratic candidate for president, so, given the two-party system we find ourselves in, you would think that I would find a situation that guarantees a Republican loss a good thing.

But, trust me when I say that I honestly pray that any combination of Palin/Jindal 2012 never comes to pass. A two party system perhaps isn't the healthiest democracy but when one of the major parties becomes an unimaginable joke... that's no good for anybody.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 12:34 PM on February 25, 2009 [20 favorites]


Tuning into Jindal's speech a bit late last night, I thought, "why is Mike Huckabee giving the Republicans' response?"
posted by gurple at 12:35 PM on February 25, 2009


I love everything about this. I heard Chris Matthews' "Oh god" last night, and just knew it meant wonderful things.
posted by crickets at 12:37 PM on February 25, 2009


I thought he did a really good job of explaining everything in easy-to-understand terms.
posted by dhammond at 12:38 PM on February 25, 2009 [5 favorites]


At first he was for government transparency. Then he wants to change the system to make his decisions closed to the public, now this. We sure can pick em.
posted by winks007 at 12:40 PM on February 25, 2009


Wow. I mean, the dude is a robot. He's like a cross between an infomercial and a 6-year-old giving his very first report in front of the class.
posted by ORthey at 12:40 PM on February 25, 2009


Jindal was a national embarrassment. If he does run in 2012, he just lost every single state in the Pacific Northwest, not to mention Hawaii (which I'm pretty sure Obama has a lock on, duh) with his anti-science "volcanoes aren't a real threat" bullshit. It's like Palin mocking fruit-fly research: it plays to the (rapidly shrinking) base but lays bare a fundamental misunderstanding of scientific research and its import.

But, shit, if I need a "lay exorcism" I know exactly whom to contact.
posted by joe lisboa at 12:40 PM on February 25, 2009 [12 favorites]


If Jindal doesn't want the USGS to monitor volcanoes anymore, maybe he can ask Palin to do it when she isn't keeping an eye on Putin.
posted by rmless at 12:41 PM on February 25, 2009 [7 favorites]


If you're going to give a "response" speech that doesn't even bother to address any of your opponent's points, why wouldn't you just write it and practice it in advance?
posted by dsword at 12:41 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


David Brooks unloads on Jindal.
posted by billysumday at 12:42 PM on February 25, 2009 [11 favorites]


Damn, K! What you got against volcanoes?
posted by Mister_A at 12:42 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


My fgavorite response to Jindal's response.
posted by ShawnStruck at 12:42 PM on February 25, 2009 [29 favorites]


Listening to Jindal's response last night, I had to intersperse the occasional "Golly Gee Willikers!" and other stereotypical Southern expressions. Honestly the homespun inflection comes of as entirely hokey and affected. I can't imagine that his performance came of as anything remotely authentic. However I was always amazed that the electorate seemed to buy into Bush as a man of the people so what do I know?
posted by vuron at 12:43 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Who told him to use that delivery? That's not his usual delivery, is it?
posted by mr_roboto at 12:43 PM on February 25, 2009


"Have y'all been drinking hill-people milk or somethin'?"
posted by billysumday at 12:44 PM on February 25, 2009 [13 favorites]


It's truly remarkable how much republicans hate science. I mean, it boggles the mind.
posted by ORthey at 12:45 PM on February 25, 2009 [25 favorites]


This is America. Here, we tell the volcanoes when they can and will explode, godammit.

WE ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE ANY SHIT OFF OF VOLCANOES.


USA! USA!
posted by snuffleupagus at 12:46 PM on February 25, 2009 [27 favorites]


I'm feeling this charitable to Jindal: Aside from the obvious difficulties of following Obama, delivering a speech like this is not one of Jindal's skills. He's a smart guy who impresses everyone with his intelligence and knowledge in small groups and meetings. He's a Rhodes Scholar like Bill Clinton was, and apparently just like Clinton, you can't come out of a meeting with him without being impressed at just how much he knows and how clearly he expresses it, even if you're still dead set against him.

That said, the actual Chris Matthews "Oh God" clip really captures it. As someone else said, it looks like Jindal just came out of a basement and left a dead (or not quite yet) body down there.
posted by fatbird at 12:47 PM on February 25, 2009


This is going to be one of those posts where, towards the end, I'm going to want a "filter by most favorites" option for comments. That would be such a great feature.
posted by ORthey at 12:47 PM on February 25, 2009 [16 favorites]


After opening & closing the "yourself" link to huffingtonpost in IE7 it started opening all sorts of crazy popups. Tried it on two different computers with IE7. Is this happening to anyone else?
posted by yeoz at 12:48 PM on February 25, 2009


I saw that Jindal was against 'volcano monitoring', which is hilarious coming from the Governor of the state that was subject to the worst natural disaster to hit the United States in modern times.
posted by PenDevil at 12:48 PM on February 25, 2009 [14 favorites]


If Jindal doesn't want the USGS to monitor volcanoes anymore, maybe he can ask Palin to do it...

Her state is already doing it! And if you don't believe the mainstream media, here's FoxNews: Alaskans Brace for Redoubt Volcano Eruption

I used to like Jindal. Used to.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 12:48 PM on February 25, 2009


The "Americans Want Bipartisanship" Myth

I don't want bipartisanship, certainly not if one of the parties is DEAD WRONG.
I want a party that will tell these fuckers "no, you're full of it", put the reality-based community in charge, and prosecute corporate crime with a vengeance.
posted by dunkadunc at 12:49 PM on February 25, 2009 [19 favorites]


Wasn't this guy supposed to be the GOP new hottniss? I mean, I have even heard from Louisiana people that they don't hate him, which has to count for somethin'. ColdChef, what's the deal? Was that a normal appearance by the Gov, or was he off his game?
posted by mwhybark at 12:50 PM on February 25, 2009


Looks like Barney Fife walking out there.

God, I'm old
posted by dilettante at 12:52 PM on February 25, 2009 [5 favorites]


I'm feeling this charitable to Jindal

I'm not. What a complete fool.
posted by R. Mutt at 12:53 PM on February 25, 2009


Move over, Sarah Palin! There's a new sheriff of Dumb.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 12:55 PM on February 25, 2009 [9 favorites]


Limbaugh Defends Jindal, Warns Conservatives They Are ‘Making A Real Mistake If They Go After’ Him.
Paul Begala urges Jindal to “dump Rush.” Begala writes, “But if it is Pres. Bush who haunts Gov. Jindal’s past, it is Rush Limbaugh who haunts his future.”

Last night on Twitter, conservative commentator Amanda Carpenter wrote: "Hackwatch: Conservatives/GOP-ers who try to spin Jindal's performance as anything better than it was..are hacks. Ugh, I have to go to bed."
posted by ericb at 12:55 PM on February 25, 2009


Not everyone hated it: "His delivery, if that is so important, started off shaky but got markedly better as the speech went on. Even more importantly, the whole speech was replete with bedrock conservatism couched in a conversational and simplified structure. In that respect (and probably the most important respect, mind you), it was truly Reaganesque."

"Reaganesque." The fact that this term is used as a compliment blows my mind.
posted by you just lost the game at 12:55 PM on February 25, 2009 [13 favorites]


Ah, Mefi's first Jindal thread. It's historic, if his rising star status is to be believed

I just hope I won't have to be revisiting this post for ironic-in-retrospect quotes after a Jindal victory November 6th, 2012. It's unlikely, but Americans voters have done stupider things.
posted by Rhaomi at 12:55 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Jindal: Disaster Preparedness Is Only Worth Funding If It Will Help My State.

What a tool!
posted by ericb at 12:56 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Wow, and to think I was afraid of this guy until last night.
posted by Damn That Television at 12:56 PM on February 25, 2009


Since America isn't likely to move to a transferrable vote system any time soon, this is probably the next best thing. Having the Republican party implode (at least on the national scale) will serve as a reminder that just because it's a 2-party system doesn't mean you're guaranteed to be one of the two parties.

The Republicans always did "loyal opposition" better than "competent majority," but now it might just be time for them to fade away, and a new party to emerge.
posted by explosion at 12:56 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


Jindal/Palin 2012! Yesssssss!
posted by ericb at 12:57 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Some kind of MAGICAL LEVITATION DEVICE that TAKES YOU TO DISNEYLAND!!!!

This kind of talk just makes me think of Pol Pot rounding up the intellectuals and relocating them to the countryside. Live strong, Barack. Keep these guys on the back bench.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 12:58 PM on February 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


but when one of the major parties becomes an unimaginable joke... that's no good for anybody.

I cannot remember a time when both major parties weren't an unimaginable joke.
posted by Hovercraft Eel at 12:58 PM on February 25, 2009 [10 favorites]


Also, I really hope he maintains the smug, patronizing, "You're all idiots" tone. Voters loved to be talked to like they have head injuries.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:00 PM on February 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


Jindal/Palin '12 Let's hear it y'all!

It's like a dream team! Tell all your friends, really! Please, tell all your friends that this would be the best ticket evar!!!1!

Really, please tell them, especially the Republicans you know. They might just start to think it would be a good idea.
posted by Pollomacho at 1:00 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


snuffleupagus: "This is America. Here, we tell the volcanoes when they can and will explode, godammit.

WE ARE NOT GOING TO TAKE ANY SHIT OFF OF VOLCANOES.


USA! USA!
"


And if one does erupt you can always declare a War On Glaciers.
posted by PontifexPrimus at 1:00 PM on February 25, 2009 [9 favorites]


Is there a point to this FPP other than as a place to dump on Jindal and Republicans? I mean, while there's certainly no requirement for unbiased FPPs, I really don't see how the FPP, as it's written, really sets the tone for intelligent conversation besides "LOL Republicans."
posted by gyc at 1:01 PM on February 25, 2009 [5 favorites]


I hated this guy when he was in Phantom Menace, and me-sa hates him now.
posted by Mister_A at 1:02 PM on February 25, 2009 [5 favorites]


And if one does erupt you can always declare a War On Glaciers.

Yeah, I think we already did that.
posted by hifiparasol at 1:02 PM on February 25, 2009 [31 favorites]


Is there a point to this FPP other than as a place to dump on Jindal and Republicans?

Just when I thought we might have a thread like this without someone trying to ruin the fun.
posted by ORthey at 1:04 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


Really, please tell them, especially the Republicans you know. They might just start to think it would be a good idea.

"You know, Bob, speaking as a Democrat, confidentially, I pray to God Almighty that Jindal guy doesn't run. He would totally crush Obama."

Is there a point to this FPP other than as a place to dump on Jindal and Republicans?

It seems as though many Republicans are dumping on this guy, too. He's an emerging political figure who is quite possibly being groomed for the GOP candidate in 2012. And he's proudly, loudly stupid. I'd say that warrants an FPP.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:04 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


We are totally whipping the glaciers BTW.
posted by Mister_A at 1:04 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


Am I the only person in the country who doesn't think it's noteworthy when a politician speaks to the people like they're a bunch dumbasses?

There's nothing special about this Jindal clown's incompetence or lack of charisma. Turn on C-SPAN once in a while!
posted by orville sash at 1:05 PM on February 25, 2009


The Kenneth The Page comparison is absolutely hilarious and in terms of inflection, dead on.

Sarah Palin Tina Fey, please, oh, please, broker a deal to get "Kenneth the Page" (Jack McBrayer) back on 'Saturday Night Live' this weekend to portray Jindal in the opening skit. Please, oh, please.
posted by ericb at 1:05 PM on February 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


a bunch OF dumbasses. See? That's why Jindal talks to me like that.
posted by orville sash at 1:05 PM on February 25, 2009


Is there a point to this FPP other than as a place to dump on Jindal and Republicans?

No, it's a place to discuss Jindal's performance. The discussion just seems to be going in a certain direction, not just here but pretty much everywhere, including Fox. I don't think you can blame Metafilter for Jindal's performance.
posted by stupidsexyFlanders at 1:05 PM on February 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


I'm a little uncomfortable with the inevitable conflation of Jindal saying dumb things, and the latch being on him "sounding" dumb. The implication that his accent (affectation? I am not familiar with him, really, enough to know) is really hard to avoid. So, we call him a jackass and there's an unintentional hint of "He's a jackass because he's from the south" or "he's a jackass because he speaks in a 'common' way" which is not useful in any way, and puts up another post in the "lofty Democrats don't understand you" thing.

Fact is, he sounded like a jackass because he was saying really stupid shit. Volcano monitoring is a bad idea? The lesson of Katrina is that the government should do LESS in such situations? High speed rail is a bad idea? Rex Harrison would've sounded like a stupid fuck saying that stuff.

Not to say that anyone is calling him a dumb hillbilly, just that that is a thing to be aware of when criticizing this ever so criticizeable performance.
posted by dirtdirt at 1:07 PM on February 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


Is there a point to this FPP other than as a place to dump on Jindal and Republicans?

Is that not enough?
posted by normy at 1:09 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


Geologist Erupts at Jindal's Volcano Question.
posted by ericb at 1:09 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


And if one does erupt you can always declare a War On Glaciers.
posted by PontifexPrimus at 1:00 PM on February 25


Yeah, I think we already did that.
posted by hifiparasol at 1:02 PM on February 25


Shit, it's the only goddamn war I can remember us winning.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 1:09 PM on February 25, 2009 [8 favorites]


When will he learn that the word "president" is comprised of three syllables?
posted by peeedro at 1:10 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


After thinking on this and reading some responses there is only one logical response:

THAT'S IT I'VE HAD IT

Is it really impossible for Republicans to just send someone out there to talk like a normal human being? Everyone one here has seemed to key into the obvious logic fails of the things presented in Jindal's speech. But I'm getting to a more Machiavellian level. What the heck is the point of making that kind of speech?

Why does the message need dumbed down? Aren't they just trying to go after reasonable people in the first place? Aren't a good deal of American's just unsure of spending such a huge amount of money and how it's done? Can't there be more sense in trying to do that? Why do you need to go after people who think it's silly to monitor volcanoes? Is it because there's no volcanoes near the trailer park? And aren't the kind of people who are going to be interested in Jindal's points the very people who don't need any convincing? I don't get it. There's this whole argument about whether the republican party should me more moderate or conservative, but shouldn't the real argument be whether they should be more refined/populist? Am I missing something? Isn't the "good ole' boy" stereotype already the bread and butter of the party? Are they really worried about missing them? If anything I've seen a heck of a lot of people jump ship on the republicans even with their fiscal conservative emphasis, simply because the Republican party continues to debase itself in populist pandering. What's the point?

The only possible point would be to invigorate that portion of people who say "yeah, fuck them volcanoes!" or "don't take any my money!" and create a systemic oppostion to the obama administration. It's rabble rousing in purest form. There only shrewd reason would be to try and tear down Obama since there is no way you can build the Republicans up (at least to the point where they'd match obama's popularity, which would be the goal).

I don't know. I just don't get why Jindal would play along to this. Maybe he thought he was communicating on a basic level, but it was a massive failure. This was the best speech since Obama's earliest campaign days in terms of taking something complicated in communicating it in a broad way. Remember Clinton, despite all his faults, was the master of this. So even though Jindal was a Rhodes Scholar like him, Jindal may have flunked his first exam.

And the Republicans have really seemed to entrench themselves. They're going to try and make the next 4 years as ugly as possible.
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 1:12 PM on February 25, 2009 [22 favorites]


I'm a little uncomfortable with the inevitable conflation of Jindal saying dumb things, and the latch being on him "sounding" dumb.

Personally, to me he says dumb things and he sounds incredibly condescending. I'm not sure a lot of Democrats would latch onto making fun of his accent as a killing blow, considering the accents of Clinton and Carter. Remember, Bush's speech patterns were criticized not for being Texan but for being just plain sloppy, or faux-downhome.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 1:12 PM on February 25, 2009


Is there a point to this FPP other than as a place to dump on Jindal and Republicans?

Sorry. Next time I'll include some thoughtful responses from political analysts and scientists, and I'll include a link to the actual speech being discussed so Jindal has a better chance for his voice to be heard.

Oh, wait. That's exactly what I did.

You know what? Jindal and the Republicans dumped on us first. They dumped on us by talking to us as though we're brain-damaged four-year-olds, and they dumped on us by pandering to us. I think they can stand a little LOL mockery, because their approach to discourse makes me laugh out loud.
posted by hifiparasol at 1:13 PM on February 25, 2009 [94 favorites]


The crazy-ass wing of the Republican Party has dominated the GOP for my entire life, and has dominated the American federal government for most of the last decade and a half. It is incredibly gratifying to watch it implode.
posted by Pope Guilty at 1:14 PM on February 25, 2009 [18 favorites]


Those shitstains are doomed.
posted by gman at 1:15 PM on February 25, 2009


Why does the message need dumbed down?

Shit, I'm pretty sure Jindal just smartened that dumbassed message UP.
posted by kittens for breakfast at 1:16 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


Krugman on Jindal:
"[L]eaving aside the chutzpah of casting the failure of his own party’s governance as proof that government can’t work, does he really think that the response to natural disasters like Katrina is best undertaken by uncoordinated private action? Hey, why bother having an army? Let’s just rely on self-defense by armed citizens.

The intellectual incoherence is stunning. Basically, the political philosophy of the GOP right now seems to consist of snickering at stuff that they think sounds funny. The party of ideas has become the party of Beavis and Butthead."
posted by ericb at 1:19 PM on February 25, 2009 [25 favorites]


Lacking Subtlety, I agree with you that the Republicans are going to cling to their old ways and old attacks, desperately trying to shore up what little support they can muster on the far right, rather than pursue a policy of cooperation in an attempt to win compromises that may benefit the electorate and allow them to show progress in advancing conservative goals, even in a democrat-dominated federal government. I think that, even if the economy continues to founder, the Republicans will suffer losses at the 2010 midterm election because their message is so dated, and so antithetical to the way most Americans want to run the country, and their motives so suspect, that people will stay away from Republican candidates in droves.
posted by Mister_A at 1:20 PM on February 25, 2009


Am I the only person in the country who doesn't think it's noteworthy when a politician speaks to the people like they're a bunch dumbasses?

I was wondering if he used that tone of voice in his campaign speeches. Or does he just talk like that all the time? It seriously sounded like he was talking to a class of kindergartners.
posted by ArgentCorvid at 1:20 PM on February 25, 2009


Okay, I have a new rule.

If you're going to call the Government out on its spending projects, you are no longer allowed to use phrases such as "something called" or "which is apparently for" when referring to the projects.

Saying stuff like that means you're either playing the "I ain't no highfalutin' smartypants, but I do know..." populist angle, or that you really didn't do your homework on what the project's for and instead chose to mention it because it sounded funny.

Or both. And if it's both, then there are more rules of mine which you'll have to follow, involving having angry ferrets placed down your trousers and being forced to eat hot soup without blowing on it first. I mean business, people.
posted by Spatch at 1:22 PM on February 25, 2009 [12 favorites]


Buddy of mine is an (Illinois) republican in office. He expressed some views tangentially related to abortion that were pretty level headed at a town meeting a bit ago. I mean nothing inflamatory, akin to: “hey, we shouldn’t remove someone’s molars and set their legs on fire whether they’re getting an abortion or not” type of thing.
Some guy stood up and berated him as not being pro-life enough, yadda yadda, called him a RINO, etc. And it generally devolved into chaos.

Now, political views aside, if your spaghetti machine is so unstable you can’t vaguely gesture at it, much less turn it on, without a complete breakdown, maybe it’s time to get a new machine.
Point being - the GOP should have imploded years ago. As it is, it’s going to fracture and shatter hard, which, normally, I couldn’t care less, but I think there’s going to be a lot of shrapnel.
Idiots like this? They’re going to be one of those nasty chunks of metal lodged too near the heart so they can’t operate and remove the thing.

We need an opposition party. But it’s been so that when the GOP’s been running things (of late) the Dems were too whipped to do anything. Now that the Dems are (somewhat) in charge, we’ve got...this.
posted by Smedleyman at 1:22 PM on February 25, 2009 [7 favorites]


maybe Jindal, in order to have credibility for a future Republican presidential run, needed to "good-old-boy" himself. Everything I have heard about him makes me believe he is better than the speech but everything I know about Republicans shows me that Jindal had better be a war hero or a certifiable southerner if he ever dreams to win a nomination.
posted by Glibpaxman at 1:24 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


No, it's a place to discuss Jindal's performance. The discussion just seems to be going in a certain direction, not just here but pretty much everywhere, including Fox. I don't think you can blame Metafilter for Jindal's performance.

Come on. I agree with pretty much everything being said about Jindal and Republicans here, but I still think the FPP was way too editorialized. The direction this thread is going and has gone may have been pretty well set by the speech itself, I'd admit, but the tone of the FPP didn't really guide it back to cogent discussion at all.
posted by kingbenny at 1:26 PM on February 25, 2009


.
posted by cjorgensen at 1:27 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Lacking Subtlety, I agree with you that the Republicans are going to cling to their old ways and old attacks, desperately trying to shore up what little support they can muster on the far right, rather than pursue a policy of cooperation in an attempt to win compromises that may benefit the electorate and allow them to show progress in advancing conservative goals, even in a democrat-dominated federal government. I think that, even if the economy continues to founder, the Republicans will suffer losses at the 2010 midterm election because their message is so dated, and so antithetical to the way most Americans want to run the country, and their motives so suspect, that people will stay away from Republican candidates in droves.
posted by Mister_A at 1:20 PM on February 25 [+] [!]


I guess I'm just saying that I can usually have interesting conversations with fiscal conservatives that oppose the stimulus in some form. I disagree, but it's a real conversation. Heck, I can have a real conversation about number of conservative issues (even abortion, and it would have nothing to do with souls). So what's really stopping the republican party from being thoughtful presenters of material?

Maybe it's just my youth betraying me, but I feel like even under Reagen the pandering wasn't so... pandery.

So where are the thoughtful modern conservatives in government? I meet them in real life, but maybe they're too busy making money to be bothered with something as silly as government.
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 1:27 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


His delivery is amusing, but the man himself is frightening, and I'm not nearly as convinced that he'd be bad for the Republicans in 2012.

I live in the Texas panhandle. John McCain was never popular here, he was too liberal, and not churchy enough, for a lot of my neighbors. Sarah Palin, however, was loved from the instant she appeared. I saw more bumper stickers reading "Sarha!" than I did "McCain/Palin".

The fact is that crazy religious sells like hotcakes. The fact that Palin was a religious fruit loop was not, I think, a liability for the Republicans. She gained votes, and she energized the crazy religious people who do the donkeywork (if you'll pardon the mixed political metaphor) for the Republicans come election time. Jindal seems to be cut from the same cloth. He's a crazy fundie, and that is what the Republicans want. He hates science, does exorcisms, and that shit sells in Republicanville.

I hope that it'll only sell in the former Confederacy, and that the popularity of Palin and Jindal are simply indicative of the Republican party becoming a regional party rather than a national party. But I'm not so sure. Less than 35% of Americans think evolution is true, they can't all live in the south, and a politician who agrees with their ignorance and superstitions may well be quite successful.

Yeah, his delivery sucks, but so did Reagan's. I'm not feeling complacent where Jindal and Palin are concerned.
posted by sotonohito at 1:31 PM on February 25, 2009 [7 favorites]


I'm sorry, on further review I just thought this was an obit thread.
posted by cjorgensen at 1:31 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


"Now, political views aside, if your spaghetti machine is so unstable you can’t vaguely gesture at it, much less turn it on, without a complete breakdown, maybe it’s time to get a new machine."

Yeah, the culture war doesn't wear so well when there are much bigger problems right in front of us. It's not a platform, in any event, but the Republicans have made it such. The Democrats abandoned their culture war in the '70s, but they had to fail badly and reform, which is what's in store for the Republicans, too. This is still the negotiation stage of grief. We haven't hit acceptance yet.
posted by krinklyfig at 1:32 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I heard Chris Matthews' "Oh god" last night, and just knew it meant wonderful things.

Some of the online media is making a lot of this, but I said exactly the same thing when I saw Jindal walk out, because doing that thing where the camera faces an empty podium, and then you walk out on the carpet between flags, will backfire if you're not somebody who can pull it off. It was a clunky attempt to be dramatic and weighty (or Presidential), and it looked silly. I was more surprised, though, by his attempt to sell such a worn out and failed agenda.

I was bothered by the volcano mention, but by that point I had already been way pissed on the earmark thing. I don't tend to catch network news, but in waiting for Obama's speech I watched the ABC broadcast, and they did that tired thing where they find the silliest sounding earmarks and get all indignant about it. So they brought up things like funding for waste-water treatment in North Pole, Alaska (of course, invoking 'Santa Claus') as if this was a frivolous luxury. They included things like mormon crickets and beavers--stuff that it is easy to sneer at when you see it in a one-line mention but which, on even minimal investigation, reflects legitimate issues. Not that I think they couldn't have argued that there should be another way to fund such projects, but their approach was to characterize such funding as fiscally irresponsible. I thought it was particularly crummy considering all the general tension around the current economic stuff.

I thought Obama's speech provided an incredible contrast to the administration that just departed. I was already blown away by what he did in the closing of the White House summit the other day; he owned that room, and he pwned the Republicans all over the place! Not that I'm not sincerely hoping for a good dialogue between them, but he totally called them on their negative approach, and he did it without getting trashy. My reaction was much like it had been during the election, when i wanted him to fight back as dirty as the other side, and he played it cool and skated above it. It's like he is going to continue to sit back and let the Republicans ruin themselves. Mostly, though, it's a pretty neat to be able to trust that there's somebody up there who knows what he is doing and has a solid connection to reality. I'm trying not to be blindly uncritical, but I have to admit to being optimistic and inspired.
posted by troybob at 1:32 PM on February 25, 2009 [30 favorites]


I think that there are thoughtful conservatives, people with whom one can respectfully disagree, but they are not the face (nor any other organ) of the Republican party right now. I know my republican family members all just stopped talking about politics at the end of last summer. They didn't want to hear any more, they were so disgusted and disgraced by the state of things in their party.
posted by Mister_A at 1:32 PM on February 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


He's a smart guy who impresses everyone with his intelligence and knowledge in small groups and meetings.

Bush also impressed in small groups and meetings.

He loses when you look at which party he's running with. You can be smart, real smart, and still be a total fucking idiot.
posted by From Bklyn at 1:34 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


sotonohito, "...she energized the crazy religious people who do the donkeywork (if you'll pardon the mixed political metaphor) for the Republicans come election time."

I think you were wanting "elephant's share."
posted by cjorgensen at 1:34 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Come on. I agree with pretty much everything being said about Jindal and Republicans here, but I still think the FPP was way too editorialized. The direction this thread is going and has gone may have been pretty well set by the speech itself, I'd admit, but the tone of the FPP didn't really guide it back to cogent discussion at all.
posted by kingbenny at 1:26 PM on February 25 [+] [!]


Seriously? I don't think anyone else thinks this post was editorialized. At all.

In addition, almost every comment in the post is directly related to a link provided. It's as much editorializing as posting a funny link and saying "this is funny!"

And why exactly does a FPP post have to be absolutely sterile in terms of political leaning again? I mean really? I don't think this was editorialized but even if it was a bit more, I wouldn't have been thrown off for a second.

Isn't it the commentators job to steer the thing in another direction?
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 1:34 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


He's a smart guy who impresses everyone with his intelligence and knowledge in small groups and meetings.

Smart people say smart things or they let other smart people write the smart things they're going to say because they're too busy being smart somewhere else.

Complaining about monitoring volcanoes is beyond stupid, it's like complaining about monitoring the weather. Lots of people can die if we don't monitor these things.

I hope he runs for President just so they can hang that idiotic comment on him repeatedly.
posted by Brandon Blatcher at 1:35 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]



Some kind of MAGICAL LEVITATION DEVICE that TAKES YOU TO DISNEYLAND!!!!


That's the point in the speech where I shot my TV. Unfortunately, I was listening to it on the radio.
posted by queensissy at 1:36 PM on February 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


Can we please have a bit of respect? A man just died here.
posted by WPW at 1:36 PM on February 25, 2009 [44 favorites]


How about he is a jackass because he said idiotic things in a horrible fatalistically manner.

I mean christ, he rails against big government while LA was the biggest recipient of Federal assistance in living memory. He bemoans funding for specific disaster monitoring in the face of one of his cities still in the process of recovering from a major disaster, he related stories that others have told in substantially different ways (a la Clinton's "under fire" story), referenced a racial profiler as a close friend, his biggest supporter is Rush is is demanding the GOP not criticize him....

Nah, I don't care if he is Southern, or whatever, he sounded like an asshole because he said assholish things. AND he seriously needs to get a better makeup artist, and take vocal coaching for speeches. He, in other words failed both substantively and stylistically.

But, you know the GOP have certainly pulled off the trifecta of fail between Palin, Steele and Jindal.
posted by edgeways at 1:37 PM on February 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


When I was reading about the Kenneth the Page comparisons I thought you all were overexaggerating.

Holy shit it could have been Jack McBrayer up there. He sounded like the American people were a bunch of elementary school students.
posted by Talez at 1:39 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I frankly thought I was watching a live version of Dora the Explorer when Jindal spoke.

Also, "Oh God..." is correct. Good for Chris. I had a feeling it was really Keith, but I forgot Chris is the one who is more outspoken on there.

The sad part about it all is that Jindal is just another example of how Republicans and Conservatives pander to the no so well educated of our society, and since there are many of those, the republicans end up having a grip of the US to a good extent.

I can only pray that we can somehow unclench their version of an iron fist within 3 years.

PS: Obama's speech was fantastic btw. Key point: We are not quitters.
posted by JoeXIII007 at 1:40 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I saw that Jindal was against 'volcano monitoring', which is hilarious coming from the Governor of the state that was subject to the worst natural disaster to hit the United States in modern times.

It's worse than that. It's not just that Jindal should be empathetic and thoughtful about other places that might have different natural disasters and the general idea of investing to monitor and prepare for them -- though he should be able to think that way.

The same thing that makes New Orleans vulnerable to hurricanes makes them vulnerable to tsunamis. Except tsunamis move a lot faster and give you a lot less time to evacuate.

How do tsunamis start? Anyone want to take a guess?

Yeah.

But apparently Governor Jindal either doesn't know this, or he believes that there are pure private solutions for monitoring volcanoes. I'm not sure which option would make him more of a fool, but either one implies that he's missing some of what it takes to act effectively for public safety.

And I thought his scare remarks about what might precipitate another rise in gas prices were foolish.
posted by weston at 1:43 PM on February 25, 2009 [11 favorites]


hifiparasol: "You know what? Jindal and the Republicans dumped on us first. They dumped on us by talking to us as though we're brain-damaged four-year-olds, and they dumped on us by pandering to us."

I enjoyed this little quip from FiveThirtyEight:

"If it sounds like Jindal is targeting his speech to a room full of fourth graders, that's because he is. They might be the next people to actually vote for Republicans again."
posted by Rhaomi at 1:43 PM on February 25, 2009 [8 favorites]


There were some great twitter comments on #sotu last night.

I can totally see Fred Armisen doing Jindal on SNL this weekend. I think it would be ever better if it opened up with guy that plays Kenneth on 30 Rock looking at the camera and saying 'Hi, I'm Bobby Jindal.'
posted by daHIFI at 1:44 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Did anybody see Jindal's thing before watching Obama's? I was curious as to whether his tone seemed more condescending because it so immediately followed Obama, who seems to make a point of not talking down to his audience. But also, I tend to be more generous about stuff like this, as someone who has no public speaking skill whatsoever, and even before Jindal's statement I thought it would suffer in proximity to Obama's for reasons Jindal could not control. But that receded when the content of his statement turned out to be FAIL.
posted by troybob at 1:44 PM on February 25, 2009


"While some of the projects in the [stimulus] bill make sense, their legislation is larded with wasteful spending. It includes ... $140 million for something called 'volcano monitoring.'"

"And what the hell are these... 'lightning rods'? Or this 'Doppler radar storm tracking' nonsense? We are spending hundreds of millions of dollars on fictitious threats like [checks notes] 'earthquake alerts', or 'wildfire prevention'.

This is absurd. We could and should be spending this money on real issues, like making the tax cuts permanent or stopping foreign terrorists like Godzilla."
posted by quin at 1:44 PM on February 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


It amazes me that Jondal was a Rhodes scholar because he sounded completely idiotic, but I digress.

The position the Republicans are trying to establish is not that Republicans can run the economy better than democrats, but that the government cannot be trusted to run the economy. That includes a Republican-led government. That's why criticizing a republican-led government that spent excessively and was fiscally irresponsible is not inconsistent.

Because Obama's speech was so good and so effective, what Jindal should have attacked was the administration's focus - why are we dividing our focus and resources across all these myriad things. We have to focus on doing this one thing exactly right, because if that one thing is done wrong, everything falls apart. He could have even cribbed Clinton's "It's the economy, stupid" for himself.

Of course he attempt to construct some sort of folksy personality and did none of those things. Instead, he sounded smug, fake, and out of touch. So that party sinks further into the abyss.

To the commenter who speculated above that the Republicans may lose seats in the 2010 midterm even if the economy doesn't get better, let me remind you that the economy does not have a static equilibrium. Not getting better = getting worse. If the economy is worse by Nov 2010, you are going to have rioting, let alone a complete upheaval in government.
posted by Pastabagel at 1:45 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Seriously? I don't think anyone else thinks this post was editorialized. At all.

In addition, almost every comment in the post is directly related to a link provided. It's as much editorializing as posting a funny link and saying "this is funny!"


Okay, after a little reflection and re-reading - I have to take that back. Slanted, perhaps, but not "way too editorialized". I think I mis-interpreted the post title, for one thing. I apologize.
posted by kingbenny at 1:47 PM on February 25, 2009


I for one prefer to leave the monitoring of volcanoes up to the free market.
posted by ND¢ at 1:48 PM on February 25, 2009 [7 favorites]


Has anyone ever seen Jack McBrayer in any character other than Kenneth? At least in Talladega Nights, he plays the exact same character. Weird to seem him transplanted into 30 Rock and now the governorship.

Not only should NBC get McBrayer in to do a Jindal sketch on SNL, but they should do it with the cast from Benson and make the other characters wear their Star Trek uniforms.
posted by Nelson at 1:49 PM on February 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


Because Obama's speech was so good and so effective...

At what?
posted by Krrrlson at 1:49 PM on February 25, 2009


Before yesterday I was really dreading the impending eruption of the Yellowstone supervolcano in the next few years. Now I'm only kinda dreading it.
posted by troybob at 1:50 PM on February 25, 2009


I never thought a politician's delivery (forget about content) could make me cringe more than that of either Sarah Palin or George W. Bush. But then I watched that Jindal clip...

oh-my-god.
posted by ornate insect at 1:50 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I for one prefer to leave the monitoring of volcanoes up to the free market.

Dude, I told you about my start up's business plan in secret.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 1:51 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Not only should NBC get McBrayer in to do a Jindal sketch on SNL, but they should do it with the cast from Benson and make the other characters wear their Star Trek uniforms.

Screw one sketch -- put that show on between My Name is Earl and The Office and I'm one hella satisfied viewer.

And poor NBC needs every single one they can get.
posted by MCMikeNamara at 1:55 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I for one prefer to leave the monitoring of volcanoes up to the free market.
posted by ND¢ at 1:48 PM on February 25


One of the many graffitos found at the ruins of Pompeii: GOOGLE RON PAVL
posted by Optimus Chyme at 1:55 PM on February 25, 2009 [72 favorites]


At what?
posted by Krrrlson at 1:49 PM on February 25


Irritating you.

I miss SCdB, because when he got all hissyfitted about left-wing politics you could just tell him to go glomp a fuckin' bishie and he would shut up for a few hours.
posted by Optimus Chyme at 1:58 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]



Because Obama's speech was so good and so effective...

At what?
posted by Krrrlson at 4:49 PM on February 25


At communicating his message, his vision, his morals and his assessment of the country's morals, his plan to realign government with those morals, and most importantly at persuading the audience that all of those things are (a) good, and (b) the same things that they want.

From a factual standpoint, his plan may be the worst thing ever, and he may be a bumbling idiot, but you'd never get that impression from his speech.

Conversely, it's possible that Jindal may be brilliant, that he may have a plan that makes everyone a millionaire, and that volcano monitoring can be effective without costing a penny over $4. But you'd never get that from watching his speech. He sounded like a message board poster sounding off in an effort to procrastinate from doing his geography homework.
posted by Pastabagel at 2:00 PM on February 25, 2009 [14 favorites]


I can't wait to see: http://www.jindalaspresident.us/
posted by cjorgensen at 2:01 PM on February 25, 2009


Brandon Blatcher: "Complaining about monitoring volcanoes is beyond stupid, it's like complaining about monitoring the weather. Lots of people can die if we don't monitor these things."

I wonder how many people have been killed in terrorist attacks vs. volcanic eruptions worldwide over the last few decades...
posted by Rhaomi at 2:01 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


He was a Rhodes Scholar? The sun really has set upon the British Empire.
posted by lukemeister at 2:07 PM on February 25, 2009


Did this ever happen with Bush? I mean, did the networks ever give air time to an entire speech by a Democratic pol, running directly counter to a speech of the President's?
posted by fleacircus at 2:08 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I still think the FPP was way too editorialized.

You know, I may just be an abortion-loving, gay-marrying, magma-fearing, evil pansy liberal...
but this sounds an awful lot like something a volcano would say.
posted by Greg Nog at 2:08 PM on February 25, 2009 [49 favorites]


Can we please have a bit of respect? A man just died here.
posted by WPW


Yes, but he came back as Zombie Jindal. Zombie Jindal wants your brrraaaaiiiinnnsss....

Aside from that, allow me to apologize on behalf of the state in which I am currently residing: I'm sorry about our Governor. We'll be sure to keep him secure in Baton Rouge from now on, at least as secure as we can without all that fancy volcano monitoring and levitating trains. If we had those...there would be no chance of him escaping ever again.
posted by rand at 2:08 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


volcanic eruptions worldwide

There you go again, talking about this "world" as though it were anything more than a mythical realm of wind & ghosts. Since when does any rational person care about this "world"? If I can't buy it, it doesn't exist.
posted by aramaic at 2:09 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


I wonder how many people have been killed in terrorist attacks vs. volcanic eruptions worldwide over the last few decades...
posted by Rhaomi at 5:01 PM on February 25


Let's drop this, okay? You can't watch out for terrorists. There is absolutely nothing stopping someone from building a gigantic diesel-fertilizer bomb, packing it into a semi, and removing a non-trivial portion of a downtown city block. There is nothing stopping some group from simultaneously raiding a dozen suburban walmarts nationwide and killing as many people as possible.

All of the transcontinental freight rail traffic in the US crosses the mississippi river over fewer than a dozen rail bridges. Nearly everything imported from China arrives at a west coast port and is delivered over freight rail across the mississippi. Disable half of those bridges and you strike a severe commercial blow to the east coast of the US.

Hunting rifles have never and will never be banned in the US. And there is no more cunning game than man...

You can't be on the lookout for terrorists because anyone could be one, it takes 10 semi-intelligent people to pull off a massive attack and the country is so open that you wouldn't know an attack was happening until it was too late.

So cut that shit out and let me take my diet coke on the airplane, mmkay?
posted by Pastabagel at 2:12 PM on February 25, 2009 [25 favorites]


volcanic eruptions worldwide

Nevado del Ruiz in Colombia killed more than 20,000 in 1985.
posted by lukemeister at 2:13 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


I wonder how many people have been killed in terrorist attacks vs. volcanic eruptions worldwide over the last few decades...
Of all the people killed by volcanoes between 1975 and 2000, 86% died in Colombia. Most of these people died in the town of Armero due to mud flows from the Nevado del Ruiz volcano, on 13th November 1985 - almost 22 thousand deaths were recorded there. (pdf)
22,000 deaths from a single volcano on one day in 1985 probably surpasses the number of people killed by terrorists from 1975 to present date by itself, let alone all the other volcano-related deaths there have been during those years.

But for incurious populists like Jindal, volcanoes aren't real things, in America, that actually destroy life and property. No, to them, a volcano is a thing Tom Hanks could get thrown into in that hilarious movie, or it holds a gateway to the center of the Earth. Like unicorns or Ben & Jerry's Blueberry Cheesecake ice cream, it's a fantasy to Jindal.
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 2:14 PM on February 25, 2009 [7 favorites]


I mean, did the networks ever give air time to an entire speech by a Democratic pol, running directly counter to a speech of the President's?

I'm fairly certain it's somewhat common for the opposition party to give a response after a SOTU. I remember Sebelius giving one after one of the Bush's, and it was a friggin' snoozefest.
posted by hifiparasol at 2:14 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


USGS volcano monitoring saved at least 5,000 lives, possibly as many as 20,000, including those of American troops and their families. Via. Also note the "Last Modified" date on the USGS article: it wasn't put up in response to Jindal's comments. It's been there for almost five years.
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 2:14 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


I can't wait to see: http://www.jindalaspresident.us/
posted by cjorgensen at 5:01 PM on February 25


I so wish that website was one of those Escape-the-Room games...
posted by Pastabagel at 2:14 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


Jindal also conveniently seems to have forgotten the hundreds of billions in aid that the State of Louisiana has received for Katrina damage while speaking as an advocate for less government and self sufficiency.
posted by snowjoe at 2:15 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Did this ever happen with Bush? I mean, did the networks ever give air time to an entire speech by a Democratic pol, running directly counter to a speech of the President's?

Yes. It's common to offer a rebuttal to the other party after an annual 'Presidential Address' or 'State of the Union Address' to Congress. Here's Tom Daschle/Richard Gephardt's response to George W. Bush's first address (not SoTU) in 2001.

Past Responses to the Annual Presidential Address to Congress
posted by ericb at 2:17 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Seriously? I don't think anyone else thinks this post was editorialized. At all.

In addition, almost every comment in the post is directly related to a link provided. It's as much editorializing as posting a funny link and saying "this is funny!"

Okay, after a little reflection and re-reading - I have to take that back. Slanted, perhaps, but not "way too editorialized". I think I mis-interpreted the post title, for one thing. I apologize.
posted by kingbenny at 1:47 PM on February 25 [+] [!]


No worries in terms of an apology.

My point was probably more that I think sometimes we're just all a little too eager to defend (for lack of a better term) what I'll call the "sanctity of metafilter"... because we all like Metafilter and how it operates very much; in which we basically try to be unlike the rest of the internet... in a genial/constructive way and not a contrarian way.

Sometimes just a little more leniency is necessary in some cases. That's all.
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 2:18 PM on February 25, 2009


As far as Jindal being described as "Reganesque" I think its quite accurate. Reagan was a poor speaker, and lied both obviously and frequently. Jindal's hallucination about a maglev rail system between Vegas and Disneyland isn't quite in the same league as many of Reagan's blatant lies, his bit about personally being involved with the liberation of a concentration camp was epic, but the political context and blatant nature of the lying was very Reaganesque.

However, I don't think it'll work quite as well today as it did for Reagan. We have youtube and other means by which such lies can be exposed and spread widely today. As during the Reagan administration, I am confident that the TV media would never be so uncouth as to actually point out that Jindal is lying, but I do have some hope that the spread of video on the internet will help bring exposure to the pathological lying of Jindal. Internet video of the Macca incident did seem to be harmful to Allen, so it doesn't seem too internet-wank to hope that it'll hurt Jindal as well.
posted by sotonohito at 2:18 PM on February 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


Did this ever happen with Bush? I mean, did the networks ever give air time to an entire speech by a Democratic pol, running directly counter to a speech of the President's?

It's pretty standard to air the opposing party's response speech right after the State of the Union. This wasn't an official "State of the Union Address," but it pretty much was one de facto.
posted by dersins at 2:19 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Cue Cards! Apply directly to the forehead! Cue Cards! Apply directly to the forehead!
posted by doctorschlock at 2:20 PM on February 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


I watched his speech and here's what I learned:

1) The Republican Party wants to win your trust so that you will elect them and then not trust your government.

2) Americans can do anything. Americans can do anything. Americans can do anything, mutter something about our men and women in uniform. Americans can do anything. Americans can do anything, mutter something about small businesses. Americans can do anything as long as it isn't too clever or sciencey.
posted by ob at 2:20 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


Well, speaking as a lifelong liberal Democrat, I am 100% behind Jindal's running for president in 2012. Palin/Jindal? Jindal/Palin? Aw yeah, the New Republican Party. That'd be even better if the economy is reviving strongly by then. Do you want to vote for the guy who saved us, who is also BLACK, and a TERRORIST, or do you want JINDAL/PALIN?! Rah rah rah. Man, that'd be so fun seeing that ticket run. I'm not sure I deserve to have that much fun. You should have to *earn* that much fun.
posted by jamstigator at 2:21 PM on February 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


It's truly remarkable how much republicans hate science. I mean, it boggles the mind.

FALSE
posted by MiltonRandKalman at 2:21 PM on February 25, 2009 [7 favorites]


Jindal is exactly the kind of strong, visionary leader the Republicans need to lead them to victory in the coming civil war.
posted by homunculus at 2:24 PM on February 25, 2009


Jindal also conveniently seems to have forgotten the hundreds of billions in aid that the State of Louisiana has received for Katrina damage while speaking as an advocate for less government and self sufficiency.

"There are times when we're fifty states and there are times when we're one country, and have national needs. And the way I know this is that Florida didn't fight Germany in World War II or establish civil rights. You think states should do the governing wall-to-wall. That's a perfectly valid opinion. But your state of Florida got $12.6 billion in federal money last year - from Nebraskans, and Virginians, and New Yorkers, and Alaskans, with their Eskimo poetry. 12.6 out of a state budget of $50 billion. I'm supposed to be using this time for a question, so here it is: Can we have it back, please?" — Jed Bartlet, The West Wing, "Game On"
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 2:24 PM on February 25, 2009 [24 favorites]


"I really don't see how the FPP, as it's written, really sets the tone for intelligent conversation"

Yes, let's blame the FPP for the fact that someone did something stupid. Better that we just all ignore it?
Make no mistake - the setup here was a trial run for the GOP's great hope in the next presidential election. It was a massive failure, and there really isn't much you can say about it that is "nice" or that would fit into the little old ladies tea party that a lot of whiny hand-wringing me-fiers seem to crave.
Republicans are pathetic dead enders at this point - get used to it.
posted by 2sheets at 2:24 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Did this ever happen with Bush? I mean, did the networks ever give air time to an entire speech by a Democratic pol, running directly counter to a speech of the President's?

Link

Since 1966,[6] the speech has been followed on television by a response or rebuttal by a member of the political party opposing the President's party. The response is typically broadcast from a studio with no audience. In 1970, the Democrats put together a TV program with their speech to reply to President Nixon, as well as a televised response to Nixon's written speech in 1973.[7] The same thing was done by Democrats for President Reagan's speeches in 1982 and 1985. In 1997, Oklahoma congressman J. C. Watts delivered the Republican response to that year's speech in front of high school students sponsored by the Close Up Foundation.[8] In 2004, the Democrats also delivered their response in Spanish, delivered by New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson.[9] After President George W. Bush's 2006 State of the Union address, Virginia Governor Tim Kaine delivered the Democratic Party's response in English while Los Angeles mayor Antonio Villaraigosa gave a response in Spanish.[10] Virginia Senator Jim Webb made the 2007 response[11] and Rep. Xavier Becerra of California delivered the Spanish version.[12] In 2008 Democrats tapped Kansas Governor Kathleen Sebelius to give a response in English;[13] Texas state Senator Leticia Van de Putte did the same in Spanish.[14] In 2009, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal gave the Republican response to Democratic President Barack Obama's first address.[15][16]
posted by jckll at 2:39 PM on February 25, 2009


He was a Rhodes Scholar? The sun really has set upon the British Empire.

He was the best the rest of the world had to offer. Sucks to be the rest of the world.
posted by vbfg at 2:40 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


So even though Jindal was a Rhodes Scholar like him, Jindal may have flunked his first exam.

David Vitter was a Rhodes Scholar, too. I don't think being a Rhodes scholar means you're brilliant.
posted by jayder at 2:42 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


So even though Jindal was a Rhodes Scholar like him, Jindal may have flunked his first exam.

David Vitter was a Rhodes Scholar, too. I don't think being a Rhodes scholar means you're brilliant.
posted by jayder at 2:42 PM on February 25 [+] [!]


Haha. Well, let's say that kind of stupidity depends on a different set of skills.
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 2:50 PM on February 25, 2009


Rhaomi: "I wonder how many people have been killed in terrorist attacks vs. volcanic eruptions worldwide over the last few decades..."

Pastabagel: "Let's drop this, okay? You can't watch out for terrorists. There is absolutely nothing stopping someone from building a gigantic diesel-fertilizer bomb, packing it into a semi, and removing a non-trivial portion of a downtown city block. There is nothing stopping some group from simultaneously raiding a dozen suburban walmarts nationwide and killing as many people as possible. "

Um, maybe I wasn't clear. I wasn't saying that volcano monitoring is a less worthy cause than terrorism prevention -- I was mocking people like Jindal who freak out about fighting terrorism and yet dismiss more mundane measures that in reality save many more lives. If people like him would look at the record they'd see that natural disasters are far more lethal and costly than terrorist attacks.

Also, thanks for the statistics, Marisa Stole the Precious Thing. I did a little looking myself, and apparently the worst volcanic disaster on U.S. soil, the eruption of Mt. St. Helens, killed "only" a few hundred people.

Then again, Nate Silver identified this near-miss on an American military base in which volcano monitoring saved hundreds of soldiers, thousands of villagers, and hundreds of millions of dollars worth of equipment, so it's clear this is still an important investment even if volcanoes are a rather unconventional threat to most Americans.
posted by Rhaomi at 2:55 PM on February 25, 2009


Yes, I look forward to watching the GOP trying to convince the same voter base that was convinced a black man from Hawaii was a secret Muslim that Bobby Jindal ain't "one a them ragheads." Good times, that.
posted by Amanojaku at 2:59 PM on February 25, 2009 [18 favorites]


Now if only Michael Steele would make taking the economy behind the woodshed to impregnate it a pillar of the Republican platform, we'd have the perfect 30 Rock hat-trick.
posted by bunnytricks at 3:03 PM on February 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


So what's really stopping the republican party from being thoughtful presenters of material?
The "thoughtful" part.
posted by Flunkie at 3:07 PM on February 25, 2009


I did a little looking myself, and apparently the worst volcanic disaster on U.S. soil, the eruption of Mt. St. Helens, killed "only" a few hundred people.

Then again, Nate Silver identified this near-miss on an American military base in which volcano monitoring saved hundreds of soldiers, thousands of villagers, and hundreds of millions of dollars worth of equipment, so it's clear this is still an important investment even if volcanoes are a rather unconventional threat to most Americans.


Still, I bet you could read that article aloud to Jindal and he'd hear the word "volcano", his eyes would glaze over, and he'd be thinking about Lilo and Stitch.

JINDAL/PALIN 2012!
posted by Marisa Stole the Precious Thing at 3:09 PM on February 25, 2009


OK, guys, this speech is gonna be big, we want to counter this and at least take some of the edge off, so who's gonna do the response thing?

*crickets*

Hey, do you think Bobby Jindal might bite? Maybe if we get Bay Buchanan to call him up and flatter his ass?
posted by longsleeves at 3:09 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


I'm all for volcano monitoring and government funding thereof. But what, exactly, does it have to do with stimulating the economy?
posted by The World Famous at 3:10 PM on February 25, 2009


I saw that Jindal was against 'volcano monitoring', which is hilarious coming from the Governor of the state that was subject to the worst natural disaster to hit the United States in modern times.

Jindal also conveniently seems to have forgotten the hundreds of billions in aid that the State of Louisiana has received for Katrina damage while speaking as an advocate for less government and self sufficiency.


No - as the Rachel Maddow clip makes clear, he's perfectly well aware that they got aid - he just thinks that was the problem! He thinks the government is incapable of doing anything right, and should therefore not even try. The federal government was such a mess in responding to Katrina that instead of relying on them to handle natural disasters we should... what?

Well, he doesn't quite work it out. I guess he really does believe the free market or survival of the fittest or whatever. People will only live in areas with volcano or hurricane risk if they can afford the risk, presumably (since we always start from blank slates and choose rationally and all the rest...) Or perhaps if the gov't weren't going to respond some for-profit company would get in the business of ... something helpful. I mean, I'm sure insurance companies would have been a great help in getting Katrina taken care of faster - maybe if we'd had more insurance companies everything would have worked out better.

God it is painful to try to understand what some people are thinking.
posted by mdn at 3:12 PM on February 25, 2009


I'm all for volcano monitoring and government funding thereof. But what, exactly, does it have to do with stimulating the economy?

*facepalm*
posted by joe lisboa at 3:12 PM on February 25, 2009 [9 favorites]


I'm all for volcano monitoring and government funding thereof. But what, exactly, does it have to do with stimulating the economy?

Well, you have to pay people to do it. And those people need logistical support, which is more jobs. And they use a very specific set of tools, so the companies that make those tools make more money. And the people who make the components that go into those tools make money as well. And when all those people have a little bit more money to spend, they can spend it on stuff like new cars or dinners out or higher education.

Also, volcanic eruptions tend to have a negative effect on local economies.
posted by hifiparasol at 3:14 PM on February 25, 2009 [17 favorites]


Yes, I look forward to watching the GOP trying to convince the same voter base that was convinced a black man from Hawaii was a secret Muslim that Bobby Jindal ain't "one a them ragheads."

He has an "R" in front of his name, so in their eyes he's fine.
posted by ob at 3:17 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


I wonder how many people have been killed in terrorist attacks vs. volcanic eruptions worldwide over the last few decades...

Nevado del Ruiz in Colombia killed more than 20,000 in 1985.
<republican>He said "people", not "Colombians".</republican>
posted by Flunkie at 3:19 PM on February 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


Every political satirist in the country, even the shitty one's like Bill Maher, just started shopping for a bigger home at the thought of 4 yrs of this guy as poster boy for the GOP. it's the start of the recovery, and of course the republicans will take credit for it.
posted by OHenryPacey at 3:24 PM on February 25, 2009 [5 favorites]


it takes 10 semi-intelligent people to pull off a massive attack and the country is so open that you wouldn't know an attack was happening until it was too late.

Given that I play World of Warcraft I can safely say that it's quite rare to be able to assemble 10 semi-intelligent people from a wide cross selection of people.
posted by Talez at 3:25 PM on February 25, 2009 [23 favorites]


I don't think being a Rhodes scholar means you're brilliant.

Well, it's possible that Jindal's quite a lot smarter than the content of his speech. He may understand full well which portions of it consist of misdirection and non sequitur but not care, if he believes the kind of speech he gave may serve a political purpose (and there's certainly some historical evidence it can).

Right now the world is doing all kinds of things that tear holes in a certain type of Republican narrative. Jindal's speech was pretty obviously about centering people who might be wavering back inside of it, and I don't think it's impossible it worked to some extent.

On the other hand, it probably would have worked a lot better if he'd gotten details like endpoints of a rail line between major metro centers correct.

(Or... maybe not. It's pretty easy to see what kind of rhetorical point someone might be going for if they choose to paint the endpoints as amusement/diversion centers like Disneyland and Vegas, rather than vast metro areas like the Bay area and LA. "This isn't about infrastructure, it's about wasteful spending on enabling entertainment." The rhetoric's good, but just like the clever line connecting volcanos with erupting spending, it places the facts completely subservient to the rhetoric, and rather than being ineffective, it's possible that something about this could actually help by activating potential for immersion and centering in susceptible listeners. )
posted by weston at 3:25 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


That was awesome awesome awesome! I was taking notes... let's see now...

1) Tanned dude named "Piyush" is representing a crew that just got done wondering aloud if having the middle name of "Hussein" means yr a Muslim terrrrrrrist. *

2) As evidence for why government is bad, dude uses his own party's leadership as an example.

3) Proposed solution is to reelect... his party... !

4) Volcanoes aren't real.

5) Government can't protect people (see Katrina, item #2) so why try? **

6) That Obama guy is trying to misunderestimate America / Americans! That's not hopey!

7) There's this racist sheriff guy I hang out with... has some good idears!

8) I'm turning down this ridiculous stimulus... (no follow-up questions please)

* I have 10 American bucks for the talent who can capture the hilarity of this in a nice looking t-shirt.

** Except from terrrrists

I'm sold! Can I cast my vote now?
posted by MeatLightning at 3:25 PM on February 25, 2009 [20 favorites]


All I can say is, these Republicans know their base and are not afraid to exploit it.
posted by Mental Wimp at 3:25 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Because Obama's speech was so good and so effective...

At what?
posted by Krrrlson at 4:49 PM on February 25


Christ, you are so boring with this shit. Surely by now even you must be tired of hearing yourself speak.
posted by shmegegge at 3:26 PM on February 25, 2009 [5 favorites]


PALIN/JINDAL '12: I CAN MONITOR VOLCANOES FROM MY HOUSE
posted by Flunkie at 3:29 PM on February 25, 2009 [15 favorites]


Seems Jindal maybe was in Baton Rouge when he says he was trying to get boats into New Orleans.
posted by CunningLinguist at 3:29 PM on February 25, 2009


"If it sounds like Jindal is targeting his speech to a room full of fourth graders, that's because he is. They might be the next people to actually vote for Republicans again."

Nate Silver
posted by Relay at 3:29 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


bobby and sayrah
saytan' inna tree
kay i essin' ing..
WTF America. One dumb mf ass of a Gov'ner after another.

He's trying to compare himself to Pres. Obama, ie: where I'm from, a far away land... Slumdog Millionaire this isn't. However, he is channeling eminem's 'My Name is Mike'.

Hi kids....
posted by alicesshoe at 3:29 PM on February 25, 2009


It's a shame that more Republicans don't stand behind their goal of smaller government by removing themselves from it.
posted by troybob at 3:30 PM on February 25, 2009 [10 favorites]


Christ, you are so boring with this shit. Surely by now even you must be tired of hearing yourself speak.

He enjoys playing the thoughtcrime victim in every thread he doesn't like. Best to just ignore him.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:40 PM on February 25, 2009


If the Kenneth the Page thing sticks, Jindal's done. Toast. It's even worse than Tina Fey's Sarah Palin impression, which destroyed her, because at least there she was just riffing on stuff that Palin had put out there. In Jindal's case, he's getting tagged to a pre-existing ridiculous character, and it doesn't take more than fifteen seconds of video for people to say "HA HA YES HE DOES SOUND LIKE THE DORKY GUY FROM 30 ROCK HE MUST BE A DORK."

Which isn't fair, and he may very well be a bright guy. (I suspect he's fallen into a similar trap to the one John McCain succumbed to, and he's decided he has to pretend to be an idiot if he wants the Republican nomination.) It is, however, how politics works. If Barack Obama had been easily caricatured, I'm not sure he'd be the president now. The fact that it was so difficult to find a funny angle on him had a lot to do with his credibility as a candidate. It's the same reason Dennis Kucinich and Ron Paul could never be taken seriously (well, one of several reasons).

It's a major unforced error on Jindal's part. He may be able to come back from it, although if he's going to attempt damage control, he's got to be funny, self-deprecating, impressive, and above all he's got to do it before 11:30 EST this Saturday evening.
posted by EarBucket at 3:41 PM on February 25, 2009 [8 favorites]


Volcanoes are best monitored from high-speed trains.
posted by Hovercraft Eel at 3:42 PM on February 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


Well, Barack again did a stellar job. And Jindal's response was gumbo made of tap water, with a little tap water for seasoning.

The thing is, the problems looming ahead really do seem enormous. I'm curious how the body politic will respond if, roundabout 2010, it finds itself confronted with pre-WWII levels of economic dislocation... and the sense that all the wealth and privilege we expect (nationally, rather than individually) has gone, and isn't coming back.

I keep wondering if Obama will be the US version of Gorbachev: a smart, daring guy... who has arrived way too late.
posted by darth_tedious at 3:45 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


Anyway, if the GOP wants to put Jindal up in 2012, then now is the time to do it. He might as well work out the kinks now (pun somewhat intended) instead of the GOP pulling another Palinesque catastrophe shortly before a general election.

If he can recover, he'll be a stronger candidate for the experience. If he can't, then at least the GOP machine can put another dumbass up for the job, someone who can at least pretend to be intelligent and likable.
posted by Blazecock Pileon at 3:45 PM on February 25, 2009


One of Andrew Sullivan's readers: "Will Smith vs. Urkel."
posted by EarBucket at 3:46 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


It's truly remarkable how much republicans hate science. I mean, it boggles the mind.

FALSE
posted by MiltonRandKalman at 2:21 PM on February 25 [1 favorite +] [!]


Well... to this guy maybe.

The truth is his answer is reasonably good (except his conclusion that republicans don't want religion in the classroom because it would mean they would make less money... that doesn't make sense whatsoever in terms correlation/cause), but his answer is still a kind of half-truth.

1) The first thing about the proportion of science funding under democrats being way less than under republicans is misleading. That's because the reason the science budgets are so inflated is because most of that research is for the military. The amount of actual money going into purely scientific endeavors* is comparable. What you often get during republican administrations is a kind of "I'll scratch your back if you scratch mine" mentality where you go on a military expedition, they pay for your own research and then you help them with yours. Back when I worked with our oceanography department in college, all of the expeditions were in conjunction with military research; and there were more military expeditions during republican admins. So often, the department was often very indifferent to the politicization because, well, they were giving us money to do research. However, there are sometimes some moral issues.

2) the second problem is kind of glosses over the impact of Bush's anti-stem cell stance and his anti-environmental stance. I mean... seriously? Those aren't "just two things", but instead fairly large and far-reaching problems. So even if those are the central issues... they are big central issues that I won't get into here.

My point is that you can look at the militarization of scientific research funding and the environmental/stem cell roadblocks as a legitimate qualification for a "war on science". I wouldn't call it a war... or even a hate of science... I would call it a not-so-subtle way of getting what they want... politically speaking of course.

* which is not to say military research can't be pure science.
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 3:46 PM on February 25, 2009 [20 favorites]


If he can't, then at least the GOP machine can put another dumbass up for the job, someone who can at least pretend to be intelligent and likable.

I'm pretty sure Mike Huckabee was watching gleefully from home last night.
posted by EarBucket at 3:47 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


If he can recover...

I've known about the guy generally, but last night was the first time I've heard him speak. I'm guessing he was selected for this last night to get him in front of the American people. But first impressions are lasting.
posted by troybob at 3:51 PM on February 25, 2009


Dear GOP: just stick to grunts, clicks, whistles and barks. That'd make every bit as much sense and wouldn't get you nearly as much trouble.
posted by telstar at 3:53 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


If the Kenneth the Page thing sticks, Jindal's done


too late.
posted by CunningLinguist at 4:04 PM on February 25, 2009


YJLTG's link: "[Jindal's] whole speech was replete with bedrock conservatism couched in a conversational and simplified structure. In that respect (and probably the most important respect, mind you), it was truly Reaganesque"

Fox News' Charles Krauthammer: "Jindal didn't have a chance. He follows Obama, who in making speeches, is in a league of his own. He's in a Reagan-esque league. ... [Jindal] tried the best he could."

Financial Times: ‘Reaganesque’ Obama seeks to shift paradigm
"...the speech was a great deal more Reaganesque than a mere expression of optimism. The key fact about Ronald Reagan was that he changed the paradigm of American politics. “The era of big government is over,” Mr Reagan said. Promising boldness and declaring that the “day of reckoning” had arrived following years of growing indebtedness and irresponsibility, Mr Obama said that the “time to take charge of our future” had arrived."

So which news network will be the first to display a Reagan-o-meter on-screen during political addresses?
posted by prinado at 4:05 PM on February 25, 2009


There's a reason it's volcanoes, guys.

Most of the volcanoes, and especially most of the volcanoes that endanger people, in America are on the West Coast and Hawaii. Jindal isn't targeting many areas where people fear volcanoes, and there are enough on his Side who will briefly think "LOL, let the other Side burn." (And of course states are mostly on one Side only by about 60-40 but whatever, let God sort 'em out.)
posted by TheOnlyCoolTim at 4:06 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Jindal has previously said that he wasn't planning on running for President in 2012. It would be difficult for him to campaign, because he has to run for re-election as governor of Louisiana in an off-cycle election in 2011.

Of course, had he actually done well last night, his mind may have been easily changed. Given that he didn't, right now, to me, it looks like the GOP frontrunners will be Huckabee, Romney and maybe Palin, Tim Pawlenty or Charlie Crist.
posted by thewittyname at 4:10 PM on February 25, 2009


I've said it before, I'll say it again. I want my former Republican party back. Small government. Science over dogma. Get the fuck out of my bedroom.

/voted Obama
//sorry for the farkish slashies
posted by OneOliveShort at 4:20 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


a Jindal victory November 6th, 2012. It's unlikely, but Americans voters have done stupider things.

Meet one.
posted by Mental Wimp at 4:21 PM on February 25, 2009


I've said it before, I'll say it again. I want my former Republican party back. Small government. Science over dogma. Get the fuck out of my bedroom.
When was the Republican party ever out of your bedroom?

"Science over dogma" and "small government" don't actually sound very real, either, frankly.
posted by Flunkie at 4:26 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


.
posted by jckll at 4:29 PM on February 25, 2009


I wonder how many people have been killed in terrorist attacks vs. volcanic eruptions worldwide over the last few decades...

I smell a research opportunity! Here's some data on death by volcano; here's some data on terrorism deaths. The data doesn't parallel directly, but it's something...
posted by sadiehawkinstein at 4:31 PM on February 25, 2009


Can everyone stop saying "Reaganesque" without immediately following it up with "stupidity"? Thanks.
posted by Sys Rq at 4:39 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


Damn. Coming from anyone else, it would be an mortal insult, but Krauthammer drawing a comparison between Obama and Reagan?

It wouldn't surprise me if the Republican party collapses. There'll be a replacement, but it won't be the Republicans.
posted by dunkadunc at 4:42 PM on February 25, 2009


When was the Republican party ever out of your bedroom?

If the Republican Party is in your bedroom, you are doing it wrong.
posted by The World Famous at 4:43 PM on February 25, 2009 [7 favorites]


I once had a case of the farkish slashies. I must have swallowed about a gallon of penicillin, and it still took me a week and six razors to comb out all the nits.
posted by hifiparasol at 4:47 PM on February 25, 2009


More background on Jindal from the Daily Kingfish.
posted by gimonca at 4:48 PM on February 25, 2009


when the hell did the republicans actually do anything to promote small government? I know they talk about it all the time (well, at least when they don't have the presidency) but I have never seen it actually put in play. Hells bells The Republicans just thew a shit ft to maintain all their staffing levels from last session even though in this congress they should actually cut 20% of staffing because of their losses, so in real effect they are expanding government while bitching about wanting smaller government.

So.. smaller government under Republicans? Bush II? bwhahaha. Bush I? Nope, Reagan? Again Bwhahah, Ford? Nope, Nixon? Nope.. so we are already nearly 40 years back.. at what point can people actual say, no the Republicans are not the party of small government, because that just isn't what they do?

In reality it has been a hell of a long time since they have had anything to do with staying out of people's bedrooms, promoting science or being about small government. That is not what Republicans are, and may well never be again. Right now we have an administration that seems to value science, and also seems to care a lot less about bedroom issues.. and is talking about making a serious effort towards tacking the deficit, which might not be "small government" but the reality is we just will never have small government in the US, if that is what you want you need to live elsewhere, I hear The Western Sahara has a pretty small government currently.
posted by edgeways at 4:54 PM on February 25, 2009 [5 favorites]


HOLY SWEET JESUS ELECTIONFILTER NEVER EVER EVER EVER ENDS AHHHHHHHH

FOUR MORE YEARS! FOUR MORE YEARS!
posted by the_bone at 4:55 PM on February 25, 2009 [3 favorites]


Personally I think the Republicans are in a major crisis, they are becoming regionalized and racdicalized, neither of which works well on a national level when you are trying to appeal to a wide diverse audience. At the same time they are making efforts, tokenism perhaps, four of their biggest starts are a woman, a man who is black and a man who is Indian, and a Mormon. When you consider the GOP conventions look like a Son's of the Vikings reunion it's pretty funny.
posted by edgeways at 4:58 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


You know...it WAS Mardi Gras yesterday. Maybe Jindal was just totally shitfaced and that's how he talks when he's trying to sound "not drunk."
posted by ColdChef at 5:13 PM on February 25, 2009 [7 favorites]


Quick Recap:

0:00-1:45

Explains the importance of Obama being elected—African Americans: from slavery to the Presidency—which is no doubt a monumental landmark that should be discussed, but dude, we know. More thoughtful people have already said far more eloquent things on the subject.

Then he adds in his me too and gives the country part of his bio.

He tops it off with two doses of Americans Can Do Anything™.

1:45-2:06

Talks about the crises we are facing as a country—unemployment, dwindling college and retirement savings, lost health care and homes.

Alright, good, he is aware of some of the problems we're facing and he's talking about them rather than ignoring them. He says that we're looking toward the government for help. For answers. We are. We're also looking for competency and accountability.

2:07-2:40

Talks about the need for bipartisanship. Cites his experience in Louisiana as an example. He describes his ideal view of bipartisanship.

2:41-4:10

"Today in Washington, some are promising that government will rescue us from the economic storms raging all around us. Those of us who have lived through Hurricane Katrina—we have our doubts."

This is where shit starts getting ridiculous. He notes earlier that the citizenry is looking toward the government for help, but now—a goddamn minute later—he starts his attack on the idea of government helping. How does he do it? He uses the imagery of an 'economic storm' to segue to a discussion on Katrina.

In a stunning feat of intellectual dishonesty, he uses a calculatedly folksy anecdote about straw men bureaucrats attempting to stop rebellious git-R-done citizens from saving the day as a lesson: "The strength of America is not found in our government," said the politician. "It is found in the compassionate hearts and the enterprising spirit of our citizens."

I seriously cannot believe he is using an atrocious failure of government to help its citizens as support for the notion that citizens shouldn't look to our government for help. What a fucking insensitive—and wrong—asshole. As far as I'm concerned, from here on out, he is at the batshitinsane carnival making surrealist spin art in an attempt to hypnotize and rally the carnies. I'd be afraid if it wasn't so obviously specious.

He ties up the 'economic storm' analogy. Rhetorical thunderbolt!

4:11-4:55

Talks about how Washington must lead. Says raising taxes is bad, mkay. It gives the scary Washington politicians—who must lead, btw—more money and power. Says that's why Republicans want to lower income taxes to create jobs. Can someone explain how that would work?

Talks about helping small businesses, as if the Democrats aren't saying the same thing. Did this guy even watch Obama's speech? Sheesh. Talks about strengthening incentives for businesses to buy new equipment and hire new workers. I guess I could see how that would be helpful, but what does he mean by incentives? Wouldn't they involve, I dunno, some sort of stimulus package? Says we should create a new tax credit to stabilize home values and cites that as a way to create new jobs. Again, I may just be ignorant—can someone explain this to me? It's not making sense.

Ah, here it is. The Democrats have refused to accept those brilliant ideas he just laid out! Fuckers!

4:56-6:35

Says that instead of letting people make decisions on how to spend their money, the government passed the crazy expensive 'spending bill'. It's like the government thinks it should lead or something. Like it has answers.

People have already covered the BS wasteful spending spiel—new cars for government, magnetic disney trainz, something called volcano monitoring, oh my!

Says the stimulus won't grow the economy. It will just grow the government, blah, blah, blah. David Brooks, of all people, nailed it. How the fuck is this speech a rebuttal? How does it even pertain to what is happening? You think the Republicans would wise up. (Not a joke, I swear.)

Says they do it different in Louisiana, the magical place with no more corruption, where everyone gets to keep everything they earn.

6:36-7:08

Says we gotta keep energy prices down. Talks about how gas is cheaper right now. Says unless we act now, the price of gas will go back up. How? Increase conservation, increase energy efficiency, increase the use of alternative and renewable fuels, increase our of nuclear power, and increase drilling for oil and gas here at home. It seems, as his list goes on, it goes from I've-gotta-say-this-shit? to what he actually wants.

He adds an Americans Can Do Anything™ for good measure. Is this his take on Yes We Can? Holy shit, I think it is!

INTERMISSION

0:00-0:49

Finishes energy pep talk. Moves on the health care. Says no American should have to worry about losing their health care, period. What about the Americans who don't have health care? Sneaky. False dichotomy time: Republicans want everyone to have their choice of health care and Democrats want the government—not you and your doctor—to call the shots when it comes to your health! How about an honest conversation about this, please?

Americans Can Do Anything
™.

Asserts that it is partisanship that is really in the way of affordable health care. Seriously.

0:50-1:23

Education time! More Hurricane Katrina talk. Guiliani : 9/11 :: Jindal : Katrina. Does he really think bringing up Katrina over and over is a good thing? Katrina was handled horribly. Does he think that everyone has forgotten that?

Talks about improving schools, etc. I heard the Democrats want to burn down the schools! Again, did he even watch Obama's speech? How is this a rebuttal?

Americans Can Do Anything™.

Says it shouldn't take a hurricane to bring about these improvements. The part of Obama's speech where he was wishing for new Hurricanes to come so we could get some shit done was really weird, I've gotta say.

1:24-2:04

Talks about the need for accountability and transparency. Tells folksy joke with shitty delivery. Brags about Louisiana again.

Says that we need to get rid of corruption. Uses the 'spending bill' as an example of corruption and says that Congress hasn't even read it and the American people haven't even seen it. Yawn.

Notice: the less truth behind what he is saying, the more confidence in which he says it. I'm starting to think he's a sociopath in the vein of W and Palin—you can see it in the eyes, I tells ya!

2:05-2:32

Says for all the troubles at home, we've gotta remember to be scared of the bad guys. Says we shouldn't dismantle our defenses. Support the troops. But I thought government spending just gets in the way? States plainly that we need to stay on the offensive.

America's Fighting Men and Women Can Do Anything™.

2:33-3:16

Says bipartisanship is important. Another false dichotomy: Republicans place their HOPE in the American people and Democrats place their HOPE in the federal government. Says it's an honest and fundamental disagreement about the proper roll of government—with a straight face. Says that Republicans oppose the Democrat's idea of increasing American's dependence on federal government. What a dick. I am almost surprised he is capable of nonstorm-related rhetoric, though.

Says we need to cut spending—except for paying for the warz, amirite—and rely on citizens and small business to boost the economy and create jobs. That's Washington leading the way, alright.

3:17-4:01

I'm sorry, baby. I've made some mistakes. Done some shit I regret, said some nasty things. But I'll fix this—I swear. And in time, I'll win you back <3. Want a back rub?

4:02-5:32

Totally ignoring the inspiring speech Obama just gave, he quotes the President out-of-context, from a few weeks ago, saying that we may not be able to reverse this crisis. Says to not let anyone (read: Obama, as long as you ignore that speech he just gave) tell you that America's best days are over. Talks up great things America has done and the bad things it has overcome. Talks up America's greatness. (Did he just say we have the most Brazilian economy?)

In closing, Americans Can Do Anything™.
posted by defenestration at 5:13 PM on February 25, 2009 [41 favorites]


"Can everyone stop saying "Reaganesque" without immediately following it up with 'stupidity'? "

It's kind of like "peanut butter and jelly", or "mustard and ketchup". They're so closely intertwined it's almost impossible to separate them.
posted by mr_crash_davis mark II: Jazz Odyssey at 5:17 PM on February 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


So which news network will be the first to display a Reagan-o-meter on-screen during political addresses?

Probably Comedy Central.
posted by JHarris at 5:18 PM on February 25, 2009


It wouldn't surprise me if the Republican party collapses. There'll be a replacement, but it won't be the Republicans.

I think it's quite likely, although it'll take a few decades to happen. In forty years, fully a quarter of the country's population will be Latino, and the current crop of Republicans have done a bang-up job of alienating them for a generation. The party that ran on fear that the brown-skinned guy isn't one of us, you know, not a real American is going to have a very hard time reaching out to people who aren't white Christians--a demographic that makes up less than 40% of the country and is shrinking steadily. They're going to go the way of the Whigs, and they're only going to get stupider and more desperate as it happens.
posted by EarBucket at 5:22 PM on February 25, 2009


> Can everyone stop saying "Reaganesque" without immediately following it up with 'stupidity'?

For real. Based on someone's recommendation in another thread I signed The Clothes Have No Emperor out of the library, and...holy shit.
posted by The Card Cheat at 5:27 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


"I've said it before, I'll say it again. I want my former Republican party back. Small government. Science over dogma. Get the fuck out of my bedroom."

How far back do we have to go? Eisenhower? Well, maybe at the beginning, but he did preside over the creation of the "Military Industrial Complex," as he called it, and he did have some misgivings about it, but it happened under his watch all the same. I don't think the myth of the party of small government went back further than that. In fact, wasn't it Reagan who made the idea popular within the party? Republicans haven't always been the "small government" party.
posted by krinklyfig at 5:32 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


I hate to comment without actually watching through the whole video, but I can't. I just can't. I got up to the "Ah remembah goin' to the GROcery store with mah dad" bit. I don't know how you guys got so far into it, or were able to watch the whole thing. It was condescending and painful to watch. It was like watching Mr. Burns idea of how to talk "like a peasant."

Gah.
posted by Ghidorah at 5:33 PM on February 25, 2009 [6 favorites]


"They're going to go the way of the Whigs, and they're only going to get stupider and more desperate as it happens."

There's a chance they will revive the idea that it's a party for working class Latinos. Don't doubt for a moment that people have short memories when it comes to politics. Bush was pretty smart to court that vote, because he's right that there is a natural tendency to conservatism within the culture, as there is a strong social conservative element, anchored mainly by Catholicism. But I'm not sure the culture war will work anymore, and the Republicans aren't really getting anywhere at the moment with their version of class warfare.
posted by krinklyfig at 5:36 PM on February 25, 2009


How 'bout "Reaganesque Corruption"?
posted by Cookiebastard at 5:41 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


"In forty years, fully a quarter of the country's population will be Latino"

Just to give you an idea of how long that is in political terms, 40 years ago, Nixon was president. The Democrats had barely just become the party of civil rights. But they weren't before the Southern Strategy, which originated just about 40 years ago, in the Goldwater/Nixon era. The same party which gave rise to the stereotype racist Southern Democrat also gave rise to Obama, around 40 years after they chose a different direction.
posted by krinklyfig at 5:48 PM on February 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


The same party which gave rise to the stereotype racist Southern Democrat also gave rise to Obama, around 40 years after they chose a different direction.

Sadly, the same party which gave rise to Lincoln also gave rise to the Southern Strategy.
posted by Talez at 6:21 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


I have a distinctive Southern accent, and I have to say that Mr. Jindal sounds like a total tool to me. It's bad when a guy who drawls everything he says listens to you and thinks your accent is ridiculous.
posted by sonic meat machine at 6:32 PM on February 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


Frankly, I don't need Fox or MSNBC or NPR to help me spot an ASS-HAT.
posted by pianomover at 6:44 PM on February 25, 2009


I was really surprised as Jindal's poor performance. I'd heard positive buzz about him, people are already talking him up as a candidate in 2012, and he was smart enough to turn down McCain's VP slot. This was basically his debut on the national stage, and he blew it.

And I don't think his accent is as much of a problem as his weird putting the stresses on the wrong syllables.

The Republicans are getting stuck on the style of recent Dems, not the substance. They saw how well Hillary Clinton did in the primaries and put a woman on the ticket whose policies are very different. Clinton's qualifications and positions had more to do with her successes than her gender. Obama got elected and the Republicans put up Michael Steele and Bobby Jindal. Obama's not president because he's black, he's president because he's smart, he sounds smart, and he makes inspiring speeches.

The Democrats had barely just become the party of civil rights.

That timing's a little off. Truman desegregated the armed forces in 1948 (hello Dixiecrats!). LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act in 1964.
posted by kirkaracha at 6:58 PM on February 25, 2009


The Republicans need a tool. A tool that has major Mojo, so as to go head to head with the big O. They need someone young, likeable, smart and charismatic, whom they can control. The best they had was Palin, but she wasn't smart. And she was too much like Britney Spears: could not be controlled. I almost liked her after I saw BJ walk to his podium. He looked like a man who would take great pleasure in torturing someone. I made a .gif file of him walking to that podium. SNL will be all over this Saturday night. Perfect response to a great speech. I hope he does run for president.
posted by Flex1970 at 7:01 PM on February 25, 2009


He was a Rhodes Scholar? The sun really has set upon the British Empire.

AFAIK, the processing for a Rhodes scholarship is done in the country of application, and not in Oxbridge. So if anyone's to blame, it's the screening committee state-side that gets to choose the 32 or so folks who get the scholarship every year from the US.

Then again, ignoring the exorcism bit, there was a lot of evidence of Jindal being smart prior to this mishap.
posted by the cydonian at 7:05 PM on February 25, 2009


The dynamics of this speech and its response have me even more confused about why so many people still talk about Palin as a big player in the Republican party without laughing. Jindal is a supposedly smart guy who looked foolish coming off the heels of an Obama speech. If Palin does re-emerge as a candidate for high office, it's going to be after a few years of Obama talking to us like adults. Given how strange it feels now to have gone from Bush to a leader who doesn't, I suspect, get his White House briefings in comic book form, I think that the prospect of going in the reverse direction in 2012 will make a lot more people uncomfortable.
posted by troybob at 7:17 PM on February 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


More David Brooks on Jindal: "I thought Bobby Jindal gave possibly the worst response to a democratic speaker in the history of democracy." Jindal comments start at 1:20

More Rachel Maddow on Jindal (and Steele an Palin).
posted by nooneyouknow at 7:22 PM on February 25, 2009


Also, I think the Republicans should probably find some new image consultants. Their whole tone these days is bitter and vindictive, and so far this week I've twice seen Obama masterfully reduce their whining resistance to a punchline. He has severely outclassed them without as much as hitting a sweat, and it is looking like elephants can't really maneuver around that.
posted by troybob at 7:23 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


"That timing's a little off. Truman desegregated the armed forces in 1948 (hello Dixiecrats!). LBJ signed the Civil Rights Act in 1964."

Yes, I consider the Civil Rights Act the point when the Democrats came fully over. It's around 45 years ago, but the '68 elections were a pretty good example of the Southern Strategy in its full-blown stage. Before then, it hadn't been employed at that level and had never been as popular for the party as it became then. It set the stage for the next 40 years. I think that era may be coming to an end, but that remains to be seen.
posted by krinklyfig at 7:27 PM on February 25, 2009


The Farkish Slashies - a week and six razors

When the address began last night, I was bemused by Jindal's voice and mannerisms - truly, it just seemed comically incongruous for that voice to be coming from that man, at least at first - but it seemed like he was striking the perfect tone: we're all here because we know we're in a crisis, and we have different ideas of how to solve it, and I'm going to explain where we differ.

Of course, things went off the rails pretty quickly from there.

I myself was so livid about him dismissing high-speed rail out of hand that I didn't even catch the volcano monitoring bit. Lemme lay it out for you, Bobby.* We are in an economic crisis. We are also in an energy crisis. For a sustainable future, it is necessary for us to move most of our population to urban centers, preferably those with light rail or similar mass transit capabilities. High-speed rail would be the most energy-efficient and comfortable way to travel between the urban centers. Building this rail is an unambiguous investment in our future, as well as a damn good stimulus proposition for the time being.

When I was working in NOLA this summer, the general feeling towards Jindal was pretty much "meh." Nobody was passionate about him one way or the other, but the (initial) Katrina failure wasn't on his watch, and everybody really dealt with Sen. Landrieu and Mayor Nagin anyway, so nobody really thought about him. Having watched this and read all of the links - fuck it. I detest this man now. I don't think he's dumb - though his speech certainly assumed that its audience would be - I think he's craven.

The claim that Louisiana is a corruption-free model of the ownership society would be laughable if the reality weren't so fucking tragic. New Orleans officials are using all of their power to remove poor black citizens in the hopes of seizing their property for future investment. These transparent and above-board hearings involved no counsel for the homeowners, a "mediator" from the same office as the prosecutors, and straight-down the line racial bias in dismissing any claims against whites while expropriating black families who hadn't been able to move back yet for not having their lawns properly mown, even when those people had been paying services who were defrauding them without their knowledge. Great work routing out the corruption, Bobby-boy.

Stay tuned for my epic comment: Katrina Rashomon, or: The Story of the Evil Bureaucrats in Three Variations.

*There is a class of nickname that can no longer be acceptable once you regularly find yourself wearing a suit to work. Bobby, Billy, Jeffy (really anything from the Family Circus, I guess) and Turtle all qualify.
posted by Navelgazer at 8:09 PM on February 25, 2009 [16 favorites]


*There is a class of nickname that can no longer be acceptable once you regularly find yourself wearing a suit to work. Bobby, Billy, Jeffy (really anything from the Family Circus, I guess) and Turtle all qualify.
posted by Navelgazer at 8:09 PM on February 25 [+] [!]


What about Scooter?
posted by vansly at 8:16 PM on February 25, 2009


Josh Marshall: As an aside, Ben Smith makes a point I've been thinking about too: after the GOP has burned through Michael Steele and Bobby Jindal, I'm not sure they have any non-white guys left.

Well, there's always Alan Keyes. It's not like he's completely batshitinsane and squawking about it day and night to the media. Oh wait.
posted by maryh at 8:30 PM on February 25, 2009 [4 favorites]


This is going to be one of those posts where, towards the end, I'm going to want a "filter by most favorites" option for comments. That would be such a great feature.

Here, try this. Yes, I do in fact have too much free time.
posted by you at 8:31 PM on February 25, 2009 [5 favorites]


Is "Jimmy" not okay, then?
posted by armage at 8:37 PM on February 25, 2009


I don't hate Jindal but I love Jack McBrayer!! We were in drama in highschool together. His mom was my pe coach. Great guy and I hope this just catapults him!!! Forget the political bs, get Jack back on SNL!!!
posted by pearlybob at 8:42 PM on February 25, 2009


The Jack McBrayer Response To The Internet Response To The Republican Response To The President's Address To Congress
posted by MegoSteve at 9:02 PM on February 25, 2009 [7 favorites]


get Jack back on SNL!!!

Career-wise, wouldn't that be a lot like getting Bobby Jindal to do the Republican response?
posted by Cyrano at 9:06 PM on February 25, 2009


The Jack McBrayer Response To The Internet Response To The Republican Response To The President's Address To Congress

Okely-dokely.

Tina Fey is to Sarah Palin, as Jack McBrayer is to Bobby Booby Jindal ... and "away we go!"

Popular culture (aka 'popular sentiment') may indeed have an impact on a politician's ambitions/desires for power -- no matter his/her party affiliation.

Thank God for comedy, satire and the Internets!

GOP, you're Golden Boy is not so golden after all.
posted by ericb at 9:14 PM on February 25, 2009


*your Golden Boy*
posted by ericb at 9:18 PM on February 25, 2009


thank you
posted by found missing at 9:24 PM on February 25, 2009


Find the up and coming Republican politician who looks like Judah Friedlander, and you'll have the key to their whole five-year-plan.
posted by padraigin at 9:33 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


ANNOUNCER: This week, on KATRINA RASHOMON!

Shots of flooded streets, crying citizens, and the Superdome...

NARRATOR: In the fog of war, it has been said, it is often difficult if not impossible to know the truth. In the deluge of a national crisis, it is no different. We present for you, three separate versions of the same event, so that you might judge for yourself what really occurred...

End on money shot of Bourbon Street

NARRATOR: ...during Hurricane Katrina!

BLACK

FADE IN

SUPER: VERSION ONE

INT: GENTILLY HOME - UPSTAIRS BEDROOM - DAY

A strapping, handsome man, ROGER (35), swims through the rising waters of his house, desperately searching for... something. A quick RAPPING at his window reveals the face of CHARLIE (40's, stoic, no-nonsense) peering through. Charlie shouts something but it's lost through the glass.

ROGER: What?!

At that moment an errant tree limb comes flying towards the back of Charlie's head. He ducks just in time, and the limb crashes through the window.

ROGER: Holy shit!
CHARLIE: C'mon, there's no time. I've got to get you to safety. Where are Helen and the girls?
ROGER: I got 'em to safety, I just had to come back... for one thing.

Roger dives into the waters and searches through his cheat of drawers, eventually coming up with a jewelry box. He takes one last look at the still-dry picture of his family sitting atop the drawers and makes a grab for the tree limb. He uses it to climb through the broken window.

EXT. GENTILLY HOME - CONTINUOUS

Charlie uses a nearby tree for leverage as he helps to pull Roger through the glass.


ROGER: ARRGGGGHH!

Roger gets through, but is bleeding. He treads water and takes a look around: WAILING everywhere, as stranded survivors huddle atop their roofs looking for rescue.

CHARLIE: Let's go, we need to get to safety and get you patched up.
ROGER: Look around us, Charlie. Ain't no one comin' for them.
CHARLIE: Look at yourself! You're no good to Helen and the girls all bled out, like.
ROGER: I'm fine, now listen for a minute. You think your seacraft is still floatin'?
CHARLIE: Last I saw.
ROGER: Tell you what, then. We go pick up your boat, fill it up with as many people as we can carry, and once we get someplace dry, I'll put on a band-aid with the rest of 'em, deal?
CHARLIE: Good to have you with me, Roger.

Montage of Roger and Charlie swimming to the motorboat, stoking the motor, getting it running, welcoming a young family into the boat with them, etc.

EXT. PONCHATRAIN EXPRESSWAY - DUSK

Roger, Charlie and the family bring the boat to a halt at the raised freeway. The water's too high to pass underneath, but too low to drive the boat over. A line of boats stall along the freeway in the same situation. Roger's shirt is now soaked and red.

ROGER: Shit.
CHARLIE: We can find a way around, there's still time.
ROGER: Well, we do what we have to, I reckon.

A Black SUV screeches to a stop in front of them on the freeway. NED STIFLEMAN (40, short, impeccable gray suit, suspenders, toupee) steps out, tapping a pencil against his notepad.

STIFLEMAN: What exactly do you all think you're doing?
CHARLIE: We're tryin' to get these people to safety.
STIFLEMAN: Rescue operations, huh? Well that's our job, I'm sorry to say.
CHARLIE: Well you ain't doin' your job. We've gotta find a way around.
STIFLEMAN: Not so fast there. May I see proof of insurance and registration on that vehicle, please?
ROGER: Proof of... What the hell's the matter with you? Sheriff Lee put out a call for volunteers!
STIFLEMAN: Hah! You ordinary Americans think you can do anything. I'll just have to give this Sheriff Lee a little phone call...

INT. SHERIFF'S OFFICE - RECEPTIONIST DESK

A makeshift office. CONGRESSMAN JINDAL steps up to the RECEPTIONIST.

JINDAL: May I speak with Sheriff Harry Lee, please?
RECEPTIONIST: But he's a Democrat!
JINDAL: And a good friend of mine!
RECPTIONIST: Go right in.

SHERIFF'S OFFICE - CONTINUOUS

SHERIFF HARRY LEE huddles over his desk, red-faced, shouting into the phone.

LEE: Well, I'm the sheriff, and if you don't like it, you can come and arrest me.
JINDAL: Sheriff, what's got you so mad?

Sheriff Lee rest the receiver on his desk.

LEE: I put out a call for volunteers to come with their boats to rescue people who were trapped on their rooftops by the floodwaters. The boats were all lined up and ready to go. And then some bureaucrat showed up and told them they couldn't go out in the water unless they had proof of insurance and registration.
JINDAL: Sheriff, that's ridiculous.

Sheriff Lee picks up the receiver.

LEE: Congressman Jindal's here, and he says you can come and arrest him, too.

FADE TO BLACK

SUPER: VERSION TWO

FADE IN

EXT. GENTILLY ROOFTOP - DAY

The floodwaters have reached the second story of the two-story homes in the area. Residents swim to neighbors rooftops. KEVIN (21, handsome, black) taps on a transistor radio, surrounded by his family.

RADIO ANNOUNCER: (over static) widespread incidents of looting...
KEVIN'S MOTHER: I can't see anyone coming!
KEVIN: Ssshhh! I'm trying to listen.
RADIO ANNOUNCER: ... Sheriff Harry Lee is calling for any volunteers with boats to assist in the rescue of stranded families...

Kevin looks over the edge of the roof. They've got a boat.

KEVIN'S MOTHER: Kevin, don't you even think about-
KEVIN: Mom, I've got to. Don't worry, I'm coming back for y'all.

Kevin jumps off the roof and swims to the boat. He takes off through the now-canal-like streets.

EXT. VOLUNTEER RENDEZVOUS - DAY

A line of volunteers in boats, chattering away desperately. Kevin drives his boat up to the line. Everything goes silent. Bureaucrat NED STIFLEMAN runs up to him, panting.

STIFLEMAN: Woah, woah woah! Do you have registration and insurance for that?!
KEVIN: I don't know, man. I'm just here because I need to help my family and the rest of the people in my area.
STIFLEMAN: Jesus Christ. Gimme a minute - somebody keep an eye on him!

Stifleman dials a number on his blackberry.

INT. SHERIFF'S OFFICE

Makeshift. Sheriff Lee picks up the RINGING phone.

LEE: Dammit, I'm up to my ass in alligators right now! What could you possibly want? ... Mmhmmm. No, let him do what he needs to, I don't see any need to...

EXT. VOLUNTEER RENDEZVOUS

STIFLEMAN: But Sheriff, your policy clearly states that in the event of a black youth in a vehicle that-

INT. SHERIFF'S OFFICE:

LEE: Dammit, don't quote my policy back to me! I wrote it! I'm the sheriff, and if you don't like it, you can come and arrest me!

FADE TO BLACK

SUPER: VERSION THREE

FADE IN

EXT. VOLUNTEER RENDEZVOUS

JERRY, 30, holds a loudspeaker at his side and looks over the crowd. Other Federal RESCUE WORKERS rush around, checking out the various boats at the scene and speaking with the VOLUNTEERS. Jerry raises the megaphone to his mouth.

JERRY: Hello. Can everybody hear me? Can everybody... We're handing out portable GPS systems so that you can all recognize where you're going without the aid of street signs. Make sure that you feel comfortable with their usage before you depart so that you don't get lost in your efforts. As soon as you're familiar with the equipment, I need to to enter this address into the GPS so that you have it saved for after you've made your rescue efforts...

Another RESCUE WORKER runs up to Jerry, who puts the megaphone down.

RESCUE WORKER: Some of them don't have registration or insurance on their boats.
JERRY: You're kidding me.
RESCUE WORKER: It's an emergency. Some of them are bound to have it filed at home, but...
JERRY: Right. Fuck. Can you dial up the Sheriff for me?

Jerry pulls up the megaphone again

JERRY: Please use this moment to become more familiar with the life-saving tools you are being provided. Thank you.

The Rescue Worker hands him the phone.

RESCUE WORKER: It's ringing.
JERRY: Thanks... Hello? Hello! I'm on the scene with your volunteers, we're just about ready to go, but our guidelines say that the volunteers have to have registration and insurance and some of them... No, I understand, I'm just trying to find a way to...

INT. SHERIFF'S OFFICE

Very makeshift.

LEE: Yeah, yeah, you've got your guidelines, but we don't have time for that. If anybody gives you any shit about it, well, I'm the sheriff, and if they don't like it, they can come and arrest me.

Sheriff lee looks expectantly at the door, but no one enters. After a pause:

LEE: So anyway, yeah.

EXT. VOLUNTEER RENDEZVOUS

Jerry closes the phone.

JERRY: (to the Rescue Worker) It's cool. Let's send them out.

FADE TO BLACK

NARRATOR: Which of these stories are true? Are any of them true? Or does the truth, perhaps, lay somewhere in between? That is for you, the viewer, to decide, on KATRINA RASHOMON!
posted by Navelgazer at 10:12 PM on February 25, 2009 [14 favorites]


(I should mention that the phrase "up to my ass in alligators" is courtesy of Scott Adams, but the rest of that is all me/straight from the transcript of the Jindal Response.)
posted by Navelgazer at 10:18 PM on February 25, 2009


Hours after mocking Disney-Vegas rail line, Jindal to vacation at Disneyworld
posted by Rhaomi at 10:46 PM on February 25, 2009 [1 favorite]


Kenneth responds.

posted by CunningLinguist at 11:02 PM on February 25, 2009 [2 favorites]


sorry, didn't see megosteve had posted it.
posted by CunningLinguist at 11:04 PM on February 25, 2009


Kenneth responds.

What the fuck fuckity fuck fuck fuck NBC?

Not available in my region? We don't even get Jimmy Fallon over here you tards. There's no rights issue. Ah well it's your ad revenue going down the shitter.
posted by Talez at 12:04 AM on February 26, 2009 [3 favorites]


where was this thread yesterday, when I liveblogged my snarky comments to Obama's address?

I may post my impressions of the Jinal speech later today, if I can sit through all of it.
posted by LMGM at 12:50 AM on February 26, 2009


maryh no relation: Wow. And here I thought Kung Fu Monkey (see: Crazification Factor) was exaggerating all this time.

(That page was the first place I had heard of Obama. I wonder how many other people would say the same....)
posted by JHarris at 1:22 AM on February 26, 2009


I just spent 10 minutes trying to google up a working link for that mysterious McBrayer video. Apparently it is utterly unreachable from the frigid north that is Canada. Fuck you internet.
posted by mek at 3:57 AM on February 26, 2009


it might just be time for them to fade away, and a new party to emerge.

I can't wait for the Democrats to be the conservative, right-wing party that I vote against.
posted by DU at 5:13 AM on February 26, 2009 [6 favorites]


How far back do we have to go? Eisenhower? Well, maybe at the beginning, but he did preside over the creation of the "Military Industrial Complex," as he called it, and he did have some misgivings about it, but it happened under his watch all the same. I don't think the myth of the party of small government went back further than that. In fact, wasn't it Reagan who made the idea popular within the party? Republicans haven't always been the "small government" party.

Every democrat should be issued a copy of the graph in this post to pull out whenever a republican claims to be from "the party of fiscal responsibility"
posted by afu at 5:33 AM on February 26, 2009 [1 favorite]


I can't wait for the Democrats to be the conservative, right-wing party that I vote against.

Seriously, Obama is the Republican president of my dreams.
posted by afu at 5:35 AM on February 26, 2009 [1 favorite]


"Reaganesque." The fact that this term is used as a compliment blows my mind.

Consider that Reagan ranked third in the category of "public persuasion" in the recent CSPAN Historians Presidential Leadership Survey and you'll understand how this could be a compliment. I am no fan of Reagan (great book recommendation here) but from a historical viewpoint calling him anything but an effective and persuasive orator is just disingenuous. So from that standpoint, it is definitely a compliment to call him "Reaganesque". Clearly, this is the context the term was used in about Jindal and Obama. Of course, just so you know, I too think Jindal's asshattery is intolerable.
posted by IvoShandor at 5:39 AM on February 26, 2009


Canadians: fear not. It's Jimmy Fallon. It's not that funny. So don't bother.
posted by fungible at 5:43 AM on February 26, 2009 [3 favorites]


When Discover Magazine thinks your grasp of science is weak, you know you have a problem.
posted by DU at 5:43 AM on February 26, 2009 [3 favorites]


I can't wait for the Democrats to be the conservative, right-wing party that I vote against.

I generally vote Socialist or Green- if they get enough votes they'll qualify for public funding.
If there's only a Republican on the ticket (like for sheriff or what have you) i'll write in Eugene Debs.
posted by dunkadunc at 5:55 AM on February 26, 2009


When Discover Magazine thinks your grasp of science is weak, you know you have a problem.

To their credit, Phil Plait's blog is pretty good stuff, which is where those links went.
posted by IvoShandor at 6:00 AM on February 26, 2009


I generally vote Socialist or Green- if they get enough votes they'll qualify for public funding.

That's great if you live in MA or TX. I live somewhere where that would be counterproductive.
posted by DU at 6:01 AM on February 26, 2009


I love you, Metafilter.
posted by fiercecupcake at 6:35 AM on February 26, 2009


"americanscandoanything.com" was registered on the 24th. Welcome to 2012's "Yes We Can".

defenestration nailed it.
posted by schwa at 7:01 AM on February 26, 2009 [2 favorites]


Today's AP article: Jindal draws flak from GOP, Dems over speech -- "Earnest, awkward delivery earns comparisons to '30 Rock' character."
posted by ericb at 7:44 AM on February 26, 2009


Facebook group: Bobby Jindal is Kenneth the Page.
posted by ericb at 7:46 AM on February 26, 2009


Who let Sanjaya back into the limelight?

I don't see a connection between the two besides race. Am I missing something?
posted by Bookhouse at 7:57 AM on February 26, 2009 [2 favorites]


Facebook group: Bobby Jindal is Kenneth the Page.

Ever since I removed the groups listing from my profile page, the "group memberships as bumper stickers" model doesn't seem to apply to me any more. Now I only belong to groups where I'm actually interested in the content. (Also: Kids. Lawn. Off.)
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:02 AM on February 26, 2009


American scan DOA NY thing? What? Is that some sort of threat?
posted by ROU_Xenophobe at 8:04 AM on February 26, 2009 [1 favorite]


Who let Sanjaya back into the limelight?

I don't see a connection between the two besides race. Am I missing something?

Didn't Sanjaya fail miserably before a national audience in a shameless attempt to pander for votes?
posted by aftermarketradio at 8:04 AM on February 26, 2009 [1 favorite]


Didn't Sanjaya fail miserably before a national audience in a shameless attempt to pander for votes?

Isn't that the case with most American Idol contestants?
posted by DevilsAdvocate at 8:07 AM on February 26, 2009


I might try again later but I honestly had to stop after maybe a minute. Really he is a terrible speaker and it made me uncomfortable to listen to him regardless of message.
posted by MrBobaFett at 8:14 AM on February 26, 2009


Really he is a terrible speaker and it made me uncomfortable to listen to him regardless of message.

Which makes him a perfect heir to Bush and match for Palin.
posted by DU at 8:19 AM on February 26, 2009


Jindal is a supposedly smart guy who looked foolish coming off the heels of an Obama speech.

I went to Brown University at the same time that Bobby Jindal did, in the early 1990s. At the time, Brown had one of the lowest acceptance rates of any university in the United States, let alone in the Ivy League. (It was about 28%, IIRC.) Since Jindal was not a "legacy admit" like George W. Bush getting into Yale, Jindal had to have been very smart simply to get into Brown at that time.

I think the reason his speech was so awkward is that Jindal cannot ingratiate himself to the Republican base without making himself appear less smarter and educated than he really is. He graduated as a biology major from an Ivy League university for crying out loud, but he's now an uncritical advocate of creationism. He's a Rhodes Scholar, but he has to make himself palatable to white, non-college-educated Southern Republicans who don't take kindly to a man of color who sounds smarter than them. If I were in the same spot, my speeches would look foolish too.
posted by jonp72 at 8:19 AM on February 26, 2009 [8 favorites]


I think the reason his speech was so awkward is that Jindal cannot ingratiate himself to the Republican base without making himself appear less smarter and educated than he really is. He graduated as a biology major from an Ivy League university for crying out loud, but he's now an uncritical advocate of creationism. He's a Rhodes Scholar, but he has to make himself palatable to white, non-college-educated Southern Republicans who don't take kindly to a man of color who sounds smarter than them. If I were in the same spot, my speeches would look foolish too.

You talk like a fag, and your shit's all retarded.
posted by EarBucket at 8:32 AM on February 26, 2009 [19 favorites]


Please oh please SNL: bring on Jack as Jindal w/ Tina as Palin. 30 Rock meets SNL meets GOP apocalypse.
posted by CunningLinguist at 8:36 AM on February 26, 2009


Didn't Sanjaya fail miserably before a national audience in a shameless attempt to pander for votes?

Isn't that the case with most American Idol contestants?


Also, most politicians?
posted by dersins at 8:58 AM on February 26, 2009 [1 favorite]


He graduated as a biology major from an Ivy League university for crying out loud, but he's now an uncritical advocate of creationism.

You know how universities will give out honorary degrees? This should earn him an honorary expulsion.
posted by stevis23 at 9:30 AM on February 26, 2009 [5 favorites]


I'd heard of the Kenneth the Page comparison even before I learned that Obama had given a speech. (Seriously, how was it publicized? I completely missed it!)

About two seconds into Jindal's speech, I cracked up, thanks to the comparison. But then it didn't take long for me to get fairly upset and annoyed at the content. The volcano point was awful, as were plenty of other things. But I also really didn't appreciate his comments at the beginning about slavery.

If you're giving a speech which isn't about the legacy of slavery, or about how monumental Obama's election was, or anything similar, then I just don't see why you have reason to bring slavery up. It sounds more like, "Hey! That guy who's president? You remember he's black, right? And you remember that black people weren't slaves all that long ago, right? Right? Don't forget!!!" than anything else.

I'm sure he probably just wanted to say something nice about Obama, before going in to the attack, especially since he had to realize that Obama's speech was fantastic... But, at the same time, I really didn't like it. It rang false, to me.
posted by Ms. Saint at 10:00 AM on February 26, 2009 [2 favorites]


gimonca's link to the dailyKingfish article is quite telling, bears repeating and discussing...

The 'exorcism' episode is quite bizarre. When someone is smelling something that isn't there, it leads me to suspect schizophrenia, in a worst case scenario and not the devil [exuse me?]. Brandishing crucifixes and praying is the collective UFC club members' way to deal with someone's mental breakdown [possibly] with prayer and fetching clergy is odd behaviour.
The person needed to be referred immediately to a psychologist or psychiatrist, a hospital and not what they did.

This kind of collective behaviour borders on mass hysteria. Not one thought to act differently. Zero critical thinking - what are they teaching at this Brown University anyways? Like a carpenter upon seeing a nail sticking out - uses his hammer on it as the solution rather than looking behind what is causing it to be sticking out.

If it isn't Sarah Palin and Muthee and witches, it's this. What in hella kool aid is going on here? It's rather bizarre behaviour, notwithstanding Jindal's content in his 'address', which defenestration pointed out, has more holes in its 'logic' than swiss cheese.
posted by alicesshoe at 10:05 AM on February 26, 2009


I'm sure he probably just wanted to say something nice about Obama...

No, he wanted to draw attention to his own "foreign" origins (i.e. the GOP draws a tiny, inexplicable number non-(white male christian) members) as well as defuse the "Southern governors hate Obama because he's black" idea.
posted by DU at 10:15 AM on February 26, 2009


Politics aside, Jindal is no Obama.

Rhaomi: I read on a different blog:
Finally, as I returned back to the East coast today, on a flight to Orlando, who do I see sitting there in first class... Governor Jindal. I walked right up to him and said "Governor you are a first class clown"! The air Marshall looked a little embarrassed but I didn't care, I was a little ticked off myself after his pandering for the Rights nomination in 2012. And not in really wanting to help his constituents.
posted by edgeways at 11:21 AM on February 26, 2009


Do you have a link to that, edgeways?
posted by hifiparasol at 11:56 AM on February 26, 2009


I think it's quite likely, although it'll take a few decades to happen. In forty years, fully a quarter of the country's population will be Latino, and the current crop of Republicans have done a bang-up job of alienating them for a generation. The party that ran on fear that the brown-skinned guy isn't one of us, you know, not a real American is going to have a very hard time reaching out to people who aren't white Christians--a demographic that makes up less than 40% of the country and is shrinking steadily. They're going to go the way of the Whigs, and they're only going to get stupider and more desperate as it happens.

You know, at first I completely agreed with this. Then I remembered that my girlfriend's family (largely latino) all vote Republican. Why? Because they're very very religious. it trumps everything to them. If you were to ask them how they could vote for the party that constantly tries to demonize illegal immigration, they'd say "so? we're here, aren't we?"
posted by shmegegge at 1:36 PM on February 26, 2009 [2 favorites]


hifiparasol: Here's a link.
posted by dunkadunc at 1:41 PM on February 26, 2009


Yeah, I have a prediction:

"The POTUS is black and not too long ago he would've been enslaved / segregated / excluded; isn't it great?" is going to be the new opening gambit for any Republican that wants to criticize Obama.
posted by LMGM at 2:14 PM on February 26, 2009 [1 favorite]


Well that was quick...

http://gawker.com/5160682/kenneth-the-page-responds-to-bobby-jindall
posted by Lacking Subtlety at 2:19 PM on February 26, 2009


oh, and FWIW, my own reactions to the Jindal response. It was supposed to be snarky, but it quickly turned to frank outrage and disbelief.
posted by LMGM at 2:22 PM on February 26, 2009


Well that was quick...

Quicker than you by two! ; )
posted by ericb at 2:29 PM on February 26, 2009


Not as quick as you might think, LS.
posted by shiu mai baby at 2:32 PM on February 26, 2009


Nor as quick as you, shiu mai baby! ; )
posted by ericb at 2:34 PM on February 26, 2009


You're ALL quick. And you're all VERY SPECIAL.

Many tanks, dunkadunc.
posted by hifiparasol at 3:00 PM on February 26, 2009


You're ALL quick. And you're all VERY SPECIAL.

Mmmm ... Nesquik
posted by ericb at 3:58 PM on February 26, 2009


At CPAC, Obama is a Commie foreigner
posted by homunculus at 4:23 PM on February 26, 2009


I'm not quick, ericb, I'm fast.

Hey-oh!
posted by shiu mai baby at 5:44 PM on February 26, 2009


He's kind of hypnotizing...
posted by saysthis at 10:46 PM on February 26, 2009


making himself appear less smarter and educated than he really is

Ah, well. Brown failed many of its students in those ever-so-competitive years, it seems.

Just shitting you. But you have to admit it's funny.

And seriously, a South-Asian-American Christian from Louisiana with high grades could get into any Ivy League school right now. You know how many applications Harvard or Brown get from Louisiana?

I'm serious. If you really want to go to Harvard or Brown or Yale, make your parents move the family to Wyoming before you enter High School and just get decent grades.
posted by fourcheesemac at 4:55 AM on February 27, 2009


Jindal Admits Katrina Story Was False
posted by CunningLinguist at 10:33 AM on February 27, 2009 [1 favorite]


CunningLinguist: "Jindal Admits Katrina Story Was False"

What a shitty person. I was reading the Economist today and I had a chuckle at this story: The hope of the party. The article's opening:
A contender for the White House?

WHEN Bobby Jindal appears on national television to deliver the Republican response to Barack Obama’s first address to Congress on February 24th, not many people in Louisiana will be paying attention. After all, it will be Mardi Gras, a local holiday celebrated with passion, and plenty of libations.

Outside Louisiana, however, Republican leaders will be watching closely to see if Mr Jindal, who a month ago marked his first year as the governor of one of America’s poorest and most troubled states, is the man they hope he is: the redeemer of their hard-pressed party.
posted by defenestration at 4:11 PM on February 27, 2009


Jindal Calls Limbaugh A "Great Leader" For Conservatives, Is Glad Steele Apologized
posted by homunculus at 9:27 AM on March 3, 2009


« Older Remember the stink a few weeks back that caused We...  |  Want to play a swashbuckling p... Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments