Who is Althouse? * View only LAW posts * Contribute * Shop AMAZON*
Labels: Andrew Sullivan, Jindal, racial politicsOh, God.
He's referring to Althouse as a wingnut now? Wow, how long before he bows to reality and makes the Daily Dish a Daily Kos diary?
He always has to bring up Palin! This guy has a special hatred of smart women. Hillary, Palin, Althouse, it doesn't matter. He just can't deal with it, and projects his upset demeanor onto Althouse or whoever else. Althouse is a wingnut, huh? I can recall a time when it was Sullivan who was the idiotic cheerleader of Bush's foreign blunders. Seems he couldn't deal with it.Anyway, Palin's interview with Couric was awful, but a lot of that was just her being so foolish as to not control the boundaries of the interview (it was cut up to hell so as to make Palin look as bad as possible... which is still Palin's mistake). Jindal's awful speech was not like that in any way.And is Althouse defending Jindal? Is anyone? Noting that the democrats can be pretty racist sometimes is not to say that Jindal's speech wasn't stilted and dorky and impossible to follow.The democrats, from many directions, attacked Jindal's race in a way that, had the parties been reversed, would be a national scandal. Deal with it, Sullivan, deal with it.
I'm still waiting for bobby flay to pull up in a van.
had the worst debut on national television of anyone since Palin's encounter with Katie CouricThat's a pretty short time period.Which is wise on Sullivan's part.Otherwise we'd have to talk about Sebilus, Kaine, and Bill Clinton's first snoozer at the 1988 DNC.
Well, Althouse isn't a wingnut, but that comment was. I mean, NO ONE thought the man did a decent, let alone, good job. If I recall, Sullivan's comments were limited to comparing Jindal's walk to Mr. Burns from the Simpsons and then the obvious comparison to that 30 Rock kid. If that's racist, then society is completely and utterly out of touch with reality. Althouse missed the boat here, in a dreadful fashion. I keep waiting for her to, well, not apologize, but recognize that she made a mistake in suggesting it. Instead, she keeps piling on. It's rather funny, actually...
John Edward's political demise can be directly traced to the debut of Kenneth the Page and 30 Rock.
Maybe: Not to nit-pick, but I believe clinton's first introduction to the national stage was giving this same "reaction" speech following a Reagan State of the Union. As I recall, he nailed it. The sleeper came later...
Permission to call in a virtual airstrike on this vapid, tempestuous, mid 40's, 12yr old.
Today's secret ingredient: watermellon. Ai cuisine!
Oberon, I'm with you. I thought the first post was total irony -- you know, liberals make everything about race, so haha, I can too. But wow, this is absurd. The only basis for making this point is deep seated subconscious/structural racism. The implication of "All? You can assert that, but what makes you so sure?" is that essentially everything is about race. Which is fine if you want to make that argument, but it's one normally associated with critical race theorists, not centrist skeptics. Frankly, this stinks of knee-jerk contrarianism. Everyone (seriously, everyone) thought the speech sucked, Ann hates to be with everyone, so she pushed back (and in the process, took the low road of claiming racism while Rush Limbaugh -- RUSH!! -- took the high road of saying Jindal is the real deal on substance).
Did he just call you a "wingnut", Professor??
What year, Oberon?I can't find him.
... Jindal - stylistically and substantively - had the worst debut on national television of anyone since Palin's encounter with Katie Couric. That is so wrong on a single level. Couric's interview with Palin wasn't Palin's debut on national television. Sullivan, you're just another dumb ass Brit wedging themselves into American politics. Deal with it, Dumb Ass, deal with it.
I was mostly confused by the fact that I thought Jindal was pronounced "Jin-dahl" but Jindal himself pronounces it "Jindle," rhyming with Kindle. Is he trying to make his own name sound less "foreign"?
Wow, it takes a real Conservative Soul to call someone a "wingnut" (which I've always contended is a meaningless term). Call him "glutes", Althouse.
Jindal is the only governor to sign an "academic freedom" bill offering the state's support to science teachers who wish to mislead their students.He's Santorum II, and I'm happy to see him stumble.MayBee, I like the John Edwards connection. I hadn't thought of that.
Oberon, I think you've got a strong point in Sullivan's defense, but Althouse is clearly just opening up a discussion about a complex topic.Read the other Jindal tagged posts to see what I'm saying, and you'll see that there's something to this idea that Jindal's race is much more of a liability to him than Obama's was to him. It's interesting how any mention of Obama's race from the right would be jumped on instantly, but the left can laugh about Jindal being a dorky Indian nerd all day long.Sullivan's a total jackass for being so simplistic. 'deal with it, deal with it'. Yeah, if Althouse is really one of those pundits who is trying to 'score' an 'in your face' point, then Sullivan's response makes sense. But really, it looks like Althouse's point sailed way over Sullivan's head. All he knows is that he needs to attack the republicans as much as possible. He doesn't care about the details, and this isn't an intellectual exercise for him.
This guy has a special hatred of smart women. Hillary, Palin, Althouse, it doesn't matter. He just can't deal with it, and projects his upset demeanor onto Althouse or whoever else.True that. Anybody not see it? It's bound up in Sullivan's particular way of dealing with his sexuality.
Are you sure you're not having sex with chickens? I know you claim you're not, but are you really really sure? How would you know?
You see it's ok to make fun of an indian's accent as long as you give him a drawl. It's not racist because slumdog-abu sounds like he's from louisianna and everyone would make fun of Obama if he had a southern drawl right? Why, he'd sound just like a plantation owner!How do people generally make fun of Indians?....their accent...
"How do people generally make fun of Indians?"Usually we just mock their casinos.
I see so much racism hidden in Andrew's lack of praise for Jindal's face. His face!Obama with his down at the end of the sentence speech is just as grating as Jindal's up.But we expect to see successful Indian men, so he isn't lauded just for being him. That's the real racism.
Althouse is approaching this issue like a teacher, posing questions designed to broaden discussion of a complicated issue. Sullivan is approaching this issue like a deranged scumbag, which seems to have become his standard working method.
I must admit that one of the main reasons I enjoy this site is the author's ability to get a rise out of those who take themselves too seriously.I mean honestly, she does it so effortlessly that it just leaves me in awe sometimes. (Granted this is Andrew Sullivan, but still)On a side note:Palladian,You really should have taken that bet with Michael regarding the stock market's reaction to Obama's speech.
I guess this isn't very interesting, but when I say I think this has sailed over Sullivan's head, I'm talking about how Althouse's point was not that Jindal didn't sound like a dork. In fact, her point relied on that premise.Sullivan thinks pointing this premise out ends the argument, when really, all it does is show he doesn't care enough about the dialogue to even bother understanding Althouse's posts (if he even read them... he does attack a lot of stuff and then have to retract the attack once he realizes he misunderstood his target).To sullivan, everything is a big war, where if you point out an inconsistency, or an attack that goes too far or is made in a stupid way, then you must be 'on the other side'. Althouse noted a lot of the problems with the attacks on Jindal (who is a totally awful politician from my view). To Sullivan, that means Althouse is 100% a Jindal supporter, even though this is bewildering.That's why I am so easily goaded by Sullivan. It's so annoying to talk to people like this.
Man it would have been so cool if the guys who did Slumdog Millionaire sent Sacheen Littlefeather up to accept the Oscar.Nobody thinks outside of the box anymore.
Other than raising taxes, pimping unions, and endlessly insisting government run health care is the answer - the left are devoid of logic and critical thinking. They must rely on their base knee-jerk instincts that blindly vilify anyone who isn't the mirror image of their group-think.The left cannot articulate why they hate Steele or Jindal in anything but racist or condescending terms.
Yo April. Steele be da man yo!
How do people generally make fun of Indians?....their accent...Personally, I've been hoping to hear the "Tech Support" / "Customer service" meme, but I don't subject myself to enough of the leftisphere for that.ChipAhoy beat me to the other point that I was going to make: Gov. Palin's national debut wasn't the Couric interview, but her speech at the RNC convention (which was watched by as many - if not more - people than the Sermon on the Mile High given at the DNC convention a week earlier). That Palin hit that speech out of the park necessitated the hit-piece editing of the Couric interview.
jayne_cobb - Michael doesn't have any money. That's why he had to move back home.
Also, it would be a step in the right direction if the republicans could be as soto voce in their racism as the sub-contextual democrats. As it stands emailing pictures of Obama with a watermellon patch is going to trump anything about jindal.
AprilApple,What's that make the right then, if they can't do a better job winning arguments with such a simple minded left?I don't think it's left vs right so much as dumbass vs reasonable person. 90% of folks out there are dumbasses, and this time the dumbasses in the middle agreed with the dumbasses on the left on Obama. Even if Obama was a better candidate than Mccain, it really doesn't matter. All that matters is finding a simple enough narrative to convince the dumbasses in general.But the right has PPPPPPPPPllenty of these dumbasses too. Like the people who clapped and laughed when John Bolton suggested Chicago could be nuked.
Maybee: I couldn't remember the exact year so I had to look it up. It was 1985. http://clerk.house.gov/art_history/art_artifacts/stateunion.html Sorry, I don't know how to do those fancy-schmancy embed-links. Fatboy: I had Althouse in class and understand how she presents things. I don't think, however, that this is something that made sense to bring up. I know she isn't trying to score points as a reactionary (or, I suspect she isn't) I do know, however, that she loves the race card (as anyone who ever had her in class knows). Not the race card as in "how dare you..." but more of a "let's talk about all the ways racism is present here." Further, of course Jindal's race is more of a liability than Obama's. We don't have nearly as many Indians in this country. He doesn't have that 10% built in base. Plus, how many of us even know a few Indians all that well? (By "us" I mean Americans). Due to numbers alone, we "know" many more blacks. The fear of the unknown is ever present in humanity. But that still doesn't mean we can't say this guy remined us of Mr. Burns or Kenneth. Again, ridiculous. But I'm hoping this pissing match continues because it really is quite funny.
Trig Trootherism should have made AS beyond the pale. Like the 9/11 Troothers are.I don't go to AS or The Atlantic anymore. Has he made up an e-mail from a "reader" yet to bolster his own point?
Sully does not lead any parades, he follows them. He was only a "Conservative" as long others put together the orginizations and allowed charismatic individuals (Reagan, Thatcher) be the head. And Sully Hates women. How? Look at the man's Trig truterism. Ann is many things, but she is not a Republican. She is honest Democrat, unlike Sully who claims to be a Conservative.
"the hit-piece editing of the Couric interview."The editing. Just that one interview. The editing. Ha ha ha ha.
I can't believe The Atlantic still employs him after his performance during the election. Completely agree with the comments about his issues with smart powerful women, and he remains the only person that has made me feel sympathy for Hillary Clinton. And Palin was off the charts. She was the wrong choice for a host of reasons which became apparent during the campaign, but the personal attacks were ridiculous. Literally the last time I went to his site was when I saw a post about Todd Palin's business partner's divorce documents being redacted for some reason, with Sullivan concluding with a breathless "Uh oh!" (insinuating that she was screwing her husband's partner). Turns out her name wasn't mentioned at all. Maybe he should go work for Perez Hilton or TMZ - seems more up his alley these days.
How about this:http://clerk.house.gov/art_history/art_artifacts/stateunion.html
And yet people still read this idiot's writing.
Oberon- I don't think it compares. Clinton was one in a group. And you remember him nailing it in this group with random voters? Bobby Jindal has certainly been on national television in a groups setting before. But it's your nitpick, so I'll let you score it how you want.
"of course Jindal's race is more of a liability than Obama's."Of course? See outcome, assume cause. We have a black president, so of course being Indian in this country or in our political system is more of a liability than being black. Meanwhile, how many black senators are there or have there ever been? And how many 37 year old black people have been elected governor in the south, or anywhere, so far? There were a lot more black people -- sorry, "constituents" -- than Indians in this country in 1800, 1850, 1900, and 1950. Which was more of a liability at those times? History still matters.
OMG-he called you a wingnut.I love that.So delish.I am stewing in it right now.Yummy.
Oderon, you say you get it, but I'm not sure you do.Race is an interesting topic. But read this post, for an exampleof how precise Althouse is being. She's suggesting that the Burns walk was not 'all' there was to 'all' of the attacks. She is obviously right. Helen Thomas and a host of others have proven her right.Andrew Sullivan is the only one overstating a case.Further, Jindal isn't hurt so much in that there are fewer indian americans so much as being a dorky black guy is refreshing and being a dorky indian is the stereotype. I guess you might already get that, but it's not apparent.Pointing out that Jindal is dorky is like pointing out that Obama likes delicious fried chicken. At least in type, though not in degree. It's a valid POINT FOR DISCUSSION. Althouse only thought it worth discussing, and I think it is.This isn't about Jindal, and it's not about racism. It's about Sullivan and other people's absolute hysteria when they feel it's helpful, and their complete hypocrisy when that standard is applied to them.Here's an example: Suppose Althouse were to call Sullivan hysterical in her next post. Sullivan would accuse her of homophobia instantly. Why can't we just discuss these things without the political bent? And if we have to have the bend, why does it always lean against the right? Sullivan is wrong... there's what my law professors would have called 'insensitivity' in calling an indian a dork. At least if Jindal was a democrat, and not a douchebag clone of Huckabee.
I want to see Palin step on Jindal in the 2012 primaries. She will walk all over that little Punjab in the election.
You can assert that, but what makes you so sure?That's such a useful phrase, because you can keep saying it to anyone about anything, and sound like a deep thinker. If you're in second grade, that is. It marks the next stage of intellectual development beyond "Why? But why? But why?..." Although, not very far beyond.
I think Andy is obviously dealing with his attraction to Jindal and gosh darn it-he's confused-on many levels.He's over there closing his eyes and wishing Jindal was more like Bobby the Page from 30 Rock.The character is gay-right?
I'm still waiting for bobby flay to pull up in a van.???Are we having a barbeque?I'll make strawberry daiquiris
Deal with it. Wingnuts. Deal Are we sure Andy doesn't post here?
And if republicans think the governor of a state that ranks last in just about everything is their great brown hope they are delusional.Yea, the rest of the country wants to be taught intelligent design. Thanks Louisana but you can keep that shit down there in the south where it belongs.Palin 2012!Stormy Weather 2010 senate candidate for Louisiana! Beat Diaper David Vitter!
Daniel, I think there's more to the discussion than demographics.Why can a black man say the N word and a white man can't (in pop culture)?Why can a veteran support the Iraq war, but a 'chicken hawk' not (to many)" Why could Nixon go to China, or Obama argue for tac cuts for 95% of Americans? Had Mccain argued for tax cuts for 85% of Americans, he'd have been attacked viciously for it.Stereotypes make a huge impact, even on the people who are trying to be fair.Just as all these people who are noting that Jindal is a dork... a lot of them would never have said that about scrawny, dorky, feminine Barack Obama. A black dork is interesting. An indian dork is conformist and boring.This is the discussion that is too complicated for Sullivan to take part in.
I see a big fight between Althouse and Sullivan.My money is on Althouse.Get that faggot!
This has been a series of attacks on minorities on Republicans in politics:Anyone remember when "Sexual harassment" was an real issue by NOW?That was during Justice Thomas' hearings. Andrew Sullivan has attacked a woman (and her family -- the Dems who I learned from said that was a taboo line not to cross), who has raised herself up through the ranks, and because she does not have an Ivy league pedigree, dismisses her and her family. Remember the stories of Oreos being thrown at Lt. Gov. Steele and the way the NSDC went through his credit reports. Sullivan supported that. Niow Gov. jindal is being mocked as an Indian-American because of the (R) next to his name. C'mon you Liberals and democrats, i thought you were for diversity, as well as diversity of opinion (Our Blogress certainly does).Here is the challenge -- will any Liberal stand up against Andrew Sullivan's rascism and misogyny?I betting against. Althouse stands up to Sullivan, no one else has the balls.
Titus, I realize you don't even care much about the facts, and I'm not a huge fan of Palin, but how does Alaska rank last? Distance from Antarctica?I'm not aware that they rank last in any meaningful category.Palin is to the left of Jindal, by the way. She argues for contraception methods to be taught in school, did not argue for a ban of books, and did not argue for creationism bullshit to be taught in public schools.Those lies are on the same level as the idea that Barack was born in Kenya. It's plausible, but there is no evidence aside from the freaking out of people who are political invested in hatred.Do you sincerely believe this stuff? I think Palin is counting on these attacks as her best hope. They make people love Palin, because they are disproven (and more legit criticisms get lumped in as bullshit).A good example is that Couric interview. Palin was idiotic there, but Couric overplayed her hand, edited the hell out of it, and was not an honest player. So a lot of the legit criticism loses credibility. Obama loves the birth certificate truthers, bush loved the 9/11 truthers, and Palin loves the Trig truthers.
I am worked up today and ready to rumble!I want to see Althouse and Sullivan in the ring. Althouse kicking him in the nuts and pulling his hair.That would be hot.
Fatboy - McCain lost. The "right" is completely out of power.I'll say it again:Other than raising taxes, pimping unions, and endlessly insisting government run health care is the answer - the left are devoid of logic and critical thinking. They must rely on their base knee-jerk instincts that blindly vilify anyone who isn't the mirror image of their group-think.The left cannot articulate why they hate Steele or Jindal in anything but racist or condescending terms.
Fat Boy-Well-Sully is hysterical...I get that he's Brit and all but that-I'm a lumberjack...-get up he's got going on is LOL.
I meant Louisiana is last or close to it not Alaska. Mississippi and Alabama rival Louisiana for the bottom of the barrel.I love Alaska.Louisiana not so much.And I love Palin.I am getting a hardon thinking of battling too.
April, Why shouldn't the left be devoid of logic? As you astutely noted, Mccain lost, didn't he?Whatever the left is relying on (I think it's pretty similar to what the right is relying on), it's working, isn't it?In democracy, this is really just a big argument... the arguments the left is making are more effective than the ones the right is making. I'm not disagree with you that some of the left are devoid of logic... but I don't think this is a 'left' trait.Madawaskan, I'm pretty sure Sullivan's picture appears next to hysterical in the dictionary... I'm just saying that he will interpret the remark as homophobia (actually he has specifically done so). By this exact same standard, his comments about Jindal were racist. It's as simple as that, to my view.
i dig discussions of not so willful but destructive ignorance ("the bouncer was a big black dude") but this is absurd. you seem to be working off some 1993 post-colonial syllabus where ousmane sembene movies are watched and essays on the la riots are read and dudes a wigger and brother wants to be white and kenneths an especially white white man!
Titus, my mistake.You've got a good point about Louisiana, and I would have understood what you meant if I had put some thought into it.Jindal is probably the best Louisiana has to offer. :( for them.
Still curious:Will any Liberal or Democrat stand up to Sullivan's rascism and misogyny?Or is the Left allowed to sterotype, as they did with Justice Thomas, Lt. Gov. Steele or Gov. Palin?Or is "Liberal Tolerance" a myth, like Michael/Lucky's support of any President that is not a democrat?
Fatboy A13370 said..."To sullivan, everything is a big war, where if you point out an inconsistency, or an attack that goes too far or is made in a stupid way, then you must be 'on the other side'"And that, more than anything, is the attitude that puts him on the left. It's their standard MO.
We should start a countdown. How long will it take Althouse to admit that she was wrong about Obama. Althouse said Obama would be a pragmitist, which is why she voted for him.Obama has been nothing like a pragmitist. He is a radical.How long will it take for all the moderate intellectuals to admit how wrong they were about Obama.
Never thought I'd say this, but: Sully is right here, and Ann is wrong. Maybe "wingnut" is strectching it, but if it talks like a wingnut....
Personally I would just like to see Althouse kick Sullivan's ass.that would be cool.
Fatboy wrote: Oberon, I think you've got a strong point in Sullivan's defense, but Althouse is clearly just opening up a discussion about a complex topic.IMHO I think Althouse is clearly just poking her thumb in Sullivan's eye.garage mahal wrote Are you sure you're not having sex with chickens? I know you claim you're not, but are you really really sure? How would you know?This is exactly what Althouse is doing to Sullvian, but in fewer words.The joke is that Sullivan appears to think that "it wasn't chickens" puts him in the clear.As usual, when Althouse is playing with epistomology, her targets think she's being political.
Titus,Ann is kicking Sully's ass now -- Sully is a rascist and misogonist. Althouse is the ONLY Democrat who has the balls to kick Sully in the ass. The rest of the Liberal and democartic posters here support Sully's rascism.
Titus-Well have you seen when Ann get's into it with a Liberal chick on Blogginghead's?It looks something like this-Chicita ThrowdownI think they even make a buck.Then the guys get in the thread and do something close to this-Diapered Males Mud WrestlingIt's how I envision an Althouse Meet Up.
As it stands emailing pictures of Obama with a watermellon patch is going to trump anything about jindal.Is this something you actually saw, or are you making it up? Just curious.
Fatboy said: "In democracy, this is really just a big argument... the arguments the left is making are more effective than the ones the right is making."Maybe, but "more effective" doesn't mean better, or more true. For one thing, both sides' arguments don't get equal time in the media: All else being equal, the Democrat argument is always going to be more effective, because voters hear it more. Then there's the fact that a majority of voters already have a predetermined partisan loyalty which can't be changed by argument. Elections are decided by low information swing voters, who in many case couldn't even tell you which party controls Congress, and who vote based mostly on things like economic conditions and personal characteristics of the candidates. The effectiveness with which the parties argue their respective philosophies, only makes a difference around the margins.
As usual, when Althouse is playing with epistomology, her targets think she's being political.Let me put this another way. One of the characteristics of Sullivan and others of his ilk is his certitude. He's always on a crusade.One of the characteristics of Althouse and her ilk (us) is skepticism (or scatology, depdending on the day of the week).Althouse isn't exposing Sullivan as racist. She's exposing Sullivan as thoughtless.
I have given up reading Andrew Sullivan (and Camilla Paglia) for Lent. And quite possibly for an extended post-Lenten season as well.
Is this something you actually saw, or are you making it up? Just curious.No, it's real.The mayor who sent out the ugly cartoons as a "joke" later resigned.
Puh-LEASE, Professor. No more visits to the local insane asylum to laugh at the inmates.Andrew Sullivan is a broken remnant of what was once an thought-provoking individual with an interesting point of view. Now he's just crazy. For your own good, let him go.
Sloanosaurus said: "We should start a countdown. How long will it take Althouse to admit that she was wrong about Obama. Althouse said Obama would be a pragmitist, which is why she voted for him."Althouse said that she voted for Obama because McCain wasn't conservative *enough*- if we were going to have liberal policies, it's better that they come from a Democrat. That's a very reasonable and defensible position. I'm about as conservative as they come, and I think that once McCain got the nomination, it may indeed have been better for the country and the GOP if Obama won. For example, we would actually have been more likely to get an amnesty for illegals from McCain.The damage that Obama does to the economy can be undone, but an amnesty can never be undone. And even if Obama does pass an amnesty, at least now the Dems will own it. As Althouse put it, McCain would have tarnished the conservative brand, reaching across the aisle to pass liberal legislation, while calling himself a conservative, and getting many Republicans to go along with him out of party loyalty. Exactly what happened under Bush, except worse.
"Glutes" Hee hee hee!
I'm sorry - what fatboy?http://jammiewearingfool.blogspot.com/2009/02/chicago-islamist-sends-tainted-blood-to.html
And if republicans think the governor of a state that ranks last in just about everything is their great brown hope they are delusional.Titus, you've been listening to Joe Biden again? Sometimes last is best.Wednesday morning on the CBS Early Show, Vice President Joe Biden asked, "But what I don't understand from Governor Jindal is what would he do? In Louisiana, there's 400 people a day losing their jobs. What's he doing?" But that claim is wrong if you look at the numbers from the Louisiana Workforce Commission. "In December, Louisiana was the only state in the nation besides the District of Columbia, according to the national press release, that added employment over the month," said Patty Granier with the Louisiana Workforce Commission. "The state gained 3,700 jobs for the seasonally adjusted employment," Granier said of the most recent figures. Those numbers are available on Louisiana's employment website, laworks.net. Also available on the site are the state's latest unemployment statistics, statistics that appear to directly contradict what the vice president said Wednesday morning. The latest statistics show from the week ending January 17th, there were 4,527 claims for unemployment insurance in Louisiana. For the next week, that number dropped to 4,179. Economists credit a diverse economy for Louisiana's resilience to unemployment.It's unclear where the vice president got his unemployment figures from. The unemployment rate in Louisiana has gone up from 5.3 percent to 5.9 percent. Some blame that on a bigger workforce in the state, however that rate is still less than the national average of 7.2 percent.A call to the White House on the source of Mr. Biden's information has not been returned.
When I used to hang out at the South Asian American blogs*, I noticed that one of the most complaints of some of the SA commenters was how much they hated the Indian nerd stereotype, it really pissed them off, and, apparently, caused some distress to the young'uns growing up here in the good ole states. Deal with it, I'd say, but it was a real source of frustration for some. Oh, dreaded stereotypes!Ahem. Keep going with this theme, Dr. Althouse, you are onto something. No, it's not racism, but the way we talk about each other influences how we treat each other. Or vice versa. Or something.*I don't have the heart to visit those SA blogs after the Jindal speech. It's either high-yelling drama (He's a sell out, no he's not) or everyone is burnt out on identity politics and Jindal, because, like, we in the SA community (loathsome multi-culti language! And, yet, sometimes useful) have discussed this stuff ad nauseum.
Also.I am the one person who kind of liked the speech. I feel I must continue to stress this point. That was my natural, honest assessment and I was surprised by the uniform negative reaction the next day. I, being stubborn, refuse to change my mind.
onparkstreet-Ya-I liked the middle, and the end unfortunately-the beginning is how you hook them in-and that didn't work out so well.Cripes to get to the to the point-I'd love a link to these boards or blogs you are referring to.After seeing Jindal on youtube in response to Viera-I am really liking the guy.
The Republican Governors in Alaska and Louisiana are great and popular spokespersons in their States for the "tell people the truth and eliminate the Government by Bribery schemes" traditional style of politics. The New National Dems say thru their Couric's and Sullivan's in the media that "personality and style have become the only relevant political issue" since more than 50% of voters no longer care about honest government like the Joe the Plumbers, but their voters openly vote to loot the wealth of property owners "legally". Honesty is so out of date when the New Dems now win with ACORN politics and Obama Beauty with no one left to stop their legal looting of private property not yet redistributed.
madawaskan - I just checked one of the more popular ones (sepiamutiny.com) and there are only 54 comments under the Jindal post, so people seem burnt out on it. In the past, posts like that would have gotten hundreds of comments. Or, they are twittering instead, or facebooking or whatever.
onparkstreet-Thanks-I dunno why but I have to va cherche that.[I hate the ratmaze that is twitter-because I refuse to register]I'm off!
Althouse does innuendo. She wants to attack liberals and accuse us of racism, no matter the substance. Dark-skinned guy is compared to light-skinned guy. Hard to see how that's racist, unless you're inclined to denigrate any criticism of any Republican in any way possible. But, guess what? Bobby Jindal is a bald-faced liar.His story about the Sheriff and the boats was made up. And that has NOTHING to do with race. Bobby Jindal = LSOS.
Aprilapple,Are you some kind of wacko? I don't mind if you are, but I don't really comment here much and I'm not going to waste my time with a wacko.Do you really think that an assasination plot against Obama is proof that the ENTIRE left is *anything*?Do you really believe that there are no legitimate policy reasons why a person would disagree with a minority on the right? Or that the left is entirely devoid of reasoning in a way that is special to the left and not evident on the right?Because I think that's stupid. I worked for Republicans for a long time, and that kind of crap really makes it impossible for this party to get anything done. The left has some great points, and some idiotic points. They have some smart people, and some complete monsters. The right has a huge contingent of frat boy idiots who are too simple to understand the things they argue for... and while they often have the right answer, it's impossible for them to explain their reasoning to normal people who aren't politically invested. Three posts I gave you to explain what the fuck you were talking about. Your responses are less coherent than Tidus's toilet.
Labels: Andrew Sullivan, Jindal, racial politicsOh, God.Amen. Ann thinks if a non-white person is involved in politics and/or criticized, it's automatically racial politics. What a crock. Jindal is getting into the deep end of the big pool. His fans, like Althouse, may blame his critics as racists but there's skin color is not the same as teflon. Jindal was bad. Terrible. And a liar. It's not our fucking fault for pointing out simple facts. You guys are back with Palin. Or Jeb. I'm fine with either!
Aprilapple,Are you some kind of wacko?I thought you were closer with "dumbass." April seems incapable of making a coherent argument. All she has is vitriol and insults. Take those out of her arguments and you're left with nothing. Silence from the right on Jindal's lie to the nation.
But, guess what? Bobby Jindal is a bald-faced liar.Let me guess, his first name isn't Bobby? (heh, kidding. Ignoring your link right now because I didn't watch the speach in the first place and I really have no opinion on Jindal yet.)
Gosh and golly!! AG Eric Holder says we are a nation of cowards because we can't discuss race. He must not know of the heroes on this thread.
AlphaLiberal-Please let's have the LIE off.Problem with this contest is that Jindal you supposedly have him on the timing of the story-the when of it.Most people forget or mistate timing-that's memory related.In comparison Obam has told so many whoppers before and after getting elected-and a couple of days ago-Who the hell can keep up with the whirlwind of them?And-btw his Obama's lies are going to have a much greater impact on the futre and well being of America.You people really are a piece of work.You revel in the petty.It's like the art critic that hasn't got a clue about how something was accomplished, or the talent to do it but by gawd he's found a hair in the painting.That crap is so much easier aye Alpha?And perfect distraction from what stacking of the deck-Obama is doing.
Even college kids I know are saying-Taxes are now just an Obama campaign contribution.College kids are grasping that.
madawaskan tries to cover for Bobby Jindal's lie to the nation: Problem with this contest is that Jindal you supposedly have him on the timing of the story-the when of it.Jindal was not in a room with Sheriff when unnamed bureaucrats told them they could not send volunteers out in boats. It never happened. It's. a. false. story. a Jindal spokeswoman has admitted to Politico that in reality, Jindal overheard Lee talking about the episode to someone else by phone "days later." The spokeswoman said she thought Lee, who died in 2007, was being interviewed about the incident at the time.Here is the Politico scoop, picked up by TPM. Key point of the lie: Jindal told the American people that rescuers were prevented from going out in boats to help people. That's not what happened, as Jindal's own spokesperson confirms. Jindal said "A" but reality was "B." Now you're trying to polish this turd and tell us A is just the same as B but it's not at all. Sometimes it pays to just admit the point and move on. Turd polishing just makes a mess.
@Alpha, do you actually believe the stuff posted on TPM? Because I'd like to sell you some ocean front property I have out by Tucson. (Well it will be ocean front when the oceans rise.)@Fatboy, if all you do is hang around frat boys then you shouldn't be looking for articulate comments. You might try some of us who started out liberal, but who got "mugged by reality." If you meet somebody my age who isn't fairly conservative then they're either stupid (e.g., Joe Biden, who teaches contitutional law but doesn't know that Article 1 establishes the Legislative branch) or their money (e.g., Hollywood types) or position (e.g., university professors) shields them from dealing with real life.PS: Not necessarily you, Prof. Althouse -- knowing Wisconsin by reputation some of your colleagues in the sciences and humanities could do with earning a real living.)
Salon finds someone else who was there and reports a very different story: Despite having asked for his driver's license and social security number, when Riggs only provided his name, the officials let him through anyway. He told Salon that he was under the distinct impression they were collecting names in case any of the rescuers met some sort of misfortune and didn't come back.
@Alpha, do you actually believe the stuff posted on TPM?Yes. The do real reporting, and they admit the limits of their knowledge. You, OTOH, have nothing beyond denial. Not one example or fact.
Alpha-OK I'll admit that you've got more from your sources-which oh btw-have no bias whatsoever..Fine. Do I care? They don't have much credibiity-given the perforance of all of the media over the years.Point is the philosophy behind the story however it's conveyed and whatever the details might be-that bureaucrats are one jumbled up, inefficient mess-that is true.However you may want to obscure it with whatever the details might or might not be.And the rest of my comment above still stands however much you may not want to face the reality.Obama's multitude of lies are doing much more damage.
All of you who are defending Andrew Sullivan and attacking Ann Althouse: It is worth keeping in mind which blogger allows debate on her posts, even publishes vicious attacks on her character and intelligence on her blog, and which one does not.One of the reasons I avoid Daily Dish most days is that I hate not being able to respond to Sullivan's many argument fallacies which are beneath an alleged Oxford grad. He is the king of the strawman, the ad hominem, the taking-out-of-context, the blatant misrepresentations. One can point these things out on one's own blog, but not in a way that Sullivan's fans will see it. Sullivan is not a fan of "speaking truth to power" when the one in power is himself. Perfect example here. Althouse raising the question of Sullivan's subconscious racism was NOT a defense of Jindal's speech. It was a separate point, aimed at something Sullivan wrote. The subject was Sullivan, not Jindal. But on Sullivan's never-ending monologue, he gets to redefine Ann as a "wingnut" defending Jindal. Moreover, he's communicated to his readers that the group of bloggers often called "wingnuts" by the left thought Jindal did well -- when in fact the rightosphere savaged Jindal. And Sullivan's made sure no one will call him on these fallacious and misleading assertions.Andrew Sullivan is a nation of cowards.
Simon said..."He's referring to Althouse as a wingnut now?"She herself may not be a wingnut, but YOU and about 95% of her regular sycophants certainly are.Anybody who visits the site knows it as soon as they read through the comments.
How do we know John Stodder isn't having sex with goats? Maybe he is but isn't aware himself. Hey I'm just throwing it out there!
the same morons who instinctively cried "racism" from the left in the 70's and 80's are still up to it, just now, in their old age, from the right and thats all she wrote
Shanna - "Let me guess, his first name isn't Bobby? (heh, kidding. Ignoring your link right now because I didn't watch the speach in the first place and I really have no opinion on Jindal yet.)"Well, if you didn't even watch the speech, how would you know if he was lying or not? (Hint: He was.)
@Alpha, you could go here: http://www.redstate.com/blog/2009/02/27/keith-olbermann-owes-bobby-jindal-an-on-air-apology/Here's the problem I have with you and other frothing-at-the-mouth-I-have-a-lock-on-all-the-world's-wisdom types. You jump all over nits in the effort to discredit the big story. In Jindal's case while Blanco and Nagin dithered on the sidelines, he was boots on the ground. That is not a lie. That is the truth.You also ignore your own side's nits. There are not 57 states. Article 1 of the Constution does not establish the Executive Branch. Hezbollah was not pushed out of southern Lebanon. Learn humility, lest you be humiliated.
Ah, yes. Jindal also lied about the Stimulus bill containing money for "a ‘magnetic levitation’ line from Las Vegas to Disneyland."
Big Mike: "Learn humility, lest you be humiliated."You mean like the fool you supported for the last eight long years?Lecturing people about "humility" after watching and listening to George W. Bush is laughable at best.And please...don't even try to say you didn't support the man and vote for him twice.
What's really ironic is that Jindal, right after spouting the bullshit about the line from Disneyland to Vegas...left with his family for...Disneyland.
Well, if you didn't even watch the speech, how would you know if he was lying or not? (Hint: He was.)How do you know a politician is lying? His lips are moving.Badabump.All of them without exception.
Alpha Liberal-We've given you an honest opinion or reaction to your assertions that-Bobby Jindal lied.Do you think for one minute you could return the favor-you know, as a good faith participant?What's your excuse or explanation of this Obama abomination of a lie-Not because I believe in bigger government-because I DON'TExplain that to me-because that looks like a big philosophical lie.That looks like he actually has no philosophical or moral grounding.
Big Mike: First, the link you post has nothing to do with TPM. Keith Olbermann is not with TPM. Second, since that post we now have Jindal's spokesperson asmiting to the press that the meeting did not take place during the rescue efforts. That's not a "nit." You try to recast Jindal's point as being that he was there while Blanco and Nagin were... somewhere else. That's not Jindal's point. Jindal's point was that we should give up on government, and that he and the Sheriff stood up to the `crats, risking legal prosecution. Bunk. False. Not true. Not what happened. A misrepresentation. Not so much. A lie. Bear in m ind, this was a carefully prepared speech to the nation, not some off the cuff remark. I understand trivializing and argument is one way to avoid admitting your guy screwed the pooch. That's the only game you're playing here. "57 states" was a tired candidate failing to add "...and territories." I admit that's a nit.
I usually glance at Sullivan's site at least once each workday, but not for any substantive commentary. It's become a solo version of the charming chorale at Huffington Post and therefore useful in taking a quick pulse of the lockstep American left. His continuing obsession with the Palin Family Chronicles seems truly psychosexual at this point. And while he's shown admirable steadfastness on his clearly heartfelt matters of circumcision, bears, and Proposition Eight, his opportunistic abandonment of the cause of Iraqi freedom has put him forever in the category of someone not to be counted on in a streetfight.
"57 states" was a tired candidate failing to add "...and territories." I admit that's a nit.Really? Name the seven territories that Obama claims to have visited. Admit it...your guy made a bone headed error. 57 States..right.
madasakawan, I don't know where you got that quote from. I don't even know if Obama said that. But I don't think anyone "believes" in Big Government. I mean, do you guys "believe" in big corporations?
There aren't 57 states. Obama made an error. Wup de fracking doo. A candidate gaffe on the trail. They all do it. It comes with being a candidate. Unlike Jindal, I don't think it was an error written into the teleprompter, and prepared and vetted and agreed to by him and his staff. That is, Jindal clearly intended to lie. Obama fucked up on the "57 states" line. I can't explain it to you much clearer than that.
The more Althouse tries to make the case that there's something racist about seeing the absolutely obvious, to all with eyes to see and ears to hear, comparison of Jindal to the character of Kenneth the Page, the more nutty she sounds.On this one, Althouse is just fucking nuts, wingy or not.
Honestly Alpha-seriously?It was in Obama's address to the joint session of Congress, you know the one that Jindal gave the Republican Response to.
Alpha-I'm going to go get the text for you.
Alpha-Here is the exact quote-Obama: Not because I believe in bigger government –- I don’t.Here is a link to the transcript-source the Los Angeles TimesLA Times
Reminds me that there is a new Battlestar Galactica on tonight. Must say I'm torn on the whole Cylon alliance. Can't trust a toaster.
"All that really happened here is that Jindal - stylistically and substantively - had the worst debut on national television of anyone since Palin's encounter with Katie Couric."The Couric interview was of course not Palin'e national TV debut (Announcement? Nomination acceptance? Gibson interview?) but why confuse St. Andrew with facts; Couric is obviously the only thing about Palin he and the left want to remember.
The more Althouse tries to make the case that there's something racist about seeing the absolutely obvious, to all with eyes to see and ears to hear, comparison of Jindal to the character of Kenneth the Page, the more nutty she sounds.Too true. And also, it creates a dust cloud of bullshit that takes away from the actual substantive reasons why the speech (and Jindal) was so dreadful. Luckily, just remember that this is a random blog and not a representation of what the majority of normal Americans are talking about.
Blogger UWS guy said... I'm still waiting for bobby flay to pull up in a van.*snorfle*More like rope a dope.
Full context: As soon as I took office, I asked this Congress to send me a recovery plan by President’s Day that would put people back to work and put money in their pockets. Not because I believe in bigger government –- I don’t. Not because I’m not mindful of the massive debt we’ve inherited -– I am. I called for action because the failure to do so would have cost more jobs and caused more hardships. A) I don't think Obama "believes in bigger government." As I stated before, I don't think anyone gets behind that goal in and of itself. Big government is not a belief system. Now, health care care for all is something people believe in. Good family-supporting wages are something people believe in. Ending pollution and being good stewards of the our natural heritage for future generations is something people believe in. B) I believe his main point, that he thinks we're in deep doo doo because the private sector is contracting and not spending and output is falling off hugely. So, he, and most economists, think the government needs to be the "spender of last resort." So, do you guys "believe in big corporations?" Or just that the private sector should be free to do as it pleases?
Couric is obviously the only thing about Palin he and the left want to remember.Aside from whipping up the hate, lying about the Bridge to Nowhere and her record, pretending to be salt of the earth poor when she's actually wealthy, and being "Dan Quayle with a ponytail." And about 100 other gaffes and lies. Aside from that, you might have a point. (But, snark aside, that line jumped out to me as poorly considered, too).
Ok. Buh bye.
Really? Name the seven territories that Obama claims to have visited. Admit it...your guy made a bone headed error. 57 States..right.Yes, how can people, even now, still be pretending that Obama didn't screw up when he said 57? As I've said every time this came up, he clearly meant to say 47 states (one left to go, two -- Alaska and Hawaii -- that he would not be visiting in the main campaign). He said "fifty," then paused to count up, and said "seven." It's a perfectly innocent error, and it's nothing short of bizarre how his deranged acolytes insist on trying to recast it as something else. And the argument about territories? I mean, honestly.
Alpha-Actions speak louder than words.He's putting a whole lot of effort and energy into accomplishing just that BIG Government.Now if he doesn't believe in it-it's looking kind of weird-like Peter building The Church because he was an atheist.
Economists credit a diverse economy for Louisiana's resilience to unemployment.No, they don't. Louisiana doesn't have a diverse economy; our budget is tied directly to the price of oil. We've been trying to diversity for years, but our low standing on education, health care and crime continually make it difficult to attract diverse business. We've lost out on auto plants and steel plants in the past few years, for example, to other Southern states.Our current somewhat low unemployment rate is due to Katrina recovery spending. That doesn't add up to a diversied economy, because those conditions will come to an end.
I want to see Althouse physically beat the shit out of Sullivan.I want to hear him scream like a girl while Althouse drags him around by his nuts.That video would be so diva.I want her to say, "Who's the wingnut now, bitch"?.
"That desi men are portrayed as geeks/dorks/nerds isn’t a surprise." I googled the popular South Asian American blog Sepia Mutiny - that I mentioned above - and nerd, and came up with that sentence in one of the posts. No, I'm not gonna link, my point isn't the post, but that the 'desi men as dorks' is a common stereotype. Big deal? No, not really, in my opinion, it's like being stereotyped as a red-neck or stuff-white-people-like NPR'er.I guess it really is a victory for nerds - Obama is Urkel and Jindal is Kenneth the Page. Ha ha.(I read that politico article and I don't get the big deal. How did he lie, exactly? I don't get it.)
The left cannot articulate why they hate Steele or Jindal in anything but racist or condescending terms.Liar.I've articulated very clearly why I object to Jindal in clear terms of his policies and political/social philosophies.
DBQ wins at 3:14 pm.No lie.
AL: B) I believe his main point, that he thinks we're in deep doo doo because the private sector is contracting and not spending and output is falling off hugely. So, he, and most economists, think the government needs to be the "spender of last resort."Why would those of us who still have money to invest back those who have proven irresponsible? Do you lend money to deadbeats? If so I have a ne'er-do-well nephew I'll send your way.The private sector is not just "big corporations", it's tens of millions of investors, responsible community banks and small businesses. We've been prudent so why should our taxes be increased or profits confiscated to dole out to those who have not by the "spender of last resort"?We cannot spend our way out of insolvency with borrowed funding. Eventually the inverse debt pyramid will fall of it's own weight.Government as spender of last resort is the mother-of-all Ponzi schemes.
@Michael, you shouldn't try to swap invective with me.The only thing correct in anything you've written is that I certainly did vote twice for George W. Bush (not to mention twice for his father and zero times for that draft-dodging hick from Arkansas). I voted for him because (1) I thought both of his opponents had half the intelligence of an orangutan*, a judgement that seems to have been amply borne out by Al ("I invented the Internet") Gore and John ("I never fall") Kerry in their actions since each election, and (2) I thought he had integrity, at least more so than either opponent. Not that liberals understand the word -- it's some strange word in the dictionary between "integrate" and "intellectual."As regards integrity, there's an interesting comparison of the uber-green Gore with Bush's ranch in Crawford at: http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.aspI have never personally met George W. Bush, but I know several people who have and they are pretty uniform in commenting favorably on his intelligence. There are a lot of things he could have done better, and he doesn't fire people nearly fast enough (Rumsfeld, to name one), but I didn't have a choice between him and somebody perfect for the job, I had a choice between him and two utter phonys. And George W. Bush is real.I am contemptuous of Al Gore and pseudo-science he has been pedaling. Though John Kerry saw combat during his time in the service, which I thankfully didn't, two of his 3 purple hearts appear to have been granted for mis-handling his own weaponry. Good Lord! What a twit. His own best friend from those days owns up to the fact that he got his last wound from not ducking fast enough after throwing a hand grenade into a poor village's rice storehouse. How do you not know to duck after you throw a hand grenade? So I am contemptuous of him, too.In fact I have so much contempt for you, Michael, and your partner-in-crime Alpha, that you probably don't have enough working brain cells to comprehend it. I am utterly disgusted by limousine liberals. I am disgusted by people who push tax increases, like Tom Daschle, and then chisel on their own taxes. I am disgusted by limousine liberals who preach integration but are careful to send their own kids to private schools or schools with neglible minority enrollments. Do you have kids, Michael? Do they go to majority minority schools? Mine did, and that actually worked out well, since they are even more conservative than I am.*N.B. That's an orangutan, covered in reddish -- not black -- fur and resident in SE Asia, not Africa. It should not be confused with any sort of reference to the great Obama. Got it? Are you sure you got it?
To accuse Jindal of a lie over this Katrina/rescue boats story is so absurd one doesn't know how to respond.I live just outside of Louisiana and the rescuers (private people) will tell you (and did) all kinds of stories of the problems they initially had getting to help people.Beth, you want to chime in here? You live in Louisiana, I'm sure you read/heard the stories on WWL and their website during the storm and the immediate aftermath.Wow, some people are just fanatics.
Interesting comments to the Politico story. Lots of use of Jindal's given name rather than the name he has used for 25+ years. Wonder why they do that? What does it remind me of? Something about the 2008 election those same people complained about?
To those discussing the TPM story, here; it even contains a video of the sheriff in question.
Daniel - See outcome, assume cause. We have a black president, so of course being Indian in this country or in our political system is more of a liability than being black. Meanwhile, how many black senators are there or have there ever been? And how many 37 year old black people have been elected governor in the south, or anywhere, so far? There were a lot more black people -- sorry, "constituents" -- than Indians in this country in 1800, 1850, 1900, and 1950. Which was more of a liability at those times? History still matters.I see no parallel track between blacks and Indians. Blacks big failure to advance in politics was more attributable to a "Mah People!!" stance than racism. Meaning blacks in politics were preceived as being in it only to help other blacks and get other citizens's money mainly to fund "black needs". After a very promising self-reliance movement - blacks went away from that - began undervaluing education, entrepreneurship, and not in a position to help others but demand things from others.Which screwed them when they tried to represent larger society until they finally wised up in recent years.This contrasts sharply with the path Indians are taking that follows what other distinct minority groups achieved in educational attainment, professional success solely due to talent and hard work. With great political success following as they became Governors, Senators, CEOs in environments where they were both identifiable as a minority and without a "power base" - Japanese Americans, Chinese Americans, Jews, Mormons, Italians. We have even had more Arab Americans, albeit Christian ones, in the Senate than blacks - in the last 30 years. Indians follow their lessons. Strong achievement in each family. Selection to positions of leadership in America not on what they will "do for their people", but will do for all Americans. Smart enough to have prominent people in both parties and intolerant - like Jews, Japanese-Americans, Chinese-Americans, Mormons - of demonizing their fellow minority in the "wrong party".It has been a big black mistake to demonize people like Steele, Ward Connerly and do their utmost to block any black success in the Republican Party. Inouye would never shitmouth Hayakawa. Jews are happy to boast they were half the Soviet Central Committee at one point, half Bill Clinton's cabinet and 1/3rd of Bush's. And have top dogs in both Parties, pro-Zionists and anti-Zionists in academia who don't think it is "wrong" to have Jews of various competing ideologies and affiliations.. Mormons are happy they have members that are both liberal and conservative, that they do not quash one side for an official Party Line, and eventually ended up with Mormons in high power in both State and Fed government and the private sector of all party "stripes and persuasions".Look around. Indians are rising fast. Perhaps you have one, an Indian doctor or engineer, serving quietly but well on one of your town's committees.
bigmike, you're quite right that conservatives who became that way after thinking hard about it (often from a position of being liberal) are the most interesting and useful variety of republican.So what?That's not to say that there aren't TONS of douchebags working for the GOP. As I said, this is a problem within the party (as in... the people employed by the party). It's not a criticism of conservatism so much as a criticism of generalizing one side of the debate over the other. I'm sure the democrats have just as many idiots.
SMG: I think the part of Jindal's story that's weasely is his interjecting himself into it, as a participant. He wasn't. It's something he heard from Harry Lee, days later, as Lee was relating to someone else, maybe an interviewer, over the phone. So the whole part where Jindal says Lee was having it out with a "bureaucrat" - where he claims "Lee] was yelling into the phone: 'Congressman Jindal is here, and he says you can come and arrest him too!'" is untrue. It's an attempt to put himself into the story, and it just didn't happen.I don't doubt people faced some obstacles, but lots of folks came in with boats, so I don't know exactly how much bureaucratic wrangling actually happened. Jindal's point seems to be "government is bad" but in my opinion, the lesson from Katrina is "poorly functioning government is bad." It's absurd to think citizens will be able to respond to, or prevent, natural disasters without government being involved. And I don't Jindal believes that. I think he's pandering, which is why he sounded like a simpleminded fool the other night.
I am certain Harry Lee would have told boaters to screw the regulations and get in the water. And if Jindal wants to argue that he and Lee cut through the red tape so citizens could help, well, he and Lee are the government. That keeps biting the "government is bad" people in the ass. They keep running for office and being in government. They want to be re-elected. They are the frigging government.
@Fatboy, there are tons of idiots in both parties. But there are nearly zero Liberals who demonstrate the ability to reason from A to B to C to D. The best can get to C, but most can't get past B.In the USA where I want to live, people who work hard and apply whatever talent they've got should (unless they have bad luck) get ahead of people with comparable talent who don't work nearly as hard. Liberals, and I'm thinking Michael and Alpha here, presume that anyone who gets ahead -- other than by being able to sing well or act not too badly or run fast holding a football in their hands -- only got ahead by stealing from someone else. "Country Club Republicans" are a dwindling breed, replaced by the Limousine Liberal. If you read my flame above, you can see how I feel about neighbors who rhapsodize over multiculturalism and diversity, but make sure their precious daughter doesn't have to mix with black kids at the local elementary school and associates only with kids from a comparable (white upper crust) background.
That keeps biting the "government is bad" people in the ass. They keep running for office and being in government. They want to be re-elected. They are the frigging government.Right, because what Jindal et al are espousing is-anarchy.
So the whole part where Jindal says Lee was having it out with a "bureaucrat" - where he claims "Lee] was yelling into the phone: 'Congressman Jindal is here, and he says you can come and arrest him too!'" is untrue. It's an attempt to put himself into the story, and it just didn't happen.Whoa, and we know this how?We have Jindal's recollection and Lee's. Lee is dead (I recall seeing him about 5 years ago - my brother lives in Metairie and I have relatives in New Orleans and Kenner - and he looked just flat worn out).I think your dislike of Jindal is blurring your thinking (so to speak).I have no doubt that both Lee and Jindal had to deal with complaints from residents about red tape and that they took some action. Hell, this was the charge made against the FEMA crowd; that they were too bureaucratic and slow to respond.Was this an apocryphal story? Or real? Or something in between?Who knows? But those making the claim of it being a lie haven't presented much evidence.
@Michael, you shouldn't try to swap invective with me.Oh man, Big Mike, I trust you understand that I would never try that.Please believe me that I, and I hope everyone else, is thoroughly intimidated.Got it? Are you sure you got it?
I think your dislike of Jindal is blurring your thinking (so to speak).Or I'm following the story more closely, and reading more local coverage, than you are. Think whatever you want.His own aides have said the conversation took place between Lee and someone on the phone, as Lee recounted the story a day or days after the fact, and Jindal overheard that. But maybe his chief aide, Tommy Teepel, hates Jindal. That's probably it.
Hell, this was the charge made against the FEMA crowd; that they were too bureaucratic and slow to respond.News unfolding on that front, too. They're STILL too bureaucratic and slow to respond. Currently, the local FEMA office is under investigation for holding up projects in order to keep FEMA employees on the job. There's a very bad culture in that organization.
Here, despite my thoughts being clouded and blurred from dislike, I've managed to find the most recent update:"Col. John Fortunato, spokesman for the Sheriff's Office, said Jindal appeared at the sheriff's offices on the east and west banks several times in the days after the storm. The boat rescue holdup by federal response officials did occur initially as citizens brought their watercraft to a staging area in Jefferson Parish, he said. But the problem was resolved and the great majority of boats were deployed to the flooded areas of New Orleans later that day.Teepell, who after the storm drove with Jindal to visit various sheriffs' offices in his district, said he recalled being in Lee's office in west Jefferson on several occasions in the days after the storm. Teepell said he remembers the phone conversation but did not know who was talking to Lee.Lee was recounting the boat rescue story to the caller on the line, Teepell said. The phone call was not taking place while the boats were attempting the rescue operation, but some days afterward, Teepell said. "TPM is not one of my favorite sources, and they're over-stating this. But Jindal is most likely pulling a typical bit political exaggeration. Did you know Al Gore invented the internet?
Sorry to go on about this, but one more thing is important for me to point out: I don't know anyone who can say exactly what happened day to day, where they were moment to moment, and what they were thinking, in the days after Katrina. Katrina fucked us up. My mind did not work the way it worked for the 45 years u to then for at least the year after Katrina. Some things are as clear as crystal, other things all run together. So much was happening, so much spur of the moment prioritizing was called for. I still think Jindal is doing what all politicians do (See DBQ at 3:14 comment), and it doesn't make me think any better of him, but I don't want to see a cascade of nitpicking about every pissant little story like this.
What fun! I just got this email from someone named David Cho:"If you ever get an abortion, can I be the one who rips it out? I promise I won't tell Jindal."Stay classy, rightwingers!
I've joined the discussions on this blog for at least four years now; in that time, I've received emails and from and chatted with other posters, many of them "rightwingers" or conservative posters. All have been not just cordial but friendly. Whoever David Cho is, I realize he's not typical of the people I've met here over the years. I guess one asshole in four years isn't a bad record.
But Jindal is most likely pulling a typical bit political exaggeration. Did you know Al Gore invented the internet?Well, we've gone from a complete lie to a "typical political exaggeration".There's a lot of space between those two statements.As to private messages, I've received a few too (offhand 3 or 4) calling me a Nazi or some such nonsense. There's loons everywhere on all sides - politics, sports, games, books - whatever. I actually received one anonymous semi-threat because I criticized cats!The delete key really comes in handy.
Well, we've gone from a complete lie to a "typical political exaggeration".There's a lot of space between those two statements.SMG - if only the same person had made the two statements, you'd have an actual point to make. Instead,yYou quote me saying "exagerration" in comparison to complete lie - no quote marks there, but search my posts and you'll see that I don't call Jindal's story a "complete lie." So who's lying now to make a point? You. I can see why you're sympathetic with Jindal. It sucks to have people point out when you're making shit up.
He hates Coulter, too. I said, well, okay, Coulter. But Coulter, Palin, Hillary, and Althouse? Yes, definitely a problem with women and I don't ever want to hear about his teenage weirdness regarding Thatcher again. If he saw Thatcher now for the first time, he'd despise her.
@Beth, you could take a look at the video at this site: http://www.redstate.com/blog/2009/02/27/the-day-after/I gather you're from Louisiana so probably you can understand Sheriff Lee better than I did -- I had to replay it a couple times. But I think he's saying that Bobby was in his office the day after Katrina and cut through the red tape for him. And this strikes me as pretty much corroborating what Bobby said in his speech.
Big Mike,I saw that video. I also saw this on Redstate - "The left accuses Bobby of not being near New Orleans when Katrina hit and only flying over." Any one saying that is wrong, and it's certainly not what I've said.But the anecdote Jindal told in his speech the other night isn't accurate. Again, Tim Teepell and another aide have clarified that particular conversation was one Jindal overheard a few days later. Harry Lee in this video is campaigning for Jindal for governor, and recounting that Jindal was a good resource after the storm, and he was. He was in and out of the surrounding parishes, arranged for some equipment needed, and so on. He just didn't happen to be in a "oh yeah? well come arrest me and Jindal" moment - that didn't happen.If you read my comments here, you'll see I am very much against nitpicking this, from the left and from the right. The leftist blogs criticizing Jindal's Hillary-Bosnia-style story overstate the case, and the rightwing blogs yelling that this is all a nefarious attack are also uninformed. Jindal was a good guy in those days after the storm. It's too bad he decided to fictionalize a story to make it more exciting, and to make the incredibly wrong and stupid point that citizens didn't need government help after Katrina. He could have told all sorts of other good, and accurate, stories about his actions after the storm.
@Beth, dang it all, I was getting prepared to not like you and here you are being all reasonable.Except!I think that left-wing blogs and dedicated Democrats have been attacking two of the top governors in the 50 states over nits, so as to knock them down as potential 2012 candidates, and to hell with whatever fallout there is to the states they govern. And I find that reprehensible. You live in a state that the rest of us in the other 49 regarded as "ungovernable" and to the extent that Bobby Jindal turns that around, he deserves all the credit in the world. If he can. You might really be ungovernable after all.Both Bobby and Sarah need more seasoning and would do well to focus on being the best governor possible and forgetting dreams of a 2012 presidency. If the opportunity comes they should go for it, but running their states well is the best 2012 campaign they can have in 2009.
You might really be ungovernable after all.I think we might be overgoverned - everyone pretty much cringes everytime the Legislature goes into session. I agree with you that Jindal ought to focus on being the best governor he can be and let 2012 take care of itself. And I'm peeved that he's not doing that. There are obviously many things that I'm ideologically opposed to on his agenda, but there's room for common ground on many other fronts - the chief item being reforming our budget process to spread the effects of budget cuts across the board, rather than targeted at higher ed and health. I think, from what I can tell from his public commets, that he and I agree on this. And I suspect he wants to cut back on the number of colleges in every little town across the state, and maybe repurpose some to technical and industrial training. I know the people of Bunkie and Eunice and Waterproof and Gross Tete and what have you want to drive no more than a few blocks to go to college, but it would do them no harm to get out of the country and go study in Baton Rouge, or Shreveport or New Orleans for a few years - hey! they might even have a shiny new magnetic lev train to travel on (yes, Jindal's taking the train money). And we wouldn't have to support the facilities on so many campuses statewide.
and Big Mike - I'm prepared to like you, even when you're unreasonable, if you're up for it. We can always throw a few bricks at each other then find something to agree about later.
Who, me? Unreasonable? You must have me confused with some other commentator.OK, seriously, there are many, many things that I am certainly going to be unreasonable about, and if you wind up on the opposite side of any of them you should expect me to let you have it.According to the Tuskeegee Institute over 6000 black people were lynched in the century after the Civil War (1865 - 1965). There's nothing for a white person to be proud of in that statistic. But according to the FBI, over 7000 black people are murdered annually by other black people. In other words, more black people die in one year at the hands of other blacks than the KKK managed to lynch in an entire century. I'm going to be very unreasonable about that. As a Democrat you probably assume the Republican == racist and that's that, but from where I sit it's your party that is in the way. So, yeah, I'm unreasonable.According to NPR, which is a bit to the left of my position, 70% of all black children are born out of wedlock. It's not old white guys like me that are impregnating black teenage girls. And, yeah, I'm going to be unreasonable about that, too.I'm deeply offended by the pseudo science behind "climate change." It may look like science, but it's not. Go out on the web and find a copy of Richard Feynman's 1974 commencement address at Cal Tech. He called it "cargo cult science" and he had the targets appropriate for 35 years ago, but it's true today and it applies to "global climate change." I say that, even though I strongly agree with pushing through renewable energy. The wind will blow whether we tap it for electricity or not. Uranium atoms will decay whether we use nuclear power plants or not. But fake science is not how to go about it.And Ted Kennedy's efforts to sabotage a wind farm in the ocean off Cape Code are just another in the long list of reasons to utterly despise him. His older brother John was worth several thousand of him.Democrats aren't all bad. Just their policies that perpetuate black poverty and crime and sabotage the education of black children. Just "shared inconveniences" that are somehow never shared by the Barbra Streisands and Ted Kennedys and Chris Dodds and Joe Bidens and Hyde Parkers like the Ayers and Obama families.Yup, I can be pretty unreasonable at times.
Post a Comment