Did you see Bobby Jindal on Hannity last night? I was really hoping Hannity would ask him about the NY-23 election, but no luck. I've contacted Jindal's office twice trying to get him to endorse Hoffman, but no luck. Jindal SAYS the right things, but he's still sort of "iffy" around here and gets mixed reviews. I like him, but I've still got him in the unproven category.
2 comments:
My opinion on Jindal is that he is another neo-con; in the mold of Bush or Lindsey Graham. His health care stance some years ago in the only solid evidence of what he would do or recommend. That stance is similar to Obamacare. Otherwise, somehow he has managed to do very little. To be a proven leader he will have to have action to back up his words, particularly after the lesions we learned from Obama.
But on the other hand you can look at the modern politician and see that he/she has developed a style of rhetoric that insulates them from subsequent action. My thought is that Lincoln was the first truly modern politician. His speeches are pieces of art and infused with notions of freedom and common cause. Yet his actions can only be compared to Hitler and other despots that we have experienced over the last two centuries. To this day, the image of Lincoln is tied to his rhetoric and not to what he actually did.
Jindal is too liberal on health care. But he has real accomplishments. They just do not get reported in the national media because he is an effective Republican. I'd like to hear Pat's take on his accomplishments as governor. My brother-in-law was born in Louisiana and lived much of his life there has always gaven me a picture of severe, endemic political corruption stifling the state at every level. But apparently Jindal with strong popular backing has made real headway in greatly decreasing corruption.
Post a Comment