Bobby Jindal on a Possible Run for President in 2012

[mallwalker123]

Screw you Jindal. My parents are from South India and I'm born in New York yet screw you Jindal you will fuck up as a president. Bobby Jindal you and Bush you a pair of 2 fucking scumbags!!!!!!!

[TomAraya23]

NO WAY APU!!!

[ilovepri]

BOBBY JINDAL FOR 2012 is what we need. We need to change the Healthcare which has been screwed by *ahem*.

[frenchcolors]

Jindal = Crook and Creep! What planet is this guy from??? He thinks he'll be re-elected????

[lifekiwi]

Fucking love Meet the Press.

[juseph29]

this guy jindal is a borderline nutcase.i would rather any other rep. than this clown

[tripeandbean]

If he becomes President he's going to make Indian people look bad.I've ask an Indian person the following question:

Why do they always sing in Bollywood films?

The second non-white president can not be Republican.

I don't want him to be President nor Michael Steele to be President.

[obamapower1]

@tripeandbean Fuck you. You be and uneduceted racist.Get on the Maeflower and gone back to Pais, you David duke RACIST FUCK

[tripeandbean]

@obamapower1 I'm uneducated? "You be an uneducated racist" isn't proper grammar.

The reason why I said he's going to make them look bad is because he's a republican and republicans are terrible.

By the way,I like Indian people.I even have a friend who is from India.

Who's David Duke?

I wouldn't even be allowed to go on the Mayflower.

If he was a democrat I'd vote for him.

You don't know this,but,I will NEVER vote for a republican.

[obamapower1]

@tripeandbean You really do not know who David Duke is? Typical racist are dumb, white, and have a friend that is black or friend that belongs to a minority. You be educated on shit you fucking white conservative republican. I be proud i voted for Obama and other demorcates. I bet you be voted on Marco Rubio from Florida in 2012, he is a racist like you, but Cuban. You need to vote republican you dumb shit.

[Conservative1001BG]

@obamapower1 You're an example of the uneducated Obama voter: throwing out random spouts of race baiting, can't spell worth shit and debates like flustered housewife on steroids.

[jpprr]

jindal for president in 2012!?

who needs education and health care anyway right!

I guess people down here don't care about anything else but football and taxcuts that'll keep them happy

[KWOTEC]

did youl know that bobby jindal was backed up by mike foster and david duke which is the leader of the KKK ?

[Conservative1001BG]

@KWOTEC Did you know that Obama was backed by Jeremiah Wright (who is a racist asshole) and Bill Ayers (a former terrorist).

[swatford98]

@KWOTEC did u know obama pays the terrorist group hamas 4 billion dollars a year?!

[KWOTEC]

did youl know that bobby jindal was backed up by mike foster and david duke which is the leader of the KKK?

[KWOTEC]

fukkk bobby jindal, I'm 4rm baton rouge,La. and if your not 4rm you u wouldnt know. as soon as he made it in office, he put a freeze on state hiring (3 times), refuse the stimulis package 4rm obama, and refuse the money for L.S.U. He aslo said that he was gonna close down Southern University, he raised taxes twice, and HE DIDNT EVEN SHOW UP @ THE CAMPAIGN DURING THE VOTING FOR REPLUBLICANS AND DEMOCRATS. He was in Ohio campaigning for someone else

[dnair9]

If people like Govenor Jindal don't elected to higher office by virtue of his skin colour, which gives rise to suspicions of him being Muslim. The extremists will be delighted. America will be happily letting go of their brightest stars, to put some idiot who can't spell a sentence for candidacy. It will mean the extremists can now plan their malicious attacks easily knowing smart people like Jindal would not be there to stop them..lolz

[tripeandbean]

@dnair9 First of of all most of India is Hindu.Do you know why that it is?It's becuase back in gandhi's time them and the Muslims did not get along.Therefore,India's Muslim population moved away and created a place named Pakistan.By the way,his were hindu and he converted to Christianity in high school.Also in India,Christianity is one of the top religions.

[VinzZissou78]

Bobby Jindal is an absolute joke, he's straight out of a cartoon.

[Superboy316KING]

give me a break this raghead will not even get past the primaries.



[youngmarc86]

Sadly He Won't Make It, Not B/c He Is Not Qualified, Only Bcuz The GOP Only Wants A White Person. Gov. Jindal Would Be Good, But Ppl Will Wrongly Call Him A Muslim To. Ppl Will Look At His Skin Tone and Be Scared. I Wish America Would Get With The Program And Move Forward. 100% Sad!!!

[dud3man6969]

@youngmarc86 You don't know what you're talking about. It's the left who is obsessed with that shit. Only the left says the Republican party only wants white guys.One of the founding members of the Republican party was Frederick Douglass. The Democrats were the KKK party. Not only was Bird a KKK member, but FDR was too.

[HiRoader11]

@dud3man6969 The Lakers use to play in Michigan.., And the Colts played in Baltimore.... Your logic borders on clueless political alliance... This Great taste, Less filling dems vs repubs is foolishness... The lobbyist have brought & paid for both parties... Bobby Jindal aka Rick Santorum is merely a political hack, a Limbaugh parrot like Palin... He's lobbyist brought & paid for,.. Public anger over JOBS have been diverted & distracted to cutting parachute programs tax payers paid into SS & UC.

[matv78]

@youngmarc86 Nahh, America is past that. Look at how many minority-majority states there are. The demographics are changing. The views people in America hold is changing and is much more harmonious than 40, 20 even 10 years ago- blacks, whites, latinos and asians - for the better. Our leader should represent everyone's best interests, not those of any one community. I agree with you, we need a bold, intelligent leader that can get this country back on course.

[psakai09]

He would be a better president than Obama. People thought they were getting a true leader in obama, but he is a wolf in a sheep's clothing. 2 yrs as a congressman and 3 years as governor, that is already more experience than Obama, and he is 10 yrs younger. In another 10 yrs, he will be more ready for higher office than Obama ever was. And he's made actual changes in his state. Not just voted "present" like Obama did, because he thought it would hurt his shot at the presidency.

[SHSFB79]

RUN FOR PRESIDENT FOR THE LOVE OF GOD!

[jpprr]

@SHSFB79 yeah!! louisiana is doing great, I mean education, health care who the hell needs that

[TheTruth775]

@obamapower1, you sir, is what is wrong with this country. Stupid dumbasses who blindly support Obama, and know nothing of our nation, or history. First of all, Obama defeated John McCain in the election, not George Bush. But I guess you didn't know that. In addition you contradicted the philosophy of your own "favorite president," who wants to grant amnesty to illegal immigrants, and provide for free healthcare for them, etc. So in short, you are a typical American liberal democrat.

[69Westerling]

Gov Jindal exposed... search youtube for VICJhLoJVo

[CloudtheNxssEffa]

It is amazing that since the Grand Old Party has a potential legitimate President Candidate in Bobby Jindal people tear him down every which way and compare him to Sarah Palin...(?????). It just goes to show that Democrats see him as a threat and it gives me much pleasure to witness.

[obamapower1]

@CloudtheNxssEffa no threat at all Obama can beat any man. Jindal needs to go back to mexicao were hed been born. We needed less mexicans in are country, theys just sit around and collect unemploysment

[tripeandbean]

@obamapower1 1.Jindal was born in the United States.Just listen to how he speaks and you would know that.2.His parents are from India.3.He's not Hispanic,he's Indian.4.Not all Mexicans are illegal.5.You're not from this country either.6.Be quiet,you racist fool.

[mukaikof]

@tripeandbean bobby jindal is very handsome but i wouldnt consider him for president, then USA would be more of shithole then it is. jindal gets in office then we will have an illegal immigration problem with indians

[hindu22696]

What the hell. He is one hell of Governor, and has a 77 Percent approval rate, he's bright and i hope he does run for president.

[swanson6666]

Obama wants real change. He's going to get it in 2012.

[PalinBOOBS]

@swanson6666

it's hard keeping with these guys shifting positions. they whine about big government but all I hear Jindal crying about since the oil spill is where my big government? it's confusing Bobby! make up your mind... big or small? which is it you Muslim terrorist?

[dannyd1572]

Screw Jihndal! Cutting down the President for not responding to the oil spill and yet he greets him with open arms today. What a little twirp.

[ketogenesis]

Obama aka Soetoro picked up right where Bush aka Skull and Bones (aka the same place John Kerry is from) aka Illuminati (according to Jack Van Impe) left off, I assume this guy is being trained to pick up right where Soetoro leaves off.

[manucalrad]

fuck hes better than palin like waaaaayy better.

[sandythebear]

simply put, i like him

[odessyrcr589]

I didn't think it could be much worse than Ms. Palin.

BUT OH GOD BOBBY JINDAL.

Republicans- BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AT ONCE!

[smiFromBelarus]

LOL at the way he talks

[smart14u2]

Jindal even thinking of running for President? The man is DELUSIONAL!

[jaskaram]

the line between working and time off for the rich is fuzzier than the middle class knows. I worked hard all my life, and at this point the decision is whether to reward myself by investing time in areas I ignored previously or to grow the business and make a lot of money

Things that tip the scale either way aren't huge issues by any means. If I can put off working now for a more economically viable market in the future because Obama's making life difficult for small businesses, I'll do it

[brothermikefan]

This Jindal guy really could be the next president. He's got all the right qualities. His skin is dark, his ears are big and he's almost got that Obama lisp figured out. He's gotta lose that "Alfalfa" voice though.

[JohnR22926]

Jindal is off-the-charts smart, but I don't think he's the guy. First of all he's just too conservative; no way his positions on social issues will win back the swing voters. Second, he's funny looking. They're already comparing him to Mr. Rogers...I think he looks like Don Knotts. Voters will never elect a Pres who looks geeky.

But, the Reps are correct to find female and/or non-white candidates.

If only we could combine Palin's charisma and Jindal's smarts in one candidate...

[shdyslimm1]

hmm i dont want a president to be good at lying. this guy sux at lying

[vaaggie]

ANSWER THE QUESTION!!!!!!!!!!!

[SeekerNLife]

Bill Clinton also did this....he said repeatedly in 1990, that "If you re-elect me as your Governor, I promise to stay here in Arkansas and not run for President."

The press gave him cover for this lie.

Bobby Jindal is great.

But he's going to have to polish up his presentation skills before he will be ready to win votes on a national scale.

He doesn't posess the natural con-man skills and charisma that Obama has...so he will have to work at it.

[computerpurple]

Ok here is my 2 cents on Bobby Jindal. I saw his republican response last night and i didn't think he did a good job. Why - ... well it's not a case of what he said it's just his delivery was flat. However i did see Michael Steel on Hannity he came across very lively full of energy.And what he had to say was far better.

[menana2u]

computerpurple, have you considered the different settings? You have BO speaking elegantly, with hundreds of sheeple cheering at every other word. There was big energy in that room. BJ was in a nice quiet setting, and yes he could have had a better delivery, but his words rang true, unlike BO.

We just have realize that whatever BO says, he will do the opposite. He's a liar and a cheat ,and those are just the ones I can say on here.

[computerpurple]

Hello menana Perhaps Bobby Jindal will get better at getting the conservative message out over time. NOT that i think he hasn't at all. My comments i made were not made based on obama's speech that night because i didn't watch him.Obama makes me SICK can't stand to see his face or hear his voice. I loathe all the obama worshiping. HATE the liying press , they to worship b. hussien obama.

[gunnyranger2]

So, what now, do we HAVE to have a person of color run for president?!

[lv3ddip]

His real name is Piyush Jindal, not "Bobby", and how do we know his is an American citizen? We haven't seen his birth cerificate.

[JohnR22926]

Well, Jindal is very smart and he's not an old white guy...which is what the Reps are looking for. However, he's VERY conservative and I'm not sure a Rep can win the presidency if he's too far to the Right.

Here's my prediction. Most Presidents get a 2nd term and IMO Obama will win in 2012. So...I'll bet the Reps nominate a placeholder like Romney, but have their chosen future leader as VP. Jindal is a very likely VP candidate in 2012.

[ka7krz]

It was McCains liberal ways that cost him the election. The largest victory for president was Reagan 1984. He was a true conservative. Until the moderates and liberal wing of the GOP understand this we will continue to punt.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

McCain wasn't nearly as liberal was Obama and Obama won. Reagan's election in 1984 wasn't the biggest landslide in American history, Lyndon Johnson's 1964 election was (Johnson was a liberal). McCain lost because of his VP selection, his similarities to Bush, his age in contrast to Obama's youth, and his overall failure to make a better argument than Obama on any given issue. In order for the GOP to win in 2016 (Obama will win re-election) they need to be more moderate and less stuborne.

[pimpdalyrical]

Obama won on a platform of Tax Cuts, GeeYouAreYou0001! Not to mention, what the GOP likes about this Jindal guy soo much is his Reagan-esque pure conservatism. His ability to express the pure logic and correctness of conservatism is what convinced soo many in a liberal state like Louisiana to vote for him.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

I wouldn't say tax cuts were Obama's winning platform. He pledged to cut taxes for the middle class, which the public would normally respond well to, but he also pledged tax increases for the rich which rendered mixed feelings amongst the public falling largely along party lines. I'd say Obama's winning platforms were healthcare, the economy and his then in development stimulus, Iraq, and basically anything that contradicted Bush policies.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

As for Jindal, the GOP's off to a good start in renewing their party. By good start I mean not tossing the same boring old white guy in your face. Jindal's image is something that can lead the GOP to victory, but his ideas are another story. America is getting progressivley more liberal as time goes by and if the GOP wants to remain relevant it will have to adapt to that. If you're smart enough you can explain anything and make it sound perfectly logical.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Conservatism is no more correct than liberalism. In reality, a staunch belief in either ideology is incorrect. The best route is a progressive combination of the 2 ideologies that cherishes what works and scraps what doesn't. That progressive ideology is what both parties need to adapt, though the GOP faces more urgency in this. Reagan wasn't perfect. He made a lot of mistakes that cost us dearly in the long run and, in case you haven't noticed, Republicans are the only ones who like Reagan.

[pimpdalyrical]

Nice try, "progressive" is just the latest cover up term for socialism, after they figured out "lberal" wasn't cutting it anymore. The millions of people who owe their lifestyle to the innovations made by the private sector in the late 80's (such as the PC and internet) like Reagan for letting tech companies reinvest profits into R&D instead of being taxed. Clinton is what killed the tech bubble!

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Progressive is a very flexable term. Yes, some are using it to replace liberal, but it can also be used to describe accepting what works and scrapping what doesn't. Teddy Roosevelt, a Republican and arguabley one of America's greatest presidents was extremely progressive. If Clinton killed the tech bubble than why has it continued to advance and grow literally every day? My point was that policies that won in the 80's can't win in the 2000's.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Reagan was never even as popluar as the modern GOP makes him out to be. In 1980, he won with 50.1% of the vote and in '84 he won with 58%. 60% is what is considered a landslide.

[pimpdalyrical]

And Bill Clinton won the presidency with only 43% of the vote, soo what? The winner is the winner. W. won twice, even a liberal panel of judges confirmed it was just. Get over it.

Economic principles and math don't change. They are the same as they ever were. What changes, apparently, is that over time we have forgotten about basic human nature in favor of feel good policy.

Just like Carter.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Well, you have to take into account that Clinton ran against 2 other candidates while Reagan only ran against 1. I'm not even going to start a discussion on Dubya. The point is that 1 economic theory won't work all the time. Nobody objects to the free market system, it's one of the systems our country was founded on. What people object to is to little regulation and laissez-faire which promotes irresponsibility and leads to abuse of freedom.

[pimpdalyrical]

I'd agree with you, except historically, politicians interfering with the market has gone badly. Often because they saw a need for regulation when all they needed was oversight. Such was the case in the mortgage industry back in the 70's. The truth is that even the auto industry would be doing fine selling SUV's right now if it weren't for government intrusion. Check out what Ayn Rand thought about government interfering in the market and you'll see what I mean.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Government intervention in the economy has had mixed effects. If the economy was propsperous than the government's only duty would be to fight corruption and ensure a fair playing feild. In times of economic collapse though, the government should have a much more decisive role. Take FDR's New Deal for example. When FDR came into office, unemployment was at 25% and the nation was in a panic. Continued...

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

FDR bombarded Congress with plans to stabalize the housing and credit markets as well as put Americans back to work. There were a few rough spots such as the NIRA whitch attempted to set prices and wages higher than they were worth (the NIRA was proclaimed unconstitutional and stopped by the Supreme Court after 2 years), but by the end of his first term, FDR had cut unemployment in half, laid the path to economic recovery, and invented the social net that still keeps us economically sound today.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Obama's plan is essentially a mini-New Deal. The causes of the Great Depression and the causes of our current recession are eeriely similiar, so our approach to recovery should be similiar as well. Odds are that some spots in Obama's plan won't do as well as we've hoped, but there will also be parts that work better than we expected. Plus, if you watched the Obama's address last night there is no way that you didn't walk away with atleast a little more confidence than you had that morning.

[pimpdalyrical]

"if you watched the Obama's address last night there is no way that you didn't walk away with atleast a little more confidence than you had that morning."

No, I judge on substance instead of style. (He didn't know who invented the automobile!)

If you passed high school economics, you know the New Deal prolonged the great depression by at least 3 years. It was free market entities competing for War equipment contracts that ended it. (government acted as a customer, not owner.)

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

The NIRA was the only New Deal proposal that did any damage and it was declarded unconstitutional 2 years after it was put into effect. You're partly right. There's no doubt that the surge in job openings to make equipment fot WW2 was the final kick start that got our economy out of the depression, but it is also true that the economy made significant improvements before the war as well.

[pimpdalyrical]

If you want to support that mother of 3, go right ahead, you have no right to tell anyone else who they should be charitable to. Not to mention, she gets a break already just for being a single mom, and probably doesn't make enough to pay taxes anyway. Rich guy gets a tax break, a thousand people get jobs and put their kids through school, (including your tragically precious single mom.) Mom of 3 gets a handout, they buy lunch. Which is more beneficial for society?

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Well that's how it works in Republican fairytale land. In reality this is how it goes. Rich guy gets a tax break, he buys a bigger house, a faster car, and a shiney new jet. Meanwhile, Mr. Big'n'Rich has to lay off 2,000 people because the economy is in the crapper due to the massive gap in income. At the same time, Ms. Mom works 2 jobs on top of her benifits, just to get by and have her kids live a normal life. Rich guy gets a tax cut and doesn't make jobs, Mom needs any money she can get.

[pimpdalyrical]

You're obvioulsy not smart enough to be one of the rich people, so I will spell it out for you. Rich guy wouldn't be rich if he didn't know the best way to use profits, which is re-investment in his company. Michael Dell will use a tax break to research new tech, which means expanding both workforce and facilities. meaning jobs for everyone from geeks, to security, to construction workers here on visa's. Why? because he knows it will make him more money in the long run.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

That is how it should work, but in today's society that is just a roesy senario. If CEO's are devoted to their employees and the good of the country than why do you always hear of failing companies giving their executives massive bonuses. That isn't how you run a company! Some CEOs are smart, but many others are careless and obssesed with personal gain. Executive carelesness is a major factor in why our economy is in the shitter. You're denying reality here man!

[pimpdalyrical]

You attract the best talent by offering competitive wages and bonuses fool. The better your talent pool, the more the company grows, which means promotions and raises for EVERYONE involved. (until some acinine Gov't regulation comes along and ruins the market.) Restricting executive pay is going to drive more and more college students to other professions. Do we really need the brightest kids to become more fucking lawyers, or do we need good Dr's and CEO's? You have to pay what they're worth!

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

You don't give yourself a bonus when your company is failing. You cut your salary and use that money to keep your company afloat. The talant pool is smaller than it was back in ol' Reagan's days because of our broken education system, and the vast majority of students wouldn't become CEOs even if our schools were #1. CEOs get payed more than they're worth and regulation is needed to stop them from spending their company into the ground and creating an economic shock wave! Get real man!

[pimpdalyrical]

The CEO of a publically traded company does ot have the ability to give THEMSELF a bonus, you idiot, the board of directors decides that. Anybody that can keep a company afloat for as long as these guys have despite obscene regulations, (never mind facing criticism from those who are actually to blame) deserves every penny they get. Do you really think that those bonuses really matter to a company $70 billion in the hole? Please.

[pimpdalyrical]

Hitler was such a good speaker, even jews found it hard not to stand up and cheer when he hit his high points. Now that is a parallel for today's times. We have a man standing up on live television promising to usurp more and more control over us, and you cheer for it. Like the stimulus bill that contains language setting up a review board to see if it's worth paying for your medical procedures. It only matters to medicaid recipients now, but what's Obama's next project again?............

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

What's wrong with review boards? And trust me, there are very few parrallels between Pres. Obama and Hitler.

[pimpdalyrical]

Imagine if your socialist utopia, actually consisted of thousands of smaller governements, that actually had to compete for someone of your quality by promising better and better cuts of the revenues? Instead of being a monopoly which would then have no incentive to treat anyone fairly once their power is ultimate. Well we have that, their just called businesses instead of governments, and you can vote with your dollars!

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

What? I'm not sure your analogy makes total sense. I spend money in a company that I want to suceed. True, but my $10 here and $20 there isn't going to do much. Our government isn't socialist, I don't think you know what real socialism is. We're just taking the steps neccisary to revitalize our economy.

[pimpdalyrical]

Well, there's you're $10 or $20, and everybody else's that have been satisfied with that company, and soon you have an entity giving the people what they want. All a politician has to do is feed lines of Bullshit through the media until election day and then do whatever the hell they want. Obama's plan is not about revitilizing shit. He's using the petty amount of Jobs that will be created to excuse the implementation of his radical agenda. Let me know when THE POINT of an Obama plan is jobs.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Sure, but you have to remember that consumer confidence is around zero now and people aren't spending money as they normally would. Some politicians are good and others are rotten, just like any other group of people. How is rebuilding America's infistructure, investing in clean energy, fixing healthcare, and giving us an across the board efficiency boost radical? All of those things are neccisary and they all create jobs.

[pimpdalyrical]

"How is rebuilding America's infistructure, investing in clean energy, fixing healthcare, and giving us an across the board efficiency boost radical?"

Oh please. Because the inferstructure is fine, global warming is a hoax, government can't even make money running a whorehouse in Nevada, and our healthcare system is better than anywhere else in the world (it's expensive because it's WORTH IT!!!) That's why it's radical. Besides, I thought hard labor was "jobs American's won't do?"

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

The inferstructure is terrible and nothing nation-wide has been done about it since Pres. Eissenhour built the innerstate highway system. Every fact and every creditable scientist points out that global warming is reality, plus, clean energy would reduce our dependence on foreign sources and create millions of jobs. Our healthcare system is the worst of any industrialized country in the world because the only we leave millions uninsured and healthcare companies are obssesed with personal gain.

[pimpdalyrical]

We have the best electronic communications network on the planet, the roads are fine, the power grid works. The inferstructure is fine. Even NASA's Goddard institute has admitted that global ice levels are INCREASING! Private interest in healthcare is the only reason there is enough equipment and doctors for everyone, note the flood of Canadians in to our country for healthcare they can't get at home at ANY cost. You want to insure people, give them the opportunity to get a free market job!

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Look buddy, I'm tierd of arguing with you. It's obvious that we have some fundamental disagreements with each other and it's obvious that we never will agree with each other. Unless we want this back and fourth to go on for months than the best thing we can do is agree to disagree. Ok?

[pimpdalyrical]

I don't know about you, but I'm havin a blast! If you don't feel like discussing things then don't reply. Don't participate if you don't want to. I got no hard feelings. (a tip though, more people will take you seriously if you proof read: I don't know what being tierd means and you go back and forth, not back and after third.)

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Abuse of freedom is largely the reason we are in a recession now and to me it seems rediculuos to try to fix a problem with the problem's initial cause. The only thing that can fix our problem in an economy with zero consumer confidence and corrupt fat cats running the show is government intervention. Doing nothing is not an option, tax cuts will just go towards paying off personal debt, and both liberal and conservative economist demand bold and swift action, which is what Obama has delivered.

[pimpdalyrical]

The government is exactly where those "corrupt fat cats" are Gee! Tax cuts increase income, which is better than a one time payment. Also, a lower tax rate on doing business spurs economic growth and expansion of companies, which creates jobs across every income bracket. The only one demanding swift action, instead of well thought out action, is Obama and the liberals. Why do you think they wanted to vote on this before anyone had a chance to read the whole thing?!

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Of coarse tax cuts are benifitial, I'm not arguing that with you. The problem is that more and more of the government's tax relief went to the wealthiest 1% of the country, the people who don't need tax relief at all, many of whom don't even pay taxes at all (Well, at least that's what Bush did, Obama has other plans). Tax cuts for CEOs do nothing for the country, that's just money down the drain. Middle class tax cuts are what benifit the economy and that's why they are in the stimulus bill.

[pimpdalyrical]

The wealthiest 1% in this country pay 50% of the taxes! That means those responsible for providing jobs are also burdened with paying for everyithing else! Who deserves a break more than them?! The bottom 40% who pay no taxes whatsoever?!?!! You must be joking! Bush's tax cuts went to businesses, only some of which were privately operated, that's why they worked until the dem congress artificially hiked wages for their Union buddies.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

The tax issue has as much to do with ethics as it does with economics. The people at the top 1% are so rediculously rich that it's nearly impossible for taxes to effect their quality of life. Bush tax cut's did not help buisnesses because they did not go to buisnesses, they went to buisness owners in the form of income tax cuts. Those who don't pay taxes would pay taxes if they could afford to. Plus, I'd rather see a single mother of 3 get a tax cut rather than Bernie Madolf.

[pimpdalyrical]

For one, who the fuck are you to say how much another person can earn? The ability of every citizen to decide the quality of their own life through how hard they want to work is exactly the POINT of this country. You can go to any third world country and live the way you want to, leave this one to us. Second, the point of any business is to earn money for the boss. Your paycheck is the piece you are promised for helping them do that, that's it. No altruism is implied or necessary.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

I never said I support restriction on income. I just believe that tax cuts are strictly for people who are in financial difficulties. No exceptions. The middle class is in fiscal distress. People are loseing their jobs, homes, and hopes of a better life. The wealthy are just as rich as they ever were. They continue to grow in wealth and their income has never slowed down. The middle class is suffering and the middle class is the foundation of our economy; they need tax breaks and the rich don't.

[AzFCFRanger]

Reagan won ALL but Minnesota, Johnson lost several states. Palin is the only reason McCain did as well as he did. If it would have been Hillary it would have been a landslide to get rid of the liberal wing of GOP.(see Ann Coulter) He was very little like Bush, if he was still would have lost. The point is there was NO CONSERVATIVE in the race.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

In the electoral college he did Reagan won all but Minissota. I'm talking about the votes of actually American citizens. Reagan in his 1984 re-election bid earned 58% of the vote. In Johnson's 1964 re-election bid he earned 60% of the vote which justifies a landslide. Palin sured up the conservative wing of the GOP for McCain, but she alienated everyone else. McCain wouldn't have won either way, but he would have done better had he picked Bobby Jindal, Mitt Romney, or even Charlie Christ.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

I don't know what you're saying about Hillary. Do you mean that McCain should have picked her as his running mate? Hillary would never accept his offer in the first place and even if she did, McCain would alienate his own party and lose by the biggest landslide in American political history. Also, McCain is as Bush-like as it gets. During the 2000 GOP primaries they agreed on nearly every issue and in the Senate McCain voted with Bush 95% of the time.

[JohnR22926]

ka7krz: I'm not sure. Nothing stays the same and I wonder to what extent the electorate has changed in the last 28 years. Has the country moved to the Left? If so, have they moved Left on fiscal issues, social issues, or both?

I just don't know. Obama is clearly implementing Left wing policies, so it will be interesting to see how much support there will be for a true conservative in 2012 and 2016.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

You have a point. Jindal is a smart guy and even though I'm a Democrat, I can't help but like him a bit better than the typical Reagan-loving, do-nothing, stuborne as hell, old white guys who are so abundant in the GOP. My prediction is that Obama will without a doubt win re-election in 2012. The only threat to his re-election is a failed stimulus and that would hurt Congress more than it hurts him. The GOP will nominate another Bob Dole in 2012 and then nominate Jindal in 2016.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Whether Jindal wins in 2016 will depend on the sucess of Obama's stimulus package and how bipartisan Obama is in the end. If Obama's policies are very sucessful (which I predict they will be) and the Democrats stay one step ahead of the Republicans in campaigning then we could see another Reagan/Bush situation in 2016 (though Biden probabley won't be Bush, some younger guy who hasn't come onto the playing feild yet will.) So Obama for sure in 2012 and 2016 is still up for play.

[JohnR22926]

geeyou: I agree the Dems' prospects in 2016 hinge largely on what the economy looks like. But, remember...the nation has a tendency to switch horses periodically.

IMO the biggest threat to the Dems in 2016 is a too-Left congress. Obama is smartly staying away from the really hot-button social issues that would cost him swing voter support, but the House Dems aren't backing off on anything.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

EXACTLY. I love Obama, but I can't stand Pelosi. My point remains though, that Obama will win without a doubt in 2012 and 2016 is a good shooting point for Jindal. However, Jindal will not win if the Dems have been sucessful in fixing the economy. The pattern does seem to be GOP, Dem, GOP, Dem, but lets not forget that we're talking about a post-George Bush America. He left the GOP in ruins and it will be a long while before they recover.

[GeeYouAreYou0001]

Also, after and during the Great Depression when Republicans protested The New Deal, it lead to 5 consecutive Democratic presidential victories.

[Cartoonist10]

Good vid!  Thanks for the insight! (5)

[jp3711nc1]

Its stupid the libs ar saying he is the token republican because of skin they did the same with Steele but what they don't know is that we don't car about skin color he can be purple all we care if he or she has the right message.

[spock8585]

Jindal has spent most of his time out of state since becoming Governor. Jindal is also flying around the country on a private jet, with Lobbyist, campaigning for a presidential run in 2012. Our Legislators have started calling Jindals right hand man, Governor Timple because Jindal is never around.

[jp3711nc1]

Obama just hired A lobbyist but you don't seem to care do you.

[spock8585]

What does that have to do with Republican Governor Bobby Jindal flying around the country in a private jet with Lobbyist, instead of staying home and being Governor. Do you think a conservative should be planing to spend 1 million dollars of surplus money on a bridge , off of a mud road for a private enterprise. Jindal is nothing but big spending and more government.

[jp3711nc1]

We have a lot of democrats saying there's global warming yet they have a private jet Al gore being one of them. Obama just hired Jo Biden and his son is a lobbyist. Same with the same guy who supposed to look after the car situation I believe is a lobbyist. Democrats been saying we should sacrifice not republicans democrats never do as they preach.

[TedVoron]

Today is another Global Freezing day (again).....

Go Bobby Jindal 2012!!!

[spock8585]

Jindal does not own the jet, it is owned by private interest, such as a lobbyist always riding with him, Why is jindal letting a private company fly him and lobbyist around ? Could be why Jindal is wanting to build a million dollar bridge at the end of a mud road that serves a private enterprise.

[spock8585]

Jindal has spent more than any other governor before him. He increased the budget by 1.1 billion dollars, He has grown state government by 4 thousand people during his so called hiring freeze, He gave all his buddies big raises. Now he wants to spend 1 million dollars of surplus money on a bridge off of a mud road for a private enterprise. Jindal is nothing but big spending and more government.

[laclient19]

umm... are you from Louisiana?

Where exactly do you get your information?

[spock8585]

Yes I am and you can search the Internet. Google, Jindal plan raises questions.

You can search our local news, like 2theadvocate, wafb9, You can even search republican political forums. Jindals lies will be exposed if he runs for president.

[alancook01]

Proof that Obama is a LIAR!!

[obamapower1]

@alancook01 Obama speaked truth and change . this cuntry is much better now that we gotten a black president. Looke what bush did his a fucking cracker, America love Obama and not bush. That is why Obama beat bush in the last election.. Omaba will gone down in history as one of the greates presidents of all time. the most imortent black men in history

[alancook01]

@obamapower1 lol learn to spell and type before you speak to me again.

[urahdwn]

I hope he does run.

[JohnRhysMusician]

Jindal will not run in 2012. Think more like 2020.

[geargemartin]

if jindal was on the republican ticket in 2012 i would enthusiastically vote for him!

[clash360]

Jindal 2012

[GiovannaNYC]

Jindal & Ginrich 2012

[JohnRhysMusician]

ROMNEY 2012

Sanford, DeMint, Palin, Gingrich, Huntsman, Bachmann, Pawlenty, etc. many people could run with him.

[GiovannaNYC]

.........you forgot Huckabee:) The choices are many:) that is IF we still have an election process

[jp3711nc1]

Democrats will use religion on Romney plus the way he manage Health Care no way. I will say Newt on next ticket.

[JohnRhysMusician]

How can they use religion on Mitt Romney when their candidate is widely believe to have been a Muslim at one time? They won't use religion. They might use race against Jindal. Saying that we tried to nominate a non-white candidate. Mitt Romney's health plan was glorified on NBC a few weeks ago. Mitt Romney's health plan is widely respected among the healthcare community.

[NurembergPrinciples]

did he give a speech to the Bilderberg group ,they are the only people who are elected world wide

[Raycheetah]

Alright, gorramit! Is JINDAL eligible to be POTUS? Was he born within the US to at least naturalized citizens, or is he another flawed candidate? I can't find any biographical information about his parents. ='[.]'=

[Thebboss]

He was born in the US, him and his siblings. He has a real birth certificate unlike the guy in office now.

[Raycheetah]

I kinda figgered he had a BC. But do we know the status of his parents at the time of his birth? I like the cut of his jib, but I don't want there to be ANY question of his eligibility if he is going to ask for my vote in 2012. =^[.]^=

[Thebboss]

His parents were immigrants at the time but he's a legit natural born citizen. Under American law he's wholly American.

[jp3711nc1]

He is born in the US he is a first generation I believe his parents where born in India but he was born here in the US.

[Raycheetah]

Yes, but, according to the Constitution, being BORN in the US is NOT the same as being born in the US to CITIZEN parents. If they were not naturalized at the time of his birth, he is a citizen, but NOT "natural born." Same issue as Obama. Doesn't matter where he was born, Kenya or Hawai'i. Father was foreign national, mother too young to transfer citizenship by law. Obama's BC doesn't matter. ='[.]'=