Our Views: Jindal speech lacked ideas (The view of Jindal's speech from Baton Rouge)

Baton Rouge Advocate ^ | February 26, 2009 | Op-Ed Staff

[ikeonic]

Jindal saved the best part for the latter half of his talk. It’s as if, wandering through the mulberry bushes of his own biography, he remembered the circumstances of the party.

“You elected Republicans to champion limited government, fiscal discipline, and personal responsibility. Instead, Republicans went along with earmarks and big government spending in Washington,” Jindal said. “Republicans lost your trust — and rightly so.”

Had he opened his remarks with that note, the credibility of his criticisms of the stimulus bill would have been enhanced.

[ikeonic]

I'm a huge supporter of Bobby. I watched Bobby's response before I saw Obama's speech and thought Bobby did well. Then I read the reviews of Bobby's speech and went back and watched Obama's. Obama gave one hell of a speech... no doubt he's a great salesman and Bobby is not (at the moment anyway). Watching them in order completely changes your perspective and it's easy to see why Bobby looked and sounded flat compared to Obama's much longer and well orchestrated speech. Obama is the king of the teleprompter.

But I don't think Obama believed half of what he was saying whereas I know Bobby was genuine and meant every word.

When your cause is just and your principles are right, you merely need to find the right tone, the right parable, the right verse to get your message across. Steele and Jindal are pursuing the right course, they just need to hire some better speechwriters and get some coaching on speechgiving.

Guess some Greek columns wouldn't hurt either...

[Admin Moderator]

The title you created

"The view of Jindal's speech from Baton Rouge"

did not match the title of the published editorial and had to be changed. In this case, I was able to squeeze in your version of a title into parentheses.

We're trying to reduce the number of duplicate threads we have to pull. Please do not edit, alter or create your own titles for any published material. Just copy and paste the original published title found directly above the published article or editorial.

Thanks.

[ikeonic]

Thanks and my apologies.

[techno]

These guys are plagiarists. I wrote on the same theme 4 hours ago under ‘Jindal’s rebuttal: Obama is Laughing’.

[ikeonic]

The Baton Rouge paper plagarized you? Really? Interesting?

I posted this because it's from a paper that would normally be very friendly to Bobby and even they had a little trouble building him up. He had a bad day. It happens to the best of us. The good news is Bobby has at least a couple of years to become a better speaker. He can't do any worse than Palin with Couric or Gibson or McCain giving any speech anywhere.

Somebody in this party is going to have to find a voice sooner or later. Let's not forget that Reagan not only believed what he preached, but he could preach what he believed. He not only preached to the choir, but had new converts crowding the vestibule to hear him speak.

Bobby might still be that guy in time. Or it just might be that preacher from Arkansas that Rush loves to paint as a populist hillbilly, Mike Huckabee.

Keep an eye on Huck, Jindal and Romney. One of them is most likely the GOP nominee in 2012. Miss Wasilla won't make it to the top 2 of that beauty pageant.

[deannadurbin]

I still like Mike Huckabee. He is a brilliant speaker and comes up with his own material and parables and quips, just like Reagan. Remember during one of the primary debates how much Nancy Reagan liked Huck. You could see her mouthing to Arnie, “He’s right.” During most of the primary debates Huck got the most applause from the audiences. I will never forget how he hit it out of the ballpark on the issue of “gay marriage” and gave a beautiful response to hold up traditional marriage as holy.

I think it’s a shame how often Republicans kicked one of their own down who consistently proved (and proves) how well he speaks and could go word for word with Obama and make him look like a fool.

[bicyclerepair]

While I like Mr. Jindal, he is not presidential in my opinion.

[ikeonic]

While I like Mr. Jindal, he is not presidential in my opinion.

Well, of course I'd have to agree with you *today*.

But today is not yesterday and it is not tomorrow and Bobby is not running for anything today.

For example: James Carville, who was once a strategist for former President Bill Clinton, said Jindal would do well to treat the speech as a learning experience. Clinton’s first major national speech — at the 1988 Democratic National Convention — also bombed. “Hey Toto, we’re not in Ponchatoula anymore,” Carville said Wednesday.

[Gondring]

Yes, Mike Huckabee might be a good replacement for Biden in 2012—many of his views are right in line with President Obama’s (e.g., feeling morally right in taking money from taxpayers to spend on what gov’t defines as noble causes, etc.) And he sure knows how to borrow & spend!

Who could the GOP choose to oppose them?

[FFranco]

Didn’t know that about what Carville said. It’s interesting, thanks. Maybe by 2016 Jindal might be more ready for the national stage. Gov. Palin might be more ready then too.

[top 2 toe red]

And Huckabee had better not unless we are all ready to settle in for another dark, devastating four years of obama’s reign!

[top 2 toe red]

Totally agree.

[deannadurbin]

He was against the first bailout and the porkulus. Now if you want to talk about liberal look at Romney and Taxachusetts.

These are old arguments. There is no way anyone could tell me Mike Huckabee would be as bad a leader as Obama or Biden.

The real reason Republicans fought his nomination is not his record or his positions but because he was a preacher. Stupid, if you ask me. We even had a minister, Rev. Witherspoon, sign the Declaration of Independence. If anything during this time in America we NEED a national pastor; without God this nation is decaying and dying faster than you can say Jack Robinson.