Andy9o8 0 #1 February 28, 2009 http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/jindal_admits_katrina_story_was_false.php If this was supposed to be the GOP's new star "alternative brown messenger", I think they need to go back to the bullpen. QuoteJindal Admits Katrina Story Was False By Zachary Roth - February 27, 2009, 12:39PM Looks like the game is up. Remember that story Bobby Jindal told in his big speech Tuesday night -- about how during Katrina, he stood shoulder-to-shoulder with a local sheriff who was battling government red tape to try to rescue stranded victims? Turns out it wasn't actually, you know, true. In the last few days, first Daily Kos, and then TPMmuckraker, raised serious questions about the story, based in part on the fact that no news reports we could find place Jindal in the affected area at the specific time at issue. Jindal had described being in the office of Sheriff Harry Lee "during Katrina," and hearing him yelling into the phone at a government bureaucrat who was refusing to let him send volunteer boats out to rescue stranded storm victims, because they didn't have the necessary permits. Jindal said he told Lee, "that's ridiculous," prompting Lee to tell the bureaucrat that the rescue effort would go ahead and he or she could arrest both Lee and Jindal. But now, 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. This is no minor difference. Jindal's presence in Lee's office during the crisis itself was a key element of the story's intended appeal, putting him at the center of the action during the maelstrom. Just as important, Jindal implied that his support for the sheriff helped ensure the rescue went ahead. But it turns out Jindal wasn't there at the key moment, and played no role in making the rescue happen. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TankBuster 0 #2 February 28, 2009 QuoteIf this was supposed to be the GOP's new star "alternative brown messenger", I think they need to go back to the bullpen What we need is a new party of fiscally conservative libertarians. It's as if they chose him and asked him to come up with a speech the night before. Silly story notwithstanding, there was some great content, we just need an Obama delivery. We need Ronnie.The forecast is mostly sunny with occasional beer. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #3 February 28, 2009 QuoteQuoteIf this was supposed to be the GOP's new star "alternative brown messenger", I think they need to go back to the bullpen What we need is a new party of fiscally conservative libertarians. A US analog to the UK's Liberal Democrats? Maybe. We do have the Libertarians in the US, but they haven't done enough to make the cross-over from silly to serious. Quote It's as if they chose him and asked him to come up with a speech the night before. Silly story notwithstanding, there was some great content, we just need an Obama delivery. We need Ronnie. And I'd add (Bill) Clinton to that list of compelling communicators. As Tom Tancredo (R-CO) says in this article , Jindal is "steak without the sizzle." Now, Obama and Clinton were both top Ivy League intellectuals. But Reagan, and I say this as objectively as possible, was a mediocre intellect at best. He was all about ideology; and in private, he had surprisingly little fluency with substance. So what was they key to his monumental success? Delivery. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #4 February 28, 2009 Quote And I'd add (Bill) Clinton to that list of compelling communicators. As Tom Tancredo (R-CO) says in this article , Jindal is "steak without the sizzle." Now, Obama and Clinton were both top Ivy League intellectuals. But Reagan, and I say this as objectively as possible, was a mediocre intellect at best. He was all about ideology; and in private, he had surprisingly little fluency with substance. So what was they key to his monumental success? Delivery. QuoteReagan was very good with speeches and getting the correct message delivered at the right time. Obama is a very good speaker but unless someone gives him the correct words to say he sucks.(great speech bad content) You can see the difference from running for president and being president and Obama needs to go back to having the handling he had before he was elected. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #5 March 3, 2009 Quote You can see the difference from running for president and being president and Obama needs to go back to having the handling he had before he was elected. just a tad premature on that one - a clearly partisan statement. Reagan was getting shot and presiding over a worsening economy his first 2 years, Oh, and deepening the Cold War. Scary times all around, regardless of the speeches Ron was giving. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 0 #6 March 3, 2009 Quote Reagan was getting shot Makes it sound like the 10:30am item on his daily agenda. OK, I easily amuse myself. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites StreetScooby 5 #7 March 3, 2009 At least Ronnie kept it positive.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #8 March 3, 2009 QuoteAt least Ronnie kept it positive. positive is not on the lefts agenda. Fear is what they need to make changes. the left has no intention of being positive until election time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DanG 1 #9 March 3, 2009 Really? The right wing hasn't tried to use fear to win elections? Have you been sleeping since 9-11? - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #10 March 3, 2009 QuoteReally? The right wing hasn't tried to use fear to win elections? Have you been sleeping since 9-11? who said anything about getting elected? the left wants to ram shit down our throughts and are using fear to do it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DanG 1 #11 March 3, 2009 My God, is your head so far in the sand that you don't realize that both parties use fear to motivate the population? The Democrats are using economic fear, the Republicans used terrorism fear. Same shit, different day. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 0 #12 March 3, 2009 QuoteAt least Ronnie kept it positive. That's revisionist history. So, in the interest of historical completeness: For all his cheerleading (which there was), the Reagan administration was also a skilled practitioner of The Politics Of Fear: Reagan capitalized on people's paranoia's of invasion by Communists, gay men with AIDS, brown-ish immigrants and "welfare queens". In 1980, he launched his presidential campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi with a speech championing "states' rights", long a Deep South civil rights era code-phrase used to embody Southern whites' fears of blacks. Those are just a few examples. So while much of Reagan's messages were positive, plenty of them were very negative fear-mongering, too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #13 March 3, 2009 QuoteQuoteAt least Ronnie kept it positive. That's revisionist history. So, in the interest of historical completeness: For all his cheerleading (which there was), the Reagan administration was also a skilled practitioner of The Politics Of Fear: Reagan capitalized on people's paranoia's of invasion by Communists, gay men with AIDS, brown-ish immigrants and "welfare queens". In 1980, he launched his presidential campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi with a speech championing "states' rights", long a Deep South civil rights era code-phrase used to embody Southern whites' fears of blacks. Those are just a few examples. So while much of Reagan's messages were positive, plenty of them were very negative fear-mongering, too. the difference wasn't that he told people what was happening, he left the public feeling it was being taken care of and we could live our lives. A positive outlook coming from the president means alot to how the people react and Obama isn't helping things with his sky is falling act. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites wmw999 2,146 #14 March 3, 2009 Quotehe left the public feeling it was being taken care of and we could live our livesI don't remember that. I remember the tent city in Houston, the drop in real estate prices, the first time I heard about creative financing like negative am mortgages, that people who watch late night TV "deserve" credit, cocaine and crack, that AIDS was the gay disease and that drinking from a water fountain could give it to you... There were the Libyan terrorists who were going to attack us, the worsening relationship with Iran, and our help to Iraq making that even worse. Reagan was sunny-dispositioned; no doubt about it. There's a reason he was called the teflon president -- nothing stuck to him. Not that he was evil, either. Frankly, America needed a sunny disposition. But you have to take reality along with it. And let's not forget the excesses of the S&L scandal, and the stock market crash in 1987. In 20 years, we might think about these times differently, too. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #15 March 3, 2009 Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites chuckakers 370 #16 March 3, 2009 Thank goodness that's all. I thought you were going to say he claimed to be named after that famous mountain climber "Sir Edmond Jindal". Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites DanG 1 #17 March 3, 2009 Very interesting take on CDIF. Any comment on the Jindal story? - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites livendive 8 #18 March 3, 2009 QuoteQuoteReally? The right wing hasn't tried to use fear to win elections? Have you been sleeping since 9-11? who said anything about getting elected? the left wants to ram shit down our throughts and are using fear to do it. Hello Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, and war in Iraq. Both parties are guilty on this front, but I'd say the Republicans are even worse about it. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites marks2065 0 #19 March 4, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteReally? The right wing hasn't tried to use fear to win elections? Have you been sleeping since 9-11? who said anything about getting elected? the left wants to ram shit down our throughts and are using fear to do it. Hello Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, and war in Iraq. Both parties are guilty on this front, but I'd say the Republicans are even worse about it. Blues, Dave the patriot act i have mixed feelings on, if used properly can be a very good thing but if missused could be very bad. unfortunatly the gov rarely does things properly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
kelpdiver 2 #5 March 3, 2009 Quote You can see the difference from running for president and being president and Obama needs to go back to having the handling he had before he was elected. just a tad premature on that one - a clearly partisan statement. Reagan was getting shot and presiding over a worsening economy his first 2 years, Oh, and deepening the Cold War. Scary times all around, regardless of the speeches Ron was giving. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #6 March 3, 2009 Quote Reagan was getting shot Makes it sound like the 10:30am item on his daily agenda. OK, I easily amuse myself. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #7 March 3, 2009 At least Ronnie kept it positive.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #8 March 3, 2009 QuoteAt least Ronnie kept it positive. positive is not on the lefts agenda. Fear is what they need to make changes. the left has no intention of being positive until election time. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #9 March 3, 2009 Really? The right wing hasn't tried to use fear to win elections? Have you been sleeping since 9-11? - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #10 March 3, 2009 QuoteReally? The right wing hasn't tried to use fear to win elections? Have you been sleeping since 9-11? who said anything about getting elected? the left wants to ram shit down our throughts and are using fear to do it. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #11 March 3, 2009 My God, is your head so far in the sand that you don't realize that both parties use fear to motivate the population? The Democrats are using economic fear, the Republicans used terrorism fear. Same shit, different day. - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #12 March 3, 2009 QuoteAt least Ronnie kept it positive. That's revisionist history. So, in the interest of historical completeness: For all his cheerleading (which there was), the Reagan administration was also a skilled practitioner of The Politics Of Fear: Reagan capitalized on people's paranoia's of invasion by Communists, gay men with AIDS, brown-ish immigrants and "welfare queens". In 1980, he launched his presidential campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi with a speech championing "states' rights", long a Deep South civil rights era code-phrase used to embody Southern whites' fears of blacks. Those are just a few examples. So while much of Reagan's messages were positive, plenty of them were very negative fear-mongering, too. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #13 March 3, 2009 QuoteQuoteAt least Ronnie kept it positive. That's revisionist history. So, in the interest of historical completeness: For all his cheerleading (which there was), the Reagan administration was also a skilled practitioner of The Politics Of Fear: Reagan capitalized on people's paranoia's of invasion by Communists, gay men with AIDS, brown-ish immigrants and "welfare queens". In 1980, he launched his presidential campaign in Philadelphia, Mississippi with a speech championing "states' rights", long a Deep South civil rights era code-phrase used to embody Southern whites' fears of blacks. Those are just a few examples. So while much of Reagan's messages were positive, plenty of them were very negative fear-mongering, too. the difference wasn't that he told people what was happening, he left the public feeling it was being taken care of and we could live our lives. A positive outlook coming from the president means alot to how the people react and Obama isn't helping things with his sky is falling act. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
wmw999 2,146 #14 March 3, 2009 Quotehe left the public feeling it was being taken care of and we could live our livesI don't remember that. I remember the tent city in Houston, the drop in real estate prices, the first time I heard about creative financing like negative am mortgages, that people who watch late night TV "deserve" credit, cocaine and crack, that AIDS was the gay disease and that drinking from a water fountain could give it to you... There were the Libyan terrorists who were going to attack us, the worsening relationship with Iran, and our help to Iraq making that even worse. Reagan was sunny-dispositioned; no doubt about it. There's a reason he was called the teflon president -- nothing stuck to him. Not that he was evil, either. Frankly, America needed a sunny disposition. But you have to take reality along with it. And let's not forget the excesses of the S&L scandal, and the stock market crash in 1987. In 20 years, we might think about these times differently, too. Wendy W.There is nothing more dangerous than breaking a basic safety rule and getting away with it. It removes fear of the consequences and builds false confidence. (tbrown) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #15 March 3, 2009 Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
chuckakers 370 #16 March 3, 2009 Thank goodness that's all. I thought you were going to say he claimed to be named after that famous mountain climber "Sir Edmond Jindal". Chuck Akers D-10855 Houston, TX Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DanG 1 #17 March 3, 2009 Very interesting take on CDIF. Any comment on the Jindal story? - Dan G Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
livendive 8 #18 March 3, 2009 QuoteQuoteReally? The right wing hasn't tried to use fear to win elections? Have you been sleeping since 9-11? who said anything about getting elected? the left wants to ram shit down our throughts and are using fear to do it. Hello Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, and war in Iraq. Both parties are guilty on this front, but I'd say the Republicans are even worse about it. Blues, Dave"I AM A PROFESSIONAL EXTREME ATHLETE!" (drink Mountain Dew) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
marks2065 0 #19 March 4, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteReally? The right wing hasn't tried to use fear to win elections? Have you been sleeping since 9-11? who said anything about getting elected? the left wants to ram shit down our throughts and are using fear to do it. Hello Patriot Act, warrantless wiretapping, and war in Iraq. Both parties are guilty on this front, but I'd say the Republicans are even worse about it. Blues, Dave the patriot act i have mixed feelings on, if used properly can be a very good thing but if missused could be very bad. unfortunatly the gov rarely does things properly. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
