Bobby Jindal leading the way in Louisiana:
Jindal ‘bats a thousand’ at session
BATON ROUGE — The state Legislature on Friday wrapped up its second special session during the 2-month-old administration of Gov. Bobby Jindal by completing a full sweep of the governor’s proposed package of business tax cuts and $1.1 billion in surplus spending priorities.
Jindal and his legislative allies won all the initiatives they set out to accomplish during the six-day session, including a controversial bill to grant a partial tax deduction for private school tuition.
Flanked by many members of his supporting team of lawmakers at an evening news conference, the governor framed the results as a positive statement on Louisiana’s national image.
“This group should be proud of batting a thousand,” Jindal said. “The country’s watching us … we know they’ll like what they see.”
The session followed a February lawmaking period in which the governor passed a slate of new ethics laws. A regular spring session of the Legislature will begin March 31.
Lawmakers passed bills to eliminate a 1 percent sales tax that businesses pay on utilities, an estimated annual savings to Louisiana companies — as well as a loss of state revenue — of $69 million. They also passed an expedited phaseout of taxes on corporate debt and on manufacturing machinery and equipment. Those taxes were widely seen as burdens on companies that expand their operations, therefore placing Louisiana at a competitive disadvantage with other states.
What have you Democrats got as your “breath of fresh air”? Barack Obama – an ultra-liberal product of the corrupt Chicago Democratic machine…you can keep him; we GOPers have genuine change we can believe in. Bobby Jindal is just starting out, and he’s already done more real things for people than Barack Obama could ever dream of doing – it is in this youthful, idealistic conservatism where we’ll finally win all down the line, crushing the life out of that leftwing thought which has been desrtoying our nation for decades.
You can’t win, lefties – your worldview is built on lies and thus it never, ever works when put into practice. Sure, you’ll be able to win an election or two, from time to time, but not by running on what you are; only by hiding it…but we’re out there, telling people what we believe, and then putting it into place…and it works, every time we try.
Blogs For Victory 
Brian (Boston): I was suggesting that since he [Jindal] is a Governor of a State, which has completely different responsibilities than a Senator, that it would be fair to compare him to someone with the same responsibilities.
The fact is though, before he became governor he had no executive experience. And yet in two months time he is being hailed as such a success that he’s considered a viable VP candidate right now by some (e.g., Limbaugh), and a viable presidential candidate 4 or 8 years hence by others (e.g. Mark). So apparently at least in some circles within the GOP the “breath of fresh air” argument (or, as you termed it, “a person who possesses greatness and strives to be greater”) gets more traction than the “experience” argument — well, as long as you like the party he’s currently affiliated with.
phnx,
Feel free to imagine the huge divisions in the Democratic party. I’ll see your huge “divisions” and raise you a Rush Limbaugh and a Melanie Morgan bashing Senator McCain.
SEW,
I don’t whether it’s more sad or comical when you and others try to be concern trolls for Islam. I’d recommend another tack, frankly.
For those of you interested Rush has an insightful interview he did with Jindal on his website.
For those of you questioning why some of us are a little concerned that Obama has associated himself with a hate america first, anti-semite, let me give you some details that have emerged over the last year (I hate doing this, like some of you it feels as though we are doing the media’s work).
– When Obama announced his candidacy in the Land of Lincoln he had originally asked Jeremiah Wright to attend and say a few words. A few days prior to the event Obama pulled the offer and was later quoted saying ‘He can get pretty rought in his sermons” (which seems to contradict his statements that he didn’t hear his pastor say some of these awful things)
– Obama has called Wright his “Mentor and Spiritual Advisor” of more than twenty years.
– Obama said that he chose that Church because ‘it fit his style of beliefs and where he was most comfortable”
– Obama’s pastor married him and his wife and baptized both of his daughters(not a job that you leave to your old crazy uncle).
– Yes Obama has been pictured not being reverent during the national anthem and he has said “that wearing a lapel pin does not prove your patriotism”(which is funny cause it always reminds me of Kramer refusing to wear the AIDS ribbon).
– Yes his wife was recently heard saying “For the first time in my adult life I’m proud of my country”(And yes she attends the same church as her husband)
– Obama is a friend of admitted Weather Underground terrorists William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. Is anyone other than me noticing a trend?
And I’m not even going to talk about Farrakhan or Syrian born Atoin Rezko. Let me tell you, being from Chicago I have a little different perspective about that whole fiasco. So if you want to know just ask.
The majority of us are not accusing Barack of being a foreign agent or wearing a Muslim mask. What we have are questions that need to be asked and he needs to answer them honestly. I do not accept that out of the presumebly hundreds of sermons he’s heard this man preach, he’s never heard this vile hate come out of his mouth? Can some of you people really believe that? Could Pastor Wright only preach hate when Obama and family are absent from the pews?
Obama has compared his Pastor to an “old uncle who says things I don’t always agree with”. The problem with that statement is you don’t get to choose who your uncle’s are.
What kind of man seeks out this type of church and would subject his family to it. What kind of man associates himself with leftist radical terrorists? These are questions that are going to dog him through the general election, if he’s fortunate enough to win the nomination.
What specific policy positions of each candidate would make for a great debate? Or is it strictly their ethnicity that you like?
17. neocon | March 15th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
I realize that their ethnicity may be of historical significance, neocon; but no, I was thinking along the lines that the Republican party would finally offer the American people a viable and credible candidate in the 2008 Presidential race.
Darva,
The surge, most americans now understand that it is working.
Taxes, other than the looney left, what american wants higher taxes.
Immigration, most americans are for a sensible immigration policy which McCain supports.
McCain was very critical of Bush. In addition, he is revered by the press and independents as a maverick who doesn’t hew to the party line.
McCain actually has a record of achievement in the Senate, unlike either Hillary of Obama.
Diana, Rush Limbaugh, Bwwwahahahaha!!!!!
I love how Rush give you leftists fits. Do you even listen? If you did you wouldn’t be quite so smug about his bashing McCain.
Diana, I doubt that you even know what Bush’s policies are. The radical Left seems to think that outcomes are the same as policies, and furthermore that interim outcomes are the same as final outcomes. In other words, they don’t have a clue.
Some GOP policies are:
Strong national defense;
Strong borders and immigration control;
Lowered tax rates for all;
Increased international trade;
Strong tactics against terrorism;
Increased independence from foreign energy sources;
Development of alternative energy sources;
Improvement of education through the making choices available to more students and parents;
Addressing problems in the health care and insurance industries;
Revising the Social Security system to make it viable throughout the next century;
Working on the income tax problems, with solutions varying from simplfying the tax code to initiating a Fair Tax and getting rid of the IRS;
Stopping the growth of government and, if possible, shrinking government;
Adhering to the United States Constitution as the law of the land;
Stopping the growth of entitlement programs and, if possible, reducing them;
Eliminating pork from national budgets and bills.
This is a partial list, and certainly not every Republican agrees fully with every other Republican on every issue, or on the best ways to approach every issue. But these are broad brushstrokes of Republican pollcies.
Feel free to address them—NOT how various Republicans have failed to enact them, or any other mudslinging, but the policies themselves—what do you like or dislike about any of them?
And how do they agree with or differ from Dem policies?
Off the top of my head, I can come up with some differences.
Higher tax rates, at least for the most productive.
Increased size and, as Diana put it, “intrusiveness” of government, putting it in charge of health care for example.
Keeping Social Security the way it is, just increasing SS taxes.
Treating terrorism as crimes and not as acts of war;
Vastly increasing government spending on a variety of programs;
Open, or nearly open borders, with amnesty, including citizenship, for illegal aliens;
Protectionism in trade;
Encouraging interpretation and modification of the Constitution, seeing it as a “living document” subject to easy change;
The appointment of activist judges who can and will legislate from the bench;
Gun control.
People who are genuinely interested in issues, and who vote on issues instead of identity, can and will be able to discuss the merits of each policy, without resorting to snide comments or personal attacks.
I doubt that you even know what Bush’s policies are.
55. Almiranta | March 16th, 2008 at 3:54 pm
Would they be the same as the GOP policies you listed, Almiranta, or did Bush go off the rails to become the ‘decider guy’ so he could, you know, do his own thing?