Could it be happening?!

[bhsup]

I don't read it that way at all. It's straightforward. You're really trying to warp the meaning, I think. Well, I don't mean that maliciously. I don't think you're -trying- to warp the meaning so much as I think your reading of it is warped.

 

[Commodore]

That's awesome.

Let's see, in no particular order: (Rand) Paul, (Jeb) Bush, Huckabee, Christie, Ryan, Cruz, Rubio, Jindal... have I missed anyone?

Personally I think Rubio has the best shot.

Wouldn't it be a little hypocritical for Jindal to run for president?

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Wouldn't it be a little hypocritical for Jindal to run for president?

Why?

Not that being hypocritical ever stops anyone anyway, but I'm curious.

 

[kochman]

I second that question...

 

[IglooDame]

Wouldn't it be a little hypocritical for Jindal to run for president?

Thirded.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Since Commodore passes through on a somewhat occasional basis we may never get an answer...if there is one. I did a little looking around and Jindal doesn't even seem to have made any news outside Louisiana for quite a while. Can't imagine what would make him any less likely than anyone else on that list.

 

[kochman]

Since Commodore passes through on a somewhat occasional basis we may never get an answer...if there is one. I did a little looking around and Jindal doesn't even seem to have made any news outside Louisiana for quite a while. Can't imagine what would make him any less likely than anyone else on that list.

I mean, Jindal's extremely conservative, but that's not ironic.
I can't figure it either.

 

[onejayhawk]

Since Commodore passes through on a somewhat occasional basis we may never get an answer...if there is one. I did a little looking around and Jindal doesn't even seem to have made any news outside Louisiana for quite a while. Can't imagine what would make him any less likely than anyone else on that list.

I would hazard it was a reference to his predecessor's mishandling of Katrina. Just a guess.

J

 

[Light Cleric]

Jindal made some comment about 'rebellion' that got him riled up and he wanted Jindal removed from office for making them.

Thank God it doesn't work that way. I don't see the 'hypocrisy' there either.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Jindal made some comment about 'rebellion' that got him riled up and he wanted Jindal removed from office for making them.

Thank God it doesn't work that way.

Ah. Well, that might make Jindal running for president idiotic, but I don't see the irony.

 

[Gori the Grey]

Well, if the quote that LC has provided is the grounds for Commodore's claim, I can see how he could consider a Jindal bid for presidency hypocritical.

"I can sense right now a rebellion brewing amongst these United States," Jindal said, "where people are ready for a hostile takeover of Washington, D.C., to preserve the American Dream for our children and grandchildren."

Anyone who imagines that rebellion could be a legitimate mode of political "takeover" might fairly be regarded as hypocritical for making a bid through the legitimate channel.

Have the courage of your convictions, man! Make yourself an American Dream flag, secede, muster your army and storm the capital. Don't then turn around and start a handshake tour through Iowa's counties.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Well, if the quote that LC has provided is the grounds for Commodore's claim, I can see how he could consider a Jindal bid for presidency hypocritical.



Anyone who imagines that rebellion could be a legitimate mode of political "takeover" might fairly be regarded as hypocritical for making a bid through the legitimate channel.

Have the courage of your convictions, man! Make yourself an American Dream flag, secede, muster your army and storm the capital. Don't then turn around and start a handshake tour through Iowa's counties.

I guess that could be what he meant.

I thought Jindal was just using the typical yammer that 'someone' was going to rebel if 'the gov'ment' doesn't straighten up...which is usually followed by that handshake tour where they tell people they are just the man to prevent the uprising that only they predicted in the first place.

America is still waaaay too fat to revolt.

 

[Light Cleric]

Well, if the quote that LC has provided is the grounds for Commodore's claim, I can see how he could consider a Jindal bid for presidency hypocritical.



Anyone who imagines that rebellion could be a legitimate mode of political "takeover" might fairly be regarded as hypocritical for making a bid through the legitimate channel.

Have the courage of your convictions, man! Make yourself an American Dream flag, secede, muster your army and storm the capital. Don't then turn around and start a handshake tour through Iowa's counties.

When it comes to that kind of thing I always assume there is an implicit "last resort" kind of thing, where if absolutely all else fails then we do X.

As TF explained in that thread, too, he's not necessarily advocating "violence". Hostile takeover can mean many things. It could be no more violent than a corporate takeover.

 

[kochman]

Jindal made some comment about 'rebellion' that got him riled up and he wanted Jindal removed from office for making them.

Thank God it doesn't work that way. I don't see the 'hypocrisy' there either.

Ah. Well, that might make Jindal running for president idiotic, but I don't see the irony.

To the contrary, we need a president that doesn't insist on pushing the power of the executive to ever higher levels.
Not backing Jindal, for the record.

 

[Light Cleric]

To the contrary, we need a president that doesn't insist on pushing the power of the executive to ever higher levels.

Pretty much, which is why nearly the entire presidential field for everyone makes me want to bash my head on the wall until it bleeds. Both my head and the wall.

 

[kochman]

Pretty much, which is why nearly the entire presidential field for everyone makes me want to bash my head on the wall until it bleeds. Both my head and the wall.

Unfortunately the structure of our system basically demands that we get a "strong" leader, where strength is defined by making new rather than eliminating old.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

There is no point looking for a president who will self limit executive power. That is totally counter intuitive and unrealistic, and we have never had that and never needed it.

The breakdown currently crippling the country is that the legislative branch is totally useless, which amplifies the power of the executive branch and judicial branches beyond manageability.

 

[kochman]

There is no point looking for a president who will self limit executive power. That is totally counter intuitive and unrealistic, and we have never had that and never needed it.

The breakdown currently crippling the country is that the legislative branch is totally useless, which amplifies the power of the executive branch and judicial branches beyond manageability.

Those are precisely the type of presidents we need... like G Washington. He could have pulled a Julius Caesar, but it was precisely that he didn't want power that he was judicious in its application.

We end up, in this day and age, only with people seeking power getting into power... that's the system. It has to be that way.

 

[JollyRoger]

To the contrary, we need a president that doesn't insist on pushing the power of the executive to ever higher levels.
Not backing Jindal, for the record.

Good thing on not backing Jindal:

For Gov. Bobby Jindal, getting Louisiana out of the Common Core State Standards may be a harder task than he originally thought.

The Common Core State Standards were adopted by the state in 2010, encompassing English language arts (ELA) and math. Full implementation of the standards did not come until this past school year, bypassing a transitional year that was originally planned.

According to new analysis, Jindal does not have the executive power or authority as Governor of the state to all-out stop Common Core from being implemented, something State Superintendent John White has said.

To work around his limited executive power, Jindal has requested that the Division of Administration Commissioner Kristy Nichols help withdraw Common Core’s test-taking counterpart known as the Partnership of Assessments for College and Career Readiness (PARCC). This, essentially, would be one step forward from removing the nationally recognized standards from school districts across the state.

There is no argument, however, that Jindal will have to get past a few obstacles while he is trying to remove Common Core from the state.

A 2012 law mandates that the state must use nationally recognized standards, aka Common Core, in all of its schools.

http://thehayride.com/2014/06/common-core-jindal-limited-in-power/

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Those are precisely the type of presidents we need... like G Washington. He could have pulled a Julius Caesar, but it was precisely that he didn't want power that he was judicious in its application.

We end up, in this day and age, only with people seeking power getting into power... that's the system. It has to be that way.

I didn't say we couldn't use someone like Washington, I said there was no point in looking for them. We actually shouldn't need them, because I think the drafters of the constitution realized that we couldn't count on finding them in perpetuity. What they didn't count on was congress at some point completely abandoning their responsibilities.

The judicial branch is accused of 'legislating from the bench', with one of the most commonly cited examples being the never ending series of interpretations and reinterpretations of Roe v Wade...a decision that would never have had to have been made if congress had not blatantly refused to draft legislation establishing a clear position on a controversial issue.

The executive branch is perpetually 'misusing' executive authority in regards to issues that are absolutely pressing that congress refuses to take up. Yes, the executive branch is indeed expanding and misusing executive authority...but what is the alternative?

The house has passed uncounted resolutions calling for 'the repeal of Obamacare'. They have not once acknowledged that there is no way to just wind the clock back and have the no longer existing system suddenly return to existence, or that that system wasn't working in the first place. And they have not once produced even a glimmer of a suggestion about what to use to fill the vacuum created if they got their way.

Every member goes out and campaigns about how they will fight for a 'balanced budget amendment' while denouncing the horrible economic fallout from the sequester...which forced a tiny movement in the direction of a balanced budget and clearly demonstrated the difficulties. The very thorny problem of how to institute a balanced budget which is fully within their power to do without an amendment requiring it but is a practical impossibility and would be just as impossible even if it were required by law...that they don't address.

I am in no way advocating abandoning the republic, but for all intents and purposes we already have...because the congress is f'ing useless.