« Confused Republicans - Do we sit or stand during Obama's speech? | JudyAnn's Blog | BREAKING NEWS: Politico is reporting from WSJ - Obama will propose a 10-year, $634 billion healthcare plan... »
Jindal leaves Rachel Maddow Speechless! Krugman - GOP the Party of Bevis and Butthead
Rachel Maddow's Reaction to Jindal! A must watch: Click on link!
--------
Also as Paul Krugman of the New York Times says:
--------
Also as Paul Krugman of the New York Times says:
So what did Bobby Jindal choose to ridicule in this response to Obama last night? Volcano monitoring, of course.
And leaving aside the chutzpah of casting the failure of his own party's governance as proof that government can't work, does he really think that the response to natural disasters like Katrina is best undertaken by uncoordinated private action? Hey, why bother having an army? Let's just rely on self-defense by armed citizens.
The intellectual incoherence is stunning. Basically, the political philosophy of the GOP right now seems to consist of snickering at stuff that they think sounds funny. The party of ideas has become the party of Beavis and Butthead.
Advertisement
At least Beavis and Butthead were occasionally funny, even if it was largely accidental.
February 25, 2009 12:36 PM | Reply | Permalink
Quite right TOG, quite right.
Another clip shows he embarassing Chris Matthews a few moments later. He got pretty flustered having her step on his comment.
February 25, 2009 1:14 PM | Reply | Permalink
HAHAHA. Rachel Maddow = amazing.
February 25, 2009 3:28 PM | Reply | Permalink
True that. I was shocked, but then, not so much, to hear she does not watch the TV! She listens to radio and music and reads a lot, but no TV?!?!
February 26, 2009 12:48 AM | Reply | Permalink
Kevin Madden was on MSNBC as a right wing strategist. He tried to claim that Jindal, despite having a lackluster (=poor) performance, did set out Republican values and ideas.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/29378380#29393428 starting about 1 minute in.
He starts out trying to excuse Jindal based on location differences, "[Obama] a tough act to follow".
He later changes the subject from the speech to Jindal in other contexts. The ideas are not stale?? "a lot of ideas we can build around" Did you hear any forward looking ideas, even if conservative? "a modernized forward looking agenda of our own"
He admits Katrina was an odd example. Brings up education and health care as though those were Repo ideas and values! He does call for being constructive critics.
That's the most positive spin attempt I've seen re Jindal's performance. Pathetic.
I think Jindal flubbed on style and substance, performance and ideas.
February 25, 2009 5:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
I thought it was interesting also that he brought up volcano monitoring as though natural disasters are not really such a big deal (?)
Remember when Sara Palin mocked the money spent on (her words): "Get this -- fruit fly experiments!" I learned in 9th grade that the large body of information we have on genetics started with pea plants and FRUIT FLIES. It is ironic that she would choose to mock this area of study particularly because much of what we know about the genetics of Down Syndrom began with fruit fly research.
Science -- Why do republicans ridicule it? Why do they love ignorance? Oh, yeah -- so they can relate to their voting base.
February 25, 2009 7:13 PM | Reply | Permalink
Why was that not pointed out by the Free Pass media?!?!? Fruit flies were all the rage for study in high school. I think because they reproduce so quickly, faster then Bristol Palin or her mom!
February 26, 2009 12:50 AM | Reply | Permalink
Great post, Judyann
February 25, 2009 7:46 PM | Reply | Permalink
Science -- Why do republicans ridicule it? Why do they love ignorance? Oh, yeah -- so they can relate to their voting base.
Ain't that the truth. The GOP is living proof that a degree from an ivy league school does not indicate ones level of intelligence.
February 25, 2009 10:19 PM | Reply | Permalink
This is a marvelous post
February 26, 2009 12:00 AM | Reply | Permalink