Originally Posted By Inspector 57 What's more relevant is that Jindal totally lost it. He completely blew a golden opportunity. He had a chance to shine -- both personally, and as a representative of the Republican Party -- and what he delivered was obviously dishonest, weak, and pitiable. He lied about his personal involvement in Katrina. He demonized the giving of federal funds without acknowledging the fact that, under his leadership, his state has gratefully accepted millions of dollars of them. He knowingly, purposefully, and stupidly misrepresented Obama's plans. His lies were obvious, and now he's -- totally predictably -- being called on them. I don't totally blame Jindal for his graceless, erroneous, deceitful talk. After all, he was speaking as THE representative of the Republican Party. He certainly didn't have personal carte blanche about what he would say on national TV. The Republican Party had to have approved his deserves-to-be-mocked speech well before he ever delivered it poorly. Own it, DouglasDubh. Your party was given a golden opportunity to show leadership, content, and specific proposals after Obama's speech, and the best you could come up with was a guy who spit out platitudes and lies.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh Oh brother. The President is spinning up a tornado, and you're claiming that Gov Jindal lied because a few liberals couldn't follow the timeline of a story?
Originally Posted By Mr X ***Oh brother. The President is spinning up a tornado, and you're claiming that Gov Jindal lied because a few liberals couldn't follow the timeline of a story?*** You said that already. And we followed the "timeline" just fine. Now, again, let's have some specifics. What lies has the President made? Explain the specifics behind "spinning up a tornado", please. I would really like to hear exactly what you're examining. I really would. If you can point to lies (even just one), I will certainly have to rethink my staunch support of the President thus far.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <You said that already.> The two posts before mine repeated the liberal talking points, so I repeated the truth. The President said he was going to abide by public financing rules, then he didn't. He said that he wasn't going to employ lobbyists, then he did. He said that he wouldn't sign bills until the public had a chance to review them, then he did. He said that he would go through the budget line by line and cut spending, then he didn't. He said that he'd cut earmarks, then he didn't. He said he'd close Gitmo, then he didn't. He said his Treasury Secretary would present a detailed plan to deal with the financial crisis, but he didn't. He said his plan to deal with the mortgage problem wouldn't help "flippers", but it will.
Originally Posted By dshyates "So where is the lie?" There is nothing in the bill that says ANYTHING about a high speed rail from Disneyland to Las Vegas. Yes they have been working on getting a rail line there since 1988, and Harry Ried may have pushed for more money to add to the bill that MAY go towards this rail line. But there is nothing in the bill spacifically designated to it. So to say there is is a lie.
Originally Posted By Mr X ***The President said he was going to abide by public financing rules, then he didn't. He said that he wasn't going to employ lobbyists, then he did. He said that he wouldn't sign bills until the public had a chance to review them, then he did. He said that he would go through the budget line by line and cut spending, then he didn't. He said that he'd cut earmarks, then he didn't. He said he'd close Gitmo, then he didn't. He said his Treasury Secretary would present a detailed plan to deal with the financial crisis, but he didn't. He said his plan to deal with the mortgage problem wouldn't help "flippers", but it will.*** Thanks for your reply Douglas. I will start a new topic to discuss all of this, point by point (if you don't mind). I'll wait for your go ahead before doing so (it's far to big a laundry list to be subjected to anything less than its' very own topic, I think, hopefully you agree)...
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Oh brother. The President is spinning up a tornado, and you're claiming that Gov Jindal lied because a few liberals couldn't follow the timeline of a story?> You repeated, so I'll repeat: "Jindal didn't just lie about the "timeline." He talked about being there in the room with the guy when this all was happening. He wasn't. It's akin to Hillary talking about being under "sniper fire" when that didn't happen. She was quite rightly taken to task for that, though it didn't derail her political future (obviously), and I don't think this will derail Jindal's. But it's silly and just looks blindly partisan to claim that he didn't tell a "stretcher" (as Huck Finn would say)." Jindal's anecdote was very analogous to the Clinton sniper fire thing. Did she lie? There are basically three possibilities. 1. A pure, knowing, venal lie. 2. A purely innocent brain fart in which she "remembered" something that never happened. I read a study recently that says this happens with the memory more often than you might think. 3. (And most likely). She exaggerated/embellished a real incident to make herself look better and/or make a political point (in her case, that her years as first lady made her a quasi-diplomat). Now, of course, she WAS in Bosnia. And she undoubtedly knew administration members who were there who actually did hear or were close to sniper fire. But did she face any on the occasion she said she did? No. So did she lie? Well, it wasn't the truth, anyway. Neither was Jindal's story.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <There is nothing in the bill that says ANYTHING about a high speed rail from Disneyland to Las Vegas.> Gov Jindal didn't say there was. He said it includes, "$8 billion for high-speed rail projects, such as a magnetic levitation line from Las Vegas to Disneyland". That is true.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <I will start a new topic to discuss all of this, point by point (if you don't mind).> I don't mind.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <He talked about being there in the room with the guy when this all was happening.> He talked about being in the room while the Sheriff was yelling at someone on the phone. Nothing you've presented has shown that wasn't true. It's in no way analogous to Secretary Clinton's story.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <Gov Jindal didn't say there was. He said it includes, "$8 billion for high-speed rail projects, such as a magnetic levitation line from Las Vegas to Disneyland". > That, at the very least, is intentionally misleading "weasel speak" on the part of Jindal. It makes it sound as though the LV-DL line is included in that 8 billions dollars, not as though it's only one of many projects that may or may not get a portion of it. ("Not to anyone who's smart enough to read it correctly"... - just anticipating your inevitable disingenuous response).
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<He talked about being there in the room with the guy when this all was happening.>> <He talked about being in the room while the Sheriff was yelling at someone on the phone. Nothing you've presented has shown that wasn't true.> <a href="http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2009/02/jindals_katrina_story_a_tall_tale.php?ref=fp8" target="_blank">http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpoi...?ref=fp8</a> "When the storm made landfall on August 29, Jindal was on a foreign trip. His family was evacuated to his parents' house in Baton Rouge, and when he returned, he went straight there to join them. In a September 1st CNN interview given from Baton Rouge, Jindal talked about taking an aerial tour of the disaster area, but didn't mention anything about having been on the ground personally. We've reviewed Nexis and other sources, and can find no news reports putting Jindal on the ground in the affected area during the few days after Katrina struck when people might still have needed boats to rescue them from rooftops. Schedule issues aside, it's also noticeable that Jindal has talked or written several times before about the problems of excessive red tape during Katrina, but has never told this story. " < It's in no way analogous to Secretary Clinton's story.> Of course it is. In both cases, they wanted to make a political point, and they conflated different events to make it more dramatic and to place themselves at the center of events. It's not THAT big a deal. It hardly derailed Clinton's career. But by denying it was an embellishment, you just look silly.
Originally Posted By DAR I don't know about the rest of you, but I am shocked and hurt that a politician was caught in a lie.
Originally Posted By Kar2oonMan >>but has never told this story<< Someone (Twain?) once said: Never let the truth get in the way of a good story. But even his delivery of the story sounded artificial. "Well, Sheriff, that's just ridiculous" I said. Good grief.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <just anticipating your inevitable disingenuous response> As is always the case, I'm not the one being disingenuous.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder "<The Bunny Ranch is near Reno, you idiot.> Wow, you sure showed me. Because most Republicans don't know the difference between the Mustang Ranch and the Bunny Ranch, it's evidence that we're lying idiots. You've totally lost it." I lost it at the Bunny Ranch. As did you. If you're going to accuse someone of lying, get your facts straight. You didn't.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 <<just anticipating your inevitable disingenuous response>> <As is always the case, I'm not the one being disingenuous.> I disagree.
Originally Posted By DouglasDubh <If you're going to accuse someone of lying, get your facts straight.> I haven't accused anyone of lying. It's the Democrats who seem to be doing that. Maybe they're projecting.
Originally Posted By SingleParkPassholder If you're going to come back here and start with the same "you're projecting" crap all over again, which really carries no meanng, you might as well go back and get a head start sulking over all the inevitable "personal attacks".
