PDA

View Full Version : Jindal



Kathianne
01-15-2015, 10:11 PM
The possibilities on the 'right' are numbinh. While Bush and Romney are garnering the headlines, the bench is deep:

http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/jindal-bash-hillarys-mindless-naivet-london-speech_823731.html#


Jindal to Bash Hillary's 'Mindless Naiveté' in London Speech

And Declare 'Islam Has a Problem.'

9:05 AM, JAN 14, 2015 • BY DANIEL HALPER (http://www.weeklystandard.com/author/daniel-halper)


Governor Bobby Jindal of Louisiana, a likely 2016 Republican presidential candidate, will give a major foreign policy address next week in London. According to early excerpts of the address, Jindal will use the speech to bash Hillary Clinton, the likely 2016 Democratic presidential candidate, and to go after radical Islam in wake of last week's Paris terrorist attacks.

Referring to Clinton's recent comment (http://www.weeklystandard.com/blogs/hillary-we-must-empathize-americas-enemies_820584.html) on having empathy for the views of America's enemies, Jindal is planning to say, "Our former Secretary of State in America recently said that we need to 'show respect for our enemies' and 'empathize with their perspective and point of view.' Well, yes, understanding our enemies as a means of destroying them, I’m all for that. But empathizing with them as if perhaps we can find some common ground, I have no interest in that kind of mindless naiveté."

He'll continue:


Let me be blunt about this. I want America’s allies to trust us and respect us, and I want our enemies to fear us. Every day our enemies spend their time trying to avoid our justice is a day they are not plotting against us. And I fear that in recent years this has not been the case.

The events of the past several years clearly suggest that America’s allies are often less than certain that they can count on us, and our enemies too often do not fear us. Of course, as Americans we want all people to live in harmony, and we do not desire to have any enemies. But the simple truth is that we do, but that is not of our doing.



There are people in the world who mean us harm, who desire our downfall, and who simply detest us because we stand for freedom. I have no interest in coddling them, or pretending that bad is good. Sugar coating the reality of the situation serves no purpose, we must not be afraid to speak the truth.

A wise man once said, 'the truth will set you free.'


And here's what Jindal will have to say about the recent jihadist attacks in Paris, according to preview of the prepared remarks:

"Now, let’s talk very directly about the elephant in the room…that is, allow me to discuss the recent horrific events in France.

"I will warn you in advance that I’m going to say some things that are not politically correct, so brace yourselves.

"To be clear, I have no interest in defaming any religion, nor do I have any interest in assigning the maniacal acts of radical Islamists to millions of Muslims worldwide.

"I’m interested only in dealing with reality and facts.

"And the fact is that radical Islamists do not believe in freedom or common decency nor are they willing to accommodate it in any way and anywhere.

"We need to stop pretending otherwise.


...

fj1200
01-16-2015, 09:26 AM
The possibilities on the 'right' are numbinh. While Bush and Romney are garnering the headlines, the bench is deep:

I would appoint him president tomorrow but he's got a tough road, number one being his disastrous response speech he gave a few years ago.

Drummond
01-16-2015, 12:16 PM
I would appoint him president tomorrow but he's got a tough road, number one being his disastrous response speech he gave a few years ago.

You 'WOULD appoint him president tomorrow, BUT ....'

.. you're too busy finding fault with him .....

Well, FJ, I WOULD appoint Tony Blair as Britain's PM once more, except that he's a Leftie, who thinks like one, and would want to bring the Left back into power !!

But why would you think of supporting Jindal ? He shows every sign of NOT wanting to be a terrorist apologist ! And besides, if, as he says, he's all in favour of understanding terrorists as a way of destroying them, you MUST surely be in opposition to him ??

On how many threads have you argued that terrorists are human ??? How many times have you called my countering views 'disgusting' .. ?

Yet, it's I who wants to understand the truth of the enemy, and not sugar-coat those perceptions into fantasy !

fj1200
01-16-2015, 12:36 PM
You 'WOULD appoint him president tomorrow, BUT ....'

.. you're too busy finding fault with him .....

Well, FJ, I WOULD appoint Tony Blair as Britain's PM once more, except that he's a Leftie, who thinks like one, and would want to bring the Left back into power !!

But why would you think of supporting Jindal ? He shows every sign of NOT wanting to be a terrorist apologist ! And besides, if, as he says, he's all in favour of understanding terrorists as a way of destroying them, you MUST surely be in opposition to him ??

On how many threads have you argued that terrorists are human ??? How many times have you called my countering views 'disgusting' .. ?

Yet, it's I who wants to understand the truth of the enemy, and not sugar-coat those perceptions into fantasy !

Do you spend your time thinking up new ways to be a non-thinking idiot? Because that seems to be the only explanation for your responses.

He's got a tough road because there could be at least a couple of good conservative governors also on the campaign trail, Scott in FL and Walker in WI, not to mention the formidable Jeb Bush. Bush isn't the most conservative choice but I don't think he's going to be a push over. And his aforementioned response speech a couple of years ago was widely criticized. He's got to do better than that if he's going to make it through the primaries let alone the general.

So, are you going to drag another thread off topic with your moronic rantings, see your terrorist prattle above, or can you keep it on topic. Inquiring minds want to know.

EDIT: and to point out how you fail at reading comprehension. I would appoint him tomorrow. BUT he has a tough road because of how we choose our presidents over here; do you need a primer on the subject?

Drummond
01-16-2015, 03:27 PM
Do you spend your time thinking up new ways to be a non-thinking idiot? Because that seems to be the only explanation for your responses.

He's got a tough road because there could be at least a couple of good conservative governors also on the campaign trail, Scott in FL and Walker in WI, not to mention the formidable Jeb Bush. Bush isn't the most conservative choice but I don't think he's going to be a push over. And his aforementioned response speech a couple of years ago was widely criticized. He's got to do better than that if he's going to make it through the primaries let alone the general.

So, are you going to drag another thread off topic with your moronic rantings, see your terrorist prattle above, or can you keep it on topic. Inquiring minds want to know.

EDIT: and to point out how you fail at reading comprehension. I would appoint him tomorrow. BUT he has a tough road because of how we choose our presidents over here; do you need a primer on the subject?

Do you spend your time thinking up new ways to turn logic on its head ?

'I would appoint him tomorrow'. That statement introduces the concept of your 'having the power' to do that, because if not, the whole notion of your 'appointing' him is a nonsense. Why indulge in fantasist nonsense ?

OK, so Jindal, reportedly, has a lot of opposition to contend with, which is the reality in play. You say as much, so this 'appointing' nonsense is just that, said for effect rather than any real wish to see Jindal prevail.

It is my hope that one day you will debate honestly on this forum. Just as you oppose Conservatives every chance you get in these threads, why not tell us that Jindal is someone you'd rather NOT defend ?

Thunderknuckles
01-16-2015, 04:09 PM
I don't know. Nothing about Jindal gives me a "tingle up my leg".
In fact, none of the candidates do at this point but that may change in about a year when things start to heat up.
And this Jeb Bush thing is just plain suicide for the Republicans. If he wins the Republican nomination, I will become convinced that the Illuminati have been controlling things all along :laugh:

fj1200
02-12-2015, 02:02 PM
Do you spend your time thinking up new ways to turn logic on its head ?

'I would appoint him tomorrow'. That statement introduces the concept of your 'having the power' to do that, because if not, the whole notion of your 'appointing' him is a nonsense. Why indulge in fantasist nonsense ?

OK, so Jindal, reportedly, has a lot of opposition to contend with, which is the reality in play. You say as much, so this 'appointing' nonsense is just that, said for effect rather than any real wish to see Jindal prevail.

It is my hope that one day you will debate honestly on this forum. Just as you oppose Conservatives every chance you get in these threads, why not tell us that Jindal is someone you'd rather NOT defend ?

My god you are one dumb idiot. Anyone who thought I had any power to appoint anyone President is surely a moron which explains that tripe that emanates from your keyboard. As to your "debate honestly" meme, I'm the only one between you, me, and the knuckleheads who does but I get the pleasure of not only having superior arguments than you but I get to call you a moron and idiot when you say moronic and idiotic things... which is often.

fj1200
02-12-2015, 02:08 PM
I don't know. Nothing about Jindal gives me a "tingle up my leg".
In fact, none of the candidates do at this point but that may change in about a year when things start to heat up.
And this Jeb Bush thing is just plain suicide for the Republicans. If he wins the Republican nomination, I will become convinced that the Illuminati have been controlling things all along :laugh:

Hmm, I'm not sure that conservatives should have the tingle effect. :eek: I'm not that down on Jeb but I don't think Republicans can afford another election where conservatives sit on the sidelines.

As for Jindal, I'd still take him tomorrow but this causes me concern.


Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal (R) says he wants Congress to pass an amendment to the Constitution if the Supreme Court decides to overrule state gay marriage bans.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/232263-jindal-supreme-court-gay-marriage-decision-could-prompt

Thankfully the proposed amendment won't go anywhere IMO.

Anton Chigurh
02-12-2015, 02:41 PM
I don't know. Nothing about Jindal gives me a "tingle up my leg".
In fact, none of the candidates do at this point but that may change in about a year when things start to heat up.
And this Jeb Bush thing is just plain suicide for the Republicans. If he wins the Republican nomination, I will become convinced that the Illuminati have been controlling things all along :laugh:Give me Dr. Ben Carson.

aboutime
02-12-2015, 03:10 PM
If only concerned....I do mean, really concerned Voting Americans had spent a tenth of the time vetting Obama BEFORE he was elected. We might not have a need for any of us to come here to discuss Jindal, or any other candidate who would probably be someone other than Hillary.

fj1200
02-12-2015, 03:36 PM
Give me Dr. Ben Carson.

He's got a thread.

darin
02-13-2015, 05:34 AM
Not sure why, but when i see "jindal" i think some cleric declared a Jindal against the infadels