Is not coming from the Hornets' "hive" in the New Orleans Arena.
It's coming from national conservative pundits like William Kristol
, and it involves Governor Bobby Jindal. In a column titled "McCain-Jindal?" Kristol strokes our boy wonder whiz kid, arguing that the McCain campaign is naming him as a possible Vice Presidential choice:
[In] separate conversations last week, no fewer than four McCain staffers and advisers mentioned as a possible vice-presidential pick the 36-year-old Louisiana governor, Bobby Jindal. They’re tempted by the idea of picking someone so young, with real accomplishments and a strong reformist streak.
It might also be a way to confront the issue of McCain’s age (71), which private polls and focus groups suggest could be a real problem. A Jindal pick would implicitly acknowledge the questions and raise the ante. The message would be: “You want generational change? You can get it with McCain-Jindal — without risking a liberal and inexperienced Obama as commander in chief.” I would add that it was after McCain spent considerable time with Jindal in New Orleans recently, and reportedly found him, as he has before, personally engaging and intellectually impressive, that the campaign’s informal name-dropping of Jindal began.
We've been told that Jindal is the "future of conservatism"
. He's the "next Ronald Reagan"
And now he's got a headache:
A major tax-cutting measure that gained critical momentum in the Legislature last week is threatening to scramble the state spending picture and create a political headache for Gov. Bobby Jindal.
But any large-scale tax cut would probably need to be matched by corresponding spending cuts, creating a political dilemma for an administration that says it philosophically favors lower taxes but doesn't appear eager to sacrifice the new spending it has proposed for health care, higher education and public schools.
The dilemma is made more acute by the fact that it's Jindal's GOP allies who are behind the effort, after months of genially backing the governor's plans to overhaul the state's ethics laws and spend a $1 billion surplus.
Recently Jindal told the Legislature that they "must be bold".
I guess that's a "mission accomplished". Your move, Guv.
Again, I must emphasize my belief that Jindal is not
going to be McCain's Vice Presidential pick. This orchestrated "informal name-dropping" campaign is meant to raise Jindal's profile, as he seeks the keynote address at the GOP Convention. Jindal enjoys all the "buzz" and attention, but he would be a horrible Veep pick. It's sort of like Rudy being the nominee-- I can't even comprehend it.
McCain, a candidate that many regard as too old, would look positively ancient if he runs with Jindal. McCain's 100 years in Iraq platform would not be "balanced" by an inexperienced candidate who largely avoided the Iraq issue over the past year, repeating ad infinitum "I don't think our troops have to be there forever".
(Just imagine the campaign commercials that splice Jindal's "not forever" comments with McCain's 100 year pronouncement.) And if you think Jeremiah Wright is a problem (which he is-- this is the undeniable low point of the Obama campaign-- luckily it's only May) wait till a national audience gets a taste of Jindal the exorcist. You can bet the National Dems will raise that story in a much more effective way than did the hapless Louisiana Dems. All the apparent weaknesses of Obama (youth, inexperience, commander-in-chief bona fides, not being "vetted") will instantly be much less of an issue if the septuaganerian McCain asks Jindal to stand one heartbeat away from the Presidency.
It doesn't make sense.
An anonymous commenter points us to this hilarious deconstruction
of Jindal's "exorcism" essay.
Labels: Elections and Campaigns, Jindal, McCain
I think the exorcism story will hurt Jindal less than his attacks on non-Catholics in his little essay he wrote.
And I am sure the National Democrats will be able to make that argument much better (i.e. getting their facts straight about what the article actually said) than the state party did.
The national party would probably do well to hire some Jindal experts from Louisiana if Jindal is picked.
And speaking of the exorcism, see today's posting on Wonkette.com which links to this story on Jezebel.com:
Future VP Bobby Jindal's College Girlfriend Possessed By Satan? Or Just Horny?
FROM JEZEBEL.COM: Meet Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal! He's the frontrunner to be the running mate to the presidential candidate closest to death, so it will surely please you to know that, in his brief 36-year life, he has endured many difficult things, including the presence of SATAN HIMSELF.
I disagree with Daniel. I think the big mistake the LA Dems made was going for the "anti-Protestant" angle rather than just the pure nuttiness of the "exorcism" story.
I also grudgingly agree with you that Jindal won't be on the ticket. But it would be sooooo much fun if he were.
That link is great, anon. Many thanks.
Also, let me take this opportunity to say that I love your blog and look forward to reading it every day.
Your prescience in mentioning the exorcism on the same day that it's discussed on a "national" blog is a great example of why I enjoy your perspective on all things, whether local, statewide, or national.
Keep fighting the good fight!
Jindal makes Obama look experienced.
McCain had better pick somebody ready to be president, because there ain't no way he gets two years into a second term Alzheimer's-free.
Jeffrey: Actually, over on Jindal Is Bad I said that they probably shouldn't have tried to tackle the religion issue at all because there are so many other flaws with Jindal that they didn't need to play the religion card.
That being said, not only did the Democratic Party take the risk of going after Jindal on the issue of religion. They...
B) Didn't come with clean hands since they didn't accurately quote (or paraphrase) what he said 100% of the time (thus opening the door for the Republicans to say they lied)
C) Didn't respond to Jindal's false claims of being a "Born Again Christian" in Northern Louisiana when he responded to the "Jindal on Religion" ad.
Of course, had the Democratic party been smart, they would have spend cash fighting him in 04 and 06, putting as much dents in him as possible before the 07 elections. It is not like we had to guess what he would do in 2007. Instead, they let him have a free ride and the state of Louisiana is suffering because of it.
And one of the problems is that some people in the Party don't quite understand the concept of incremental gains. Had scalise won with only 60%, it would have been an incramental victory that could be worked on later. But no, they would rather allow LA01 be a spawning ground for Fresh Republican "Talent". Jindal, Vitter.... who else needs to come out of LA01 and get success statewide until people wake up and smell the coffee?
(And yes, this stopped being a response to Jeffery a long time ago) ;)
I doubt McCain will even run for a second term...which is one reason why Hillary doesn't mind adopting some scorched earth tactics versus Obama...she'd still be at an "acceptable" age in 2012, but not necessarily 2016.
You know, I'd almost--emphasis on "almost"--hope for a McCain-Jindal victory, especially if Clinton somehow managed to garner the Democratic nomination. Jindal would be replaced by Mitch, he'd be stuck as second fiddle for what will be, at best, a pretty rocky four years, and could end up as the far right's Walter Mondale, minus Mondale's insider experience...
On the other hand, for those who might be a little superstitious, the Maya "long count" calendar calls for a rather ominous cycle change in December of 2012...just about the time a McCain-Jindal term would be coming to an end...
Leaving aside the Mayan calender deal, I want to focus on the Michael's doubt that "McCain will even run for a second term."
This is a remarkably widespread belief, and there's absolutely no evidence for it. And I'll put the chances at zero that McCain would ever commit to one term of service.
No, there's no evidence that he'll announce ad hoc that he's a one-termer, but age and circumstances will hobble if not destroy him politically.
He's also not particularly healthy in a real, physical sense. That could add up to the GOP showing him the door in four.
I don't think Jindal would benefit, being a little too young, although it's not with any elation when I think about how another young GOP governor was once put on the national ticket, and folks in his home state weren't all that upset to be rid of him: Teddy Roosevelt.
Dems need to get McCain on the record, showing that he will not commit or promise to serve only one term.
That'd be an absolute win-win scenario for any Democratic candidate (and I guess the "conventional wisdom" tonight is back to Obama is inevitable)...a refusal would naturally raise questions, uncomfortable or not; a confirmation would be a significant and astonishing admission of weakness.
Of course, you'd need an attack dog to actually do the deed--Obama, or Clinton, would have to remain above the fray.
IF the situation were reversed, i.e., if the Democratic nominee was 71 years old and had undergone surgery/significant treatment for a serious disease, you can bet that everyone from hacks like Ken Mehlman to "journalists" like Brit Hume and Tim Russert would have a field day. They'd no doubt justify it by insisting how "serious" a matter it was.
Is it fair? Is it something that's valid? I don't know--I'd actually prefer to see an educated electorate debating far more serious matters of public policy, like the war in Iraq (and, more broadly, the history and future of our Middle East policy generally), Gulf Coast recovery, crumbling infrastructure (hell, that's even an immediate and significant LOCAL concern of mine...and I mean local like "in my front yard" local...I'll spare you the details), etc.
But real issues have been pretty much ignored for more or less an entire generation at this point. Well, hell: if that's how they want to play, then...fight fire with fire.