Not the Next Big Thing, I'm afraid

[jducoeur]

When I went to bed last night, I found myself thinking a bit about Obama's speech, but more about Jindal's. And rather to my surprise, I turned out to be rather pissed-off.

The thing is, I don't self-identify as a Democrat. I usually vote for them, but that's at least half because I've found the current generation of Republicans (especially at the national level) to be loathsome enough that they have to be kept out of power. I would actively like that to change -- I'd far rather have a Republican party that provides a genuine alternative worth considering, to act as a valid counterbalance when the Democrats get too full of themselves.

For about six months now, everyone has been putting Bobby Jindal forward as the future of the Republican Party: he's been referred to as "the Republican Obama" so many times I've lost count. He'd be the young, thoughtful and deep politician who would save the party from Sarah Palin. So I was rather looking forward to his rebuttal -- with a little trepidation, perhaps, because I was sure that I'd disagree with much of it, but I figured that it would contain some reasoned counter-arguments to move the debate forward.

Not so much.

What I got was More of the Same, to a degree that shocked me. I mean, yes, the party has a message. But seriously: this sounded just like the words of an identikit Republican Senator. In fact, after I closed my eyes, discounted the accent and simply thought about the words, the tone, and the body language, it sounded *exactly* like a John McCain stump speech.

Moreover, my hopes of a reasoned rebuttal were foiled. I didn't expect a *precise* rebuttal, since he would have had to be working from the advance notes rather than the speech itself. But I'd been expecting -- well, what I would have expected from Obama in that circumstance. A thoughtful dissection of the proposals, some specific cautions about the problems in them, respectful but firm in opposition. Instead, I heard a speech that really didn't address Obama's in any meaningful way: instead, it was nothing but anti-Democrat grandstanding, containing nothing but the same vague generalities that the Republicans parrot over and over and over again. Obama's speech has been mildly criticized as not having enough specifics, but Jindal's didn't say *anything*.

If Jindal has any independent personality, it sure as hell didn't show through. This was his moment -- his version of Obama's introduction at the Democratic Convention -- and IMO, he entirely blew it.

There are actually some interesting and smart conservatives among the pundits (I'm talking about the David Frums here, not Rush Limbaugh) -- people who I might disagree with, but I at least *respect*. But the number of Republican politicians I respect is now staggeringly low. It annoys me greatly that the only prominent Republican who I could even *consider* electing President is the one who's not eligible. (The Guvernator, who seems to be essentially the Republican version of Bill Clinton, a reliable panderer.)

My disappointment is palpable: my remaining hope of a flicker of intellectual depth among the Republicans has been extinguished. As an opposition party, they're looking pretty hopeless -- far from a meaningful alternative, they come across as a bunch of zombies, shambling around the political landscape going, "BRAAAINS", "TAAAAAAAX CUUUUUUTS", "GOVERNMENT BAAAAAAAD", "SPLEEEEEEEN"...

Comments

[anastasiav.livejournal.com]

Note: I didn't watch it, I only read the postgame.

Talking Points Memo points out that even FOX news didn't have good things to say about either the message (ie: "talking to the base") or the way it was delivered.

FiveThirtyEight on the "volcano monitoring" - an example which could, indeed, have come right out of a McCain speech (along with the "projector" that turned out to be for a planetarium and other "waste" that McCain tried to complain about, inevitably picking lousy examples.)

But the number of Republican politicians I respect is now staggeringly low. It annoys me greatly that the only prominent Republican who I could even *consider* electing President is the one who's not eligible. (The Guvernator, who seems to be essentially the Republican version of Bill Clinton, a reliable panderer.)

We're big fans of Ms. Snowe up here. I'm very proud of my State's two Republican Senators.

[osewalrus.livejournal.com]

Yes, on the volcano monitoring, given that we are coming up on the 30th anniversary of the Mt St. Helens' eruption next year, my reaction was: "And I just want to say, that if I am President, the people of Hawaii and Washington State can [bleep] off and die. And more federal money for levees and flood insurance."

[jducoeur]

Good point -- the two from Maine (plus Arlen Spector) seem to consistently have the right attitude: fighting effectively for their viewpoints but understanding that compromise is necessary for getting things done.

But man: three Senators, who are getting largely vilified by their own party, doesn't exactly make an inspiring opposition...

[its-just-me.livejournal.com]

I have to say though Jindal does give me a good chunk of hope that the party will go back to its respectable core values. I can always hope.

[dlevey.livejournal.com]

That is similar to what I got from Obama on the campaign train (enough so that I don't even bother with his speeches in office). HOOOOOOOOPE, CHAAAAAAAAAAAANGE...

[jducoeur]

Seriously -- you're coming across as having a bad case of sour grapes. I can understand disagreeing with Obama, but you're being even more knee-jerk negative towards him than I am towards Bush, which ain't easy, and with reasons that seem to have less and less to do with current reality. That's your prerogative, but it's going to lead to people not taking you seriously on the subject...

[dlevey.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry you feel that way. The mindless chanting was the main thing I had against him - he's not the messiah. You may think that's sour grapes, but when exactly that point is made by comedians - LEFT-wing comedians - across the country, perhaps there's a little more to it.

[jducoeur]

I can understand the dislike of the mindless chanting -- the Obamamania certainly went much too far. (And still seems to, albeit not to quite the extreme that it did before the inauguration.)

But your complaints have come across as equally knee-jerk: they read as quite dismissive of the man himself, rather than the excesses of some of his supporters. I don't find that any more sensible than I do the "Obama is God" crowd. He's a politician putting forth (a lot of) proposals and strategies: it's appropriate to grapple with those proposals, rather than putting him down, as you seem to, as a windbag.

I mean, the fact is, he *is* proposing the swiftest changes the country has seen in quite some time, maybe since Roosevelt, and in quite a lot of areas. So making fun of the "Change" motto seems to miss the mark. Whether you *agree* with those changes, or think they are likely to succeed, are quite reasonable to debate. (I could argue both sides in many cases -- in general, I think he's making good educated gambles, but little of it is sure to succeed.) But he's living up to the word "Change" pretty effectively, so I think the complaint about it has gotten kinda old...

[dlevey.livejournal.com]

From my perspective, I'm not seeing the same sort of change. For all the talk about it, for example, he's filling the administration with insiders and retreads. Yes, it's what politicians do, and some of them are intelligent choices (there are others who I think signal particularly bad directions, but that's another topic). This doesn't live up to the "change" rhetoric, though, that came out of his own campaign. The stimulus bill, too, is much of more-of-same actions. His proposal is one of the *largest* packages proposed, but whether it will indeed induce swift change remains to be seen. Much, if not most, of that bill isn't really stimulus-related, either, even when a reasonable argument could be made that those expenditures are or will be necessary.

However, these bills were rammed through congress in record time, without a lot of true debate. The nearly-uniform Republican opposition should be a signal: if truly swift action is necessary, and failure or delay means catastrophic results, one would hope for a more bipartisan result. I am reminded of nothing so much as the run-up to the Iraq war, where we were told that delay courted disaster and that authority for military action should be granted without bothering to debate.

There is a legitimate economic school of thought that says that tax cuts DO stimulate the economy. While I don't always agree with them, can you see why your "TAAAAX CUUUUTS! BRAAAAAIIIIINS!" chant is no better than my "CHAAAANGE!" chant (and why I responded as I did in the first place)? They repeat that mantra because (in some circumstances) it has been shown to work, and they are staying true to the party principles. If I sound like sour grapes, can you see why ridiculing them for it seems like nothing more than gloating?

[leanne-opaskar.livejournal.com]

I'm rather hoping our Governator will run for Senator. (:

[redsquirrel.livejournal.com]

My disappointment is palpable: my remaining hope of a flicker of intellectual depth among the Republicans has been extinguished. As an opposition party, they're looking pretty hopeless -- far from a meaningful alternative, they come across as a bunch of zombies, shambling around the political landscape going, "BRAAAINS", "TAAAAAAAX CUUUUUUTS", "GOVERNMENT BAAAAAAAD", "SPLEEEEEEEN"...

*chuckle* You have so totally pegged it there. I have a new visual going on now.

I can't say I always agree with him and he does do his fair share of pandering but overall our Republican Gov. Charlie Crist down here in FL appears to be trying to do an honest job of governing the state and shows refreshing flashes of independence now and again. Of course he succeeded ShrubCo MarkIIA, which could make anyone look good. I'm not sure he'd have the backbone to buck the GOP leadership if they dangled national office in front of him, though. Time will tell because it's pretty clear he has ambitions.

[jducoeur]

That actually points out one of the few things that *does* give me hope. While the Congressional Republicans have become ever more ideologically hopeless, the Republican *governors* seem to be a lot more pragmatic and sensible on average. (Part of why Jindal's speech disappointed me so, really.)

So there's a possibility that it will only take a few years for the governors to essentially take the party back from the senators and steer it to more centrist ground. I can only hope this is the case...

[ladyariadne.livejournal.com]

Dayum Mark, we agree. What is the world coming to! 8-)

[jducoeur]

Happens now and then. I'm basically a centrist by instinct, which means that I agree with almost everybody some of the time, and nobody all of the time...

[dryfoo.livejournal.com]

Did you see Paul Krugman's column? He has the best response I've seen, with everybody quoting the last sentence of his piece. Here it is in context:

"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."

That, as Woody Allen might say, is quite pithy. It has great pith.