Gotta get street cred somewhere....

He will be Slum Dog Millionaire! Chai Walla!

FTA...Jindal is not refusing all, or even most, of his state's share of stimulus money, only $100 million or so in federal unemployment assistancemoney designed to allow states to expand eligibility for unemployment benefits.

I felt it worthy of pointing that part out....

So, in other words AMERICAN1ST, he's playing politics, getting a little national attention.
Just what I figured.

BTW...isn't Louisiana still rolling in Katrina money?

Why reject it?

The gub'ment is gonna get their pound of flesh, you might as well get 10 ounces of it back.

he's playing politics, getting a little national attention

uhmmmm...yeah. He's a politician...it's what they do. All of them.

So, in other words AMERICAN1ST, he's playing politics, getting a little national attention.
Just what I figured.

No Danni, he is being a pragmatist. As I am told here weekly, there is a big difference.

A minority conservative who resonates with people is like one of the 4 Horseman of the Apocolypse to the left. Gotta love it.

FTA...Jindal is not refusing all, or even most, of his state's share of stimulus money, only $100 million or so in federal unemployment assistancemoney designed to allow states to expand eligibility for unemployment benefits.

So he's only a mostly communist America hater.

I think Rushpublicans should stand up and say to America-"we believe this is a bad idea and we refuse to involve our state or district in this terrible plan. We're willing to work for $1 a year, and put the rest, as well as our personal fortunes out there to help those affected by our opposition to the stimulus package" instead of whining how terrible it is while sticking their paws out for their cut.

Jindal claims that the unemployment assistance actually amounts to an unfunded mandate, since Louisiana would need to permanently change its eligibility rules, while the federal money would expire in short order.

It is another way the federal gov gets it's hooks into everything. Remember the 55mph speed limit? You will loose all your federalfunds if you don't enact a 55mph you will loose all the "federal gas tax money" the feds take in from YOUR state.

There ain't no free money!!!!!

"No Danni, he is being a pragmatist."

Riiight.

"The gub'ment is gonna get their pound of flesh, you might as well get 10 ounces of it back."

Well that is true for California but for most red states it is more like get your 1.3-7 lb.s of it back. Jindal can refuse whatever amount he wishes but Louisiana still recieves more federal dollars than they pay in. Never heard him make a fuss about that before. I hope Palin does the same thing so they can compete for the biggest nut in the Republican Party honors.

"A minority conservative who resonates with people is like one of the 4 Horseman of the Apocolypse to the left. Gotta love it."

Would the authoress of the above please rephrase for the benefit of us unschooled libs. herm

Well that is true for California but for most red states it is more like get your 1.3-7 lb.s of it back. Jindal can refuse whatever amount he wishes but Louisiana still recieves more federal dollars than they pay in. Never heard him make a fuss about that before.

Finally you and I in agreement Danni...cut all the money off...California, Louisiana or otherwise.

I see 2012 from here.

"""Jindal claims that the unemployment assistance actually amounts to an unfunded mandate, since Louisiana would need to permanently change its eligibility rules, while the federal money would expire in short order. """

Did you read the article or was it a deliberate omission?

""But, as his state's Democratic senator, Mary Landrieu, has pointed out, there's no reason why Louisiana or any other state couldn't revert to its old eligibility rules when the federal money runs out; this is actually what the authors of the stimulus envisioned."""

Shameless posturing when real people need real help.

""Jindal claims that the unemployment assistance actually amounts to an unfunded mandate, since Louisiana would need to permanently change its eligibility rules, while the federal money would expire in short order. ""

No nearly as simple as Jindal would like for us to believe. The problem is easily handled. NO, he's just playing for national attention. It's no secret he has ambtions.

""'Sunset' clause suggested

A senior aide to Landrieu agreed that the state would have to change the law to take advantage of the windfall but said the change would not have to be permanent. Instead, the Legislature could write the new law with a "sunset provision" so it expires when the federal stimulus dollars run out.""

The march towards irrelevance is picking up speed.

"Finally you and I in agreement Danni...cut all the money off...California, Louisiana or otherwise."

Yeah, a good depression might be fun. It's a great way to lose weight.

Would the authoress of the above please rephrase for the benefit of us unschooled libs. herm

What was I thinking with a Bible reference? It's bad for "plantation" scheme you like to set up for minorities, you know, you're locked in voters? Clear it up for you?

It's highly unlikely any will refuse the money
Posted by American1st at 2009-02-18 08:56 PM

Like every other politician they will gladly take the money after publicly bad mouthing it.
Posted by 726 at 2009-02-18 09:24 PM

Sure, they'll refuse the money. Riiiight.
Posted by danni at 2009-02-19 08:06 AM

I'll believe it when I see it.
Me too. Nice empty posturing!
Posted by rcade at 2009-02-19 09:19 AM

These Republicans are just liars playing partisan politics.
Posted by danni at 2009-02-19 09:28 AM

there's no reason why Louisiana or any other state couldn't revert to its old eligibility rules

It would be called "Draconian cuts in unemployment benefits" then, Pancho

Way to go, Joe! Mind you, I said "highly unlikely" not "They'll never take the money". BTW, it's only $100 mil. out of how many billion?

Jindal provided legitimate reasons for turning down the "stimulus". The language within the bill was conditional upon his state government carrying forward counter-productive measures as a means of 'paying back' the powers that sent the money in the first place.

Apparently Jindal and righties here think no new jobs will be created which will help people leave unemployment rolls. That's pretty idiotic when you look at the piles of case even the likes of Jindal are accepting even as the bad mouth Obama and the Dems. The most transparent political posturing ever.

"BTW, it's only $100 mil. out of how many billion?"

In a state like Louisiana that's 100 million in stimulus which won't be stimulating. I guess that Louisiana economy must be booming right now.

Danni,

Actualy bassed on Unemployment numbers they are compared to the rest of the country.

LA is running 5.9%

What's FL at again?

Always remember people in glass houses should change in the basement dear.

So is Jindal still considering using stimulus money to cover his bad budgetting?

Forida's is higher but furtunately we have a governor more concerned about Florida than his own political future, he's a Republican BTW. He's earned the respect of many Dems here in Florida lately.

So, in other words AMERICAN1ST, he's playing politics,
#4 | Posted by danni

......at the expense of the unemployed......

.........Jindal is a Republican after all....I mean if it was 100million tax cut for millionaires....he'd be all for that........

"Jindal provided legitimate reasons for turning down the "stimulus".

#25 | Posted by JeffJ at 2009-02-23 01:49 PM"

He didn't turn down "the stimulus." He turned down some small piece of the plan. Big deal.

Isn't 42% of the Stimulus bill tax cuts? That's the numbers I heard last, anyhoo...

"Isn't 42% of the Stimulus bill tax cuts? That's the numbers I heard last, anyhoo..."

Jindal turning down that part???

It would be called "Draconian cuts in unemployment benefits" then, Pancho

#22 | Posted by American1st at 2009-02-23 01:43 PM |

So be it. If it's done in more prosperous times, so be it. The trade off is to keep funds away from people who need it now? I guess it's" fuck people in need, it's all about posturing, " right?

Not that I'm aware of.

So, in other words AMERICAN1ST, he's playing politics, getting a little national attention.
Just what I figured.

#4 | Posted by danni at 2009

bullshit

rick perry has said the very same thing and tell me what show he was on yesterday

HINT>..I watch them all and the answer is none..

and of course there is little real debate on the issue
what he says makes perfect sense

take the money now and the feds FORCE you into certian regs on benefits.
IN THREE YEARS when that money is set to run out..

these same people will have to sound just like liberals and raise taxes to pay for it.,..

its not that hard to see...

It's difficult to reverse anything once people get used to it. If the requirements are relaxed today, then they will never be reinstated to what they were yesterday.

There are some governors that have said if Louisiana doesn't want the money, it should be sent to them. I agree!

BLT do you ever actually read any of the posts before you make idiotic statements???
Sen. Landriu gave a prefectly logical answer to that objection. Sunset the provision and it expires when the federal funding does. Jindal knows that, this has nothing to do with fiscal responsibility on his part and much to do with an opportunity to be on the national stage opposing Obama.
He's just playing politics and pretty poorly at that.

BLT do you ever actually read any of the posts before you make idiotic statements???

#40 | Posted by danni at 2009-02-23 02:16 PM | Reply

No.
-Otis

"It's difficult to reverse anything once people get used to it."

Many states "sunset" everything unless re-approved by the legislature periodically which is exactly why sunset provisions work better than attempts to repeal legislation. The Bush tax cuts "sunset" in 2011. If we had to actually repeal them it would be much more difficult politically, as it is all the Dems have to do is....nothing.

as it is all the Dems have to do is....nothing.

Wishful thinking...

he's a Republican BTW. He's earned the respect of many Dems here in Florida lately.

#29 | Posted by danni

Code for....... he's a lib.

Boy I hope this doens't bite him in the ass.

I thought Jindal was the only hope on the horizon for the GOP.

When is he up for reelection as Gov.?

It's difficult to reverse anything once people get used to it. If the requirements are relaxed today, then they will never be reinstated to what they were yesterday.

#38 | Posted by American1st at 2009-02-23 02:14 PM | Reply |

C'mon. That's just plain weak. Exceptional circumstances call for exceptional solutions. Making these solutions temporary is easy, and they are already presented as such in the proposal.

BLT do you ever actually read any of the posts before you make idiotic statements???

#40 | Posted by danni at 2009-02-23

yes.

tell me where I have been wrong today

if its so commonplace, then tell me where in this thread I have been wrong...

Couldn't Jindal just exorcise the bad parts of the law away?
"In the name of Jayzuzz, I command Paragraph 325, Article 47, sub-section b, lines 976-985 to be gone!"

It's not like he doesn't have any practice.

"Code for....... he's a lib."

No, he could not be described as a lib. I would say Crist is a moderate REpublican but he recognizes the immensity of the problems we face economically.
When McCain campaigned Crist was right up there endorsing him though I think I noticed him holding his nose when he was near Palin.

IU SEE NOW

you are trusting the word of a democrat in LA

AGAIN....I am sure her intenrions are admirable BUT you know good and well that she would make up anything she wanted to for votes....

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS TEMPORARY democrat spending bills...and I truely believe you know that....

and pelosi knew this could happen and thats why there is also a provision to sidestep a state governor by allowing the legislatures to overrule him

NOT TELL ME THATS not sticking their nose in too far....

I voted for Crist and so far am very happy with my vote. I was nervous about voting for JEB's partner, but he has done a great job of putting Florida and Floridians first. He is a conservative, but one who realizes he is the Gov of all Floridians, not just members of his party.

After reading this post all I can say is that many of you do not handle rejection well:)

After reading this post all I can say is that many of you do not handle rejection well:)

#53 | Posted by MSgt at 2009-02-23 02:30 PM | Reply |

Thanks dr. phil, now go fuck yourself.

Is Jindal playing politics or not....you be the judge.....

""4. Enact A Four-Year Sunset For All Statutorily Created Funds

Governor Jindal proposes a law to authorize the automatic sunsets of all dedicated funds beginning at the end of the next fiscal year, July 1, 2010, with renewed or newly created dedications to sunset every four years thereafter. Using performance data, the legislature will have the time and resources they need to evaluate which statutorily dedicated funds should sunset. This process will bring uniformity and transparency into the annual review process of all expenditures by applying performance evaluations of statutorily dedicated activities like the Activity Performance Review process for spending supported through the General Fund.

Governor Jindal said, "No family or small business establishes a new spending need without the ability to evaluate it especially during times of deficit. Government should be no different. A four-year sunset is not only another common-sense fiscal reform, it is also designed to directly eliminate the old mindset that funds can be quietly created and then just continue on forever with no need to produce results. This old way of thinking about government spending limits our ability to make strategic choices during times of deficit.""

"THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS TEMPORARY democrat spending bills..."

True...but to be ENTIRELY correct, you should amend it to read,"....NO SUCH THING AS TEMPORARY GOVERNMENT spending bills." After all, you DO know that we have been subsidizing mohair sheep ranchers since WWII...right? It had a purpose back then, but now...????

KANREI I have to admit I voted against Crist but I am willing to admit he has been a better governor than I expected.

I find it amazing that people admit to being Floridians.

I can't even remember who ran against Crist to be honest....

I find it amazing that people admit to being Floridians.

#58 | Posted by Manypaths at 2009-02-23 02:38 PM

Considering most of the people here are from somewhere else, you are in the minority. It seems most people want to be a Floridian badly.

"I can't even remember who ran against Crist to be honest...."

Jim Davis.

The guy that drew Garfield?

I spent 8 years in that place...never again...WPB sucks ass.

"Well that is true for California but for most red states it is more like get your 1.3-7 lb.s of it back."

#12 | Posted by danni

That is deceptive data. The only reason blue states pay more taxes than red states is because more corporate headquarters are located in blue states so the federal taxes are paid as though they were generated in those states.

Example: GM, Ford etc. Headquarters located in Michigan. Their sales are from all over the country but the taxes are paid from Detroit. Take a look at all of the companies that have home offices in NewYork or California.

So it only looks like red states get more than they generate.

"So it only looks like red states get more than they generate."

Well, that and the fact that they receive more back than they pay in. BTW, how much income tax do you figure GM or Ford paid these past few years???

"WPB sucks ass."
Not my favorite part of Florida either.

I rate Key West #1
Ft. Lauderdale #2
Tampa/St. Pete #3
Melbourne area #4
TAllahassee #-5000

Forgot Orlando. Probably best economy but still I wouldn't live there even if you paid me.

C'mon. That's just plain weak. Exceptional circumstances call for exceptional solutions. Making these solutions temporary is easy, and they are already presented as such in the proposal.

#46 | Posted by panchovilla
You mean like social security? Pancho your a fool. It is political suicide in this nation full of takers to eliminate any entitlement programs. You know this to be true - now who is posturing?

BLT do you ever actually read any of the posts before you make idiotic statements???

#40 | Posted by danni at 2009-02-23
Self retorting retort flag. DANNI, do you ever....read? I mean, apart from the wrapping paper you use for your joints?

Well, that and the fact that they receive more back than they pay in. BTW, how much income tax do you figure GM or Ford paid these past few years???

#65 | Posted by danni

More than you. Oh yeah, you have to have a job to pay income tax - sorry DANNI - GET OFF THE POT.

ELCID you make stupid remarks but never comment on the ideas presented. Now, take a moment, read what is said about "sunset provisions" for the LA unemployment compensation laws which need to be changed and then explain why that would not solve the problem and allow Jindal to accept the federal funds. Or, just admit he's just playing politics. He isn't the first, won't be the last, but call a spade a spade.

"More than you."

Companies losing billions are paying income tax???

I work, I do pay tax. I have paid tax every year for neary forty years.

"Well, that and the fact that they receive more back than they pay in. BTW, how much income tax do you figure GM or Ford paid these past few years???"

#65 | Posted by danni

Ummmm, those were just used as examples. There other corporation besides those in the US and most have home offices in blue states. Example: Chevron based in California. How much taxes did they pay thepast few years?

That is the point that your data is skewed.

Interesting!

For Some Reason these governors think its Politically Wise to Deny a Return of Federal Tax Dollars to their constituents in Need, the very people who Paid those Federal Moneys in the First Place!

For Years "conservatives" and "libruuls" alike have paid into the federal coffers and now both "conservatives" and "libruuls" need some help!

And Who is Standing in the Way of these people getting some of their money back (people Always remember anger)!

Now While this agitating may sell some commercials for hanmboughboortz by exciting the ignorant pheasants, I wonder how the people in need feel that their own money is being denied, When they Need it Most?
I wonder how that will translate at election time? My guess is Not To Good!

I wonder how the people in need feel that their own money is being denied, When they Need it Most?
I wonder how that will translate at election time? My guess is Not To Good!

This is the same state who re-elected someone who didn't do too much to help his own people during a recent flood.

:-(

"Isn't 42% of the Stimulus bill tax cuts?

#33 | Posted by danni

NO!

Attempt to understand the selfish motives for transparent unanimous obstruction by Republicans to refuse the American Recovery package and the Republican Governors rejecting overdue funds needed to help their own weary, battered constituents
RepuBILLYS - DERELICTS of (public) duty!

PROVEN by ACTIONS: RepuBillys love with a deep passion to "Spread the Poverty" as a demented strategy to generate a desperately vulnerable workforce (commercial and military) of victims (servants) they can readily "hate for being poor", exploit for profits, and abuse to enforce their own deranged brand of "Darwinism"

NATION Building* projects (Iraq) are fine with RepuBILLYS and "war spending" $800,000,000,000 Billion (Iraq) is "great policy"

* as long as that NATION being BUILT by American Taxpayer dollars is NOT AMERICA..!???

Jindal is a Sicko and, especially after RepuBillys neglected Louisianna in Katrina!
Impeach JizzDoll..!

Apu for prez 2012!!!

GUNNER - Poverty, just like stupidity, will never be eradicated. The elimination of the 'weakest' has been negated by government programs; hence you can post.

I hope Jindal runs for president.

Losing his home state will make his overall defeat all that much more sweet.

Jindal's supporters need to be reminded not to get all exorcised at his rallies.

The Republicans are terrified that the stimulus will work because if it does, it will refute their entire conservative mantra: lower taxes and reduced spending as the solution to all economic ills. Consequently, they are going to do everything they can to spook the market by saying that the stimulus won't work, that the policies of the Obama administration will lead us into socialism, etc.

Every two years, the American people get a chance to speak. If in two years the lives of the American people have improved, people will remember the role Republicans played in the recovery. Republicans will lose even more seats in congress and become even more marginalized.

I believe that the economy will revive before the 2010 elections and as it does so, House Republicans in swing districts and Senators in states that Obama won handily will begin to break ranks with its leadership so as to preserve their chance for re-election.

On the other hand, if the economy hasn't improved substantially by the elections of 2010, we are screwed.

He's obviously not opposed to the stimulus bill in general. Just one part.

More from the interview (the opinion piece above didn't include it for some reason):

GOV. JINDAL: That's great, except the federal law, if you actually read the bill--and I know it was 1,000 pages, and I know they got it, you know, at midnight, or hours before they voted on it--if you actually read the bill, there's one problem with that. The word permanent is in the bill. It requires the state to make a permanent change in our law. Law B--our employer group agrees with me. They say, "Yes, this will result an increase in taxes on our businesses, this will result in a permanent obligation on the state of Louisiana." It would be like spending $1 to get a dime. Why would we take temporary federal dollars if we're going to end up having a permanent program?

Rename the package the "Bridge to Nowhere" fund. GOP governors won't be able to say no.

"Bridge to Nowhere"

I hope Jindal runs for president.

Losing his home state will make his overall defeat all that much more sweet.

#80 | Posted by COMMONSENSE

Even better. The pointy head of every single Klansman left in America will simultaneously asplode when they find out their choices fer POTUS come down to either a black man or a brown man.

^_^

On Topic?

Jindal's political posturing here is so pathetically transparent that Jon Stewart made a point of pointing it out and laffing at it last night.

Essentially, Jindal is taking Billions in Federal monies but rejecting the tiniest fraction of the total in order to appear in lockstep with the other rethuglican obstructionists and, as other folk keep mentioning on this thread, positioning himself for a run against Obama in 2012.

Run Bobby, Run!

Jindal all the way!

/Fer the lulz alone.

Be Well.

Jindal's political posturing here is so pathetically transparent that Jon Stewart made a point of pointing it out and laffing at it last night.

On Meet the Press Jindal explained that the stimulus money he turned down from the government had strings attached. The language going with the money would have forced his state to continue spending on whatever the money was to go for well-beyond this one-time infusement of federal cash. Taking the money now would cost his state down-the-road.

order to appear in lockstep with the other rethuglican obstructionists

Not a single Dem opposed the stimulus bill. Not one. They are playing politics with this bill every bit as badly as you accuse the "rethuglicans" of.

The bill sucks and I am glad the Republicans opposed it. The Dems used the public desire 'to do something' as an opportunity to pack the bill with all sorts of money allocated to Dem special interests and packed on almost $8 billion in pork. "We have to do something now!" they screamed. Yet, a fair amount of what could actually be called stimulus isn't even set to take effect for 1-2 years. So much for needing this done NOW. Instead what we get now is beautifying a mall and pampering some field mice.

The economics behind any stimulus can be debated. Personally, I don't think incurring more debt when bad debt is what caused all of this shit in the first place is a good idea. Having said that, if this bill would have been focused on 'immediate' stimulus with minimal monies going to Dem special interests and pork, I could have supported it and I am sure at least a few Republicans would have as well.

I guess to Obama, bi-parrtisanship means meekly going along with everything the Democratic party wants.

The question is, is he right about the federal bill requiring states to make permanent changes in their law?

Any questions about posturing are useless unless we know if he's BSing us about that.

Interestingly, the opinion piece didn't include the part of the interview where he explained why (right or wrong) he opposed the small piece of stimulus.

Any questions about posturing are useless unless we know if he's BSing us about that.

Agreed.

It would be nice if our wonderful media would actually dig into his claim and report on it.

I am not holding my breath though.

I am not holding my breath though.

#89 | Posted by JeffJ

If true, then it would show that he is one of the few politicians willing to dig into a bill and find out what's in it before making a decision, and then make a responsible decision based on his state's needs.

If false, he's just full of shit.

The lack of answers to that question from the media, Obama's supporters, etc..., makes me wonder who actually did read the bill. Of course, I didn't read it either, and have relied upon news to tell me what's in it.

makes me wonder who actually did read the bill. Of course, I didn't read it either, and have relied upon news to tell me what's in it.

Who has time to read almost 1000 pages of political speak? That IS the job of the media - read it and report on it accurately.

Again, I would like to know if Jindal took a principled stance in what he believes to be the best interests of his constituency, or is full-of-shit with his posturing.

I doubt the MSM will provide the answer - perhaps the 'new media' will step-up. Here's hoping.

subsidizing mohair sheep ranchers since WWII...right? It had a purpose back then..
.....#56 | Posted by jestgettinalong

......I never realized the Perry Como look depended on a subsidy......

So, in other words AMERICAN1ST, he's playing politics, getting a little national attention.
Just what I figured.

#4 | Posted by danni

yeah right. It has nothing to do with the fact that he is speaking for 80% of Americans...

Other than that, he's grandstanding.

LOL, you idiot.

He's avoiding a future unfunded mandate. Good for him. This is the cancer or dependence that Obama wants to spread into the states. Good for him for refusing this.

Essentially, Jindal is taking Billions in Federal monies but rejecting the tiniest fraction of the total in order to appear in lockstep with the other rethuglican obstructionists and, as other folk keep mentioning on this thread, positioning himself for a run against Obama in 2012.

Run Bobby, Run!

Jindal all the way!

/Fer the lulz alone.

Be Well.

#86 | Posted by dethspud at 2009-02-24 12:01 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

Exactly, nothing more than a pathetic attempt to garner the RNC nomination in 12. I grew up less than 3 miles from this idiot in B.R. La. He got the Governors seat because there was an Idiot that ran aginst him. Even Blanco beat him in '03.

I voted for him this round only because Blanco didn't run. This is ridiculus. Is this what the RNC has been reduced to?

Jindal (Louisiana to be exact) is poised to get 3.8 Billion.

Jindal is talking-up his not wanting to take the money all while agreeing to take 3.7 BILLION! What an ass.

PLEASE RUN THIS MAN for President! Palin on the ticket would be fantastic too!

Jindal (Louisiana to be exact) is poised to get 3.8 Billion.

Jindal is talking-up his not wanting to take the money all while agreeing to take 3.7 BILLION! What an ass.

PLEASE RUN THIS MAN for President! Palin on the ticket would be fantastic too!

#96 | Posted by COMMONSENSE at 2009-02-25 04:16 AM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e

What he realy wants is to come across as be a fiscally conservative guru who led his state through the tough times with no welfare.

HEY BOBBY- tellem how your education system is in shambles, or you have the highest infant mortality rate in the nation, or how you have more citizens w/o health insurance than anyone else (percapita).

But we don't need no stinkin money from the federal gubment.

While I'm ranting, let me mention that the fact that a minority was elected POTUS really got his hot in the panties. He just wishes hed made the run this time maverick...

"yeah right. It has nothing to do with the fact that he is speaking for 80% of Americans..."

He isn't even speaking for 80% of himself, he took far more of the stimulus dollars than he rejected.
Anyone who is stupid enough to believe he refused the money because of an "unfunded mandate" is unable, apparently, to understand what a "sunset provision" is. Bobby knows, he's proposed it to the legislature before, he's simply playing politics but very poorly.
His speech last night was so amateurish that I doubt he will ever be a major player even in the party of losers. Palin would eat him alive even with her substandard IQ.

Is this what the RNC has been reduced to?

#95 | Posted by lfthndthrds

Sarah, Michael, or Bobby. Take your pick.

HEY BOBBY- tellem how your education system is in shambles, or you have the highest infant mortality rate in the nation, or how you have more citizens w/o health insurance than anyone else (percapita)

Yeah, thanks to decades of liberal Democrat rule.

Jindal is talking-up his not wanting to take the money all while agreeing to take 3.7 BILLION! What an ass.

#96 | Posted by COMMONSENSE

He's rejecting a specific part of the stimulus, not the stimulus in general. He feels his state needs federal funds, just not the 100 million for a program that he says would be a future mandate.

In general, Republicans believe that any type of Public Assistance should be limited to people who already have alot of money.

Anyone read about the "Democrats" that shot the 7 people at Mardi Gras?

Hey, read the bill Danni, there is no sunset provision on this. Democratic morons are trying to push this because they know, on the merits, that Jindal is right on this. No unfunded mandates. Makes perfect sense.

Even if the bill did contain a sunset, the libs would absolutely jump his shit when he pushed to roll it back.

Give it a rest...

Jindal is talking-up his not wanting to take the money all while agreeing to take 3.7 BILLION! What an ass.

#96 | Posted by COMMONSENSE

Wow, another retard who can't comprehend what he reads, and who ignores the part of the interview where he explains himself.

He's rejecting a specific part of the stimulus, not the stimulus in general. He feels his state needs federal funds, just not the 100 million for a program that he says would be a future mandate.

#100 | Posted by LIVE_OR_DIE at 2009-02-25 09:21 AM | Reply | Flag:

Well, "Retard", I read all of his words and I'm simply pointing out that idiocy of people who are trying to claim he's "refusing the stimulus money".

I pointed out that he refused 100 million out of 3.7 BILLION. He can claim it's for whatever reason he likes, but we all know it's just so that he can claim "I refused the stimulus money".

PLEASE run him for president!

Anyone read about the "Democrats" that shot the 7 people at Mardi Gras?

#102 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2009-02-25 10:10 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Democrats"? You sure about that? Did LimpBlob tell you this?

That was one of the lamest retorts I have witnessed. Seriously, why even bother if that's all you've got?

Well, "Retard", I read all of his words and I'm simply pointing out that idiocy of people who are trying to claim he's "refusing the stimulus money".

I pointed out that he refused 100 million out of 3.7 BILLION. He can claim it's for whatever reason he likes, but we all know it's just so that he can claim "I refused the stimulus money".

PLEASE run him for president!

#104 | Posted by COMMONSENSE

You didn't point out anything at all. He didn't claim to outright reject the stimulus money, just the specific 100 mil part, for a specific program, for a specific reason.

Your post is nothing more than some weak ass speculation on his motives unless you can determine if we was right or wrong in his reason for turning down the 100 million.