The proposed Jindal VP candidacy is a transparent attempt to fight the Democrats at their own game of identity politics. Everyone will see it that way. A little too much "me-too" in the Republican party these days.

He needs to be left alone as governor a few terms to become a more useful vetted asset in the future.

Nobody's gonna look at Bobby Jindal and think he's black.

Although Joe Biden might think he knows him from the 7 eleven down the street.

first and foremost: Jindal needs to be left alone and allowed to grow. He's really cleaning house in Louisiana and doing a damn good job of it. even though he has more 'experience' than Obama, the world doesn't see that.

Secondly: oddly, the only people I knew who were 'troubled' by the race issue in Louisiana went by the name of Landreau, Blanco, Nagin, and...well...blacks!

thirdly: when Jindal ran against Kathleen Blanco, pre-Katrina, guess what one of his biggest platforms was: fixing the levees in New Orleans! but racism played a part and he wasn't elected. i'll always wonder what (if anything) Jindal could have done.

I know a few individuals who would be considered racist by most PC police and they all vote democrat except for this election. I doubt they would find issue with Jindal as I have yet to hear any negative stereotype of Indians from them. One little plus with Jindal if race plays any factor is that citizens of India are the most pro-US of any other country. So maybe if he is elected Vice-President then that will further good will. Of course that probably won't mean much to voters here. I don't know much about him myself but he sounds a lot better than McCain so far.

Is a fine man.

Simon is an ASS.

I think Jindal should help the folks in LA

What is Simon saying? Is Simon admitting he will not vote for the inrcxperienced BLACK democrat presidential nominee?

Screw 'em.  None of these left-winged bozo's in the lamestream media will vote for that ticket anyway.  It's bad enough they chose McCain in the primaries, and we're stuck with him.  If voters so shallow as to put age and race above such topics like the global war on terror or illegal immigration or high oil and gas prices, they need to re-evaluate their list of priorities and get it straightened out.

One was Hindu  one was Muslim.  Why are we being led by converts?

http://www.ornery.org/

Obama's Real Religion

I believe Jindal should stay where he is. He is too young and too talented to be associated with a possible losing ticket.

I know it's old, not at all original, but I love how the WSJ ridiculed the "progressivism" of the NY Times

Louisiana
Elects 60th Caucasian Governor
As expected, Rep. Bobby Jindal has been elected governor of Louisiana. He captured
54% of the vote
on Saturday, a 37-point advantage over his nearest opponent. Twelve candidates
appeared on the ballot in Louisiana's open primary; had no one received a majority,
the top two finishers would have faced a run-off next month. Jindal, 36, will
supplant Missouri's Matt Blunt as the nation's youngest governor. In a state
famous for flamboyant and corrupt politicians, Jindal is, as we noted in our
Weekend
Interview last month, "an affable policy wonk with a quick mind and
a fascination with the details of governance."

His victory is also an ethnic first, and one that runs counter to the New York
Times's stereotype of the South:

[Jindal] is a highly unusual politician, having become the nation's first
Indian-American governor in a Southern state where race is inseparable from
politics.

It's not exactly clear what the Times means when it characterizes Louisiana
as a "state where race is inseparable from politics." Louisiana's
most memorable connection between race and politics was the 1991 run-off election
for governor, which pitted corrupt former governor Edwin Edwards against white
supremacist David Duke. But Duke lost in a landslide and, despite warnings that
his 39% showing was an ill portent, he faded into obscurity.

It's true that blacks and whites in Louisiana have disparate voting patterns,
with blacks voting much more heavily Democratic than whites do. But this is
the case everywhere in the country; and it is probably less true in Louisiana
than in most other Southern states. Bayou State whites are more inclined to
vote Democratic than those elsewhere in the region: Louisiana was the only Southern
state other than Arkansas and Tennessee that the Clinton-Gore ticket carried
twice; it elected its first Republican U.S. senator just three years ago; and
it is likely to retain Democratic state legislative majorities after next month's
run-offs.

There's something odd, too, about casting the election of an Indian-American
in "racial" terms. It's reminiscent of U.S.
v. Bhagat Singh Thind (1923), in which the U.S. Supreme Court ruled
that "a high-caste Hindu, of full Indian blood, born at Amritsar, Punjab,
India," was not "a white person" for the purposes of immigration
law--even though ethnologists consider Indians to be part of the Caucasian race.
Justice George Sutherland wrote for a unanimous court:

It may be true that the blond Scandinavian and the brown Hindu have a common
ancestor in the dim reaches of antiquity, but the average man knows perfectly
well that there are unmistakable and profound differences between them to-day;
and it is not impossible, if that common ancestor could be materialized in
the flesh, we should discover that he was himself sufficiently differentiated
from both of his descendants to preclude his racial classification with either. . . .

[The word Caucasian] is at best a conventional term, with an altogether
fortuitous origin, which under scientific manipulation, has come to include
far more than the unscientific mind suspects. According to Keane, for example
(The World's Peoples, 24, 28, 307, et seq.), it includes not only the Hindu,
but some of the Polynesians (that is, the Maori, Tahitians, Samoans, Hawaiians,
and others), the Hamites of Africa, upon the ground of the Caucasic cast of
their features, though in color they range from brown to black. We venture
to think that the average well-informed white American would learn with some
degree of astonishment that the race to which he belongs is made up of such
heterogeneous elements.

The Times, in ascribing "racial" significance to the election of
an Indian-American, seems to see the world through a lens similar to that of
"the average well-informed white American" of 1923. And when the paper
searches for a link, beyond simple ethnic pride, between Jindal's background
and his politics, it comes up empty:

His ascent has delighted many Indian-Americans, who have never seen one of
their own elected to such a high political position. Sanjay Puri, chairman
of the U.S.-India Political Action Committee, predicted that Mr. Jindal would
surprise doubters with the depth of his understanding on policy issues. Others,
however, are cautious, saying that Mr. Jindal is out of the mainstream on
issues that matter to Indian-Americans.

"The fact that he's of Indian ancestry is a subject of jubilation," said
Vijay Prashad, professor of South Asian history at Trinity College in Hartford,
speaking of the way Mr. Jindal has been portrayed in the Indian-American press.
"But there's a very shallow appreciation of who he really is. Once you scratch
the surface, it's really unpleasant."

The Times doesn't give Prashad an opportunity to enumerate the "issues
that matter to Indian-Americans" on which Jindal is "out of the mainstream."
But we found a 2003 article in Little
India in which Prashad explained why, although "I like Bobby Jindal,
. . . I don't support him for governor."

Prashad disagrees with Jindal on abortion, stem-cell research, church-state
separation and guns. In other words, Prashad takes liberal positions on "social
issues" and opposes Jindal because his positions are conservative. That's
fine, but these are not issues that "matter to Indian-Americans" qua
Indian-Americans.

A Times
editorial on a separate subject today opens with as concise a statement
as we've seen of the liberal worldview on race and other group identities:

Think of America's greatest historical shames. Most have involved the singling
out of groups of people for abuse. Name a distinguishing feature--skin color,
religion, nationality, language--and it's likely that people here have suffered
unjustly for it, either through the freelance hatred of citizens or as a matter
of official government policy.

This is not exactly false, but it is misleading in a fundamental way. Has there
ever been a society that did not practice "the singling out of groups of
people for abuse"? And has there ever been a society that put more effort
into overcoming this tendency than America?

The Times treats America as if it were uniquely susceptible to the ordinary
human failing of prejudice, when in fact it is uniquely committed to rising
above prejudice and affirming the ideal of equality. If Bobby Jindal can win
a Louisiana landslide, it may be that voters there are more progressive-minded
than writers and editors at the New York Times.

And as far away as you can.

Think Siberia. Seriously.

Stay where you are and start laying your plans for 2012. Please, please do not allow yourself to be associated with a liberal like McCain.

Any association on the part of a real conservative with John McCain will be political suicide in the end. :-(

The truth is insensitive. - Neal Boortz

We can call him the Native Indian-American Candidate.

Then watch the Dems squeal.

• LYDSEXICS UNTIE

McCain is going to have to deal with stories about his collaboration with the NV while a POW, his pitiful military career, why the Navy found him unfit for higher command, his wife's personal and business issues (along with her family's), his connections to Keating, the Keating 5 scandal, how he tossed POW/MIA families under the bus in 1994 so Anheuser-Busch (which he and Cindy own millions in stock) could start making millions selling beer to the Vietnemese, his record as a RINO, and on and on.  I'm sure the race of his VP will be the least of his worries.

I don't see that any Demoncrats would ever vote for him. They all have to vote for The Obamination because.... all together now class - "He's a black victim of white society." Just like hispanics are 'the other white meat' when it comes to leftist and black politics, Bobby Jindal is not dark enough for the racists that comprise the main stream Demoncrat party.