Madam Speaker, the President of the United States

[Dennis S]

I know things will probably change, but as it stands, the Republican lineup for President seems to be Palin, Jindal and Huckabee. That will be quite a show. I figure the economy should be turning around right about then and Obama should bowl them over. (I hope.)

[Mac1337]

$tevie wrote:
I was really disappointed with Jindal's speech.

Disappointed? That is pretty disingenious. I am not crazy about him either but you pretend you were sitting on the fence until you heard him speak. What possible message a conservative Republican can deliver that you would like? This is just your way of telling people that you gave him a chance but he blew it. Yeah, right.

[$tevie]

Oh, BS. I was expecting an interesting speech and I got nuthin'.

I wasn't expecting to want to vote for him, or even agree with him. I was expecting a man who was supposedly one of the GOP's best hopes, and he ain't it based on that speech.

[Black]

$tevie wrote:
Oh, BS. I was expecting an interesting speech and I got nuthin'.

I wasn't expecting to want to vote for him, or even agree with him. I was expecting a man who was supposedly one of the GOP's best hopes, and he ain't it based on that speech.

Watching it, I felt like:

[Dennis S]

Dakota wrote:
[quote=$tevie]
I was really disappointed with Jindal's speech.

Disappointed? That is pretty disingenious. I am not crazy about him either but you pretend you were sitting on the fence until you heard him speak. What possible message a conservative Republican can deliver that you would like? This is just your way of telling people that you gave him a chance but he blew it. Yeah, right.
He did blow it. I was prepared to have a little fear put into me by Jindal because he is good off the cuff. But, I don't fear him now. Regardless of the politics, the speech was terrible. Just as bad as some of the forgettable Democrats' speeches in the last 8 years.

[lafinfil]

For all the hype about Jindal, even the folks at Fox News roundtable were calling it weak and simplistic.

On "The News Hour" David Brooks was about to fall out of his chair calling it "a disaster for the party" .... "embarrassing" ....
"a poorly timed condemnation of government intervention, and a form of nihilism"

He sounded like he was talking to a bunch of fourth second graders and not to adults, but I suppose
that particular sing song style appealed to some.

[Pops]

Dakota wrote:
I am not crazy about him [Jindal] either but you pretend you were sitting on the fence until you heard him speak.

I won't pretend. Jindal had nothing of substance to add to the issue and that became more obvious with his delivery. He obviously doesn't believe in the message he was forced to deliver. Pandering is almost too soft a label.

[RgrF]

I was at basketball practice but caught both on a web site. It was grossly unfair for a guy like Jindal to have to follow Mr. Obama. He'd of looked almost competent following Mr. Bush but not in this setting. He was awful.

[Carthaigh]

Sounded like Obama was cribbing Auntie Entity's speech about rebuilding Bartertown.

[swampy]

Well, looking at the title of this thread, I was expecting to read comments about Obama's speech. Instead it's all about Jindal's rebuttal.

Did any of you fact check some of the glaring errors that Obama made? Here are 3 that were pointed out by FoxNews.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2009/02/...realities/

"OBAMA: "And I believe the nation that invented the automobile cannot walk away from it."

THE FACTS: Depends what your definition of automobiles, is. According to the Library of Congress, the inventor of the first true automobile was probably Germany's Karl Benz, who created the first auto powered by an internal combustion gasoline engine, in 1885 or 1886. In the U.S., Charles Duryea tested what library researchers called the first successful gas-powered car in 1893. Nobody disputes that Henry Ford created the first assembly line that made cars affordable."
----
"OBAMA: "We have already identified $2 trillion in savings over the next decade."

THE FACTS: Although 10-year projections are common in government, they don't mean much. And at times, they are a way for a president to pass on the most painful steps to his successor, by putting off big tax increases or spending cuts until someone else is in the White House.

Obama only has a real say on spending during the four years of his term. He may not be president after that and he certainly won't be 10 years from now."
-----
"OBAMA: "Regulations were gutted for the sake of a quick profit at the expense of a healthy market. People bought homes they knew they couldn't afford from banks and lenders who pushed those bad loans anyway. And all the while, critical debates and difficult decisions were put off for some other time on some other day."

THE FACTS: This may be so, but it isn't only Republicans who pushed for deregulation of the financial industries. The Clinton administration championed an easing of banking regulations, including legislation that ended the barrier between regular banks and Wall Street banks. That led to a deregulation that kept regular banks under tight federal regulation but extended lax regulation of Wall Street banks. Clinton Treasury Secretary Robert Rubin, later an economic adviser to candidate Obama, was in the forefront in pushing for this deregulation."
------
To be fair... A couple topics that he hit on that I can agree with...

1. Better health care and benefits for veterans.
2. $2500 tax credit for education
3. Extended unemployment benefits
4. Responsibility for our children's education must begin at home.
5. I want to pass a budget next year that ensures that each dollar we spend reflects only our most important national priorities.
6. I am committed to restoring a sense of honesty and accountability to our budget.