Reminder: Jindal on Leno tonight

As I mentioned last week, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal will be on Leno tonight in a show he taped earlier. If Leno is on past your bedtime then you can read the full transcript here:

Leno: So, tell us Bobby. If John McCain came asking or begging you to be vice president, you’re telling us you will say “no”.

Jindal: Jay, again, I would be honored but I have a job to do and that is to be the governor of all of the people in Louisiana, republicans and democrats, rich and poor, young and old.

Leno: Spoken like a politician Bobby. You are learning fast. But, getting back to the question. Would you say absolutely say I would not serve as Vice President if asked. Remember you would be a heart beat away from the Oval Office and McCain is no “spring chicken”. Are you telling the nation tonight you would not serve no matter what?

Jindal: Jay, I have a job to do. I was voted into office by a large majority. I want to be the best Governor Louisiana has ever had and we have really had some real colorful clowns in the past.

Leno: So, that is the best we will get from you tonight, right.

Jindal: I have spoken repeatedly about this issue explaining my feelings, so let’s talk about how Louisiana is becoming a major force to be reckoned now and in the future.

Leno: Governor, first, I’ve been wondering. Tell me. How did an Indian American become Governor of the same state that almost put David Duke in the mansion a decade or so ago? Did you buy his list or something?

Jindal: (laughs) Well, Louisiana has changed so much in the past decade and will do so even more during my administration. I am pleased that the son of an Indian immigrant could become Governor in the Deep South. I was born in Baton Rouge, am an American and am dedicated to turning Louisiana around after years of neglect and poor leadership. [Link]

I have to say, he is saying all the words a person who’d accept and invitation to be VP should be saying. I don’t think you’d HAVE to resign your Governor’s job to be a Vice Presidential running mate. I guess it is in his advantage to keep his name in the spotlight by not dismissing the idea. I’ll link the video once its up.

143 thoughts on “Reminder: Jindal on Leno tonight

  1. 48 · Gooch said

    They could no longer accuse the Republicans of “racism” anymore and thereby lose one of their core attack points on the GOP.

    Huh?

  2. what positions of jinda violate the establishment clause, in your opinion?

    Take any of the standard religious right-wing chicanery of the hard social conservative republicans. Jindal is on the “right” side of these positions.

  3. Rahul – I’m asking you to point to specific policies he’s implemented or says he will implement that will violate the establishment clause. I think we should confine our discussion to those policies rather than attribute a general set of policies (that he might not necessarily endorse) to him.

    I agree with #47 above – I discourage the use of the word “Uncle Tom” – and the whole reason I made my initial comment was because I don’t think self-hate should be the foundation on which we judge Mr. Jindal.

    Boston Mahesh – you have got to be kidding me.

    India is *MUCH* better when it comes to seperation of Temple and State. We elected a Catholic, Sonia Gandhi, as the supreme leader in ’04. Instead, we settled with a Sikh (2% of the population are Sikhs). Indians don’t care, unless they’re the Piyush Jindal types.

    First of all, last time I checked there was no official elected position in India called the “supreme leader.” She may be the leader of the Congress Party but…that discussion is for another day. And claiming that India has more religious freedom or better separation of church and state based on the presence of religious minorities at the national level is a foolhardy argument. That’s like saying women’s rights movement is far beyond that in America because you’ve had women in high positions of political power. That’s just ridiculous.

  4. 54 · nikhildev said

    Rahul – I’m asking you to point to specific policies he’s implemented or says he will implement that will violate the establishment clause. I think we should confine our discussion to those policies rather than attribute a general set of policies (that he might not necessarily endorse) to him.

    I didn’t bother listing because Jindal slavishly follows every one of them. You can look up his positions on intelligent design teaching in schools, and abortions without exception, for example.

  5. 55 · Rahul said

    You can look up his positions on intelligent design teaching in schools, and abortions without exception, for example.

    I give you a .5 out of 2. it seems jindal has made some claims supporting intelligent design, but has also made some claims against it. he seems to be pandering, like rob has been saying, so i’m not sure if he’s serious. so a half a point there.

    abortion. the unconstitutionality of outlawing abortion has never rested on the establishment clause. jindals view may be informed by his religious beliefs, just as MLKs views on the civil rights act was rooted in his, but since such actions also have a secular purpose, encoding them in law does not necessarily violate the establishment clause. for jindal, i’m sure its just like making a law against murder.

  6. “Also, does any one else see his slight resemblance to Bobby Kennedy?”

    yes, I noted that before. Someone here said Jindal looked like a “neanderthal.” Nah–they were top-heavy, weren’t they? He’s a little peaky looking. The intellectual, aquiline, ascetic type. That’s how I see ‘im anyway. One thing to note: in the U.S. presidential race, the taller of the two candidates has always won. Both have usually been taller than average. George Washington was 6’4″ at a time when the average height was about 5’7″. But until now, the candidates have always been males of northern european extraction.

  7. 58 · whadayuno One thing to note: in the U.S. presidential race, the taller of the two candidates has always won.

    False. Bush-Kerry ’04.

  8. I give you a .5 out of 2. it seems jindal has made some claims supporting intelligent design, but has also made some claims against it. he seems to be pandering, like rob has been saying, so i’m not sure if he’s serious. so a half a point there.

    Ok. He panders well enough that when he says things about Christianity in government, I believe him. And I fear him. In any case, this is not a politician I agree with, or even respect.

  9. Jindal is like Alan Keyes, but not quite as muppet like. That dude sounds like Kermit. Both would be like Torquemada left to their own devices. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition…

  10. Oh yeah, I forgot, Obama and Jindal are exactly the same because they are dark-skinned, lean, and have both expressed a firm belief that government must be run based on the tenets of their religious beliefs. Umm, no… I am going by what Jindal has said since he was age 20, not what Jindal’s pastor said.

  11. I know Limbaugh loves playing these equivalence games that you enjoy so much, but I don’t subscribe to ClearChannel, so they are lost on me, unfortunately.

  12. If Jindal gets caught getting a Lewinsky, he will accuse the hapless girl of being a succubus and her cat of being a familiar and drown them both in the Potomac as perscribed in the Malleus Maleficarum. The bro believes in exorcism dammit. You can take a pindu out of the pind, but you can’t take the pind out of the pindu.

  13. The bro believes in exorcism dammit

    I have made this point a million times before, I cannot fathom how people can insist that Jindal is right in the head about this stuff.

  14. i really wouldn’t worry about it rahul. the establishment clause is, well, well-established. its primary goal, to prevent the government from imposing an official religion (a la sharia law, for example) and restricting the freedom of religious minorities, as long ceased to be relevant in the US. all we have is some peripheral issues usually revolving around religious people wanting equal access to public funds and not wanting to finance anti-religious activities (cruxufix in urine.)

    anyway, there’s a separation of power, its up to the courts, roe vs. wad isn’t going anywhere, and even in the long shot that it did it would be the single best thing that ever happened to the democrats, returning to the legislature an issue that plays into their hands.

  15. the establishment clause is, well, well-established. its primary goal, to prevent the government from imposing an official religion (a la sharia law, for example) and restricting the freedom of religious minorities

    Scalia and Thomas are not going to die anytime soon, and I am sure they can come up with an originalist interpretation that favors Jindal’s views – I still remember Scalia’s frothing rage over being outvoted on Lawrence v. Texas. I am just hoping that Stevens can hold out till a dem can manage to get him/herself elected.

    So, yes, I worry about it. And about ID in schools. And religious agenda trumping science in federal appointments and decisions.

  16. 62 · louiecypher said

    Jindal is like Alan Keyes, but not quite as muppet like. That dude sounds like Kermit. Both would be like Torquemada left to their own devices. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition…

    You’re right about Keyes and Jindal; they’re alike. They both married Indian women.

  17. In India, we have regional political parties in the South which are atheistic. In India, the voting populace couldn’t care less if Sonia Gandhi was a Catholic, which is why the Indians voted her in back in ’04. Indians could have cared less that Rajiv Gandhi was half Zoroastrian or that the first President was a Pashtun Muslim named Zakir Hussain. A populist speaking on religion and being divisive is not common in India like it is in the USA.

    I’m watching Barrack Obama on the TV now clarifying his religious views and his association with Rev. Wright. How many times do you see Indians having to make this clarification?

    49 · DizzyDesi said

    India is *MUCH* better when it comes to seperation of Temple and State.
    there is so much wrong with this statement, that I do not know where to start. Anyway since I do not want to derail this thread, it is sufficient to say that in India, the govt usually runs temples
  18. 58 ·” whadayuno One thing to note: in the U.S. presidential race, the taller of the two candidates has always won. ‘ wrong :Bush-Kerry ’04″

    I’d meant to say, until the past election. Wasn’t sure which election broke the pattern, 00 or 04. Anyway, it still stands. Kerry won by several votes. Shorty Bush is an illegal president.

  19. 54 · nikhildev said

    Rahul – I’m asking you to point to specific policies he’s implemented or says he will implement that will violate the establishment clause. I think we should confine our discussion to those policies rather than attribute a general set of policies (that he might not necessarily endorse) to him. I agree with #47 above – I discourage the use of the word “Uncle Tom” – and the whole reason I made my initial comment was because I don’t think self-hate should be the foundation on which we judge Mr. Jindal. Boston Mahesh – you have got to be kidding me.
    India is *MUCH* better when it comes to seperation of Temple and State. We elected a Catholic, Sonia Gandhi, as the supreme leader in ’04. Instead, we settled with a Sikh (2% of the population are Sikhs). Indians don’t care, unless they’re the Piyush Jindal types.
    First of all, last time I checked there was no official elected position in India called the “supreme leader.” She may be the leader of the Congress Party but…that discussion is for another day. And claiming that India has more religious freedom or better separation of church and state based on the presence of religious minorities at the national level is a foolhardy argument. That’s like saying women’s rights movement is far beyond that in America because you’ve had women in high positions of political power. That’s just ridiculous.

    NikhilDev-ji,

    You’re the 2nd person to criticize my position. Please enlighten me. I’m open-minded and I’m willing to learn from my mistake. However, in India, we’ve had Jain leaders, Budhist converts (Ahbedkar, my main man, was a B), etc. However, I do feel that Muslims are under-represented, and I’d like ofr more of them to run for office.

  20. Kerry was actually elected so he really won. but the Nixon/McGovern (the latter taller) was exception to the rule I’d forgotten.

  21. Alan Keyes and Piyush Jindal also are both married to Indian women. They also hate their own race.

    62 · louiecypher said

    Jindal is like Alan Keyes, but not quite as muppet like. That dude sounds like Kermit. Both would be like Torquemada left to their own devices. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition…
  22. Kerry was actually elected so he really won. but the Nixon/McGovern (the latter taller) was exception to the rule I’d forgotten. Then I checked and there are a couple other exceptions from the 19th century. Must still conclude that the taller is more likely to win.

  23. Boston_Mahesh. I guess the Celtics have a legitimate shot at winning the championship this year – so maybe that’s why you’re so ill-informed. But I can’t help but laugh (and be shocked) when someone tries to make the argument that India is more religiously tolerant because of some isolated examples of candidates/persons in important positions who are not Hindu. I agree, a Hindu is the PM, a Muslim has been President, and a Roman Catholic is the leader of one of the major political parties. But, there is this really big party and movement in India based on Hindu nationalism. Maybe you’ve heard of this party…they’re called the BJP and they are not atheistic or secular. How could you just ignore that pertinent aspect of Indian politics. That’s ignoring the 1200 lb Hindu Elephant in the room buddy.

    Indian politicians campaign on religious issues. Go read a newspaper or attend a rally or something. Your naivete is beyond comment. But most importantly, at least in America we don’t have political parties campaigning and organizing the destruction of mosques, helping with the rape and murder of religious minorities, and inciting genocide. GENOCIDE. Say what you want about WACO, polygamist communities, and shooting of abortion doctors – they are incomparable to the RSS/Bajrang Dal activities in India today.

  24. 77 · boston_mahesh said

    Alan Keyes and Piyush Jindal also are both married to Indian women. They also hate their own race. 62 · louiecypher said
    Jindal is like Alan Keyes, but not quite as muppet like. That dude sounds like Kermit. Both would be like Torquemada left to their own devices. Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition…

    Yea, voting Republican means that you hate your own race (when you’re a minority).

  25. Rahul – Would you be equally as critical of someone who was as devoted to Krishna? What if that person literally believed that Krishna used his mystic powers as God to defeat demons? I mean isn’t that concept as equally scientifically implausible as exorcism? I am a fan and student of science but I won’t dismiss anybody who has strong religious convictions as not being “right in the head”.

    Let’s get serious…are you telling me he’s unfit to be a leader of our country because he believes in exorcism? If adherence to scientific doctrine is so important – then shouldn’t we be looking for a leader who is an atheist on scientific grounds (i.e. he is a devout scholar and believer in the recent pop atheism books?)

  26. 48 · Gooch said

    Bobby Jindal is the greatest! I couldn’t be more proud of him as a Desi in America. I would love it if McCain picked Bobby as his VP. What would all the liberal Democrats do then??? Why, they’d go crazy. They could no longer accuse the Republicans of “racism” anymore and thereby lose one of their core attack points on the GOP. I hope more Indians move to the Republicans because their values are far more closely aligned with ours than the Democrats could ever be.

    Gooch,

    I know what it feels like to be on your own as a lone dissenter. Please see how everyone seemed to have disagreed with my recent post. Now, regarding the Republicans being more aligned with the Indians? Forget about it, jee!

    The Democrats: 1. Have always been more pro-legal immigration. In ’65, my main man LBJ, increased the number of Indians to this country significantly.
    2. Under Clinton visited India, and had normalized relations with India since ’00.
    3. Democrats are for the seperation of Church and State. They don’t want you smashing coconuts or halaaling meat at the courthouses.
    4. Are pro-choice, and they believe a woman can have an abortion. 5. Democrats tend to be more pro-Palestinian like Gandhi himself. 6. Democrats are anti-guns, or they tend to be more in favor of gun-control. 7. Tend to want to a more equitable and fair society where income is distributed more fairly. NOTE: India has a VERY FAIR distribution of income, according to the latest edition of Economist magazine. Also, their Gini Coefficient is very low (i.e. income is distributed much more evenly than the USA). 8. In ’62, when India engaged in a war with China, the American government, under the Democratic President J.F. Kennedy was the first superpower to offer help to the Indians (which the Indians turned down). This was, by the way, was indirectly related to the Indians offering the Dalai Lama, PBUH, refuge in India. 9. The Democrats supported a hate-crimes initiative, which the Republicans were against. Moreover, many Indians are victims of hate-crimes, especially Sikhs after 9-11. 10. Democrats love Indians so much. They’d adopt every single poor Indian children if they could, but due to the limited capacity of super freight tankers, only 100 or so a year Indians are allowed to be adopted each year.

    Compare this to the Republicans, who, on the other hand: 1. Republicans have always been anti-immigration, especially towards the Indians.
    2. Under Nixon, tried to wage war against India in ’71. Under Reagan increased arms spending to the Pakistanis (to be used against the Indians, but most of it was to be diverted to the Afghanis). 3. Republicans believe in a theocracy. They want you to harm baby cows in plain view of everyone to see.
    4. Republicans are anti-choice and against abortions. Unless, of course, it’s in the form of female infanticide in India. 5. Republicans tend to work counter to the Palestinian Christians (~5%-~10% of Palis are Christians), and support the illegal occupation of Israel, which is counter to Gandhi’s view (and your view).
    6. Republicans are pro-guns, but they don’t Sikhs carrying knives. 7. Republicans = old money and trophy wives. They’re indifferent to predatory capitalism, where a person can “earn” $1B in one year (i.e. hedge fund managers).
    8. Republicans hate the Dalai Lama, PBUH, and believe that it’s some exotic animal from the zoo who worships the devil. 9. Republicans want to forcibly remove the dots from our foreheads using the keys to their SUVs. They’re against hate-crime legislation. 10. Republicans hate Indians. Not only do they want to spray graffiti on every desi motel on I-95, but President Nixon and Henry Kissinger referred to Indians as ‘treacherous’ and ‘bastards’. From the Net: “Indians are “a slippery, treacherous people”, said president Richard Nixon. “The Indians are bastards anyway. They are the most aggressive goddamn people around,” echoed his assistant for national security affairs, Henry Kissinger.”

  27. 1. Republicans have always been anti-immigration, especially towards the Indians. 3. Republicans believe in a theocracy. They want you to harm baby cows in plain view of everyone to see.

    haha–nice spoof of a deranged left-winger! thanks!

  28. Rahul -

    Voting republican when you’re a minority = hate your own race? So every Latino, Black, Indian, Asian, Native-American, or any other minority I’m forgetting who voted Republican are all self-haters. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I can go kill myself for voting for the Governator in California. But I guess good news for Desis in the pharmaceutical industry because we’re gonna need a whole lot of anti-depressants.

  29. 84 · nikhildev said

    Rahul – Voting republican when you’re a minority = hate your own race? So every Latino, Black, Indian, Asian, Native-American, or any other minority I’m forgetting who voted Republican are all self-haters. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I can go kill myself for voting for the Governator in California. But I guess good news for Desis in the pharmaceutical industry because we’re gonna need a whole lot of anti-depressants.

    Dude. I was being sarcastic. I’m a fellow right winger.

  30. General note to everyone who quotes another comment in their comment:

    Please ensure that you’re quoting the whole quote and nothing but the quote. Otherwise, it reads like you’re carrying on a conversation with yourself while calling yourself different names. It’s even worse when you’re dissenting, because it reads like you’re trying to kick your own ass. Be aware that the quoteComment function does not always blockquote multiparagraph quotes correctly, and may need manual cut-pasting of the blockquote end tag to make the comment structure look like what it really is.

    Of course, Real Men (TM) type inline HTML.

  31. 85 · Rahul S said

    84 · nikhildev said
    Rahul –
    Voting republican when you’re a minority = hate your own race? So every Latino, Black, Indian, Asian, Native-American, or any other minority I’m forgetting who voted Republican are all self-haters. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I can go kill myself for voting for the Governator in California. But I guess good news for Desis in the pharmaceutical industry because we’re gonna need a whole lot of anti-depressants. Dude. I was being sarcastic. I’m a fellow right winger.

    I actually love 2 Republicans: Lincoln and Reagan. Before Reagan, government was too big and bureaucratic. Inflation and taxes were very high, and Reagan/Volcker rectified all that. Plus, The soviets were defeated in Afghanistan. Oh…wait. The. Refit for that goes to Charlie Wilson(D-TX).

  32. Boston-Mahesh:

    Just for clarification – you mean Democrats are more aligned with Indians like from India and not Indian-Americans, right? Because I’m an Indian-American…and #7 just bothers me. I love my guns and I’ll die before I let some liberal Yankee-blooded Democrat take my guns away from me!

  33. Jindal isn’t athletically lean like Obama and Bobby Kennedy as some folks here are saying. He is painfully thin as in malnourished desi nerd: stick-like limbs, sunken chest etc. I guess thats what upper caste scythians look like :)

    The low caste jatt sudras look more robust.

  34. Rahul:

    And given his views then, and his views now, it takes a leap of, er, faith, that this atheist is not capable of, to think that he doesn’t believe most of what he says

    For an atheist you sure get very defensive about the hindu caste system. What gives?

    As for Jindals’s catholic beliefs, why pick on him alone? Almost all elected american politicians profess to believe in either christianity, or to a lesser extent judaism. What is it about their beliefs that you find more acceptable than Jindal’s?

  35. 90 · Idol said

    For an atheist you sure get very defensive about the hindu caste system. What gives?

    Hey, Idol (or do you prefer to be called Vyasa?), yes, I love the Hindu caste system. I am also a racist, sexist, zenophobe, and boil young kittens alive for my amusement. Does that give you enough material to troll with?

  36. Let’s get serious…are you telling me he’s unfit to be a leader of our country because he believes in exorcism?

    Yes, somebody who has a literal belief in this kind of gobbledygook does give me pause. Just like Kucinich when he says he saw UFOs. And most importantly, the point I have made a million times, is that his religious beliefs are a prime factor in his decisions on public policy, and I have quoted many poisonous examples of this. And yes, I am against religious talk justifying policy decisions, be they policy decisions I agree with or not, and that is something I have said too.

    I think a large number of people are able to separate their religious beliefs from their opinion on appropriate conduct by others, and those who are not, well, I don’t want them to be in positions of influence.

  37. 84 · nikhildev said

    Rahul - Voting republican when you’re a minority = hate your own race? So every Latino, Black, Indian, Asian, Native-American, or any other minority I’m forgetting who voted Republican are all self-haters. Thanks for clearing that up for me. I can go kill myself for voting for the Governator in California. But I guess good news for Desis in the pharmaceutical industry because we’re gonna need a whole lot of anti-depressants.

    I assume you are aware, but for clarity, those comments are by a different Rahul. Not the exorcism-hater.

  38. Rahul:

    yes, I love the Hindu caste system

    How do you reconcile that abomination with your professed “atheism”?

  39. 73 · boston_mahesh said

    I’m watching Barrack Obama on the TV now clarifying his religious views and his association with Rev. Wright.

    He is not clarifying his religious views, he is clarifying his social and political views. As for religious views, McCain can get away with embracing Hagee’s endorsement despite the vitriol Hagee spews against Catholics and most other religious beliefs, because it is acceptable as public discourse in this country.

    You’re the 2nd person to criticize my position. Please enlighten me. I’m open-minded and I’m willing to learn from my mistake. However, in India, we’ve had Jain leaders, Budhist converts (Ahbedkar, my main man, was a B), etc.

    Indian elections are not analogous, most political leaders are local, and there is no national election like the US has. If it did, I am certain that being from a minority religions, as well as caste pressures will cause massive problems for any single candidate. Today, a party just fields the most locally acceptable candidate taking these factors into account, caste dynamics and religious leanings definitely play a massive role in Indian politics. There are districts in southern Tamilnadu, where Thevars will not vote for Vanniyars, and vice versa, and such micro-prejudices decide elections.

  40. 94 · Idol said

    How do you reconcile that abomination with your professed “atheism”?

    The same way I reconcile cat boiling with my professed “vegetarianism”. Good trolling by selective commenting, Vyasa/Prem/Prema/Dev/Idol/Gupta.

  41. 95 · Rahul said

    73 · boston_mahesh said
    I’m watching Barrack Obama on the TV now clarifying his religious views and his association with Rev. Wright.
    He is not clarifying his religious views, he is clarifying his social and political views. As for religious views, McCain can get away with embracing Hagee’s endorsement despite the vitriol Hagee spews against Catholics and most other religious beliefs, because it is acceptable as public discourse in this country.
    You’re the 2nd person to criticize my position. Please enlighten me. I’m open-minded and I’m willing to learn from my mistake. However, in India, we’ve had Jain leaders, Budhist converts (Ahbedkar, my main man, was a B), etc.
    Indian elections are not analogous, most political leaders are local, and there is no national election like the US has. If it did, I am certain that being from a minority religions, as well as caste pressures will cause massive problems for any single candidate. Today, a party just fields the most locally acceptable candidate taking these factors into account, caste dynamics and religious leanings definitely play a massive role in Indian politics. There are districts in southern Tamilnadu, where Thevars will not vote for Vanniyars, and vice versa, and such micro-prejudices decide elections.

    However my friend, there are Many places in US where your color won’t allow you to win. Heck, even the alleged color of your daughter (John McCain) will disqualify you. In s India,a Sikh is the 2nd in charge. They’ve had atheists, N India has had a eunuch. I dont think the US is ready for a eunuch. Also, how many agnostics today are senators/house members,

    Btw, the RSS were pure evil and what happened in Gujarat was horrifyingand deplorable . I hate RSS and racism.

  42. 86 · pingpong said

    Of course, Real Men (TM) type inline HTML.

    Why should men be expected to inline HTML to prove their masculinity? Women can get away with their technolophobia, luddism, and incompetence — while society passively condones the status quo. I am tired of this girls will be girls mentality. When will we stop burdening men with these oppressive expectations?

  43. Leno was an opportunity for Jindal to show his casual side but instead he came accross as a well tutored politician. He was funny at times though.

  44. speaking of odd sounding Indian -american politicians, how would one describe Ramesh Ponnuru lol?