It's awesome that Jindal's so young--no matter what happens this year, or in 2012, he will be a force in national politics for decades to come!! I am loving it!!

but HE'S A REPUBLICAN!!!

He's going to be a stud in the years to come.

He's going to be caught with a Hooker.

He's going to be caught with a Hooker.

Oh, that's just fine and dandy for an R-La., it's only unethical if your stance ain't narrow.

Hey--it's Louisiana--as long as it's not a live boy or a dead girl, it'll be fine!!

i think he's too conservative to be a plausible VP.

My dream 2012 Presidential race is Obama v. Jindal. Can America handle that much melanin?

He's going to be caught with a Hooker.

Spitzer's Hookergate files may become required reading for all politicians to know what to avoid in that regard.

7 · razib

i think he's too conservative to be a plausible VP.

Razib,
I agree to the extent that he will have to moderate some of the social conservatism (e.g., "Intelligent Design," all abortion is illegal) for national office. But I think he can and will. Most "local" politicians face similar challenges (e.g., Romney w/ some of the stances he took running for Gov. in Mass.), yet Governors have a great track-record at getting elected President compared to, e.g., Senators (not this year, admittedly).

he will have to moderate some of the social conservatism (e.g., "Intelligent Design," all abortion is illegal) for national office. But I think he can and will. Most "local" politicians face similar challenges (e.g., Romney w/ some of the stances he took running for Gov. in Mass.)

There is a fundamental difference between Romney and Jindal. I think Romney holds very few beliefs as articles of faith. He is a good businessman, and just figures out how best to position and push his product. In an election, the product is himself, and he just adds the right features to make the product appealing to the consumers. Unfortunately, he wasn't able to fake sincerity as well as some of the more successful ones.

Jindal's extensive writings make me believe that a large number of his positions actually come from a more sincere place. Since I disagree very fundamentally with his world view, I wouldn't want him to be able to reach any office where he can influence my life, even if he fakes (relative) moderation so he can get there.

leno? that's a sign. if oprah's next the futures contracts on him becoming vp will go in the money.

11 · Rahul

Jindal's extensive writings make me believe that a large number of his positions actually come from a more sincere place.

Why be so credulous about the written word? He's a politician, no?

13 · rob said

Why be so credulous about the written word? He's a politician, no?

This stuff was waaay before his political career. And exorcism, hellfire and brimstone is a little off the deep end to be merely political.

he's lean too. that's key. i think he's in.

Leno is definitely a step toward step to gauging his national appeal. Sure the GOP pollsters will be working overtime the next few days to break down his numbers across the demographics. Frankly, It's a natural fit with McCain's adopted daughter. Additionally, it will further appeal to the Latino vote as a reminder that upper mobility is possible within in the GOP. The numbers don't support Condi Rice running as VP. Clearly, GOP strategists are looking to neutralize Obama's effect as the first African American candidate and this would be a major on the other side of the minority vote.

Still, Jindal's a tool. He should have stayed an accountant. He's this generation's Dan Quayle.

I'm more curious about the Democratic ticket.

Obama/Warner 2008?

He's this generation's Dan Quayle

Jindal may be a creationist, but am pretty sure he can spell "potato"

Jindal was dodging the question Leno asked about his daddie having an accent. "Oh India has the British system....etc." Plus, Jindal didn't want to say his first name. Ashamed of his first name. Won't wear it proud unlike Barry Obama.

14 · Rahul This stuff was waaay before his political career. And exorcism, hellfire and brimstone is a little off the deep end to be merely political.

I see what you mean, but, as a personal note (it's not data!), when I was in college a lot of "desis" (the term was not in use, really, at the time) flirted with Catholicism (not really other forms of Christianity--again, it's my experience)--I even hung out with some Opus Dei people for a couple of weeks. . . . I didn't convert (nor, really view it as anything but an interesting discussion), but it didn't seem overly "weird" from the "internal" perspective of the time, even if now it does (a lot of East Asians were converting too). It's difficult for me to even reconstruct the milieu that led to those conversations--though one factor was definitely being impressed by the Pope in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

So I guess this is why (though it may undermine my own credibility) I cut a lot of slack to Bobby Jindal on this front (I certainly didn't have political goals for myself, but was trying to make sense of things in "my" world, as opposed to the world my parents had grown up in) having been half-way there myself. . . .

when I was in college a lot of "desis" (the term was not in use, really, at the time) flirted with Catholicism

All indications are that Jindal didn't just flirt with Catholicism, he stalked it like Alex Forrest, married it, and fathered six children with it. 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 (ID is the only issue on which there might possibly be some belief that he is merely pandering, but given that he is a doctrinaire Catholic, I don't think it is far-fetched to assume that even that might come from some sort of pre-Vatican II or far-right, if that is the correct term, Catholicism).

(As an aside, this discussion is funny: Oh, I like Jindal, but only because I think he's a really good liar about a big part of his platform :)

being impressed by the Pope in the wake of the collapse of the Soviet Union.

So, who was it? Reagan or the Pope? We need to pick one winner. The only thing I think we can all agree on is that Gorbachev had absolutely nothing to do with it.

So, who was it? Reagan or the Pope?

Why are you reductionist?! It's both!! Don't try to steal my childhood from me! ;-)

(As an aside, this discussion is funny: Oh, I like Jindal, but only because I think he's a really good liar about a big part of his platform :)

Don't be so idealistic--see Obama v. Goolsbee on NAFTA!

Don't be so idealistic--see Obama v. Goolsbee on NAFTA!

I am hardly idealistic (except about the injection of fake idealism/hope/change, but Jindal isn't doing that), which is why I find the discussion funny, not sad. But hanging the case for a politician on the hook of his being a good liar about a large part of his positions is quite hilarious.

But hanging the case for a politician on the hook of his being a good liar about a large part of his positions is quite hilarious.

Rahul,
Given that we have two parties, don't most politicians do that about much of their platform most of the time??

Why are you reductionist?! It's both!! Don't try to steal my childhood from me! ;-)

Let's not forget David Hasselhoff!

Given that we have two parties, don't most politicians do that about much of their platform most of the time??

Yeah, they all lie, or pander, or whatever. The only question is about how integral or incidental what they are lying about is to the public's perception of them.

27 · Rahul Yeah, they all lie, or pander, or whatever. The only question is about how integral or incidental what they are lying about is to the public's perception of them.

OK, then, putting aside your psychological analysis (or mine), we are entitled to disagree over what the "true" Jindal views are, and I'm putting my money on (frankly) anti teachers-union school reform and free trade, and you are entitled to disagree, but don't pretend you have the proof in your direction! ;-)

but don't pretend you have the proof in your direction!

Oh, come on! Don't make the aside the focus of the discussion.

I think it is a real stretch, from any reasonable examination of Jindal's personal writings and record over the last 20 years, to claim that he is not a sincere religious nut. You might choose to discount that over your liking his economic agenda, but I think it is a mistake to think that his religious views will be immaterial from the standpoint of the policies he enacts.

29 · Rahul I think it is a real stretch, from any reasonable examination of Jindal's personal writings and record over the last 20 years, to claim that he is not a sincere religious nut

Rahul,
Be serious, my friend. How many "sincere religious nuts" have in fact risen to high power in the US? Don't be so naive. It's not a rich country b/c it gives free reign at the top to "religious nuts." Thank God (!) our country does not. You really need to recalibrate your view of who really runs the country. Jindal is breaking in, and it is not b/c of his religious views.

who was it? Reagan or the Pope? We need to pick one winner. The only thing I think we can all agree on is that Gorbachev had absolutely nothing to do with it

it was de Klerk! oh wait...wrong evil.

How many "sincere religious nuts" have in fact risen to high power in the US? Don't be so naive.

Well, he is good about not pulling an Elmer Gantry in his public appearances if that's what you mean.

Jindal is breaking in, and it is not b/c of his religious views.

I do not dispute that he is talented, but he didn't get elected in David Duke country because he balances the books.

You really need to recalibrate your view of who really runs the country.

That's an extreme contortion of the point I am making. Good night.

Be serious, my friend. How many "sincere religious nuts" have in fact risen to high power in the US?

i think carter admitted to believing in the literal interpretation of genesis. maybe one of youse who have a google subscription can doublecheck this 4 me.

i think carter admitted to believing in the literal interpretation of genesis. maybe one of youse who have a google subscription can doublecheck this 4 me.

Sure, Carter has never hidden his Christian-ness. But he has always insisted that it is a personal belief. (And I guess that is the subtext of this discussion but I should articulate it: I don't care that Bobby Jindal is Catholic or Christian or whatever, but I care that his religion affects his opinion on good public policy.)

Carter presents his views as a "born again" Christian and a former political leader. He says: "I think it's very important for the American people to know that not only has this happened, but it has resulted in a breakdown of the separation of church and state that's been part of our nation's principles ever since Thomas Jefferson espoused this principle as one of our founding fathers."

(and I do find the way Carter frames some of his other views, say on the abolition of the death penalty, in terms of Christian mercy very problematic.)

Look, every politician protests that he is religious, but to believe the Machiavellian theory of religion in politics fully explains the Huckabees and Jindals is a big stretch.

but to believe the Machiavellian theory of religion in politics fully explains the Huckabees and Jindals is a big stretch.

OK, that's where we differ--glad we've identified it, and no hard feelings! ;-)

Look, every politician protests that he is religious

sorry, he or she. init2winit!

rahul:

what positions of jinda violate the establishment clause, in your opinion? genuine question i know relatively little about jindal himself, so that why i've kept my opinions on him restricted to theoretical discussions of what it means to be an uncle tom and his oprah-endearing leaness.

but I care that his religion affects his opinion on good public policy

i have the same gripe with MLK.

i've kept my opinions on him restricted to theoretical discussions of what it means to be an uncle tom and his oprah-endearing leaness.

I'm baaaack! I feel like discussions on how Jindal's specific policies might violate the establishment clause maybe a little bit more useful and constructive than accusing him of being an Uncle Tom. But since you've broached the subject - is he an Uncle Tom because he's a Republican or because he's a Catholic-convert? OR is a little bit of both?

39 · nickdev said

is he an Uncle Tom because he's a Republican or because he's a Catholic-convert? OR is a little bit of both?

i see the uncle tom phenomina as more psychological than political, like the Stockholm syndrome. it exist, fannon and malcolm admitted to it more or less, but outside a narrow scope of fundamental political issues, like apartheid, it's very hard to attach to politics...though an increasingly desperate progressive movement has tried via identity politcs.

jindals marriage to an indian women makes it hard for me to believe that this psychological phenomena is driving his politics. nehru, on the other hand...

but to believe the Machiavellian theory of religion in politics fully explains the Huckabees and Jindals is a big stretch.

To be clear, I don't think that that means that politicians' views are not at all determinable, just that a good prediction needs to take account of a lot more than their public platform and public poses.

Maybe it me but it seemed like Mr.Jindal had a little bit of a southern accent.

George W. Bush is a religious nut...a macadamia nut at that. America has had quite a few jokers, especially recently who are religious gun nuts as leaders here. W more than compensates for all the religious nuts that we didn't have. 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.

30 · rob said

29 · Rahul
I think it is a real stretch, from any reasonable examination of Jindal's personal writings and record over the last 20 years, to claim that he is not a sincere religious nut

Rahul,
Be serious, my friend. How many "sincere religious nuts" have in fact risen to high power in the US? Don't be so naive. It's not a rich country b/c it gives free reign at the top to "religious nuts." Thank God (!) our country does not. You really need to recalibrate your view of who really runs the country. Jindal is breaking in, and it is not b/c of his religious views.

it's very hard to attach to politics...though an increasingly desperate progressive movement has tried via identity politcs.

good thing that the conservatives never practiced identity politics. of course, it was all over in 2005, so we can rest easy now.

I saw it last night. He seemed pretty mellow, which surprised me. But why didn't he just say his birth name? Also, does any one else see his slight resemblance to Bobby Kennedy?

Also, does any one else see his slight resemblance to Bobby Kennedy?

Hell no!

This neanderthal is nothing like Bobby. I guess physically speaking, they are both pretty lean. Thats about it.

jindals marriage to an indian women makes it hard for me to believe that this psychological phenomena is driving his politics. nehru, on the other hand...

I discourage the use of the word Uncle Tom and don't believe self hate is driving his politics. But I do 100% believe that Jindal had his eye on the presidency at age 12 and that every move of his has been calculated to further his electoral attractiveness. Marrying an Indian woman and having her convert to Catholicism:
a) Avoids career killing miscegenation in Louisiana
b) Gets you points for saving a soul

If Jindal were genuine in his faith and an accidental politician the stats favor him having married a Hibernian Midwestern Campus Crusade cutie at age 25.

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.

India is *MUCH* better when it comes to seperation of Temple and State.

Anyway since I do not want to derail this thread, it is sufficient to say that in India, the govt usually runs temples

47 · louiecypher said

But I do 100% believe that Jindal had his eye on the presidency at age 12 and that every move of his has been calculated to further his electoral attractiveness.

I agree -- he seems to have been ambitious from the get-go (and I think his realization of being somewhat different from mainstream in crucial ways may have further goaded him). Like Rob, I admire his calculative capabilities and determination. In fact, his thoroughness about Catholic assimilation shows me that if he want to accomplish something, he'll leave no stone unturned. Like Rahul, I think whether or not his Catholicism is purely cosmetic or entirely internalized, the consequences for public policy are disheartening.
And there is really little reason for him to want to be McCain's running mate (especially since he faces strong strong competition) -- why would Jindal want any odor of defeat on his person should McCain lose? Like louiecypher pointed out previously, he has plenty of time to acquire a gilded resume and a dead duck or two. And Manju has been incessantly pointing out to Bobby's stunning figure, which will stand out even more ten years from now. America ain't getting younger or slimmer or wealthier.

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?

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.

42 · Suki Dillon said

Maybe it me but it seemed like Mr.Jindal had a little bit of a southern accent.

He's from the deep south.

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.

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.

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.

Bobby's stunning figure

Port, serious? The guy is very skinny...

"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.

I agree that guy is very skinny...

Wanna Buy a website sell your website Come visit us and join our growing community

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.

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.

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...

well, i'm afraid that pastor wright is right, and obama is just saying the things he's saying because he's a politician, but he real beliefs are those of rev wiright. when in power he's going re-install a Sandinista dictatorship, replace the us flag with al qaedas (since they're the same, anyway), and gut funding for programs that distriburte AIDs thru the black community.

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.

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.

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.

60 · rob said

False. Bush-Kerry '04.

nixon mcgovern too

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.

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.

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.

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.

69 · Manju said

an official religion (a la sharia law, for example)

We are living under sharia law. Bush's sharia.

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

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.

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.

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

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...

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.

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.

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).

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?)

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."

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!

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.

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.

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.

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).

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!

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.

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?

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?

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.

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.

Rahul:

yes, I love the Hindu caste system

How do you reconcile that abomination with your professed "atheism"?

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.

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.

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.

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?

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.

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

Ponnuru speaks in the "standard" NE dialect. He sounds like most of the ABDs I know, though he says many ridiculous things

100 · vivo said

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

Fat Indian who is against stem-cell research.

Piyush is the Mitt Romney for the Indians. He was probably for stem-cell research at Brown University...Oh yeah, he probably refers to Brown University as "White University" as a Freudian Slip. Finally, I'd call Piyush as a "Tom Uncle" (not an "Uncle Tom"). That's more syntatically correct for the South Asians.

Naw. Piyush is the Benedict Arnold for Indians.

Every time there is anything on Bobby Jindal on SM, the usual Bobby Jindal is an Uncle Tom comments come up.

Anybody who said that needs to get a life. What have any of you done in you life that compares to him. If Mr.Jindal was to become McCain choice for VP, he would be the most succesful desi ever in American history. Yes there may be some others who become very rich here, but yet none will be know worldwide like Mr.Jindal. Maybe some of you want Bobby Jindal to fail, because then you can complain about what evil country America is and how hard you have it here in the evil racist country known as the United States.

Alot of the anger here is at Bobby Jindal here is for him changing his name and religon. Yet where is the anger when White Americans become muslims, sikhs or any other eastern religon and change there name. But those people looked very highly upon, where any desi who does the same is a sellout.

To think that Bobby Jindal parents came from the villages of Punjab and how far he made it is proof of the American Dream. And being of punjabi background, he is someone I want my young daughter to look as future role model.

Living here in Canada, where many people who come from the Punjab do stupid things and give the community a bad name, I would love to have a Mr.Jindal here in Canada, not these useless people who only get elected cause they run in area with a high brown population but the only thing they ever do is go to weddings and give shorts speeches.

Do I agree with Mr.Jindal views. Some I do, and others he is too far to the right for me.

Suki bhraava, that was the most articulate comment you've left here...not that I necessarily agree with all of it, but still...impressive. Anyway, Jindal's change of religion was a genuine conversion, which I fully support...and his politics don't bother me either...the only thing that bothers me about him is his utter lack of interest (and reluctance to engage in) the non-religious aspects of his cultural heritage. It's not that he's ignorant of it...someone that bright CAN'T be...it's that he doesn't care for it. That's a shame. But I guess you can't get so far in American politics, especially in a place like Louisiana, by being visibly Indian (in a cultural sense). If word got out that he spoke to his kids in Punjabi (not that he even knows it), or if he had given them Indian names, that would turn off a lot of voters I think, on a visceral level. Right or wrong. Anyway, I'm proud of him too. And I'm proud of this country for letting him get this far. Not that I'd want him to be a role model for my (hypothetical) kids...he's TOO assimilated.

106 · Amitabh said

...the only thing that bothers me about him is his utter lack of interest (and reluctance to engage in) the non-religious aspects of his cultural heritage. It's not that he's ignorant of it...someone that bright CAN'T be...it's that he doesn't care for it. That's a shame.

True. Jindal has succesfully managed to make his ethnicity less significant by simply not talking about it. Even on Leno he seemed disinterested.

105 · Suki Dillon said

he would be the most succesful desi ever in American history.

That my friend has to be Vinod Khosla.

105 · Suki Dillon said

To think that Bobby Jindal parents came from the villages of Punjab and how far he made it is proof of the American Dream.

I think this is a stretch. It certainly isn't proof that anyone can make it.

I do believe that some people are overreacting when it comes to his distance from his cultural heritage, but I also understand where such disappointment comes from. You say you want your daughter to consider him a role model and be like him. Do you also want her to change her name to Jennifer and convert to Christianity? I think that question is imporant because whether or not political expediency was a player in his various decisions to dissociate himself from his ethnic background, the fact is that without such a distancing there is no way he would have come as far as he did. Louisiana would not have elected the proudly Hindu Piyush Jindal.

If Mr.Jindal was to become McCain choice for VP, he would be the most succesful desi ever in American history.

Depending on how you define success, becoming governor of a U.S. state might already make him the most successful desi ever in American history.

To think that Bobby Jindal parents came from the villages of Punjab and how far he made it is proof of the American Dream.

His parents don't come from a real, hard-core village background...they come from urban (albeit small-town) Punjab and are pretty well-educated themselves. My point being, he is similar to many ABDs (myself included) whose parents came here in the 60s and 70s as educated professionals. He's had a lot of advantages, although yes he's brilliant and hard-working.

Depending on how you define success

I say Sanjaya!

I mean, does this guy ever even crave Indian food once in a while? I'd be fascinated to know what he and his wife/kids eat for dinner...would roti/daal/sabzi completely destroy his image?

I mean, does this guy ever even crave Indian food once in a while? I'd be fascinated to know what he and his wife/kids eat for dinner...would roti/daal/sabzi completely destroy his image?

WHO CARES? Nobody has any imperative because of their birth to hold on to certain values or system of life. What sort of pigeonholing of people is this?

I'm told he enjoys fava beans and