Posted on 02/25/2009 6:43:09 PM PST by trying17 (AKA DrGop0821)
"[T]he people on our side are really making a mistake if they go after Bobby Jindal on the basis of style. Because if you think — people on our side I’m talking to you — those of you who think Jindal was horrible, you think — in fact, I don’t ever want to hear from you ever again. … I’ve spoken to him numerous times, he’s brilliant. He’s the real deal." --Rush Limbaugh on his radio show today.
Sean Hannity was equally impressed with Gov. Jindal.
With all do respect, Rush and Sean, I politiely disagree. In my unscientific analysis of the blogs today, conservatives seem to be about 50/50 on Jindal's performance.
First, I like Bobby Jindal. I like his policy. I like his politics and I think he will no doubt emerge as one of the many fresh faces of conservatism for years to come.
I admire his life story: the hard-work, discipline and success that his parents and he have earned are truly a great American story and do, in fact, demonstrate that anything can happen in American. And he was much better this morning on "The Today Show".
With that said, he really sh*t the proverbial bed in his Republican Response to President Obama's address to Congress. Frankly, he was not very good at all.
I know, I know, everyone who gives the "Other Party Address" following at State of the Union is at a distinct disadvantage. Whether it's Barack Obama or George Bush; the stage, the backdrop, the drama and Great American Ambience provided by the Chambers of Congress are difficult to match.
But Gov. Jindal was flat out dry, boring and stiff. The speech itself was quite good, full of substance and stayed on message (full transcript below), but the delivery was uninspiring and did little to energize the Republican base and surely many people simply tuned him out or turned him off.
And, as I've learned in the blogs today, many Conservatives could not make it all the way through the speech. So what do you suppose the reaction from independents and moderates was like? I know Republicans are never going to appeal to the Radical Leftist Obamamaniacs, but there still exists a fairly large number of "Independent" voters (myself included) who expected a bit more from Jindal.
Maybe it's not all his fault; obviously the Republican party was part of the planning process. But besides being flat, the atmosphere of Jindal's mansion was gloomy, creepy and empty.
But alas, herein lies a huge problems with Conservatism and Republicans. We live in the era of Bush Derangement Syndrome and Obamamania.
Like it or not, we do live in the "Dot-Com" era of sound bites and snapshots. As much as I would like to believe Americans believe in substance over style, the reality is most Americans in today's video-game, Internet culture cannot focus much on substance for more than a few seconds.
It's sad, but it is the truth.
Rightly or wrongly, this summarizes, in part, the success of Barack Obama. Yes, there was a clear media bias, but can you really blame them?
Compare Obama to his former rival John McCain. Take away the message and the substance and what are you left with?
By no means am I supporting Obama or the media or the Radical Power-Grabbing Socialist philosophy of the Commie Liberals in Congress.
However, I am applauding his campaign strategy and his staff and supporters for their use of modern technology as well as using the slobbering media to their political advantage.
However, as Conservatives -- and the Republican Party Leadership -- we must realize the reality of the world in which we live. Americans do respond to style and image. It's a tough pill to swallow, but something we Conservatives need to stomach if we wish to rise to power again.
As John Ziegler pointed out while he was slamming MS-NBC's Norah O'Donell, the line between entertainment and journalism, and between politics and entertainment are becoming less clear each day.
There are, in fact, many people in this country (some of my own friends and family) who "get their news" from shows like The Daily Show and The Colbert Report.
And that's scary and yes, most of them are Liberals (no surprise).
It's also worth mentioning, again, that Tina Fey's satire of Sarah Palin became how many Americans perceived the Alaska Governor. Yes, it's wrong, unfortunate and disgusting, but it is the truth.
The Republican party and Conservatives are years behind the world of 21st Century era of information and technology. No, image isn't everything, but as a society we are becoming more image-conscious everyday.
The sooner Republicans learn this lesson, the more hope we have. Perhaps it's a necessary evil -- and we don't have to like it -- but it is reality.
Instead of bashing Liberals and the media and Leftwing blogs for celebrating style over substance, we need to learn we can use the same modern tactics for advancing our own agenda.
The full text of Gov. Jindal's speech:
I still say his content was good but the poor audio and the quirky delivery didn’t come off as that memorable from a positive standpoint.
It was not Jindal’s best moment last night, but he is the real thing and is the type of conservative we need more of in the Republican Party.
Bill Clinton’s 1988 speech at the Dem. Convention was actually booed and then 4 years later he was elected president.
It is a long time to 2012. I still think Bobby’s our best hope.
“Seems if you don’t like Obama you are not allowed to post on this site.”
I absolutely can’t stand that lying alien Obama, so I guess I’ll have to be zapped.
There must be "stand up" Conservatives, in order to form a circle.
They've all been shut down, by themselves.
Jindal is the Ross Perot of Conservatism.
I didn’t want Guiliani to be President, but there is no doubt in my mind that he would have taken Obama to the woodshed. That’s what was needed, in rebuttal to an attempted snow job on America, for socializing wide swathes of this country. It wasn’t a dress rehearsal, or a low risk introductory environment for a promising young governor.
Criticize Sarah Palin all you want for her perceived shortcomings one on one, but she would have excelled at this particular task, too.
But, Bobby Jindal didn’t.
That’s why the strong reaction.
Your points are valid—but I put the blame on the RNC and its new chairman, Michael Steele.
Let’s see...we’ve known that Obama would address a joint session of Congress since before he took office. We also knew that someone from the GOP would be offering our response. Jindal was selected for that role several weeks ago, so it’s not like he was a last-second choice or replacement.
My point is simple: when you’ve got that much lead time, it’s incumbent to ensure that your speaker is ready. Obviously, Governor Jindal is not a neophyte on TV. But this was his first shot at delivering a major address to a national audience. But watching his performance, it was clear that no one had coached him on delivery techniques.
There is a certain art to reading a speech off a teleprompter, and Governor Jindal hasn’t mastered it yet. His sing-song delivery sounded like a recent graduate of the Columbia School of Broadcasting, trying to avoid a monotone at all costs. But that’s a problem that could have been easily addressed—had someone from the RNC simply watched Jindal’s practice sessions with a critical eye.
Call it a triumph of style over substance, but you can’t ignore the “theatrical” aspects. Great oratory is the fusion of ideas and delivery. Listen to Reagan or Churchill. You remember what was said (in large measure)because of how it was said.
The good news is that Governor Jindal has plenty of time to improve his skills. He has a first-rae mind and he genuinely believes in conservative ideals. All he needs is a little practice. Perhaps Mike Steele will postpone his efforts to “hip hop” the party, and find a coach who can work with Bobby Jindal.
As I said in another thread...
I was not upset or let down or disappointed at all.
Gov. Jindal was not speaking to me. He was speaking to the low IQ, lazy arsed, semi-thinking Obama voters.
Gov. Jindal is just fine. He is young and needs polishing, but he will do just fine. We have two years to fine tune him.
BALONEY.....Go READ what Jindal said....forget the Video Picture and the backdrop, and the style.
Jindal didn’t have APPLAUSE for 1 hour in the Video. BHO was an empty suit in a full blown TV production.
Are we becoming a Pop Rock Britney Spears, acadamy awards presentation, red carpet America ? Do we have to be entertained before we listen ? Or can we listen to someone in Louisiana, 1400 miles away and allow for differences in style, in culture, in speech patterns . . . while Enjoying the substantive discourse of meaninful conversation about complex subjects, without looking down the clevage of Paris Hilton wanting to be entertained, while missing out “totally’ on being intelectually engaged ?
You Misunderestimated Jindal.
You are so right. “Nobody” includes Republicans, Conservatives and even Freepers. They want a pretty, flowery speech that will convert the heathen in 15 minutes flat. I think after four years of Obama, style stock will go way down and there will be citizens looking for substance and/or food morsels.
This isn’t hard; look at what these politicians have done rather than what they have said.
Yes, it was bad.
Jindal is best when he speaks from the gut, not reading a prepared speech from a teleprompter.
I hope you're right. A lot of people, at least here in Ohio, may have a permanent impression of Palin. It's not fair, but first impressions on a pretty woman, an unusual entity in politics, will have a more indelible impression on people than someone who did an unremarkable speech. I'm afraid that Palin may be "Quayled." I hope I'm wrong.
Two paragraphs in and you are right on! I watched his response and was not impressed.
Amen to that post.
Gee no one has bothered to post Jindels political history/his stand on issues ect ect.
I am not going to shoot the man down based on the 1 time I ever even heard him speak.
Since I have heard jingles that he may be a Practicing Conservative Catholic with ethics...he gets my support if that is true.
Bingo!
Sad but true. Today, you need to win the minds with substance and win the hearts with style. Deny it all you want, but that is what it takes to win over a general populous raised on Hollywood, video games and porn.
Reagan had style and class and enough intelligence and experience to properly craft his words of substance.
If you want to win, don't look for Jindal to run in 2012. We need a natural talent.
I know Palin wanted to come back to Michigan after McCain wrote us off and speaking for myself, that meant a lot even though she couldn’t come back.
Choo-choo-choose me!
Best Post of the Thread Award. :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.