Prove it.
You're claiming Jindal took the La. budget from $12B to $24B. This has been repeatedly debunked on this thread and you're refusing to denounce this preposterous lie.
Prove it or get the heck out of here.
Don’t be flinging around the term “lynching” when it comes to putting out facts about a politician’s record.
You and your buddy are putting out blatant lies and engaging in a coordinated attack on a conservative. Yeah, that's a lynching.
Start out by denouncing your "friend" and then we'll see.
Nah, I think I’ll stay.
http://www.nola.com/news/t-p/elie/index.ssf?/base/news-0/1233296670238120.xml&coll=1
Call him a conservative spendthrift
Friday, January 30, 2009
Lolis Eric Elie
The benefits of conservative government cannot easily be measured.
Promises of small government and fiscal restraint, hallmarks of the conservative ethos, provide the governed with a certain warm fuzzy feeling. However, my efforts to actually quantify the impact of conservatism on state government have left me scratching my head.
We need look no further to make the point than the Governor’s Mansion. Since Bobby Jindal took over from that wanton liberal Kathleen Blanco, he has instituted not one, but two hiring freezes.
-— A light freeze -—
Jindal’s hiring freezes thawed pretty quickly, however. The first one, instituted on Jindal’s first full day as governor, fizzled when it became clear that the state’s need for doctors and nurses was so acute that we had to do some hiring.
In November, Jindal announced another hiring freeze, which was supposed to save about $25 million.
But figures provided by the state Department of Civil Service indicate that both the number of state employees and the amount of money expended on state salaries have actually increased under Jindal’s leadership.
The total employee count as of Dec. 31, 2008, was 103,086 employees, an increase of 2,437 employees over the 100,649 figure for January 31, 2008, Jindal’s first month as governor.
snip
Our friend Walter here has been attacking Jindal for at least two years (and perhaps longer). There is no possible way that he could be considered a neutral observer. I have long suspected that his vendetta against Jindal is personal to some degree. I have no proof of this, of course, with the exception of what Walter himself provides through his tireless attacks. He (and the author of this piece) have no problem falsifying statistics, and while I have no intention of sifting through years-old posts I am certain this is not the first time this has happened.
I guess the moral of the story is that Walter has long since gone ‘round the bend on this matter. He’s been carrying the “Jindal is not a conservative” torch for as long as Jindal’s been known, and most of his attacks boil down to “Jindal did the right thing, but he had to be made to do it.” This is far beyond juvenile, of course, and what we can actually tell is nothing beyond the obvious - Jindal did the right thing. Cutting spending is a prime example - Jindal does it, and somehow Walter knows that Jindal was forced to do it. What the hell does that mean? How can that be proven?
Really, it makes no sense. Don’t try to change his mind because he’s long gone.