The Potential Impact of Jindal's Message
Bobby Jindal's response to President Obama's speech on Tuesday was deservedly panned by pundits across the political spectrum. Avoiding the temptation to make ad hominem attacks on Governor Jindal due to his awkward folksiness, and extraordinarily reductively inaccurate analysis of the problems in our economy and his proposed solutions is not easy, but I will try.
Jindal's speech, nonetheless, suggests that the Republicans are not going to try to reinvent their party, but will instead go back to the playbook which, for the most part, has served them well over the last third of the twentieth century. The following passage from Jindal's speech, while singularly unoriginal, taps into something powerful in Republican mythology.
"Democratic leaders say their legislation will grow the economy. What it will do is grow the government, increase our taxes down the line, and saddle future generations with debt. Who among us would ask our children for a loan, so we could spend money we do not have, on things we do not need?"
While the delivery evoked the image of a high school debater struggling through an awkward opening statement and the anecdotes that followed were not exactly Reaganesque in their charm or delivery, the central messages, that the Democrats are the party of tax and spend and that government is part of the problem, were the ones that have helped Republicans get elected reasonably consistently for most of my lifetime and would not have sounded out of place coming from Ronald Reagan, Newt Gingrich or any number of Republican politicians who have led their party to big victories over the last decades. While the Republican Party may seem to be all out of ideas and, at least for now, not really relevant to policy making in Washington, we should not underestimate the resonance of these appeals.
In recent decades, hundreds of millions of dollars have been invested by conservatives in convincing the American people that the Democrats are the party of tax and spend and that government is part of the problem. Although any reasonably serious observer of politics over the last decade can see that the Democratic Party certainly has no monopoly on taxing and spending, Jindal's narrative about the Democratic Party is still powerful. The Bush administration, as we all know, took fiscal irresponsibility and deficit spending to levels unprecedented in American history, but for many voters, the Democratic Party still remains the party of tax and spend. Thus, while Jindal's critique is not precisely true, it is believable, and in politics the latter is at least as important as the former.
While it is not, in any meaningful sense, the case that the Democratic Party is the party of tax and spend, they are a party of tax and spend. Of course, the other party of tax and spend, or more precisely, borrow and spend, is the Republican Party. For Jindal, and other calculating Republican strategists, this nuance can be brushed over, because what matters is not which party is fiscally responsible, but which party voters see as being more fiscally responsible. Jindal is betting that the Republicans are still seen this way by voters who will be willing to forget the Bush years, or dismiss them as an aberration, just as many quickly forgot the massive debts run up by the Reagan administration. Over the next few months, charges like those made by Bobby Jindal, will become increasingly common. The Republicans will likely repeat these charges, which after decades, voters are primed to believe, until they begin to sink in.
The task for the Democrats, at all levels, is to remind voters that this analysis is not true; and that it was Republican policies of tax, borrow and spend, albeit largely on foreign policy fantasies rather than useful infrastructure and programs, that created the debt problem our country will face for years to come. It should also be kept in mind that the real cost of the Iraq war will likely dwarf even this massive stimulus bill. No Republican should be allowed to get away with a speech like the one Bobby Jindal made without the Democratic leadership; and not just, or even primarily, the White House, pushing back and reminding Americans about the enormous debt the Bush administration ran up, and the shoddy record of Republican fiscal prudence, which goes back for decades. Moreover, it is critical to proactively take this issue away from the Republican Party by attacking them for their fiscal incompetence and the rampant spending during the six years that their party controlled congress and the presidency.
Even in a best case scenario, the economic recovery will be slow. The Obama administration, as is evident from the proposed budget, is not close to being finished with the work we all need them to do. It is imperative that the serious efforts to rebuild our country and our economy not be sidetracked by desperate Republicans who suddenly have gotten religion regarding balancing budgets. Jindal's speech is easy to dismiss, but the potential power of his misleading message must be taken seriously.
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
Ah so! So the dems are like rats: Broadminded and Clannish and bring in food for everybody and the Republicans are like horses: Narrowminded and Self-centered "Every man for himself. " The ironic part of this titanic struggle of "relating and policy" styles is that if the Dems plans work out, everybody benefits. But if the Republicans win their bet, only the rich prosper.
Thomas Jefferson always hoped that our "newspapers" now media would protect us against misinformation - thank God that no one owns the internet really since the rest of the media is owned by Republicans, albeit a few like The Nation and Mother Jones.
Republican statement: "We have an economic plan that costs half as much and does twice as much as the Democratic plan."
Question: would that be the same economic plan that got us into this awful mess, or is that a new plan, to fix the last plan you guys put forward, that got us into this awful mess?
Lets not forget to add the lack of oversight absent in the Bush years that created an abstract fiscal base directly linked to the current insolvency of our banks. That one is worse than any spending spree they embarked on.
Hopefully this version of the Republican Party will become like the Whigs, deceased, and maybe a better version rise from the ashes. So I hope they continue "putting lipstick on a pig" as it were. I just can't believe my party ever lost to these clowns.
RUSH - Champion of Bobby Jindal. So he says.
The day after Jindal gave the lame GOP response to Obama's speech -
I listened to RUSH during his first segment and heard him say "Joe Biden must have been wondering
who Bobby Jindal got to cover his shift at the Seven Eleven, so he could make that speech". No
kidding. He can't help outing himself, and he can't hide his real, reptile, racist thinking.
Funny how he'll make a racist statement but preemptively include a democrat appear to be the protagonist of the statement. Clever propaganda, that.
"The potential power of his misleading message must be taken seriously.
You might as well say that misinformation should be taken seriously. Inaccuracies are inaccuracies and they should be debunked clearly, directly and with strong and irrefutable evidence.
Bill Clinton left office with a surplus of 72 billion dollars for the country. The Bush criminals spent money we didn't have to the tune of three trillion dollars for tax cuts for the richest and two wars.
Dealing in misrepresentation should never be taken seriously.
The author's comment was not an endorsement for misinformation, but an acknowledgement of how powerful misinformation can be as a tool of politication pursuasion. He's saying that if you ignore its power, you'll fall victim to it, which I think is very true.
You need to take misinformation seriously in order to effectively counter it and remove it as a distorting influence on political debate.
The author is saying that if we let people get away with misrepresentation, it could be powerful if believed.
Always to be remembered is that the people advising both political parties on talking to the public are advertisers. A group that has infrequently used actual evidence to push products but rather that whatever will make you more desireable, tougher, cooler, smarter etc etc..... Meaning that actual thinking through complex problems is what is needed, listening to all proposals and not letting the people who told us smoking and eating fast food are good for you control are behavior.
I'm currently studying in Moscow, so I didn't see the State of the Union address or Bobby Jindal's response. From everything that I've heard about the response, it sounds as though Jindal is further soiling Louisiana's reputation.
It was not a State of the Union speech. It was an address to a joint session of Congress.
You have made a very true and important point. The Republican Party is like the monster in a cheesey horror flick: no matter how dead it seems, the moment you turn your back (without making SURE it is really deceased) will be your last moment. No matter how ridiculous or in disarray they seem, now is not the time to gloat, have a good laugh, or ignore them as a threat to rational government.
Sure, all this is true, but now middle aged delusional white guys are losing their jobs, and nothing focuses the mind like pain and hunger. The Joe the Plumbers of middle America may be true believers, but they're dropping like dodos, proving that delusion is not in the long run a viable survival strategy.
And who the president now, his name not Bush, is it.
I feel that there's something in your comment that I need to respond to ... but I don't understand what you've written ... yet it does seem to affirm skeetshooter's point:
... "proving that delusion is not in the long run a viable survival strategy!"
andyg, wow, the Obama administration tanked the economy after only a month in office?
Sorry, you obviously do not understand how the world works
andyg,
That was not a sentence. Return to grammar school at once!
"Tax And Spend" is the line Repugs like to tag the Dems with, but if you think about it, it's a much more moral approach than the "Borrow From Future Generations And Spend" that the Repugs favor.
Tax US to spend on US. Don't borrow from OUR CHILDREN to pay our way. Get it, Repugs?
Yes, Obama is borrowing for the short term to keep the nation from collapsing after Bush's disastrous tenure. SHORT TERM! And what's the next thing Obama did? He announced that he would cut Bush's deficit in half in four years.
You Repugs can bellyache all you want, but you're out of power now for a good reason, which is that you su.ck at economics.
I don't see why it's wrong to tax wealthy people in order to rescue the system they count on more than anyone for overwhelming success. I'm a lawyer, and I owe my profession to the court system, in large part. I wouldn't have a job without the courts, yet they are completely paid for with tax payer money. So all of you, who make maybe 20k a year or even 2000k a year, you are paying to keep the courts going, and you may never have to use them, while I use them every day to earn my salary.
The same goes for people in manufacturing. They rely on the roads, the rails, the police much more than an ordinary citizen/wage earner does. Their business relies on a strong infrastructure, so why not pay a small percentage of the profits toward rebuilding
The "free market" would be Cosa Nostra without the civil and criminal court systems.
And it's always worth mentioning that this country spends half its budget every year on defense, defense of vital strategic -and economic- interests around the globe. I would say the CEO of an oil corporation should expect to personally pay more for the carrier groups that patrol the world's oceans and insure the delivery of their product- at the same crazy rate they expect to over-compensated for the "work" they do, how 'bout that?
At least the Dem. spending mostly stays at home and circulates in the system. GOP spending goes to a handful of people and Corporations who get tax write offs and get to have secret overseas bank accounts to hide even the small tax liability. The IRS is finally catching up with this 100 billion fraud.
Excellent article. Perception is reality and the Repubs take full advantage of the fact that their constituents are amongst the least educated in the country.
And hope they stay that way.
Yeah, but the problem is ... they vote!!!
And remember:
Approximately 47 percent of those who went to the polls in Nov. voted for McCain/Palin.
And remember Obama won
Yes, we did!
Indeed, and I'm glad he did. My point was that even with everything the Republicans have done to the country, 47% voted to let them keep doing it.
They dont understand these things. Even when I pointed out how much backlash there was against Bush and The Republicans. Along with the "Supernova" of the Democratic party and his drawing power: 47% didnt vote for him.
then Compare this to 2000 and 2004 election = Bush lost majority vote in 00 and barely scraped in 04. Now compare this to 2008 election, Obama romped in on a landslide. He has a major bigger mandate than Bush ever did and this will grow even bigger as more younger people become eligible to vote next time around
Yeah, but those two sure managed to lead the GOP congress over a cliff! The House of Representatives fulfills the role of the people having a voice in government. The dem's increased their gain there and just about conquered the senate. That happened because tons and tons of people voted for democrats last year. That is what makes a mandate, not the election theft of Ohio 2004 from which Bush drew his self-imposed title of "decider."
It's horrifying isn't it? I'm not trying to use the "r" word, but does anybody think it would've been that close if he weren't black? Seriously?
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
