Bobby Jindal

Already the Republican party is looking for its next presidential candidate. That’s fine by me; it gives me and other concerned citizens plenty of time to dig up dirt and formulate arguments. Of course, depending on how Obama fares, I might just vote for the third party candidate anyway because there always is one, and I think our nation would be better with more options. I mean, isn’t that why we love our gadgets and our cars to have all the bells and whistles? Sure we don’t need seats that warm or a phone that can surf the net, make a call, and contains a GPS system. All of these features are nice, but we don’t need them. And yet we have them because Americans love options, so why are we satisfied with just two parties? Get a third one in there to mix things up. show us what it is really like to have a choice in politics.

But back to the main point of this post. One of the early (very early) names being floated for a 2012 Republican Presidency is Bobby Jindal. He is the current governeor of Louisiana, and I must say is a bit of a douchbag. I mean, I don’t know him personally, and I’ve never heard him speak, but look at him.

Doesn’t he look like a bit of a douche, what with the hair and half-Joker smile? I know, you can’t judge a douche by its cover, so let’s look a little deeper. He is completely pro-life, but he does allow for emergency medical procedures if the mother’s life is in danger. He’s also okay with emergency contraceptive in the case of rape. Now, that’s not so bad because he at least acknowledges that there are some instances where abortion might be necessary/preferred, but he still isn’t willing to go all the way for women’s rights, and that is just not cool. Sure he doesn’t believe that women should once again become property and marriage should be defined as a contract between a man and his concubine’s father (to see what I’m talking about and to see some examples of pure unadulterated douchbaggery check out this site, but be warned if you have any kind of rational mind you will want to shoot yourself in the head repeatedly after reading what some of these whack-jobs write and believe) , but he still wants to limit women’s rights which is uncool with me, and in my book makes him a douchebag.

Also, his environmental record is less than stellar, so much so that the Republicans for Environmental Protection gave him a negative score on his policies and votes concerning environmental issues. Keep in mind that he is a Republican, so you know that he has to be pretty damn bad when his own party (who are not generally known for their concerns for the environment) give him a bad score. So not only is he a douchebag, but he is a douchebag who doesn’t care about the environment, which somehow makes him even more of a douche.

And finally, he wants to use what little funding our public schools have to teach intelligent design. I don’t know if he wants to teach the theory of evolution along with it, but I do know that our schools do not have enough money for both. Or maybe they do because the “unit” on intelligent design could go like this: “The Bible says that God created the earth and all its life, including humans. This is a nice thought, but it is a matter of faith with absolutely no scientific evidence to support it. Now let’s move on to Charles Darwin and the Theory of Evolution….” This would probably upset a bunch of folks, but it could still technically be considered teaching “intelligent design.”

I kinda hope they do go with this guy cause he’s of Indian (the country not the Native American kind) descent who used to be a Hindu (he is now Cathloic) and actually did change his name. By selecting this guy, the Republican party would be eating a lot more crow than it is now because these are some of the arguments that were proffered against Obama.

I love hypocracy.


One comment on “Bobby Jindal

  1. Tony Whitson says:

    You conclude:

    I love hypocracy.

    That’s one of the best neologisms I’ve ever heard — and completely apt, in the context here.

    “Hypo-” means “deficient.”
    So if “democracy” means government by the people, and “plutocracy” means government by the wealthy, then “hypocracy” can be “government by the deficient.”

    Well put.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s