|

Bobby Jindal, et al, are blowing smoke

00000000000000006.jpg 

The Gray Lady’s editorial has got THIS ONE right.

 What is it with these Southern Republican governors balking at federal aid for the jobless residents of their states? They seem almost eager to represent the most unflattering political stereotypes of their region — cruel, backward and distrustful, stubbornly clinging to ideology in the face of countervailing realities.

 They’re doing their states, their country and, yes, their party no good. And those Republicans from elsewhere who sympathize with them are on the losing side of history in this current struggle against economic crisis.

 America is moving in a different direction.

UPDATE: Chuck Schumer SAYS states should have to take all the stimulus money due them — or get none of it!

UPDATE II: Roger Simon has some SNARKY SLANTS on all of this.

UPDATE III: Bobby Jindal was singing a DIFFERENT TUNE about federal unemployment funding in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Situational ethics, no doubt.

Share:

9 Comments

  1. Mike Carroll

    From the linked NYT’s editorial-“States that accept the stimulus money aimed at the unemployed are required to abide by new federal rules that extend unemployment protections to low-income workers and others who were often shorted or shut out of compensation.”
    As pointed out later in the editorial, 31 states would have to change their eligibility rules for unemployment to qualify for the federal dollars. Perhaps there is a good reason why some Governors do not want to reduce the incentives for returning to work in their states which will result in higher state expenditures when the federal largesse is no longer available. It is also worth noting that the unemployment rate in the states singled out in the editorial is far less than the national average.
    It would also appear that we have returned to the days when positive poll numbers are considered indicative of good governance. They aren’t.

  2. Wow, hukumboy, used Jon Steward as source. Now that is a reasonable way to make a point. I noticed that Steward cuts off the interview with the Governors as soon as they explain why they don’t want to take the money. Someone who is actually looking to the future is ridiculed for pointing out the potential problem.

    Pat, I am sick of your, we in the North are so much smarter. Why do you think that the fastest growing cities in the U.S. are southern? Because the people of the north have totally destroyed their cities, now they want to go do it somewhere else.

  3. Ding,
    I didn’t use Stewart to make a point. I merely said I enjoyed Stewart’s humorous take on the subject. Obviously is didn’t get a laugh out of you.
    I suppose folks who follow the comedian Rush Limbaugh’s mantra have a very limited sense of humor.
    If Stewart had instead made fun of Michael J. Fox’s Parkinson’s Disease, as Limbaugh did, would you laugh then?

  4. hoke: You have to be hooked on hillbilly heroin to think Limbaugh’s funny.

  5. The problem is, some people think Limbaugh and Steward are real news.

  6. Dingy,
    the difference between the two is that if they were around 70 years ago Stewart would be making fun of Roosevelt’s cigarette holder. Limbaugh would be mocking his leg braces.

  7. hokumboy: Your analogy is non-sense. Steward made fun of Bush’s personal attributes.

  8. And your point is?
    Stewart ( yes it’s Stewart – not Steward) made fun of Bush’s personal attributes as he also would have, I imagine, made fun of Roosevelt’s affectations, such as the cigarette holder. But, I doubt very much if he would mock a man’s infirmity as Limbaugh did in the Michael J. Fox incident.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xpFC9uziVhE

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>