[Assam] ECSTACY
Chan Mahanta
cmahanta at charter.net
Wed Feb 25 08:30:15 PST 2009
At 8:03 AM -0800 2/25/09, Dilip and Dil Deka wrote:
>The Republicans can make a come back (Jindal or no Jindal) only if
>Obama administration fails in its effort to salvage the economy.
> As seen so far, the Republicans will make every attempt to derail
>the Obama train and will point out every mistake the administration
>makes.
**** Nothing wrong with that. That IS the role of the opposition. But
right now they are reduced to playing OBSTRUCTIONISTs.
I did not expect someone like Jindal to fit so snugly into that mold.
He tried to break from it, but very feebly.
>Right now, everyone's focus is on domestic issues, mainly the economy.
**** Of course. Not that the world around does not matter. Iraq,
Afghanistan, Palestine/Israel, Kashmir/Pakistan/India cannot be
ignored either.
>
>Please note: I voted for Obama as a man, not on party lines, and I
>want him to succeed. Let's see how it goes in the next six months.
>Dilip Deka
**** It is important for us as thoughtful people to deliberate on
issues to weigh what is more important for the common good than be
driven by party loyalty or ideologies or ethnic/religious identities.
>
>
>
>
>________________________________
>From: Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net>
>To: A Mailing list for people interested in Assam from around the
>world <assam at assamnet.org>
>Sent: Wednesday, February 25, 2009 9:39:50 AM
>Subject: Re: [Assam] ECSTACY
>
>At 10:13 AM -0500 2/25/09, amlan saha wrote:
>>Agreed! Also, I do not know much about the wider Indian-American community
>>but from the little bit I do know about the politically active
>>Indian-American groups, it appears to me that a staunch anti-choice and
>>pro-intelligent design Jindal is unlikely to pick up much traction come
>>campaign time.
>>
>>A.
>
>
>*** Very true.
>
>And add to that the patently cruel and typically anti-poor , southern
>approach to not allowing unemployment benefits to part time workers
>or not extending it to those whose benefits have already run out by
>refusing to accept federal monies . This shows that he is more
>interested in appealing to the strident Republican base in the
>pursuit of political ambitions at the cost of those who are already
>hurting
>bad by the economic downturn.
>
>That will cost him dearly!
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>
>>
>>On Wed, Feb 25, 2009 at 9:55 AM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>> At 11:52 PM -0600 2/24/09, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>>>
>>>> Bobby Jindal is normally a pretty good speaker - but look at what he was
>>>> up
>>>> against:
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *** I thought so too. He does present himself well and usually speaks
>>> convincingly on the subject.. But my exposure to Jindal is very cursory.
>>> Never saw a full speech or a discussion on the TV circuits where he was a
>>> major participant.
>>>
>>> So, I was horrified by his performance last night!
>>>
>>> I realize that no matter who or how good a speaker or intellect one is, to
>>> compete with the like of a President Obama last night, is, at the very
>>> least, a tremendously challenging task, as far as the SHOW part
>>>of the task
> >> is involved.
>>>
>>> But what about the SUBSTANCE part? Could Jindal have not been expected to
>>> do MUCH better than how he did on the substance of the
>>>Republican rebuttal ?
>>>
>>> There was a lot of hype from the Republicans on how Jindal wrote his own
>>> speech ( Obama like) and how it was vetted by the leadership
>>>luminaries like
>>> Michael Steele ( heh :-)), Mitch McConnell ( new blood :-)) and who helped
>>> him fine tune it ( that ought to have been a giveaway). What Jindal
>>> delivered, was almost sophomoric. I could not believe how much
>>>of it was a
>>> poor repeat of what Obama spoke about minutes earlier. Then there was this
>>> incredulous example of his policeman friend's story about governmental
>>> ineptitude and bureaucratic bungling, compounded by the Bush admin's.
>>> horrific failures in the Katrina response to support the old and tired
> >> conservative arguments against GOVERNMENT ! Who was he thinking he was
>>> speaking to? Where was all that intellectual acuity of the Rhodes Scholar?
>>>
>>> Either his speech was thoroughly stymied and diluted by the
>>>veteran vetters
>>> or he/they just did not really have any ideas beyond repeating the same
>>> old tired mantras of tax-cuts and tirades against big-government. And if
>>> the substance was that weak, they needed at least a stellar orator to
>>> deliver it.
>>>
>>> I have to give him high marks, however, on not thoroughly discrediting
>>> himself like the Rush Limbaughs of the right by sounding to be
>>>the strident
>>> obstructionists and acknowledging why the Republicans have lost the
>>> confidence of the people.
>>>
>>> We realize that style alone ought not to be the measure to judge a speaker
>> > by. Jindal was handicapped on style and personal charisma. But he could
>>> have and should have been able to make a difference on substance.
>>>
>>> I was watching MSNBC. And guess what? As Jindal was walking in, someone
>>> exclaimed with the mikes on, Oh God! That was very bad on CNBCs part. But
>>> being a visual event, one could not ignore the fact of his processional
>>> being that of an awkward, nerdy, high-school kid's. That was sad. And to
>>> add insult to injury, the Republican audio-visual team really
>>>blew it, when
>>> they filmed him in dim light, against a darkened, haunted-house like
>>> background of the Governor's Mansion, where his dark complexion almost
>> > disappeared into the background. The final straw was that
>>artificial grin
>>> at the end of his spiel, that made him appear like a cartoon character.
>>>
>>> No wonder then, those who were hoping to see Jindal as the Republican
>>> Obama, were in for some shock. And for the desis looking for one of their
>>> own in the White House, I guess we will have to wait a little longer. I
>>> can't wait to see what the desi-decoder will have to say in The
>>>Daily Show
>>> with John Stewart in Comedy Central :-).
>>>
>>> *** I agree that Republicans ought to go ahead and accept Sarah Palin as
>>> their leader. That will be good for the country and would serve them right
>>> :-).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> A charismatic President, who is probably one of the best orators
>>>> (Presidents) the US has had for a long time. Add to that that the
>>>> Republicans have been branded as the party of 'NO', and are in the wrong
>>>> side of history.
>>>>
>>>> And then he made a statement that LA did not get Fed funds - and it was
>>>> all
>>>> private & state funds after Katrina. The fact though is that LA did get
>>>> something like 181 Bill $ Fed funds for Katrina.
>>>>
>>>> His speech was more like 'he also spoke' and not much more.
>>>>
>>>> What Ed Rollins ought to have said was if Palin runs, then it is actually
>>>> excellent for another Dem term. For the Reps. their best (long) shot is
>>>> someone like Jindal, and not a loon like Palin. GW, Chenney, and their
>>>> dream
>>>> team have done the GOP in at least for another 8 years.
>>>>
>>>> --Ram
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 10:46 PM, Chan Mahanta <cmahanta at charter.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> What did you all think of the Republican response delivered by Bobby
> >>>> Jindal?
>>>>>
>>>>> Republican political consultant Ed Rollins' tongue-in-cheek comment that
>>>>> it
>>>>> was a good night for Sarah Palin was telling :-).
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> At 9:33 PM -0600 2/24/09, Ram Sarangapani wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Mukul da,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree, it was a fantastic speech. I am surprised that the speech was
>>>>>> broadcast in India too. I mean, they pay to a address of the President
>>>>>> to
>>>>>> the jt. session of the Congress.
>>>>>> On a side note, GW Bush is slated to start speaking for a fee, March
>>>>>> 17th
>>>>>> (to a select group of people). I wonder, how much anyone is willing to
>>>>>> pay,
>>>>>> to listen to someone who is unable to put together a complete, coherent
>>>>>> sentence.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --Ram
>>>>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 8:56 PM, mc mahant <mikemahant at hotmail.com>
> >>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> If USA had general Election tomorrow -Who would get 99% votes?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I wish I could speak like he did -and the dream-better than Jack
>>>>>>> Kennedy's!
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> mm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>>>>>> For the freshest Indian Jobs Visit MSN Jobs
>>>>>>> http://www.in.msn.com/jobs
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> assam mailing list
>>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>>>> assam mailing list
>>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> assam mailing list
>>> assam at assamnet.org
>>> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>>>
>>_______________________________________________
>>assam mailing list
>>assam at assamnet.org
>>http://assamnet..org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>assam mailing list
>assam at assamnet.org
>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
>_______________________________________________
>assam mailing list
>assam at assamnet.org
>http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
More information about the Assam
mailing list