Jindal does not give the same vibe as Obama or even Leiberman. Obama went from “Barry” to Barack, while Jindal went from Piyush to “Bobby.” Obama seems to come to terms and embrace who he is and his ethinicity, while Jindal seems to want to change a lot of who he is and go further away. Joseph Leiberman was a VP candidate while remaining an Orthodox Jew. That is acceptance of diversity – both by Leiberman about himself and by the Democratic Party about him as he was born. Republicans picking a minority who converted to Christianity doesn’t seem to convey acceptance. Obama seems comfortable with his full real name – Barack Hussein Obama. While Jindal doesn’t seem to be comfortable with his real name Piyush Jindal and rather likes people to call him “Bobby,” after a kid who doesn’t even really exist except on television. Obama and Leiberman seem comfortable today with their born diversity, unlike Jindal.

Bill Kristol thinks that McCain-Jindal could indeed be a possibility.

I agree that some Indian-Americans want/expect all Indian-Americans to put India’s interest first or some Hindutva members being outraged at the issue. I just felt you were using an overly broad brush (one can be cynical or saddened about the conversion without being a bigot or expecting Mr. Jindal to vote for Indian or desi interests over the interests of all Americans) and I couldn’t understand why comments about Mr. Jindal’s views on evolution etc. triggered a rant about the danger of AIPAC activities. As for the sell-out, I guess it depends on the beholder. If an individual is perceived as turning his back on a group of which he is a member (and you’re mainstream media also stresses his “INDIAN-American” aspects from time to time, the “sell-out” label is not unexpected. If an individual is perceived as turning his back in order to advance his own individual interests as the expense of group members, the “sell-out” label is virtually guaranteed. And if he’s perceived as doing so as a purely cyncial ploy… Obviously, the Rolling Stones can still rake in advertising royalties from commercially licensing their songs, and the rights of the individual to choose his own path will take precedence over such accusations.

I wasn’t accusing you of showing a lack of tolerance for minorities–I was stating that concerns raised about Mr. Jindal demonstrating a lack of tolerance for religious minorities in the U.S. seemed to me to relate to America’s interests, rather than India’s. That’s it.

As a lawyer, or at least one who endured 3 years of law school (congratulations, btw), you know that the profession lives (sometimes very profitably) or dies on the semantics. Yes, I’m going to analyze a statement that seems overly broad and prejudicial in its scope, if only out of an anaphylactic reaction to potential “9-11–Iraq”s. Hopefully such analysis remains constitutional, although, judging from the reactions to those who tried to parse the “9-11–Iraq” statements some 5 years ago, it might be considered Unamerican

In any event, we now appear to understand each other clearly enough to move on. Is the correct sign-off Govern Yourself Accordingly? I think I’ll just stick to Best Regards.

Well, she’ll get her day in court. interesting case. i think the board will argue they have the right to fire someone if they engage in speech that’s detrimental to their job. for example, there have been cases where cops have been fired for using racist language or belonging to a hate group, b/c–even though such speech and associations are constitutionally protected–the state has a compelling interest in keeping racists out of such positions, since the beliefs could reasonably be expected to interfere with their job. (i think, this is where the case law is, but i’m not up on it).

she’ll either argue that her speech did not rise to a hate speech level or even if it did, it didn’t interfere with her job. she’ll probably win, since the courts usually need some evidence of interference with the job, as “prior restraint” in first amendment law is greatly frowned upon, which is the reason, btw if hmf is reading, why the state cannot ban saying merry christmas in the workplace even though it may lead to an establishment of religion. basically you have to wait until it actually does, you can’t take a preemptive strike except in very narrow circumstances. prior restraint.

while criticism of jindals conversion does not violate the first ammendment, i think its worth noting that it may eventually violate international law, as there is a growing movement to enforce “an international law that criminalizes religious insults and enforces mutual respect of religions.” the movement is gaining traction.

Don’t worry! Freedom of speech is alive and well in America.

Fair question. If I recall correctly, he’s in favor of pretty radical experimentation with respect to funding for primary and secondary school education (contra the interests of the teachers’ unions, but we know what tree they’re barking up, and esp. important b/c that’s probably the biggest weak spot in the US economy), increased off-shore drilling for hydro-carbons (wise, I think, b/c even w/out having one’s head in the sand re: environmental issues the transition to a lower hydro-carbon-based economy is not going to be quick or painless), and free trade in general rather than protectionism (just wise in general).

I think the politically correct phrase for this is “small government”.

Vice Presidential candidate/ running mate is not the candidate that is put on the block – It is the Presidential candidate, who raises the money, and puts his or her reputation on line. Running mates are supposed to compliment (Lyndon Johsnon for JFK, looking photogenic like Dan Qualye, etc.).

It will not be Jindal or Huckabee’s or Shirley Jones or John Doe’s economic stance, it will be McCain’s, and only McCain. VP running and their family (with all the kids) are supposed to look pretty on the podium, and do some below the belt attacking, and bring a vote base that Presidential candidate thinks lacks.

I have followed Jindal very closely – I lived in Louisiana for 7 years (6 in Baton Rouge and 1 in Lafayette) when Jindal career was unfoldinf. I was a visiting faculty at University of Louisiana when he (Jindal) was the President of University of Louisiana system.

Now a simple question to you, rob: What is Jindal’s economic stance? I am all ears. Except slash and burn he did as the Secretary, Department of Health and Hospitals in Louisiana.

C’mon, now! You have interesting comments on a lot of stuff, but this is really showing a tin ear. Going for the “Huckabee” vote is really unfair to Jindal. No, I would totally not vote for a Huckabee, but would absolutely vote for a Jindal. The difference is their stance on economic issues. Not everyone votes on cultural/religious/etc. grounds, which IMHO, are better left out of the political realm (not that Jindal does enough of that, I would concede).