A spokeswoman for Bobby Jindal says the Louisiana governor didn't imply that an anecdote about battling bureaucrats during Katrina directly involved the governor or took place during the heat of a fight to release rescue boats.
Really now? So what part of this lie-fest doesn't imply the timing or Jindal's involvement?
During Katrina, I visited Sheriff Harry Lee, a Democrat and a good friend of mine. When I walked into his makeshift office I'd never seen him so angry. He was yelling into the phone: 'Well, I'm the Sheriff and if you don't like it you can come and arrest me!' I asked him: 'Sheriff, what's got you so mad?' He told me that he had put out a call for volunteers to come with their boats to rescue people who were trapped on their rooftops by the floodwaters. The boats were all lined up ready to go - when some bureaucrat showed up and told them they couldn't go out on the water unless they had proof of insurance and registration. I told him, 'Sheriff, that's ridiculous.' And before I knew it, he was yelling into the phone: 'Congressman Jindal is here, and he says you can come and arrest him too!' Harry just told the boaters to ignore the bureaucrats and start rescuing people.So what part doesn't imply that Jindal was involved, or that it was at that moment? The "ready to go" part? The "Congressman Jindal is here" part? Yeah, he's a liar, and so are you. You two are perfect for each other.
Anyhow, I'm not the first to notice this, but Jindal's a guy who spins folksy-sounding outright lies to support his "all government but mine is bad and evil" idiocy. He grins, and he beams, and he acts like all he has to do is make it sound good and people will eat out of his hand.
Hey, GOP, you've been looking for the next Reagan? Well, there he is!
