Jindal's Win

I understand that conservatives are eager for a win, and Bobby Jindal's election as governor of Louisiana is a win. What's more, the Louisiana Democrats are no prize pigs, so it's quite possibly even a deserved win. Still, a lot of the crowing from the right seems a bit odd in light of the fact that everyone knows the Louisiana GOP's electoral fortunes have been substantially boosted by demographic changes caused by the destruction of Hurricane Katrina and the subsequent failure to rebuild/resettle the displaced people.

Given the large role that the administration's horrifying mishandling of the destruction of a major American city played in the unraveling of Republican popularity, you might expect a little bit more introspection as to how this all came about. I will say, though, that unlike the Ogonowski special election, there very possibly are some broader implications to this result if only because it shows how Louisiana may be a bright spot in the 2008 Senate races as well.

Comments

Note that the Dark Prince, Bob Novak, has acknowledged that GOP operatives have long been well aware of the likelihood for positive electoral consequences to accrue to the GOP as a result of Katrina.

Time for another House subpoena for Karl Rove.

Posted by bob | October 22, 2007 2:52 PM

Looking for some introspection from the current Republican party, huh? Let me know how that works out.

Posted by alwsdad | October 22, 2007 2:54 PM

That was the whole point, Matt. What do you think "heck of a job" was all about? Yet again, not a bug, a feature.

Posted by Bloix | October 22, 2007 2:54 PM

Does this mean Diaper Dave Vitter can step down now?

Posted by alphie | October 22, 2007 3:19 PM

I will say, though, that unlike the Ogonowski special election, there very possibly are some broader implications to this result if only because it shows how Louisiana may be a bright spot in the 2008 Senate races as well.

Actually, my read on it is almost the opposite. Jindal is by far the most attractive candidate the GOP has in Louisiana. His winning the Governorship means that a less worthy candidate will be running for Senate. Given that the Democrats were almost certainly going to lose the Governor's house anyway, this is pretty much a positive for the party.

Posted by Milind | October 22, 2007 3:20 PM

That photo is so creepy...

Posted by More Axe | October 22, 2007 3:30 PM

I get really tired of references to "mishandling" and "incompetence" re the failure to help Katrina survivors return to NOLA. As several other commenters have already noted, this was malign intention, not a result of mistakes. LA was a purple state, but now it's trending red, because a lot of reliably Democratic black voters are gone (and scattered across TX and MI, where their votes are hopelessly diluted). This is NOT good for the Dems, or for the cause of good government; this is malicious government being politically rewarded.

Posted by beckya57 | October 22, 2007 3:30 PM

to follow up on the point, even fred barnes acknowledged that the reason that jindal lost last time was the number of louisiana voters who will never vote for a person who isn't white.

that said, my wife is from new orleans; her mother still lives there; other family members and friends live there. all the non-right-wingers sincerely believe that jindal would have been a better governor than blanco had he won last time, and all think that, if nothing else, the odds are his administration will be less corrupt and buffoonish than the norm.

Posted by howard | October 22, 2007 3:31 PM

Another thing - remember that the rest of Louisiana HATES New Orleans (I live here). It's not all that far-fetched to say that most folks in North Louisiana could care less whether NOLA gets rebuilt or not, and most of them were pretty happy that the flood "washed away the welfare state." Notice that Jindal didn't campaign on the recovery AT ALL. I don't even think it was on his website. The candidates who talked about it lost big time.

Louisiana politics are mad complicated. Jindal will be just as corrupt as the rest of them. I am not looking forward to the next four years. At least Mitch Landrieu is still Lt. Governor.

Posted by alli | October 22, 2007 3:34 PM

and beckya57, MI is Michigan, MS is Mississippi...

Posted by alli | October 22, 2007 3:38 PM

If Katrina affected Louisiana politics so much, how did Democrat Mitch Landrieu win statewide in the landslide for Bobby Jindal? Landrieu got, like 57% of the vote in his race for Lt. Gov.- that's a few points higher than Jindal's smashing victory.

I don't know- I think the fact that the Democrats didn't have a candidate, and the fact that Jindal is personally popular statewide are way more telling than the displaced Katrina folks...

Posted by P | October 22, 2007 3:39 PM

On principle, I'm opposed to any kind of non-white elected Republican official.

It just sends the wrong message.

Posted by GOP Everyman | October 22, 2007 3:44 PM

"even fred barnes acknowledged that the reason that jindal lost last time was the number of louisiana voters who will never vote for a person who isn't white."

I am not sure what point this is supposed to bolster? These are the people that didn't get displaced by Katrina so that fact that Jindal won means they changed their vote this time around to support him. And the data from the northern parishes -- where Jindal was weak last time -- bears this out. Jindal may have benefited from the African American diaspora but he also did a much better job of getting the good-ole-boy vote this time.

Posted by Mark Adams | October 22, 2007 3:49 PM

In a lot of ways, this was an election in line with past results in LA. Jindal pulled out 48% in 2003; it's not surprising that he'd draw a bigger percentage after what was widely regarded as a failed governorship.

The Dems lost a few, but not many, seats in the state House. Some races will go to runoffs, but the changes in statewide officers weren't huge - Mitch Landrieu drew 57%, and in four of the five other statewide offices, the incumbent was the biggest vote-getter (the exception is AG, where a different Dem than the incumbent pulled the most votes).

It's easy to read too much into an election that wasn't spectacular or even much of an outlier. Mary Landrieu should be just as nervous today as she was last week at this time, and not really any more or less.

Posted by SDM | October 22, 2007 3:52 PM

He looks like an Indian Alfred E. Newman.

Posted by blah | October 22, 2007 4:06 PM

On principle, I'm opposed to any kind of non-white elected Republican official. It just sends the wrong message. -- "GOP Everyman"

Republicans were crowing about the victory because overcame a sustained campaign of Democrat bigotry, like the above. I expected no less - after all, Democrats were perfectly happy to be anti-Semites in Virginia by using "Felix" when referring to George Allen, so why wouldn't I expect Democrats to continually refer to Bobby Jindal as "Piyush"? (And make no mistake about it, we all know if there is to be an Obama campaign and Republicans start calling him "Hussein", Yglesias will be the first to cry racism.)

Posted by Al | October 22, 2007 4:07 PM

Well, it could be worse. At least Jindal's not, y'know, black.

Regardless, I still wouldn't invite him over for dinner.

Posted by GOP Everyman | October 22, 2007 4:11 PM

Once again Al demonstrates that he doesn't understand what racism is. If it is anything (and I'd probably call it satirically trenchant), then it is a (mis?)understanding of how REPUBLICANS feel. Not a racist comment in the least ...

And yes, if the Republicans go racist, then Yglesias will call that spade a spade. Dub.

Posted by Matt | October 22, 2007 4:15 PM

Once again Al demonstrates that he doesn't understand what racism is. If it is anything (and I'd probably call it satirically trenchant), then it is a (mis?)understanding of how REPUBLICANS feel. Not a racist comment in the least ...

Al doesn't call the GOP Everyman quote racist. He calls it bigotry. And it is.

What does have at least a whiff of racism is the way so many lefty bloggers insisted on calling him Piyush Jindal instead of Bobby. And this was what Al referred to as racist.

Posted by Mark Adams | October 22, 2007 4:23 PM

Felix is a Jewish name? I thought it was of Latin origin? And a name mostly given to cats...

Posted by More Axe | October 22, 2007 4:24 PM

Well, Bobby is just his nickname that he decided to use after watching The Brady Bunch? No? I didn't realize it was such an offense to call someone by their first name...

Posted by More Axe | October 22, 2007 4:29 PM

Matt, you say "everyone knows" how the demographic changes have helped the Republicans. I don't know this--and your assertion that everyone does know it doesn't help me to. Maybe some evidence on the point? (If there is any to be had.)

Matt in the comments is right: Racism is something Republicans do. When Democrats do racism, they're doing it ironically! (Only their antisemitism is earnest, and even that has been freshened--a younger, hipper version of an old standard.)

Posted by Thomas | October 22, 2007 4:35 PM

Jindal's name is Piyush. "Bobby" is a manufactured nickname. It's not meant to be racist, it's another way of calling him a big f'ing phony.

Posted by alli | October 22, 2007 4:38 PM

His winning the Governorship means that a less worthy candidate will be running for Senate.

'zactly. And though Mary Landrieu is basically useless, the GOP will have trouble coming up with a challenger that has Jindal's statewide recognition, even in an ethnically-cleansed Louisiana.

On Al's useless trolling tangent, 'Felix' was applied to George Allen to a) reinforce the fact that he wasn't his father; b) undercut the manly-man crypto-Confederate image by pointing out that he quite literally has a pussy's name.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | October 22, 2007 4:41 PM

Jindal would have beaten Blanco even if Katrina had not occurred. He probably would have had to defeat her in a runoff, but he would have won. The woman was probably kind and decent but completely overwhelmed. Blanco was a puppet of the Shaw Group. Jindal lost to her in 2003 because of rural white voters in Northern Louisiana. From January '04 to Oct '08 he visited the area constantly to assure them that he was no Bill Jefferson or Cleo Fields. The displaced people from NOLA were not a reliable voting block before the storm and would not have been afterward. Bush's poor leadership PLUS Blanco's mismanagement of the LRA has prevented the displaced from coming back. That is if they want to come back. I have a lot of anecdotal evidence of "displaced" people preferring to stay in cities with functioning schools and tolerable crime NB:Bush nor Blanco had any role in NOLA's crime problems.

On paper, Jindal is the most intelligent governor in the history of the state. He is a policy wonk with few ties to the corrupt establishment. My only quible is his condoning the teaching of intelligent design. If he turns the state around, he may be a savior for the Republican party which is on the precipice of total defeat in 2008.

Alli is right to note Nothern LA hates NOLA. But this is statement is ludicrous: "At least Mitch Landrieu is still Lt. Governor". AKA the Tourism Czar. LA Tax payers pay for his jaunts around the world to suppress the truth about violent crime in NOLA. LA has one of the most powerful governors and least powerful LT governors. Praise be to Jesus!

Posted by WillG | October 22, 2007 4:42 PM

My apologies to Al and his defenders if he meant that Democrats' "bigotry" is directed only at Republicans.

If that was his point then I'll concede and we can all go home - many of us believe, Republicans and Democrats alike, that the other party is full of morons these days in a way that might border on intolerance.

I don't think that was Al's thought process (hence the above post), but who am I to say. As for the the other component, see alli above. Calling someone by their actual first name instead of the nickname doesn't seem to be compelling evidence of racism, especially since I don't know of an anti-Indian class that would key in on the name Piyush as some kind of codeword.

And sorry, Thomas, for not making the argument that you want me to make so you can tear it apart.

Posted by Matt | October 22, 2007 4:49 PM

Pseduyo intelektual NC said: "he GOP will have trouble coming up with a challenger that has Jindal's statewide recognition,even in an ethnically-cleansed Louisiana." That is insulting to Jews, Armenians, Native Americans and countless other peoples. The agent of 'cleansing' was a storm and poorly designed levees. Not a government.

Mary Landrieu barely defeated a "Woody" and a woman who could have been cast in "Cavemen".
Mary will lose to Treasure John (not F.) Kennedy(D-->R). He bares a striking resemblance and accent to actor Randy Quaid. I hope he wins for the unintentional comedy alone. Mary is a DiNO anyway.

Posted by WillG | October 22, 2007 4:53 PM

Have our moronic countrymen in Lousiana figured out that doing something about crappy education, fixing levees, etc. is more important than gay marriage and other "values" issues. I doubt it; these people suffer from terminal stupidity.

Posted by bob h | October 22, 2007 4:54 PM

"I get really tired of references to "mishandling" and "incompetence" re the failure to help Katrina survivors return to NOLA. As several other commenters have already noted, this was malign intention, not a result of mistakes."

Considering that most of these survivors lived in the most areas most at-risk from another flood, would it make sense to encourage them to move back there? A rational assessment of New Orleans's geography would suggest that some of it should revert to wetland buffer. Imagine if the federal government were successful in bringing most of the New Orleans evacuees back to their old hell-holes like the lower 9th ward, and then another storm hit, and, again, these survivors failed to evacuate and suffered another Katrina-like devastation. Bush would be attacked for bringing the Katrina survivors back to New Orleans where they could be hit by another storm.

There was really no way to win with Katrina. New Orleans was such a rotted, dysfunctional city, and the storm merely revealed this. The press almost universally ignored the heroic work done by the Coast Guard and National Guard in preventing a much larger loss of life, but the abuse Bush took over this wasn't warranted. Had the same storm hit, and the local officials reacted the same way, and Kerry been president, the result wouldn't have been much different.

Posted by Juan | October 22, 2007 5:03 PM

"I will say, though, that unlike the Ogonowski special election, there very possibly are some broader implications to this result if only because it shows how Louisiana may be a bright spot in the 2008 Senate races as well."

I wouldn't count on that -- Jindal seems to benefit from remarkable personal charisma (he seems to come off like a sort of right-wing Obama), and his genuinely big victory wasn't reflected at all in any other Lousiana races. Lt. Gov. Mitch Landrieu (note that last name) beat two Republicans with 57%, the two Democratic candidates for Attorney General totalled 68%, and the Dems apparently pulled a mild upset (although I'll have to recheck this) to hold onto both legislative houses. The GOP will still have to dig up a strong candidate to oust Sen. Landrieu -- and Jindal now is not available for that purpose.

(It'll also be interesting to see how Rhodes scholar Jindal does when his supporters pressure him to follow through on his promise to let Louisiana schools start teaching Intelligent Design.)

Posted by Bruce Moomaw | October 22, 2007 5:10 PM

The agent of 'cleansing' was a storm and poorly designed levees. Not a government.

Really? I didn't know that a weather system had the ability to relocate a population in precisely those areas where their votes don't count for shit.

Posted by pseudonymous in nc | October 22, 2007 5:15 PM

Juan doesn't care about black people (or government accountability).

"It'll also be interesting to see how Rhodes scholar Jindal does when his supporters pressure him to follow through on his promise to let Louisiana schools start teaching Intelligent Design."

He's Catholic (his family is from Goa) and not just Catholic, but crazy Catholic, so who knows? Either way, he's a bit embarrassing.

Posted by Reality Man | October 22, 2007 5:19 PM

It would be incorrect to call me a racist. For example, I enjoy The Cosby Show, and I occasionally allow my wife to watch "Oprah."

Posted by GOP Everyman | October 22, 2007 5:25 PM

"Juan doesn't care about black people"

Thank you Kanye West. By the way, why do you hate brown people?

Posted by Juan | October 22, 2007 5:28 PM

Shorter Matt: it's not bigotry when I do it! Yes, yes, yes--that's exactly why we call you self-righteous! But don't kid yourself, you don't need to worry about whether the bigotry you engage in is mainstream or not--you can also be antiblack or antihispanic without worry. Come on, have some confidence in your remarkable abilities.

Posted by Thomas | October 22, 2007 5:40 PM

He's Catholic (his family is from Goa) and not just Catholic, but crazy Catholic, so who knows? Either way, he's a bit embarrassing.

He is Catholic, but his parents are not. He converted in high school.

Posted by Milind | October 22, 2007 5:44 PM

There are no black NASCAR drivers.

There's a reason for that.

Posted by GOP Everyman | October 22, 2007 5:48 PM

"There are no black NASCAR drivers."

Are you saying that Chris Bristol, Tommy Lane, and Joe Henderson III aren't black, or are you just talking out of your ass?

Posted by Juan | October 22, 2007 5:54 PM

I guess I have to stop watching NASCAR.

Dammit.

Posted by GOP Everyman | October 22, 2007 6:01 PM

"And make no mistake about it, we all know if there is to be an Obama campaign and Republicans start calling him "Hussein", Yglesias will be the first to cry racism."

Actually, I noticed that Obama has modified his line: "when your name's Barack Hussein Obama, you're always the underdog."

It'll be interesting to see whether his self-inoculation works.

Posted by Carrington Ward, Queens, NY | October 22, 2007 7:29 PM

For what it's worth outside the feline world and 19th Century Classical scholars, I have encountered Felix as a fairly common Catholic name, common not just among various Latin ethicities but among the traditional American Catholic mainstream. So I was a bit surprised to see it associated with anti-Semitism.

Posted by Gene O'Grady | October 22, 2007 7:56 PM

"Thank you Kanye West. By the way, why do you hate brown people?

Posted by Juan | October 22, 2007 5:28 PM"

No, as an Indian-American, I just find Bobby Jindal and Dinesh D'Souza to be embarrassing. By the way, when you say the stuff you've said on this blog about black people, it's pretty obvious you don't like black people, that you hate them and find them inferior.

Posted by Reality Man | October 22, 2007 8:02 PM

So if I read the bulk this comment thread correctly:

Karl Rove forestalled the Katrina recovery effort--humiliating his boss and cratering his boss's numbers--as part of a malign plan to drive a lot of black people out of Louisiana so that he could get the first Indian-American governor elected there. Wow, that is devious.

Posted by southpaw | October 22, 2007 8:05 PM

I don't want to defend Jindal, and I surely don't want to start a shouting match about who's racist or not, but yes, going out of your way to call the guy "Piyush" when his stated preference is "Bobby" isn't the sort of thing I'd feel proud of myself for doing. Unless you're his mother or being encyclopedic, calling him by his given name is emphasizing his foreignness, telling him that while he may have been born here and raised in America, if he's not white, he'll never be a "real" American. Maybe that's not your intent, but that's what it comes out sounding like, and I'm certain that if his political opponents are doing that, they know what they're doing.

Posted by Adam Villani | October 22, 2007 8:08 PM

Re: I didn't know that a weather system had the ability to relocate a population in precisely those areas where their votes don't count for shit.

Where would you suggest they be evacuated to? Texas and Mississippi were right next door. Maybe they should have been sent to North Dakota?

Posted by JonF | October 22, 2007 8:25 PM

Considering that most of these survivors lived in the most areas most at-risk from another flood, would it make sense to encourage them to move back there? A rational assessment of New Orleans's geography would suggest that some of it should revert to wetland buffer. Imagine if the federal government were successful in bringing most of the New Orleans evacuees back to their old hell-holes like the lower 9th ward,

Rational assessment my ass. Juan, don't put your ignorance on display like this. The lower 9th is on higher ground than most of New Orleans (see my link below), including much that didn't flood. And look through the archives of that link for the "Blame Game" to see how stupid your minimizing of the federal response is.

And I actually think Pro-Torture Bobby will probably be a fine governor by Louisiana standards. I think having a smart guy (he really is very bright, his staff is a little in awe of him) running the place might not be such a bad thing, just to switch things up.

Posted by nolaboyd | October 22, 2007 8:44 PM

"I don't want to defend Jindal, and I surely don't want to start a shouting match about who's racist or not, but yes, going out of your way to call the guy "Piyush" when his stated preference is "Bobby" isn't the sort of thing I'd feel proud of myself for doing. Unless you're his mother or being encyclopedic, calling him by his given name is emphasizing his foreignness, telling him that while he may have been born here and raised in America, if he's not white, he'll never be a "real" American. Maybe that's not your intent, but that's what it comes out sounding like, and I'm certain that if his political opponents are doing that, they know what they're doing.

Posted by Adam Villani | October 22, 2007 8:08 PM"

I think it depends on the individual who is writing the particular piece. There is a difference between doing it with the intent of calling out his brown-ness and doing it to point out that the guy is a bit of a poseur. I've heard from within in the Indian-American community that his family is from Goa and that he converted to Catholicism (not sure which is true). If he converted, that is a little sad and suggests that he is a bit of the white man's buttboy. You can be an Indian-American Republican like Fareed Zakaria or Ashley Tellis without being a bit of an Indian Michael Jackson, but Jindal has not accomplished this. Having followed his career with a passing interest, it does seem to me that he does wish he was a good white Christian male.

Posted by Reality Man | October 22, 2007 9:15 PM

reality man, I think the self-righteous tack is more effective than divining the line between "calling out his brown-ness" and saying that he's a "poseur" because he's brown-and-acting-white.

Posted by Thomas | October 22, 2007 9:47 PM

The foundational conflict of identity politics rouses its ugly head.

Is one's identity determined by simple, observable characteristics regardless of your tastes and ideas? Or is the identity inextricably bound up with a specific and narrow political agenda that is predetermined for you? Does a non-conforming ideology negate or betray the identity which is your patrimony?

In short, can you really be Indian-American if you displease Reality Man?

How dreary.

Posted by southpaw | October 22, 2007 10:15 PM

On Jindal's 'authenticity' because he converted religions:
So is Keith Ellison a poseur for being raised Roman Catholic but converting to Islam?

Posted by Kenny | October 22, 2007 10:20 PM

I'm an Indian-American convert to Christianity. (And a Democratic voter.)Does that make me any less brown? I converted because I believed that Jesus Christ was the only son of God, of one substance with the Father, who died to redeem us. Not because I wanted to be the white man's butt-boy. Christianity existed in India from 52 AD, brought there by the Apostle St. Thomas, and Indians have every right to claim it as their faith, too.

Fareed Zakaria might be a Muslim (which by the way is just as 'foreign' to India as Christianity, and which has done a lot more wrongs to the Hindus of India than Christianity ever has), but his foreign policy ideas show that you can't become much more of a catamite for Bush than he is.

Christianity is a universal faith, not one for any particular race. There are of course lots and lots of Hindus who would tell you that Christianity (and for that matter, Islam) are 'foreign' religions, but I don't see why American liberals need to agree with them.

Posted by Hector Dauphin-Gloire | October 22, 2007 11:07 PM

Really? I didn't know that a weather system had the ability to relocate a population in precisely those areas where their votes don't count for shit.

Houston and Atlanta have been by far the two largest recipients of the largely African-American diaspora from Louisiana. Both metro areas have been trending bluer in recent years. I think it's a stretch to say "their votes don't count for shit." Besides, did you seriously think Bush was going to arrange for them all to head to Ohio?

Posted by Tracie | October 22, 2007 11:53 PM

Katrina refugees were welcomed in many parts of the country. In one example, a liberal family in Minnesota headed by a lesbian couple took in a black single mother and her kids. Of course, they came to grief.

Posted by Harry | October 23, 2007 12:13 AM

"Jindal's name is Piyush. "Bobby" is a manufactured nickname. It's not meant to be racist, it's another way of calling him a big f'ing phony."

Alli,

So it's ok for the media to refer to Barack Hussein Obama as such from here on out, b/c y'know it is his real name? Even if Jindal's friends, family and co-workers referred to him as "hey you" for the last few decades, that's the name he goes by, that's his name. He's hardly running from his heritage with a last name like Jindal anyway.

And Matt, Jindal won b/c he won the Protestant vote upstate, not because of demographic changes in New Orleans. Remember, Nagin won re-election in NO last year - and he ran against Mitch Landrieu in the runoff, another Democrat. They're not hurting that bad for Democrats in New Orleans.

Posted by Dan | October 23, 2007 12:17 AM

On principle, I'm opposed to any kind of non-white elected Republican official.
It just sends the wrong message.
Posted by GOP Everyman

It just proves you don't know Indians are caucasoid, or do you know that and simply wish to manipulate and deceive less wealthy, less educated Americans that they are a separate race?
It's as ignorant as calling an Arab or Persian non-white, same with Jews or full European ancestry Hispanics..

Love how the Lefty twats prove again that "racism" is a term of semantic convienience they can ignore when they wish.

Same sort of Far Left Jewish and Gentile twats that were behind the effort to organize and pay the way to bring black thugs to a rally to take oreo cookies and throw them at Michael Steele.

Not a great way to make friends and influnce people? Ey?

Well, it could be worse. At least Jindal's not, y'know, black.
Regardless, I still wouldn't invite him over for dinner.
Posted by GOP Everyman

Must suck to be someone reduced to racist bitching about Indians that dare to not think as far Left Jewish and Gentile activists require them to think. Fear not. They will soon have the same resentment & contempt for your ilk like many blacks now do, and that will give you something legitimate to bitch about.

"Why do they hate us? Why? All we wish to do is uplift those poor, noble, oppressed minorities and guide them and tell them what to do as their childlike minds grow with our nourishment!
Don't they understand that the Clarence Thomas, Lee Elder, Ken Salazar, now Bobby Jindal types ruin our improvement plans? Those sort of people have just begun to take the first steps to equality and aren't ready to think for themselves! That's our job....and we must delegitimize and marginalize those minorities that could hurt the groups we mentor...."

Posted by Chris Ford | October 23, 2007 3:30 AM

Wow a thread full of truthiness based on partial factoids.
The NYT on the religion thing:

Mr. Jindal is a technocrat and a Roman Catholic convert, a policy aficionado well-versed in free-market solutions to the crisis in health insurance and a proponent of “intelligent design” as an alternative theory to evolution, suggesting it may be appropriate in school science classes....

Piyush Jindal was born on June 10, 1971, in Baton Rouge to Hindu parents who had come to the United States six months before so his mother could pursue a graduate degree in nuclear physics at Louisiana State University. His father was an engineer from the Punjab region of India, the only one of nine siblings to attend high school. The younger Jindal, growing up in Baton Rouge, was not expected to come home from school with anything less than 100 on tests. Public high school in Baton Rouge was followed by Brown, where Mr. Jindal was Phi Beta Kappa, and a conversion to Roman Catholicism that Mr. Jindal has described in transformative terms. “I draw my definition of integrity from my Christian faith,” Mr. Jindal said during the campaign. “In my faith, you give 100 percent of yourself to God.”

“But we live in a pluralistic state,” he was careful to add.

Note they use "Piyush" in the above. At the beginning of the article, they confirm that "Bobby" really did come from The Brady Bunch, at age 4:

The message could not have been clearer: I’m one of you, a normal, red-blooded football-loving Louisiana guy. It is a theme that seems to have informed the youthful Republican congressman’s every step, from his decision at age 4 to jettison his given name of Piyush for that of a character in the television series “The Brady Bunch”...

Hector Dauphin-Gloire:

Great "loud and proud" retort; this agnostic found the "butt boy" comment nauseating and racist and was glad to see you speak out on it.

southpaw @ 8:05 PM:

Thank you so much for that reality alert, as in "snap out of it, people!" I am in a jet lag fog and for a moment there the echo chamber was starting to make me buy into the group-think Roveuberalles conspiracy, ala "it's impossible for any Republican to win an election for real so we have to make an explanation." Sheesh, it's insidious the way that happens sometimes; scary, too. :-)

Posted by artappraiser | October 23, 2007 3:31 AM

He looks more like an Indian Raymond.

Posted by merlallen | October 23, 2007 3:37 AM

Still, a lot of the crowing from the right seems a bit odd in light of the fact that everyone knows the Louisiana GOP's electoral fortunes have been substantially boosted by demographic changes caused by the destruction of Hurricane Katrina and the subsequent failure to rebuild/resettle the displaced people.

This isn't right. See http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MDMwNmM1N2U0ZGFkNmY4MDIxZmUyNGNhZTgyYWQyNTk=

Posted by John Dope | October 23, 2007 10:45 AM

Better yet, here: http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MGFkN2FlYjFlNmEwYWIzNmM5ODVkNGNkNTIzMTU3M2I=

Posted by John Dope | October 23, 2007 10:53 AM

Recent republican LA gov - Treen, Romer, Foster. Treen and Romer had good reps but didn't do much. As for Foster, I think most think he is a bit of a bafoon i.e. place holder. I hope Jindal manages to do some good but I don't necessarily expect him to break with that particular Republican tradition.

I was back there this weekend, and saw the debates. Sigh. Jindal was obviously captain of the debate team. And the rest of the candidates were just more of the same LA pol. - no one real galvanizer. I am not sure Jindal won so much as there was no one else that seemed could win. Sure the percentages of the other top there were barely in the double digits, and way beyond the 53% or so Jindal got, but low 50%'s is not exactly a ringing endorsement of Jindal or Republicanism.

Posted by ET | October 23, 2007 11:50 AM

For those that care, local bloggers and such call Blanco "Governor Memaw."

Posted by Kiril | October 23, 2007 12:35 PM

The National Review references by "John Dope" are not accurate. Actually, seriously, referencing the National Review? It's like quoting the Weekly World News or the Wall Street Journal editorial page -- simply not usable as a sort for accurate information.

Jindal's election is real, but says little about future elections. The Democratic candidates were typical unlikeable Louisiana pols, and Jindal is both personable and has a record of competence. Plus he's that oddity, a non-white Republican.

And as noted, New Orleans was depleted of Democrats by Katrina, and by the federal government's malign neglect during it. This still improves Republicant chances in the next Senate election, but that's a much tougher environment than the governor's election.

Posted by Anon. | October 23, 2007 2:27 PM

Failure? As far as Republicans are concerned, the failure to resettle the residents of New Orleans displaced by Katrina is a feature, not a bug.

Posted by jonp72 | October 24, 2007 11:59 AM

By the way, Bobby Jindal's name is in fact Piyush Jindal. I went to Brown University the same time that he did (he's class of '92, I'm class of '94). He's listed in my yearbook as Piyush Jindal. It's as phony as how John Ellis Bush calls himself "Jeb" Bush to make himself sound like a Bubba instead of the scion of a New England blueblood family that he is. You don't see Barack Obama calling himself "Barry" Obama on the campaign trail. That should tell you something about the differences between the GOP and Democratic base.

Posted by jonp72 | October 24, 2007 12:06 PM