Neil Stevens has risen in defense of that most defenseless group, the Club for Growth in regards to their attack on Governor Bobby Jindal:
Hairs shot up on the necks of a great many Republicans. At least, among those who took Governor Mike Huckabee’s side against the organization, Club for Growth’s subdued, objective comments about the recall seemed an implied attack on Jindal. Jindal was The Next Target of the Club For Greed™.
However I saw no such thing. Certainly CfG wasn’t jumping to Jindal’s defense, but they are a single interest group. It’s not their job to get awed at the way he wantonly tears down the corrupt, fascist Kingfish legacy. In fact, if Jindal were to raise the tax burden of his state way up, I’d appreciate it if CfG were to warn us before we go and nominate Governor Jindal in 2016.
Why the posts, though? Soloveichik says that CfG is attempting to follow the news on all the leading prospects for Senator McCain’s running mate, and of course that includes Jindal. CfG is also looking at the economic records of each candidate, just as they did for the Presidential candidates.
I believe it. Governor Jindal does not have much of a record yet. It’s not his fault, but he hasn’t been in office for even a year yet. So naturally, Club for Growth has little to work with in evaluating him, and so when they count the pay hike as a strike against him, they don’t have much else to balance against it. But just the same, they’re not treating this one thing the same as, say, Governor Huckabee’s long record which included multiple substantial tax and spending increases.
One wonders what Huckabee people they’re responding to. As Leon at Red State linked to my piece cross-posted at the Next Right, I’m assuming they mean me. To quote Robert DeNiro, “I don’t see anyone else here, so you must be talking to me.”
Anyway with Club for Growth, it’s not what they tell you, It’s what they don’t tell you.
They were correct about Huckabee’s tax and spending increases. What they didn’t tell you is that Huckabee’s veto could be overridden by a majority vote and that he had a Democratic legislature that’s 70-90% Democratic through his entire tenure in office.
They didn’t tell you that there were 2 court rulings that forced additional money to be spent on Education and Medicaid.
I wonder what conservative here could have done better than Huckabee did under those circumstances?
As for Jindal, the idea that his record is short is notable except during his brief time in office, he accomplished a school choice program and introduced and gained passage of a tax cut for business.
His educational accomplishments has been given short shrift, and I’ve seen no mention in recent discussion of his vitally needed business tax cut.
They’ve gone after his Congressional record, but somehow failed to note his 98% anti-pork performance on the 2007 RePork card. Their own report card! And they didn’t bother to mention it when trying to explain that his record was uninspiring among their list. I don’t know, I consider someone with a 98% anti-pork record to be fairly inspiring.
I didn’t come out for Huckabee until after Super Tuesday. But then I began to research this, I became angry. The Club for Growth didn’t lie, but they sure as heck deceived me with incomplete information. They’re doing the same thing with Bobby Jindal.
The nomination of John McCain can be laid at the feet of the Club for Growth whose obsessive compulsive campaign against Mike Huckabee gave John McCain the South Carolina Primary and the nomination. Where we’ll their economic puritanism lead in 2012 or 2016?
I still read the Club for Growth blog and they find stories I use on my blog or website,two or three times a week. I have two currently endorsed CFG candidates, Lt. Governor Sean Parnell and Congressman Paul Braun (R-GA) on my slatecard, along with former CFG candidates, Rep. Bill Sali (R-Idaho) and Michelle Bachmann (R-MN). There’s no denying that CFG does some good work, but their recent antics have caused me to view their statements with a far-more skeptical eye.
