What difference would that make? It’s still personal use of the company car.

You also, Mr. Martin. That cousin thing was pure japery.

My point is, Jindal (or any politico) shouldn’t be using the company car for personal business.

Given the number and variety of destinations, I doubt that Mr. Jindal’s purpose is strictly personal. It sounds to me as if the governor is visiting citizens at their places of worship.

It isn’t like you to intentionally miss the point, Q. My point is, Jindal (or any politico) shouldn’t be using the company car for personal business. And masking it by having meetings on Sunday that could otherwise, and would more normally, be held during regular business hours doesn’t excuse that he’s spending taxpayer money on personal travel.

Well, now, if he was governor of South Carolina….

Visiting the people of Louisiana? I’ve heard rumors about intersecting branches of the gene pool in the Bayou State, but they can’t all be his cousins, can they?

If you want to pursue this line of reductio ad absurdum, would the governor be out of line to ride in a state-owned limo to these places? What if he took a small, fuel-efficient car? Is it OK if he walks there?

The state provides a helicopter for the governor’s use. If they feel he’s using it frivilously, well OK. However, I don’t Jindal’s use of the helicopter as an egeregious abuse.

But not on official business. Would it be okay with him to use the copter to visit his cousins, as long as he didn’t travel out of state?

No, it is not.

The issue isn’t whether Oliver in particular thought the AF1 photo was inappropriate and wrong. It’s clear it was, as rational, responsible people (including such prominent Democrats as Obama) have already said in no uncertain terms.

The issue her is whether Jindal’s use of the helicopter for personal matters was inappropriate and wrong. And you’re transparently dancing all over the place to avoid answering that.

“Jindal shouldn’t have used the helicopter for personal errands.”
“Look, they wasted money on an AF1 photo op!”
“Yes, they did. That was bad. Weren’t Jindal’s actions wrong?”
“But, but, but.. Oliver never commented on the AF1 incident.”
“No, he didn’t. But wasn’t it wrong for Jindal to use the copter for personal purposes?”
“The whole issue is Oliver’s opinion on AF1.”
“No, it isn’t.”

Strike three, Farris. Is it really that impossible for you to aver admit a Republican screwed up?

Walsworth said he hasn’t had any complaints about the governor’s use of a state helicopter to attend the services.

CON
State Sen. Robert Adley, R-Benton, questions the necessity of Sunday meetings with officials.

“I’m glad he goes to church, but I don’t think we ought to be paying his way there,” Adley said.

PRAGMATIC
State Sen. Joe McPherson, D-Woodworth, said Jindal is the most accessible governor in modern history. He said taxpayers must decide whether the trips are worth their expense.

Personally, if I was a politician selling state and national fiscal conservatism, I’d try to err on the side of state fiscal conservatism, and not what can so easily be percieved as my own personal fiscal conservatism.

Do you get brownie points from your liberal blog readers when you’re dishonest like this? The article you linked to clearly states that Jindal meets with public officials during these trips and that is backed up by people in the story. He planned that alongside the trips to the churches to talk with voters.

I don’t support his actions as he can conduct business and meet with constituents during the week, but this was not “personal travel.”

http://www.oliverwillis.com/2009/02/26/kenneth-the-intern-responds-to-bobby-jindal/

A 100 percent chance of darkness tonight with increasing lightness at dawn.

Hunh?

No one was traveling on AF1 during the shoot. That was an Air Force operation from the start.

No, it’s the entire point. If Oliver thinks that air travel spending is such a big issue, he would have raised it during the AF1 flyover fracas. That he didn’t shows that he doesn’t actually care, so why should I?