For those who were listening closely, that was not the sound of Gov. Bobby Jindal clearing his throat in Baton Rouge on Tuesday.

That was because Jindal the candidate made bold, written pledges to Louisiana's voters on the campaign trail. They included this one under the subhead "Make the Legislature accountable to the citizens they represent": "Prohibit legislators from giving themselves pay raises that take effect before the subsequent election."

Sounds clear enough to us. It sounded clear enough to the voters, too, who flocked to the polls last autumn to give Jindal a majority of the votes, sweeping him into office. They liked what Jindal the candidate said. They liked what Jindal the candidate wrote.

In that document, which is available on our Web site, the governor used the verb "prohibit," which meant the governor would take action. In fact, he made the point under a document he called the "Jindal Action Plan."

He did not write from the stance of a detached observer, who pledged to merely scold errant lawmakers. He wrote as a candidate of action, who promised positive action on behalf of the citizens' protection. Thus, he used the word prohibit, which means, "to hold back, to restrain, to forbid." More precisely, it means, "To forbid, as an action, by authority or interdict; forbid, as a person, from doing something; to prevent or debar."

That was then. This is now.

Come Tuesday, the governor's press secretary presented the governor's position in words that contradict what the candidate himself wrote. "The governor has said all along and even included in his campaign materials that legislators should not give themselves a pay raise until after the next election," she said in a prepared statement. "He said this again at a press conference last week after the House's vote and continues to point out that not only is the Legislature's move to double their pay completely unreasonable but it should not take effect until after the next election."

The inconsistency is plain: Jindal the candidate promised action, he did not promise to merely "point out." Who needs Jindal to "point out" that it's wrong to rob the taxpayers. We taxpayers can see that for ourselves.

What we need is for Jindal the governor to act, to exercise the power of his office to deliver on his pledge. Instead, Jindal the governor is rubbing his hands and saying he will do nothing.

Jindal is not "holding back," "restraining" or "forbidding" the Vandals from ransacking Rome. He's simply giving the Vandals a lecture. Big deal.

That was a poor strategy for Maximus, the emperor who fled Rome rather than defend his people against the Vandals. The governor should take note.