This is Why I Don't Trust Chris Christie


Recommended Posts

This is Why I Don't Trust Chris Christie
 
Ever since Chris Christie came onto the national scene, I have been relieved to hear his form or rhetoric, of speaking his mind clearly and getting in people's faces.
 
But something about him always left me cold. When Ann Coulter was endorsing him like the savior in the flesh, I still didn't trust him.
 
Then he came out palling around with Obama right before the election, He claimed it was because of the hurricane, and in part, I believe it was. But it seemed like overkill to me. Sure, he had to play the Federal game to get the Federal money in a disaster, but Federal game qua Federal game doesn't include sucking up to Obama in public in a manner that helped sway the election, especially after he had been on record over and over bashing Obama for "lack of leadership."
 
I kept thinking, this dude is not to be trusted. He's a big government dude saying he's small government. He's a liar.
 
Now the mask is coming off. Check it out:
 
Christie goes after libertarians — hard
By Aaron Blake
July 25, 2013
The Washington Post
 
From the article:
 

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie ® on Thursday offered a clear broadside against Republicans drifting toward a more libertarian view of foreign policy, lumping Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) in with them and suggesting they explain their position to victims of the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.
 
The House earlier this week narrowly voted against a reduction in funding for the National Security Agency, as libertarian-leaning members from both sides joined together to vote for the amendment.
 
“As a former prosecutor who was appointed by President George W. Bush on Sept. 10, 2001, I just want us to be really cautious, because this strain of libertarianism that’s going through both parties right now and making big headlines, I think, is a very dangerous thought,” Christie said.

 

Here's the video of him saying it:

 

 

You can come to your own conclusions, but I swear, if this dude manages to run against Hillary Clinton, I might vote for Clinton. At least she will be a political opponent with a clear Progressive message.

 

Christie is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

 

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 101
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

The libs/progressives that dominate the MSM have been promoting Christie, at least since he sucked-up to Obama. They idolized him when the two recent hurricanes/nor-easters hit New Jersey, especially his "take command by bullying" style.

I think that they are grooming him to run against whatever conservative/libertarian runs for the G.O.P. candidacy. A number of years ago, they idolized pipsqueak John Anderson who made a pathetic run against Reagan. Before that, I well remember their idolization of Nelson Rockefeller when he ran for the GOP nomination against Goldwater. It wasquite clear by the primary results and at the convention that 95% of the Republicans supported Barry. But the MSM cast poor little Nelson as the brave, lone voice of "moderation" amidst the extreme Right.

In any case, these MSM lefties would not ultimately vote for a Rockefeller/Anderson/Christie, not when they can get a McGovern/Clinton/Obama/Hillary-type! They just want to screw around with the Republicans, and cast them in as worst a light as they possibly can..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris Christie's public appeal largely stems from coming off as a regular guy in the Jackie Gleason tradition - he's overweight, he holds strong opinions, he bellows, he calls people out on BS, and so on. It's a welcome reprieve from the carefully tailored pod politicians that have emerged as the norm in an age where every sound byte is recorded, scrutinized, and replayed ad nauseum. To that extent, Christie hasn't changed, and I don't think his persona is necessarily a bad development.

The problem with Christie for small government advocates is that he also appeals to humanity's regressive desire for a strongman personality to cut through the details and push us collectively toward some better version of society - a society for people like you, and me, and Ralph Cramden instead of for fancy-pants special interests. People envision him gathering all the relevant movers and shakers in a room, cutting through red tape through force of personality alone, and getting shit done on their behalf. As a practical matter, this invariably means expanded government, and anyone familiar with how communitarian bro-led fraternity house councils quickly morph into factionalized fascistic oppression engines should immediately recognize the hopelessness of this ideal in the face of human nature.

I sympathize with the desire to reject wolves in sheep's clothing - even if that means electing a wolf outright - but we should also be careful not to stand too firmly on principle or "let the perfect become the enemy of the good." Christie would take us toward bigger government, true, but full blown progressive ideologues like Clinton and Obama have the potential to do a lot more damage when handed the reins of government and become normalized as mainstream politicians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You can come to your own conclusions, but I swear, if this dude manages to run against Hillary Clinton, I might vote for Clinton. At least she will be a political opponent with a clear Progressive message.

Christie is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Michael

Christie is a man of the Republican machine. A statist, all 350 lbs of him.

Ba'al Chatzaf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Chris Christie certainly has a mixed record. At first I liked him because he took on the unions in New Jersey. By now, I've all but given up on him. His performance after hurricane Sandy was just too much. However, I don't necessarily agree with the Libertarian message of isolationism. In my view, the U.S. has no choice but to be the world's policeman. Whether we like it or not, we can't abandon the high seas to the Chinese or anyone else.

With respect to his other comments regarding domestic policy, Christie is absolutely on the wrong side --- a big government Republican.

Darrell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[...] anyone familiar with how communitarian bro-led fraternity house councils quickly morph into factionalized fascistic oppression engines [...]

I am not familiar with this. It would make a good story, I think. I am guessing there is another kind of 'bro' -- different in measurable ways from a communitarian.

The Christie appeal is not perhaps unique, but is noticeably distinct from others on the 2016 presidential primary horizon. I get the impression that Christie wants to paint a thick line between himself and GOP faux-libertarians such as Rand Paul -- at least as far as votes on NSA funding fall. I am not familiar enough with what he considers his own selling points to rate him through Objectivish lenses.

I think he did some good old school politicking in the aftermath of Sandy. It was a big story not only for its destruction but also for its gaming. Poor old Mitt was not an actor or executive in those days, he could lead no efforts to respond to the disaster, and so he got no political gain.

In terms of old-school politicking, Christie positioning himself at the front of the disaster response with the then-current President was wise -- and Christie played his role as well as any of us here might have done in the same situation. I mean, it was a week of big news, tremendous media attention, and the roles of executive-level responders were already written for the President and the governor.

Would it have made sense for Christie to play 'frosty' with the federal executive in the disaster response? I think that the role as written calls for close cooperation. The political golden light was there for the taking as long as a competent response was underway. Christie showed competence in leading, and was rewarded in public opinion.

In terms of the House NSA vote, and the 'bad thoughts' Christie ascribes to Rand Paul among unnamed others, I would want him to detail his objections. On the face of it, he seems to be ramming anyone who votes to de-fund data-collection, and pointing to a dangerous split in GOP opinion on national security issues. Is there such a split? Is such a split actually dangerous for the GOP in terms of winning elections?

Anyhow, I am sensing that a Clinton/Christie matchup in 2016 would be a fraught choice for US voters here at OL.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darrell:

Logically, we have a choice.

The Chinese, whom, unfortunately, we will have to confront, sometime in the next fifty (50) years, are economically and socially imploding.

In my view, the U.S. has no choice but to be the world's policeman. Whether we like it or not, we can't abandon the high seas to the Chinese or anyone else.

Darrell:

What would happen if we, strategically, drew the Chinese out into the Pacific?

What would happen, if we, strategically, employed our allies in the Pacific rim, and drew the Chinese into that vast Pacific military zone?

What would happen, if we, strategically, stretched their supply lines into that vast blue water?

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darrell:

Logically, we have a choice.

The Chinese, whom, unfortunately, we will have to confront, sometime in the next fifty (50) years, are economically and socially imploding.

In my view, the U.S. has no choice but to be the world's policeman. Whether we like it or not, we can't abandon the high seas to the Chinese or anyone else.

Darrell:

What would happen if we, strategically, drew the Chinese out into the Pacific?

What would happen, if we, strategically, employed our allies in the Pacific rim, and drew the Chinese into that vast Pacific military zone?

What would happen, if we, strategically, stretched their supply lines into that vast blue water?

A...

And what would happen if we declared we were not going to pay the money we owe them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Darrell:

Logically, we have a choice.

The Chinese, whom, unfortunately, we will have to confront, sometime in the next fifty (50) years, are economically and socially imploding.

In my view, the U.S. has no choice but to be the world's policeman. Whether we like it or not, we can't abandon the high seas to the Chinese or anyone else.

Darrell:

What would happen if we, strategically, drew the Chinese out into the Pacific?

What would happen, if we, strategically, employed our allies in the Pacific rim, and drew the Chinese into that vast Pacific military zone?

What would happen, if we, strategically, stretched their supply lines into that vast blue water?

A...

Hi Adam,

I'm not convinced that the Chinese are economically or socially imploding. It's true that they have a huge demographic problem. A Chinese guy with whom I used to work said that there is a saying in modern China, that, "China will grow old before it grows strong." So, the Chinese are conscious of their own demographic problem brought on by the one child policy.

So, let's just say that the next generation is only 80% as large as the current --- the one child policy would suggest that it would only be half as large, but the reality is that a significant proportion of the population still has two or more children. In fact, I think it is unlikely that the Chinese population will decline at all. Anyway, let's say it did decline somewhat. So what? China would still have a billion people, still be three times as large as the U.S., still have the possibility of fielding an army three times as large with three times as many engineers and scientists solving problems and designing things, etc.

Also, the fact that growth has slowed to 7% from 10% hardly sounds like an implosion, though it is possible they could go into recession. Even if they did, it would probably be temporary.

I'm not sure where you're going with the strategy of "drawing them out". I'm not anticipating an actual shooting war with China. I'm just concerned about their influence on the rest of Southeast Asia. They might lean on their neighbors to provide special treatment to countries that they consider strategically important while relegating the U.S. and its allies to second class status. U.S. citizens might not be safe travelling to that part of the world. Australia and New Zealand might find themselves isolated. It might not be the end of the world, but it could be very unpleasant.

Darrell

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I gather that China is purchasing as much gold as it can get from production within its own country as well as from the open market in an attempt to be able to back its currency, the yuan, at a time when, thanks to our own Federal Reserve Chairman, Ben Bernanke, the dollar is being drained of its purchasing power because of the euphemistic quantitative easing to the tune of $85 billion a month or 1 trillion a year.

Consequently, the U.S. dollar may very will lose its world reserve currency status which would profoundly lower the demand for dollars worldwide and cause a collapse not anticipated by the average American whose standard of living would plummet over 25% in some estimates.

One wonders if this predictable event is an explicit goal of president obama who will take the opportunity to blame everyone else as he grabs more central government power to deal with the crisis he has created.

You will not have to wait too long to see if this outcome actually happens.

Precious metals have been manipulated downwards intentionally to discourage citizens from daring to purchase them which would be the wise thing to do given the imminent decline of the fiat paper currency at the hands of our devious central government.

gg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

I'm not sure where you're going with the strategy of "drawing them out". I'm not anticipating an actual shooting war with China. I'm just concerned about their influence on the rest of Southeast Asia. They might lean on their neighbors to provide special treatment to countries that they consider strategically important while relegating the U.S. and its allies to second class status. U.S. citizens might not be safe travelling to that part of the world. Australia and New Zealand might find themselves isolated. It might not be the end of the world, but it could be very unpleasant.

Thanks for your insights Darrell:

Essentially, a part of the strategy of "drawing them out" is to assist the drain on their economy by forcing them to extend their supply lines and their rudimentary "Blue Navy" at least to Guam.

The Communist Party, which is in full control of mainland China has serious economic problems. The pressure to produce jobs on a monthly basis is beginning to take its toll on the "managed economy."

Secondly, the Communist Party has serious pressures from Muslim cultures in the Southwest borders of their state. The Tibetians are always present, as are the Soviets/Russians to the West and Northwest. The North Korean "problem" is present and pressing.

The Chinese are seriously under pressure globally.

Now is the time to push them.

A...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
Christie is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

Michael

Wolf is about to get taken down, skinned and mounted on a wall.

The second I heard about the e-mail, I told my network that if I was in the Democrats team, I would immediately get all the police, fire, EMT, 911 calls for all four (4) days of this bogus lane closure.

Any fatalities make what happened a crime. Anything less pain and suffering for an entire community.

I have a sneaking suspicion that this is not going to work out for "The Whale."

After, what he apparently said at the press conference today, he better not be lying, or, he could face a criminal indictment, especially when the Feds are now involved.

As they pressure the key senior staffer and his HS buddy who was on the other end of that e-mail with real Federal jail time, you have no idea what and who they will give up.

Plus the progressives want to take him out early anyway and they will never give up.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam,

Heh.

Christie talked about "the sheer stupidity" in his apology. Except he only insinuated that "the sheer stupidity" was the traffic antic.

I think, in his mind, he was referring to his idiot people putting it down on record in emails.

:smile:

Michael

Adam,

Heh.

Christie talked about "the sheer stupidity" in his apology. Except he only insinuated that "the sheer stupidity" was the traffic antic.

I think, in his mind, he was referring to his idiot people putting it down on record in emails.

:smile:

Michael

Absolutely.

I am dumbfounded that one (1) of the five (5) most "in the know" and powerful members of the Governor's team, including the Governor would ever put anything like this in writing.

And essentially, she "lied to him," about what?

The real weak spot is his HS buddy.

This could get very, very interesting.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Come on would this sweet choir boy face have your legs broken?

2014-01-09T193003Z_944600167_GM1EA1A09MZ

Cari bello! Angelico...

A...

Post Script:

The only situation that makes me worry is:

state-seal2.jpg

that severed horse head above the shield.

The non-Steve Colbert guy said that lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And essentially, she "lied to him," about what?

Adam,

Obviously about the fact that there was no written trail that could bite them on the ass...

:smile:

Michael

See that "story" does not make sense to me.

She knew they had her dead to rights. Everyone needed to get on the same script, "Yes Governor, I really fucked up and there is at least one e-mail,"

Ok, here's what we are all going to do:

and then you break the story. The key to theses situations is getting out in front of the media wave. Kinda like surfing.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam,

I have heard Christie runs a tight ship and favors obedience over free-thinking contribution.

I think if you add that mentality to the arrogance of power that surges in the minds of certain people, someone like Bridget Anne Kelly (had to be a Kelly, didn't it? :) ) might simply have thought she was above reality and imagined no one would notice, or if they did, would have the balls to question her.

Didn't Obama send out that lady with the shaggy dog anti-Islam video story on 5 major TV news shows for the Benghazi fiasco?

Some people do really stupid things when they get power.

Michael

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

Some people do really stupid things when they get power.

Michael

Perhaps the power just makes their own stupidity obvious.

Note to self: When dictator, discard the idea of having monkeys joust one another.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bridget Kelly - Director of Legislative Relations - $83, 000 + pension + disability + medical [probably family coverage]. Well over $100,000 per year.

Corrected:

a highly political job with a $140,000 annual salary that would put her in frequent contact with both lawmakers and local officials, making sure they had a venue to raise concerns right to the Christie administration. - See more at: http://www.northjersey.com/fortlee/Bridget_Kelly.html?c=y&page=2#sthash.KF8UwVWS.dpuf

http://nj.gov/governor/news/reports/pdf/20100408.pdf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Adam,

Heh.

Christie talked about "the sheer stupidity" in his apology. Except he only insinuated that "the sheer stupidity" was the traffic antic.

I think, in his mind, he was referring to his idiot people putting it down on record in emails.

:smile:

Michael

Michael:

Completely agree. I always look for the "smoking gun" memo/e-mail/sticky note left in a file.

I love discovery. I am constantly amazed how sloppy folks are and what they leave in the "record."

By the way, Gershowitz agrees with you also. That is very fine company. He is a smart lawyer and actually did teach law.

See the available "record" back from the "smoking gun" e-mail in this link:

http://www.newsmax.com/TheWire/bridget-anne-kelly-chris-christie-bridge-scandal/2014/01/10/id/546365

It is getting real interesting in NJ.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Opening paragraph of today's Rasmussen e-mail:

Most New Jersey voters think it’s likely Governor Chris Christie was aware of the Fort Lee traffic lane closures before they happened and should resign if this is proven. But voters in the state still think the governor is doing a better job than President Obama.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/general_state_surveys/new_jersey/56_in_nj_think_christie_should_resign_if_he_knew_about_fort_lee_retaliation

Purple NJ!

Sometimes you do have to admire a parliamentary paradigm and then you realize that you have to take the whole package.

Anyone think the President, he does seem to get smaller and smaller by the day, would win re-election today? Scary part is that it would still be close.

A...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Did not realize how quickly this lady rose into the inner circle of a potential Presidential candidate.

Her emerging role in the controversy seemed almost as fast as her ascendency from Ramsey GOP president to the inner circle of a likely presidential candidate.

Kelly came to Trenton in 2010 after Christie beat then-incumbent Democrat Jon Corzine. She had coordinated Christie’s strong showing in Bergen County for the governor’s campaign. Before that, she was the longtime chief of staff to Russo and was known for her fierce loyalty.

Last year, Kelly was promoted to the inner-circle position of deputy chief of staff for legislative and intergovernmental affairs, a highly political job with a $140,000 annual salary that would put her in frequent contact with both lawmakers and local officials, making sure they had a venue to raise concerns right to the Christie administration.

Among those officials would be Mark Sokolich, the mayor of Fort Lee and the subject of several of the email interactions between Kelly and Port Authority appointee David Wildstein.

Wildstein wrote Kelly in September after New York appointees to the Port Authority reopened the local bridge lanes accessible via Fort Lee that “we are all appropriately going nuts.”

- See more at: http://www.northjersey.com/fortlee/Bridget_Kelly.html?c=y&page=2#sthash.KF8UwVWS.dpuf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now