This is Why I Don't Trust Chris Christie

[Peter]

Las Vegas wrote, “I'm Italian too.”

Don’t you need a vowel at the end of your name to be Italian? How about “Las Vegasi?”

We need ideas.

On Tuesday, November 4th, 2014, what will *predictably* stand in the way of Republicans keeping the House and winning the Senate? The “extreme” Ideology of Freedom, democrat voting Hispanics and immigration, the Left Wing media, an improved economy, and some voter’s vested interest in Obamacare are a few of the “sure things” predicted to swing the election to the Democrats. Can you think of other sure things that will sway some voters?

Eric Cantor, Ryan, Boehner, Christie, McCain, Lindsey Graham, and the other “moderates” think that the insistence on political decisions made from the perspective of Constitutionalism from “extremists” like Rand Paul, Ted Cruz, and all the Tea Party sorts could doom the election of 2014. They insist that to be elected, Republicans must be moderate. Remember the Republican, Primary Presidential debates? Whenever contender Ron Paul answered the question from a libertarian perspective many Tea Party supporters applauded but in their hearts, they cringed too, knowing that a position of “no compromise” and “isolationism” would doom his candidacy. Could the cringe factor keep voters from considering Constitutionalists?

Unpredictably influencing the election of 2014 are a scandal, poorly phrased political speech, the public’s perception of the leading Republican contenders for President in 2016, a terrorist act, interventionist rhetoric, etc. What else is out there looming on the horizon?

Who do you trust to correctly predict the outcomes of 2014 and 2016? Remember the dismal failure of predicting the Presidential election of 2012 by Rasmussen and Karl Rove? I remember Fox commentator and University of Virginia Professor of “American Politics” Larry J. Sabato correctly predicted a Republican loss. Does anyone have confidence in other conservative, moderate, or left wing pollsters or punsters?

[Peter]

I have rarely seen a “personality” have more lies told about them than Sean Hannity. It reminds me of the smear campaign about Peron? after he allowed NAMBA, a bunch of pedophiles, to set up a booth in his Bay Area book store. When he was posting on old Atlantis I received a personal note from him (or so I thought) that truly sounded like he was a pedophile (which he may or may not be) asking me about my preferences. When I mentioned on Atlantis that I was not going to correspond with him again, someone pointed out that the web address that contacted me was not Mr. Peron but an address “constructed” to look the same. It may have had an extra space or an “s” or some such thing. What rotten character assassination.

Several years ago when Sean Hannity was attacking candidate Obama for his associations I googled Sean’s site and got a bunch of hits for “gay” sites, Sean’s gay match up site, etc. Now I see web headlines like, “Why does Sean Hannity's wife seek a divorce?” Bullshit. He bought his wife since 1993, Jill, a new BMW and gives her $7500.00 a week for fun money.

Other people want to boycott Sean Hannity's advertisers on TV and radio. Now, Elvis may have had more deliberate lies about him but Sean may be a close second.

In the wake of the Christie meltdown, Sean Hannity on his radio program today is calling for other Republican Governors to enter the 2016 Presidential race. Some Governors with surpluses are Scott Walker, Bobby Jindal, and Rick Perry. They are getting the job done and could do the same for the whole country.

Notes from USA Today:

Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker, Republican: "What do you do with a surplus? Give it back to the people who earned it. It's your money," he said. But not all of it — Walker also outlined plans to spend part of the surplus to "invest in our technical colleges, train workers for high-demand jobs, and support employment opportunities for people with disabilities."

New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat: "We have gone from a $10 billion deficit to a $2 billion surplus in just three short years," he said. "We can increase our investments in education, health care, economic development and still provide more tax relief."

[Selene]

What else is out there looming on the horizon?

1) Out own motaal courage in not voting for any non-libertarian, non-Constitutionalist, or, non-conservative; and

2) Another factor, is not peimarying anyone that does not fit #1 above.

Larry J. Sabato is, at best, incompetent.

[Backlighting]

Peter said: "Las Vegas wrote, “I'm Italian too.”
Don’t you need a vowel at the end of your name to be Italian? How about “Las Vegasi?”
We need ideas"

Just some humor.

Of course we need ideas & the effective marketing of such, particularly to the students of our colleges & universities.

[Darrell Hougen]

My favorite is Ted Cruz, but I would seriously consider Scott Walker too. Bobby Jindal is also a possibility.

Ted Cruz could potentially appeal to Hispanics although he is of Cuban, not Mexican descent. He claims to speak Spanglish though I'm not sure what effect that might have on an election.

In general, the Republican Party has to do a better job of reaching out to minorities. That doesn't mean it has to change its principles, but it needs to pay attention to them, go to their neighborhoods, listen to their concerns, speak to them about problems that matter to them, etc.

Bobby Jindal might appeal to Indian Americans, but that is a rather small minority. Also, talking to an Indian after Jindal gave the rebuttal to the State of the Union Address a few years ago, he stated clearly that he didn't think Jindal had done a good job, almost as if he were embarrassed. I thought Jindal had done fine, but sometimes people are embarrassed for their own countrymen. The Indian giving his opinion was on the left and, perhaps, was embarrassed when he didn't hear the words he wanted to hear. I don't know, but I've seen the same reaction from women watching another woman run for President.

Scott Walker and Bobby Jindal have experience as successful government executives while Cruz is technically no more qualified than Obama. Oh, wait ... Anyway, Walker would certainly be a lightning rod and it would be a long ugly fight for him to get elected, but I think he could win, just as he did in Wisconsin. I also think Cruz could win though I know that would also be an ugly fight. I'm not too sure about Jindal. I'm not sure if he has the cajones to win.

I guess I like Cruz because I know he is principled. I'm not as clear on Walker or Jindal.

Darrell

Edit: I forgot to mention Marco Rubio. He's gotten a reputation for being a little soft on immigration, but otherwise I think he would be a great candidate. I love his positive, upbeat attitude.

Edited February 5, 2014 by Darrell Hougen

[GALTGULCH8]

I can understand why some of the hopefuls you mention are appealing to you and they each have their advocates.

There is a hurdle that might be hard for some of them to get over. But then again it is just some words in the eligibility clause of the U. S. Constitution which are being ignored these days.

You see one criterion which mattered for good reason to the Founders who wanted to assure that as aspirant to the presidency would have no divided loyalty, say by being a child born to European parents but not first born hence not in line to inherit a foreign throne.

Notice how one simply had to be an American citizen to be eligible to become a Senator or a Congressman but to be eligible to the Presidency one had to be a "natural born citizen."

This meant that both of one's parents had to be American citizens.

This bar was not met by our current usurper and it is odd that no Constitutional crisis has occurred for some reason. Powerlust comes to mind. This has trumped any patriotic feelings held by those who have longed to transform our country into a utopian egalitarian altruistic state.

It will be curious to find any objection brought against a GOP nominee whose parents are not American citizens by those who have supported the present occupier of the White House.

I get the impression that those who want to see a GOP nominee who does not meet the constitutional eligibility requirement elected share the distain for the Constitution held by those who are quick to ignore it when it does not suit their egregious purposes.

gg

[Selene]

I'm not as clear on Walker or Jindal.

Darrell:

Walker in a heartbeat should be considered because he has moral courage and has performed financial miracles in his purplish state of Wisconsin.

I like Jindal also, however, he is the worst speaker and needs a serious speech coach.

I agree on Cruz and Rubio also. Don't quite think that Rubio is ready, he seems to be still a tad unseasoned.

A...

[Peter]

Darrell wrote:

In general, the Republican Party has to do a better job of reaching out to minorities. That doesn't mean it has to change its principles, but it needs to pay attention to them, go to their neighborhoods, listen to their concerns, speak to them about problems that matter to them, etc.

end quote

Adam responded:

I agree on Cruz and Rubio also. Don't quite think Rubio is still a tad unseasoned.

end quote

Absolutely. Give these two guys a candy cigar. And I will stop with the Italian jokes. Have a well qualified minority on the ticket, as President or Veep, like Cruz or Baby Faced Marco Rubio.

Republican candidates must stop mentioning a woman’s reproductive rights. Butt out guys. It may seem petty but even women who prefer there were no more abortions don’t like a man telling women what to do. It is only peripherally a man’s business. Rand Paul sent out a “pro life” email last week and that was a big mistake. People are in other senses petty too because IN GENERAL a white will vote for a white, a black person will vote for a black, and a Hispanic will vote for a Hispanic.

In the case of our first black president that pettiness was evident in the breakdown between Obama and Romney. Whites voted 59 percent for Romney and blacks 93 percent for Obama. A case could be made that minorities vote for another minority because Hispanics voted for Obama 71 to 27 percent and Asians voted 73 to 26 percent for Obama.

Women voted for Obama 55 to 44 percent. 18 to 29 year olds voted for Obama 60 to 37 percent. 51 percent of college graduates voted for Romney, 47 percent for Obama. But a smaller educational group post graduate degree holders voted for Obama, 55 percent to 42 for Romney.

So white men and college graduates are reliably conservative and the rest are racists. (joke)

[Selene]

White men can't jump or dance then?

[Peter]

Adam wrote:

White men can't jump or dance then?

end quote

Uh oh. I will try not to offend anyone. This is an Objectivist site so I will discuss things in a fairly moderate, scientific way. Fred Astaire and Gene Kelley would disagree with the dance portion of your joke. And some of the worst dancing I have ever seen is by Beyonce though she was good dancing in a chair recently.

[Peter]

February 6, 2014 A Bridge Too Far-Fetched Ann Coulter

2/5/2014 7:50:00 PM - Ann Coulter New Jersey governor Chris Christie deserves to be defended.

The gravamen of the media's case against Christie on Bridgegate seems to be that he is a "bully" -- which I painstakingly gleaned from the fact that the governor is called a "bully" 1 million times a night on MSNBC and in hundreds of blog postings and New York Times reports. Christie is not a bully. If anything, he's a pansy, a man terrified of the liberal media, of Wall Street, of Silicon Valley, of Obama, of Bruce Springsteen, of Mark Zuckerberg, of Chuck Schumer. It's a good bet he's afraid of his own shadow. (In fairness, his shadow is probably pretty big and scary.) About the only thing Christie doesn't seem afraid of is the buffet at Sizzler.

Even Christie's defenders call him a bully, but in an admiring way. Fox News' Bill O'Reilly recently said of the governor: "One reason Mitt Romney lost to President Obama was that Governor Romney is too much of a gentleman. He apparently did not have the 'fire in the belly' to deliver a knockout blow. But Christie does and is therefore a threat to the Democratic Party." O'Reilly thinks Christie would have gotten in Obama's face? (I mean other than for a quick make-out session with Obama during Hurricane Sandy?)

By sheer coincidence, that was Christie's job at the 2012 Republican National Convention. As the keynote speaker, it was his assignment to "deliver a knockout blow" to Obama. Let's see how he did.

In Christie's entire gaseous convention speech, he talked about New Jersey (ad nauseam), his parents, his kids, his upbringing, every tedious detail of his tedious life -- "I coached our sons Andrew and Patrick on the fields of Mendham, and ... I watched with pride as our daughters Sarah and Bridget marched with their soccer teams in the Labor Day parade."

Just before I dozed off, I seem to remember Christie sharing his seven-layer dip recipe. The guy whose role it was to attack the president mentioned Obama exactly one time. Once. And even then, not by name. Here is Christie the Lion-Hearted taking the fight to Obama: "You see, Mr. President, real leaders do not follow polls. Real leaders change polls."

And that's how Christie bravely threw down the gauntlet to Obama on Benghazi, on Obamacare, on skyrocketing unemployment, on crony capitalism, on astronomical government spending and so on. He said: "Real leaders do not follow polls." Accusing a politician of following polls is the biggest cliche in politics after "He's dividing us!" In Obama's case, it isn't even true. Would that he followed polls! If he did, we never would have gotten Obamacare.

Of course, there wasn't much time for Christie to talk about Obama, because the main theme of his convention speech was: Chris Christie, Augustus Corpulus. He said "I" 37 times and "me" eight times, breaking Kim Kardashian's old record for a single tweet. He only mentioned our actual nominee (Mitt Romney) seven times -- in order to tell us how we were all going to have to sacrifice and make hard choices, and Romney was just the man to tell America the bad news and make us all suffer.

I suppose Christie considered it more than sufficient to announce that he, personally, supported Romney: "If you're willing to fight with me for Mitt Romney, I will fight with you." He -- Chris Christie! -- supported Romney. What more could voters want? It was as if Christie had sent his speech to MSNBC for pre-approval.

And it's not just one godawful speech. Christie's daily checklist appears to consist of two items: (1) Suck up to liberals. (2) Ask waiter for more bread. After a 30-minute conversation with Sen. Chuck Schumer last fall, Christie capitulated to the Democrats' need for 30 million more voters by directing his temporary Senate appointee to vote for the Schumer-Rubio amnesty bill. Schumer considered Christie so impotent that he immediately leaked the news that he had buffaloed Christie on amnesty in a single phone call.

The people amnesty helps are Democrats, who get multiple millions of new voters, and the soulless rich, who don't care about the country and don't care about the culture. They just want cheap labor.

Instead of standing up for the long-suffering middle class that is the backbone of the Republican Party -- much less the lower class lionized in so many Bruce Springsteen songs -- Christie sided with Silicon Valley billionaires and Wall Streeters on their servant problem, while also helping Democrats with their demographic problem. A few months later, Christie doubled down on amnesty by granting in-state tuition to illegal aliens. There isn't a wall high enough to stop illegal immigrants from sneaking across the border when the reward waiting on the other side is free health care, jobs, driver's licenses and college tuition subsidized by American taxpayers.

But at least Christie no longer has to lie awake at night wondering if Mark Zuckerberg will be his friend. True, Christie yelled at a few public school teachers, but they richly deserved it. Taking a page from John McCain, the main targets of Christie's wrath are his fellow Republicans. This has won him the respect of his most crucial constituency, liberal journalists, who have been precisely as loyal to him as they were to McCain.

If Christie looks guilty in Bridgegate, it's not because he's a "bully." It's because he believes lawbreaking is no big deal. Maybe he's hoping his BFF Obama will grant him amnesty.

[Peter]

Here’s a blurb about Hillary from Yahoo News today. I don’t think it deserves a thread so I will put it here with Christie.

From Yahoo News:

But the deeper question, if you’re Hillary Clinton, is less about the atmospherics of a campaign than about its animating idea. The mainstream of the party has now veered back toward its more populist and pacifist instincts, venting its suspicion of the emerging military-digital complex, along with outright contempt for the wealthy and for conservatives generally. That’s not where Clinton is. She maintains close relationships on Wall Street, where executives are not so secretly pining for her return to the arena, and she’s advocated a firmer American hand around the world, most recently in Syria. Her worldview reflects the governing establishment of both parties more faithfully than it does the Democratic base. This is exactly what most analysts think tripped her up last time, and there will be pressure for Clinton not to make the same mistake twice.

end quote

What anyone agree that Hillary’s mistake in 2008 was to not be a more doctrinaire left winger? I think the left and the left wing, mainstream media turned on her because Obama was a more warm and fuzzy story. Towards the press and the Democrat establishment Hillary was correctly perceived as vindictive and manipulative. This time there will be a front running challenger who will be a Hillary flunkie meant to split the primary votes with any real challengers. What Democrat will the Republicans facetiously support to thwart Hillary? Remember Rush’s “Operation Chaos” which supported Clinton over Obama?

[Michael Stuart Kelly]

Fred Astaire and Gene Kelley would disagree with the dance portion of your joke. And some of the worst dancing I have ever seen is by Beyonce though she was good dancing in a chair recently.

Peter,

Let's go for broke on politically incorrect.

Would you be interested in Chris Christie dancing?

Michael

[Selene]

Fred Astaire and Gene Kelley would disagree with the dance portion of your joke. And some of the worst dancing I have ever seen is by Beyonce though she was good dancing in a chair recently.

Peter,

Let's go for broke on politically incorrect.

Would you be interested in Chris Christie dancing?

Michael

If he was as light on his feet as Jackie Gleason, sure...

A...

[Selene]

February 6, 2014 A Bridge Too Far-Fetched Ann Coulter

Instead of standing up for the long-suffering middle class that is the backbone of the Republican Party -- much less the lower class lionized in so many Bruce Springsteen songs -- Christie sided with Silicon Valley billionaires and Wall Streeters on their servant problem, while also helping Democrats with their demographic problem. A few months later, Christie doubled down on amnesty by granting in-state tuition to illegal aliens. There isn't a wall high enough to stop illegal immigrants from sneaking across the border when the reward waiting on the other side is free health care, jobs, driver's licenses and college tuition subsidized by American taxpayers.

But at least Christie no longer has to lie awake at night wondering if Mark Zuckerberg will be his friend. True, Christie yelled at a few public school teachers, but they richly deserved it. Taking a page from John McCain, the main targets of Christie's wrath are his fellow Republicans. This has won him the respect of his most crucial constituency, liberal journalists, who have been precisely as loyal to him as they were to McCain.

If Christie looks guilty in Bridgegate, it's not because he's a "bully." It's because he believes lawbreaking is no big deal. Maybe he's hoping his BFF Obama will grant him amnesty.

Not this Ann Coulter - lol

Mark Levin on Chris Christie and Ann Coulter’s support

Posted: February 16th, 2011 8:28 PM | Author: Henry D'Andrea

Mark Levin responds to Ann Coulter’s support for Chris Christie for President. Christie has stated many times that he is not running for President. Ann Coulter still widely supports him. Mark Levin responded to Coulter, and I have to agree with him. This isn’t Christie’s time.

When will my dear friend Ann start to address the substantive problems with Christie’s actual positions or are we going to get another year of “only Christie can win” fortune cookie logic?

Does she support his positions on: gun control, amnesty, the appointment of an Islamist to the bench, the green agenda, his campaigning for Mike Castle, his MIA on health care litigation, etc.; and how does she think this would energize the base outside of New Jersey? Has the Tea Party even in NJ been pushing for his candidacy? No. Yes, he’s solid in his YouTube battles with teachers and his efforts to try and address NJ’s budget problems, the outcome of which have yet to be determined. But the federal government is a vast enterprise that requires a solid conservative at the helm, especially now.

Oh, and Ann, I backed Fred Thompson. He lost. I reluctantly wound up voting for McCain like millions of my fellow conservatives. Who did you back? Who did you vote for? And what did you do to stop McCain before his nomination? My listeners know we opposed him every step of the way until the end of October 2008. I don’t run the GOP and I don’t decide who runs in primaries. I can encourage candidates to run, etc., but my powers are limited. If it were up to me, Marco Rubio would get into the presidential race. I’m not sure why Ann is dissing him for Christie. Rubio is solidly conservative.

Read the rest here

Conservatives4Palin on the issue

I generally like Ann Coulter and agree with many of her views. However, as smart a lawyer and writer as Ann is, I am puzzled as to why she thinks Christie is the best candidate to defeat Obama in 2012. He likely would not even stand a chance at winning the nomination when Republican primary voters realize many of the stances he has taken that are outlined in Levin’s piece above. Finally, this is all a moot point anyway because Christie has said as recently as this afternoon that he is not running in 2012.

Right Wingnut from Right Speak

I agree with Levin on this one. I enjoy watching Christie take on the corrupt unions as much as anyone, but I don’t understand why Coulter is willing to give him a pass on his questionable policy positions.

At least she was honest enough to change her mind...

A...

[Peter]

Michael wrote, “Would you be interested in Chris Christie dancing?”

Naw. He wouldn’t be as good as Jackie Gleason. Now if any late night host would put together about a dozen Chris Christie’s dancing in unison, like the dancing bears in a Disney cartoon, that would be hysterical. I would never have guessed the music from Adam’s video link was Armenian. I would have guessed, “Indian.”

Anne Coulter said about Christie, “This has won him the respect of his most crucial constituency, liberal journalists, who have been precisely as loyal to him as they were to McCain.” Wow. That is right on. Christie is the least unpalatable person they will never vote for. The red, yellow journalists will support Socialist A and vote for Communist B before they would ever vote for a Republican. As Taylor Swift sang, “We are never, ever, ever getting together with a Republican Statist, only a Progressive Statist.” Reminds me of the battles between the Nazis and the Commies.

My only beef with Mark Levin is that he needs to stop getting so worked up on the air. It makes him sound kookie like Michael Savage and Glenn Beck. Rampant emotionalist might get you replayed by a few left wing shows but no one on the Right will promote you. Which brings me to another beef. Why is Fox news analysis so shallow? I get tired of watching its knee jerk reactions.

[Selene]

My only beef with Mark Levin is that he needs to stop getting so worked up on the air. It makes him sound kookie like Michael Savage and Glenn Beck. Rampant emotionalist might get you replayed by a few left wing shows but no one on the Right will promote you.

So their passion, their Pathos should become what, Peter?

Boring colorless "orators" like most of the Orthodox Objectivists?

I would never have guessed the music from Adam’s video link was Armenian. I would have guessed, “Indian.”

I believe the are common roots of that music throughout the Persian empire, e.g. Turkey, the Stans, eic.

A...

[Backlighting]

In a Republication Administration Christie might be effective as our Ambassodor to the U.N.

There at the podium, with a Colt revolver on each hip, he would take on the middle east tribal chiefs, Putin and the Asian dictators.

Now that would be a sight.

[BaalChatzaf]

In a Republication Administration Christie might be effective as our Ambassodor to the U.N.

There at the podium, with a Colt revolver on each hip, he would take on the middle east tribal chiefs, Putin and the Asian dictators.

Now that would be a sight.

As long as he does not go shirtless.

Ba'al Chatzaf

[Peter]

A potential political ad.

A phone rings at 4 in the morning. The camera goes to a Hillary look alike. She answers “hello” and listens. We see Benghazi on the screen. We see four coffins coming home. The screen cuts to Secretary of State Clinton at the Senate’s inquiry petulantly answering, “What difference does it make?” Cut to a black screen with the bold letters, “Who would you entrust a foreign diplomat or soldier’s life to in the White House?”

Think of some improvements.

I heard very little of the broadcast but Rush was saying today that he does not think Hillary will run. Does anyone know who might run in the Democrat primary?

[Selene]

The lying lady from Massachucetts is one.

Cuomo is another.

[Selene]

Love this woman's sense of satire...

The House Republicans' "Standards for Immigration Reform," for example, contains this fat, honking nonsense: "One of the great founding principles of our country was that children would not be punished for the mistakes of their parents."

As the kids say: WTF?

Excellent aticle...http://www.anncoulter.com/columns/2014-02-12.html#read_more

The once-respected Rep. Trey Gowdy, R-S.C., compared illegal aliens brought here as kids to children who steal a grape or scream in a restaurant:

"When children wander into neighborhood yards, we don't call that trespassing. When children cry and yell and scream at restaurants or on airplanes, we don't call that a violation of the noise ordinance. When children eat a grape at the grocery store or eat a piece of candy waiting in line before Mom or Dad pays for it, we don't have them arrested for petty larceny."

Yes, but in those cases, both the child and his parents had a right to be where they were -- the yard, restaurant or grocery store -- when the child suddenly behaved like a child. With illegal aliens, the parents are more like gypsies teaching their kids to beg and pick pockets. The parents forced the kids into being lawbreakers.

Similarly, Palestinians use their children to commit acts of terrorism against Israel, so that when Israel responds, the parents can wail, "They're bombing children!"

(I thought only liberals couldn't do analogies.)

Americans are under no moral obligation to admit huge numbers of people who have no particular right to be here just because the Democrats need 30 million new voters.

[Peter]

As a possible candidate in the 2016 Democrat Presidential primary, Adam mentioned, “The lying lady from Massachusetts is one.”

She needs a nickname. How about Wooden Indian? Commie Swami? Phony Indian? Resume enhancer? Lying Indian? Flawed Squaw? Cherokee, Wannabe?

[Selene]

She who speaks with forked tongue!

[Peter]

She who speaks with forked tongue!

Wow. That is better than any of mine. Rush once mentioned Warren will be the token resistance for Hillary in the primary. Now he thinks Hillary is too old. She does look old. Maybe Hillary will get a "life style lift." Before: Troll. After: Joan Rivers. Still a troll. Now Margaret Thatcher was an older lady so it may be sexist to focus on exteriors.