Chris Christie's Chappaquiddick

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 1:06 AM GMT
    Emails recovered from the Christie administration prove that the lane closures in Fort Lee were political payback. After repeatedly denying it, the lies were proven when his chief of staff, Bridget Kelly, sent an email saying "Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee."

    Amusing political prank. say the Republicans. But it stopped being amusing today when it turns out that a woman died because emergency vehicles couldn't get through.

    There goes Krispy Kreme's presidential dream.

    http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/01/08/3138621/report-bridge-closures-led-emergency-response-delays-death/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 1:10 AM GMT
    Christie thinks he's a mafia bully. It's time his bullshit gets called out.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 3:08 AM GMT
    At least children didn't have to watch him sucking some woman's toes.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 3:10 AM GMT
    Has deniability. Won't make a difference in three years.

  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 3:10 AM GMT
    http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304347904579308632102026344?mod=WSJ_Opinion_MIDDLETopOpinion

    We'd like to develop the point with a bit more specificity. Christie's reputation as a straight talker has made for a flattering contrast with the smooth-talking Barack Obama. Obama's deceptions, most notably his fraudulent claims about ObamaCare, have seriously damaged public trust in Washington. Christie's supposed candor made him look as if he might be the man to restore it.

    Worse, the Christie administration's evident abuse of the Port Authority is reminiscent of the Obama administration's abuse of the Internal Revenue Service. Neither the governor nor the president has been shown to be directly involved, but each must bear a measure of responsibility for his subordinates' actions. One of Obama's worst traits is his unvarnished contempt for his political opponents. The new revelations from Trenton suggest that Christie's administration, if not the man himself, has a similar quality.

    Its sheer pettiness is what distinguishes the GWB scandal from the ObamaCare and IRS ones. The ObamaCare fraud was in the service of an ambitious ideological agenda, and as we have argued, the 2012 election was close enough that it is possible the IRS's suppression of opposition was necessary to secure the president a second term. Christie, by contrast, is not much of an ideologue and was cruising to an easy re-election.

    In the latter regard, the bridge shenanigans look more like the Watergate burglary--a gratuitous misuse of power. "Reporters will eventually demand to know . . . what Christie knew and when he knew it," observes conservative blogger Sean Davis. "None of the defenses now available to Christie--intentional deceit or intentional ignorance--paint him in a favorable light." That's especially true if voters two years from now are looking for a corrective to the corruption and deception of the Obama years.


    As for using personal emails for work purposes to attack political opponents? The IRS scandal is still growing -
    http://www.wcpo.com/news/political/house-oversight-committee-louis-lerner-used-personal-email-for-irs-business

    Christie won't get the nomination.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 3:20 AM GMT
    woodsmen saidriddler78, who do you think will be GOP POTUS candidates?


    No idea... I do think however that there will be a resurgence of libertarians/tea partiers who are focused primarily on economic issues. Midterms I think will be more helpful in seeing who emerges as a leader with coat tails as tea partiers continue to pick off candidates favored by Republican leadership.

    I think it's a safe bet though that Chris Christie will run - but again, I highly doubt he'd get the nomination - with this scandal being used for the reason though there are considerably more. I think there are just far too many variables of things that could go horribly bad (or good) on a number of big issues that play better for various potential candidates - from healthcare, foreign policy, drug legalization to the emerging scandals with benghazi, irs.

    Oh and one last variable: possible emergence of a grassroots movement within the Democratic party that emulates the tea partiers. Something more akin to the blue dogs (see video of very unhappy black voters in Chicago).
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 3:26 AM GMT
    This is definitely bad for Christie, abusing power never looks good and even though he can shift blame onto appointees, it still will hurt his bipartisan credentials.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 3:32 AM GMT
    If there emerges any sort of alternate movement within the Democratic Party, it won't be towards the right, it will be towards the Elizabeth Warren-Bill deBlasio direction.
    The Ridiot once again demonstrates how superficial is his understanding of American politics. The Democratic Party is already about as conservative as its base will ever permit it to get. Stupid flinging around of terms like "socialist" aside (and where else should you fling them?) the mainstream Democratic Party right now resembles most closely the Eisenhower-era Republican Party.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 3:32 AM GMT
    woodsmen saidSeveral political scientist scholars have indicated that the signs are present for the demise of the GOP (as it had four times in our history to conservative parties) to give rise to a new conservative party. It would be bad for conservatives if this were to happen in the next POTUS election.


    I think that was a more plausible scenario before the Democrats imploded over Obamacare (and as I've noted, I think it's going to get far worse). Now you have the opposite view with those like Ted Cruz looking pretty good given his predictions at this point.

    I don't think the tea partiers will abandon the Republicans. What will be interesting to see is how quickly the social conservative influence will collapse - given the already dwindling support for a lot of these views demographically amongst young Republicans.

    It's been pointed out by many people - least of all pundits, that the Obama Administration has been the best gift to libertarians ever... by making the young engaged politically, they're the ones becoming libertarians as they enter (slowly) and develop in the workforce.

    Oh and by way of reference:

    http://wizbangblog.com/2013/12/23/video-al-sharptons-chicago-town-hall-revolts-against-democrat-machine-politics/

    You can decide if Democrats will shift left or right. Some will undoubtedly shift left, but the Occupy/Shaheen wing of the party shows how sustainable those views were.

    Aristoshark however does have a proven record of wishful thinking.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:15 AM GMT
    The tea partiers aren't a party certainly - but it's a movement where people are tired of the government corruption, regulation and intrusion. I'm not sure the tea partiers are united either on being against immigration or immigrants - which would make the article somewhat mute for historical comparative purposes. Ted Cruz after all, is hispanic.

    When it comes to immigration though, I think you'll find that tea partiers don't want to have amnesty and a short cut for people who have broken the law prioritized over those who have actually tried to navigate your horrible immigration system. With parents who were immigrants to Canada, I think that's reasonable. It is somewhat instructive for instance the startup visa (fast track visas for proven/startup entrepreneurs) - where it was in fact, the Obama Administration that quashed it thinking that he could use something that was popular on both sides of the aisle to insist on comprehensive reforms that would include amnesty.

    Let me again emphasize that it was the Obama Administration that killed this bill - not the tea partiers.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:34 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Let me again emphasize that it was the Obama Administration that killed this bill - not the tea partiers.

    Pretend whatever you like.
    The bill was killed by Tea Party caucus members pressuring the non-Tea Party GOP by threatening primaries.

    As usual, you have everything wrong. Not that that stops you, or even penetrates.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:36 AM GMT
    Aristoshark said
    riddler78 said
    Let me again emphasize that it was the Obama Administration that killed this bill - not the tea partiers.

    Pretend whatever you like.
    The bill was killed by Tea Party caucus members pressuring the non-Tea Party GOP by threatening primaries.

    As usual, you have everything wrong. Not that that stops you, or even penetrates.


    Heh - you can make stuff up all you want but it was the Obama Administration that decided to tie the startup visas that would have passed on its own to larger immigration reform.

    So no, it was the Obama Administration that killed the bill.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:37 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    Aristoshark said
    riddler78 said
    Let me again emphasize that it was the Obama Administration that killed this bill - not the tea partiers.

    Pretend whatever you like.
    The bill was killed by Tea Party caucus members pressuring the non-Tea Party GOP by threatening primaries.

    As usual, you have everything wrong. Not that that stops you, or even penetrates.


    Heh - you can make stuff up all you want but it was the Obama Administration that decided to tie the startup visas that would have passed on its own to larger immigration reform.

    So no, it was the Obama Administration that killed the bill.

    As usual, you don't understand the politics.
    Obama and the Democrats refuse to allow the GOP to pick apart bills and pass only the parts they like. It's called standing up to bullies---kind of what you force me to do with you.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:40 AM GMT
    Aristoshark said
    riddler78 said
    Aristoshark said
    riddler78 said
    Let me again emphasize that it was the Obama Administration that killed this bill - not the tea partiers.

    Pretend whatever you like.
    The bill was killed by Tea Party caucus members pressuring the non-Tea Party GOP by threatening primaries.

    As usual, you have everything wrong. Not that that stops you, or even penetrates.


    Heh - you can make stuff up all you want but it was the Obama Administration that decided to tie the startup visas that would have passed on its own to larger immigration reform.

    So no, it was the Obama Administration that killed the bill.

    As usual, you don't understand the politics.
    Obama and the Democrats refuse to allow the GOP to pick apart bills and pass only the parts they like. It's called standing up to bullies---kind of what you force me to do with you.


    The startup visa bill was introduced separately - by the Democrats. It was however killed by the Obama Administration after the fact when they decided they wanted it combined with the comprehensive immigration act.

    For someone who claims to know as much as you do, you have a really convenient memory that leaves out all the relevant facts. Not to mention the fact, that when it comes to bullying, few do it better than your lovely self. icon_rolleyes.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:45 AM GMT
    You have an answer for everything.
    Your answers are invariably wrong.
    But you answer anyway.
    You think because you read WorldNetDaily that you know what people here think.
    You're really not worth my time.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:46 AM GMT
    woodsmen saidriddler78, who do you think will be GOP POTUS candidates?


    Remember that Kennedy came back to still mount a very serious challenge to Carter in 1980.

    I think Rubio's star has fallen a little so I'd still say Christie or Jeb Bush with Rubio slightly behind.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:47 AM GMT
    Aristoshark saidYou have an answer for everything.
    Your answers are invariably wrong.
    But you answer anyway.
    You think because you read WorldNetDaily that you know what people here think.
    You're really not worth my time.
    Good - then people should go back and look at the timeline and decide who they want to believe. Your delusions or their lying eyes icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:47 AM GMT
    freedomisntfree said
    woodsmen saidriddler78, who do you think will be GOP POTUS candidates?


    Remember that Kennedy came back to still mount a very serious challenge to Carter in 1980.

    I think Rubio's star has fallen a little so I'd still say Christie or Jeb Bush with Rubio slightly behind.

    Chriatie's done, and not just because of this.
    I put it between Ted Cruz and Scott Walker.
    I hope it's Cruz. He'll get slaughtered.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:48 AM GMT
    YourName2000 saidIt amazes me the time some of you spend arguing with a troll who is Chinese (living in China, not talking about his race), pretends to be Canadian, and only talks about American right-wing talking points. You all do remember that his primary function is stealing jobs from America and outsourcing them to China, right? Nothing he says is honest...yet you trick yourselves into thinking you're having an honest policy discussion with him. He has a totally different agenda, and the best interests of America and the fulfillment of real Americans aren't part of it in the slightest.


    Ah you just can't help it with your racism. Have you considered dating Aristoshark? You're more or less matched in looks and you guys could be angry and delusional together. icon_wink.gif
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:48 AM GMT
    YourName2000 saidIt amazes me the time some of you spend arguing with a troll who is Chinese (living in China, not talking about his race), pretends to be Canadian, and only talks about American right-wing talking points. You all do remember that his primary function is stealing jobs from America and outsourcing them to China, right? Nothing he says is honest...yet you trick yourselves into thinking you're having an honest policy discussion with him. He has a totally different agenda, and the best interests of America and the fulfillment of real Americans aren't part of it in the slightest.

    I only do it to counteract his fantasies in case any of the other posters who don't pay much attention actually believe any of his Communist horseshit.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:50 AM GMT
    woodsmen saidNone of the GOP choices are good if the GOP is even going to be around with its current platform.


    The problem is that the Democratic platform as it stands is also a highly unpopular one.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:52 AM GMT
    Aristoshark said
    freedomisntfree said
    woodsmen saidriddler78, who do you think will be GOP POTUS candidates?


    Remember that Kennedy came back to still mount a very serious challenge to Carter in 1980.

    I think Rubio's star has fallen a little so I'd still say Christie or Jeb Bush with Rubio slightly behind.

    Chriatie's done, and not just because of this.
    I put it between Ted Cruz and Scott Walker.
    I hope it's Cruz. He'll get slaughtered.


    I'd be perfectly happy with Scott Walker too. Like Rubio, I just don't think he's seasoned quite enough yet. 2020 maybe.

    Hopefully, things are settled down enough around here that I can work for the campaign, which I wasn't able to do for Romney
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:55 AM GMT
    riddler78 said
    woodsmen saidNone of the GOP choices are good if the GOP is even going to be around with its current platform.


    The problem is that the Democratic platform as it stands is also a highly unpopular one.

    Yup, that's what you get reading WorldNutDaily.

    In the real world, the Democratic positions outpoll all Republican positions by anywhere from 10 to 30 points, depending on the issue.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 5:57 AM GMT
    Aristoshark said
    riddler78 said
    woodsmen saidNone of the GOP choices are good if the GOP is even going to be around with its current platform.


    The problem is that the Democratic platform as it stands is also a highly unpopular one.

    Yup, that's what you get reading WorldNutDaily.

    In the real world, the Democratic positions outpoll all Republican positions by anywhere from 10 to 30 points, depending on the issue.


    icon_lol.gif . Yep kinda like how the Obamacare website is going so well. Keep posting. Oh and documenting - you might learn something.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Jan 09, 2014 6:07 AM GMT
    Aristoshark said
    riddler78 said
    woodsmen saidNone of the GOP choices are good if the GOP is even going to be around with its current platform.


    The problem is that the Democratic platform as it stands is also a highly unpopular one.

    Yup, that's what you get reading WorldNutDaily.

    In the real world, the Democratic positions outpoll all Republican positions by anywhere from 10 to 30 points, depending on the issue.



    http://www.pollingreport.com/work.htm

    http://www.pollingreport.com/budget.htm

    http://www.pollingreport.com/crime.htm

    http://www.pollingreport.com/energy.htm

    http://www.pollingreport.com/enviro.htm

    http://www.pollingreport.com/guns.htm

    http://www.pollingreport.com/food.htm

    http://www.pollingreport.com/health.htm

    http://www.pollingreport.com/immigration.htm

    http://www.pollingreport.com/civil.htm

    http://www.pollingreport.com/religion.htm

    http://www.pollingreport.com/social.htm