NJ Gov. Chris Christie: "The President has kept every promise he made" (On Sandy aid)
In a televised interview on "Morning Joe", New Jersey Governor Chris Christie declared President Obama followed through on promises to New Jersey after Hurricane Sandy delivered widespread devastation along the coast.
As Christie himself seemed to acknowledge, doubtless such praise would infuriate folks in his own party.
Possible political conclusions:
(1). Governor Christie is running for re-election in a Democratic majority state. He can't afford to worry about the Republican Presidential nominating process when he still has to win re-election. (Not that he looks very vulnerable at the moment!)
(2). Governor Christie's just being Governor Christie. He says what he believes, and to hell with the political repercussions (in terms of national politics). He understands that's what makes him appealing.
(3). Governor Christie has tentatively concluded he has little chance of prevailing in a race for the Republican Presidential nomination anyway, given the the very conservative tilt of the first Republican primaries and caucuses. And he knows only too well what happened to Rudy Giuliani, who avoided Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina... just to focus on Florida. Giuliani's candidacy imploded. Plus, what room would there be for Christie with several Tea Party-type candidates on the ultraRight and either Marco Rubio or Jeb Bush running with G.O.P. establishment support?
(4). Or, Governor Christie is concentrating on New Jersey for now, figuring - if he DID run for the G.O.P. Presidential nomination - he'd stand out as the kind of Republican who could potentially win purple or even blue states. Jeb Bush very well might decide against running and Marco Rubio's immigration stance could get him into trouble in those early caucus and primary states.
Anyway... here's the account of Christie's remarks about the Obama Administration's follow-through on Hurricane Sandy aid...
Allan Loudell is watching "Morning Joe." This proves he's a right-winger. A failed wing-nut, red-neck Florida ex-congressman has no business on MSNBC with progressives like Ed and Rachel Maddow. Ship the loser over to Fox where he belongs.
And typical for a right-wing host, Allan Loudell makes an obvious attempt to incite and rouse his Archie Bunkerite fans against Christie or anyone else who shows intelligence and independence enough to deviate from the ditto-head gospel.
Tue, Apr 30, 2013 7:20am
Stop jumping to conclusions, Mr. Smith.
Actually I've NEVER watched "Morning Joe", not once.
Frankly, given my job responsibilities, I wouldn't be able to.
But even with free time, I don't - repeat - I don't watch ANY of the morning TV shows, over-the-air OR cable.
And I rarely watch the nighttime shows.
I just saw a web account about Christie's interview this morning.
I have no desire to incite people for or against Christie.
As I've said repeatedly... I don't vote for President or Senator or Governor not because of some contrived journalistic neutrality, but because I cannot do so for private reasons with which I've struggled for three decades.
I agree with you that "Morning Joe" is an outlier for MS NBC (although he's infuriated conservatives too!).
It's interesting you yourself said we should not be captive to a flat right--center--left continuum and then you consign me to one pole of that continuum.
I probably don't agree with ANY commenter on this blog more than a third to a quarter of the time. But it obviously would surprise you how often I agree with you -- when you're not just slamming someone on this blog.
Tue, Apr 30, 2013 8:15am
Sad commentary that our society is so partisan that an elected official is 'not allowed' to praise somebody in another party. GOP criticizing Christie for praising Obama? This reflects the narrow-minded dunderheads running the Republican Party right now.
Tue, Apr 30, 2013 8:45am
I think by bucking that trend, Christie is doing what he can to change the environment. There is nothing like success. And though die-hard Republicans who are now, less than 10 percent of the population, they still have 75% of favorable media focus. Those who cry, wail, and gnash their teeth when Christie runs and wins votes, as well as attracting the admiration of Democrats simply for being his own self... the entire world will come to accept that those with Republican values are not even worth listening to. So what if a tree falls in the woods?
Which brings us to another assertion. One that is glaringly true. If there were no televised media, there could be NO Republican Party. The false logic of all Republican ideas, when seen in print, is indefensible. Only with lights, backdrops, explosions, and harsh facial contortions, in other words, studio effects, can they even attempt to make their argument appear the slightest bit plausible to the general public....
Without television. It's impossible! There could be no conservatives.
Mike from Delaware
Tue, Apr 30, 2013 8:59am
Allan: I'll pick #2, (2). Governor Christie's just being Governor Christie. He says what he believes, and to hell with the political repercussions (in terms of national politics). He understands that's what makes him appealing.
That is exactly what I like about the rotund governor from the "Petrachemical Capital of the World" which they call the "Garden State" because the other name wouldn't fit on the license plates [stealing a line from "Miss Congeniality" Gov. Christie says what he believes and "damn the torpedos", or, in this case the far right-wing branch of the GOP. He's a breath of fresh air in the stale stuffy air of insane partisanship that's now Washington, DC.
Sure, Christie probably doesn't agree with all of Obama's policies, but he's got an independent enough of a mind to be able to say when Obama does something correct, and apparently Obama kept his word as to what help the Feds would give NJ. So why shouldn't he acknowledge that? To NOT do so would be less than honest, and less than honorable. So if the GOP gets its knickers in a twist over that, then that might suggest the GOP, as a party, is being less than honest and less than honorable.
I really hope Christie runs for Prez; he's got my vote. Wow, a straight talker, who'll tell you like it is, what a concept. An "honest politician". Can a man or woman who's as outspoken, who's willing to work with the other side of the aisle to get something done, as Chris Christie seems to be able to do, win the Presidency? Maybe we'll find out in 2016.
It's also time for the "moderate wing of the GOP" to either kick out the ultra-rightwingers or go start their own party, maybe calling it "Classic GOP" the party that gave us Teddy Roosevelt. Of course for those under 40, you might have to explain who Teddy Roosevelt was. But you get my point.
Tue, Apr 30, 2013 9:29am
David Letterman has been telling "fat jokes" about Christie since he took office. A few weeks ago, Christie went on the show as a guest. He sat down for the interview and pulled a sandwich out of his pocket and took a bite - getting one of the biggest laughs recorded on the show. Christie came off as smart, articulate and funny. A big hit.
I've seen different political scientists describe different left-right dimensions in political thought. They often use different words to describe them, too. Generally, they boil down to....
And few people are left or right on all of them.
Letterman often recalls that his show is broadcast from the same theater as the Ed Sullivan Show. It's also the same theater used for several years by the Jackie Gleason Show. I was waiting for Christie to come out wearing Ralph Kramden's bus driver uniform (and carrying a lunch box). Maybe next time.
Marco Rubio tried to work across the aisle and now he's getting slammed for it, too.
In his day, Teddy Roosevelt was considered (and considered himself) a "progressive"). This is when the Democratic Party was generally "conservative" (and dominated by Southerners). Teddy died in 1919, so people who need to have him explained might be way over 40. Heck, you'd have to be in your 70s to remember his cousin.
"Petrachemical (sic) Capital of the World?" Look to the beam in Delaware's own eye in that category.
Tue, Apr 30, 2013 9:48am
What are the private reasons why Mr. Loudell cannot vote for Senator, Governor or President? Does he vote for state legislators or county council?
Tue, Apr 30, 2013 10:33am
I vote for local lawmakers to the extent that they don't cast votes on the big (life & death) issues which concern me.
If I ever did a PRIVATE blog - apart from WDEL.com - and I were retired, no longer on-air - I'd give you my complete philosphical world view. I do not feel it's appropriate to do so here.
Suffice it to say I don't know of any talk-show host on-the-air today anywhere in the country; or newspaper editorial board; or ANY political party... who/which truly reflects my worldview.
I realize - for many people - it's not a matter of truly embracing a party or candidates, but voting for the "lesser of two evils". That doesn't work for me.
A couple of times over the years, I've argued with my parents over this issue.
Indeed, doing this blog at wdel.com represents a challenge because I realize readers want me to offer SOME opinion and analysis, not just antiseptic neutrality. (I've talked to newspaper people who blog who experience the same conflict... how much to let out!)
I envy those of you who do not experience a profound conflict when voting, who can identify substantially with Republicans, Democrats, Libertarians, or even one of the minor, minor parties. I must respect how all of you have arrived at your current philosophical positions.
Mike from Delaware
Tue, Apr 30, 2013 10:49am
Billsmith: When I said, that those under 40 might not know who Teddy Roosevelt was, I was implying they didn't study him at all in their high school history classes.
Tue, Apr 30, 2013 1:02pm
Allan Loudell: My voting strategy is to go for minimal damage. I vote against the incumbent. If/when the person I vote for becomes the incumbent, then I vote for his/her opponent. It doesn't matter what they say they think or what they promise to do; they lie and they don't keep their promises anyway. If no incumbent is running, I vote for whichever person annoys me less. I realize this runs against the current of Delaware and other places which seem to take pride on re-electing people over and over ... and even over.
Speaking of Widener and incumbents: No wonder these people can't get jobs if Biden represents the quality of their faculty. He briefly practiced law some 40 years ago. Never been a legal scholar or researcher (actually plagiarized a law school paper). Did not attend a top law school. Did not make the law review. Barely graduated. I guess he represents those who can't do principle in legal education. Same for Ed Rendell.
Wed, May 1, 2013 1:21am
Obama has kept his promises on more than just Sandy aid. He's promised to enact policies that are destructive to America and so far has delivered on every one of them. Way to go, Mr. President!
Wed, May 1, 2013 1:24am
I hope the people of New Jersey overwhelmingly elect Corey Booker for their next governor in retaliation for Christie's most sickening kissing-up to Obama.
Wed, May 1, 2013 5:50am
Corey Booker is running for the U.S. Senate.
Wed, May 1, 2013 7:08am
I see pizza is up late and forgot to take his meds. The tip-off is "destructive to America." Funny, the wing-nuts never hated Clinton this much. Of, wait a minute, Clinton was all-White (he just acted Black sometimes). Obama is half-Black (but acts all White).
Wed, May 1, 2013 8:07am
To the original question posed about NJ Gov Chris Christie I'll vote for #1. (1). Governor Christie is running for re-election in a Democratic majority state. He can't afford to worry about the Republican Presidential nominating process when he still has to win re-election. (Not that he looks very vulnerable at the moment!)
If he were "just being himself" I think he would have bluntly pointed out both the good and the bad that happened during/after Hurricane Sandy recovery...I will not be surpised in the least when Gov Christie changes over to a Democrat and he uses the Arlen Spector quote that, "I didn't leave the R party, the R party left me"...
btw, republicans despised Clinton during his presidency almost as much as they currently despise Obama...remember, Clinton was actually able to pass the AWB but (thanks to the NRA) Obama was defeated on that one. Now if HillaryCare had passed Clinton would have been even worse than Obama....even many Democrats are starting to balk as they see what ObamaCare is going to cost the Middle class they are supposedly helping.
The dislike for these men has nothing to do with race, it's about the policies both put into place and how they have performed in their jobs at President of the United States...btw, how many Republicans do you think like Jimmy Carter? And how many Republicans are walking away from Chris Christie as his policies look less and less like theirs? Again, not race...it's the policies.
Mike from Delaware
Wed, May 1, 2013 8:28am
EarlGrey: its those ultra rightwing policies that are killing the GOP. Bring back the moderate GOP, the one with common sense.
The NRA and the TEA folks [the ultra rightwing branch of the GOP] are against having stronger back ground checks on folks who want to buy a gun. Most of these school, college, church, mall, shooters were not criminals PRIOR to them shooting up some place. Having back ground checks that look at mental issues are important to help make it more difficult for the mentally challenged to easily get a gun.
Granted criminals will still go buy illegal guns, hey they're criminals, and that is a different issue that also needs to be addressed, but we're ignoring totally the nut jobs out there who need to be on Medications daily to keep them in this world and not out in Never Never Land somewhere. Those folks have no business owning or getting near a gun. YET the Teafolks and NRA oppose that common sense approach.
Frankly I'm starting to believe the reason is many of them may indeed be on Meds themselves to keep them from going to Never Never Land, so of course they oppose stronger back ground checks. There's no other explanation possible. Doing this will in no way prevent ANY legal, sane, law abiding American from owning or buying guns.
It's this kind of non-sense that might drive a moderate GOPer like Chris Christie to start a Classic GOP Party, going back to the values that made Republicanism a good thing not a hinderence to the nation. Even Ronald Reagan isn't conservative enough for today's GOP. It's only because they've "knighted" him or made him Saint Ronald that is less than their conservative values are acceptable.
Frankly I believe its time for the moderate wing of the GOP to retake the GOP or go start the Classic GOP Party, because if they don't, the DEMS will continue to win. The nation does not want the ultra right wing stuff any more than they want the ultra left wing stuff. Most Americans are moderates in the middle. Note the most popular radio show in America is elRushbo, he pulls in 5% of the radio audience. So essentially 95% of the radio audience is NOT listening to right wing talk radio. So he does NOT speak for the majority, anymore than Rachel Maddow on the left speaks for the majority. The sooner the GOP wakes up and realizes this the sooner they will start winning again. It is what it is.
Wed, May 1, 2013 9:23am
MikeFromDelaware: Tea Party types have always been with us. At one time they were aligned with Strom Thurmond, George Wallace and the John Birch Society. Nixon invited them into the Republican Party. But it was the current system of primaries and unlimited money that gave them power, and that has allowed them to take over the Republican Party and nominate the O'Donnells and Palins among us. They are able to intimidate members of congress into doing their bidding because they can deny them re-nomination (no re-nomination, no re-election). All votes don't count equally. A combination of anger and money makes some votes count more. Too bad pollsters don't factor that in when prediction "popularity contests."
Wed, May 1, 2013 10:06am
billsmith: Clinton prided himself on being America's first black president.
Wed, May 1, 2013 11:00am
mike: I think the real reason the GOP keeps losing is because the party has watered-down its policies and has become nothing more than Democrat-Lite in its attempts to been seen as "Moderate"... Would you go with the candidate who has completely sold-out his/her core conservative values so that candidate can "compete" with liberal values? That type of thinking gave Republicans both moderate McCain & Mitt Romney, and we saw how well that went. Why not try some REAL Republican vs. Hillary...or Santa Claus in 2016? Another moderate will lose against both.
The GOP is weak and floundering just as "the Church" is floundering because each institution has abandoned its values to "win"...whether it's more votes or more people in the pews. Without the values, each has "sold its soul" and will end up losing. The Church and Conservative politicians need to stop trying so hard to be liked and remain faithful to their belief-systems and treat people (all people) with respect & love...otherwise, both will be completely irrelevant within the next decade (if not sooner).
Mike from Delaware
Wed, May 1, 2013 1:18pm
EarlGrey: That is part of what I like about Lutheranism. Their service [the Lutheran Mass] uses ancient Gregorian Chanting, and doesn't try to be hip or cool. You don't go to church to be entertained. It shouldn't be a rock concert; it should be a holy, sacred place of worship. I find that in the Lutheran Church. I agree with your point on that in terms of the church.
As far as the GOP is concerned, Mitt was a moderate as Mass Gov, but campaigned as a hardline right-winger, insulting retired folks with that infamous 47% remark, by implying those who've worked for over 40 years paying taxes were now freeloaders like Welfare folks, etc. No, Mitt blew it, because he didn't stick with what made him viable. The GOP blew it [those knuckleheads who made those crazy legit Rape vs. illegit Rape comments, the abortion issue/birth control issue [thank Rick Santorum for those], weren't even issues until he made them issues. Mitt and the GOP caved-in to the extreme TEA folks and they are too far to the right; the nation is not that far right, so the GOP will lose national elections. That election was in the bag so to speak, but they managed to let it loose and lose.
Wed, May 1, 2013 2:37pm
MikeFromDelaware: I just hope you don't genuflect and cross yourself at "mass." I know some older church-goers revert to the liturgy in Elizabethan English they learned as kids but just don't revert to Latin.
Mike from Delaware
Wed, May 1, 2013 3:21pm
Billsmith: I believe it's been some time since you've been to a Lutheran Mass [service] ELCA or LCMS. At both, the pastor does the Sign of the Cross when administering forgiveness for sins at the begin,ing of the service; most of us also do the Sign of the Cross then too. The pastor also makes the Sign of the Cross over the elements during the liturgy as he's consecrating them into the body and blood of Christ. Some folks also do it after they've received Holy Communion, before getting up from the altar rail. For the final blessing, the pastor again does the Sign of the Cross and again most of us do it too then.
In the order of worship the terms Kyrie Sanctus, etc., are used, yes, we say those sections in English, but they do use the Latin titles.
The one difference between ELCA and LCMS I've noticed is in the Apostles Creed or the Nicene Creed the ELCA says I believe in the holy catholic church [there's an * at bottom of page says 'catholic' means universal]. The LCMS says I believe in the holy Christian Church.
Wed, May 1, 2013 8:19pm
Lutheran pastors do the sign of the cross to the congregation and over the host. Lutherans do not cross themselves. I played a bishop in a high-school play and a Catholic guy had to teach me how to cross myself. They never taught me that in Lutheran schools. Genuflecting neither.
Of course, Lutherans say "Christian" in the Apostle's Creed. They don't want to suggest any association with the idol-worshiping Church of Rome and its leader, the anti-Christ.
Mike from Delaware
Wed, May 1, 2013 10:48pm
Billsmith: Lutherans in both ELCA and LCMS churches do cross themselves now, not all, but quite a few do [of course they may all be former Catholics].
In the ELCA they say "catholic", not "Catholic"; in the LCMS they say "Christian".
Add your comment: Attention: In an attempt to promote a level of civility and personal
responsibility in blog discussions, we now require you to be a member of
the WDEL Members Only Group in order to post a comment. Your Members
Only Group username and password are required to process your post.
You can join the WDEL Members Only Group for free by clicking here.
If you are already a member but have forgotten your username or password, please
Please register your post with your WDEL Members Only Group username and password below.