• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

NJ Governor closes beach and uses it himself

The Don

Penultimate Amazing
The Don
Joined
Nov 27, 2002
Messages
39,885
Location
Sir Fynwy
It's not a big story or a huge scandal but IMO it's an indication of the contempt in which Chris Christie holds the electorate. Not only did he lie outrageously but then doubled down even though there is clear evidence of the lie. :mad:

I guess this is the new normal thanks to the example set by the US' "modern President" who IMO is the exemplar of this kind of thing.

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is facing heavy criticism after he was photographed relaxing on a state beach he had ordered closed to the public.

The Republican gave the go-ahead for non-essential services to be shut down - including the Island State Beach Park - over the 4 July holiday weekend because of a budget impasse.
Click to expand...

Cue the denial...

"I didn't get any sun today," he said, before the aerial photos emerged.
Click to expand...

....and then the weak explanation of the lie when the truth emerges:

After being told of the photographs, his spokesman Brian Murray admitted Mr Christie had "briefly" been on the beach "talking to his wife and family before heading into the office", NJ.com reported.

"He did not get any sun. He had a baseball hat on," Mr Murray added, NJ.com said.
Click to expand...

The man was in t-shirt and shorts FFS, he got some sun....

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-40478247
 
Trebuchet said:
His political career is over, his popularity is in the tank, and he couldn't even get a job from Donald Trump. He simply doesn't give a ****.
Click to expand...

Of course he couldn't get a job in the Trump administration. He put Kushner's dad in prison for giving a sex tape of his brother in law to his sister as punishment for testifying against him. Such a family values administration.
 
Does he wake up every morning with a new plan to reach 0% approval?
 
ponderingturtle said:
He has just understood that his approval ratings don't matter anymore, optics don't matter anymore, he might as well have fun.
Click to expand...
This is actually why I don't understand the initial denial. Given that his approval ratings couldn't get him elected to a seat on a local school board, when asked he should have just said, "Yeah, I went with my family to the beach. I'm the *********** governor!"
 
It never ceases to amaze me the number of people that just don't realize camera's are EVERYWHERE! So either you don't care how this plays out, and so you go to the beach with the family, or you truly are that stupid that you think privacy exists.

I won't even pick my nose walking down the street alone anymore because you never know if you're really alone. Who knows when you'll end up on YouTube or some other viral distribution from somebody sticking a cell phone out an office window.

Err... I mean, not that I ever did.

Thing is, I don't doubt that this type of thing historically was fairly routine. It was either a.) kept private so no issue, or b.) "He is the governor, so he deserves it" respect for the office.
 
Last edited:
Spock Jenkins said:
It never ceases to amaze me the number of people that just don't realize camera's are EVERYWHERE! So either you don't care how this plays out, and so you go to the beach with the family, or you truly are that stupid that you think privacy exists.

I won't even pick my nose walking down the street alone anymore because you never know if you're really alone. Who knows when you'll end up on YouTube or some other viral distribution from somebody sticking a cell phone out an office window.

Err... I mean, not that I ever did.
Click to expand...
Yeah, cameras are everywhere, but for the average person who is just going about their day without being ridiculous, I really don't think it's a worthy concern. Now, in the case of a governor whose name frequently appears in national news stories, yeah, it's pretty silly to try to get away with such dumb lies about things you do out in the open air.
 
Babbylonian said:
Yeah, cameras are everywhere, but for the average person who is just going about their day without being ridiculous, I really don't think it's a worthy concern.
Click to expand...

While I was just joking about picking, I don't agree with this fully. There have been pretty intense discussions on these forums about the right to privacy. I know one point that always gets beat down pretty hard is the, "if you have nothing to hide, the lack of privacy shouldn't be an issue."

Maybe I'm reading too much into the quoted sentence. We should have the right to pick our underpants out of crevices without ending up on a "People of Wal-Mart" website. Not that I can be found there or anything.

Okay - sorry about the derail. Back to the Gov.
 
I'm convinced that Christie would be an outstanding asset for FEMA. Just imagine, a human levy that could be readily dispatched to flood situations using a cargo plane.
 
I would guess not many of us here are influenced by optics. Is there a non optics reason Christie should not avail himself of this benefit?
 
BobTheCoward said:
I would guess not many of us here are influenced by optics. Is there a non optics reason Christie should not avail himself of this benefit?
Click to expand...
Because neither he nor his office owns the beach on which he was [not] sunning himself and as governor he had closed it to the public for "budget" reasons. One can own a "beachfront" property and not own the beach which is in front of it. This is one of those [very common] cases, where the residence is separate from the public beach in front of it.

The only circumstance where the governor spending time on a public beach that has been closed would be acceptable would be one in which he was there to exercise his official duties. For example, governors often visit disaster areas that are not otherwise open to the public.
 
Babbylonian said:
Because neither he nor his office owns the beach on which he was [not] sunning himself and as governor he had closed it to the public for "budget" reasons. One can own a "beachfront" property and not own the beach which is in front of it. This is one of those [very common] cases, where the residence is separate from the public beach in front of it.

The only circumstance where the governor spending time on a public beach that has been closed would be acceptable would be one in which he was there to exercise his official duties. For example, governors often visit disaster areas that are not otherwise open to the public.
Click to expand...

Are you saying he wasn't technically allowed to use the beach?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom