• 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.

Time for some TRAFFIC!

One school of thought has it this is a lose-lose situation for The Big Man (and I don't mean the late Clarence Clemons) as far as the White House is concerned.

1. If Christie knew about this then he is unfit to be President.

2. If Christie didn't know about this then he is not competent to be President.
 
In her latest column, Kathleen Parker makes some appropriate remarks regarding Mr. Christie's current troubles. But then she goes on to her larger point about "the media" and the danger of it possibly overreaching on this matter because people really don't like them and will think the situation is being made to look worse than it is.

So, if "the media" wants to be liked (or seen as "fair"), they should tread carefully. And if they don't, we shouldn't be surprised if the info they report is disregarded for being partisan.

Ms. Parker is not a stupid person. Unless I'm very much mistaken, in what I took from her remarks, she does not have as high an opinion of her readership.
 
Last edited:
Regnad Kcin said:
In her latest column, Kathleen Parker makes some appropriate remarks regarding Mr. Christie's current troubles. But then she goes on to her larger point about "the media" and the danger of it possibly overreaching on this matter because people really don't like them and will think the situation is being made to look worse than it is.

So, if "the media" wants to be liked (or seen as "fair"), they should tread carefully. And if they don't, we shouldn't be surprised if the info they report is disregarded for being partisan.

Ms. Parker is not a stupid person. Unless I'm very much mistaken, in what I took from her remarks, she does not have as high an opinion of her readership.
Click to expand...

I don't know... I think she assumes "her readership" are not the conservative base and that is ultimately the conclusion she comes to... that the conservative base is known to get distracted by claims of librul media bullying a good guy. I don't think she's saying that the media better watch its step so much as she's laying out a possible shifting strategy that we may see coming from the conservative blogosphere and press.
 
Skeptic Ginger said:
For you and I, I suspect that is true. For someone who was stuck in that traffic, I suspect that is true. But for people who want a GOP candidate in 2016, there are already Net echoes that it was minor, business as usual, "look how well he handled the press conference" :rolleyes: and so on. For that group, who knows?
Click to expand...

Two words: echo chamber. And that's been working really well for the GOP lately, hasn't it?
 
Regnad Kcin said:
In her latest column, Kathleen Parker makes some appropriate remarks regarding Mr. Christie's current troubles. But then she goes on to her larger point about "the media" and the danger of it possibly overreaching on this matter because people really don't like them and will think the situation is being made to look worse than it is.

So, if "the media" wants to be liked (or seen as "fair"), they should tread carefully. And if they don't, we shouldn't be surprised if the info they report is disregarded for being partisan.

Ms. Parker is not a stupid person. Unless I'm very much mistaken, in what I took from her remarks, she does not have as high an opinion of her readership.
Click to expand...

This is hand-waving, plain and simple.

I couldn't care less what Mary Matelin and the Grey martian think about it (okay, that was cheap, but really, why the hell does Carville look like that?). Are we seriously pretending that "the media" haven't hyped the various fake scandals that have followed Obama around?Are we pretending that, when these fake scandals were trotted out, Obama gave a press conference and said "Nah, I'm not looking into it."?

Christie lost this PR fight a long time ago. He can continue on a state level, likely, but nationally, he's done. This isn't simply a matter of what democrats will say, but rather of *republicans* will say as well. Yes, there is a substantial part of the GOP that likes Sarah Palin or the Duck Dynasty guy. But they hate Christie. And as usual, their hate is not rational. This won't help him much, and between this, his hugging President Obama and, frankly, his size hindering him in a national campaign, I don't see him getting near the White House.

Let me put this another way - we're told that Romney considered Christie as a running mate, but turned him down because research showed that he had too much of this sort of thing in his background. At this point, I'm willing to believe that, and if Romney can figure it out, so can anyone else.
 
Christie has been dogged by ethics problems throughout his career.

I saw an episode of American Greed where they interviewed a former NJ District federal prosecutor. He was a top guy under Christie when the Big Man was the US Attorney in NJ in the 2000s. That appointment was purely political; Christie had a law degree but no background in law enforcement, however he had raised a ton of money for G.W. Bush in the 2000 campaign. The appointment as New Jersey District Federal Attorney was his reward.

The former staffer said Christie wanted the staff to develop high profile cases, he wanted to use the office as a springboard to a political career, he made that plain. He especially wanted the staff to develop political corruption cases.

This gentleman told a story that the FBI had been carrying out an intricate sting that led to a money laundering scheme run by a rabbi from South Jersey. There were millions of dollars involved and it included loansharking and outright fraud.

He attended a staff meeting where they briefed Christie. He laughed as he recounted it. He said it was unforgettable.

He said Christie became enraged, his face flushed. He told them, "Are you kidding me? I ask you to make political cases and you're giving me a rabbi laundering money? What am I supposed to do with this?" He said Christie told them, "Lemme break it down for you. Nobody gives a **** about a rabbi laundering money! I need mayors, congressmen. What's the matter with you guys?"

He said after the meeting the staffers quietly laughed together and began referring to their Boss as Chris Soprano.

Eventually they did make political cases. One involved the up-and-coming Democratic Mayor of Jersey City. They ended his career and put him in prison. That was for selling zoning variances.
 
Last edited:
Of all the half-butt excuses offered up in Christie's defense this weekend, Brit Hume's had to be the weirdest.

In explaining why Christie is perceived to be a bully Hume said:


“In this sort of feminized atmosphere in which we exist today, guys who are masculine and muscular like that in their private conduct, kind of old-fashioned tough guys, run some risks,” Hume said on Sunday’s Media Buzz.

Even co-host Lauren Ashburn was a bit taken aback by that. “Feminized?” she asked.

“Atmosphere,” Hume specified. “Men today have learned the lesson the hard way that if you act like kind of an old-fashioned guy’s guy, you’re in constant danger of slipping out and saying something that’s going to get you in trouble and make you look like a sexist or make you look like you seem thuggish or whatever. That’s the atmosphere in which he operates. This guy is very much an old-fashioned masculine, muscular guy, and there are political risks associated with that. Maybe it shouldn’t be, but that’s how it is.”
Click to expand...

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/brit-hum...-cant-survive-in-todays-feminized-atmosphere/

I can not decide what part is the funniest.

1) "Feminized atmosphere?" Femme-gas? The femmosphere?

2) the image of Christie as a "muscular guy."

3) the whole basic proposition that there is something desirable in being a cave-man. Barney Rubble for President.
 
Last edited:
As Christie is learning now, inside every little scandal is a bigger scandal waiting to get out. Now it looks as if the Gov. may be investigated for misusing Sandy relief funds.
Pallone wrote that he was concerned about the bidding process for the firm awarded the marketing plan; the winning firm is charging the state about $2 million more than the next lowest bidder. The winning $4.7 million bid featured Christie and his family in the advertisements while the losing $2.5 million proposal did not feature the Christies.
Click to expand...

In other words, he wasted 2 million dollars making sure that he got a lot of face time after the storm. Frankly, I'm not sure that using relief funds to make promotional ads is a correct use of such monies in any case, but I understand that these things are important to the businesses, who have a lot to say about how money is spent.

The forecast is for cloudy with an increasing chance of a ****-storm.
 
plague311 said:
Why would one hope for that again?
Click to expand...

Uhhh, because it's it true he used his political office to punish a Democratic rival for not supporting him in the past by shutting down part of a bridge, which resulted in a death due to EMT delays, not to mention other complications from same and unknown amounts of lost man hours of work due to commuter delays.
 
Alferd_Packer said:
Of all the half-butt excuses offered up in Christie's defense this weekend, Brit Hume's had to be the weirdest.

In explaining why Christie is perceived to be a bully Hume said:




http://www.mediaite.com/tv/brit-hum...-cant-survive-in-todays-feminized-atmosphere/

I can not decide what part is the funniest.

1) "Feminized atmosphere?" Femme-gas? The femmosphere?

2) the image of Christie as a "muscular guy."
3) the whole basic proposition that there is something desirable in being a cave-man. Barney Rubble for President.
Click to expand...

Well, it does take some serious muscles to move that much mass, you just can't see them. ;)
 
A New Jersey journalist I know told me that what most concerns people who cover Christie is the combination of his huge ego, his relentless ambition and his lack of ethics. In a political leader that's a prescription for disaster.

Christie has gotten in ethics trouble at almost every stop along his career, starting all the way back when he was a member of the Essex County (NJ) Board of Freeholders. Yet he never seems to learn a lesson. Some of the journalists think that is maybe because he's not capable of learning the lesson. That he has some pathology that blinds him to any concerns about his personal ethics (or lack of ethics). As he attains higher office one wonders, where would Christie draw the line? Or would he draw a line? How far is he willing to go to satisfy his raw political ambitions?

Because of libel laws journalists have to be careful about what they report. They hope the public is getting this, reading between the lines, to pick up on the potential danger this guy presents, but the public doesn't seem to be. He won his last election by a huge majority.
 
Alferd_Packer said:
Of all the half-butt excuses offered up in Christie's defense this weekend, Brit Hume's had to be the weirdest.
...
Click to expand...


Brit Hume went insane years ago. I first noticed it when he mistook Fox News Sunday Morning for a televangelism broadcast, and exhorted Tiger Woods to dump Buddhism and go Christian.
 
newyorkguy said:
That he has some pathology that blinds him to any concerns about his personal ethics (or lack of ethics). As he attains higher office one wonders, where would Christie draw the line?
Click to expand...

To translate, Christie may be amoral, the kind of guy whose actions aren't really tempered by any sense of right or wrong. That maybe the only thing Christie considers is, "What're the odds I get caught? And then how could I explain it?"

In that sense he is a little scary.
 
Unabogie said:
And doesn't this speak volumes?

To expand on this: Christie has a unique power here to get to the bottom of things. Not only is he the boss of all of these people, but he's also their friends. And in the case of Wildstein, he's been his friend since junior high. To find out why this actually happened, and what motivated the actors, all he'd have to do his ask. And especially right before canning them. The fact that he hasn't done this, when most of us would consider that our first act as someone's boss who did something so wrong that reflects on us ("Bridget, tell me, please, what were you guys thinking? Why would you do this? Do you have any idea how this makes us look? Give me the whole story") tells me that he already knows everything he needs to know. And all he wants to do now if make it all go away.
Click to expand...

If he was trying to get to the bottom of this I would expect the same people who think he is not doing enough now would be accusing him of interfering with the investigation.
 
eeyore1954 said:
If he was trying to get to the bottom of this I would expect the same people who think he is not doing enough now would be accusing him of interfering with the investigation.
Click to expand...

Now? Now it's too late. Train left the station.

Can I reinterpret this?

If he was had been trying to get to the bottom...
Click to expand...
 
eeyore1954 said:
If he was trying to get to the bottom of this I would expect the same people who think he is not doing enough now would be accusing him of interfering with the investigation.
Click to expand...


For myself, there's an expiration date on his obligation to investigate the goings-on in his area of responsibility.

Now that the governor has made it plain that he had no interest in investigating for the months that this was building up and now that subpoenas and prosecutors are flying about, Christie's window for investigation has definitely closed.

This is the Cooperate with Investigations stage of the story for the governor. Let's see if he is any better at that than he was at investigating.
 
newyorkguy said:
To translate, Christie may be amoral, the kind of guy whose actions aren't really tempered by any sense of right or wrong. That maybe the only thing Christie considers is, "What're the odds I get caught? And then how could I explain it?"

In that sense he is a little scary.
Click to expand...

But who better to represent new jersey?
 
Interesting wrinkle.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/fort-lee-mayor-not-talking

Sokolich has decided to stop talking. There was a report over the weekend suggesting that the whole kerfuffle was actually about "Hudson Lights", which is a billion dollar development that's set to go up right there at the toll lane entryway.

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/cafe/is-a-billion-dollar-development-project-at-the-heart-of-bridgegate

Could it be that Sokolich has unclean hands here? Could it be that he was paid off (legally in some way) during Christie's in-person apology?

The more we look into this, the dirtier the whole thing looks.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom