Told Ya'll Christie KNEW!

[Statistikhengst]

Oh, I dunno, maybe it's just crazy as fuck, but I would suggest waiting until all the papers have gone through court.

We know something is up when one side is really trying to discredit the credibility of a mayor.

Oh, and lawyers are excellent at protecting themselves. Do y'all REALLY think that Christie's now EX-lawyer would have turned on him if he didn't have airtight evidence, and I mean, a considerable amount of it?

Consider that. Many lawyers may be slimy, but very, very few of them are stupid.

 

[deltex1]

Let's remember the Big Bopper died 55 years ago today. Some things are more important to recall than others.

 

[DGS49]

This whole kerfuffle is Exhibit A of the main Liberal strategy in politics: If the answer to the question is not what you want, then change the question and hope nobody notices.

(Example: When does human life begin? (W/r/t abortion). Changed to, Why shouldn't a woman be able to choose what to do with her body?)

There is ONE relevant question in this whole dustup: Did Christie order the lane closings, or knowingly allow them to take place, in order to punish a mayor for a political "transgression"? That's it. It's not terribly complicated.

There is NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that the answer to the Only Relevant Question is, "Yes." So they change the question and hope nobody notices.

The Somewhat-Less-Corpulent Governor stated in several different forums that he "did not know" about the lane closures until he heard the news reports.

To any rational human with an interest in the Truth, this means that he had no advance knowledge of the closings, and wasn't aware that there was any controversy about the lane closings or why they may have occurred, until he saw those news reports.

Thus, his statements in the press conferences were truthful.

Now we have someone (a LAWYER, for Christ sake) who is trying to get the State of New Jersey to pay his legal bills, and he CLAIMS that there is information SOMEWHERE indicating that the Governor knew about the closings WHILE THEY WERE OCCURRING.

Even if true, this is meaningless, because they have no relevance to the Only Relevant Question. The only possible interest this claim could have is if you retractively re-parse Christie's statements and interpret them to mean that he was claiming he had no knowledge of the closings until after they were over.

WGAS?

 

[paperview]

The misuse of Sandy Funds and Christie's cover up to hide how the funds were allocated are just as damaging, if not more than the abuse of power from his office to turn a city into a parking lot for four days because of spite (and rigging development projects for financial gain.)

 

[rdean]

Oh by the way, did you notice how nothing more has come of that accusation against Christie?

I think you will see lots of back & fourth bullshit, with each camp claiming premature victories and over-reading every little sign, but we will not know what the evidence is until all the subpoenas and testimony have been processed, which could take a long time. Given that this will likely end Christie's presidential run, I'm not sure that the issue should continue to have the importance assigned to it. This is looking like a standard case of government corruption, which should not surprise your party.

Most odd is how the Right, the self-proclaimed party of Constitutional fidelity, clings to its crooks until the bitter end. [This is why we laugh at you when you point out Democratic crimes] The reason the Right gets away with ignoring its party's crimes is partly because the party has gotten better at manipulating the opinions of its less educated followers (I'm talking about the post-Nixon Right which created a powerful Think Tank & Media universe to expunge/rewrite all facts that didn't serve the party's interests). For instance, we have raised a generation of Republicans fully inside a bubble where Reagan's act of selling weapons illegally to the world's leading terrorist nation (Iran-Contra) does not exist. And where Reagan's massive financial and weapons infusions into the early Hussein regime literally doesn't exist, despite being on the public record. And where Bush's anti-Constitutional spying or the cherry-picked Intelligence that allowed him to justify a pre-established policy of regime change in Iraq... doesn't exist because the Right has created such loyal dupes. [FYI: this extreme level of opinion management was a Nixonian strategy, who thought that controlling public opinion was the only way to insulate himself from the Watergate investigation. You have to understand the context here. The pre-Nixon press was quite Liberal. This is why Nixon felt the party had to create its own media universe, with its own factual content... so that the Washington Post couldn't end a presidency or so that men like Walter Cronkite couldn't end the Vietnam War by talking honestly about the stalemate. Had FOX News, Limbaugh, Coulter, Savage, Hannity, O'Reilly, Levine and the blogosphere existed in the 70's, Nixon could have gotten away with his crimes against the Constitution, and people like you, 100% contained within the Rightwing media universe, would have been among his loudest and most aggressive advocates]

When LBJ, by expanding the Vietnam War, went against the core principals of the Left, he was severely disciplined by the democratic base, who denied him a 2nd term as the student Left screamed " "Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?" By contrast, your party is 100% loyal to its sitting presidents, thus displaying a faith in Big Government that far exceeds the Left.

As a voter, you're supposed to be an internal check against your party's Constitutional abuses, not a sycophant or a flag-draped dupe. The fact that you always protect your biggest crooks 'til the bitter end makes it hard to take your criticism of the Left seriously.

When you party's leader says "Washington is going to save the middle east with freedom", your job is to be skeptical of Big Government's ability to control or save the world (despite the very best of intentions). Indeed, if Washington can't run a laundromat on budget, why would you give it the money and power to remake whole Arab nations in our image? The fact that people like you were rabid cheerleaders for such a massive expansion of Washington's power and budget makes it very hard to take any of your criticisms against Big Government seriously. We expect you to be intelligent critics of Government's ability to do big things, but every time your party captures the White House you expand the power and budget of Washington more than even the Left. We need dupes like you to become more literate on Foreign and Domestic policy. Please research how much power and money the Reagan War on Drugs gave to Federal agencies. Or take a look at the Patriot Act and Homeland Security, two unprecedented power-grabs over which you are silent (unless a democrat is in office). Let's start your education now. Read this article on Homeland Security so you understand why this Bush creation shows the true Republican Party, the one which has grown government more than the Left could ever dream.

Click Me to see Big Government Conservatism in action.

Conclusion: stop cheerleading for your own presidents and party leaders and we will be able to take you seriously. Be a real critic of Big Government in all its form, not a mere cheerleader and attack-dog for one party.

WoW!!!!

So deep, so profound, so heavy, so...TRUE!!

All I can do is....

*stand to my feet, commence to giving a one-man standing ovation*

You're right. That was profound.

 

[rdean]

[

Are you kidding me Owbama won because of racism 95% of blacks voted for him not because they thought he would do a good job but because he is half black. thats probably the reason he did not get 100% the half white part.

Guy, 91% of blacks voted for Al Gore. 89% of blacks voted for John Kerry.

The reason why they do that is because Republicans have done nothing for the last 40 years except find new ways to piss black people off.

The GOP is 90% white. But that 10% that's left includes some blacks but also those like Bobby Jindal and others of a different race.

But you can bet, the part that is 90% white voted 100% against Obama. That must be racism according to the standard set by that other poster.

 

[racewright]

[

Are you kidding me Owbama won because of racism 95% of blacks voted for him not because they thought he would do a good job but because he is half black. thats probably the reason he did not get 100% the half white part.

Guy, 91% of blacks voted for Al Gore. 89% of blacks voted for John Kerry.

The reason why they do that is because Republicans have done nothing for the last 40 years except find new ways to piss black people off.

They both lost?????HMMMMThe reason is because they are racists

 

[JoeB131]

[

Are you kidding me Owbama won because of racism 95% of blacks voted for him not because they thought he would do a good job but because he is half black. thats probably the reason he did not get 100% the half white part.

Guy, 91% of blacks voted for Al Gore. 89% of blacks voted for John Kerry.

The reason why they do that is because Republicans have done nothing for the last 40 years except find new ways to piss black people off.

They both lost?????HMMMMThe reason is because they are racists

Actually, Al Gore won, but the SCOTUS stole the election for Bush.

But let's not rehash that issue, it puts you wingnuts into fits that you stole an election and he fucked up the country.

here's the thing. The GOP has alienated blacks, hispanics, working people, women and young folks.

All they have left are old rich white guys and old poor white guys who can't deal.

And it's not enough to win elections.

 

[Nyvin]

Christie truly strikes me as that new breed of politician who isn't content to just win. This new breed run down a scorched earth policy against anyone and everyone who opposed them in an election.

My feelings have nothing to do with whether or not he helped Obama win with all the photo ops. Because I believe with all my heart that it wasn't about helping Obama win.

Christie wanted to punish Romney for picking Ryan and not him as VP.

It was all about hurting Romney and Ryan.

I think he's just that type of scumbucket.

ETA: Yes liberals, you read that right. If you look out your window right now you will see this.

]

Do you really think there is ANYONE out there who was all set to vote for Romney, and then he saw Christie hanging with Obama and decided to vote for Obama?

Really?

Romney lost because he was arguing that the rich don't have enough money and half of us are moochers because we expect to be fairly paid.

He'd have lost by bigger margins if the economy wasn't still in such bad shape because of Bush. Or if so many racists didn't vote Republican.

Are you kidding me Owbama won because of racism 95% of blacks voted for him not because they thought he would do a good job but because he is half black. thats probably the reason he did not get 100% the half white part.

Actually it was 98% in 2012.

 

[Redfish]

Guy, 91% of blacks voted for Al Gore. 89% of blacks voted for John Kerry.

The reason why they do that is because Republicans have done nothing for the last 40 years except find new ways to piss black people off.

They both lost?????HMMMMThe reason is because they are racists

Actually, Al Gore won, but the SCOTUS stole the election for Bush.

But let's not rehash that issue, it puts you wingnuts into fits that you stole an election and he fucked up the country.

here's the thing. The GOP has alienated blacks, hispanics, working people, women and young folks.

All they have left are old rich white guys and old poor white guys who can't deal.

And it's not enough to win elections.

As usual you are wrong--------the media and the dems have run a successful campaign to convince blacks and minorities that democrat liberal policies are good for them---the problem you have today is that those same blacks and minorities are saying "WTF? the dems have made my life worse" "they lied to me" "obama lied to me" "the GOP ideas actually make a lot of sense"

Liberalism via the dem party is losing, as it always has. History is repeating itself.

 

[Redfish]

Do you really think there is ANYONE out there who was all set to vote for Romney, and then he saw Christie hanging with Obama and decided to vote for Obama?

Really?

Romney lost because he was arguing that the rich don't have enough money and half of us are moochers because we expect to be fairly paid.

He'd have lost by bigger margins if the economy wasn't still in such bad shape because of Bush. Or if so many racists didn't vote Republican.

Are you kidding me Owbama won because of racism 95% of blacks voted for him not because they thought he would do a good job but because he is half black. thats probably the reason he did not get 100% the half white part.

Actually it was 98% in 2012.

So the question is: are 98% of blacks far left liberals, or did they vote race. The answer is pretty obvious.

 

[Nyvin]

Are you kidding me Owbama won because of racism 95% of blacks voted for him not because they thought he would do a good job but because he is half black. thats probably the reason he did not get 100% the half white part.

Actually it was 98% in 2012.

So the question is: are 98% of blacks far left liberals, or did they vote race. The answer is pretty obvious.

Probably a combination of both.

Not like anyone can blame them, over 200 years of presidents and only 1 African American president? I think it's justified to show enthusiasm for that.

 

[Redfish]

Actually it was 98% in 2012.

So the question is: are 98% of blacks far left liberals, or did they vote race. The answer is pretty obvious.

Probably a combination of both.

Not like anyone can blame them, over 200 years of presidents and only 1 African American president? I think it's justified to show enthusiasm for that.

I agree, I understand why they did it. If I was black I probably would have voted for him too.

But when the libs claim that blacks voted for obama because of his policies, that is simply not true. They voted based on his half-blackness and his lying rhetoric. And I will admit that he is a very good orator----so were Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Castro, Chavez, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, and Genghis Khan.

 

[Truthmatters]

run a black republican and see how your idiot theory works out

 

[Statistikhengst]

Oh by the way, did you notice how nothing more has come of that accusation against Christie?

I think you will see lots of back & fourth bullshit, with each camp claiming premature victories and over-reading every little sign, but we will not know what the evidence is until all the subpoenas and testimony have been processed, which could take a long time. Given that this will likely end Christie's presidential run, I'm not sure that the issue should continue to have the importance assigned to it. This is looking like a standard case of government corruption, which should not surprise your party.

Most odd is how the Right, the self-proclaimed party of Constitutional fidelity, clings to its crooks until the bitter end. [This is why we laugh at you when you point out Democratic crimes] The reason the Right gets away with ignoring its party's crimes is partly because the party has gotten better at manipulating the opinions of its less educated followers (I'm talking about the post-Nixon Right which created a powerful Think Tank & Media universe to expunge/rewrite all facts that didn't serve the party's interests). For instance, we have raised a generation of Republicans fully inside a bubble where Reagan's act of selling weapons illegally to the world's leading terrorist nation (Iran-Contra) does not exist. And where Reagan's massive financial and weapons infusions into the early Hussein regime literally doesn't exist, despite being on the public record. And where Bush's anti-Constitutional spying or the cherry-picked Intelligence that allowed him to justify a pre-established policy of regime change in Iraq... doesn't exist because the Right has created such loyal dupes. [FYI: this extreme level of opinion management was a Nixonian strategy, who thought that controlling public opinion was the only way to insulate himself from the Watergate investigation. You have to understand the context here. The pre-Nixon press was quite Liberal. This is why Nixon felt the party had to create its own media universe, with its own factual content... so that the Washington Post couldn't end a presidency or so that men like Walter Cronkite couldn't end the Vietnam War by talking honestly about the stalemate. Had FOX News, Limbaugh, Coulter, Savage, Hannity, O'Reilly, Levine and the blogosphere existed in the 70's, Nixon could have gotten away with his crimes against the Constitution, and people like you, 100% contained within the Rightwing media universe, would have been among his loudest and most aggressive advocates]

When LBJ, by expanding the Vietnam War, went against the core principals of the Left, he was severely disciplined by the democratic base, who denied him a 2nd term as the student Left screamed " "Hey, hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?" By contrast, your party is 100% loyal to its sitting presidents, thus displaying a faith in Big Government that far exceeds the Left.

As a voter, you're supposed to be an internal check against your party's Constitutional abuses, not a sycophant or a flag-draped dupe. The fact that you always protect your biggest crooks 'til the bitter end makes it hard to take your criticism of the Left seriously.

When you party's leader says "Washington is going to save the middle east with freedom", your job is to be skeptical of Big Government's ability to control or save the world (despite the very best of intentions). Indeed, if Washington can't run a laundromat on budget, why would you give it the money and power to remake whole Arab nations in our image? The fact that people like you were rabid cheerleaders for such a massive expansion of Washington's power and budget makes it very hard to take any of your criticisms against Big Government seriously. We expect you to be intelligent critics of Government's ability to do big things, but every time your party captures the White House you expand the power and budget of Washington more than even the Left. We need dupes like you to become more literate on Foreign and Domestic policy. Please research how much power and money the Reagan War on Drugs gave to Federal agencies. Or take a look at the Patriot Act and Homeland Security, two unprecedented power-grabs over which you are silent (unless a democrat is in office). Let's start your education now. Read this article on Homeland Security so you understand why this Bush creation shows the true Republican Party, the one which has grown government more than the Left could ever dream.

Click Me to see Big Government Conservatism in action.

Conclusion: stop cheerleading for your own presidents and party leaders and we will be able to take you seriously. Be a real critic of Big Government in all its form, not a mere cheerleader and attack-dog for one party.

 

[Truthmatters]

Oh yeah your racist cheating party wouldn't do that

 

[natstew]

Benghazi? Obama knew, Hillary Knew, and patriotic Americans died!!

Chris Christi knew and there was a traffic jam? And you go after Christi and cover for Obama/Hilary?

Maybe you're not an idiot, but you are EVIL INCARNATE!!

This is aimed at all you Libtard Democrats!

 

[Nyvin]

So the question is: are 98% of blacks far left liberals, or did they vote race. The answer is pretty obvious.

Probably a combination of both.

Not like anyone can blame them, over 200 years of presidents and only 1 African American president? I think it's justified to show enthusiasm for that.

I agree, I understand why they did it. If I was black I probably would have voted for him too.

But when the libs claim that blacks voted for obama because of his policies, that is simply not true. They voted based on his half-blackness and his lying rhetoric. And I will admit that he is a very good orator----so were Hitler, Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Castro, Chavez, Idi Amin, Pol Pot, and Genghis Khan.

His policies in comparison to Romney or Mccain's policies? Yes they almost certainly did choose Obama over them. Obama being black probably gave him a small ~5%-10% boost in African American turnout, more so in 2008 then 2012.

It didn't give him 98% of the African American vote, that's just crazy. Who does every single African American district in the south elect? A democrat. Which presidential candidate wins ~90% of the African American vote every election, a democrat.

To point to him being black as the reason he won the African American vote is being VERY delusional, and doesn't get you anywhere.

 

[Nyvin]

Benghazi? Obama knew, Hillary Knew, and patriotic Americans died!!

Chris Christi knew and there was a traffic jam? And you go after Christi and cover for Obama/Hilary?

Maybe you're not an idiot, but you are EVIL INCARNATE!!

This is aimed at all you Libtard Democrats!

You see there's this thing called evidence, and due process of law, innocent until proven guilty?.....oh nevermind, not worth my time.

 

[DGS49]

Funny how all the Democrats are convinced that this non-incident will kill Christie's chances, but all the Republicans - you know, the ones whose opinion counts? - are unanimous in believing that his is No Big Deal.

There are SEVERAL great potential R's who could come out of the primaries as very strong candidates, and Christie's chances were maybe 10-1 a couple months ago. Now they are 10-1.

No change.