Should politicians be allowed to relax?

By Richard Barry

I've been to a number of those off-the-record media roasts in which skits and songs are performed and politicians mix it up with members of the press, frequently making fun of themselves in a way that resonates with the tenor of media coverage of them.

Though I doubt any of these events are ever really off the record these days, which is too bad because a lot fun can be had if those involved feel safe for an evening.

On Wednesday, at an annual New Jersey media roast, Gov. Christie took the stage and gave what Bloomberg Politics called "an expletive-laced speech . . aimed at reporters who mocked him for the George Washington Bridge scandal, his travel, and state finances."

“We don’t give a s--- about this or any of you,” Christie, a 52-year-old Republican who is considering a run for president, said to laughter and applause from about 350 people at a Hamilton banquet hall. He told one journalist to “open your eyes” and “clean the s--- out of your ears.”

“This is a guy who says he doesn’t know what I’m doing every day,” Christie said of the New Jersey Legislative Correspondents Club president. “Then just get the f--- away from me then if you don’t know what I’m doing.”

As well, a parody of the song, “If I Were a Rich Man” from Broadway’s “Fiddler on the Roof,” was reworked: “I’m not Sheldon Adelson’s boy/I’ll tell him I’m another hopeless goy.”

In 2012, Christie and Cory Booker, the former Newark mayor who now is a Democratic U.S. senator, collaborated on a video for the show that parodied the governor’s potential as a vice president and the mayor’s heroism after saving a neighbor from a fire. Posted on Christie’s YouTube page, it’s been viewed more than 400,000 times.

I don't know what Kevin Roberts a Christie spokesman, was referring to when he said in an e-mail, “That anyone would misrepresent the traditional lighthearted nature of the event is a disservice everyone involved." I'm sure some people would love to take Christie's remarks out of context.

I'm no fan of Chris Christie, though he does seem to have a good sense of humour, and a lot of very funny people are from New Jersery. But the point is that it would be a shame if these time-honoured events didn't happen anymore because the 24-hour news cycle is so desperate for content that it will take what are obvious jokes and try to turn them into something else.

In other words, the lack of authenticity in politicians is not entirely their fault. 

It is better to be feared than loved, or not

By Richard K. Barry 

Ryan Lizza has a fascinating piece in The New Yorker on New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie's political style. For the piece he interviewed former New Jersey Gov. Tom Kean, who clearly has issues with Christie:

"He doesn't always try to persuade you with reason," Kean said. "He makes you feel that your life's going to be very unhappy if you don't do what he says." He added that one of Christie's flaws "is that he makes enemies and keeps them. As long as you're riding high, they'll stay in the weeds, because they don't want to get in your way. But you get in trouble, they'll all come out of the weeds, and come at you." 

I couldn't help thinking about a passage in Machiavelli's Prince (Chap. XVII), in which he discusses a particular aspect of political style:

Upon this a question arises: whether it be better to be loved than feared or feared than loved? It may be answered that one should wish to be both, but, because it is difficult to unite them in one person, is much safer to be feared than loved, when, of the two, either must be dispensed with. Because this is to be asserted in general of men, that they are ungrateful, fickle, false, cowardly, covetous, and as long as you succeed they are yours entirely; they will offer you their blood, property, life and children, as is said above, when the need is far distant; but when it approaches they turn against you. And that prince who, relying entirely on their promises, has neglected other precautions, is ruined; because friendships that are obtained by payments, and not by greatness or nobility of mind, may indeed be earned, but they are not secured, and in time of need cannot be relied upon; and men have less scruple in offending one who is beloved than one who is feared, for love is preserved by the link of obligation which, owing to the baseness of men, is broken at every opportunity for their advantage; but fear preserves you by a dread of punishment which never fails.

Perhaps Gov. Christie has read his Machiavelli and believes it is best to keep everyone around him in a constant state of fear that he could do them harm if inclined.

But Kean's comments are instructive. If those surrounding the leader are loyal only as long as he is powerful enough to hurt them, they may happily "come out of the weeds" when they sense he is no longer "riding high." If there is real respect and affection, however, it is possible those around him may remain on side when times are tough.

I'd like to think Machiavelli got this one wrong, and that Christie will suffer for it. 

How much slime is too much slime, politically speaking?

By Richard K. Barry

Even though the internal report commissioned by Gov. Christie’s office blamed the entire Bridgegate mess on two former aides, while absolving Christie, anyone paying even scant attention dismissed it as self-serving nonsense. Still, a lot of people don't even pay scant attention, so it might have done Christie some good. I can almost hear low-information voters parroting the results of the report without realizing its origins.

I would, however, like to believe former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell who recently said that “[n]ot only can Chris Christie not win, I think he may have trouble finishing out his term ... There’s absolutely no chance that he didn’t know this was going on if he didn’t order it or OK it. So I think he’s not a factor.”

The more general question is how low a politician has to go before he or she is unelectable. I should, by the way, mention that I live in Toronto (and that's all I'm going to say about that). In any case, I was somewhat heartened to see, as the New York Daily news reported, "Muriel Bowser win the District of Columbia’s Democratic mayoral primary Tuesday, defeating incumbent Vincent Gray in a race defined by a scandal involving Gray’s campaign four years ago."

Bowser tapped into an electorate that tired of the allegations surrounding Gray. Five people who worked on the mayor’s 2010 campaign have pleaded guilty to felonies, and Bowser said the city needed to move away from a mayor who faces potential criminal charges.

So, we know there might be a limit.

In Christie's case, it is not credible that he didn't know about the circumstances surrounding the bridge closure, which means that the only interesting question remaining is whether his actions will dissuade voters from supporting a Christie presidential candidacy.

I was taken by a poll conducted recently finding that "Americans say 75 percent of politicians are corrupted, 70 percent use political power to hurt enemies."

Having lived through the Watergate era, when it was fashionable for some to claim Nixon only got caught doing what they all do, I don't know what to believe. Gov. Rendell is a smart guy; maybe Christie is toxic. I'm not so sure. 

Pope Francis needs to go kick some New Jersey ass

By Michael J.W. Stickings

Consider:

John J. Myers, the archbishop of the Newark Archdiocese, comes to this vacation home on many weekends. The 4,500-square-foot home has a handsome amoeba-shaped swimming pool out back. And as he's 72, and retirement beckons in two years, he has renovations in mind. A small army of workers are framing a 3,000-square-foot addition. 

This new wing will have an indoor exercise pool, three fireplaces and an elevator. The Star-Ledger of Newark has noted that the half-million-dollar tab for this wing does not include architects' fees or furnishings.

There's no need to fear for the archbishop's bank account. The Newark Archdiocese is picking up the bill.

And it's not just the upscale living while so many struggle and suffer:

He is known to insist on being addressed as "Your Grace." And his self-regard is matched by his refusal to apologize for more or less anything.

It was revealed last year that a priest seemed to have broken his legally binding agreement with Bergen County prosecutors to never again work unsupervised with children or to minister to them so long as he remained a priest. When next found, he was involved with a youth ministry in the Newark Archdiocese.

Parishioners in Oradell, N.J., also discovered that the archdiocese had allowed a priest accused of sexual abuse to live in their parish's rectory. A furor arose, and last summer the archbishop sat down and wrote an open letter to his flock. He conceded not a stumble. Those who claim, he wrote, that he and the church had not protected children were "simply evil, wrong, immoral and seemingly focused on their own self-aggrandizement."

Evil, wrong, immoral, focused on self-aggrandizement? Huh. It really does seem that Pope Francis should have a chat with this prick. And while he's in the beautiful Garden State, maybe he can also teach its bullying blowhard of a corrupt, power-hungry governor a thing or two about humility and true public service.

The (ugly, dirty, sordid) truth about Chris Christie

By Michael J.W. Stickings

I highly recommend Alec MacGillis's excellent piece on Chris Christie at The New Republic. It's a comprehensive look at the long and sordid political career of the scandal-ridden governor -- who he is, how he rose to power, and how he abused his power once in office. And it's not just Bridgegate. The George Washington Bridge scandal has just been the most high-profile example of his political malfeasance, opening a door onto so much else, so much that was always there but that was hidden behind his carefully manufactured image of "straight-talking, corruption-busting everyman." Now he's seen as "a liar, a bully, a buffoon," but in truth he's always been that.

What is remarkable about this meltdown is that it isn't the result of some deep secret that has been exposed to the world, revealing a previously unimagined side to the candidate. Many of the scandals and mini-scandals and scandals-within-scandals that the national media is salivating over have been in full view for years. Even the now-infamous Bridgegate was percolating for months before it exploded into the first major story of the next presidential race.

Make sure to read the whole thing.

New Jersey's top newspaper backs away from Chris Christie

By Michael J.W. Stickings

The Star-Ledger is now regretting its endorsement of the scandal-ridden bullying blowhard of a governor:

During the fall campaign, the liberal TV hero Rachel Maddow ran a stinging segment ridiculing The Star-Ledger’s endorsement of Gov. Chris Christie. How could we endorse him, she asked, when we criticized him so harshly in the same piece? Had we lost our minds?

Not quite. An endorsement is not a love embrace. It is a choice between two flawed human beings. And the winner is often the less bad option.

But yes, we blew this one...

Yes, we knew Christie was a bully. But we didn’t know his crew was crazy enough to put people’s lives at risk in Fort Lee as a means to pressure the mayor. We didn’t know he would use Hurricane Sandy aid as a political slush fund. And we certainly didn’t know that Hoboken Mayor Dawn Zimmer was sitting on a credible charge of extortion by Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno.

Even before this scandal train got rolling, this endorsement was a close call and a split vote among the editorial board. We regard Christie as the most overrated politician in the country, at least until now, a man who is better at talking than governing. We criticized him for trashing the working poor, for his tea party approach to the environment, for his opposition to gay marriage and a livable minimum wage. And so on.

Yes, and so on. Basically, despite "hesitations" and "deep reservations," the Star-Ledger endorsed Christie because he'd done some good things (and obviously wasn't/isn't a right-wing Republican fanatic) and because his opponent, Democrat Barbara Buono, was a weak alternative. So much for all that.

But, as editor Tom Moran writes, despite everything that's happened, all the new revelations and all that we now know about the governor, Christie is still preferable to the rest of his party, and in 2016 would be better than, say, Mike Huckabee, Rand Paul, or Ted Cruz.

Yes, as terrible as Christie is, he's just not as terrible as the rest of the Republican Party.

That tells you a lot about the current state of the GOP.

Chris Christie lashes out in response to the latest George Washington Bridge allegations

By Michael J.W. Stickings

So how does scandal-ridden New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, bullying blowhard extraordinaire, respond to new allegations he knew full well about those lane closings on the George Washington Bridge?

Why, by going on the attack, of course, verbally assaulting the man who dared come forth against him, as well as the newspaper that dared report something other than pro-Christie spin:

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, after a low-key initial response to Friday's explosive allegations about his involvement in a bridge-closing scandal, mounted an aggressive defense late Saturday afternoon, attacking The New York Times and a former political ally in an email to friends and allies obtained by POLITICO.

"Bottom line — David Wildstein will do and say anything to save David Wildstein," the email from the governor's office says, referring to the former appointee who reignited the controversy.

*****

The subject line of the 700-word email from the governor's office is: "5 Things You Should Know About The Bombshell That's Not A Bombshell." It offers a harshly negative portrayal of Wildstein's character and judgment.

Oh, but Chris Christie won't do and say anything to save Christie? The man's a massive egomaniac, and he's now watching his presidential ambitions slip away in slow motion.

And of course you knew it was going to be a vicious ad hominem attack like this. Surely you did, if you know Christie at all.

He's like this normally, but with his credibility already shot it would now appear that desperation is settling in.

Things just keep getting worse for egomaniacal bully Chris Christie

By Michael J.W. Stickings 

We'll have to see if there is anything to this, if there is in fact the evidence to back it up, but one of New Jersey's governor's old pals and allies, the man at the center of the George Washington Bridge scandal, appears to be on the verge of taking Christie down:

The former Port Authority official who personally oversaw the lane closings at the George Washington Bridge, central to the scandal now swirling around Gov. Chris Christie of New Jersey, said on Friday that "evidence exists" that the governor knew about the closings when they were happening.

A lawyer for the former official, David Wildstein, wrote a letter describing the move to shut the lanes as "the Christie administration's order" and said "evidence exists as well tying Mr. Christie to having knowledge of the lane closures, during the period when the lanes were closed, contrary to what the governor stated publicly in a two-hour press conference" three weeks ago. 

As you might expect, Christie continues to deny, deny, deny, but the state's leading paper, the Star-Ledger, emphasizes the importance of this new revelation:

Forget about the White House in 2016. The question now is whether Gov. Chris Christie can survive as governor.

*****

If this charge proves true, then the governor must resign or be impeached. Because that would leave him so drained of credibility that he could not possibly govern effectively. He would owe it to the people of New Jersey to stop the bleeding and quit. And if he should refuse, then the Legislature should open impeachment hearings.

There are any number of reasons why Christie should resign, or face impeachment, or at the very least be held in contempt, but obviously the GWB scandal and Christie's repeated denials of any wrongdoing are at the center of his corrupt administration.

Christie has proven himself to be an egomaniacal bully who abuses his power for personal and political gain. It is long past time for him to be held accountable.

Bruce Springsteen and Jimmy Fallon: "Gov. Christie Traffic Jam"

By Michael J.W. Stickings

You've seen this already, right? It's hilarious, it's poignant, and it's awesome. And I don't just say that because I love Bruce Springsteen.

This duet with Jimmy Fallon (who continues to grow on me), a parody of "Born to Run" aimed at the bullying governor of New Jersey, is brilliantly creative. And what it makes it all the more effective is that Christie considers himself, and I suppose is, a Springsteen superfan, so much so that it meant the world to him when he finally met Springsteen (thanks to President Obama), when they hugged and Springsteen called him a friend, during the Hurricane Sandy aftermath last year -- yes, so much so that Christie says he wept afterwards. (I get that. I'm not sure how I'd react if I ever met, say, David Gilmour or Roger Waters, or Springsteen for that matter, but it would be similar.)

But of course politically and personally the two men are vastly different. Christie is anti-union. He's close to Wall Street and very much its champion. He opposes marriage equality. He's one of the more sober Republicans but a Republican nonetheless. And it's like he's a Springsteen superfan who doesn't get what Springsteen is all about. I mean, has he ever paid attention to the lyrics? What does he make of, say, "The Ghost of Tom Joad"? Or "Death to My Hometown"? Or anything on Nebraska? Or even "Born in the U.S.A."? Or, or, or... Seriously, does he just not get it? How do you call yourself a huge Springsteen fan and still be... Chris Christie?

Anyway, like I said, this is brilliant, personal parody and political satire of the highest order, directed at a most deserving target. So much for that "friendship," which was never much of anything anyway.

Behind the Ad: Did Chris Christie use Sandy funds for political gain?

By Richard K. Barry

Who: New Jersey.

Where: New Jersey.

What's going on: This is simple and interesting. Following Superstorm Sandy, one company bid $2.5 million to produce an upbeat ad promoting New Jersey as it recovered from the devastation.  They lost to a company that bid $4.7 million. According to Reuters, the losing bid may have failed because its proposed ad did not feature Gov. Christie:

Sigma Group's $2.5 million bid lost out to a $4.7 million bid by MWW of East Rutherford, New Jersey, for a campaign that featured Christie and his family proclaiming the state is "stronger than the storm."

[...]

While well-received at the time, the ad campaign has become a headache for Christie. Already enmeshed in a scandal over snarled traffic at the George Washington Bridge, Christie is being audited by the Inspector General at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to determine if Sandy funds were misappropriated to put him in the spotlight during an election year, an agency spokesman said.

Not surprisingly, a Christie spokesman said that he was confident "any review will show that the ads were a key part in helping New Jersey get back on its feet after being struck by the worst storm in state history."

L'Etat, c'est moi, eh Chris?

Raising deflector shields

By Mustang Bobby

You had to know that this would be the GOP response to the New Jersey bridge story:

In an interview on Meet the Press, [RNC Chair Reince] Priebus argued that Americans would forgive Christie after his administration closed part of the busiest bridge to hurt his opponents because “we all make mistakes.”

“They’re forgiving when you take ownership, you take corrective action. And that’s what Chris Christie showed,” the chairman explained. “He stood there for 111 minutes in an open dialog with the press. Now, only if Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton would give us 111 seconds of that, would we find out some of what we want to find out about Obamacare, Benghazi, the IRS. I mean, Chris Christie has been totally open here.”

Translation: “Oh, look! Benghazi! IRS! A kitty!”

That was a little too much even for David Gregory.

“There’s some deflection going on here, and I respect your position,” Gregory observed.

Very observant, David. Now get up off your knees and do the job of a journalist.

(Cross-posted at Bark Bark Woof Woof.)

Make no mistake, the GWB scandal is pure Chris Christie

By Michael J.W. Stickings

The politically-motivated closing of lanes on the George Washington Bridge, targeting Democrats (probably not Fort Lee Mayor Mark Sokolich but rather Senate Majority Leader Loretta Weinberg), speaks volumes about New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, those close to him, and the culture of bullying and retribution that lies at his core both personally and politically.

And while his various Republican pals and conservatives in the media are using this opportunity to slam President Obama, by suggesting that Christie, in contrast, owned up to the problem, apologized, and thereby showed true executive leadership, what we're actually seeing, and what is actually becoming more and more apparent as more and more comes out, is that Christie directly enabled this to happen whether he was in on the details or not and that there was a concerted effort to cover things up after the fact:

Some of Governor Christie's closest loyalists made an effort to keep information about the George Washington Bridge lane closures out of public view for months, as questions swirled about what now appears to have been a politically motivated vendetta, thousands of documents released Friday show.

The documents provide a sweeping timeline of the internal deliberations taking place among at least 10 of Christie's trusted aides. They stretch from the weeks before the September lane closings up to and beyond the November election and are punctuated with vulgarities aimed at the media and signs of tension between New York and New Jersey officials who share control of the agency that operates the bridge.

The documents also show that Port Authority Chairman David Samson, Christie's top appointee at the agency, blamed a New York official — the one who reopened the lanes and said the closings were possibly illegal — for a leak to the media.

Comparisons to Richard Nixon and his henchmen are apt, but any such historical perspective tends to shroud the point: This may all be rather Nixonian, but it's also pure Chris Christie: playing politics as if it's a feudal (and very personal) bloodsport, pitting loyalists against everyone else, bullying the media when the story emerged, resorting to sarcasm and ad hominem attacks to try to blow things off, along with that Jersey swagger that is so typically his, supposedly apologizing but hardly taking responsibility and really just blaming others, throwing anyone and everyone under the bus, whatever is required to save his political skin, showing his massive egotism in stressing how hurt he is by all this, how he was let down, suggesting he's the real victim here, his sycophantic minions circling the wagons and waging an ongoing campaign of lies and smears to protect their master, just he wanted from them.

Really, this whole scandal has it all. And however much he may continue to deny that he had any knowledge of anything that was going on, it has his fingerprints all over it.

Chris Christie the Bully faces his political comeuppance over GWB scandal

By Michael J.W. Stickings

It's a scandal that no amount of his usual swagger and sarcasm can put to rest. And so New Jersey Governor (and, to some, leading Republican light in 2016) Chris Christie put his tail between his legs yesterday and came out to address the media with the appearance of a humbled man:

In a remarkable day of swirling political drama, Gov. Chris Christie tried on Thursday to control the damage from revelations that his administration ordered the revenge-closings of traffic lanes at the George Washington Bridge by firing a top aide, cutting ties with a longtime political adviser and repeatedly apologizing in a nearly two-hour news conference.

Sounding somber and appearing contrite, the normally garrulous Mr. Christie said he had had no advance knowledge of the lane closings and had been "humiliated" by the entire episode.

"I am a very sad person today," the governor said. "I am heartbroken that someone I permitted to be in that circle of trust for the past five years betrayed that trust."

Was he genuinely apologetic? I would suggest that he was politically apologetic, that is, apologetic because the scandal has grown into a political disaster for him, apologetic because his political life demands it. And indeed, as New York magazine's Adam Martin points out, his entire statement was oddly passive in its presentation, as if this is all happening to him, as if he's just the victim. Note that he's "sad" and "heartbroken." Oh, really? And somehow that's really what this is all about, not the bullying message sent to the the mayor of Fort Lee, not all those people who found themselves trapped in the bullying tactics that are central to Christie's character and career? 

Read more »

The semantics of weight

By Carl 

It's easy to make jokes about Chris Christie's weight. After all, even he's admitted it's an obstacle to any presidential campaign he might launch, and once you open that door, people will step into the breach. Connecting his weight to his niggardly attitude towards other people, such as the poor or the long-term disabled, is within bounds, I think.

I'm not above making weight jokes, to be sure. Like smoking, it's most often a behavioral problem and therefore generally controllable. I keep in the back of my mind, however, two things: one, it's important to know the boundaries of taste and harm, and two, there but for the grace of God go I, having been abruptly reminded last year that I was bordering on obesity myself (BMI near 29) and even after losing that all-important first twenty pounds, the last twenty never really seemed to come off.

So it may be a controllable issue, but it's a struggle, no different from poverty or illness, and we need to respect that.

So it surprised me a little to see this on Bloomberg.com:

A New Jersey judge is set to hear an emergency request to block the testimony of a political ally of Governor Chris Christie today before the state Assembly about a traffic scandal that has drawn national attention.

The ally, David Wildstein, sued yesterday to quash a subpoena compelling his testimony over closures in September of lanes in Fort Lee, New Jersey, that lead to the George Washington Bridge, which connects with Manhattan. The closures snarled traffic for four days and now threaten to tarnish the image of Christie, a Republican weighing a run for president.

Now, it's a common phrase, to be sure and I don't want to put myself out there as some bluenose grammatician, but it seems to me some editor or other might have used a different wording like "considering." "Pondering" is also possible, although the adjectival form of that, ponderous, carries some connotations of bulky and ungainly.

In this instance, on this story, it seems a cheap shot.

(Cross-posted to Simply Left Behind.)

Bad news that looks like good news: Possible changes to New York's marijuana laws

Guest post by Ted Leibowitz  

Ed. note: Ted is good friends with our former associate editor and co-blogger Creature, and Ted often wrote for Creature's now-on-long-hiatus blog State of the Day. He's an occasional guest blogger here at The Reaction. -- MJWS  

Ted Leibowitz is an award-winning internet radio music director / DJ focused on bringing the best new and interesting indie rock to his worldwide listenership via his 10-year old station BAGeL Radio. He has been featured on panels at music/tech conferences and writes about the exciting new business of music as well as the foot-dragging, entrenched, dinosaur-like old music industry. 

**********

The headline reads, "New York State Is Set to Loosen Marijuana Laws." To marijuana advocates, this sounds good on the surface. However, Governor Andrew Cuomo's gesture is being made more for political reasons than for the betterment of New Yorkers. 

This is not good news for legal marijuana advocates and should be opposed and worked around. As with what Governor Chris Christie did in NJ, or the mistakes made in Connecticut (legal since May 2012; however, the state still has no dispensaries!), a baby step like this will do more to delay medical marijuana for most people and legalization in general than doing nothing. 

Making medical marijuana legal for a very limited number of people doesn't help the hundreds of thousands in jail for possession, nor the hundreds of thousands more who will be incarcerated in the coming years due to way-out-of-line draconian New York State and federal drug laws. 

The continued destruction of lives by criminalization and incarceration for a benign activity partaken of by so many is a social injustice equal to denying sick people medicine that will improve their quality of life. 

Read more »

Red light, green light, 1, 2, 3...

By Carl 

So it seems that the historic bipartisan budget deal in the House last week – historic, in that it's been years since we didn't just pass a Continuing Resolution to fund the government – is falling on enough deaf ears in the Senate to be a problem:

The prospect that the budget would clear the cloture hurdle brightened Monday, when three GOP senators -- Orrin Hatch of Utah, Johnny Isakson and Saxby Chambliss of Georgia -- announced that they would vote yes. A fourth, Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, expressed his support on Sunday. Sens. John McCain and Jeff Flake of Arizona also said they would vote in favor of cloture last week.

But unlike in the House, where Speaker John Boehner aggressively battled conservative groups trying to kill the bill, GOP leaders in the Senate are signaling opposition, or at least resistance, to the package.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky has not said which way he will vote Tuesday, but he is widely expected to oppose the measure. Similarly, Senate Minority Whip John Cornyn of Texas announced his opposition Monday morning on his campaign's website -- a step his Senate office was unwilling to take. It was later deleted after reporters from The Associated Press asked for confirmation of a Cornyn quote that appeared on the Internet site Breitbart.com.

"Senator Cornyn opposes this budget deal because it breaks previously set spending caps and goes in the 'wrong direction' with regards to entitlement spending," according to the post. His Senate spokeswoman, Kate Martin, would only say that Cornyn would take "a close look" at the measure and is "concerned" that it reverses some of the spending cuts won in a hard-fought 2011 budget pact.

Interesting. It appears that hard-line conservatives in the Senate have drawn a line in the sand. The political implications of this are larger than the legislative implications (the bill overcomes any filibuster and becomes law, with minor amendments).

For one thing, the Republican nominee-apparent, Paul Ryan (by dint of running as the Veep candidate with Mitt Romney), was one of the driving forces behind this deal. The thinking on his part had to include a calculation of the national political implications of being out in front of a bipartisan budget bill ahead of an election that will likely feature Chris Christie, who's main attraction is his ability to bring Democrats on board with his agenda.

Read more »

Marco Rubio says something smart about Chris Christie and the 2013 elections

By Michael J.W. Stickings

 Specifically, about Tuesday's elections and what they all mean:

In an interview with CNN, Republican Sen. Marco Rubio downplayed Wednesday any national takeaways from GOP Gov. Chris Christie's crushing victory in the blue state of New Jersey and Republican Ken Cuccinelli's loss in Virginia, saying what happened in Tuesday's elections carry little implications for the future of the GOP.

"I think we need to understand that some of these races don't apply to future races. Every race is different -- it has a different set of factors -- but I congratulate (Christie) on his win," he told CNN Chief Congressional Correspondent Dana Bash.

The first-term Senator from Florida stressed that each race is unique to the state where it's taking place.

"Clearly (Christie) was able to speak to the hopes and aspirations of people within New Jersey. That's important. We want to win everywhere and Governor Christie has certainly shown he has a way of winning in New Jersey, in states like New Jersey... so I congratulate him on that," he said. 

Actually, he's overstating his case a bit. Each election ought to be understood on its own terms, but it's not like they take place in complete isolation from one another. And even with off-year elections like the ones on Tuesday, certain themes and trends can be found, even if there isn't necessarily the sort of easy, simplistic, overarching narrative (who won, who lost, what it all means) the news media so desperately want to find and push (as Jon Stewart amusingly pointed out tonight). And one thing we saw is that, Christie's win over a relative unknown notwithstanding, Democrats and progressive causes did quite well, on the whole.


Read more »

U.S. Election Extravaganza 2013

By Michael J.W. Stickings 

Maybe.

So here we are. A huge, historic day for the greatest country that has ever graced the face of the earth.

Actually, that's not true. None of it.

But it is Election Day in America, and there are some important, interesting races around the country, and there are already results coming in, with votes in...

Virginia... and New Jersey... and New York City... and... and... Alabama?

Yes, the (great?) state of Alabama, where one-quarter of my family is from, including my wonderful, sadly now-deceased maternal grandfather, a WWII hero and, later, baseball broadcaster. There's a House race in that state's first district, with, predictably, two right-wing Republicans on the ballot. So whatever.

(There are also a lot of other local elections taking place, and I'm sure many of them are important and interesting, but we're going to stick to the national stories here.)

Does any of this matter, though? I mean, is there any larger narrative? Will the results tonight tell us anything about the political state of the country, about where the country may be going headed into 2014, with the midterms coming up a year from now, with President Obama's approval ratings low, though not nearly as low as Congress's, with the Affordable Care Act struggling to get going and of course under a constant barrage of dishonestly from Republicans?

I would say no, not really.

Gov. Chris Christie has won re-election in New Jersey. I believe that was called weeks ago, no? It might as well have been. He's a bully and a blowhard, but there's no denying his popularity, and he certainly qualifies as the GOP superstar du jour, with all signs pointing to a 2016 presidential run, with the media salivating over his prospects, even if in reality he stands zero chance of winning the Republican nomination because he's just so out of line with mainstream right-wing Republicanism these days (though he'd likely be a formidable national candidate, just as he might have been the best choice as Romney's running mate last year). Sure, it says a lot that he can win in a blue state, and he's certainly no ideological extremist, but Republicans have a long history of winning state-wide races in my former home state and it's not like Democrats put up a truly viable alternative. Sorry, but Barbara Buono is no Cory Booker.

So, again, whatever.

The more interesting race by far has been in Virginia, where centrist (and corrupt) Clintonite Dem Terry McAuliffe has been ahead of Tea Party social conservative extremist Ken Cuccinelli, he who hates blow jobs, in the polls and appears to be on track to win in that oh-so-purple state. Last night on The Daily Show, a somewhat funny bit suggested that it's a race between two equal evils, two equally unlikeable candidates. That's Jon Stewart's independent shtick, but it's anything but true in this case. I'm hardly a fan of McAuliffe, who has spent much of his political career wallowing in the deep underbelly of the Clinton machine, but he's an opportunistic, self-aggrandizing centrist. He's not nearly as progressive as I would like, but he's at least on the right side of the issue when it comes to, say, women's health, the environment (more or less), and poverty, while The Cooch is a far-right extremist and ideologue who represents the nefarious fusion of anti-government Tea Party radicalism and socially moralistic Christianist theocratism. There's the choice. And the choice is clear. That's what Virginia voters are saying.

As for The Big Apple, well... after years and years of Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg, two right-leaning law-and-order types who were tough on crime, minorities, and Big Gulp drinkers, it's obviously time for someone who represents the city's more progressive aspirations for a better life, not just a "safer" life, and that someone is Democrat Bill de Blasio, whose toughest competition was in the Democratic primary and who will beat Republican (and former Giuliani lieutanant) Joe Lhota by, what, 40 points? More? Let's just agree it'll be a landslide. It remains to be seen how de Blasio performs as mayor, and perhaps there are questions about how effectively he'll manage the city and be something more than an aspirational figure, but there's no denying his broad support among the city's various demographic groups and the fact that he's generated a good deal of excitement during the campaign.

By the way, it's still too early to call in Virginia. Not surprising. The early votes from the more rural parts of the state tend to go Republican, while the Democratic votes from the denser northern parts of the state come later, and so The Cooch will continue to lead until, hopefully, those urban, suburban, and exurban votes turn the tide in McAuliffe's favor. But it'll take time. This is purely anecdotal, but Virginia vote-counting and reporting always seems to be a slow, slow process.

Alright, a short break... be back soon.

**********

Okay.

At 9:30 pm, it's a really tight race in Virginia, but McAuliffe has closed the gap significantly. It's now 878,515 to 875,160, or 47-46, for The Cooch, with 87% of precincts reporting.

Christie's up 59-39. Yes, yes, a big win. Let the media kick their stupid "Christie 2016" narrative into an even higher gear. Perspective, people, perspective.

In New York, the race has been called for de Blasio even though, as of right now, CNN has no votes reported. There you go.

**********

By the way, make sure to read the comments. One of our co-bloggers, Frank Moraes, is weighing in as well.

**********

McAuliffe has taken the lead. It's now 911,726 to 906,841, or 47-46, with 91% reporting. I was going to say it's hard to believe that many people actually voted for The Cooch, but, no, it's not surprising at all. It's Virginia, after all, with large parts of the state deeply rooted in the Confederacy, and of course this purple state, like the country generally, remains deeply divided along partisan lines regardless of candidate.

**********

And CNN -- and probably others, but that's what I've got up on the screen at the moment -- has called it for McAuliffe.

It's still 47-46, and so a closer election than expected (and than the polls were suggesting was likely to be the case), though the final numbers will likely show a larger McAuliffe victory, with votes still coming in from populous Democratic areas.

Why is that, this closer-than-expected race? Republican vote suppression efforts, anyone?

**********

At 11:19 pm, it's McAuliffe over Cooch 45-45.

Meanwhile, Christie won big and de Blasio is crushing it. And, for what it's worth, Bradley Byrne beat Dean Young in AL-1.

Oh, what an extravaganza it's been.

Good night, everyone.

You mean Chris Christie may not actually be the second coming?

By Richard K. Barry 

The new book by Mark Halperin and John Heilemann chronicling the 2012 presidential campaign contains some interesting revelations about New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, the man so many in America seem ready to anoint an across-the-aisle-working, pragmatic saint who can save America.

In a review of Double Down: Game Change 2012, CNN's Peter Hamby writes this, referring to the Romney team's vice presidential vetting file:

According to the authors, Romney and his team were shaken by what they discovered about Christie during "Project Goldfish," as the hush-hush veep search process was known. [The] "disturbing" research file is littered with "garish controversies," the authors write: a Justice Department investigation into his free-spending ways as U.S. attorney, his habit of steering government contracts to friends and political allies, a defamation lawsuit that emerged during a 1994 run for local office, a politically problematic lobbying career that included work on behalf of a financial firm that employed Bernie Madoff. And that's not to mention the Romney team's anxiety about the governor's girth.

Hamby adds this:

For Christie, who is coasting to reelection on Tuesday and already laying behind-the-scenes groundwork for a 2016 presidential bid, the book's revelations are a Drudge-ready public relations nightmare that will send his advisers scrambling to explain awkward aspects of his record and his personal life just as he is stepping onto the national stage.

Never did like that Chris Christie.

Silly things morning show hosts ask politicians: Survey says...

By Richard K. Barry

Is there anyone with even a passing acquaintance with American politics who is unaware that New Jersey Governor Chris Christie is going to make a run at the presidency in 2016? Yet, for some reason, it was a story yesterday that Christie refused to commit to serving another full term after he is re-elected (and he will be re-elected).

Christie was on "Good Morning America" on the first anniversary of Hurricane Sandy, but the topic of conversation also included Christie's potential 2016 presidential run -- a campaign that, were he to win, would require him to step down with a year left in his term. "I'm committed to being the best governor New Jersey can have for as long as I can possibly do it," Christie said.

He went on to say the kind of thing elected officials in his position always say, which is, "But, you know, George, neither one of us have a crystal ball and know what's going to happen in the future."

I'll do this job as long and as aggressively as I possibly can, and my current intention is to spend four years, but we'll see what happens, George, you never know what life's gonna bring you.

For those who don't know, Christie's comments are on page 432 of the media relations handbook under the heading: "Shit Politicians Say When They Have No Intention of Serving a Full Term."

Remember that scene in Bull Durham in which Crash Davis teaches "Nuke" LaLoosh how to do media interviews in the major league? Same book.