Let’s just all admit it, President Obama is responsible for everything bad in the world and none of the good. The heavy snowstorms are his fault; the drought in the west is his fault; he obviously is responsible for the Ebola virus; we know he is the reason ISIS exists; and when the next oil spill occurs, it will be because of something he did or didn’t do. But to state that he is partly responsible for the situation in Ferguson, Missouri is going a bit far. Chris Christie is garish, opinionated and a bit crude at times; but there’s one thing he must learn. President Obama can handle all the misdirected blame he receives, but can Christie handle the truth?
The Governor of New Jersey accuses the President of failing as a leader and that the Ferguson situation was partly a result of his inadequacies. Is this the same Christie who angered his own party when he praised Mr. Obama for his leadership after Super Storm Sandy devastated much of his state? You can’t have it both ways, Governor. You have to give a lot of the blame for a broken government in Washington to your ‘do nothing party.’
A recent Quinnipiac poll revealed that at this time Republicans favor Mitt Romney as their selection for the 2016 presidential nomination. He is followed by Jeb Bush. Chris Christie is a distant third.
Last Sunday an article in the New York Times Magazine was titled ‘Chris Christie is Back.’ At first glance one might think that the article was going to explain why he would be the standard bearer for the Republican Party in 2016. That’s why we need to read the entire story.
The author, Mark Leibovich, in his lengthy profile of the New Jersey Governor, was stating a simple fact; now that the ‘bridge incident’ is mostly behind him, Christie is acting like Christie again. He has returned to his caricature of a New Jersey Mayor. He is once again brash, sarcastic, and occasionally mean-spirited. For many politicos he is a breath of fresh air in a political system which is skilled at never answering a direct question or offering an honest opinion. Christie is quite the opposite; if you don’t wish to hear the answer, don’t ask him the question.
The article continues with explanations as to why Christie would be a poor choice as a presidential candidate.
Christie may have an additional problem. The singular most important topic of conversation regarding presidential aspirations is campaign funding. Although Christie would likely have many potential contributors, there may be restrictions on some of their ability to add to the Governor’s war chest.
As the governor of a State he has certain influence over many corporations relating to his state’s financial operations. Under the SEC’s so called ‘pay to play’ law, he may face legal challenges regarding his funding by some Wall Street entities.
Whether Christie decides to enter the battle for the Republican nomination or not, it is obvious the GOP is at a loss to offer a viable and favorable candidate in 2016. They have not changed a single policy in the party’s platform, and all they appear to seek is old men with old ideas to lead their party back into the dark ages.
By James Turnage