False con­clu­sions about Chris Christie

The me­dia reads en­trails of the wrong chicken

The Washington Times Daily - - Opinion - By R. Em­mett Tyrrell Jr.

They are at it again. They are again telling Repub­li­cans and con­ser­va­tives how dread­ful their po­lit­i­cal con­di­tion re­ally is. I am speaking, of course, of the voices of the kul­tursmog, and to hear them tell it, we are in a heck of a heap. We lost the gov­er­nor­ship of Vir­ginia. Even worse, we won the gov­er­nor­ship of New Jer­sey. What dread­ful news.

Of course, in Vir­ginia the Repub­li­cans lost to a con­gen­i­tal liar, backed by the most fa­mous con­gen­i­tal liars in Amer­i­can pol­i­tics, the Clin­tons. It is only a mat­ter of time be­fore he is in deep do-do. Gov.-elect Terry McAuliffe’s cam­paign was an amal­gam of lies as fla­grant as his lie in his mem­oirs. There, for no rea­son what­so­ever, he lied in claim­ing The Amer­i­can Spec­ta­tor charged Bill Clin­ton with or­der­ing “the mur­der of po­lit­i­cal op­po­nents.” When I asked him about this lie, he did not sim­ply shut down or ig­nore my in­quiry. He ac­tu­ally ini­ti­ated a series of puck­ish let­ters to me, never ad­mit­ting that he had lied, but con­stantly cav­il­ing with me on some ob­scure point that he raised. The up­shot of our cor­re­spon­dence was that he could never iden­tify where it was that The Amer­i­can Spec­ta­tor said Mr. Clin­ton had asked peo­ple to com­mit mur­der. Mr. McAuliffe per­formed sim­i­larly against state At­tor­ney Gen­eral Ken Cuc­cinelli, and if it were not for the fact that he had the fund­ing to out­spend Mr. Cuc­cinelli by nearly two to one, I have no doubt he would have lost. As it was, once Mr. Cuc­cinelli be­gan ty­ing him to Oba­macare, Mr. McAuliffe’s lead dwin­dled from dou­ble dig­its to a mar­gin of just 2.5 per­cent.

In the New Jer­sey race, the Repub­li­cans won and with 61 per­cent of the vote. Yet, ac­cord­ing to the kul­tursmog, they re­ally lost, be­cause the vic­tor, in­cum­bent Gov. Chris Christie, is a “po­lar­iz­ing force.” He of­fends the Tea Party, and that means he can never win higher of­fice, for in­stance, the pres­i­dency. But wait a minute. Is not the Tea Party’s ma­jor con­cern the fis­cal health of the repub­lic? It was in 2009 when the Tea Party was get­ting started. Back then, if a can­di­date brought up the so­cial is­sues, that can­di­date was doomed with the Tea Party, ac­cord­ing to the voices of the smog. Well, as Mr. Christie told The New York Times this week, “I’ve cut taxes, cut spend­ing, re­formed pen­sions and ben­e­fits … . My record is my record. I’m proud of it. And it is a con­ser­va­tive record, gov­ern­ing as a con­ser­va­tive in a blue state.” As for the dreaded so­cial is­sues, he is op­posed to abor­tion and to ho­mo­sex­ual mar­riage, though he called off a le­gal chal­lenge to ho­mo­sex­ual mar­riage in Oc­to­ber, per­haps see­ing it as a fu­tile fight. Pres­i­dent Obama might do the same with his mon­stros­ity, Oba­macare.

Doubt­less, there are peo­ple who do not like Mr. Christie and think his star has risen far enough. Yet I will tell you he is as con­ser­va­tive as he says he is, and that is a win­ning com­bi­na­tion with fun­ders, or­di­nary cit­i­zens, and even with jour­nal­ists. Back in 2010, when I in­vited him to a large Amer­i­can Spec­ta­tor din­ner in New York City, he was a hit with just such a crowd. He was the com­plete gen­tle­man, suave and amus­ing. He talked about economies in govern­ment, low­er­ing taxes and bal­anced bud­gets. He is not po­lar­iz­ing at all. Once again, the kul­tursmog is in the dark about Repub­li­cans and con­ser­va­tives.

Yet we are told he can­not beat the kul­tursmog’s “in­evitable can­di­date,” Hil­lary Rod­ham Clin­ton. In the New Jer­sey exit polls, she trounced the gover­nor. So let me give you another set of polls. Ac­cord­ing to the Ras­mussen poll, Mrs. Clin­ton polled high­est when a sam­pling of Democrats was asked “which can­di­date they would least like to see with the nom­i­na­tion.” A Wall Street Jour­nal/NBC poll found that she had fallen from an April fa­vor­able rat­ing of 56 per­cent to 46 per­cent, and her neg­a­tive rat­ing was on the up­swing to 33 per­cent. Doubt­less, there will be more. She was the least pop­u­lar first lady in his­tory.

I do not know if Mr. Christie is go­ing to run for the pres­i­dency. Nor do I know if he could win, but I think he’s a con­tender, and if he runs he will be con­tend­ing for the nom­i­na­tion in a very com­pet­i­tive field of Repub­li­can can­di­dates. As for the Democrats, they have Mrs. Clin­ton right now and, pos­si­bly, Joe Bi­den. The kul­tursmog is des­per­ate.


Newspapers in English

Newspapers from USA

© PressReader. All rights reserved.