New Jersey « Black Man Thinkin'

The Non-Case That Won’t Be Going Away…Anytime Soon

Tags: betrayal, bridgegate, Chris Christie, Christie 2012 RNC keynote speech, Christie Obama hug, Hillary Clinton, Hoboken mayor, New Jersey, obama, Port Authority, Romney

Comments: 5 Comments

Published on: February 6, 2014

Here’s the deal: This past August, a governor’s close aide e-mails one of the governor’s appointees, saying “traffic problems” should occur in a specific city. The appointee makes some calls and, on September 9th, voila, problems emerge. The city’s mayor contacts the governor’s administration to complain. The appointee e-mails the aide and another official, misleading them about what caused the problem.

An appointee of the neighboring state’s governor then orders the problem stopped. In the midst of this, the governor is re-elected by a wide margin. After joking about the incident, the governor says he knew nothing about its cause.

And then it all blows up for New Jersey Governor Chris Christie…

Since October, all manner of things continue to swirl about: subpoenas, hearings, impeachment threats. The appointee who made calls to cause the traffic problems resigned, and Christie fired the aide who sent the “traffic problems” e-mail. The appointee who resigned recently said Christie knew about the lane closures when they occurred…as though traffic could halt on the world’s busiest bridge and Christie – and a few million other people – would not know.

Add to that, Hoboken’s mayor accused Christie’s administration of bullying her over Hurricane Sandy relief funds, but her story doesn’t add up, and there is no corroboration. Now, concerns about her diary entries pertaining to a 2013 wrongful termination suit damage her credibility, including the fact she was accused of perjury in that case.

The DNC ran a Superbowl online ad about the re-inventing drama of the governor’s troubles, reading in part, “And it’s only the first quarter. It’s going to be a long game.” That could be true for Christie’s attackers as well: as Democrats and the press yell “Fire!”, it is not that easy to see even smoke in this “scandal”. As ABC News notes, “there has been no evidence linking him directly to the scandal.”

So why is the press spending so much time on what they admit is a non-story, especially when we have more Obamacare train wrecks occurring, “traitors” nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize, and a Texas Democrat struggling with the truth about her own life story?

Because none of those other items pose a threat to the presidential aspirations of one Hillary Rodham Clinton.

A UK publication said it, straight out: Republicans can’t blame Clinton for Benghazi while absolving Christie of Bridgegate. How that statement could be made with a straight face goes a long way toward explaining the liberal mind, and not only in the US. Somehow:

It is unlikely that many reasonable people will see an interstate traffic jam as equal to an international terror attack, but the effort to show equivalence be made. If it is not, then how can a woman who lost to Barack Obama in 2008 prevail against anyone who would hang her involvement in his failing presidency around her neck, as Christie might?

Therefore, the strategy Obama employed against Mitt Romney in 2012 comes against Chris Christie in 2016…even though it is only 2014…and even though the party presidential primary elections remain 2 years away…and even though neither Christie nor Clinton have announced their candidacy for the nation’s highest elected office. The “Kill Romney” strategy irrelevancies and deceptions to distract people from the Obama record and focus them on an illusory version of his opponent’s history. The strategy was arguably effective, but the 2012 election was closer than many might think.

However, Democrats may believe the margin was narrow because they did not seek to “Kill Romney” soon enough. To correct that error, they seek Christie’s blood nearly two years before the presidential primaries, and are employing a full-court press. At the state level, New Jersey Assembly Deputy Speaker John Wisniewski, a Democrat has issued subpoenas and launched investigations. At the federal level, Obama’s HUD Inspector General is looking into whether Christie misused Hurricane Sandy relief funds. Interestingly, Republicans are tacitly on board for Christie’s demise, running their own investigation of Christie.

It’s not difficult to appreciate the Democrat motivation for attacking Christie; they seek the “Clinton Coronation” they failed to deliver in 2008. Six years ago, Hillary Clinton ran a great campaign: she knew the issues, had good messaging, the best political strategists, and made no mistakes. All things were ready for her to win…except the fact that Democrat voters, wanted someone else, and leading Democrats jumped off the Clinton bandwagon. Now, the party wants to make up for its “betrayal”.

The Republican motivation for killing Christie may not seem obvious until you remember the Obama praise and “bro hug”

Bro Hug

(which Christie says did not happen), which get credit for helping the president win re-election. Before that, there was Christie’s keynote address at the 2012 Republican National Convention address, which appeared to support his own presidential aspirations more than support the party’s nominee, Mitt Romney. At least in the eyes of the GOP establishment, Chris Christie simply is not as “part of the family”.

Consequently, the issue of betrayal will keep “bridge-gate” with us for some time to come. Republicans will use it to punish Christie for his betrayal in 2012; Democrats will use it to whitewash their betrayal of Hillary Clinton in 2008 and, in the Democrats’ calculus, no Christie means Hillary can’t lose.

So, the long knives are out for Christie on the Democrat side, and revenge-minded Republicans have a few stilettos of their own. The political class does not want a Chris Christie presidency: the Democrats want to apologize to Hillary Clinton for 2008 by nominating her in 2016, and the GOP…well, no one knows who they want…but it ain’t Chris Christie.

However, if Hillary Clinton couldn’t beat Barack Obama with a near-perfect campaign in 2008, who can she beat in 2016, when she has to answer for Obama’s policies?

Bankruptcy, Thy Name Is Democrat

by Black Man Thinkin'

Categories: ... 'bout Politics

Comments: Comments Off

Published on: August 31, 2013

What do these U.S. locations have in common: Central Falls, RI; Detroit, MI; San Bernardino, CA; Mammoth Lakes, CA; Stockton, CA; Jefferson County, AL; Harrisburg, PA; and Boise County, ID? Well, each has filed for Chapter 9 Bankruptcy since 2010.

However, there is something else, shared with the financially troubled cities of Baltimore, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh, and Miami; also with Atlantic City and Camden, NJ, Chicago, and Los Angeles.

It is also common to the following states: California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey, and Massachusetts.

What these cities and states share, along with their financial challenges, is that the Democrat Party controls nearly every one of them; sometimes, it has for decades.

Consider Detroit, which on July 18, 2013, became the largest U.S. city ever to seek bankruptcy protection. No Republican has been mayor since January, 1962; the City Council has not had a Republican majority or plurality since the 1950’s. Democrats have run Detroit for more than a half century…into the ground.

As for the last Republican mayors in the other bankrupt locations:

Birmingham

Harrisburg

Among the troubled, but not (yet?) bankrupt cities:

Additionally:

There is more. In a report that identified 20 U.S cities that could go bankrupt after Detroit, at least 15 of them are Democrat-run. Of the 10 US cities with the highest percentages of residents living in poverty, Democrats have run them for decades. The point is hard to miss.

Turning attention to states with financial challenges:

governors

Democrats

• New York: Since 1958, 5 of 8 governors were Democrats. Since 1992, Republicans ran the Senate all but 4 years, but Democrats controlled the Assembly each year,

• Illinois: Since 1991, 2 Democrat and 2 Republican governors; and Democrats controlled the State Senate for 12 of 22 years, and the House of Representatives for 20 of 22 years,

• New Jersey: Since 1990 – 4 Democrat and 3 Republican, administrations. Since 1992, Republicans ran the Senate for 10 years, there were 2 years of shared control, and Democrats ran it for 10 years…the last 10 years; in the State House, Republican control for 10 years, followed by Democrat Control for the last 12, and

• Massachusetts: Since Michael Dukakis’ 1991 retirement, there has been 1 Democrat governor, but Democrats kept majorities in both the Senate and the House.

To be “fair”, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Michigan are troubled states under Republican control. Ohio has 24 governments and 6 school districts plagued by pension funding issues and an unwillingness to cut spending despite declining revenues. Pennsylvania has $47 Billion in unfunded pension liabilities and no political will to address the problem. Michigan halts between dealing with rising healthcare costs, or kicking that can down the road.

However, the political scales may not balance as much as some might believe; the policies at the root of these financial ills have a decidedly liberal Democrat aroma.

The problem of unfunded pension liabilities traces back to President Kennedy’s desire to grab union votes for Democrats. Both Franklin Delano Roosevelt and former AFL-CIO president George Meaney considered collective bargaining for public employees bad for taxpayers. However, when Kennedy saw that New York City Mayor Robert Wagner built a reliable Democrat voting bloc by granting collective-bargaining rights to the city’s public employees, he put his party’s good ahead of taxpayer benefit and issued an Executive Order in 1962, granting those rights to unionized federal employees. The practice spread across the nation. Now, governments have collectively bargained themselves into more than $4.5 Trillion in unfunded pension liabilities.

Problems with healthcare costs trace back to the 1965 origination of Medicare and Medicaid under President Lyndon Johnson. Government socialization of medical costs is now a financial disaster, with Medicare facing $38.6 Trillion in unfunded liabilities, according to its Board of Trustees. Also, Medicare heads for bankruptcy in 2016 or 2024, depending upon what is true about Obamacare.

It took 17 years for all 50 states to “voluntarily” participate in Medicaid, and 11 more for President Clinton to announce Medicaid was bankrupting them. Add the fact Obamacare makes Medicaid more costly for states, and that uninsured patients often have better medical outcomes than those using Medicaid, and one wonders how Medicare, Medicaid, or Obamacare benefit the nation. However, despite poorer health care and worsened state balance sheets, liberal Democrats use the programs to show themselves as “caring”.

More often than not in the U.S., when governments have financial trouble, Democrats are at the helm of government and, even when not in charge, policies originated and associated with Democrats cause the problems. For example, Democrats portray Social Security as an effective and successful program.

However, it is hard to imagine how a program, short nearly $10 Trillion over the next 75 years, and facing massive growth in the number of beneficiaries, meets any reasonable success criteria…until you consider how it delivers the senior vote to Democrats.

To their credit, Democrats convinced the nation that they care about the people, even as they devastate them financially. By the time Democrats finish showing their concern for people, no government anywhere is likely to have a dime to spend on them.

Perhaps it is time for a real change?

page 1 of 1

ARTICLE ARCHIVES