See other Ron Paul Articles
Title: Christie Won't Make the Conservative Argument
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://www.absoluterights.com/chris ... nt-make-conservative-argument/
Published: Dec 29, 2013
Author: Jon Dougherty
Post Date: 2013-12-30 20:24:33 by BTP Holdings
Keywords: None
Views: 109
Comments: 6
Christie Won't Make the Conservative Argument By Jon Dougherty on December 29, 2013 The Sunday Read A new CNN poll has New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton (D) tied in a head-to-head 2016 presidential match-up. According to The Hill, that’s the third national poll this month to show Christie and Clinton tied. The third. And in each, pollsters are sure to mention that Christie is the only Republican who can beat Hillary in 2016, and that conservative alternatives to Christie, in particular, don't have a snowball's chance. Are you, like me, getting the feeling that, perhaps, our presidential choices have already been hand-picked by the powers that be, in both party apparatuses and in the mainstream media? And we're barely seeing commercials for 2014 mid-term races. Well, it's no surprise the Left wants Hillary to run; Left-wing progressives (er, Democrats) have been pushing her since about 10 minutes after Barack Obama's reelection last year. But the fact that the GOP Establishment has already settled on Christie is offensive to me, as a conservative and constitutionalist. The Republican leadership obviously thinks that Christie can win, but they thought the same thing about John McCain in 2008 and Mitt Romney in 2012. Fewer Republicans turned out to vote for Romney than did McCain, and that is saying something. So why back a Christie? Why not a conservative who is representative of the core of the Republican Party? Can you say "status quo?" As a conservative, I am concerned about whom the Democrats run – whether it is Clinton or someone else, that person will be no friend of the Constitution and will look to expand government and executive power at every turn. But what I don’t want is a GOP presidential candidate who will want to do the same thing, and I see Christie as that candidate. There is little about this man that should appeal to conservatives. He may bring some fiscally conservative credos to the game, but barely – and that’s pretty much where his conservatism ends. For one, he has embraced Obamacare’s expansion of Medicaid for his state. When announcing the decision, he also said that his administration was planning a $47 million increase in additional government-provided health care. That, no doubt, concerns the state’s beleaguered taxpayers; New Jersey is the only the second-highest taxed state in the country. Christie also supports a form of amnesty for illegal aliens, though he has tried to hedge his bet of late, no doubt because he knows conservatives are dead-set against any further abuses of U.S. hospitality and immigration laws. Christie also has done little to ease his state’s heavy regulatory burdens. According to the most recent 2013 survey, New Jersey ranks near the bottom – 46th – of the best-run states (making it one of the worst-run states). Full disclosure: Govs. Bobby Jindal of Louisiana (41st) and Jeb Bush of Florida (42nd), both potential GOP presidential contenders, aren’t doing much better. So why is the GOP Establishment already ordaining him as the party’s 2016 candidate? While party hacks say it’s because he can “win,” in reality what Christie represents is the status quo. As such, he will not only push for the perpetuation of the Republican Establishment, but - based on his governing record in New Jersey and his political philosophy - he will continue to push for bigger government. Granted, it may be Big Government-lite, but, like their Democrat counterparts, the Republican Establishment does like its status quo. And what is his philosophy? Comments he made to CNN’s Jake Tapper recently provide insight: “Sometimes, I feel like our party cares more about winning the argument than they care about winning elections (my emphasis). And if you don't win elections, you can't govern." Yes, but, if conservatives don't win the argument, then we there won't be a country left to govern. The fact is, we cannot afford anymore “status quo,” anymore "governing" over "winning the argument," because "governing" America in this day and age means we continue amassing impossible debt, we continue to reject attempts to control spending and reform entitlements, we continue adopting liberty-robbing initiatives and policies, while passing freedom-stealing legislation, and we continue to witness further erosion of the Constitution. In other words, we cannot afford a Clinton, for sure, but neither a Christie. The fact is, there definitely is an argument to be made about the future of the country, and it's an argument I wish the GOP had begun making long ago. Conservative solutions are superior to the same, tired, failed, worn-out liberal/progressivism that has bankrupted our nation. Christie obviously is the wrong person to articulate them. Poster Comment: Chris Christie is a wolf in sheep's clothing.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
#1. To: BTP Holdings, 4 (#0)
Christie-like politics is why many here left the Republican party, me in '92 when I became a Perotista. PS: I hope his lap band snaps.
Clinton/Christie = Abraham Lincoln-styled centralized FedGov tyranny
#2. To: BTP Holdings (#0)
-Alex Kurtagic
#3. To: BTP Holdings (#0)
Indictment of our political system when people like Clinton and Christie are even considered. Chris Christie is a wolf in sheep's clothing.
#4. To: BTP Holdings (#0)
Christie is too fat and Crinkles is too fat and too olde. Neither will be selected.
“The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out... without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane, intolerable.” ~ H. L. Mencken
#5. To: X-15 (#2)
What do you think we have now with Obummer? He has increased the debt more than all other Presidents COMBINED! And, he wants the U.N. to control our guns. If that doesn't spell out a recipe for tyrrany, I don't know what does! ;) Clinton/Christie = Abraham Lincoln-styled centralized FedGov tyranny
"When bad men combine, the good must associate; else they will fall, one by one." Edmund Burke
#6. To: Lod (#4)
Three years to go and we may NOT get there as a viable government. Neither will be selected.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest