You'd think that the far right mind would at least be capable of understanding or bare minimum simply recognizing that the fervor with which liberal pols and their adjuncts in the media have pursued the ruin of Christie's presidential ambitions over 'bridgegate' is pretty conclusive proof of just how much the left fears him and that this fear is not just about his ability to defeat Hillary regardless of media bias but also more importantly I think because his personality and the way which it may strongly appeal to a broad swath of American voters proffers up the promise of changing the rather unflattering way conservatives are viewed and often caricatured in the country - you'd think that Christie representing such a ominous threat to the left would deserve or earn some respect from the far right - but nope, not really happening. The far right almost dumps on Christie as much as the left does - they can't seem to shake the vainglorious notion that going to war against liberalism [and all the optics and heated rhetoric of outrage that goes with that war] in a welfare state that is increasingly liberal in its tendencies and where the media and press are overwhelmingly liberal in their sympathies is a viable approach - it isn't, it's stupid, it's maladapted - you wanna mitigate, roll back the threat liberals like Obama present [and I don't at all deny that threat] you gotta out message them, out smart them and then out govern the wretched little pricks.
But is all this moot - is Christie in fact toast? I don't think so, barring of course no evidence surfacing indicating he's lying about his role in the bridge nonsense. He gave a speech recently in Chicago that demonstrated clearly why he shines: it was a pointed and aggressive attack on the Democrats and Obama that did not bore, was full of personality and a 'man of the people' charm and appealed in a way that should please rational, reasonable conservatives while at same time attracting the enthusiasm of independents and moderate Democrats looking back at America under Obama with great dismay.
This is why I like Christie and hope he's still viable - it's not just because he may be the only conservative out there with the media savvy to beat down the beast that is Hillary - it's also because he has the ability to change the way people think about conservatives and conservatism, which is in many ways a caricature manufactured by a biased media - unfortunately the far right, with their strong dislike of Christie, demonstrate why that caricature is so easily applied.
But is all this moot - is Christie in fact toast? I don't think so, barring of course no evidence surfacing indicating he's lying about his role in the bridge nonsense. He gave a speech recently in Chicago that demonstrated clearly why he shines: it was a pointed and aggressive attack on the Democrats and Obama that did not bore, was full of personality and a 'man of the people' charm and appealed in a way that should please rational, reasonable conservatives while at same time attracting the enthusiasm of independents and moderate Democrats looking back at America under Obama with great dismay.
This is why I like Christie and hope he's still viable - it's not just because he may be the only conservative out there with the media savvy to beat down the beast that is Hillary - it's also because he has the ability to change the way people think about conservatives and conservatism, which is in many ways a caricature manufactured by a biased media - unfortunately the far right, with their strong dislike of Christie, demonstrate why that caricature is so easily applied.
