GOP Hawks Reaching Breaking Point With Rand Paul

ReasonReasonEarlier this week Nick Gillespie highlighted comments the American Enterprise Institute's Danielle Pletka made on New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s attack on what he sees as the dangerous “libertarianism that's going through both parties right now.” When asked if Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) was among those exhibiting this strain Christie replied, “You can name any one of them that’s engaged in this."

Christie is not alone in the Republican party when it comes to his thoughts on Paul’s non-interventionism and opposition to government surveillance. Politico recently published an article on how many of the GOP hawks are close to breaking point with Paul’s libertarian positions.

From Politico:

The Republican Party’s hawks are finally saying it out in the open: This aggression will not stand, Rand.

After three years of watching the GOP’s non-interventionist wing gather strength, there are mounting signs that a more combative set of national security conservatives have reached their breaking point. Now, prominent conservative leaders in what used to be considered the Bush-Cheney mold are increasingly taking the offensive against their intra-party rivals.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie publicly challenged libertarian Republicans Thursday to explain their skepticism about government surveillance to the families of 9/11 victims, declaring at a Republican Governors Association event: “I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation.”

Recent polling by Public Policy Polling shows that Paul is currently the GOP 2016 frontrunner. If the Republicans want any shot at taking back the White House in 2016 they should figure out how to live with the libertarianism Christie mentioned. It doesn’t look like it’s going anywhere soon.

Follow this story and more at Reason 24/7.

Spice up your blog or Website with Reason 24/7 news and Reason articles. You can get the widgets here. If you have a story that would be of interest to Reason's readers please let us know by emailing the 24/7 crew at 24_7@reason.com, or tweet us stories at @reason247.

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  • Jon Lester||

    Establishment Republicans have been perceived as fascistic by liberals for a long time. Are they seriously branding themselves this way now?

    I'm sure the for-profit mass media will focus on Rand Paul's abortion views, and try their best to cover up his otherwise libertarian message, but it won't be because they want to help that other wing of the Republican party.

  • ||

    "Establishment Republicans have been perceived as fascistic by liberals for a long time. Are they seriously branding themselves this way now?"

    They nominated Romney and McCain** for President back to back didn't they? That should answer your question.

    **At least McCain doesn't like torture though - I will give him credit for that at least. Most Establishment Republicans don't even have that going for them.

  • Dweebston||

    Much like Obama, he'd have disgraced even his few, onerous principles as soon as he'd set foot in office.

  • ||

    Probably so. People tend to "grow" in the office of POTUS.

  • Dweebston||

    You mean evolve, right?

  • LarryA||

    "Hope -- Change"

  • AlmightyJB||

    Don't fuck with the MIC. They will destroy you.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    If the Republicans want any shot at taking back the White House in 2016

    What's the point of taking the White House if the new President takes away the bipartisan punchbowl?

    Indispensable Enemies: The Politics of Misrule in America
    ...Karp not only pulls back the curtain on the evils of partisan politics, but goes on to propose a Jeffersonian style of self-government. Some of my favorite analysis from this book includes the following:

    * Party oligarchs and their Cold War statism highlights his "principle of waste."

    * A State inherently tends toward collusion and monopoly-granting, and therefore expansion, and this necessarily leads to war.

    * Special privilege is in direct odds with liberty and self-rule, and only serves to further entrench a ruling political elite. And this he says, is a result of the "Hamiltonian tradition."

    * Political ideology necessarily takes the form of the ruling bureaucracy.

    *Decentralization [and hence, secession] is the key to breaking the back of the Hamiltonian system.

    Karp, a revisionist historian, takes on such sacred cows as FDR, Wilson, Johnson, McKinley, Hamilton, and trade unions (gasp!). It's one of the best books ever on raw political machinations. ...

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Earlier this week Nick highlighted comments the American Enterprise Institute's Danielle Pletka made on New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s attack on what he sees as the dangerous “libertarianism that's going through both parties right now.”

    Was that before or after Nick referenced Danielle's comments on how Chris earned $532.93/hr from home watching the Cleveland Browns let her down?

  • ||

    Straw man. In order for them to let you down, you have to expect them to succeed.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Once again, Chris Christie betrayed the Republicans in the last presidential election by all but publicly endorsing Obama--a week before the election. Unless he's picked as a strategic choice for a running mate by a Republican nominee for president, Chris Christie has no future in the Republican Party (outside of New Jersey).

    As far as I can tell, Chris Christie is a Republican in name only. Christie appears to support gun control. He's about as Democrat as he can be without being a Republican--actually, being from a thoroughly red state, I'm not even sure he has much of a political future inside the state of New Jersey. Why should red state voters break for a fake Republican when they can vote for a real Democrat?

  • Ken Shultz||

    "actually, being from a thoroughly red state, I'm not even sure he has much of a political future inside the state of New Jersey. Why should red state voters break for a fake Republican when they can vote for a real Democrat?"

    Change "red state" to [blue state], and what I wrote might start to make sense!

    He's from a blue state--I meant to write. Why should blue state voters vote for a fake Republican when they can vote for a real Democrat?

  • Cytotoxic||

    I wish Christie would just join team blue-he'd be a much-needed dose of sanity!

  • Ken Shultz||

    I think he already has joined the Democrats!

    Here's Christie kissing the president's ass on national television--five days before the presidential election.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VFmfkEVmLvU

    Here's Christie refusing to apologize for kissing the president's ass on national television later that day.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c6gdpbaHWuA

  • Ken Shultz||

    Here's Christie kissing Barack Obama's ass exactly two months ago.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jw_4Aa3rf-k

    He wants to be a hawk? Here's some "hawk talk" for Christie that maybe he'll understand: Christie is objectively pro-Obama. How's that?

  • Mike M.||

    Everyone has his price, and fat swine Christie's price was sixty billion dollars.

  • Killazontherun||

    Sixty billion, that's what, four to five times the costs calculated by insurance actuaries?

  • Robert||

    I was glad he was elected. Given the field of serious contenders, he was 1st or 2nd best IIRC.

  • andarm16||

    If the party wants Christie as their man, they will find a way to get him (Make no mistake, the party wants Christie. They'll probably put him with the most odious and or moronic socon that they can find, to give the base something to froth over, and the democrats and media something swoon over, but unlike McCain, Christie is young so it won't get much media play.).

  • KDN||

    I'm not even sure he has much of a political future inside the state of New Jersey. Why should red state voters break for a fake Republican when they can vote for a real Democrat?

    You mean the guy cruising to re-election whose only serious challenger decided to run for Senate instead? Yeah, that guy has no future in this state.

    If not for term limits he'd probably win in 2017 as well. The Democrats are shit scared of the guy right now. Rockefeller Republicans with media chops who can handle the nitty gritty of machine politics are really the only Republicans that can be successful in heavily blue regions (see also: Giuliani, Chafee, Castle, and Pataki; nobody doled out patronage quite like Pataki).

  • Nazdrakke||

    New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie publicly challenged libertarian Republicans Thursday to explain their skepticism about government surveillance to the families of 9/11 victims, declaring at a Republican Governors Association event: “I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation.”

    Great thing for the war-boner crowd that the Janissaries we use to field our military and send off to pointless war don't have wives, husbands, children, or other family. And those brown people over there? Terrorists, all of 'em, even the little girls, fuck 'em right? Got to keep the Vaterland safe!

  • PH2050||

    I'm so sick of hearing about 9/11 widows and orphans. Cry me a fucking river.

    Nobody is as good at standing on graves as pols, that's for sure.

  • Cytotoxic||

    Repeating my earlier comment:

    So the Neocon 'fightback' consists of...Santorum, Liz Cheney, King, some other asshole I'd never heard of before, and the star player is...Chris Christie. Wow. I'm sure Rand and Amash are trembling in their boots. I can really see why Kristol is so confident.

  • ||

    McCain and Graham...

  • Ken Shultz||

    Seriously, in what way is Chris Christie a Republican? And that's not a rhetorical question; if somebody's got some evidence of Christie taking a Republican position on something, please let me know...

    And it's not like his hawkish stance is uniquely Republican either--certainly not given Barack Obama's hawkish record.

    If Chris Christie is only supposedly "Republican", on that issue, in the same way that Barack Obama is also "Republican", then I'm not convinced that Chris Christie isn't a Republican in name only.

  • robc||

    I think you would get a better answer on, you know, a republican leaning website.

    Maybe redstate?

  • Ken Shultz||

    If you want to really understand the Church of Scientology, you don't go ask Tom Cruise.

  • robc||

    If you want to know if Tom Cruise is a typical scientologist, ask a scientologist. I have no fucking clue.

  • LarryA||

    If Chris Christie was accused of being a Republican there wouldn't be enough evidence for an arrest warrant, much less enough to indict and convict.

  • DarrenM||

    The positions/policies of Republicans (or Democrats or any other party) vary from one region to another. Christie may be a perfectly typical Republican for New Jersey, but perhaps not so much in another area. The goal of a major political party is merely as an umbrella for various factions to temporarily ally with one another to obtain and use political power. These alliances are highly dynamic and constantly changing. There is no such thing is a Republican-in-name-only (or Democrat-in-name-only, etc.), as long as the individual in question generally supports others of the same party. If there *is* an issue, that's what elections are for. There are no legal contracts involved requiring one hold specific views or to vote one way or another.

  • Ken Shultz||

    I appreciate that, but why my question is about why Christie is being projected, here, as the voice of the GOP establishment.

    He's no such thing.

    He speaks for himself alone.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Well, he was the keynote speaker at the party convention last year, and according to the poll referenced in the post he is tied for second place among potential GOP contenders.

  • Ken Shultz||

    "He is tied for second place among potential GOP contenders."

    Isn't that more about name recognition?

  • Robert||

    He's a Republican by NJ stds. Or by the stds. of all the states that stand on what was the Dominion of New England: Me., N.H., Vt., Mass., Conn., N.Y., & N.J.

    BTW, look up the hx of that Dominion. What we usually think of as "the" American revol'n was preceded by a century by one that ousted that administrative arrangement. I think before the Declaration of Independence many were hoping for a similar resolution—the conditions & causes were remarkably similar.

    Anyway, Christie looked very good to libertarians at the time he got elected, and still looks pretty good now, taking into acc't the material we have to work with. Yeah, lowered expect'ns—like when he finally got out of the way of med mj dispensaries it was like, well, he didn't hold them up any longer, he just had to make himself look "tough on crime" enough.

    Does he look good to libertarians as a presidential contender? Hell, no, because nationwide we have a much better field to pick from.

  • Robert||

    And the reason we have a much better field of politicians to pick from nationwide is not just that the nation is bigger, but that voters nationwide are much more libertarian than they are here in the [Dominion of] New England states.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Sunday morning's talking point was, "If we only had been allowed to conduct our current vast diffuse spying program on the entire communications network at the time, we would undoubtedly have thwarted the 9/11 attacks."

    Because, you know, nobody had any inkling of a potential plot.

  • Longtorso, Johnny||

    Because, you know, nobody had any inkling of a potential plot.

    Hey, the spying program stopped the Boston bombers.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    It's also bullshit because fbi agents, in two different cities, were suspicious of the 911 highjackers when they were in flight school and were told to back off by their superiors.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    It's also bullshit because fbi agents, in two different cities, were suspicious of the 911 highjackers when they were in flight school and were told to back off by their superiors.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    It's also bullshit because fbi agents, in two different cities, were suspicious of the 911 highjackers when they were in flight school and were told to back off by their superiors.

  • mr lizard||

    Looks like you got hit by the squirel spread canon

  • ||

    Same thing happened to me the other day at EXACTLY 3:01.

    *cue Twilight Zone music*

  • juris imprudent||

    Twice is coincidence.

  • Killazontherun||

    Around 3:00 PM tends to be hang time for my posts too. That must be the rutting minute for squirrels.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    “I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation.”

    I want to tell those widows and orphans to get a fucking life, and stop using the decomposing corpses of their "loved ones" as a political platform to usurp my Constitutional rights and shovel millions of dollars into their own pockets.

  • ||

    THIS^^^^^

    I just got through screaming that very thing to my wife.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Interesting thing to scream while you're fucking your wife.

  • ||

    Dude, we're married. We don't fuck anymore.

  • Ken Shultz||

    Wouldn't the widows and orphans just as soon nuke the Kaaba?

    Angry widows and orphans really shouldn't be setting our foreign policy agenda.

  • ||

    "Angry widows and orphans really shouldn't be setting our foreign policy agenda."

    Well said. It is kind of like how truly bad laws are made right after a tragedy. Better to set some distance and let the emotions die down a bit so you can think more rationally. I feel for the widows and orphans, I really do, but they are too close to the issue. It is often said that surgeons should not operate on their own loved ones.

  • Robert||

    Kill the widows & orphans 1st, then you won't have that problem. Or at least the pols exploiting them won't.

  • Luddite||

    Clearly the response to the widows and orphans of 9/11 should be to send more men and women into battle, to make more widows and orphans.

    All while simultaneously eroding constitutional protections on government, funneling vast sums of taxpayer money into crony capital organizations for rebuilding and armament purposes, and fundamentally altering the economics of an entire country of 300M+ people because X number of people died due to 19 assholes.

    Action (legislation) based on tragedy or emotional impetus is fucking retarded. Truly sorry for the loss of the 9/11 loved ones, but there are others in this country to consider as well.

  • Careless||

    Some have harsh words for this man of renown
    But some think our attitude should be one of gratitude
    Like the widows and cripples in old London town
    Who owe their large pensions to Wernher von Braun

  • PH2050||

    Fuck, I need to scroll down from now on before posting. I agree with you completely.

  • MJGreen||

    Seriously, is that supposed to be threatening? It seems like a pretty easy conversation to have, even without telling them to fuck off.

  • MJGreen||

    Seriously, is that supposed to be threatening? It seems like a pretty easy conversation to have, even without telling them to fuck off.

  • pmains||

    How about bringing the widows and orphans of those killed by drones to the table? Or children who have been maimed by those drones? Or Christians who have been forced to flee Iraq?

    I wonder who would run out of human shields first.

  • Robert||

    The widows & orphans aren't using the corpses as a political platform, just a few politicians are.

  • ||

    New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie publicly challenged libertarian Republicans Thursday to explain their skepticism about government surveillance to the families of 9/11 victims, declaring at a Republican Governors Association event: “I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation."

    Nice. Did he get permission from Rudy Giuliani to borrow the 12 year old corpses in his garage?

  • robc||

    I would show up, quote Ben Franklin at the widows and orphans, then leave.

  • ||

    Nah, I'd pretty much say what P Brooks said. Assholes think they are special andI owe them my liberty because their relatives died 12 years ago? Fuck them.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Do a majority of them think that? Or is it just some bullshit thrown out by a fascist to shut up people that disagree with him.

  • Dweebston||

    I imagine anyone sitting down for a conversation about what the State can do for them almost certainly believe some variation of that, yes.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    It's a pitiful attempt by Christie to wave the bloody shirt and Rand Paul isn't going for it.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Christie appears to support gun control.

    APPEARS?

    He's a former federal prosecutor, from New Jersey; he wants nothing more than total disarmament of the civilian population.

  • ||

    Hmmm, sounds like Rudy Giuliani.

  • Ken Shultz||

    I was just allowing for the possibility that somebody may dig up a quote somewhere of him giving lip service to gun rights.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    if somebody's got some evidence of Christie taking a Republican position on something, please let me know.

    He said something mean to a schoolteacher, once. Only a Rethuglitard would do that.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    Example:

    The governor opposed a move in Congress that would effectively override NJ's strict laws against concealed weapons although NJ's entire Republican House delegation voted for it. The "right-to-carry reciprocity" bill would allow anyone with a valid permit to carry in their home state the same right in any other state. In NJ holders of carry permits from other states must lock their guns up when entering the Garden State.

    "I believe that each state should have the right to make firearms laws as they see fit. I don't believe it's right for the federal government to get into the middle of this and decide firearms laws for the people of the state of NJ," Christie told "The Record" in July 2009.
    Source: Rise to Power, by B. Ingle & M. Symons, p.253 , Jun 5, 2012

    Of course, he only opposes federal government attempts to loosen gun control.

  • The Late P Brooks||

    What I support are commonsense laws that will allow people to protect themselves, but I also am very concerned about the safety of our police officers on the streets, very concerned. And I want to make sure that we don't have an abundance of guns out there"

    Yeah, Christie's a guy who believes deeply in the right of armed self defense, as long as you're a cop.

  • PH2050||

    "concerned about the safety of our police officers on the streets"

    Um, don't they already enjoy access to weapon systems and armor that us lowly "civilians" are denied? Serious question.

  • LarryA||

    Fake "gun-free" zones don't make officers safer. They make them the first target.

  • Heroic Mulatto||

  • VG Zaytsev||

    He's got a close encounter with a drone in his future.

  • Cytotoxic||

    There is justice in this world...it's so beautiful.

  • Jerry on the boat||

    With Ahmadinejad gone, and the current situation in Egypt, it seems the momentum is surely not with the GOP hawks. Hell, even North Korea has been out of the news for some months now.

  • SKR||

    you must have missed the recent story about NorKo smuggling ballistic missiles from Cuba through the Panama Canal.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Chris Christie is a fat fascist fuck that belongs in the democrat party.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    Comments like this one and Ken's above interest me. Did you really just wake up and realize a significant wing of the Republican Party are fascistic, big government law-and-order and national security types? This isn't some recent aberration in the party. Christie, Giuliani, McCain, Nixon...

    And this isn't just an establishment thing. The most prominent Tea Party sign I've seen doesn't quote Hayek, it says "9-11, May We Never Forget."

  • Cytotoxic||

    Gun rights are the difference.

    The most prominent Tea Party sign I've seen doesn't quote Hayek, it says "9-11, May We Never Forget."

    That's nice.

  • VG Zaytsev||

    Did you really just wake up and realize a significant wing of the Republican Party are fascistic, big government law-and-order and national security types?

    No, but it's worth pointing out the ones that brazenly hit all of those points.

    And for a couple of decades now the democrats are even more fascist, big-government, law and order, security over liberty fucksticks than the republicans, despite their pathetic claims otherwise.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    They're not very good but they're certainly not worse than the Republicans. Take their Supreme Court nominees. With the exception of Scalia in a few cases the Democrat appointees tended to rule against the authorities in search and seizure and interrogation cases this year while the conservative justices did the opposite. With the NSA stuff the court split 5-4 with the conservative justices denying standing to challenge the NSA and the liberals voting to grant standing.

    We're talking about 'tallest midget' here for sure, but as say it's perhaps worth pointing this out.

  • robc||

    Raich, the opposite.

    Kelo, the opposite.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    We were talking 'law and order, security over liberty' issues.

  • robc||

    So was I.

    Kelo is about security of tax base over liberty of property owners.

  • Irish||

    They're not very good but they're certainly not worse than the Republicans. Take their Supreme Court nominees.

    I'd argue that Republican Supreme Court nominees like Scalia and Thomas are consistently better than the Kagans of the world.

    There are obvious exceptions, generally related to spying or police brutality, but the Democratic Supreme Court nominees are roundly terrible.

  • Bo Cara Esq.||

    On 'law and order, security over liberty' cases I don't think that is the case.

    This past term the Supreme Court heard several 4th Amendment cases. One of them, involving drug dog training standards, was unanimous for the government. In the others, King v. Maryland (warrantless DNA testing of arrestee) and Missouri v. McNeely (warrantless blood test of DUI arrestee), Florida v. Jardines (drug dog sniff of porch a search) and Clapper v. Amnesty (standing to challenge NSA wiretapping), Sotomayer, Ginsburg and Kagan were on the side of the defendant. Scalia was on the side of the defendant in all but Clapper. Thomas was on the side of the defendant in only one (Jardines) as was Breyer (Clapper). The three remaining Republican appointees sided with the government searchers every time.

  • ||

    Um...

    Which Tea Party ya talkin about? The original or the hijacked version?

  • robc||

    How can a distributed grassroots organization be hijacked? or original, for that matter?

  • ||

    Quite simply. Socons claimed they were Tea Party. Done!

    When the movement started, it had very libertarian leanings. It was about small government, fiscal responsibility and adherence to the Constitution. They left social issues out of it...INTENTIONALLY.

    In part, it was BECAUSE it was grass roots that it was able to be hijacked. They didn't have anyone to actually write down what they stood for.

    As soon as the establishment republicans realized the movement had legs, shitbags like Palin (and a number of others) hopped on board, loudly proclaiming, "I AM TEA PARTY AND THIS IS WHAT I STAND FOR...pro life, no same sex marriage, I have a war boner, I luv Jebus..." IOW...Republican.

  • SugarFree||

    I got called a "fucker" for pointing this out the other day, Francis.

  • ||

    "fucker"

    A name you should wear proudly. I do.

  • Cytotoxic||

    So Palin and other tools like her hopping on board = 'hijacking'. I have seen nothing to demonstrate that the TP has been hijacked not a thing. I've seen good evidence that it's losing its focus.

  • ||

    So Palin and other tools like her hopping on board = 'hijacking'.

    Yes.

    I watched this movement from start to finish (and believe me, it's finished).

    At the beginning, I considered myself TP. Thought it was great. Now, because of socons and the MSM framing the movement based upon the beliefs of shitbags like Palin, TP=radical republican. I wouldn't touch it now with Warty's dick.

  • robc||

    I see no hijacking, HOWEVER, I apply a True Scotsman policy to anyone claiming to be a Tea Partier.

    So, you know, the hijackers failed because I say so.

  • LiberTarHeel||

    “I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation.”

    I gladly volunteer! The victims' families (unlike CC) are probably capable of reason and critical thought, and can understand the cognitive dissonance of the Amerikan Empire's Global War of Terror.

  • Gladstone||

    Recent polling by Public Policy Polling shows that Paul is currently the GOP 2016 frontrunner. If the Republicans want any shot at taking back the White House in 2016 they should figure out how to live with the libertarianism Christie mentioned. It doesn’t look like it’s going anywhere soon.

    Isn't this the same polling that shows Chris Christie has a better chance than Rand against Hildebeast? Do you read your own links? Way to undercut you're own argument!

  • Nazdrakke||

    On a side note I'm looking forward to Nick's upcoming article: I Still Hate That Palin Woman But It Turns Out That She Is, In Fact, More Libertarian Than Chris Christie.

  • Mike M.||

    ROFL. This is seriously one of the funniest posts I've ever seen here.

    Yeah, something tells me we're not going to be seeing a rehash of that article any time in the near future. Or ever.

  • PH2050||

    Funny because it's true.

  • LarryA||

    I still remember stories of the California Republican Convention. A few remaining gray-haired old guard party faithfuls standing around wringing their hands, knowing the Democrats had just kicked them to the side of the road, bereft of any clue about how to attract enough voters to raise the noise level above the chirping crickets.

    Then there was Ron Paul! Young People! Excitement! Ideals! Ideas! Hullabaloo! This Land is Our Land! REVOLution!!!

    Afterward the old guard, glad the invasion was over, went back to wondering what they needed to do to turn things around.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Jack Lew: Obama is a lying shitweasel who never had any intention of honoring his word. But, so what?

    Mike Wallace: Are you saying that the president would veto a bill, a resolution to the budget shut down, the budget crisis is, at the end of september that included $100 billion in new spending cuts?

    Jack Lew: What I'm saying is that congress has to write bills that meets the challenges that that the president sets forth to saturday investing in our future, and congress cannot steal from the domestic priorities to deal with cuts across the board.

    Lew: It would be right to get together and have a sensible set of policies, to replace the cuts.

    Lew: The cuts were to drive sensible policy.

    Lew: They were not supposed to happen.

    Lew: The surprising thing is, there's people claiming credit for things that are designed to be bad policy and senseless across the board cuts.

    So, sequestration was bad policy when Obama proposed it to get the debt ceiling increase he wanted, and he never had any intention of being held to it when the Budget Control Act passed and his new credit card came.

    Frauds and liars. The most transparent administration EVER.

  • robc||

    The most transparent administration EVER.

    They actually are transparent, just not in the way they were claiming.

  • Mike M.||

    Bookmark this: Obama is going to cave on sequestration again, because the argument that it is the end of the world as we know it has already been proven to be bullcrap. Lew is blustering.

  • Cytotoxic||

    I think you're right. I think the stupid party will try to snatch defeat from the jaws of victory and fumble it.

  • Drake||

    I just reached by breaking point with Chris Chirstie. Fuck you fatso - I'll be looking for somebody interesting down-ballot. Or else I'll just write somebody in like Lonegan or Forbes.

  • John-David||

    I'm waiting for Chris Christie to defend himself in front of the widows and mothers of those lost to the war on type-two diabetes.

  • Anonymous Coward||

    Sen. Saxby Chambliss: Sure the NSA USED to read your emails, but they gave me their word that they stopped.

    You're the chair of the intelligence committee right now. Would it surprise you if it turns out what he's reporting there is true, low level officials have the capability to read e-mails, internet traffic, listen to phone calls? George, it wouldn't just surprise me, it would shock me.

    I was at the nsa just last week. Spent a couple hours out there with high and low level nsa officials. What I have been assured of is there is no capability at nsa for anyone without a court order to listen to any telephone conversation or to monitor any e-mail.

    In fact we don't monitor e-mails. That's what kind of assures me that what the reporting is is not correct. Because no e-mails are monitored now.

    They used to be, but that stopped two or three years ago. So I feel confident that -- that there may have been some abuse, but if it was, it was pure accidental.
  • DarrenM||

    I don't think it's too much to ask to have a little humility and think about the long term consequences before committing our troops (including drone operators) to killing the citizens of other nations in the name of ill-defined possibility that some of *our* citizens might be harmed. Although, Presidents *are* hired to make hard decisions, even if they (wisely or not) put the burden on the Secretary of State. However, labeling someone else as the enemy and sicking military attack dogs on them does not require much hard thought if you think only of short term effects. I have my doubts that foreign policy itself as is currently practiced is really that tough. I suspect a monkey could come up with something not much worse. (No offense to other primates intended.)

  • Hyperion||

    I think that Christie is warming up for a VP spot on a D ticket with Shitlary.

    He's screwed as a GOP candidate.

    Also, the GOP hawks are in a battle here that they do not fully understand, and that in the long term, they cannot win. But you can't accuse most politicians of being smart.

  • Tony||

    Doveishness is not a losing position for Paul. It would be helpful for his nonsense on everything else not to taint the antiwar position.

  • Sevo||

    Tony| 7.28.13 @ 10:43PM |#
    "Doveishness is not a losing position for Paul. It would be helpful for his nonsense on everything else not to taint the antiwar position."

    Shithead, your opinion on the matter is NWS.

  • buybuydandavis||

    The Dinosaurs Strike Back. No matter.

    The Dinosaurs went extinct before, leaving only birds and fossils to show that they ever existed. The Wacko Birds are the present and the future, the Dinosaurs are the past.

  • LarryA||

    The Republican Party’s hawks are finally saying it out in the open: This aggression will not stand, Rand.

    I love the "Rand is aggressively peaceful" theme.

  • Joe Emenaker||

    “I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and the orphans and have that conversation.”

    Okay... let's start the conversation with "lockable cockpit doors". That single change (recommended by a committee headed by then-VP Al Gore in the late 90’s) would have (and now has) rendered moot any failures in telecom surveillance. If you want to go further, then we can converse about how one of the big messages from the FBI and CIA after 9/11 wants that they didn't have enough info, but that they weren't able to connect the dots on the data they already *had*. So, our solution was to gather *more* data and make the haystack even *bigger*?!

  • John C. Randolph||

    If anyone in New Jersey would do me the favor of tossing a shoe at Christie's smug, fat, power-grubbing face, I'd buy them a drink. Two if you hit him, three if you knock him out.

    -jcr

  • Night Elf Mohawk||

    I bet Christie never had any trouble talking to the wives and kids of people he helped put in prison for consensual "crimes." Fuck him.

GET REASON MAGAZINE

Get Reason's print or digital edition before it’s posted online

  • Progressive Puritans: From e-cigs to sex classifieds, the once transgressive left wants to criminalize fun.
  • Port Authoritarians: Chris Christie’s Bridgegate scandal
  • The Menace of Secret Government: Obama’s proposed intelligence reforms don’t safeguard civil liberties

SUBSCRIBE

advertisement