Chris Christie

Chris Christie Attacks "This Strain of Libertarianism That's Going Through Both Parties Right Now"

Nervous Republicans react to the Amash/Conyers bill.

|

Yesterday the House voted on Justin Amash and John Conyers' amendment to defund the NSA's mass collection of American phone records. The measure failed, but it failed by a surprisingly narrow vote, and that margin is making some Republicans nervous. One of the nervous Republicans, to judge from Aaron Blake's report this evening in the Washington Post, is New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie:

Yabba dabba do!

"As a former prosecutor who was appointed by President George W. Bush on Sept. 10, 2001, I just want us to be really cautious, because this strain of libertarianism that's going through both parties right now and making big headlines, I think, is a very dangerous thought," Christie said.

Asked whether he includes [Rand] Paul—a fellow potential 2016 presidential candidate—in his criticism, Christie didn't back down. "You can name any one of them that's engaged in this," he said.

Blake notes that Christie "also praised the national security strategies of both President Obama and George W. Bush." You can add that to the evidence for something Glenn Greenwald wrote earlier today:

It's only a suspicion, mind you.

One of the worst myths Democratic partisans love to tell themselves—and everyone else—is that the GOP refuses to support President Obama no matter what he does. Like its close cousin—the massively deceitful inside-DC grievance that the two parties refuse to cooperate on anything—it's hard to overstate how false this Democratic myth is. When it comes to foreign policy, war, assassinations, drones, surveillance, secrecy, and civil liberties, President Obama's most stalwart, enthusiastic defenders are often found among the most radical precincts of the Republican Party.

The rabidly pro-war and anti-Muslim GOP former Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Peter King, has repeatedly lavished Obama with all sorts of praise and support for his policies in those areas. The Obama White House frequently needs, and receives, large amounts of GOP Congressional support to have its measures enacted or bills its dislikes defeated. The Obama DOJ often prevails before the US Supreme Court solely because the Roberts/Scalia/Thomas faction adopts its view while the Ginsburg/Sotomayor/Breyer faction rejects it.

The worst policies to come out of Washington tend to have bipartisan support. Here's hoping Amash/Conyers is a step toward a transpartisan opposition.

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.

267 responses to “Chris Christie Attacks "This Strain of Libertarianism That's Going Through Both Parties Right Now"

  1. Alright fat man, the gloves are off. I hope when he’s running for President we see ads asking if someone that looks like him is who we want representing America, if with a body like that he can handle the rigors and stress of the job, etc.

    I foresee him being the Republican nominee because like Mitt Romney, he’s quite “electable.”

    1. Christie would more likely be the Democrat Party nominee. He is widely hated by the primary-voting GOP base.

      1. Yep, fuck that fat fascist fuck.

      2. Christie is the Catholic version of Romney. I remember the Fox crowd drooling over Chris, looking glum about Mitt, and asking what the difference was. Other than religion. I have yet to discover the answer.

        1. I know the answer…. about 100 pounds! *LMAO*

          Seriously… Romney is a self made man, where all I see of Christie is an a**-kissing, someone else made me big person.

          1. You’re off by at least 50, if not 100. Unless Christie is 5’6″ or something.

            1. Yeah, Christie is easily 400 pounds.

              1. 400 lbs of Authoritarian Goodness!

      3. You say that like the primary-voting GOP base gets to decide who the nominee will be.

        The party leaders will find a way to treat him (I’m assuming he’s the establishment pick, but maybe Jed will run. Who knows?) as the winner (or a winner) of a bunch of early primaries. If need be, they can throw out votes they don’t like and reprogram vote-counting machines. They were pretty brazen about doing that in 2012, so we shouldn’t be surprised when they try it again in 2016. Maybe they’ll go to a different bag of tricks, though. Anyway, he won’t have actually won many delegates, but the word will go out to the media to announce an absurdly inflated delegate count for Christie. Then, anoint him the “inevitable” candidate that we all need to get behind RIGHT NOW or we’re disloyal to the party and really want Hillary to be president.

        There. Problem solved, and those pesky primary voters can’t do a damned thing about it.

    2. my buddy’s mother makes $80 an hour on the internet. She has been fired from work for 7 months but last month her paycheck was $17321 just working on the internet for a few hours. Here’s the site to read more… http://www.cnn13.com

    3. up to I looked at the receipt which said $7068, I be certain that…my… father in law woz like realie receiving money in their spare time at there labtop.. there friends cousin has done this for only about seventeen months and just took care of the debts on their apartment and purchased themselves a Lotus Esprit. this is where I went,www.Rush60.??m

  2. I won’t believe there is a libertarian streak going through the Democratic party until I hear Democrats recognizing economic issues as civil rights issues. Property and speech rights don’t vanish just because money’s involved.

    1. They’ve pretty much given up on civil liberties. Both parties are working together on that end.

    2. Also, the right to pursue an occupation of one’s choice, the right to self-employ, the right to engage in mutually beneficial trade, the right to accept a job offer from any willin employer, and to hire any willing laborer. How the fuck are all of those things not considered basic human rights?

      1. It’s quite simple. Define them first as “economic” rights. Then you’ve already won the battle.

  3. Fuck you, fat boy.

    1. Exactly. I was rather intrigued by him for quite awhile, then became less so when he sucked up to Obama right before the election. But now he’s nothing more than a poor man’s Jackie Gleason. Fuck off fatso, and take your war boner with you.

      1. I thought Jackie Gleason was the poor man’s Jackie Gleason.

        1. Actually, it’s probably the fat guy who is on that awful TV sitcom (with the fat chick from Bridesmaids) who is the poor man’s Jackie Gleason. Christie is more like the delirious man’s Jackie Gleason.

  4. Sort of OT: WSJ sucks NYPD cock.

    More important is the fact that these programs are working, and on behalf of the people that the racial grievance lobby claims to be protecting. In 1990, some 2,245 people were murdered in the city. Last year there were 417 murders, an all-time low due to be outdone this year. All crime has dropped by 34% in Mr. Bloomberg’s nearly 12-year tenure.

    And it’s all because of Stop ‘n Frisk! Do not even think about SNF-free jurisdictions that went through a similar decline in crime! DON’T EVEN THINK ABOUT YOUR RIGHTS. No points for guessing how many times The Constitution is mentioned.

    http://online.wsj.com/article/…..oveLEFTTop

    1. I wonder what argument could even be made for stop-‘N-frisk preventing murders.

      Cop: “Hey get over here. I’m gonna stop-and-frisk you, you look murderous!”

      Black guy (obviously): “I was thinking of murdering somebody, but ya got me!”

      Cop: “You’re under arrest!”

  5. Will this hurt or help Christie in Iowa and NH?

    1. Yes. He done fucked himself good with the smooch up orgy he had with the jug eared one in chief.

      But, does it matter? Until the Ron Paul wack-o bird wing of the GOP can wrestle control from the old cronies, it really won’t matter. They will all sit in a room and determine who is next.

      The Dems have already done that and chosen the Hildebeast.

      1. Unless they figure out how to rig the vote like O did last year, it won’t matter what the old cronies want! If the majority don’t want him, he’s out!

      2. “Ron Paul wack-o bird”

        really?

    2. Hurt. The base hates Obama and establishment Republicans, and Christie has been sucking the teat of both of those for God knows what reason.

      They might not like libertarians (and let’s be honest, most don’t know what a libertarian is), but if a “libertarian” is something that Obama and established Reps aren’t they will probably be in favor of it.

      1. The base hates Obama and establishment Republicans

        Like Romney or McCain?

        1. Yes. Given an apparently realistic alternative, they will probably take it.

          1. What evidence do you have that the republican base is more ideologically aligned with Amash and Paul than McCain and Romney?

            Christie, or someone of identical politics, will be the next nominee.

            1. What evidence do you have that the republican base is more ideologically aligned with Amash and Paul than McCain and Romney?

              The articles and comments on virtually any Republican web site. The base despises McCain and Romney and voted for them by default.

              1. The articles and comments on virtually any Republican web site. The base despises McCain and Romney and voted for them by default.

                You must admit that that is some squishy evidence.

                Every republican candidate since Goldwater has been a supporter of a big, centralized government. Every republican administration has increased the size and purview of the government. I want to believe that there will be a small government republican nominated, but history says that’s unlikely.

                Politics is a team sport and winning is power. Power trumps idealism.

                1. You must admit that that is some squishy evidence.

                  Better than none…

                  Every republican candidate since Goldwater has been a supporter of a big, centralized government

                  Reagan for all his flaws deserves better than this.

                  1. Fuck Reagan’s nasty corpse with a rusty shovel. That motherfucker would gleefully throw me in a cage for having a machine gun or a joint. I guess I should be happy that he borrowed against my future income to pay for my parents big government. Gee thanks, asshole.

                    You fucking republicans are all talk. I could give a shit about “the articles and comments on virtually any Republican web site”. Fuck you, cut spending.

                    1. You fucking republicans are all talk.

                      That’s it in a nutshell. If they want me to believe otherwise, they’ve got to DO something. More “but this time will be different–I’ll really quit drinking! I won’t hit you anymore!” ain’t gonna cut it.

                    2. Okay first dipshit I’m not a republican. Second, Reagan helped end the USSR and kept the government’s mitts off the computer industry. He also reformed tax policy in an awesome way and allowed Volker to introduce some sanity at the Fed Reserve. To the extent we have any chance today it’s largely thanks to him.

                    3. “Fuck Reagan’s nasty corpse with a rusty shovel. That motherfucker would gleefully throw me in a cage for having a machine gun or a joint. I guess I should be happy that he borrowed against my future income to pay for my parents big government. Gee thanks, asshole.”

                      Let’s not forget killing astronauts in his pursuit of some good PR. Here, I’ll join you:

                      Fuck Reagan and fuck the necrophiliacs who fellate his corpse.

                  2. Dedicated to a more peaceful world as he was, almost his [Reagan] last act in office was to ask Congress to increase the swollen defence budget by another $5-billion and to cut the same amount from child nutrition programs and medical insurance for the aged and the poor.

                    1. In other words, he moved five billion from two programs that have no constitutional mandate to one that has.

                    2. All those programs are allowed under the US constitution.

                    3. On the face of it I have two comments.

                      First, David did not say permitted, he said mandated. That statement is undeniably correct as “common defense” is specifically mandated in the constitution child nutrition and medical insurance are not.

                      Second, as child nutrition and medical insurance are not mandated for the federal government, there is a reasonable argument that by the constitution’s statement that all powers not specified are reserved for the states and the people, to assert they are not only not mandated, but not even permitted.

                      Of course, you can make the argument that the constitution is a living document, but you can’t really consider yourself conservative or libertarian and take that position.

                      Further, if you make that argument, I challenge you to define the purpose of a constitution if it can be redefined without amendment.

                  3. Well, Reagan certainly deserved to be President without carrying all the baggage of (and the water for) the GOP machine of his day. Too bad that didn’t/couldn’t happen. I never voted for the man. The rhetoric sounded pretty to my libertarian ears, but I did not believe for a second that whatever idealism or principles he had left would survive in the atmosphere created by the machine that was necessary to get him elected. He doomed any claim to being a “libertarian” president when he ratcheted up the Drug War, which ultimately provided so many excuses to dispense with our liberties and was a direct rehearsal for the War on Terror. We the People deserved better, too.

              2. “The articles and comments on virtually any Republican web site. The base despises McCain and Romney and voted for them by default.”

                I think what you’re hearing is a vocal minority. The majority of the base in either party are not really tuned into what’s going on.

        2. Unfortunately, the GOP has a weakness for nominating candidates because it’s “their turn now” — they were the runner-up in the last primary-contested election. Reagan in 80 based on 76, Bush in 88 based on 80, Dole in 96 based on 88, McCain in 2008 based on 2000, and Romney in 2012 based on 2008. If the pattern holds, it’ll be Santorum in 2016. Sigh.

          1. Wedging Romney into that pattern is historical revisionism based on a technicality. Romney ended up with the second most delegates, but Huckabee was the true runner up in 2008 since he was the only one that was any sort of challenge for McCain.

            1. I think Huckabee would have won. Yes, yes, he personally oversees 15 female genital mutilations and eats 12 minority infants for breakfast every morning, but he was on the right track with the Fair Tax, locked down the SoCons, and was likable in a Reagan-like way that would have tempered his SoCon edge. Plus he would have been able to hammer Barry on Obamacare and there would have been no 47%/Bain nonsense to play. It would have been all abortion smearing, and I don’t think that would have impacted a more motivated base turnout.

              I still don’t know why he stayed out…

          2. “f the pattern holds, it’ll be Santorum in 2016.”

            Wait, wouldn’t it be Paul?

            1. If memory serves, Santorum had more delegates than Paul, and besides, isn’t Ron retired now, at least from politics?

    3. Hard to predict if Iowa voters value liberty over corn subsidies.

      1. No, it isn’t.

        1. Have they ever indicated they even might?

      2. DONT YOU SEE!?! Ethanol is the wave of the future!!! Soon everything, including meat, will be made out of corn…ALL HAIL CORN! Who cares that all these brown people are going hungry because they are burning their food.

        NEEDZ MOAR CORN!

        1. every Iowa primary ever

  6. He’s afraid that the POTUS won’t invite him over for anymore huggy kissy sessions. Disgusting.

  7. “…appointed by George W. Bush on Sept. 10, 2001…”

    That means he’s personally responsible for failing to prevent 9/11!

    1. Are you kidding? His appointment was the REASON for 9/11.

  8. It’s really important to elect dems so that Pelosi can be speaker again and make sure the NSA can keep spying. Let’s ask Christie for a comment:

    bucket

  9. And Christie’s star just rose even more in Stalin’s Buttboy’s eyes.

    1. Over at HuffPo, a couple of months ago, there were a lot of posts actually saying that they hope Christie gets the GOP nomination, so that if Hillary loses, they can get someone almost as good. You can’t make this shit up. Well, I could, but I’m not.

  10. Christie is now a darling of the left.

    1. Chris Christie embodies the worst of the R’s and D’s. “Working across the isle” translates to something like: “screwing the people harder, faster, and more efficiently than one party could do alone.”

      1. Which Isle? Oahu?

  11. From Greenwald:

    The Obama DOJ often prevails before the US Supreme Court solely because the Roberts/Scalia/Thomas faction adopts its view while the Ginsburg/Sotomayor/Breyer faction rejects it.

    A question for anyone who follows the SC. Is that true of Ginsburg?

    1. Not really. I think that is an exaggeration not supported by the record. I can think of a number of recent 5-4 cases where the G/S/B faction was in the minority and siding with the Obama position. Example: recent cases on affirmative action and employment discrimination. And I am having a hard time thinking of a case that supports Greenwald’s assertion.

  12. Oh look, a former prosecutor who is also a statist. Imagine that.

    1. It’s pathetic that at this hour, you have nothing better to do than to be on here.

      1. I’m multitasking while playing Borderlands. The Torgue shotgun I just got is fucking incredible. Kills Elder Treants with a single shot (when combined with The Bee).

      2. You must be some kind of fucking loser if you have nothing better to do with your evening than hurl insults at Episiarch.

        1. it’s a full time job!

        2. Don’t you have anything better to do than insult JJ, Hugh? Like waxing your asshole or cleaning the smegma from under your foreskin*?

          * not a circumcision thread

          1. Our resident intactivist isn’t here. It couldn’t become a circumcision thread if you wanted it to.

            1. Can’t we just agree that children, as products of their parents’ fruitfulness, are entirely at their parents’ disposal, and as such circumcision is a modest expression of their parents’ authority?

              1. You can try to summon nicole this way, but it won’t work. If the zedonkey didn’t bring her nothing will.

                How’s your bartender?

                1. I did like Debra better, but only because I know a Debra who’s part-jackass.

                  Bartender’s sweet and personable and smiles at the right moments, and responds with some wit, but she’s thoroughgoing waitstaff and I’m a tab. Which is fine, I had a much better time watching soccer than I did coming up with half-inventive conversational hooks. I haven’t been reading the PUA, clearly, ‘cuz my hooks lack barbs.

                  1. If you want a debra so badly you should make a point of getting an amorous he-donkey and a willing she-zebra in the same place at the same time.

                    Eh a little mild flirting is pleasant even if it’s part of drink service. It doesn’t have to go anywhere.

    2. I thought it was an indication of his lack of self-awareness that he started that statement ‘as a former prosecutor..’ as if being a former prosecutor is supposed to indicate some special insight rather than an obvious bias when it comes to balancing liberty and security. It’s like saying “As a fat pig, I know better than most how important proper diet and nutrition are”.

    3. Well, here is a former prosecutor that has but one thing to say to Christie…. fuck off, slaver.

    4. That is my experience with them as well. Fascists and statists to the core.

    5. Oh look, a former prosecutor who is also a statist. Imagine that.

      Is it just me or does it seem like most problems are caused by lawyers-turned-politicians. I know I’m generalizing, but it’s always a good idea to entertain second and third thoughts about voting for any lawyer.

  13. I never liked this fat fuck.

    1. And I don’t like to fuck fat.

      1. Me either, but I’ve heard that it’s just like riding a scooter: it can be a lot of fun, but you’d die of embarrassment if your friends ever find out.

        1. Neither of those things are that much fun. Get a motorcycle and an attractive thin chick. You’ll be much better off.

  14. Seems that lap band is squeezing off oxygen to Christie’s brain.

    Perhaps he’d care to expound on why “this strain” is more dangerous than most other thoughts floating around DC.

    1. I think by this time, I’d be asking for a refund for that procedure. Look at the tub of lard.

    2. Liberty is dangerous, especially to people who earn a living telling other people what to do.

    3. Perhaps he’d care to expound on why “this strain” is more dangerous than most other thoughts floating around DC.

      “Floating” really is the operative term here.

      Whether that be the Baron Vladimir Harkonnen or turds, it works either way.

      1. +1 for Dune reference.

        1. -1 for making me picture sting in a loincloth though

  15. By the way, I wonder what Gillespie thinks of this so-called “future of libertarianism within the GOP” Christie now? He was singing his praises in his Palin article (while bashing Ted Cruz, an actual libertarian).

    1. Cruz is not a Libertarian.

      1. More of one than “rising libertarian star” Christie, that’s for damn sure.

        1. Well, Palin is more of one than Christie, but she’s still not one.

          Christie has never been anything more than a blue state liberal, running as a Republican and doing some token shit to impress the base. But then he got all giddy looking for a big sack of dollars coming his way from the feds, after Sandy, and couldn’t restrain himself from kissing Obamas ass in public.

          His image is shot. No way he can legitimately win the GOP nomination now. Not that it means he won’t get it.

          1. Now now, Christie did put the squeeze on the teachers union and to a lesser degree other PSUs. He also vetoed a millionaire’s tax. There may have been some other good stuff, but that was a long time ago so fuck him.

            1. Christie, the fat guy, was OK.

              http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuri7p_9pm4

              Makes me wonder wear the lapband was installed.

              1. That was Phat Christie, back in the good old days.

            2. So has the occasional naive Democrat.

      2. Cruz is not a Libertarian.

        He’s closer than most people who get called libertarians. I’ll take a Cruz presidency over anyone not named Rand Paul or Justin Amash.

        1. I haven’t seen enough of Cruz to know what he’s about yet. Seems good on most civil libs. I can’t tell if he’s trying to hop the Libertarian bandwagon though with Rand/Amash or whether he’s the real deal. Time will tell. You’re right though, he’s much closer to a libertarian than some. I keep hearing people call Paul Ryan a libertarian and I can’t cope with that.

          1. Agreed, but I’m pretty sure Cruz is originally from Canada, which means he could never become Pres.

            1. Not sure if serious.

              1. Well, I’ve heard he was born in Canada. Not sure why that would be said if it’s not true.

                It would certainly be hilariously ironic if we started seeing left-wing “birthers,” which will probably happen if he runs.

                1. Your premise is correct, but your conclusion is not. He’s an American by birth because his mother was an American citizen.

    2. Nice catch. I have my problems with Cruz but calling Cruz’s statement on many college professors being Marxist ‘McCarthyesque’ was retarded. Gillespie fucking sucks.

      1. I have my problems with Cruz but calling Cruz’s statement on many college professors being Marxist ‘McCarthyesque’ was retarded. Gillespie fucking sucks.

        Gillespie really put on his Robert Reich cap for that asinine article. People who use McCarthyesque don’t seem to know what McCarthy actual stood for.

        McCarthy was a demagogue that tried to destroy people he didn’t like by labeling them communists. So people who try and destroy those they don’t like by labeling them ‘McCarthyesque’ are far more like Joseph McCarthy than Ted Cruz is. McCarthy is just as much a boogeyman now as the commies were in his day, and pulling out the McCarthy slur is basically just an attempt to stir up a Brown Scare. Bringing up McCarthy is the way idiots can make themselves feel smart by attacking their opponents in the exact same way McCarthy attacked his.

        1. people who try and destroy those they don’t like by labeling them ‘McCarthyesque’ are far more like Joseph McCarthy than Ted Cruz is.

          Comment of the month all month.

          Another couple of things worth pointing out: 1) McCarthy was horrible and almost snared exclusively innocent people but he was NOT wrong about communist infiltration. They were everywhere and they were dangerous. They were in the upper echelons of the FDR admin, which raises disturbing and chilling questions about policy directions propagated from then that affect us today. 2) McCarthy’s first person to put on the stand should have been himself. He was a huge New Dealer. He tried to bring the ND to post-war Japan and it predictably led to catastrophe. He didn’t stop the madness until he was pulled off post-war Japan.

          1. What’s funny is that in the specifics McCarthy was almost 100% wrong, but in generalities he was correct: large swathes of the American upper class were 5th columnists. Communist Russia was barely able to feed itself and was a new, unstable government — what surveillance they had during the good old Stalinist days was (mostly) domestic for all the obvious reasons and at any rate large chunks of their intelligence were liquidated during the purges; there was no reason that they should have had better intelligence on the Manhattan Project than the US or the Brits — yet they did.

            Why? Because large parts of the Western left practically begged the Soviets to use them as their agents.

            1. “What’s funny is that in the specifics McCarthy was almost 100% wrong, but in generalities he was correct…”

              But he hardly deserves much credit for those generalities. Generally, by being such a buffoon and targeting so many innocent people, McCarthy did more for the fifth column than anyone else. In effect, he made wound up casting anti-communism as stupid and malicious in the public eye.

        2. Well put sir.

  16. Damn that strain of freedom!

  17. The squirrels are out in force today. What I can’t figure out, because I had it happen to me today, is how it’s double posting posts, but posting the 2nd one several posts below the first. It’s like squirrel based transaction locking. It’s Squirreled Query Language!

    1. +3 rows for Squirreled Query Language

  18. I just want us to be really cautious, because this strain of libertarianism that’s going through both parties right now and making big headlines, I think, is a very dangerous thought,” Christie said.

    Freedom is a dangerous thought, which why tyrants are so afraid of it. Free men do not require TOP MEN to rule over them.

    The worst policies to come out of Washington tend to have bipartisan support.

    Bipartisanship: It’s like double penetration…in the same hole…without any of the satisfaction.

  19. this fat tub of shit needs to go crawl under the fucking rock he came from and simply remove himself from the public eye. jackbooted fuckstain.

  20. There are interesting splits within the conservative movement:

    1- The Moderate – He/she may or may not support limited abortion restrictions and limited restrictions on marriage equality. Usually socially moderate and economically moderate (compared to a Democrat). Very aggressive on American involvement in other countries. McCain, Graham, Christie,

    2- The ‘c’onservative (Version A) – Socially and economically conservative with a very aggressive American involvement in other countries. Believes in small Government in “most” areas. Usually represent the religious right so some big Government streaks exist. Cruz, Rick Perry, DeMint, Bauchmann, Hannity, Limbaugh (In my opinion, the new establishment)

    3 – The ‘C’onservative (Version B) – Socially moderate to liberal and economically conservative with the desire for limited American involvement in other countries. Believes in small Government 360. Tend to be Libertarian leaning or full blow Libertarian, by definition. Paul, Stossel, Judge Nap, Justin Amash

    Does anyone else agree with this?

    1. I don’t think Cruz wants so much foreign involvement. Aside from bombing Syria but that’s just a little fun.

    2. I agree with this, but would say that 2 and 3 split pretty evenly when it comes to the religious right as well. I would also say that “social conservatism” really is starting to narrow down to being pro-life. Pro-gun is starting to become the dominant position regardless of culture, marriage issues are going away quite soon, and most of the other stuff (pro-drugs, porn, etc) was more a push from the leadership than any grassroots activity. This leaves us with a fairly ecumenical movement that is mostly pro-life and anti-religious discrimination and somewhat anti- some other stuff as marginal asides.

      Last thing: group 2 is more or less movement conservatives; they aren’t so much ideologically aggressive as they are partisan and Cold Warriors. In the 90s the GOP was fairly anti-interventionist, and the attempts to put the GWoT on the same scale as the Cold War don’t seem to be taking.

    3. I personally think group 3 is frequently socially conservative, it’s just that they don’t want to legislate their conservatism. That is the real break to me. Whether or not you want to make your conservative beliefs into law or not.

      For example, Rand Paul is definitely a religious man who loves him some Jesus. He just doesn’t think his Jesus love should be forced on everyone else.

      1. Sounds about right. I’d probably fit into group 3 myself, if I still classified myself as conservative.

      2. What social conservatives want to force Jesus on everyone else? This always seems to be a straw man to me.

        1. What social conservatives want to force Jesus on everyone else? This always seems to be a straw man to me.

          The ones who think we should teach Creationism in public schools and outlaw gay marriage based on Biblical precepts.

          1. Obviously the former really comes up more at the local/state level, but there are definitely plenty of conservatives that “want to put God back in the ____” (insert public place).

            1. “want to put God back in the ____” (insert public place)

              Ooh, Mad Libs! OK, I’ll play. How about “put God back in the….church?”

          2. In terms of public schools, it’s a matter of what is being taught in schools we are forced to fund. Most social conservatives I know would just assume scrap the entire system and either go to vouchers or have everyone pay for their own education.

            1. Liberals see it as violating the human rights of students to have them being taught something *they* disagree with.

      3. Yes and let me make it clear; I don’t have a problem with someone who has socially conservative values but my problem comes when they try to use the police power of Government to enforce those socially conservative values. Personally, with the exception of the oversees involvement obsession, I tend to lean in the direction of Neal Boortz when it comes to my Libertarian politics. Again, believe in Jesus and having Christianity in your heart does not mean you have the right to enforce that using the police power of Government (looks at Rick Perry).

        1. For sake of clarity ‘SoCon’ should refer to this desiring use of government force to shove such values down our throats.

          1. You seem to get upset about this only when you disagree with those values, though.

        2. Neal Boortz is no libertarian.

      4. Frankly, I have no problem with what anyone chooses to believe. The problem comes in when when they try to legislate others to follow those beliefs. That can be the case whether your religion makes you believe that the earth is only 6,000 years old or if it makes you believe only self-sacrificing and correct-thinking humans can save the planet from climate change.

    4. OK as far as you go, but you leave a lot out. For instance, I have friends who practically don’t register on the “movement” scale because they’ve given up on politics and are seeking separation and refuge as communities of whites only, preferably in rural areas.

      Then there are the nationalists who seek mostly the same thing but on a national rather than racial or community basis. They would like autarky and are mostly against immigration. In other ways their views are all over the lot, with a large libertarian sector but also “conservatives” and other types. Many of them are “bikers” (motorcyclists) and they even have the stereotypic ass’n with biker meth. Many of them are also “sovereign”/”patriot”/Constitutionalist resister types, into weapons and/or health foods and alternative cures.

      Among Tea Partiers are many old Birchers who, however, have come to accept Medicare now that they’re of Medicare age. They’re pretty reluctant to engage in electoral politics too, though they’ll go in for protests and lots of tedious conspiracy-oriented educational stuff.

      Then there’s the American Third Position. You can look ’em up. Don’t know if they can rightly be called “conservative”, though.

      I better quit listing, because I could be up all night with this.

  21. “The worst policies to come out of Washington tend to have bipartisan support.”

    Yes.

    Yes, indeed.

  22. Pope scolds rich, demands social justice in visit to Brazil slum

    Pope Francis on Thursday issued the first social manifesto of his young pontificate, telling slum dwellers in Brazil that the world’s rich must do much more to wipe out vast inequalities between the haves and the have-nots.

    The pope also urged Brazil’s youth, who have taken part in recent protests showing discontent with the status quo, to keep alive their “sensitivity towards injustice” and be a catalyst in the fight against corruption.

    The first Latin American pope, who has rallied the Church on behalf of the poor and who lives more austerely than his predecessors, called for a “culture of solidarity” to replace the “selfishness and individualism” prevailing in modern society.

    Then the Pope, exhausted from his labors, returned to his palace in Rome, to be served delicious foods on fine platters by his well-dressed servants.

    1. Meh, I have no problem with this (except perhaps the individualism part).

      Americans and their mini-mes abroad are selfish consumerists. You can argue in favor of that, or argue that it is not something endemic to either the US or free market capitalism, but it is there. It is good for people to broaden their understanding of the world to include others, and to help them where appropriate — especially in a country like Brazil where there are many people who genuinely do go without food through no fault of their own.

      Force isn’t required to change a worldview or a lifestyle. One should be free to be an alcoholic, but if you ask me it was a miserable life when I was one, for myself and the people I loved.

      1. I find consumerism personally appalling, but I have no right to tell people what to do with their own money. If they want to buy the latest and greatest IPod, more power to them.

        That’s the wonderful thing about freedom. You are truly free if you are free to be “wrong,” whether that means being an alcoholic, an addict, or a selfish asshole.

        1. I find consumerism personally appalling, but I have no right to tell people what to do with their own money.

          Why not? It’s free speech.

          1. I think he means “tell” in the “force” sense.

            Most often any kind of vocalizations in this manner move towards a “I don’t like the way you spend your money, therefore you should have less of it” position.

      2. I doubt Americans are more selfish than others. Probably much less.

        1. Relatively speaking? You’re correct. Absolutely speaking? We could all do with being less selfish. After all, there’s no “i” in libertarian.

          Wait a minute…

          1. We could all do with being less selfish.

            NO. Self-interest is the highest moral paradigm.

            1. self-interest and selfishness are not mutually exclusive.

            2. Self-interest is unavoidable and beneficial. Denying it is to deny humanity itself.

              Selfishness is entirely avoidable and destructive, and should be avoided. Just about every illegitimate initiation of violence originates from that source — I want your _____ more than you want whatever it is that you own, and I’ll fight you for it.

              1. Just about every illegitimate initiation of violence originates from that source

                The great evils in history all stem from Altruism.

                1. I keep hearing this claim from certain libertarians, and it baffles me.

                  Does anyone really want to argue that Stalin and Hitler were really altruists? They weren’t exactly the sort to walk old ladies down the street on their spare time, especially Stalin.

                  1. Doesn’t Ayn Rand have a very specific definition of altruism?

                    1. If by “specific” you mean inaccurate and misleading in the extreme, then yes.

                  2. “I keep hearing this claim from certain libertarians, and it baffles me.”

                    I’m pretty sure it’s mostly just Objectivists

                  3. They appealed to Altruism-sacrifice your life for others.

                    If by “specific” you mean inaccurate and misleading in the extreme, then yes.

                    No, it was the only accurate meaningful definition. She was right as usual.

                  4. You are right but they can to be because of altrists.

                2. The great evils in history all stem from Altruism.

                  wut?

                  Is it altruistic to wish that others could be free to live their lives as they choose?

            3. Self-interest is the highest moral paradigm.

              That’s just, like, your opinion, man.

      3. Consumption is what broke the iron curtain: Blue Jeans and Rock and Roll.

    2. Pope Francis on Thursday issued the first social manifesto of his young pontificate, telling slum dwellers in Brazil that the world’s rich must do much more to wipe out vast inequalities between the haves and the have-nots.

      Well, Frank, I’m on board with that. The only real way to do that, though, is to dramatically roll back the size and scope of the state to eliminate it’s ability to provide economic rents at the expense of those unable to gain access to such patronage. Of course, an added factor would be vastly increased availability of birth control in the developing world.

      But, somehow, I don’t think that’s really what you had in mind.

  23. What a fat dickhead. I bet Christie and Michael Moore have hotdog stuffing contests.

  24. Put Christie’s social links up so we can “smart-bomb” the fat whore.

  25. I completely understand why people like Sowell don’t have a bigger audience and jello-spined “independents” like Christie are wiping the presidential gleam out of their eye.

    Sowell’s latest-
    The Left’s Central Delusion Its devotion to central planning has endured from the French Revolution to Obamacare.

    The fundamental problem of the political Left seems to be that the real world does not fit their preconceptions. Therefore they see the real world as what is wrong, and what needs to be changed, since apparently their preconceptions cannot be wrong.

    They can’t handle the truth. It just destroys their world.

    1. Same goes for noninterventionists.

      1. Scratch the “non” and that’s a good comparison

      2. Go fuck yourself, moron.

      3. Hardly. To be an interventionist is to have a completely unrealistic belief in the power of the U.S. government to shape the world, plus the utterly immoral belief that the entire world is U.S. government property to dispose of as it sees fit.

        1. Nope. The Ron Paul style ninnyinterventionists are diehard religious nuts. It’s policy by Faith. Once again, I see the truth hurts.

          1. How about all interventionists pay an extra tax to fund their favored military adventurism? I bet they’ll get real quiet then.

  26. Christie all but betrayed the GOP by all but endorsing Barack Obama just days before the last presidential election.

    If the Republicans can’t count on him in the days running up to a presidential election, why should the rest of the Republican party take him seriously at all?

    Chris Christie is a Republican in the same way that Michael Bloomberg was a Republican–which is to say in name only. He represents himself alone, and no one else should give him any credence whatsoever.

    Outside of New Jersey, he isn’t going anywhere–ever.

    1. IF he enters the presidential race I predict he’ll fall flat on his face in Iowa despite the media’s best efforts to support him.

      He literally offers nothing to the GOP other than a vague, undefined sense of seriousness, the same vague, undefined notion that the media repeated over and over again about Mitt Romney being the only one who could challenge Obama.

      1. Romney had the same appeal as Christie, and all that got him was……….the GOP nomination.

        Not sure anyone should be surprised if this is what runs against Hillary in a few years.

        Statists gotta State.

        1. Romney had a lack of serious competition. No Rand or Cruz calibre. It will be different this time.

          1. Romney also had a shitload of cash, and Christie doesn’t.

        2. Romney had the same appeal as Christie, and all that got him was……….the GOP nomination.

          Romney was also running against a grotesque GOP field. I don’t think Christie will be able to beat out someone like Cruz. Cruz actually has conservative support and will absolutely butcher Christie in a debate.

          1. No, I think Christie could eat up Cruz in a debate. And then vomit him, because of the stomach thing.

            1. Well, one of them has been a national debate champion and one hasn’t. That’s not exactly the same thing as a political debate, but I know where I’d put my money.

            2. Cruz would likely be an excellent debater. He has shredded witnesses in the Senate, is a former prosecutor (I know, but courtroom practice makes you fast and solid on your feet).

              1. That could all be. I just wanted to get in an eating & vomiting quip.

        3. Romney didn’t have any viable opponents though. There was no way Santorum or Gingrich were getting the nomination and the deck was simply stacked against Ron Paul so he never had a chance.

          In 2016 Rand will have the prestige of his office, the network of party officials and campaigners created by his dad, and a more serious and viable image that the media and the party can’t ignore. Christie and the others will actually have to engage with Rand on GOP ideas and that’s where Paul has a chance.

          1. Plus Ron Paul was a) a horrible candidate, and b) had plenty of areas of policy disagreement with conservatives.

            Sorry, but you aren’t going to win in a Republican primary by sounding like the second coming of Alex Jones.

            1. I really want to believe you guys, but you are fucking kidding yourself if you think that the votes that matter care about the “calibre” of the next bullpen.

              Douche or turd sandwich.

              That will be our next choice.

              At least the Obama experiment will be over, so there’s that.

              1. Not a very convincing counter Tman.

                  1. There was another poll with completely different numbers a few days ago. Meaningless!

          2. Romney didn’t have any viable opponents though. There was no way Santorum or Gingrich were getting the nomination and the deck was simply stacked against Ron Paul so he never had a chance.

            The idea some libertarians have that Ron Paul was ever a viable candidate is just absurd. I don’t know why people believe it. Ron Paul is a terrible debater and his speaking style is pretty much the opposite of presidential. He’s too opposed to any sort of foreign involvement, and the vast majority of Americans just aren’t going to buy the argument that we should stay out of world affairs.

            He never had any hope of winning the Republican primary, and he would have gotten slaughtered by Obama even if he had.

            Rand Paul may be a legitimate candidate, Ron Paul was not.

            1. Ron said a lot of crazy shit. I remember watching one debate in ’08 where he claimed that if you liberalize the US economy, you’ll see 10% GDP growth that very next year. Or some tinfoil hat nonsense about a border fence being used to seal Americans in. Or (let’s face it) pretty much anything having to do with foreign policy, where he was far too Pollyanna about how effective trading with people is and how amenable the rest of the world would be to his foreign policy.

              Ron Paul was too far removed from the rest of America to even remember how to run as the President of us normal people, much less do it. But hey, he got a bunch of annoying, paranoid college students excited, so how could he have possibly lost?

              1. you’ll see 10% GDP growth that very next year.

                Ehhhh. I’d say that would be possible, depending one what you mean by “liberalize.” If you rolled back the income tax to say a 6% flat tax, killed the corporate income tax, eliminated FICA etc. I’d say you’d have a decent chance of something like that. Maybe it wouldn’t reach 10% but it would be insanely impressive.

                1. Except that GDP includes government spending, so if you cut massive amounts of government spending there’s no way the GDP shrinkage would be made up in the next year by the private sector.

                  Long term we’d be much better off, but the first year you’d likely see a GDP drop due to the cuts to government spending.

                  This is why I hate GDP as a measurement. If the government decided to build an entire city in the middle of a desert, and no one ever moved there, the construction of that city would still count as GDP. In fact, if the government flat out wastes a trillion dollars, GDP would increase by a trillion, even though no one had actually been helped by that waste.

                  1. I see your point. I guess I’m measuring “real growth” but I’m not sure what that metric truly is.

                  2. If the government decided to build an entire city in the middle of a desert, and no one ever moved there, the construction of that city would still count as GDP.

                    You mean like China?
                    http://www.foreignpolicy.com/a…..gong_china

              2. “Ron Paul was too far removed from the rest of America to even remember how to run as the President of us normal people, much less do it.”

                Not that Paul was a great candidate by any means, but I definitely don’t think this is a valid explanation of why he lost. Say what you want about him, but Ron Paul IMO is a lot more relateable to the average person than Mitt Romney is

              3. you could actually do that, but you’d have to SERIOUSLY liberalize both the federal and state governments

              4. if America is all about using state force and violence to achieve human progress then I dont blame him.

            2. I don’t mean to imply that Ron Paul was a good candidate because he certainly wasn’t and I don’t he could have won the nomination.

              But there was a period where Paul was leading in the Iowa polls before the election and the GOP freaked the fuck out and began warning Iowa that it would lose its special place as the first caucus state if they went with Paul.

              He could have done a lot better if there wasn’t a concerted effort to marginalize him within the party and media.

            3. Worse was Ron Paul’s shameful covering for whomever ghost-wrote the racist newsletters in his name. He had no understanding of what it takes to win and the Paultards who got their panties in a bunch over Reason talking about it should get checked for brain damage.

              It is a damn shame that the movement RP started is way too much of a personality cult. Johnson should have been the libertarian standard-bearer in the GOP primary, not Paul.

            4. The average voter doesn’t really care about speaking style. Bush is famous for his tongue-tied drawl and invented words. And even Obama, for that matter, is NOT a good orator at all unless he’s got a teleprompter in front of him.

              I think what did Ron Paul in the most was the media. The left-leaning mainstream media didn’t give him the time of the day, and the talk show-dominated right wing media felt very threatened by the prospect of his libertarian ideas gaining any traction, so they basically switched between denigrating and ignoring him.

              1. Ron Paul’s candidacy had the following problems.

                1) His petulant fan base. Political enthusiasm is great. Being enthusiastic about politics only insofar as it relates to one particular person is not. Posting Ron Paul campaign info alongside whatever Alex Jones crapped out that morning even less so.

                2) His speeches were geared toward generating excitement among his fan base. They were strident and unpersuasive even to those who had very minor disagreements.

                3) He was destroyed in the debates. If the MSM ignored him, he didn’t give them much to work with in covering him.

                4) The racist stuff. Anyone in the party remotely concerned about electability could not overlook that stuff. He needed a dust buster and a come clean moment. I think he thought he was above that sort of stuff.

                5) The MSM may have ignored him, but he was a darling of the left. Having an agreeable chat with Bill Maher and getting fawning coverage from the Daily Show was not a good look. Given that he was lousy at articulating his worldview, it appeared to many he was progressive on a lot of issues.

                1. I don’t get the Ron Paul hate on a libertarian board after 100+ years of this country being ruled by war mongering psyhcopaths

                  1. How dare Ron Paul talk about liberty, peace, and sound economics, thats bat-shit crazy!!!!!!!

                2. If I wanted to figure out how to alienate potential supporters in a Republican primary, I wouldn’t do much different from Ron Paul. I mean, you can make a case to a conservative audience that we should have a less interventionist foreign policy. But, telling them that America is the world’s bully picking on the poor, good-hearted brown people just isn’t going to do that.

                3. He was destroyed in the debates.

                  Bullshit. He was sidelined by media minions who tried like hell to ignore him, but he still managed to expose Giuliani for as a pig-ignorant jackass.

                  -jcr

  27. But Ted Cruz wasn’t born in the US.

    1. It’s not just that but the fact that he was born in Canada as well!

      1. ouch.

  28. +1 for the alt text.

  29. “Chris Christie Attacks “This Strain of Libertarianism That’s Going Through Both Parties Right Now””

    Ok, folks, we been busted. Fat boy’s got it; we’re taking over the purple party and he’s figgered it out.
    Damn. I thought we were clever enough to get away with it, too!

    1. We would have gotten away with it, too, if it hadn’t been for those meddling statists and their obese dog.

  30. Shadowrun Returns looks pretty cool. Only got to play the intro bit though. One complaint is goddamn checkpoint saves in a PC game.

  31. HAHAH

    Victory

    US company Halliburton will plead guilty to destroying evidence relating to the 2010 Gulf Of Mexico oil spill.

    1. The question is, are they actually guilty or are they taking one of the ‘plead now and we’ll only take one limb’ deals American prosecutors specialize in?

      1. since they are evil, I say guilty.

        1. But they aren’t evil unless they are guilty. I wouldn’t expect someone like you to be good at thinking.

      2. I think that’s a salient point. Federal prosecutors have so much power, it’s enough to make you lust for more.

  32. Am I the only one who can’t read any old Reason articles without doing a Google customer survey? I find that rather ironic considering Reason’s anti-NSA stance.

  33. Conservatives believe in the 4th trimester

  34. Abstract: Most people are bad.

  35. Chris Christie could spend a little more time attacking a stairmaster, and a little less time attacking the plate of hot wings.

  36. The GOP field in the 2012 presidential race was weak because most strong possible contenders did not want to waste political or financial capital running against an incumbent. So we ended up with the various odds and ends which cropped up then.

    I am hoping that Paul creates enough of a force vector in the party to inspire somebody with more libertarian principles than the usual GOP candidate to take the lead. Obese, East coast, RINO’s need not apply.

  37. What is dangerous, you fat fuck, is, well, you being bigger than 99% of the DL in the NFL except with about 3 lbs of muscle. How can a guy who cannot say no to Velveeta lecture anyone about anything? Unions need to tighten their belts… well, yeah, except, you are the one guy this side of Eleftherios Venizelos.

  38. If any of you ever develop a computer game, for the love of all that’s holy – do not use a checkpoint save system. Fething consoles, screwing game sup since forever.

    1. Consoles didn’t do this. There are non-checkpoint save games on consoles.

      1. The idea that this sort of shit is acceptable started back in the console days when they didn’t have enough memory space for ‘save-anywhere’

  39. Christie’s star shone brightly to small-gov’t types when he first appeared on the national radar; there was that video of him rhetorically owning some teachers union member at a town hall meeting. He bluntly explained to her that New Jersey couldn’t afford to give her pay and benefits that wildly exceeded what the average taxpayers were getting. It was all downhill from there though.

    I wrote him off when he said, in essence, that sports gambling should be legal (because it’s something he personally likes – along with over-eating), but that marijuana users should be drawn-and-quartered because they’re decadent hippies who need to be taught to bow to authority.

    Christie’s hypocrisy rivals his girth as his most obvious trait.

    1. “I wrote him off when he said, in essence, that sports gambling should be legal (because it’s something he personally likes – along with over-eating), but that marijuana users should be drawn-and-quartered because they’re decadent hippies who need to be taught to bow to authority.”

      A while back, Joe Rogan was discussing some study that showed pot smokers are less likely to be overweight, despite the reputed appetite-boosting effect of THC.

      Christie may want to re-think his position on pot, along with many of his other positions.

  40. Here are 209 examples of Barack Obama’s lying, lawbreaking, corruption, cronyism, etc. http://danfromsquirrelhill.wor…../obama209/

    1. #28 “Had armed SWAT agents raid a law-abiding guitar factory because it was owned by a Republican”

      Can’t beat a Gibson guitar.

      1. Well with a SWAT team you can sure make that imported wood respect the LAW. Because if you don’t carry assault weapons to a warehouse that’s filled with lumber, the terrorists Win!

  41. It’s really a pity, because I was very impressed with Christie when he was taking on the NJ teachers’ union. I wouldn’t want him as president, but based on his performance then, he’d make a great Secretary of Labor.

  42. I bet he would like to attack a platter of cheeseburgers lol.

    http://www.Only-Anon.tk

    1. You have to be human.

  43. Fascist!

  44. According to The Blaze: http://www.theblaze.com/storie…..-about-it/

    “While the most talked-about news out of the U.S. House of Representatives on Wednesday was the defeat of the so-called Amash amendment that would have defunded the NSA’s massive data collection program, another amendment related to NSA spying was quietly passed overwhelmingly by lawmakers.

    The Pompeo amendment (championed by Rep. Mike Pompeo of Kansas) passed the House with a bipartisan vote of 409-12. However, “no one is talking about it,” Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas) told TheBlaze on Thursday.”

    1. Better than nothing, I guess.

    2. “Editor’s note: This story has been updated to include the clarification that the Pompeo amendment does not seem to restrict the NSA’s ability to continue collecting and storing individuals’ metadata.”

      hth

  45. Those dastardly libertarians! Trying to impose liberty on society! Pure evil I tell you! Evil!

    1. It’s how you define liberty.

      1. Here’s how the dictionary defines it.

        liberty |?lib?rt?|
        noun ( pl. -ties)
        1 the state of being free within society from oppressive restrictions imposed by authority on one’s way of life, behavior, or political views : compulsory retirement would interfere with individual liberty.

        1. Sounds good to me. I don’t see anything in there about income taxes.

  46. As a possible 2016 presidential candidate, Christie is going to rail against ANY split in the republican party. Republicans need unity to win, so even if the majority of party members were impaling babies on spears for sport, Christie would attack any minority of party members that threatened to diminish party unity by opposing that activity. Republicans can’t win if their party is divided, which of course doesn’t really matter when you consider that there isn’t a dime’s worth of difference between the two parties on most issues anyway.

    1. You talk as if its a bad thing. I hope the republican faction diminshes. Good, one statist party down…..

  47. This zepplin is a mega-statist, gun grabber of the highest order.

    And he may very well be the GOP nominee, because yes they are that stupid.

    Actually, I can’t see him carrying a single state in the South but who knows.

    1. This zepplin is a mega-statist, gun grabber of the highest order.

      Well he is an northeast Republican. There’s a fair amount of regional difference among people in both parties — heck, even Harry Reid’s gun record was better than average before he became Senate Majority Leader and had to represent the Democrat party line.

  48. Christie has been getting headlines as a governor because of his big mouth and big gut. What a fucking asshole for using 9/11 as a tool against libertarians. His big mouth wont help him win this argument. If he thinks liberty is something we should be afraid of, then he is part of the problem. I knew I never liked that fat fuck.

  49. sadly, the fact is, Christie is still one of the most libertarian leaders in the higher-level government, if you actually weigh effectiveness at getting bigger things done. He’s punched a hole in the unions bigger thn anyone else has, save for Paul Ryan

    1. Libertarian and government do not go together……..at all.

      1. Arguing minarchist vs. anarchist right now is like deciding between parking spaces in New York when you’ve just pulled out of your driveway in Los Angeles. I’d like to see a world with privatized everything, too, but for today I’d turn cartwheels just to see the government pruned back to pre-LBJ levels.

      2. Libertarian and government do not go together……..at all.

        Rather that promote ‘libertarianism’, promote ‘federalism’. Reduce the size of the *federal* government. Let state governments do what they want. I think that would be a much easier sell.

  50. Christie’s been licking Obama’s asshole for almost a good year now and having served under W, it shocks me none that he supports surveillance state policies. Clearly he knows he’s toast in a GOP primary at this point and might give it a go as a Democrat but I can’t seem any liberals running to support him either. He’s basically the politician that everyone kind of equally hates and then they act surprised when they get smoked in a primary like Guiliani did.

  51. Christie is right. We have to end this whole libertarian thing that has been running rampant lately. When they got heroin legalized that was one thing. Then they eliminated income taxes. But now they are talking about complete self ownership for adults. That would allow people to make all kinds of unhealthy choices for themselves. We simply cannot have that. Next thing you know there would be people stuffing themselves with all sorts of junk food and growing to enormous girths. We need to prevent people doing this to themselves.

  52. “I just want us to be really cautious, because this strain of libertarianism that’s going through both parties right now and making big headlines, I think, is a very dangerous thought,”

    I just want you to know that I am not a wacko bird, I am a dinosaur, and I never ever want to win in a Republican primary.

  53. Obese Fascist Chris Christie consumes America’s young.

  54. Like this douche, who supports legalized sports gambling but not legalized cannabis, is in any position to tell anybody ANYTHING.

    How the fuck do we get these rulers who can’t even rule their own bodies?! They can’t control their own appetites (for food, sex, w/e) yet want the reins of power so they can attempt to control the lives of others. This is insanity of the highest fucking order.

  55. Of course, he’s “concerned”; he’s afraid of losing his fat-cat status that he maintains by fleecing the tax payer.

  56. Is that a picture of Chris, or a picture of the guy who ate Chris? Maybe that’s why he is named Chris Christie. He’s a double wide Chris, with a tie.

  57. A blubbery sack of idiocy squawks professionalized garble impeccably designed to tongue massage the hairy chocolate starfish of politics.

  58. We need to approach this freedom thing cautiously. Before you know it people could be completely free! And where would that leave us? With freedom! Terrifying, power-decentralizing freedom!

  59. That’s right Ice (cream) Man, I am dangerous.

  60. I cant stop my self from commenting on this blog. I gone through this post and this post is really amazing and informative. I am gonne share this post on facebook and on my following site as well:

    Kamagra Oral Jelly
    Kamagra Jelly 100mg

  61. Ok, Ok, I get that Christie had to kiss O’s butt to grease the skids for getting the Hurricane Sandy recovery money… Ok, I can accept that as the normal, dirty, embarrassing, scum-sucking side of politics.

    But this rag on libertarianism? O must have some embarrassing personal photos of Christie to threaten him with…

    And no, I can’t even imagine what such photographs might contain, NOR do I have ANY desire to see them!

  62. just as Bradley explained I am stunned that anyone can get paid $9436 in 4 weeks on the computer. have you read this site linkgo to this site home tab for more detail— http://WWW.JOBS31.COM

  63. Hannah. I can see what your saying… Elizabeth`s storry is amazing… on sunday I got a brand new Honda from earning $9023 this last four weeks and even more than 10-k this past month. with-out any doubt it’s the most financially rewarding I’ve ever had. I started this 8-months ago and pretty much straight away was bringing home over $71… per-hr. I use this great link, go to this site home tab for more detail— http://WWW.JOBS31.COM

  64. I only wish that anti-libertarians would be honest about what they oppose and what they endorse. I wish they would come out and say they oppose self ownership (which is really the central tenet of libertarianism) and advocate coercion and the initiation of violence.

    1. DWC… you got that RIGHT and the anti-libertarians didn’t.

  65. unfortunately i have a different girlfriend Unless they figure out how to rig the vote like O did last year, it won’t matter what the old cronies want! If the majority don’t want him, he’s out!

    http://photoshoptravel.com

  66. It’s unbelievable. For the past 3 months, I have been so depressed after losing my boyfriend to another girl. Out of complete and total desperation, I contacted Dr Paul He is definitely different from the powerful and I felt immediate hope and strength from hearing about the promises that i will see the result in three days time which came to past. Dr. Paul is the most powerful spell caster. His spells worked wonderful and I am now back with my boyfriend. Work with him on this email
    address if necessary and you will get the best result: email altimatespelltemple@yahoo.com

  67. NSA is just another tool the “Elite” uses against the masses and Christie is one of their enforcers to spew the propaganda against those that will truly fight for the truth. They continue to label the Pauls as “Fringe” or whatever and the media speads the venom to the masses until they become irrelavant. Americans of all stripes need to see that both Dems and Reps sow the seeds for the elite to keep all of us divided so that they may conquer, and believ me they plan just that!! Check it out and open your eyes in 2014 and 2016 AMERICA. Vote for those who will uphold the Constitution for real and not just say they will, Obamboo said that!

  68. There’s really no contemplate Clarisonic is not only accepted due to its facial area cleaning up tool, and when vendor with ideal Clarisonic Outlet facial area solutions. A applicator capitals appear in bags with 3 and they’re going to amount to about $100 first set. Hence, you can utilize them when dipping. Even though it all of feels a lot often, you may in truth suitable dermis teeth Clarisonic Plus yellowing plus prevent your dermis wanting little by way of reviewing with the health care provider and also doctor pertaining to making use of the radical Obagi Very clear.

  69. He’s so fat. He’s just so Goddamn fat. It’s hilarious.

  70. Did I already post this question?

    Do you think Chris Christie just MIGHT change his tune after all of the Fed’s Sandy-Repair checks clear?

    I think Christie is smart enough to know which side of the bread has the butter and how to play politics with the best of ’em… right up to the thief in the WH…

    Or did I already say that? Sorry…

  71. rgd| 7.28.13 @ 9:53PM |#

    There’s really no contemplate Clarisonic is not only accepted due to its facial area cleaning up tool, and when vendor with ideal Clarisonic Outlet facial area solutions. A applicator capitals appear in bags with 3 and they’re going to amount to about $100 first set. Hence, you can utilize them when dipping. Even though it all of feels a lot often, you may in truth suitable dermis teeth Clarisonic Plus yellowing plus prevent your dermis wanting little by way of reviewing with the health care provider and also doctor pertaining to making use of the radical Obagi Very clear.

    http://www.plusaf.com/linkedin…..-spray.jpg

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.