Chris Christie

So What’s The Big Story This Week On CNN And Fox News?

Posted by on January 19, 2014 at 1:15 pm. 13 Comments :

Both CNN and Fox News have Sunday morning programs that analyze the media. On CNN it’s Reliable Sources with Brian Stelter. On Fox News It’s MediaBuzz with Howard Kurtz. This morning both programs chose to lead off their broadcasts with the same story that essentially takes MSNBC to task for doing respectable journalism.

CNN, Fox News Go After MSNBC

MSNBC has been at the forefront of the Chris Christie Bridge-Gate scandal from its inception. They broke the story on television with the help of the local Bergen Record newspaper in New Jersey. Since then they have scored some significant scoops that have rattled the Christie regime. One example of that occurred last week when Hoboken mayor Dawn Zimmer told MSNBC’s Steve Kornacki that the Christie administration held Sandy relief funds hostage to force her to support a real estate project that Christie favored. Not surprisingly, Christie retaliated by dispatching his spokesman to swing back at the messenger:

Christie spokesman Colin Reed: MSNBC is a partisan network that has been openly hostile to Governor Christie and almost gleeful in their efforts attacking him, even taking the unprecedented step of producing and airing a nearly three-minute attack ad against him this week.

Notice that nowhere in that statement did Reed dispute the actual content of MSNBC’s reporting. It was just a self-serving attack on the network’s liberal reputation. The example he offered of an “unprecedented” three-minute attack ad (video below) was really just a thirty second mock video demonstrating how Christie’s opponents could use the scandal against him should he run for president in 2016. And it wasn’t unprecedented either, as Fox News actually did produce a four minute anti-Obama ad prior to the 2012 election that they deleted after it had become an embarrassment.

In a week that included a Supreme Court ruling against Network Neutrality, two speeches by President Obama, and a major book release about Fox News CEO Roger Ailes (The Loudest Voice In The Room), both CNN and Fox led off their weekly media programs with stories about MSNBC’s coverage of Christie. CNN had an on-screen graphic with the pressing question, is “MSNBC Attacking Chris Christie?” While Fox went for the more macho “Christie Declares War On MSNBC.” Of course, everything on Fox News is war (Christmas, class, liberty, capitalism, etc.). Fox also placed Christie’s war with MSNBC at the top of their lie-riddled Fox Nation website. [See the acclaimed ebook Fox Nation vs. Reality for proof of Fox Nation’s catalog of lies]

There was nothing in either program that refuted the factual accuracy of MSNBC’s coverage, but the tone was nonetheless disparaging. The real question, however, is why did they both put this story at the front of their broadcasts. Was it really more important than the other media news of the week? Or were they simply jealous that they didn’t get these scoops themselves? It may be significant that MSNBC had a rare Nielsen ratings victory for the week that featured the Bridge-Gate reporting. Could that have been what drove CNN and Fox to criticize it? Either way it makes both networks look awfully petty for attacking a rival for doing their job.

Lawrence O’Donnell’s fake Christie ad:

The Hilariously Schizo Fox News Explanation For ‘Why Chris Christie will be impeached in 2014’

Posted by on January 18, 2014 at 3:05 pm. 3 Comments :

If there is one thing that you can depend on with Fox News, it’s that anything that ever goes wrong will be attributed to President Obama or some amorphous cabal of evil liberals. And so it is with the tribulations of New Jersey thug/governor, Chris Christie.

Fox News

According to an editorial by former Republican congressman, and current Fox News contributor, John LeBoutillier, the threat to Christie’s governorship and presidential aspirations is rooted in the dastardliness of Democrats. LeBoutillier’s article, titled “Why Chris Christie will be impeached in 2014,” opines that Christie’s future is fatally hampered, not because of the nefarious activities of his closest associates, and perhaps himself, but because Democrats “know how to run a gut-cutting, down-and-dirty-if-necessary investigation against a political opponent.” In LeBoutillier’s myopic and paranoid vision Democrats are an omnipotent force of political vigilantes who have the power to collapse the Christie empire.

LeBoutillier: They know how to take aim – and then keep their eye on the target – no matter what. They know they have most of the media with them – and they thus are not afraid of “over-reach.” And they have the killer instinct that almost all Republicans lack.

Exactly! While Republicans have been politely bashing Democrats as godless socialists intent on destroying America, curtailing freedom, abetting terrorism, and undermining the nation’s financial and moral foundation, all along it has really been the Democrats who have overreached with their killer instinct.

As evidence of this assault on the poor, innocent GOP, LeBoutillier cites the creation of committees in the New Jersey legislature to investigate the budding Bridge-Gate scandal. How dare the Democrats seek to learn the truth about a major political controversy wherein a governor allegedly abused his office for payback against a political opponent. Republicans would never advocate such an inquiry aimed at Democrats – unless it had to do with the IRS and the Tea Party.

LeBoutillier advances the theory that Democrats are haranguing Christie for two reasons, neither of which is that he is suspected of having deliberately caused grave harm to millions of his constituents.

The first reason floated is that Democrats want to get back at Christie for the despicable treatment they have suffered under his leadership as governor. LeBoutillier candidly admits that Christie has been a real cad, calling Democrats “animals” and suggesting that someone should “take a bat” to the Senate Democratic leader. The second reason Democrats have for going after Christie is that they allegedly fear his candidacy for president in 2016. So obviously they somehow convinced his closest aides to embark on a monumentally stupid mission to cripple traffic and commerce so that they could pin it all on the governor. Makes perfect sense.

But here is where LeBoutillier goes off the rails. He also points out that Christie’s own party is loath to support him. Apparently they have not been treated any better than Democrats by the brutish Christie administration. LeBoutillier says that Christie…

“…has systematically bulldozed so many fellow Republicans that they are tentative and tepid in their support. For four years it has been known inside Jersey politics that if you made even the mildest criticism of the governor, he would come after you with a vengeance. Payback and punishment have become the rule over the past four years.”

Reminder: LeBoutillier is a Republican writing an editorial for Fox News. Yet this characterization of Christie affirms those who have criticized him as a bully, a charge that he and his defenders have strongly denied. LeBoutillier’s commentary reinforces the impression of Christie as someone who would participate in a scheme to seek revenge on a political foe. It aligns him with the sentiment expressed by his pal, and Port Authority executive, David Wildstein, who dismissed reservations about children being hurt by saying that it’s OK because “They are the children of Buono voters,” a reference to Barbara Buono, Christie’s Democratic opponent in the last gubernatorial campaign.

LeBoutillier concludes by saying that impeachment is inevitable and that “[Christie] does not survive in 2014.” And while he concedes that Christie has burned a lot of bridges (only figuratively, so far) among his fellow Republicans, LeBoutillier saved his harshest judgment for Democrats. This despite the fact that the only impeachment proceedings in modern times were orchestrated by Republicans in congress who targeted Bill Clinton for his personal misbehavior. There was no credible talk of impeachment of George W. Bush, even after it was certified that he invaded a country on false pretenses. And the past five years has seen numerous GOP politicians and pundits advocate the impeachment of President Obama for nothing more than because they just hate him so damn much.

Be Sure To “LIKE” News Corpse On Facebook

Nevertheless, it is Democrats that LeBoutillier castigates as having a “killer instinct” and a determination to impeach the unfairly beleaguered governor. And by asserting that “almost all Republicans lack” those traits, he reveals a remarkable degree of tunnel-blindness and undermines any credibility he might otherwise have been afforded.

Socialist Republicans And Mitt Romney’s Promise To Do ‘Something’

Posted by on August 31, 2012 at 4:56 am. 3 Comments :

Wrapping up the Republican National Kvetch-a-Sketch, Mitt Romney delivered a barn-boring speech that nevertheless stirred the sheep in the convention hall. With a different theme every night, Romney chose to highlight a bold new message that is sure to resonate with the Replicant base:

“Now is the moment when we can do something. With your help we will do something.”

So there you have it. Mitt Romney pledges to do “something.” That soaring rhetoric ought to inspire America’s voters. And consistent with his campaign to date, Romney refused to say specifically what that something would be. Contrary to the build up from Chris Christie and Paul Ryan, who hailed Romney as a leader who would tell the nation the “hard truths,” Romney stuck to soft platitudes and appeals to the disappointed demographic.

However, a familiar hint of a vision did emerge from both of the GOP’s standard bearers. Romney and Ryan united to express their shared belief in the spirit of collectivism and the sense that we, as Americans, are all in this together:

Romney Ryan Socialists

Romney: “The America we know is the story of the many becoming one.”

Ryan: “We have responsibilities, one to another. We do not each face the world alone.”

Those are admirable sentiments that reflect the views of many Americans who are committed to holding the nation together community by community. Even Chris Christie declared that “We all must share in the sacrifice.” The problem with those remarks is that, had President Obama made them, they would have been castigated by Tea-publicans as anti-American, socialist sermonizing. Fox News and talk radio McCarthyites would have built days of programming around such objectionable ravings.

But an even bigger problem is that Rom-n-Ry don’t mean what they say. Their philosophy leans more toward going it alone – an “I got mine” individualism that rejects social welfare and unity of purpose. The Republican model of shared sacrifice is lower salaries for teachers, lower benefits for seniors, and lower taxes for millionaires.

Shared Sacrifice

There’s going to be plenty of analysis in the media in the next couple of days of Romney’s speech on both its style and substance (although Clint Eastwood may have stolen the RNC finale, and not in a good way). However, much of the right-wing press has already dismissed fact-checking as a liberal plot to which they don’t have to pay attention. That’s convenient considering the frequency with which they lie.

Perhaps the most blatant falsehood in Romney’s speech was when he said “Unlike President Obama, I will not raise taxes on the middle class.” Not only has Obama cut taxes for the middle class, but Romney’s tax plan actually does raise their taxes. But the funniest misrepresentation was when he said that “My dad had been born in Mexico and his family had to leave during the Mexican revolution.” Romney left out the fact that his father had been born in Mexico because his grandfather, and his five wives, had to flee the U.S. in order to sustain their polygamy. I wonder why Romney glossed over that devotion to the institution of traditional marriage.

Update: This photo just came in off the wires of another hard hitting interview with Invisible Obama:

Pee Wee Herman and Invisible Obama

Chris Christie Rebuts His Hallucination Of Obama

Posted by on November 29, 2011 at 1:52 pm. 3 Comments :

A new video soundbite has been making the rounds of conservative media, particularly Fox News. The video presents the GOP’s favorite non-candidate, Chris Christie, in a pitched ideological battle with his own imagination.

In this video Christie says…

“I was angry this weekend, listening to the spin coming out of the administration, about the failure of the supercommittee, and that the president knew it was doomed for failure, so he didn’t get involved. Well then what the hell are we paying you for? It’s doomed for failure so I’m not getting involved? Well, what have you been doing, exactly?”

Where did Christie get the idea that President Obama knew the Super Committee was “doomed for failure?” It isn’t something the President said. In fact, when he signed the legislation Congress sent him on deficit reduction Obama said…

“Congress has now approved a compromise to reduce the deficit and avert a default that would have devastated our economy. It was a long and contentious debate. And I want to thank the American people for keeping up the pressure on their elected officials to put politics aside and work together for the good of the country. This compromise guarantees more than $2 trillion in deficit reduction. It’s an important first step to ensuring that as a nation we live within our means.”

That is not exactly a statement of doom. What’s more, before the committee even convened the White House produced a plan that cut more than $3 trillion from the deficit – twice the goal of the Super Committee. And the President made crystal clear his budgetary priorities:

“I’ve said it before; I will say it again: We can’t balance the budget on the backs of the very people who have borne the biggest brunt of this recession. We can’t make it tougher for young people to go to college, or ask seniors to pay more for health care, or ask scientists to give up on promising medical research because we couldn’t close a tax shelter for the most fortunate among us. Everyone is going to have to chip in. It’s only fair.”

So Christie, were he honest, could hardly fault the President for not being engaged. The arrogant inquiry as to “what the hell are we paying you for?” illustrates the blind hostility to anything Obama attempts. The President was doing precisely what he is paid to do. And that involves much more than just deficit reduction. It also includes national security, job and economic growth, and the management of a dangerous world that includes hotspots like Afghanistan, Libya, China, and Iran.

For Christie to criticize Obama over the deficit debate reveals just how out of touch Christie is. In addition to being unaware of the steps the President has already taken, Christie is also ignorant of the fact that Obama has to tread carefully when dealing with matters that involve Congress. The bitter partisanship of the GOP has already resulted in their opposing their own initiatives if the President endorsed them. So any guidance by Obama could cause Republicans to kick in a knee-jerk denial. It is, therefore, smart for the President to let Congress do their job without interference in the hopes of getting them to produce a workable compromise that he can sign. Unfortunately, Congress was not even able to do that.

It is pathetic that the right-wing GOP has only shady characters like Christie to look up to. The anger Christie is expressing here is misplaced due to both his ignorance of the subject matter and his naivete with regard to political statesmanship. That’s why he has to resort to inventing phantom positions, assigning them to Obama, and then rebutting them as if they were real. And the fact that Fox News promotes this ineptitude as something to be admired compounds the patheticness of it all.