"Time for some traffic problems in Fort Lee"

[Anonymous]

Interesting, 7:23, thanks for posting the info about Maddow's theory.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Right-wing Republicans may hate him but he did an excellent job of apologizing this afternoon. I don't care for his politics or him but I don't think he is going to lose ground with his supporters one bit. But whether those supporters can get him the Republican nomination is another story.

Sounds like a Republican grading scale. Excellent apology! Not his fault, but he's really pissed at the people who were to blame!

Oh FFS, I didn't say I was accepting his apology. The point is the guy knows how to make political theater. He's very good at it.

I was/am a Christie supporter and I thought he did a good job apologizing. But, the people who ask how he could have let this go on for four days are right. I don't think it was because he was involved though. In my opinion, he's so used to ignoring unfair criticism that he wasn't able to hear legitimate criticism when it came. So when people were freaking out about the bridge, he probably brushed it off thinking that it was for a greater good (e.g., the traffic study) and that it would all work out. Now we know that it wasn't for a greater good and that the problems should not have been brushed off. He should have asked more questions. I don't know whether to be concerned that he might ignore legitimate criticism again or mollified because he has now learned a valuable lesson and hopefully gained a little humility (which, even as a supporter, I can see he needed).

Wow. You are incredibly naive.

After 20 years in state politics? Uh, no. Not naive. Not cynical either.

And apparently not reading this AM's news: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/bridge-scandal-christie-aide-email

It turns out that the Port Authority's warning that the decision was hasty, ill-advised, and likely illegal was sent to his chief of staff.

Do you think his chief of staff would brush off a letter stating that something they were doing could be illegal?

It's possible. (And no, I had not read the morning news when I posted.) Plenty of senior staff think they are untouchable.

It would also not surprise me if the CoS did not disclose the letter to Christie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Right-wing Republicans may hate him but he did an excellent job of apologizing this afternoon. I don't care for his politics or him but I don't think he is going to lose ground with his supporters one bit. But whether those supporters can get him the Republican nomination is another story.

Sounds like a Republican grading scale. Excellent apology! Not his fault, but he's really pissed at the people who were to blame!

Oh FFS, I didn't say I was accepting his apology. The point is the guy knows how to make political theater. He's very good at it.

I was/am a Christie supporter and I thought he did a good job apologizing. But, the people who ask how he could have let this go on for four days are right. I don't think it was because he was involved though. In my opinion, he's so used to ignoring unfair criticism that he wasn't able to hear legitimate criticism when it came. So when people were freaking out about the bridge, he probably brushed it off thinking that it was for a greater good (e.g., the traffic study) and that it would all work out. Now we know that it wasn't for a greater good and that the problems should not have been brushed off. He should have asked more questions. I don't know whether to be concerned that he might ignore legitimate criticism again or mollified because he has now learned a valuable lesson and hopefully gained a little humility (which, even as a supporter, I can see he needed).

Wow. You are incredibly naive.

After 20 years in state politics? Uh, no. Not naive. Not cynical either.

Oh, OK. If you are not naive or cynical, you must be stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Right-wing Republicans may hate him but he did an excellent job of apologizing this afternoon. I don't care for his politics or him but I don't think he is going to lose ground with his supporters one bit. But whether those supporters can get him the Republican nomination is another story.

Sounds like a Republican grading scale. Excellent apology! Not his fault, but he's really pissed at the people who were to blame!

Oh FFS, I didn't say I was accepting his apology. The point is the guy knows how to make political theater. He's very good at it.

I was/am a Christie supporter and I thought he did a good job apologizing. But, the people who ask how he could have let this go on for four days are right. I don't think it was because he was involved though. In my opinion, he's so used to ignoring unfair criticism that he wasn't able to hear legitimate criticism when it came. So when people were freaking out about the bridge, he probably brushed it off thinking that it was for a greater good (e.g., the traffic study) and that it would all work out. Now we know that it wasn't for a greater good and that the problems should not have been brushed off. He should have asked more questions. I don't know whether to be concerned that he might ignore legitimate criticism again or mollified because he has now learned a valuable lesson and hopefully gained a little humility (which, even as a supporter, I can see he needed).

Wow. You are incredibly naive.

A "traffic study"? Really? What was the hypothesis of the study? That closing three lanes of the busiest bridge on the planet for four days might cause traffic problems? Christie is either a liar or needs to be a bit more curious.
After 20 years in state politics? Uh, no. Not naive. Not cynical either.

And apparently not reading this AM's news: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/bridge-scandal-christie-aide-email

It turns out that the Port Authority's warning that the decision was hasty, ill-advised, and likely illegal was sent to his chief of staff.

Do you think his chief of staff would brush off a letter stating that something they were doing could be illegal?

It's possible. (And no, I had not read the morning news when I posted.) Plenty of senior staff think they are untouchable.

It would also not surprise me if the CoS did not disclose the letter to Christie.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Right-wing Republicans may hate him but he did an excellent job of apologizing this afternoon. I don't care for his politics or him but I don't think he is going to lose ground with his supporters one bit. But whether those supporters can get him the Republican nomination is another story.

Sounds like a Republican grading scale. Excellent apology! Not his fault, but he's really pissed at the people who were to blame!

Oh FFS, I didn't say I was accepting his apology. The point is the guy knows how to make political theater. He's very good at it.

I was/am a Christie supporter and I thought he did a good job apologizing. But, the people who ask how he could have let this go on for four days are right. I don't think it was because he was involved though. In my opinion, he's so used to ignoring unfair criticism that he wasn't able to hear legitimate criticism when it came. So when people were freaking out about the bridge, he probably brushed it off thinking that it was for a greater good (e.g., the traffic study) and that it would all work out. Now we know that it wasn't for a greater good and that the problems should not have been brushed off. He should have asked more questions. I don't know whether to be concerned that he might ignore legitimate criticism again or mollified because he has now learned a valuable lesson and hopefully gained a little humility (which, even as a supporter, I can see he needed).

Wow. You are incredibly naive.

A "traffic study"? Really? What was the hypothesis of the study? That closing three lanes of the busiest bridge on the planet for four days might cause traffic problems? Christie is either a liar or needs to be a bit more curious.
After 20 years in state politics? Uh, no. Not naive. Not cynical either.

And apparently not reading this AM's news: http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/bridge-scandal-christie-aide-email

It turns out that the Port Authority's warning that the decision was hasty, ill-advised, and likely illegal was sent to his chief of staff.

Do you think his chief of staff would brush off a letter stating that something they were doing could be illegal?

It's possible. (And no, I had not read the morning news when I posted.) Plenty of senior staff think they are untouchable.

It would also not surprise me if the CoS did not disclose the letter to Christie.

So what was the hypothesis of this "traffic study"? That closing three lanes of the busiest bridge in the country might cause traffic delays? Really? I think it is likely that Christie found out about it a couple of months ago and hoped it would blow over.

[Anonymous]

There is something more to this story.

Christie is way too smart in many ways to have authorized the bridge nonsense.

And those emails/texts?...no self-respecting New Jerseyan would actually put that shit in writing.

We all know that people on both sides want to see Christie gone....have the far right and left wing nuts finally started working together?

Also, traffic in that area of the world sucks every day, all the time. Lane closures happen daily-no one ever knows why, just a fact of life. When you go to a bridge or tunnel into the city you cross your fingers every damn time that all the lanes will be open and that there are no idiots stopped for no apparent reason. Usually, you are shit out of luck, and you wait with everyone else, every time. So, it may not have seemed out of the ordinary. Definitely not something for the Governor to get involved with. Just a "don't take the GW Bridge today, they have some lanes closed" kind of day.

[Anonymous]

There is something more to this story.

Agree. That bridge is always awful.

[Anonymous]

What is he hiding? I bet this ft lee stuff is connected to Benghazi.

[Anonymous]

Christie will have plenty of time to lift weights and convert to Islam in jail.

[Anonymous]

More stuff about Christie's vindictiveness has come out in the past few days.

There was a situation in which a respected Rutgers professor was asked to weigh in on 2 plans for redistricting, one put forward by Democrats, one by Republicans. After careful study, the prof came out in favor of the Democratic plan. Soon thereafter, Christie drew a line through the prof's grant $ when the Rutgers funding bill came to his desk (I don't know all the details).

Also, after getting into some kind of disagreement with a Democratic former governor (the one who filled out McGreevy's term after he resigned), that ex-governor's security officer abruptly was yanked. It has been a tradition that former NJ governors had a security officer of some kind assigned to them.

[Anonymous]

I smell a rat.
HRC is definitely not above some Jersey style politics.
Money talks, maybe she paid someone to stir up this mess.
3, 2, 1...go lefties!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I smell a rat.
HRC is definitely not above some Jersey style politics.
Money talks, maybe she paid someone to stir up this mess.
3, 2, 1...go lefties!

So the problem is not that it happened, or that he got caught. It's that you suspect, with no evidence, that HRC is behind it.

So now I guess it's YARGLE BARGLE BENGHAZI AYERS REZKO BRIDGEGATE.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I smell a rat.
HRC is definitely not above some Jersey style politics.
Money talks, maybe she paid someone to stir up this mess.
3, 2, 1...go lefties!

^^You are one smart cookie! Now, can you brew up a HRC-backed story for the use of the Hurricane Sandy funds issue that CC is now dodging?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I smell a rat.
HRC is definitely not above some Jersey style politics.
Money talks, maybe she paid someone to stir up this mess.
3, 2, 1...go lefties!

^^You are one smart cookie! Now, can you brew up a HRC-backed story for the use of the Hurricane Sandy funds issue that CC is now dodging?

The real story is that she conspired with a cabal of liberal climate scientists to bring Sandy onto shore. And if just one climate scientist dies of apparent suicide, this will be taken as fact for the next forty years.

[Anonymous]

Now it turns out Christie is being investigated for using Hurricane Sandy relief funds to pay an advertising company that used HIM and his family as part of a tourism campaign.

Problem is there was a bid for $2 million less that didn't propose using him and his family.

Drip. Drip. Drip.