The GOP Presidential Race--Nutshell Version Part 2

Last night I commented on the other candidates, today I'll focus on Rubio, Fiorina, Christie and Paul.

Christie: I wanted the guy to be president at one time. He's bombastic, smart, from my home state and was not afraid of a fight. That was four years ago. he had every opportunity to do what Scott Walker did in Wisconsin. he could have gotten spending back in line, reformed education, reduced taxes (I currently pay nearly $12,000 annually) and made New Jersey a destination for business. He then went soft on all these things. But if I could point out a single event that turned me against him it was him hugging Obama when Hurricane Sandy slammed into North Jersey. He could have easily asked Obama to stay away and not given him the photo op a week before the election against Romney. Even pseudo Republican Michael Bloomberg denied Obama the opportunity to show his leadership in a crisis. Christie claimed he did it because he had to work with Obama to get the funds to get the state back up and running again but he gave the man something that hurt his party and he handled the Sandy recovery horribly. Plus he's fat and fat people never win major elections.

Rubio: I like Rubio; he's young, charismatic and is smart. He is not afraid to buck the conservative wing of the party, which I don't agree with but admire. His stance on immigration is hurting him...badly. He's walked it back this week in the aftermath of the Paris attacks but he's a an open borders dude and that ain't going to win the GOP nomination. The guy has a great story and would make a good president in 12 years.

Fiorina: I like Carly. She also has a good story and is not afraid to go against anyone. but she failed at HP regardless of what she says and that hurts her. It gives the media a soundbite they would never use with Hillary. Fiorina has done more in her life than Hillary ever will but the stigma of failure is a tough one to break. I think she would make a great president and leader and would not feel like I was holding my nose when I voted for her but there's just something missing I can't quite put my finger on. Of all the candidates, I think she's the one who can get hot and break out of the pack and maybe (and a big maybe) challenge Trump. She's a free thinker and not from the beltway. I imagine she will be high on the list of running mates.

Paul: Rand Paul is a brilliant and good man. A physician who donates a lot of time to help those who could never afford the service he provides. Unfortunately he was raised by Ron Paul and if you search this blog, me and the Paulistinians go way back and have had some epic battles. Rand is way to much like his old man--he is an isolationist in world where America cannot be. He has a mean libertarian streak, which i like in a lot of respects but he's a libertarian on issues I'm not. He could break out if he would show more support for the military, legalization of marijuana and the overall revamping of the the war on drugs--the worst remnant of the Reagan years.

Bloomberg Outmaneuvers Christie in 2016 Race

It's amazing how fast Chris Christie went from the golden boy of the GOP to just another politician in the mix for the 2016 nomination. Think about it, here was a guy in the bluest of the blue states taking on the teachers unions, slashing spending and cutting taxes. He was in-yor-face like a Jersey guy should be but spoke eloquently of conservative values and viewpoints. He was a fat, egotistical blowhard but he was our fat, egotistical blowhard.

Christie played the loyal soldier allowing Mitt Romney to ascend to the nomination and he threw his support behind him early and vehemently.

And then came Sandy.

In the wake of Superstorm Sandy, Christie heaped layers of praise on Obama at a crucial moment in time. before it was even clear that the administrations response was adequate or even good, Christie gave Obama a nice Lewinsky and that probably sealed the deal and knocked the last nail in Romney's coffin. Christie invited the guy to tour and gave him a photo op that Obama campaign chair Jim Messina couldn't have dreamed about the week before.

One could argue--and I'm sure Christie would argue this himself--that he was just being Christie and was doing what was best for the state by praising Obama. You know Christie, he calls them as he sees them. Except he wasn't.

I firmly believe that Christie saw his star rising and used whatever clout he had to back Mitt Romney seeing that Romney was not the best candidate and was in fact the exact wrong candidate. Christie burnished his GOP street cred by backing the eventual nominee and did his part knowing that Romney would lose and his star would rise setting him up for 2016. But then he realized that Romney could potentially win and that would destroy any presidential aspirations for the next 8-years and maybe longer if Paul Ryan held the second highest job in the land and was in the news frequently.

So Christie chopped the legs out from under Romney in one quick swipe. He left Romney no chance to respond and no chance to get the precious momentum back in his favor in such a short time.

Christie could have said nothing, he could have thanked Obama with a terse statement and that would have been that but he trumpeted Obama's response as the greatest thing ever. A failed response that was in fact worse than the response to Hurricane Katrina by some accounts. A month later the people who were suffering (and still are) expressed just how impotent the response was.

Jump forward to this week when the GOP-led Congress failed to pass a Sandy relief bill that had been larded with pork including roofing for the Smithsonian, fishery help in Alaska and numerous other non-relief spending. Christie lashed out at those in his own party again blaming them for not passing the legislation.

Now juxtapose the responses by Mayor Bloomberg in both circumstances. He told Obama to stay home and not come to NYC for a photo op in the wake of Sandy. Yes, Bloomberg endorsed Obama a few days later but that was with one eye on 2016 pure and simple.

Then this week, Bloomberg refused to blame the GOP for not passing the relief bill because he agreed that it had way too much pork in it and was a sham.

So Bloomberg will run in 2016 as either a Republican or an independent. He can claim that he did not push Obama across the finish line while Christie did. He can say that yes, he did endorse Obama but he did it because of conscience. Christie can't say any of that. He can say that he was the first major party figure to back Romney and was the good soldier but no one that votes in the primaries will forget that Christie stabbed Mitt right between the shoulder blades. They also won't forget that Christie gave his party the finger in bombastic fashion when they were fighting against a ridiculous $24-million in pork attached to a relief bill for New York and New Jersey. I know I sure as hell won't.

The Death of a State I Love

I was born and raised in South Jersey but always knew I wanted to live in California. I spent some time there in my late teens and then moved there for what i thought was forever when I joined the Navy in 1991. I was stationed at Naval Station San Diego and my wife and I grew to love the city and the surrounding region. We became Californians as a whole and San Diegans in particular.

We lived in that beautiful metropolitan area for nearly a decade, had two kids there and owned two homes. The pure joy of waking up and living in a region that had excellent weather, a diverse population and the best Mexican food on the planet was awesome.

Granted, San Diego was not as liberal as the rest of California. The county is home to Camp Pendleton, Naval Submarine Base Point Loma, the Naval Amphibious Base, NAS North Island (where I worked as a civilian), MCAS Miramar and other outlying military bases. It also had a large retired military population and military men and women tend to be more conservative.

Oddly, we left the Golden State in late 2000 and it was for several reasons. Firstly, the kids could see their grandparents and cousins on a regular basis if we moved back. Secondly, my wife could stay at home or work part-time, a luxury not available to us in California.

The state was at the tipping point where insane taxes, higher fees on everything and a chronic housing shortage led to wildly inflating prices. A condo we had sold in 1996 for less than $150,000 sold for $400,000 three years later. Wages couldn't keep up.

So we moved back to NJ where it was cheaper. Think about that, we moved to New Jersey--a state that has astronomical car insurance rates, high taxes and a hard core liberal bent because it was cheaper.

Since we left, the liberal Democrat Grey Davis was replaced with the liberal Republican Arnold Schwarzenegger who was then succeeded by the uber-liberal Jerry Brown. Teachers and other unions that cut sweetheart deals with "progressive" governors and local representatives were draining state funds at a dangerous rate and the average person was forced to pay more and more.

So what happened? Joel Kotkin explains:

Now, however, the Golden State's fastest-growing entity is government and its biggest product is red tape. The first thing that comes to many American minds when you mention California isn't Hollywood or tanned girls on a beach, but Greece. Many progressives in California take that as a compliment since Greeks are ostensibly happier. But as Mr. Kotkin notes, Californians are increasingly pursuing happiness elsewhere. 

Nearly four million more people have left the Golden State in the last two decades than have come from other states. This is a sharp reversal from the 1980s, when 100,000 more Americans were settling in California each year than were leaving. According to Mr. Kotkin, most of those leaving are between the ages of 5 and 14 or 34 to 45. In other words, young families.

The lifeblood of California is young people. People like myself and my wife who made a good wage, had two kids between the ages of three and five and buoyed the economy bolted for cheaper if not greener pastures (a not quite apt analogy for anyone who has seen the arid San Diego in the summer but you get the point). We envisioned staying there forever but left and others are now doing the same.

I feel sad that a great state that was once the home to free-thinkers and entrepreneurs has become a wretched socialist mess where every liberal idea is tested without thought as to the repercussions. Cap and trade? let's do it. Corporate taxes that will fill the coffers? Good idea. Unchecked illegal immigration? We can tax those who are here legally to pay the costs. And so on.

 What California needs is not Governor moonbeam version 2.0 but a man or woman with the guts to say the emperor has no clothes. To preach the reality of the fiscal situation and say to all that the old habits and old collective bargaining agreements are driving us into the abyss.

They need a person like Governor Walker or Governor Christie to get in there and battle the entrenched politicos and their failed ideology. Christie as an example in the Garden State has taken a hard line and made the state solvent after years of chaos topped off by Jon Corzine who treated the states money just as he did MF Globals clients' money. Unfortunately for the state, it isn't going to happen until they face the fiscal Armageddon that Greece has as mentioned by Mr. Kotkin above.

It's going to take the economic destruction of California to save it and that's not good for the state or the country. Meanwhile, the people who truly made the state what it was--a beacon of new technology and innovation--are bailing out for states where they live and raise a family while still being able to eat and take a vacation. Texas is the new California and California may become the new Detroit.

For Inquirer, Being Asian or Black and Gay is Not Good Enough

With the exception of the NY Times, the Philly Inquirer is probably the most liberal slanted newspaper in the country. You can see other instances of their biased editorial board and wild inaccuracies here.

Remember, this is the paper that ran a 21-day endorsement of John Kerry right before he was beaten by George W. Bush.

Today we have the Inqy running this ridiculously liberal piece:

It's good to see Gov. Christie consider diversity in making his nominations to the New Jersey Supreme Court. But that hardly makes up for the way he treated John E. Wallace, an esteemed jurist and the court's only black justice, who deserved another term.

Christie made a historic and bold move with two nominations this week - Bruce Harris, an openly gay African American, and Phillip Kwon, who would become a Korean American on the court if confirmed (and if he wasn't confirmed he be a what?--but I digress--ed).

So Christie picks a Korean-American and a gay, black man to be justices and the Inquirer still scolds him? Of course, but had, say, John Corzine selected them, they'd be the greatest thing in creation. Instead, they slam Christie because he refused to reaffirm a black judge whom he deemed ill-qualified.

Now check out this nice bit of pretzel logic:

Neither nominee has prior experience as a judge, but neither did most of the current justices on the state's highest court, which has become a tradition for New Jersey.

...Under pressure from Democrats to consider diversity in making his nominations, Christie is now demanding swift confirmation hearings.

But Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Nicholas Scutari says he won't move too hastily, which is good. Too little is known about Harris and Kwon. The governor has a right to choose nominees who adhere to his judicial philosophy, but rigorous hearings are needed to determine their character and temperament.

Okay, so it's historically been the way to select people based on abilities and not by whether or not they served on the bench but in this case, it's prudent to wait and torture them with "rigorous hearings"? Why is the Inquirer so damn racist? Why do they hate Asians and black gays so much?

I Googled "Inquirer and Elena Kagan" and did not see any objections from the editorial board about her judicial philosophy, character or temperament. She never served as a judge and now sits on the highest court in the land. She was essentially a Democratic shill having worked for Clinton and Dukakis but I guess in the eyes of the Inqy, it's who nominates you and your political slant that makes all the difference.

This is classic Inquirer bias; two men who represent three minority groups are selected by a Republican governor and the hacks on the board still can't applaud.

Unfortunately for Harris and Kwon, they will always be unacceptable to the Inqy op/ed page because, like Clarence Thomas, Conservatives just don't carry the proper minority street cred for the elitists ensconced on North Broad Street.

Christie Welcomes the 1% With Open Arms

With the floundering slate of candidates we have to hear from every day, is it any wonder people are pining for better choices? We see Romney and think that we could do better with Marco Rubio. We watch Gingrich and think that Mitch Daniels is more formidable. But they all pale next to Chris Christie.

Christie has shown what it means to be a conservative and has done so with wide-ranging actions but also explaining his actions in words that describe what he's doing, why he's doing it and where he plans on us being soon. We're starting to see the fruits of his labors.

Exhibit A:

Garden State Gov. Chris Christie has a message for the top 1% of income earners: Please occupy New Jersey. "I'm going to start going after a lot of these hedge-fund guys who are in Connecticut and New York and say, 'You're going to get a better deal with us,'" says the country's most important Republican not running for president.

Mr. Christie's new tax-reform plan also offers an improved deal to the bottom 99%, which is why he may be able to move it through New Jersey's Democratic legislature: a 10% cut in tax rates across the board.

The governor is two years into a four-year term. In 2010, he told the Journal's editorial board that the Garden State represented America's best example of a "failed experiment" in rising taxes and bigger government. As he returns to the Journal for another visit, it's time to check the results of his counter-experiment.

Politically, so far so good. A recent Quinnipiac poll gives him a 53% approval rating among the state's registered voters, and Mr. Christie says that private polls show him "in the low 60s."

Economically, unemployment in the state has fallen to 9% from a high of 9.8%. With almost 3.9 million people working, New Jersey has added almost 60,000 private-sector jobs since he took office, while shedding more than 21,000 government jobs. Reforms of the pension and health programs for government employees will save taxpayers an estimated $120 billion over the next 30 years. A new limit on local property-tax increases appears to be working.

Christie came in and faced serious heat for cutting back school funding that was absolutely mandatory to even attempt to bring the state's finances into order. It hit people hard with increased property taxes at the township level to make up the shortfall and became personal when school boards sulked and instituted costs for playing sports and joining school clubs.

But all along, Christie explained his thinking and said that once we got our financial house in order, we could examine where we need to spend and what we need to spend money on. He went against the unions (some of the most-entrenched in the nation) local newspapers (extremely liberal) and fought back against a tough state legislature that tried to stop him at every turn. He preached austerity and conservative fiscal policies in ways that were easily understood and argued the case that lower taxes spur job growth and increase revenues in a way no one has done since Reagan.

More importantly, he pared state government and returned the money to schools that had learned to reduce costs out of necessity. He now presides over a governing body that is in the position of being able to offer tax cuts and attract businesses back to the state. Christie gets the simple mantra that those with money and the will to take risks will lead us back to the America we once were before Obama alienated those who create jobs.

Instead, we have the architect of Romney Care and a man who took money from Freddie and Fannie as our standard bearers. How pathetic.

Things I Meant to Write About But Didn't

Blogging has definitely taken a back seat to work and family. My company recently bought a firm down south and we're trying to get them up speed with our culture and procedures. A northern company and southern company generally change at different speeds it seems.

Here's some things I meant to bring up but didn't.

The Gun Walker/Fast and Furious scandal:
Federal agents with what appears approval all the way up to Attorney General Eric Holder and members of the Obama administration allowed guns to be bought through straw purchases in the US and then were to be tracked into Mexico and the drug cartels. It was a backdoor operation designed to give Obama an edge in the eternal battle over gun control. That is until one of the guns was used to kill a US ICE agent and several other people. If this was under Bush, the widow would be all over 60 Minutes and the Today show but since it's Obama, the man's family gets slapped in the face and the MSM is mum.

I expect Holder to fall because of this if Rep. Issa and Sen. Grassley keep digging like they've been.

Human Events and PJ Media have both been covering this extensively.

The Continued Beclowning of Paul Krugman:

Former Enron advisor and current NY Times blowhard Paul Krugman--he of the Nobel Prize in Economics--continues to prove what a loon he is by constantly driveling on about the stimulus not being big enough and closing his eyes to the fact that Keynesian theories are a failure in practice. He really showed just how much of a laughingstock he has become when he wrote that an alien invasion would be a good stimulus.

Rick Perry

This looks to be the only hope we have short of Chris Christie or Marco Rubio joining the race. I'm not a big of his social conservatism and his mixing of religion into his platform but the guy is a strong candidate on fiscal issues. Any guy that signs strong tort reform legislation is a guy I can agree with. Add to that his proven record on jobs and his realistic views on energy policy and he could be the winner. Again, this is not a social issues election but a fiscal one. In 2010, we made it all about fiscal issues and the economy and kicked ass. No one cares whether or not Jim and John get married when they have spent a year and a half looking for a job to feed their families. Leave the social issues at home.

The Rise of the Free Market Fiscal Cons

I've long considered myself a devout fiscal conservative but a libertarian-conservative on social issues. In my purview, elections should be decided on tax rates, spending cuts and deficits not abortion, gay marriage or racial quotas. The social conservatives have held sway in the GOP for decades and wouldn't think of saying anything that would upset Christian groups going as far back as Falwell's Moral Majority.

That's changed and changed for the better as we are seeing a new type of conservative rise out of the ashes of the party. Chris Christie, Nikki Haley, Scott Walker and Tom Corbett are now the ones taken seriously by everyone because they generally eschew the social issues argument in deference to the argument that we as a nation are facing a reckoning that has been laid at our feet after a half-century of Democrat and Republican borrowing and spending. The economic situation is not taking a toll only on Southern Baptists or small business owners but on the black, gay and feminist population as well. It's hurting us all equally as bad fiscal policies affect all Americans--not just those who vote for a certain party.

Christie and Walker are out there as the new conservative standard bearers and saying the tough things people want to hear in a crisis situation. They've essentially called the bluff of the liberal hierarchy and note that not only does the king have no clothes but he's going to have to take a loan from China to buy even a towel to cover up.

This new type of right-winger is not the type liberals have been fighting against for years and it scares the hell out of them. The old version was one who would talk of slashing spending and then spend anyway for those they needed to appease for reelection purposes. The old type was the one who would invoke God, get sucked into racial politics and spend half their time arguing about abortion--all the while ignoring the union influence. Not the new type we are seeing emerge. These men and women are baffling the left because they aren't just not talking about the issues that unite the Democratic coalition but going right at the jugular of the liberal body politic: unions and the money they collect and disperse. Never have we seen this in our recent history. Here we have a new breed not only giving lip service to cutting education and state costs but actively attacking the unions that have artificially inflated those costs over the last two decades. That's the reason we are seeing these protests in Wisconsin and the rage being shown.

The New Breed is fighting the war with vigor but also with a new game plan. Just as defense and war-fighting plans changed after WW I, so are they changing now. In WW I, France won yet failed to update and develop new plans to deal with changing technology that was being invented. They figured the Maginot Line was still a viable option going forward. As history notes, the line was easily bypassed and before the Gallic armies knew what was happening, the Germans were sipping tea in Paris (I see this as a much closer analogy of Nazi tactics then the idiotic signs comparing Walker to Hitler). The New Breed got past the union's Maginot Line of social issues that always bogged them down in the past and went right after the capital while they were looking the other way.

"How is this happening" they ask themselves. Just over two years ago we were preparing for the world-changing administration of Barack Obama--a man who was going to finally implement all those liberal policies they've lusted for for 35-years and now we have these interlopers not only voting against it but actively looking to defund the victories we won earlier and expected could never be touched.

We are living in strange days, folks. We've not had a recession last this long since the Great Depression. We've also not had a recession where only Keynesian strategies were used to overcome it. In under three short years, we've gone seen socialist spending policies shown as farce and socialist labor policies come under heavy attack. All the defensive techniques used in the past have simply bounced off as these juggernauts lay waste to the status quo. They used the "he's racist" canard so often it has no effect anymore. The anti-abortion lobby is powerless since someone who's been out of work for two years really doesn't have the time to argue the merits/detriments of late-term abortion. Even the old class warfare standby has been an abject failure from the federal level on down.

They've run out of arrows in their collective quivers and the only recourse available to them is to illegally shut down schools (causing great hardship to parents whose taxes pay their salaries and now have to pay even more of their money to hire babysitters) and march on the state capital. Another bit of collateral damage is their actions will come back to haunt them when deficit reduction talks begin at the national level.

All because of the New Breed.

The Chris Christie Locomotive Continues to Roll

Christie for president?

Republican NJ Gov. Chris Christie , who has taken controversial steps since taking office, has a higher approval rating than Pres. Obama in New Jersey, according to a new poll released Thursday.

Just more than half - 51% - approve of Christie's performance as governor while 36% disapprove in the Quinnipiac poll. Obama has a 47% approval rating in the survey and the same percentage disapprove of the president's performance.

"New Jerseyans are getting used to their new Gov., Christopher Christie, as his job approval breaks the 50 percent mark," said Maurice Carroll , director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute. "But familiarity hasn't helped him much with Democrats. A lot of voters still think Christie is a bully, but the victories he chalked up in the legislature earn him good marks for leadership."

Christie performs even better among independents. 61% of independents approve of Christie's performance, 29% disapprove. For Obama, 41% of independents approve and 53% disapprove.

Christie has done a remarkable job of framing the issues he and the state are dealing with. You have unions that got sweetheart deals from McGreevey and Corzine and have forced dramatic increases in property taxes. Mine currently stand at greater than $10,000 yearly and will go to $1,000 a month next year. Christie struck a chord and people in this deep blue state are starting to see that he's the real deal. 61% of Independents like him and this state--especially down south where I live, which is only semi-filled with heathens unlike the north--is largely full of Indies. These numbers are incredible as the unions laid on a full-scale carpet bombing impugning him daily in every media and he came out giving them the finger and going after them even harder.

Some are taking him to task for not commenting on the Ground Zero mosque issue but why should he? He's governor of New Jersey, not New York. Granted, many from the Garden State died in the 9/11 attacks but he should just stay out. Were he a confirmed presidential candidate, he'd have to speak up but he's not...at least at this point. Hopefully that changes.

Spitting Venom

Things that are currently pissing me off:

-If you are driving in the fast lane and doing anywhere south of 80 mph, you are a pussy driver so get the hell out of my way. I commute 162 miles round rip and you're blocking my way home.

-Obama is about to go on the air nationwide and talk about how he was on the BP spill from day one and then use the occasion of the worst environmental disaster to call for strict environmental regulations for global warming. In the midst of a long recession made longer by him he's going to essentially levy a brutal tax on businesses and expand government farther into our lives thus extending the never-ending economic nightmare.

-Obama has destroyed our longest-standing alliance in less than two years. For the record Nobama, they've fought in Iraq and Afghanistan and suffered casualties and death right beside us and you've spit in their faces repeatedly. Can't wait until President Palin or President Christie can hit the reset button on that one and mend the fences. hell, most people would like to have President Bush back.

-I'm especially pissed that Obama wants to spend another $50-billion to bail out unions that public employee's belong to. For crying out loud, they didn't give any ground when times were good, why should we when times are bad? Governor Christie has them by the short hairs in New Jersey and they are cowering.

-I'm really friggin' pissed that Obama has decided that we need an agency to force "lifestyle behavior modification". How about modifying your lifestyle by playing less golf while the country suffers and modify your behavior when it comes to spending money that my kids kids will be forced to pay back. You may know how to spend my money but stay the hell out of my diet and every other part of my life government has no right to be in.

-And finally, I'm pissed that the Phillies can't hit worth a damn lately. They have the YankMee's tonight and hopefully with Halladay on the mound they can get some runs off Sabathia's fat ass.

How Liberals Outsmarted Themselves in New Jersey

There are some things that make me feel warm and fuzzy when they occur. This would be one of them.

The Council on Affordable Housing (COAH) was instituted by Jon Corzine in 2008 to forcibly integrate affluent communities. It was paid for by a tax levied on "non-residential" builders and required communities to approve new housing as a percentage that would be made available for to those who couldn't afford the high housing costs in the state. They made it sound really swell when it was passed and promised a zillion things it wouldn't do. The fact that it was regressive and would dissuade builders from constructing commercial tax rateables never occurred to them (as if it ever does but I digress).

Communities fought it and lost. The most notable was the town next to mine.

So, instead of accepting the states mandate to integrate, towns played by the letter of the law and instead of building low-income housing, they built 55 and over communities that offered cheap senior housing. It met the statute and attempts to make communities cooperate led nowhere. It was a win-win for communities as they filled housing with taxpayers but didn't overburden schools.

Let me explain how the school budgets work in New Jersey: some funds come from the state after they receive funding from the federal government. But the bulk comes from residents who vote every spring on the school budget. We had that election yesterday and it went down in flames in a majority of towns and counties. It was a bitter battle to say the least.

Anyway, here's where the liberals in this state outsmarted themselves and got bitten square on the ass by a law they imposed upon us.

Senior housing was built and they moved in in droves. But every year, the budget came up for a vote and these folks of fixed incomes and limited means were left with a simple choice; do I vote to raise my taxes for schools that I have no kids attending? More likely than not the answer was no. Anyone who pays attention to voting trends knows that the elderly vote and they do so religiously. In my town it was about 2,700 against and 2,200 for. I'm assuming that the majority of the 2.7K were the seniors who moved into the afordable housing Corzine envisioned as being occupied by low income folks.

Now we all know that liberals are wont to write bills and not foresee the consequences. The Obamacare bill is just the latest example. They had no clue that municipalities would find a way to ensure that they were not burdened with the zombie entitlements from years past such as providing meals and others that have been a continual drain on school budgets. They were simply outsmarted by part-time mayors and housewife councilpersons.

Add to the mix the simple fact that people don't have the means anymore to vote themselves higher taxes and you have the recipe for Chris Christie victory and a teachers' union defeat.

As with all liberal policies; the best intentions will always come back and kick one square in the package. We saw that yesterday when New Jersey said enough.

Exit question: Can a fat governor from a deep blue state beat Obama? Christie in 2012?

I Hope Gov. Christie Has Good Police Protection

The rhetoric is heating up to proportions not seen in this state since I've been paying attention and save for a decade in California, that's 25-years:

HADDONFIELD, N.J. — They're the kind of obscenity-laced schoolyard taunts that could get a student suspended.

But the target of this tirade is New Jersey's Gov. Chris Christie — and the perpetrators are the state's teachers, irate over his calls for salary freezes and funding cuts for schools.

In Facebook messages visible to the world — not to mention their students — the teachers have called Christie fat, compared him to a genocidal dictator and wished he was dead. The postings are often riddled with bad grammar and misspellings.

"Never trust a fat f...," read one profane post on the Facebook page, "New Jersey Teachers United Against Governor Chris Christie's Pay Freeze," which has some 69,000 fans, many of them teachers.

"How do you spell A-- hole? C-H-R-I-S C-H-R-I-S-T-I-E," read another.

The rhetoric has become ever more heated as residents of most of the state's school districts get ready to vote Tuesday on property tax levies that support district budgets. And while many of the postings are emotional, most aren't personal attacks.

Yeah, just like the made up attacks are described as not "personal" by the AP, right?
If the Tea Partiers were on record saying anything close to this, the media would be screaming worse than they are and Bill Clinton would maybe have a point. But they aren't and the largely Democratic teachers--the ones who teach my children mind you--are saying things like this.

This is incitement plain and simple; incitement to violence that will lead to someone trying to harm the governor. The man is doing all he can to save a state that has been raped fiscally and run into the ground by McGreevey and Corzine in ways that would make Pelosi and Obama stand gaping in awe.

New Jersey teachers have gotten everything they've wanted from state government that fears them. Now they face a man who will not back down and will not bend over for them as the others have (no pun intended with regard to McGreevey).

Here's a taste of the venom these people are spewing.

As an aside; I live in this state and pay $10,000 a year in property taxes. I need some relief from that and these people want more, more, more. Sorry, I don't have it and neither do most other people. The teachers unions are spreading lie after lie in the hopes that people will buy it. Some will but most--especially us who are taxed to death--will not.

God help us if the local budgets get shot down today.