Outside of foreign policy, Chris Christie’s speech yesterday
was very interesting. He put himself squarely in the Ronald Reagan
tradition by referencing the PATCO strike and the firing of the air
traffic controllers, an event that happened 30 years ago last
month. He also made a pretty strong case against President Obama’s
leadership that could resonate with swing voters:
And still we continue to wait and hope that our president will
finally stop being a bystander in the Oval Office. We hope that he
will shake off the paralysis that has made it impossible for him to
take on the really big things that are obvious to all Americans and
to a watching and anxious world community.
Yes, we hope. Because each and every time the president lets a
moment to act pass him by, his failure is our failure too. The
failure to stand up for the bipartisan debt solutions of the
Simpson Bowles Commission, a report the president asked for
himself…the failure to act on the country’s crushing
unemployment…the failure to act on ever expanding and rapidly
eroding entitlement programs…the failure to discern pork barrel
spending from real infrastructure investment.
Christie also criticized “a Congress at war with itself because
they are unwilling to leave campaign-style politics at the
Capitol’s door.” He cited the debt ceiling debate as an example. He
took the position that these leadership failures were leading to a
fiscal crisis and also a crisis of American leadership
globally.
Paul Weyrich was right that conservatives are monarchists at
heart. The minute a Republican demonstrates any rhetorical talent,
much less governing aptitude, the right wants to crown him. Lowly
tasks like serving as governor of New Jersey or chairman of the
House Budget Committee must immediately give way, because only a
president can fix what ails us. (In many respects, this is actually
a profoundly un-conservative view.)
There are also good reasons to believe Christie when he says
he’s not ready and to expect more out of him as an elected official
before deciding to give him a promotion. Not everything about his
record is conservative, he wasn’t even considered the conservative
candidate in New Jersey’s Republican gubernatorial primary, and
experience matters. Conservative commentators who live in the
Northeast corridor underestimate the questions many grassroots
conservatives have about the extent of Christie’s conservatism. I
see such questions raised repeatedly in our comments threads.
Having said all that, the speech does remind me why so many
people hope he’ll run and doesn’t do anything to discourage
speculation that he ultimately will.
martin j smith| 9.28.11 @ 10:44AM
So why did Christie not lend support to the legal brief against Obamacare ? This is one question I would need an answer to that is a valid one--not an excuse. There are other issues too.
Thirsty McWormwood| 9.28.11 @ 11:01AM
"Lowly tasks like serving as governor of New Jersey or chairman of the House Budget Committee must immediately give way, because only a president can fix what ails us."
That's not just true of Republicans. Just a few years ago, Democrats were exceptionally eager to appoint as their leader a freshman senator from Illinois who had barely started his term and had no other experience.
It's not working out so well for them now ...
Trinacria| 9.28.11 @ 5:45PM
Tu quoque arguments do not disprove the claim...
elmo| 9.28.11 @ 1:40PM
I think Christie would be another Scott Brown on a national level. Also, I think Christie would win very few, if any, states in the South.
Mrs. Vito| 9.28.11 @ 1:40PM
Christie is a "Rinocrat". Enough said.
elmo| 9.28.11 @ 1:43PM
I think Christie would be another Scott Brown on a national level. Also, I think Christie would win very few, if any, states in the South.
elmo| 9.28.11 @ 1:43PM
I think Christie would be another Scott Brown on a national level. Also, I think Christie would win very few, if any, states in the South.
jim h| 9.28.11 @ 4:57PM
Christie would win a virtual entire "solid south" against Obama in a general election
Bob K.| 9.28.11 @ 2:02PM
You and Paul Weyrich are nuts!
There was no Conservative movement in the USA until after WWII and the people who started it; Russell Kirk, Richard Weaver, WFB,Jr, Robert Taft, Kendall, Burnham, Bozell, Friedman, Hayek and Goldwater and Reagan were anything but "monarchists" at heart.
I don't know what your agenda is here but it hasn't anything to do with getting a Conservative to run for President!
And stop conflating the "Right" with Conservatism. Otherwise you will be recognized as a "liberal" stooge.
Simon Templar| 9.28.11 @ 4:52PM
Bob, though I agree that conservatives are anything but monarchist at heart, you need to do a little more reading, drop the labels, speak more about principles, and stop this superior attitude and self appointed judge of what conservativism is and is not or who is and who is not. It is a bit more complicated.
We all know you think yourself as a libertarian conservative. Which one?
Libertarian conservatism describes certain political ideologies within the United States and Canada which combine libertarian economic issues with aspects of conservatism. Its five main branches are Constitutionalism, paleolibertarianism, neolibertarianism, small government conservatism and Christian libertarianism.
It seems that there are as many different types of conservative conservatives as there are libertarians.
I think Antles point is simply we do not really know much about this guy and what little we do is a bit surprising...perhaps before we marry this guy politicaly and go off and have kids, so to speak, it might be a good idea to meet his family of beliefs.
Bob K.| 9.28.11 @ 6:28PM
I am not getting into the fine haired distinctions you list as they are useful only to pedants and we are trying to elect a President who is not a Liberal and/or a Socialist. There are more important things to argue about. Like Antle's misinterpretation of what Conservatives believe the Presidency should be. He is wrong and he should be told so.
I think of myself as a Conservative. As I have since I read Russell Kirk's "The Conservative Mind" in the late 1960's along with Richard Weaver's, "Ideas Have Consequences" and before that Barry Goldwater's "The Conscience of a Conservative." I have subscribed to National Review since at least then and was a subscriber to AS when it was in Indiana and was a tabloid.
Antle is a sloppy writer and thinker and that often happens when one writes blogs like he does. He does the Conservative movement in the United States no favor by equating it with the "Right" which is an amorphous phrase and largely useless anymore. It is frustrating to see him using the same phraseology that liberal democrats use.
Simon Templar| 9.29.11 @ 1:51AM
Point taken.
Margie| 9.28.11 @ 3:12PM
Will he or won't he? Only his hairdresser knows for sure.
yisong| 10.26.11 @ 9:54PM
Slewing ring bearings support extreme axial, radial, and tilting moment loading in a single bearing unit. http://www.1stbearing.com