Is Chris Christie A Blowhard? Is Allahpundit A Punk?
I was drawn into a discussion about Chris Christie and Mark Levin last night on Twitter. I take it that it all started with Allahpundit being a punk, as usual. And, yes, Allah's childish eye-poking of a great many things conservative is punkish, everyone knows it, so, don't whine about my saying so. If that's the way he wants to roll, he can – and he can live with the criticism. I wouldn't, however, call him a ruffian. Maybe he did time somewhere along the way. Who knows.
b : a usually petty gangster, hoodlum, or ruffian c slang : a young man used as a homosexual partner especially in a prison
Being his usual passive-aggressive, piss-ant and annoying self, Allah highlighted this 30 second clip in which Mark Levin basically refers to Chris Christie as a blowhard. But he didn't put any focus on this 3 minute clip, which provides the context. (Is the Rightscoop locking up his video? Hmm.)
Levin was contrasting the more genuinely conservative, Jim DeMint – who, despite any edge, also comports himself like a gentleman in public, versus the more establishment-oriented, if confrontational, it's my party and I'll cry if I want to, Chris Christie.
I like Christie. I think he's doing good things for New Jersey. I believe Mark, who promoted him when he was running, does too – in that sense. He's doing fiscally conservative things Northeast establishment Republicans have failed to do in the past. However, there's nothing wrong with anyone taking exception to the fact that he's soft on immigration, the environment, taxes, given some earlier history, and other issues, as well. He didn't join 20 some odd other states in challenging ObamaCare in court, for instance.
Now, as for his You Tube stardom. I get it. I've had fun watching his clips, too. But in the end, this is still a powerful guy, a governor, with a podium, using it to slap around indivduals either to make a larger political point, or because he really is a blowhard. I'm guessing it's a bit of both.
As for whether Levin is a blowhard. Well, why does any non-fan really care? You aren't earning a living as a reporter, compelling you to go to a news conference for a beatdown? He doesn't have power over your pension fund, or union contract. So, turn him the hell off if you don't like it. Unlike the people Christie publicly confronts, you have no skin in the game and are free to move on.
Finally, as for Christie's now famous face-offs – enjoy them. But don't forget that if you are a hardliner on immigration, don't buy into wind mills, or maybe Global Warming, or you think NJ is already overly intrusive on the 2nd Amendment, if you go to a Christie presser, you might be getting more face time with him than you want, as opposed to watching him bang on one of your favorite targets on You Tube.
I'm not opposed to strong rhetoric. And I want Christie kicking union heads around and playing hardball with the media. Whether he has to embarrass a reporter, school teacher, California citizen and quasi-politician, or whomever else, to do that, will emerge as a valid question if it continues and he wants to run for higher office. And what Levin was actually pointing out is, while backing Castle, Whitman and some others, he hasn't yet beat feet to back Joe Miller, Rand Paul, or Sharron Angle. So, I fail to see the issue with Mark pointing out that tongue lashing some liberal in public isn't an accurate test of one's conservative bona fides.
Chris Christie's confrontations at public forums are becoming legendary. He's now traveling to the left coast to boost Meg Whitman's campaign, and to intervene when the damsel is in distress.