Chris Christie: Fastest Veto Pen in the West

Hot Air ^

[BigMacGOP]

Do not mess with the Fat Man, you silly Democrats. In what may be the fastest veto in recorded history, it took New Jersey Governor Chris Christie a reported two minutes to veto a new tax grab by an incoherent Democrat State Senate that clearly hasn't realized their rubber-stamp puppet Jonny the Beard is no longer in office.

[BigMacGOP]

Yes...yes...yes

[kittymyrib]

This man is AWESOME!!!!!!!
Had Christie been president instead of George Bush, the country would not have elected BO, the Worst President Ever.

[cubreporter]

Christie/Brewer or Brewer/Christie 2012

The only two people right now who have the GUTS to stand up for our rights.

God bless both of them and they have our country in mind with every decision.

The rest are a bunch of freakin’ wimps.

[CIB-173RDABN]

This is what Arnold should have done in California.

The legislature may over ride his veto, but then it would be clear to everyone who was raising taxes.

As it is, he (may have) thought he could compromise with the Democrats. The Democrats in California know only one compromise. Agree to everything we propose or we will ignore you.

Nothing is going to change until the Democrat (and public employee unions) lose their grip on Sacramento.

[Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus]

[Haiku Guy]

New Jersey is in the East.

Chris Christie is MY Governor, and you guys out West can’t have him!

Well, not until 2012...

[oldvike]

Dito!

[mrmeyer]

Perhaps. Though had Christie been President, he would have signed a renewed and permanent "assault weapons" ban. Christie is doing a good job in certain areas, but there can be no compromise in matters pertaining to constitutional rights & liberties.

And you would be disappointed to discover his stance on illegal aliens & amnesty.




Just because Christie isn't as much of a statist as Corzine, that alone doesn't not make him presidential material. Though he is the best NJ can get, national speaking we can & must do better.

[EDINVA]

“Had Christie been president instead of George Bush, the country would not have elected BO,...”

Historically, that’s just not true. Exactly twice in US history has a member of the incumbent POTUS’s party been elected to office following a 2-term incumbency. Whoever carried the GOP banner in ‘08 was up against those historical odds.

Tho, admittedly, had President Bush done a few things differently, the Republican candidate might have prevailed. IMO, even more than his failure to veto budget-busters, he made two fatal personnel decisions: Scott McClellan and Mel Martinez. One allowed the MSM to freely ride roughshod over GWB and the other adopted a RNC position that turned off the base.

[Dr. Sivana]

Historically, that’s just not true. Exactly twice in US history has a member of the incumbent POTUS’s party been elected to office following a 2-term incumbency. Whoever carried the GOP banner in ‘08 was up against those historical odds.

It's happened more than twice:

Washington/Adams Jefferson/Madison Madison/Monroe Monroe/John Q. Adams Jackson/Van Buren Grant/Hayes Reagan/Bush the Elder

And Theodore Roosevelt effectively served two terms (followed by Taft).

[catnipman]

I tell you what, after seeing that Chris Christie video for the first time, I got myself a new hero. I really, really, really like this guy! And man, wouldn’t he make a fabulous President of the United States? A Republican Truman, he would be!

[Tijeras_Slim]

Gary Johnson in NM vetoed some 800 bills during his terms and that’s when times were good. Left the state with a surplus.

Richardson more than doubled the budget and where in a heck of a hole now.

[Williams]

That’s “In The East”

[dead]

Christie's position on guns needs to "evolve" if he wants to become a national conservative leader.

His core beliefs appear to be very conservative, and he needs to align his 2nd Amendment positions for consistency with those beliefs.

I suspect that will happen over the next two years.

[mrmeyer]

I don't have high hopes for that based on his history. I can do without lip service to pander for voter support. Here's part of a transcript in a pre-primary conversation with Sean Hannity:

HANNITY: Are there any issues where you are, quote, moderate to left as a Republican?
CHRISTIE: Listen, I favor some of the gun-control measures we have in New Jersey.
HANNITY: Bad idea.
CHRISTIE: Listen, we have a densely-populated state, and there’s a big hand gun problem in New Jersey. Now, I don’t support all the things that the governor supports by a long stretch. But I think on guns — certain gun control issues, looking at it from a law-enforcement perspective, seeing how many police officers were killed, we have an illegal gun problem in New Jersey.
HANNITY: Should every — should every citizen in the state be allowed to get a licensed weapon if they want one?
CHRISTIE: In New Jersey, that’s not going to happen, Sean.
HANNITY: Why?
CHRISTIE: Listen, the Democratic legislature we have, there’s no way those type of things — listen, at the end of the day, what I support are common sense laws that will allow people to protect themselves, but I also am very concerned about the safety of our police officers on the streets, very concerned. And I want to make sure that we don’t have an abundance of guns out there.

Christie's problem is philosophical in nature. In his own words above, he reflects a warped hoplophobic view that the firearm itself is the problem rather than the criminal. "Common sense" law is something I'd expect to hear from Chuck Schumer & friends, not a supposed conservative. His problem is that he views guns from a law enforcement persepective rather than a 2nd Amendment/Liberty/Founders intent perspective. No mention of 2nd Amendment in the dialogue nor RKBA.

Changing stance for vote pandering is one thing, changing philosophy and meaning what you say is entirely different.

"A political party cannot be all things to all people. It must represent certain fundamental beliefs which must not be compromised to political expediency, or simply to swell its numbers."
- Ronald Reagan

[dead]

Yes, that was my point.

His current position on guns is awful and he will need to change it if he wants to be a national conservative candidate.

[Opinionated Blowhard]

He’s been in office less than a year, and its way to early to judge or get our hopes up but . . . .

Everything Christie has done so far has been amazing. Every story I hear about him has him doing exactly what I would hope an economic conservative to do. He’s moderate on social issues but quite frankly, if he remains this good on economic issues, I’ll overlook that. I’d rather have someone chop spending than a Christian Socialist like Huckabee in office.

[Opinionated Blowhard]

I hear everyone on guns but if we have someone who can finally actually cut spending, I don’t care what his position on guns is. I’ll live with someone who believes in gun control because the GOP in Congress won’t let him go too far. The overriding issue of our time is spending. It has to be brought under control. Government has to be limited. If that means someone who is isn’t right on gun control, so be it.