Chris Christie a Moderate Liberal Populist

http://www.ontheissues.org/Chris_Christie.htm

the above link is to a site that goes over Christie's time in office, then uses a test to score his political make-up. This is correct, yet, Republican moderates are hailing Christie as a conservative, and not just a regular conservative, but a serious damn conservative by God who can win, baby win! Moderates are all over Christie right now because his popularity is around 75%. They say Christie is a straight-shooter who fights for lower taxes and worker rights against union control, and he cuts spending. Man, what more can you ask for?

Christie is currently spending millions on education that feeds a failed bureacratic system -- taxes are astronomically high in NJ mainly because NJ pays $16,841 per student, and Christie is adding more. Today, Christie announced that he embraces Obamacare for his state. Yes, Gov Christie is a staunch conservative -- the moderates really can pick 'em can't they?

When moderate Republicans believe media hype that surrounds one of their own, like the hype that surrounded "The Maverick" John McCain around 2006 and 2007, they're always set up when this champion is chosen to run against a Democrat. Media turn on the moderate, and the moderate has no defense, because the moderate was lured into the Centrist Liberal Populist world of phony adulation from the Left, then a big smack down takes place at the strategic moment.

Christie will be destroyed because he's particularly susceptible to praise. He eats it up and loves popularity. The media and Left will play him like a bass violin. Christie will bask in the glow of agreement with interviewers regarding GOP conservatives who've become too partisan, then the partisan wolves on the Left will attack when Christie is fully exposed, and the GOP base will turn away -- same old story.

Will Romney be forced away from the Center?

Can a candidate like Romney still fake to the Right then head toward the Center in the general election without alienating half his potential supporters? Much of it depends on what independents demand in 2012. Conventional wisdom says the independents are more moderate, but what is "moderate" in this political environment. Media analysts say Obama is moderate -- I kid you not. If Obama is moderate, and his poll numbers are low, then Romney will surely turn off voters if he takes the same positions.

I think in 2012 the voters who have to be convinced are voters looking to get government under control and cut the crazy spending. There appears to be a better understanding of the need for free market principles. My problem with Romney, Cain and Perry is not that they don't understand the need for a freer market but that they will mistakenly support our foreign policy of interventionism to save the world from terrorism. Yes, terrorism is a major concern, but we're bigger than the fear mongering and the nail-biting over rag-tag terrorist outfits who made one major hit and now have been scattered and weakened. Despite what Andrew McCarthy, John McCain and Lindsey Graham believe, I don't believe Iran will  attack the US nor will they attack Israel. Iran wants to make a point to Turkey and Saudi Arabia and other countries in the area that they are a major player. Iran has too much to lose to risk a war with the US -- their concern is the mideast, and there are other nations in the region who should take responsbility for dealing with mideast territorial concerns.

The US should produce energy full speed and move away from the mideast except when it's in our interests to trade there. If Romney would experience an awakening and realize that these times call for drastic measures and a rebirth of freedom, he could win hands down. If the Left accuses him of flip-flopping, Romney can admit that he's had a change of heart and mind because the serious issues of today demand serious solutions not pragmatic, technocratic tweaks. Sometimes leaders are made by the times in which they live -- who's going to meet the challenge? 

Obama the moderate

I've heard this being tossed around among the tv pundits and bloggers, but it's one the most ridiculous memes created so far. I'm not sure what's going on in the political class, but it gets wierder and wierder, just like when the debt ceiling deal was struck -- pundits said the Tea Party won by holding the country hostage. What really happened? Obama and the establishment leaders sabotaged all negotiations until the last minute and a deal was pushed through that does nothing much but raise the debt ceiling by 2.5 trillion dollars.

There are professional, statist politicians determined to maintain the status quo, and there are Tea Party, limited government conservatives, a few libertarians, and there are politicians who just drift with the pressure, and then there are progressives and modern liberals who support the progressives. Obama is a progressive. It's not a condemnation, just a label that describes his ideology. Why all this subterfuge to hide what he is? Maybe they've done some polling.

Where else ya goin' to go, sucka?

Political pundits on the Left are fond of defending Obama's wishy-washy relationship with his base by saying the base has no other place to go -- they aren't going to vote for Republicans? Hee Hee. If I were a radical Leftist, I'd be even more pissed with this response. There is an alternative -- someone can challenge Obama from the Left. This is what I'd advise, and it could be either one of two types of challenges.

Sensible liberals who realize the ending tragedy of progressivism could support a candidate who promotes fiscal conservatism and social/civil rights liberalism, or the Left could get a radical who, unlike Obama, is not afraid to state principles and stand for socialism/communism or whatever brand of statism is the leading ideology among the radical Left.

Wouldn't that be refreshing? Especially if the Republicans choose someone who stands for something on the Right. Let's have a real national debate without the faking to the center, or shifting with every poll result. We don't need less ideology, not if ideology is a set of ideas, but more debate over ideas.

Some of the pundits said today about Obama's press conference in which he was asked if he now approves of gay marriage, that he winked and nodded toward his base while refusing to take a stand one way or the other on gay marriage. Come on! Wouldn't it be cleansing if a real person were President, and this real person was honest? Wow, just think about it.

Is Chris Christie a moderate?

http://www.frumforum.com/can-christie-stop-the-tea-partys-next-upset

Christie is not doing himself any favors if his intention is to stop Tea Party upsets. If Christie is positioning himself as a pragmatic, compromising, capitulating, status quo, establishment Republican, then his political career will be short-lived. The past problems with Republicans is that they've failed to ignite the passion, energy and clear-headed pursuit needed to build a free-market movement which stops statism in its tracks -- instead, they have been complicit in the growth of statism, and at best they've feebly attempted to slow the progress of statism -- not what I call inspiring.

Receiving kudos from the FrumForum should be a wake-up call for Christie.