Ethics Villain: New Jersey Governor Chris Christie

christie-endorses-trump

I am watching Donald Trump accepting Chris Christie’s endorsement for President.

How utterly unethical and despicable of Christie, who is about twice as smart as Trump and has to realize how unfit the man is to serve.

Yesterday, I read an article wondering why Christie never took down Trump during the debates, as he was the one candidate with the proprietorial tools and personality to do so. Instead, Christie ripped up Marco Rubio, then emerging as the most viable cahllenger to Trump. Now we know why. Christie had a deal. Trump bought him off.

Christie now establishes himself as one of the true villains of American political history, willing to place his nation in the hands of an unstable, unmanned, babbling autocrat without principles, wisdom or integrity for personal gain. It is nothing less than a betrayal of the country and its citizens.

To paraphrase Sir Thomas More in “A Man for All Seasons”:

“It profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world … but for Donald Trump, Chris?”

Just sickening.

 

69 thoughts on “Ethics Villain: New Jersey Governor Chris Christie

  1. ARRRRRRGH!!!!!!

    WTF is Chris Christie doing???

    My opinion of Christie just took a dive.

    That was my first reaction to this; then I thought about for a couple of minutes.

    No matter how unethical and despicable this is, I think this is a calculate political move on the part of Chris Christie; think about it, Christie was/is not going to get the nomination, Trump is; Christie is now setup to be the running mate on the ticket as opposed to Palin; Trump might actually win the election with Christie as a “balance”; Trump will likely to be impeached, he just won’t be able to function properly as the President of the United States; therefore, Christie is setup perfectly to be President.

    What do you think of that twist Jack?

    • 1. I assumed that the deal is running mate.
      2. Palin was never going to be picked. Never in history has a failed VP candidate run for that office a second time, and Palin brings nothing. He’s already got the idiot vote.
      3. Impeachment is a disaster, and even with a loose cannon, or loose stool, or loose cannon that fires loose stool like Trump, the odds of a conviction are looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooong. It’s a bad gamble.

      • Trump actually has a shot at winning the big prize — but he can’t have a NY/NJ ticket and do it. My guess is that Christie gets to be Attorney General.

        • Beth,
          Listen to the endorsement; if Christie hasn’t already been offered the slot as Vice President on the ticket I’ll eat one of my many hats. The link is below and I’ve identified the section where you should pay close attention.

          Your statement about “he can’t have a NY/NJ ticket and do it” is just nonsense.

          • Trump SHOULD put a non-NE person on the ticket. As Jack mentioned above, that’s conventional political wisdom. If he puts Christie on the ticket, he’s a fool.

            • You need more proof that he’s a fool? Did you hear yesterday’s promise that he’ll make it easier to sue journalists for libel? Would anyone but a fool say or believe that? Let’s see…that would require a Constitutional amendment and overturning NY Times v. Sullivan, just as a start. And how does a President do that, exactly?

              And this why he’s not going to get nominated. He’ll keep pushing the envelope until one day he says “I am the Lizard King!!!” and everyone says, “Wait–this guy’s bats!”

  2. Vintage Christie – as a 20-year resident of NJ, this is part and parcel of who he is. Cold, calculating, self-serving. Yes, a ploy for the #2 spot, and almost certainly pre-wired with El Coif-o.

  3. Slug. I used to think highly of Christie when he was the US Attorney and during his first term as governor. I no longer do. I will still pull the lever for him and Sir Roger de Trumpington (yes that was a real knight) over Hillary, I just can’t pull the lever for Hillary.

    • Sure. In no particular order, here’s 15…

      Aaron Burr
      Henry Clay
      Franklin Pierce
      Jefferson Davis
      Andrew Johnson
      Roscoe Conkling
      Woodrow Wilson
      Albert Fall
      Joseph P. Kennedy
      Huey Long
      Joe McCarthy
      Mayor William Daley
      Richard M. Nixon
      George Wallace
      Strom Thurmond

        • When I saw the question, I began a mental list before a coworker asked for help and cut me off…

          I only got 5 as I ran through the list.

          Glad to know 4 of the 5 made your list. That’s comforting to know I’ve got that assessment down.

          My 5th was Benedict Arnold… Though I know he kinda doesn’t count since his villainy occurred before any Post-constitutional politics. But his betrayal was politics also.

          • BA was more a military villain than a political one, though, so I think he belongs to a separate category. I would say there should be different lists for military villains and law enforcers, since the types of villainy they can commit tend to be more villainy of force, whereas political villainy tends more toward fraud, corruption, and misuse of trust.

            • It was all politics, sure the theater that it played out in was in the high command of the military during time of war, but politics nonetheless. That’s why I consider him a candidate.

        • A list of 15 is not a list of 16, so that’s ok. Interesting choice, most of them 40+ years ago, so we have a little objectivity. Most of them certainly fill the bill, and even are epitomes of this or that bad quality: Aaron Burr, the traitor, Woodrow Wilson, the tyrant, Joe McCarthy, the overzealous crusader, Huey Long, the POPULIST tyrant, Richard Nixon, the paranoid, Albert Fall, Joseph P. Kennedy, and William Daley, the corrupt, and so on. Roscoe Conkling I actually had to look up, I hadn’t heard of him.

          Not sure I would put Pierce or Johnson on the list, as their greatest crime seemed to be incompetence, and Pierce also suffered a major personal tragedy right before taking office. It’s interesting that you cast Henry Clay as a villain, when he’s mostly taught about as “the Great Compromiser” who kept the union together longer and prevented the Civil War from breaking out earlier. That said, perhaps you view his compromises that kept slavery going that much longer as making a deal with the Devil.

          I would add a few of my own. If Henry Clay is a political villain, then John C. Calhoun, the greatest advocate of slavery of his time, definitely is also. Frank Hearst, the supremely corrupt mayor of Jersey City and de facto Democratic boss of New Jersey, who necessitated a wholesale writing of a state Constitution to ensure no one like him would ever rise again, also makes the list. Lawrence Keitt, the sadistic proslavery thug who made a habit of beating on fellow Congressmen, probably also qualifies. “Pitchfork Ben” Tillman, the shockingly racist governor of South Carolina, also makes it. Half of me wants to put Jimmy Carter on the list as well, but that might be a stretch colored by my intense dislike of a former best friends Hosannas to Carter and snide hatred of Ronald Reagan.

          • Henry Clay yes for helping avoid the *inevitable* conflict… Had it been fought in the 1820s… Way less bloody and just as decisive.

            But as for adding slavery-perpetuating politicians to the villains list, if we’ll be that loose in the definitions, then the entire founding group of the democrat party, who formed their party with the sole basis of pushing off any federal action relating to slavery for as long as possible.

      • I would add Boss Tweed to the list who was part of a corruption ring that stole $ 1 billion dollars from NYC, Edwin Edwards, Gov. of Louisiana, convicted on 17 counts of racketeering, and conspiracy, along with Representative Carroll Hubbard of Kentucky (aka Elmer Fudd).

  4. I must disagree with you about Trump’s intelligence. I get the impression that the man is truly intelligent. He never goes down when his businesses fail, he’s an excellent showman, he knows how to pick the really popular policies, and just look at how well he’s done so far in the 2016 race. This man’s success is no unfortunate accident; it’s the work of a powerful, amoral mind. Here’s some good analysis on the subject: http://fabiusmaximus.com/2016/02/25/update-four-keys-to-trump-victory-94374/

    • His critical reasoning abilities are horrible. Horrible. His thought processes are disorganized. He confuses cause and effect. The fact that his many gaffes haven’t sunk him doesn’t mean they weren’t still dumb. Nothing you cited is indicia of intelligence. Street smarts, contacts, large margins of error, corruption, luck. It’s a lot easier to prevail if you break the rules.

      • “Street smarts”

        My sister, a teacher, after some of her students failed a test and made the street smart excuse, introduced me to a quote that sums up a long attitude that I think is accurate:

        “Whenever I hear you say ‘I’m not book smart, I’m street smart’ what I really hear you say is ‘I’m not actually intelligent, I’m imaginary intelligent’.”

        (aka, I’m too lazy to put in the effort to learn, so I’ll just bluster my way through)

  5. Christie’s been revealed as ‘real’ a candidate as several others who dropped out without challenging the front runner. I’m very disappointed as I planed to vote for him as President. I do not want to vote for Trump under any conditions.

  6. Well this is entertaining but to call it an ethics post is a real stretch. Christie is not going to be, and does not want to be, the VP candidate. It’s a matter of logistics. Christie has honorably done what the rest of them should be doing and that is to throw in the towel and back the obvious nominee. I suggest you plug your nose and suck it up. Your post and the subsequent comments, with the exception of one, reminds me of a mother hen surrounded by her chicks, all scrambling for attention, each chirping away and making the exact same sounds which, when combined, amount to nothing.

    • “All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.”

      While the weak, ignorant and venal applaud.

      A cynical and, sorry, stupid comment. Trump is not the “obvious nominee.” The Republicans, in fact, can refuse to nominate him, and should. Americans with brains and ethics and a sense of the nation’s well-being and legacy should refuse to vote for him. Since when is it ethical and the right thing to do to back an ethically. morally, intellectually reprehensible candidate? To the contrary, the ethical thing is to be the last one proclaiming the truth, even as everyone else forfeits their respectability and common sense.

      Your chick comment would be merely obnoxious and offensive if your position was grounded in anything but expediency, cowardice and cynicism, but as it is, it just speaks to deep character rot. What the hell’s the matter with you?

      Yes. It is unethical to support someone like Donald Trump to gain immense power. In fact, it is pretty close to evil.

      Get help.

        • This has nothing to do with “adversity,” and one more snotty comment like that and you’re out.

          If you want to try to make the case for Trump, I’m dying to hear it, in fact, I’d love to hear it, since no one has made a substantive case so far, not even Trump, but “everybody is giving in” isn’t an ethical argument, or anything but a rationalization..That’s two non-substantive comments adding nothing of value other than letting us know that you think the right thing to do is support an unqualified faker for President. Want to try for strike three? Go ahead, swing for the fences. I dare you.

      • I read Garlic’s “obvious nominee” as a statement of prediction, not of preference. He can clarify if he wants, but that’s what made sense to me, and he’s absolutely right.

        There is no way this ends except Trump wins outright or they go to a vicious convention with him holding a majority. Nobody else is winning ahead of the convention. He’s more obvious than Hillary at this point, and she’s now up to 70% in the odds (though I know you don’t like reading the betting pages).

        • You misread it then, Charles. I’ve been hearing from the Trumpettes all week, and I know one when I see one. “Your post and the subsequent comments, with the exception of one, reminds me of a mother hen surrounded by her chicks, all scrambling for attention, each chirping away and making the exact same sounds which, when combined, amount to nothing.” That’s a statement that everyone should relax because rape’s inevitable. Christie said that Trump was unfit to be President, more than once. I called him on his dishonesty and betrayal, correctly, as did others, and that’s “a mother hen surrounded by her chicks, all scrambling for attention, each chirping away and making the exact same sounds which, when combined, amount to nothing.”??? The only way someone can excuse Christie is if they want Trump to win.

          “This is wrong, this is cowardly, and this is irresponsible” is NOT “nothing,” in fact, saying that when it’s true is the premise of Ethics Alarms. I’m not accepting some snot saying, “this is inevitable, and you’re a fool for objecting.” To hell with that, and him.

          You have utter contempt for an entire political party and an entire set of beliefs to the right of you, so it makes perfect sense to you that all of them are idiots, and will accept an obviously unfit, dangerous candidate. I don’t, and I also know a great deal about the process. Trump can be stopped many ways, and he will be, if everyone doesn’t act like Christie or think like Garlic.

        • You misread it then, Charles. I’ve been hearing from the Trumpettes all week, and I know one when I see one. “Your post and the subsequent comments, with the exception of one, reminds me of a mother hen surrounded by her chicks, all scrambling for attention, each chirping away and making the exact same sounds which, when combined, amount to nothing.” That’s a statement that everyone should relax because rape’s inevitable. Christie said that Trump was unfit to be President, more than once. I called him on his dishonesty and betrayal, correctly, as did others, and that’s “a mother hen surrounded by her chicks, all scrambling for attention, each chirping away and making the exact same sounds which, when combined, amount to nothing.”??? The only way someone can excuse Christie is if they want Trump to win.

          “This is wrong, this is cowardly, and this is irresponsible” is NOT “nothing,” in fact, saying that when it’s true is the premise of Ethics Alarms. I’m not accepting some snot saying, “this is inevitable, and you’re a fool for objecting.” To hell with that, and him.

          You have utter contempt for an entire political party and an entire set of beliefs to the right of you, so it makes perfect sense to you that all of them are idiots, and will accept an obviously unfit, dangerous candidate. I don’t, and I also know a great deal about the process. Trump can be stopped many ways, and he will be, if everyone doesn’t act like Christie or think like Garlic.

          • Are you talking to ME?

            Did you really just tell me, “You have utter contempt for an entire political party and an entire set of beliefs to the right of you?”

            First of all, that is absolutely false, and demonstrably so, even by my comments in these pages. Utterly, demonstrably false. Almost any regular reader on these pages knows I’ve tried pretty hard to restrain my tongue, despite having beliefs far to the left of average, and generally to reach out past the 50/50 line. I count a lot of conservatives as my friends, and I force myself to read these pages because I deeply believe we need to listen to each other. I have tried, not always successfully, to be fairly civil; but at least I’ve always tried.

            I recently recommended a book to you, “Righteous Minds: Why Good People Argue about Religion and Politics,” which is precisely about helping people on either side understand each other. You didn’t acknowledge the suggestion, and I feel pretty sure you didn’t read it. It is not a recommendation by someone who has “utter contempt for an entire political party and an entire set of beliefs…”

            If I understood your comment correctly, why that isn’t a statement worthy only of an arrogant prick? How the hell DARE you make such a statement?

            Now – if you tell me you haven’t had any sleep for 24 hours, or that somehow you were referring to someone else, then that’s forgivable, but you’d better learn to write more clearly, including clarifying to whom your subjects refer.

            Otherwise, if you really meant that, then forget it – your penchant for hyperbole has just lost you another good reader.

            • Actually, I haven’t had any sleep in 24 hours, and that comment by Garlic really, really pissed me off—and I can’t understand why you would try to minimize someone who called a serious post chicken squawking. Maybe you can explain it to me.

              But that’s no excuse, and I apologize, Charles. My comment was very unfair. I am hearing such insulting and obnoxious statements elsewhere from people I thought I knew that I don’t know who to trust right now. I just unfriended a bunch of so-called progressives for making fat jokes about Chris Christie. Nice. Hypocrites.

              Again, I’m sorry. You didn’t deserve that. Please accept my apology. You know I respect you–I’m just in an awful state of mind, and took it out on you.

              Garlic, however, can go to hell.

              • Jack, that’s very high class of you. Thank you. Apology accepted, of course. And thank you for being so prompt in replying. Much appreciated.

                Now we can go back to our normal mode of disagreeing. 🙂

                Thanks,
                Charlie

                  • We all screw up, quite frequently. Ok, I do. Just most of us refuse to admit it.

                    It takes a good man to cop to it–publicly, fast, and with no hedging. You just provided a great object example of how to handle it right. And I’m honestly not even surprised. Thanks.

                  • Jack, there have been times I’ve really, fundamentally disagreed with you, and seen your posts as obdurate (to be polite), recalcitrant (to be less polite) or even…. well, better not to say..

                    But….

                    The reason you’re “lucky” in having kind and compassionate readers isn’t luck. It’s because of who and what you are. Flawed – as are we all. Sometimes screwing up – a do I and everyone else. But with integrity and introspective in an honest way. Plus the kindness and compassion.

                    You’ve taught me how to apologise, something I owe you for.

                    Cherlesgreen is providing me lessons on how to accept an apology too. I owe him too.

          • I feel badly about that last paragraph, and I’ll retract it right here. That’s not a fair or just characterization of Charles Green at all, and my lingering annoyance at Garlic’s slur somehow was focused on him. I’ve argued with too many assholes today, but Charles wasn’t one of them.

            I’ve offered him my apologies, and I hope he forgives me. I consider him a valued friend, and a respected colleague, and I didn’t treat him as either.

  7. For the record, the quote from “A Man for All Seasons” is original taken from The Gospel of Mark 8:36 and records the words of Jesus: “For what shall it profit a man, if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his own soul?” (KJV)

  8. “Your post and the subsequent comments, with the exception of one, reminds me of a mother hen surrounded by her chicks, all scrambling for attention, each chirping away and making the exact same sounds which, when combined, amount to nothing.”

    That’s an interesting statement. There is a definite amount of like-mindedness here. To someone who finds what I’ll ineptly describe as the intellectual or analytical atmosphere here offensive, I’m sure it does strike them as an echo chamber.

    But frankly, I find it very refreshing. As I’ve said before, this web log is the closest thing I’ve found to a good discussion section in a good college course moderated by a good professor since leaving college. Which is something I’ve sorely missed, certainly while fruitlessly looking for it in the broader media.

    There are the Charles Krauthammers and the Glen Harlan Reynoldses and Thomas Sowells and Victor Hanson Davises but here we have the Texses and Steve and the OJays and Chris Bentleys and wyogrannys and even the Charles Greens and Beths among all the countless other thoughtful commenters who punch way over my weight, all in one place reacting to Jack’s posts, the likes of which are hard to find anywhere else.

    I’m sure lefties consider this place reactionary and on the wrong side of history. I’d call it grown up. Cluck, cluck, cluck. Scratch, scratch. Perhaps garlicfriesandbaseball prefers other places which I find best analogously described as barnyards filled with chickens running around with their heads cut off.

Leave a Reply to Other Bill Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.