Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY) Wins CPAC Presidential Straw Poll in a Landslide … 2nd Sen. Ted Cuz (TX), 3rd Ben Carson
Look for Democrats and their liberal MSM minions to go after the rising new anti-establishment star of the Conservative movement, Rand Paul.
Rand Paul wins the presidential straw poll at CPAC going away. Paul received 31% of the vote, while his fellow anti-establishment Republican Texas Senator Ted Cruz finished in second place with 11%. Neurosurgeon Ben Carson, who came to prominence when he let America and Barack Obama know what he felt about Obamacare at the 2013 National Prayers Breakfast, finished third with 9%. Paul is a very dangerous and formidable opponent for Democrats as he energizes the GOP base and brings in the young and libertarian vote.
Rand Paul handily won the presidential straw poll at the Conservative Political Action Conference Saturday, one gauge of the Republican base’s mood less than two years before the 2016 primary season kicks off.
The Kentucky senator received 31 percent, far ahead of second place Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), who received 11 percent. Neurosurgeon Ben Carson finished third with 9 percent, ahead of New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, who received 8 percent.
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker and former Pennsylvania Sen. Rick Santorum tied for fifth place, with 7 percent.
Um, Chris Christie who? The Republican that the media just drools over, including Fox News, finished distant 4th.
- Sen. Rand Paul – KY (31%) – Although I do not agree with all of his policies, Paul is a Conservative and breath of fresh air from the power-elite GOP establishment.
- Sen. Ted Cruz – TX (11%) – A Conservative rock star, who if he can run, would make a great President and follow the US Constitution.
- Neurosurgeon Ben Carson (9%) – From out of nowhere Carson has taken the Conservatives by storm. I would vote for Ben in a heartbeat.
- Gov. Chris Cristie – NJ (8%) – RINO has no chance of winning GOP primary if Republicans ever want to be anything more than Democrat-light.
- Gov. Scott Walker – WI (7%) – A solid GOP governor who will one day be a president.
- Former Sen Rick Santorum – PA (7%)
- Sen. Marco Rubio – FL (6%) – His stance on immigration amnesty has made Rubio toast with the base.
- Rep. Paul Ryan – WI (3%) – The base not enamored with establishment Republican and 2012 VP nominee.
- Gov. Rick Perry – TX (3%) – His performance in the 2012 GOP primaries may be too much to overcome.
Four others pulled 2%: Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin.
While other addresses at this year’s CPAC focused on specific policies and red-meat issues like gay marriage and ObamaCare, Paul spoke in broad metaphorical terms of the need to “stand together for liberty.”
“It isn’t good enough to pick the lesser of two evils,” he said. “We must elect men of principle and conviction and action who will lead us back to greatness. There is a great and tumultuous battle underway, not for the future of the Republican Party, but for the future of the country.”
Paul framed the libertarian-ideas that have gained prominence within the party in recent years in historical terms, positioning his values as descending from the nation’s Founding Fathers. Paul name-dropped foundational American thinkers ranging from Daniel Webster to John Adams, James Madison to Montesquieu, but also quoted Pink Floyd’s Roger Waters.
One of his biggest applause lines seemed specifically geared toward the digital generation that has special resonance in the wake of the ongoing debate over privacy and NSA surveillance.
“I believe what you do on your cellphone is none of their damn business,” he said, to extended cheers from the crowd.
Rand Paul released the following statement touting his win:
“The fight for liberty continues, and we must continue to stand up and say: We’re free and no one, no matter how well-intentioned, will take our freedoms from us,” he said. “Together we will stand up for the Constitution. Together we will fight for what is right. Thank you, and onwards to victory.
2016 Presidential Thoughts, RUN BERNIE , RUN … Vermont Socialist Senator Bernie Sanders Says He’d Make a Better President Than Hillary Clinton
RUN BERNIE … RUN!!! WILL HILLARY HAVE A CHALLENGE FROM THE LEFT?
In an interview with Time, the senator from the Socialist Republic of Vermont, Bernie Sander (VT-
IS), had much to say on a wide range of issues like the legalization of marijuana, social security, and Barack Obama’s job as president; however, the biggest news was when Sanders said that he would make a better president than Hillary Clinton. When asked who would make a better president, Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders, he said … Bernie Sanders. Will the Independent socialist, who caucuses with Democrats in the Senate be the thorn in Hillary’s 2016 presidential election side? The Independent Socialist Senator said he “liked Hilliary” and she is a “very, very intelligent person”. However, Sanders said there needs to be a leader “to wage a political revolution in this country which brings millions of people into the political process to stand up and fighting for their rights in a way that we have not seen right now,” and Hillary Clinton was not the leader of that movement.
Q. Who do you think would make a better President, Hillary Clinton or Bernie Sanders?
Bernie Sanders. So you’re asking your question more direct. [Laughter] And I think in this particular moment when the problems facing this country are so severe, when we have seen class warfare being waged by the billionaires against the working families of America, when we have seen the billionaire class use its money in an unprecedented way for its political purposes to let more right wing extremists, I think we need people in leadership roles in the House and the Senate and governors’ chairs, in the White House, who are prepared to stand up and say, ‘You know what? This country belongs to all of the people: the waiters and the waitresses who are trying to make it on low incomes, they have a right to see their kids go to college and all people, that the United States is going to join the rest of the industrialized world in guaranteed health care to all people as a right and not any longer be the only country, major country on earth that does not guarantee that right, that all kids regardless of income have the right to a college education, that we need a tax system which in fact makes it very clear that the wealthy and large corporations are going to start paying their fare share of taxes, that we’re going to have real campaign finance reform so that the Koch brothers and other billionaires cannot buy elections, that we’re going to overturn Citizens United.’ Do you think that’s Hillary Clinton’s agenda? I don’t think so.
There is no truth to the rumor that when asked about a Sanders 2016 presidential run, Hillary said … What difference does it make!
But is Sanders really willing to run for president? More importantly as Liberland asks,” he big question is whether Sanders runs as an independent, which he is, or as a Democrat, a party with which he caucuses, but with which he many differences.” If Sanders runs as either, it will be problematic for Hillary Clinton and Democrats. If Sanders runs in the Democrat primary, Hillary will be forced to move to the LEFT to attract the base.If Sanders runs as an Independent in the general election, he will siphon the far Left vote from an establishment Hillary Clinton. We say Run Bernie, Run!!!
Personally, I agree with 0.000527% of Bernie Sanders’ agenda; however, I will give him his due and that he is an unabashed, self-proclaimed socialist. Because he stands by his beliefs and policies, no matter how wrong I think they might be, I give him kudos for standing by his socialist principles. However, after saying what he did about the need for a political revolution and Hillary not being the standard bearer of that movement, I would cry foul and bullsh*t if now Sanders did not run and instead sat back and got in line behind Hillary Clinton like a good establishment Democrat.
The reality is, these days Bernie Sanders probably represents more of what the Democrats are all about these days than Hillary Clinton. Vermont don’t stop there, let’s add former Green Mountain Gov. Howard Dean back for another run as well … YEEHAAA!!!
Bill Clinton Back in His Element at Charity Gala … Poses for Picture with Two Hookers, Ava Adora and Barbie Girl, From the Famed Nevada Bunny Ranch Brothel
Hillary Clinton must be so proud of what she hopes is her future “First Man” … Tabloids and Late Night Comedy Shows are begging, even praying that Hillary wins in 2016 for the endless Bubba material!
You just can’t make this stuff up. Former President Bill Clinton is back in the tabloids after TMZ gets a hold of a picture of the former prez and two women at a gala charity event for Unite4Humanity. Seems innocent enough, right? Well, not when Slick Willie is involved. It turns out that the two women were prostitutes at the famed Nevada Bunny Ranch brothel, Ava Adora and Barbie Girl. I guess it all depends on how you define selfie.
I did not take a picture with those two women, Ava Adora and Barbie Girl, I never told anyone to take a picture, not a single time
Slick Willie probably had no clue … but the women Bill posed with at an L.A. charity event Thursday night are two star hookers at the famed Nevada Bunny Ranch brothel.
The brunette goes by Ava Adora and the blonde goes by Barbie Girl. According to her bio on the BR website, the blonde is very flexible and specializes in de-virginizing. The brunette “knows how to please a variety of both men and women.”
We have no idea how they got in to the star-studded Unite4Humanity charity gala — which honored Clinton along with several other philanthropic celebs like Robert De Niro and Martin Scorsese — but we can take a wild guess why they showed.
Hillary Clinton was asked for her opinion of Bill’s latest pic, at least it wasn’t with porn stars this time.
Barack Obama Unlawfully Rewrites Obamacare Again … Obama Delays Employer Health Insurance Mandate Until 2016, After Elections
AMERICA, THIS IS WHAT TYRANNY LOOKS LIKE …
Barack Obama, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid and the rest of their Democrat minions were so quick to ram Obamacare down the throats of Americans with a 100& partisan Democrat vote, now they want to do everything to delay this disastrous healthcare law.
First President Barack Obama unlawfully delayed the employee mandate one year until 2014. However, Obama did not think that his signature piece of legislation would be such a fiasco and disastrously unpopular with the American people. So much so that Democrats are finding it impossible to run for reelection in the 2014 midterm elections with this anchor around their neck. So what does Obama do with the so-called Affordable Healthcare act that is not so affordable that was supposed to be for We the People … why delay the employer mandate until 2016, after the elections of course for political purposes. As reported at The Daily Caller, the Obama administration won’t enforce the rule until 2016 for business with between 50 and 99 employees. All companies with 100 employees or more will be subject to the employer mandate beginning in 2015, after an initial delay was announced before the Independence Day holiday in 2013.
Just curious … why did Congress even vote on Obamacare?
For the second time in a year, the Obama administration is giving certain employers extra time before they must offer health insurance to almost all their full-time workers.
Under new rules announced Monday by Treasury Department officials, employers with 50 to 99 workers will be given until 2016 — two years longer than originally envisioned under the Affordable Care Act — before they risk a federal penalty for not complying.
Companies with 100 workers or more are getting a different kind of one-year grace period. Instead of being required in 2015 to offer coverage to 95 percent of full-time workers, these bigger employers can avoid a fine by offering insurance to 70 percent of them next year.
How the administration would define employer requirements has been one of the biggest remaining questions about the way the 2010 health-care law will work in practice — and has sparked considerable lobbying. By providing the dual phase-ins for employers of different sizes, administration officials have sought to lighten the burden on the small share of affected employers that have not offered insurance in the past.
WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO AMERICA? Why are we allowing these illegal acts by this administration to happen? Did we or did we not fight a Revolutionary War to rid ourselves of a King’s oppression? But Obama is just allowed to change and ridiculous, unambiguous statutory mandate that requires by law and the US Constitution the approval of Congress. However, the Imperial supreme dictator Barack Obama thinks he can do anything and often decided the law is whatever he says it is. WHAT HAPPENED TO THE COUNTRY I GREW UP IN?
US Constitution, are you kidding me … I can do anything I want to
WSJ: Obama Rewrites ObamaCare – Another day, another lawless exemption, once again for business.
‘ObamaCare” is useful shorthand for the Affordable Care Act not least because the law increasingly means whatever President Obama says it does on any given day. His latest lawless rewrite arrived on Monday as the White House decided to delay the law’s employer mandate for another year and in some cases maybe forever.
ObamaCare requires businesses with 50 or more workers to offer health insurance to their workers or pay a penalty, but last summer the Treasury offered a year-long delay until 2015 despite having no statutory authorization. Like the individual mandate, the employer decree is central to ObamaCare’s claim of universal coverage, but employers said the new labor costs—and the onerous reporting and tax-enforcement rules—would damage job creation and the economy.
Remember in the past when the MSM had reported that the GOP was just an obstructionist party, but the Republicans response was that it was impossible to work with a president who kept moving the goal post? Use your own brain and decide for yourself. Once again we see Obama changing things that is supposed to be “the law of the land”. Obama keeps changing the goal post and as Ed Driscoll says, the Obamacare law is whatever Barack Obama says it is.
WHEN WILL THIS NATIONAL NIGHTMARE BE OVER?
The Hillary Papers … Archive of ‘Closest Friend’ Paints Portrait of Hillary Clinton as Ruthless First Lady
THE HILLARY PAPERS … Hillary Clinton as Ruthless First Lady, Imagine that?
Hillary Clinton is the overwhelming odds on favorite to be the Democrat presidential nominee for the 2016 presidential election, so when it comes to the Hillary Papers, What difference, at this point, does it make? Maybe this might be of some relevance … her early support for single-payer, despite later denials, is directly relevant to the current Obamacare debacle that will be an issue in the 2016 election. How is she going to be able to run from Obamacare when she had Hillary Healthcare?
If many think today that Barack Obama cannot be trusted, what would they think of Hillary Clinton who has a political motivation for everything that she does?
On May 12, 1992, Stan Greenberg and Celinda Lake, top pollsters for Bill Clinton’s presidential campaign, issued a confidential memo. The memo’s subject was “Research on Hillary Clinton.”
Voters admired the strength of the Arkansas first couple, the pollsters wrote. However, “they also fear that only someone too politically ambitious, too strong, and too ruthless could survive such controversy so well.”
Their conclusion: “What voters find slick in Bill Clinton, they find ruthless in Hillary.”
The full memo is one of many previously unpublished documents contained in the archive of one of Hillary Clinton’s best friends and advisers, documents that portray the former first lady, secretary of State, and potential 2016 presidential candidate as a strong, ambitious, and ruthless Democratic operative.
The papers of Diane Blair, a political science professor Hillary Clinton described as her “closest friend” before Blair’s death in 2000, record years of candid conversations with the Clintons on issues ranging from single-payer health care to Monica Lewinsky.
The question remains for 2016, does Hillary have too much political baggage in her past and a lack of accomplishments to be president? Please tell me that America has learned from just electing someone for being the first?
Gallup: Wyoming, Mississippi and Idaho Most Conservative States in US … District of Columbia, Socialist Republic of Vermont and Taxachusettes Most Liberal
Who are the most RED and least RED states in America?
So who are the most conservative states in the United States? According to Gallup, Wyoming, Mississippi, Idaho, Utah and Montana are at the top of the list. Followed by Arkansas, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Tennessee and Alabama. Hmm, maybe the Volunteer state of Tennessee and those that claim to be conservative can explain how they have voted into office two less than conservative US Senators. Bob Corker is bad enough, but long time Sen. Lamar Alexander ranks rather low with a 53% on the Club for Growth’s scorecard. Tennessee has a chance to put their conservatism where their mouth is and vote in a true conservative candidate in 2014. Alexander is being primary challenged in the GOP primary by TN state Representative Joe Carr. It us time to get rid of establishment Republicans who claim they are conservative.
Also, how in the hell is Montana considered the 5th most conservative state and yet they currently have two Democrat US Sens. Jon Tester and the retiring Max Baucus. If Arkansas actually considers themselves a conservative state, they will replace Democrat Sen. Mark Pryor in 2014. Some of these states that claim they are conservative best stand up and be counted in 2014 and 2016, or forever be a minority.
Imagine that, the District of Columbia is the most liberal place in the United States, followed closely by the Socialist Republic of Vermont and Taxachusettes. Check out the states that are considered most liberal, all of them except Maine have two Democrat Senators and many of which are among the most liberal.
Complete list of states can be seen HERE.
Hillary Clinton Now Says Benghazi Is My Biggest Regret … But What Happened to What Difference Does it Make?
BUT WHAT DIFFERENCE DOES IT MAKE? IT WOULD APPEAR IT NOW MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE FOR A HILLARY WHITE HOUSE RUN …
As Hillary Clinton eyes the 2016 Presidential election, she must first clean up the disasters in her political past and gloss over them hoping that the American people will some how forget. On Monday Clinton said in an interview that the “terrible tragedy” of the 2012 Benghazi attack that resulted in the death of four Americans was the “biggest regret” of her tenure at the Department of State. Regret, what exactly does she regret … completely ignoring the obvious like being told Benghazi was a terror threat?
Let the MSM slobbering love affair begin for the Hillary in 2016 campaign. What happened to the tape? What happened to this investigation? What happened to holding anyone accountable? But what difference does it make.
QUESTION: Any do-overs that you would — relative to Secretary of State?
HILLARY CLINTON: Oh, sure. I mean, you know, you make these choices based on imperfect information. And you make them to — as we say, the best of your ability. But that doesn’t mean that there’s not going to be unforeseen consequences, unpredictable twists and turns.
You know, my biggest, you know, regret is what happened in Benghazi. It was a terrible tragedy, losing four Americans, two diplomats and now it’s public, so I can say two CIA operatives, losing an ambassador like Chris Stevens, who was one of our very best and had served in Libya and across the Middle East and spoke Arabic.
Sorry, there should be a lot more than regrets:
- House of Rep Report: President Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and State Department Blew the Benghazi Consulate Response
- Sen. Rand Paul (KY-R) To Hillary Clinton at Senate Foreign Relations Committee Hearing on Benghazi Terrorist Attack: ‘I Would Have Relieved You Of Your Post’
What Hillary Clinton really regrets is losing her cool in the Benghazi hearing and being caught on VIDEO say, what difference does it make, when it came to the deaths of four Americans. Because in the end, its all about Hillary and her run for 2016.
How much will it be political precedent and how much will it be America’s strong distaste with liberalism, big government and eight years of a failed Obama presidency and his policies that will make 2016 not be a slam dunk for Hillary Clinton? Then again, how much will it be Hillary’s own doing with her disastrous handling of Benghazi, where four Americans, including Ambassador Stevens died or her own not doing in that what did she ever really do as a Senator or Secretary of State? But as Hillary Clinton says, what difference does it make!!!
Obamacare is a disaster, the economy stinks, job growth is terrible, food stamps are at record levels, federal debt is at all time highs and growing, the Middle East is a powder keg … why would America want 4 more years of the Obama administration?
How much will Benghazi and “What Difference Does It Make” will doom Hillary?
Inevitably, she will consider how much she wants, or is able, to keep going at a killer pace throughout her 70s and, more important, her chances of prevailing in November 2016.
Much of it is out of her hands. Low job approval numbers for President Obama, should they persist, will make it difficult for any Democrat to win, even with the party’s seeming Electoral College edge and growing demographic advantages among minorities and the young. Just ask John McCain how President George W. Bush’s unpopularity affected his 2008 White House bid. (Of course, you can’t rule out the very real chance that the Republicans will rescue the eventual Democratic nominee by putting forward an out-of-the-mainstream nominee.)
The Clintons are nothing if not shrewd, and they’ve lived through the entire era of postwar American politics. So Hillary Clinton would be the last to believe what I have heard with increasing frequency: that, in the end, no one of real heft, even Vice President Joe Biden, will challenge her for the Democratic nomination she nearly won in 2008, and she will steamroll over the minor contenders who do. Most frequently mentioned in the “minor” category are former Gov. Brian Schweitzer of Montana and Gov. Martin O’Malley of Maryland. (O’Malley also made a little-noticed appearance at the McAuliffe inauguration.) Sen. Elizabeth Warren of Massachusetts would be a major opponent should she run, but she insists she will not. When California Gov. Jerry Brown also bowed out, NBC News’s First Read called it “a reminder that Hillary Clinton will probably face little to no serious competition if she runs.”
Hillary Clinton’s Hit List: She Kept a File of Sinners and Saints … A Special Circle of Clinton Hell Reserved for People Who Endorsed Obama over Hillary
So Democrats, are you on Hillary’s Hit List?
This morning The Politico writes about Hillary Clinton’s hit list. Who would possibly believe that some one so warm, kind and compassionate like Hillary Clinton could have a “hit list” for paybacks against individuals who abandoned her in favor of Barack Obama for the Democrat nomination in the run up to the 2008 presidential election and thus devastating her life-long political aspirations of becoming president? Hell hath no fury like a Hillary scorned. According to the Politico, those that stabbed the Clinton’s in the back after all the fundraising and political favors. Individuals were rated on a scale of 1 to 7, where 7 was considered Hilary’s “SH*T” list. Interestingly enough, then, Sen. John Kerry (D-MA), who would succeed Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State in the Obama administration, was among those who received a “7″. The list also contained, the late and former Massachusetts Senator Ted Kennedy.
For Hillary it is all about 2016 and her ambition to be president at all cost.
As one of the last orders of business for a losing campaign, they recorded in a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet the names and deeds of members of Congress. They carefully noted who had endorsed Hillary, who had backed Obama, and who had stayed on the sidelines—standard operating procedure for any high-end political organization. But the data went into much more nuanced detail. “We wanted to have a record of who endorsed us and who didn’t,” a member of Hillary’s campaign team said, “and of those who endorsed us, who went the extra mile and who was just kind of there. And of those who didn’t endorse us, those who understandably didn’t endorse us because they are [Congressional Black Caucus] members or Illinois members. And then, of course, those who endorsed him but really should have been with her … that burned her.”
For Hillary, whose loss was of course not the end of her political career, the spreadsheet was a necessity of modern political warfare, an improvement on what old-school politicians called a “favor file.” It meant that when asks rolled in, she and Bill would have at their fingertips all the information needed to make a quick decision—including extenuating, mitigating and amplifying factors—so that friends could be rewarded and enemies punished.
Their spreadsheet formalized the deep knowledge of those involved in building it. Like so many of the Clinton help, Balderston and Elrod were walking favor files. They remembered nearly every bit of assistance the Clintons had given and every slight made against them. Almost six years later, most Clinton aides can still rattle off the names of traitors and the favors that had been done for them, then provide details of just how each of the guilty had gone on to betray the Clintons—as if it all had happened just a few hours before. The data project ensured that the acts of the sinners and saints would never be forgotten.
There was a special circle of Clinton hell reserved for people who had endorsed Obama or stayed on the fence after Bill and Hillary had raised money for them, appointed them to a political post or written a recommendation to ice their kid’s application to an elite school. On one early draft of the hit list, each Democratic member of Congress was assigned a numerical grade from 1 to 7, with the most helpful to Hillary earning 1s and the most treacherous drawing 7s. The set of 7s included Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.), Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), Bob Casey (D-Pa.) and Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), as well as Reps. Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.), Baron Hill (D-Ind.) and Rob Andrews (D-N.J.).
Yet even a 7 didn’t seem strong enough to quantify the betrayal of some onetime allies.
When the Clintons sat in judgment, Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-Mo.) got the seat closest to the fire. Bill and Hillary had gone all out for her when she ran for Senate in 2006, as had Obama. But McCaskill seemed to forget that favor when NBC’s Tim Russert asked her whether Bill had been a great president, during a Meet the Press debate against then-Sen. Jim Talent (R-Mo.) in October 2006. “He’s been a great leader,” McCaskill said of Bill, “but I don’t want my daughter near him. VIDEO”
The book by Amie Parnes and Jonathan Allen is called “HRC: State Secrets and the Rebirth of Hillary Clinton.”
UPDATE I: I could not agree more than with Jammie Wearing Fool who says that this jit list most likely goes back decades. Amen brother. An excel spreadsheet? More likely a Tera-byte hard drive of enemies.
Bridge-gate, Lessons in Leadership: NJ Gov. Chris Christie Apologizes for His Staff’s Conduct with Bridge Scandal and Fires Two Staffers … “I am Embarassed & Humiliated by Some of the People on my Team”
TAKE A GOOD LOOK AMERICA AS TO WHAT REAL LEADERSHIP AND ACCOUNTABILITY LOOKS LIKE …
Let me first preface this post with two things, I am no Chris Christie fan for presidential nominee for the GOP, and this is all predicated on the fact that he is telling the truth and he had no knowledge of this sophomoric and pathetic attempt at political retribution against the Mayor of Ft. Lee.
Yesterday in a press conference that went on for 1 hour and 7 minutes, Republican Governor Chris Christie of New Jersey apologized for members of his staff’s conduct in their part of the closing of lanes of the George Washington Bridge that caused massive traffic delays in Fort Lee, NJ. This was done as the media would find out as a pathetic and ridiculous way to get back at the Mayor of Ft. Lee for not backing Christie in the recent New Jersey governors race in 2013. Christie apologized for the incident, took complete responsibility for his staff members actions and then fired Bridget Anne Kelly, the deputy chief of staff who sent an email approving the lane closings, whom he called “stupid” and “deceitful.” Christy also asked two-time campaign manager, Bill Stepien, to step down as a consultant to the Republican Governors Association and to withdraw his name from consideration to lead the state’s Republican Party.
In a remarkable day of swirling political drama, Gov. Chris Christie tried on Thursday to control the damage from revelations that his administration ordered the revenge-closings of traffic lanes at the George Washington Bridge by firing a top aide, cutting ties with a longtime political adviser and repeatedly apologizing in a nearly two-hour news conference.
Sounding somber and appearing contrite, the normally garrulous Mr. Christie said he had no advance knowledge of the lane closings and had been “humiliated” by the entire episode.
“I am a very sad person today,” he said. “I am heartbroken that someone I permitted to be in that circle of trust for the past five years betrayed that trust.”
CNN: Christie drops swagger amid heat of scandal.
Christie’s tone and message represented a valiant attempt to disconnect himself from the embarrassing events that have attracted the attention of federal prosecutors, simultaneously pleading ignorance and accepting responsibility.
He said the buck stops with him but emphatically intoned that he had no knowledge of any aspect of the bridge controversy.
“I am stunned by the abject stupidity that was shown here regardless of what the facts ultimately uncover. This was handled in a callous and indifferent way,” he said.
As previously stated, I am not a Christie fan for president because of his stance on policy and the GOP does not need another moderate running. One would think they would have learned with the two failed campaigns of John McCain and Mitt Romney. That being said, how refreshing that a political leader come out and take responsibility for a scandal, then fire those individuals responsible. Hey Barack Obama, maybe you could learn some thing about what actual leadership looks like.