The wingers are beside themselves with glee as they watch this video of New Jersey's new GOP governor, Chris Christie, chewing out a reporter for nearly two and a half minutes, in a manner that's either fun to watch or reminiscent of the worst dressing-down you ever got from a boss or principal, depending on your point of view (that is, when it doesn't reek of Glenn Beck):
| Gov Christie calls S-L columnist thin-skinned for inquiring about his 'confrontational tone' |
There was already a tiny bit of "Chris Christie for President" talk on the right before this, and our old pal William Jacobson goes for a little more (though it's hard to tell if he's serious or just engaged in his usual liberal-goading):
He might have a shot at the presidency someday, as Allahpundit suggests, but why wait until 2016?
... Really want to see heads explode (not that that should be a reason to do something, but it sure would give me endless blog material):
"Palin-Christie 2012"
I watch the video and, yeah, I see what wingers would like about it. The peevishness and snark are bracing. And yes, much of the right would love a ticket like Palin/Christie. (Zero foreign policy experience? But Palin lives right next to Russia!)
The thing is, America elected Obama in large part because he wasn't like this -- angry, nasty, peevish -- and still mostly likes him for that reason. America hasn't wanted presidents who were like this. America has always wanted presidents who radiated Capraesque positivity (even Nixon and the Bushes managed to fake that). If America actually wants a Christie type (or a Palin type) in 2012, then we've really changed as a country. I think excessive sarcasm is a large part of what's hurting Palin with the non-wingnut public; it comforts me that GOP base voters probably would really like two nasty people on the 2012 ticket, and that they could get their wish.
No comments:
Post a Comment