Tuesday, August 14, 2012

The Fat Man Cometh



New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has been selected to deliver the keynote address at the Republican National Convention later this month in Tampa.
Christie told USA TODAY in an interview posted on the newspaper's website early Tuesday morning that his speech will focus more on making the case for electing Mitt Romney (really?) than on bashing President Obama (yea, right!).
The tough-talking first-term governor said he's been "grinding away" on the speech in the past few days (more like gnashing his teeth) since Romney contacted him about the highly coveted convention role.

10 comments:

  1. I think I'll skip it and see snippets in reruns. I watched all but a couple republican debates this year, but I have my limits. No republican conventions for me, although I "get" Christie's appeal. I'm just not into watching a bunch of republicans dressed in the American flag cheering about turning the country over to the very, very rich and walking over the poor and, now, even the middle class.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I think you have to look at Romney speak and then Christie speak and ask yourself if you were a Republican, whom would you rather have speaking for you. I'm not advocating what he says -- far from it -- just how he says it. He has a straight-forwardness that is appealing when you compare him with Romney who ducks and weaves anytime he gets near a specific idea. Now apparently Romney has even abandoned his VP pick.

    I just saw a clip of a talk Romney gave at some coal mine in Ohio, with miners lined up behind him. He didn't even bother to shake one of their hands. Just thanked them for their service to America whatever that means. And promised them good wages, although no mention of unions.

    Christie was in town this week and if it hadn't been a fundraiser for one of the usual right wingers in the state, I would have gone to hear him speak. For the first and probably last time I agree with Ann Coulter that since the republicans didn't nominate Chris Christie they will lose. He actually scared me as a potential candidate.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I suppose in some ways, Christie is to the Republicans what Mario Cuomo was to the Democrats. Seems like he is using the convention as a springboard for '16, should he decide to run.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I was thinking more Alan Grayson on steroids and pasta - it's more the style then the substance. Christie doesn't hold back, and says what he thinks. Even I find that refreshing when compared to someone like Romney who never says what he thinks.

    ReplyDelete
  5. ... than ...

    I should add that I like Grayson.

    ReplyDelete
  6. I suppose by comparison, Christie does seem "refreshing," and I'm sure he will rouse the crowd at the convention. No one else there to do it, judging by the names mentioned so far.

    What I found fascinating is how the Republican heavy hitters chose to sit out '12. I think they all figured it was Obama's election to lose so why invest all that time and energy into a campaign that most likely would fall short in November. Romney strikes me a lot like Dole, except that Dole actually had a record but was unable to convey it on the campaign trail. He looked old and tired throughout. Romney is an empty suit.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I think that's exactly the purpose -- Christie adds "style" and Ryan adds "substance" to someone who is otherwise pretty bland and boring. The only other one they could have had speak would have been Sarah Palin, but apparently she got stiffed. George Jr. and Cheney aren't welcomed. I wonder if there might be a third party come out of all of this (sadly it probably won't be to the left).

    The Republicans have nothing going on other than a guy who looks and talks like an undertaker in the Senate, and another in the House who looks like he just staggered out of the bar. I guess they just hope the electorate stays uninformed.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I think the Tea Party is relatively content with the inroads it has made in the Republican Party. A takeover from within since they represent the bedrock conservatism of the party. I think Palin doesn't have anywhere the pull she thinks she has. The TP seems rather diffuse and localized, although they pitch in for what they regard as key races outside their voting districts, i.e. Scott Walker and Scott Brown. But, I think their victories are overly amplified in the media while their losses are pushed to the side. The media seems to like to flirt with the idea of the Tea Party as a "third party" when it isn't one at all. It is simply the more militant side of the Republican Party, its "Christian soldiers."

    ReplyDelete