Christie not interested in making up with Rand Paul

[CaptLouAlbano]

Wow Rand comes out of this looking like the better man.

New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie has no interest in making nice with fellow Republican Sen. Rand Paul.

http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/01/christie-not-interested-in-making-up-with-rand-paul/

 

[specsaregood]

I think Rand played this whole fake feud just right. And cemented the reminder in the minds of GOP voters that Christie is an Obama republican.

 

[Origanalist]

Howard Dean: Meh, Rand Paul isn’t really a libertarian, ’cause he’s pro-life

snort

It’s fascinating to watch this. First of all, lesson number one, for Rand Paul, who is, by the way, not a libertarian. If you believe you ought to be able to tell women what to do with their reproductive rights you are not a libertarian. Lesson number one for Rand Paul, do not take on a guy from Jersey. Obviously this guy does not watch HBO, and, you know, you’re not going to win a fight like this with Chris Christie. That’s not the way it’s going to go.

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/...isnt-really-a-libertarian-cause-hes-pro-life/

 

[Christian Liberty]

Howard Dean is an idiot. He is correct that Rand isn't a libertarian, but he doesn't know why.

*Snort* is indeed the right response.

As for Christie not wanting to make up... good. Rand SHOULDN'T want to play nice with you either.

 

[cajuncocoa]

Christie is desperate to redeem himself after this:

....it's not working.

 

[jtstellar]

prime example of how a non-paul supporter views this

http://dailycaller.com/2013/08/01/c...n-making-up-with-rand-paul/#comment-984411585

Thomas Conservator1
• 3 hours ago

What did you want Paul to say? Let's meet somewhere private and I'll give you a B.J.? I'm no big Paul fan, but he was the one being a man here.
11 1
•
Reply
•
Share ›

you can tell from the slight 'bj' banter that he's no paul fan and probably trashed him elsewhere on other articles

like i said if this fight dragged on much longer it would go sour for both paul and christie.. sure paul could take down christie as a potential 2016 candidate, but at the cost of this movement's current standard carrier? ted cruz or rubio will come out on top over this and hillary will gain as well just by doing nothing and watching these 2 start digging at each other's records. you guys don't wager your chips very well.

if paul had to spend his political capital, let him spend it on something meaningful like saying snowden did a great thing or trying to stop foreign aid. if he loses support over that, i have no qualms. not over a pile of fat known as christie kreme no thank you. also interesting to note that paul haters think he did the right thing here, while supporters think he shouldn't have apologized. i think this movement's first and foremost priority is to expand by drawing in new blood, and a lot of new blood were just beginning to make the switch from christie/neocon camp to us, many were just beginning to get on the fence departing from the neocon camp, people should remember that

 

[Peace&Freedom]

Rand has been tactically winning almost every battle this year to position himself for the '15-'16 primaries, and in this episode Christie lost a bit of altitude. Rand took a solid stand, hung in there for a few rounds of verbal sparring, and offered the truce. He is the one who exercised leadership, is in line with the polls on the issue, and was big enough to extend the olive branch, while Christie was not. This is a good set-up for the race to come.

 

[cajuncocoa]

miker5 • 5 minutes ago

Rand Paul may not be the "bigger man", but he's the better man. For some strange reason, Christie reminds me of our big, bloated federal government which would undoubtedly get even bigger under his reign.

LOL

 

[JCDenton0451]

Howard Dean: Meh, Rand Paul isn’t really a libertarian, ’cause he’s pro-life

I agree with Dean on this. The subject of abortion needs to be brought up every time a Republican politician tries to claim libertarian credentials.

 

[Christian Liberty]

Christie is desperate to redeem himself after this:

....it's not working.

Does Christie support gay marriage?

LOL

LOL!!!!!

 

[jtstellar]

a post from hotair

You can win the 2016 nomination running as someone who’s less libertarian than Paul. (In fact, the eventual nominee almost certainly will be.) I don’t know if you can win it running as someone who’s contemptuous of libertarianism as a “very dangerous thought.” Like I’ve said before, that’s not just a philosophical difference, it’s an electability issue: The nominee will need some Paul sympathizers to hold their noses and vote for him against the Democrat. Hardcore libertarians will stay home if Paul doesn’t win the nomination, but not all people who agree with key parts of Paul’s platform are hardcore. They’re gettable in theory — provided you don’t imply that they’re nuts for worrying about the direction of the surveillance state. This is why I think Rubio/Walker/Ryan are the real winners in all this ultimately. They’ll be more hawkish than Paul but way, way less antagonistic towards his supporters than Christie is. They can play him and Christie off each other as both being too extreme in their respective ways.

http://hotair.com/archives/2013/08/...time-to-have-a-beer-with-rand-paul-right-now/

seems to reiterate what i said. the longer this drags on the more that kind of view will coalesce

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

I agree with Dean on this. The subject of abortion needs to be brought up every time a Republican politician tries to claim libertarian credentials.

You mean like Ron Paul did?

 

[Peace&Freedom]

The 'Ryan is better than Rand or Christie' view will not coalesce, because Rand can in turn tie the unconstitutional stances of the defenders of the NSA to Christie or King etc, painting them all as hard core supporters of obliterating everybody's privacy. At bottom, everybody gets the point that they don't want spying of their every burp or comment. They get it emotionally, not just logically. And this is before more NSA disclosures come to light. Again, Paul has the unique marketing position as being the sole person in the race who is concretely opposed to this who's running for President. The others can flex the rhetoric, but Rand has the high ground.

 

[JCDenton0451]

You mean like Ron Paul did?

There is zero political benefit to Rand Paul in calling himself "libertarian" and libertarian movement will be better off without him. Ron Paul did enough damage already by making social conservatism seem acceptable.

 

[Origanalist]

There is zero political benefit to Rand Paul in calling himself "libertarian" and libertarian movement will be better off without him. Ron Paul did enough damage already by making social conservatism seem acceptable.

Heaven forbid! I mean, good grief. Can you imagine if being pro-life were acceptable?

 

[asurfaholic]

There is zero political benefit to Rand Paul in calling himself "libertarian" and libertarian movement will be better off without him. Ron Paul did enough damage already by making social conservatism seem acceptable.

What do you propose we do with all these communist/nazis/terrorists-Oops, I mean social conservatives?

What hell on earth has anyone with a pro- life view ever done to hurt another human being? Go ahead, say it. Nothing. Yet it is ok to kill little babies since they are in their mommies bellies and its the mommies choice. Go fuck yourself with all your hatred towards social conservatism. I don't agree with every law that is written by so-called "social conservatives" but you seem to forget that this is a huge demographic, I bet at least 40% of the voting population. Not to mention almost exclusively REPUBLICAN, which is where we are at right now.

If you really like rainbows and unicorns and killing unborn babies then go join the democrat party.

 

[matt0611]

There is zero political benefit to Rand Paul in calling himself "libertarian" and libertarian movement will be better off without him. Ron Paul did enough damage already by making social conservatism seem acceptable.

Social conservatism is completely compatible with libertarianism, especially being pro-life.

I never understood the assertion that libertarianism -> pro-choice only.

 

[CaptLouAlbano]

There is zero political benefit to Rand Paul in calling himself "libertarian" and libertarian movement will be better off without him. Ron Paul did enough damage already by making social conservatism seem acceptable.

So you must be referring to the "libertarian movement" that is 4 guys meeting at Denny's every third Thursday. The one that hasn't won a state house election on their own merit since 1984. Yeah that dynamic "movement" will be far better off without Rand or Ron.

 

[JCDenton0451]

Heaven forbid! I mean, good grief. Can you imagine if being pro-life were acceptable?

Harry Reid is pro-life. Rand Paul is a Social Conservative: he wants the government to restrict the behaviors (and medical procedures) he doesn't approve of. Don't you see the problem with this from the libertarian standpoint?

 

[fr33]

I wouldn't have offered him a beer.