Facts and thinning the GOP herd

It's beginning to look like there will be a thinning of the herd of GOP candidates now that the first January debate wrapped up yesterday. I believe this debate shines a light on what we can expect down the road and, if anything, it has changed the mind of many voters and solidified their judgment on others.

Jeb Bush came across as a bush-league debater. He may have been a good governor of Florida, but on the debate stage looks like a stoop-shouldered old man who would rather be playing a game of pinochle or checkers.

Dr. Ben Carson is like that rotisserie chicken that's been cooking in the restaurant window all day. He's done and he needs to acknowledge that to himself. He's a really decent guy but he's not cut out for the blood-letting that politics demands.

John Kasich, for some reason, annoys the hell out of me. He's probably a nice person but he talks too long, and he is never going to close the deal.

Marco Rubio is smooth--he did himself a lot of good last night, but he has an uphill road to climb if he wants to give Trump and Cruz a run for their money. In the kerfuffle he had with Governor Chris Christie, Rubio clearly came out on top. 

The facts don't lie: Christie supported Common Core and very strict gun control, and he supported the appointment of ultra liberal Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor. 

But what I believe will sink his generous butt is the fact that he donated to Planned Parenthood. After the videos of how PP harvested baby body parts, conservatives, and a few liberals perhaps, went ballistic.

 Christie's tactic to the factual accusations was to simply deny all of them. "Let's get the facts straight. First of all, I didn't support Sonia Sotomayor."

But the facts are stubborn things, as Ronald Reagan said. According to PolitickerNJ, back in 2009 Christie issued a statement in support of Sotomayor, although prior to that he said that Sotomayor would not have been his choice. 


Christie was doing what people who cite the nice parts of the Koran do: he was using an earlier statement as if there were no later statement.

"After watching and listening to Judge Sotomayor's performance at the confirmation hearings this week, I am confident that she is qualified for the position of Associate Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court." He also added: "Elections have consequences. One of those consequences are judicial appointments. While Judge Sotomayor would not have been my choice, President Obama has used his opportunity to fill a seat on the Supreme Court by choosing a nominee who has more than proven her capability, competence and ability. I support her appointment to the Supreme Court and urge the Senate to keep politics out of the process and confirm her nomination."

Keep politics out of the appointment to the Supreme Court?

For all of Christie's claims that he's a "straight talker," there is no doubt that he speaks with a forked tongue. 

The same is true about his denial of donating to Planned Parenthood. 

Christie is quoted in a 1994 Newark Star Ledger column that he supports PP. His campaign is now claiming that he never made the donation he bragged about. 

It has a funny odor to it.

But it seems like most campaigns do.

It's anybody's guess if this will adversely effect Christie's run, but it probably should. 

There's also that little fact of his relationship with radical Muslim imams. In an article back in 2012, the Clarion Project addresses Christie's relationship with Imam Mohammed Qatanani, who was labeled a radical imam by the Department of Homeland Security. In fact, they wanted to deport him. 

Of the imam, Christie said: "In all my interactions with the imam, he has attempted to be a force for good in his community, in our state with law enforcement, with those of us who have gotten to know him over the years."

Christie went on to explain how he judges people on what he sees in them. So what's the point of having the Department of Homeland Security if you don't care what they see?

So perhaps Christie along with Kasich, should call it a day, at the end of the day. They don't seem to have a chance of winning the nomination and clearing the field would make it easier for Americans to voice who they really want.


Tweet

Why Christie Is Dangerous to Our Health

Chris Christie is currently polling better than any potential candidate for the 2016 presidential election, at least he was before Bridge Gate. He was even slightly ahead of Hillary, a woman with first name recognition, second only to Madonna, Cher, and Prince, who now goes by the name       .  However, Hillary has her own problems now that there is a new book out about her entitled "HRC." The book discusses her "hit list" of those in politics who supported Obama for president instead of her. But now the big question is whether or not Christie is the best  person for POTUS.

I have strong reasons to believe that Christie is not the man for the job as president based on how I view our national security needs.

In 2008, when he served as U.S. Attorney for New Jersey, Christie praised Mohammed Qatanani, imam of the Islamic Center of Passaic County, as "a man of great goodwill." He embraced the man and hugged him. The fawning occurred soon after Qatanani went ballistic against Jews and openly admitted to supporting Hamas, an organization designated a terror organization by the US. To make matters worse, the fawning was done on the eve of Qatanani's deportation hearing regarding an Israeli conviction for his membership of Hamas. Christie went so far as to assign Assistant US Attorney Charles McKenna to testify as Qatanani's character witness. A man named Sohail Mohammed was Qatanani's lawyer for the case--more on him below.

In 2010, a New Jersey Transit worker named Derek Fenton burned 3 pages of a Koran at a 9-11 memorial service. Christie gave his blessings for the New Jersey Transit to terminate Fenton's employment and he stated, "That kind of intolerance is something I think is unacceptable. So I don't have a problem with him being fired." What Christie should have said was "That kind of intolerance will not be tolerated, and Article One, be damned." The ACLU successfully intervened on Fenton's behalf and he got his job back. When the ACLU is on the right side of history, you can bet the other side is scratching their collective heads.

Christie appointed Sohail Mohammed to the New Jersey state superior court in 2011. Mohammed had served as general counsel to the American Muslim Union, a group of mouth-breathers who stated that a "Zionist Commando Orchestrated the 9-11 Terrorist Attacks." He also acted as a spokesman for Muslim prisoners who had gone on a hunger strike after being jailed during Ramadan, defending Sami al-Arian, a Palestinian Islamic jihadist. Mohammed characterized the legal proceeding as "nothing more than a witch-hunt."  As mentioned above, Mohammed was Qatanani's lawyer regarding the deportation hearing.

When Mohammed was asked appropriate questions by New Jersey's Senate Judiciary Committee about his strong affinity for Islam's Shari'a (law), Christie verbally attacked the lawmakers, saying, "Shari'a law has nothing to do with this [appointment of Mohammed] at all. It's crazy. It's crazy . . . So, this Shari'a law business is crap. It's just crazy. And I'm tired of dealing with crazies. I mean, you know, it's just unnecessary to be accusing this guy of things just because of his religious background." Of course, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), who also has ties to various Islamic groups with ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, gave Christie a hearty "attaboy."

Is the "Shari'a law business" crap? If you know anything about Shari'a law, you know that it treats women as inferior to men and takes away their rights. It makes homosexuality a capital offense. It goes against the US Constitution, just like Christie did when he went against Fenton's freedom of expression.

In 2012 the NYPD conducted surveillance of Islamists in Newark, New Jersey and New Brunswick. Christie was outraged and termed the action arrogant and paranoid. He mocked NYPD Commissioner, Raymond Kelly as "all knowing, all seeing." If you look at any Koran, you will see Allah is described this way. But more importantly, the NYPD was doing important counter-terrorism work and Christie attacked those who protect us from terrorists. Mosques are notorious for spawning terrorism and Kelly knows that; one wonders what Christie knows.

On one hand, when an issue regarding Islam arises, Christie takes the side of Islam every time. On the other hand, Christie is pro-Israel. This seems strangely contradictory and can only be a function of something not very obvious; maybe it's his ego. Maybe he's looking for approval from both the Jews and those who hate the Jews. The Koran very clearly spells out Mohammad's animosity toward the Jews most especially, as well as all non-Muslims.

Whatever the reason for this dichotomy, it should be noted that Christie scores high with CAIR and is on the list to recognize those who "deserve recognition for their outstanding contributions to pushing back against Islamophobic trends in 2011 and 2012." CAIR is an arm of the Muslim Brotherhood and is one of over a dozen such arms. In fact, the word "Islamophobia" was invented by them to prevent negative dialogue about the religion of peace. The term "Islamophobia" is the Muslim's equivalent of "racist" used by liberals whenever they want to end political debate.

I like Christie's directness; it's refreshing to see a politician who doesn't make any pretences about what he thinks. But it is what he thinks that disturbs me when it comes to his apparent naivete when it comes to CAIR and the Muslim Brotherhood. It disturbs me that he has appointed a man to sit on the bench who has made anti-Semitic statements and who is a member of Hamas.

And if Christie is not naive about CAIR and Hamas, that's even more disturbing. We've had one president who appears to support Islam more than he does the Constitution and Christianity, we cannot suffer the consequences of another person who appears to be an Islamic apologist. I don't want a liberal, running the country, but I don't want Christie, a fiscal conservative at best, an Islam apologist at worst, running it either. When CAIR praises somebody, I immediately know that there's a problem with that somebody. 

My latest novel, Jihad Joe, is about Islamic terrorism and suspense.  In it I challenge the precepts of the religion through my protagonist, Zed Nill, a journalist, captured by terrorists and who is destined to be killed if the American President refuses to release three Gitmo prisoners.  Of course, American policy demands we never give in to terrorists, and for Zed, the clock is ticking.

                                             

Jihad Joe Soft Cover

click here for ebook version   

Tweet