Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

Highlighting a growing split in the Republican Party over national security policy, New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) on Thursday harshly criticized libertarians -- including Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) -- by invoking the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

Speaking at the Aspen Institute in Colorado, Christie called libertarianism a "very dangerous thought" and said there had been little difference between President George W. Bush and President Barack Obama on national security. Christie spoke of "esoteric debates" over foreign policy, when the moderator interjected Paul's name.

"You can name any number of people who have engaged in [those debates], and he's one of them ...," said Christie. "I want them to come to New Jersey and sit across from the widows and orphans and have that conversation. And they won't, 'cause that's a much tougher conversation to have."

Christie warned, "The next attack that comes that kills thousands of Americans as a result, people are going to be looking back on the people having this intellectual debate."

Though a Paul spokeswoman did not immediately respond for comment, the senator tweeted, "Christie worries about the dangers of freedom. I worry about the danger of losing that freedom. Spying without warrants is unconstitutional."

JohnStOnge wrote:Christie ceased to be relevant in terms of the national Republican Party when he went overboard in gushing over Obama after Hurricane Sandy right before a national election. He instantly went from being a darling within the Republican Party to being a pariah. What he says doesn't really matter anymore.

Chizzang wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:Christie ceased to be relevant in terms of the national Republican Party when he went overboard in gushing over Obama after Hurricane Sandy right before a national election. He instantly went from being a darling within the Republican Party to being a pariah. What he says doesn't really matter anymore.

Obama does one thing right... (one thing)
Christie points that out and from that day forward he's ostracized


this is why we're doomed

Chizzang wrote:

JohnStOnge wrote:Christie ceased to be relevant in terms of the national Republican Party when he went overboard in gushing over Obama after Hurricane Sandy right before a national election. He instantly went from being a darling within the Republican Party to being a pariah. What he says doesn't really matter anymore.

Obama does one thing right... (one thing)
Christie points that out and from that day forward he's ostracized


this is why we're doomed

93henfan wrote:Christie is one of the few people who could get Congress working together and start our country back on the right path, but as you can see in this very thread, the nut wing of the Republican Party doesn't want that to happen.

93henfan wrote:Christie is one of the few people who could get Congress working together and start our country back on the right path, but as you can see in this very thread, the nut wing of the Republican Party doesn't want that to happen.

93henfan wrote:Christie is one of the few people who could get Congress working together and start our country back on the right path, but as you can see in this very thread, the nut wing of the Republican Party doesn't want that to happen.

93henfan wrote:Christie is one of the few people who could get Congress working together and start our country back on the right path, but as you can see in this very thread, the nut wing of the Republican Party doesn't want that to happen.

LeadBolt wrote:

93henfan wrote:Christie is one of the few people who could get Congress working together and start our country back on the right path, but as you can see in this very thread, the nut wing of the Republican Party doesn't want that to happen.

Anyone who can minimize the influence the nut wings in each party hold over the political process, which prevents rational compromise and gets the country back on the right path probably will come out of their own party nominating process so bloodied that they stand very little chance of getting elected. Imo, that is what happened to Romney in 2012, but at least they didn't nominate a nut wing job. The Democrats haven't been able to do that since 1996.

kalm wrote:

LeadBolt wrote:
Anyone who can minimize the influence the nut wings in each party hold over the political process, which prevents rational compromise and gets the country back on the right path probably will come out of their own party nominating process so bloodied that they stand very little chance of getting elected. Imo, that is what happened to Romney in 2012, but at least they didn't nominate a nut wing job. The Democrats haven't been able to do that since 1996.

Obama is a center right establishment corporatist.