How Chris Christie Could Use the NSA Playbook

Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Conor Friedersdorf has written a tongue-in-cheek article in The Atlantic advising New Jersey Governor Chris Christie how he can use the NSA playbook to successfully defend himself of the charges that a senior member of his staff was involved in shutting down George Washington Bridge traffic, a stunt meant to punish the mayor of an affected town for opposing his reelection. Christie's NSA-inspired explanation would include the following points: There are almost 9 million people in New Jersey, and only one was targeted for retribution, an impressively tiny error rate lower than .001 percent; The bridge closure was vital to national security because [redacted]; Since the George Washington Bridge is a potential terrorist target, everything that may or may not have happened near it is a state secret; Going after a political rival is wrong but it's important to put this event in context; Fort Lee Mayor Mark Sokolich was the only target of non-compliant behavior. No other Fort Lee resident was ever targeted for retribution, and any delays that any Fort Lee resident experienced were totally inadvertent and incidental; Finally a panel will be formed to figure out how to restore the public's faith in Chris Christie. "To some readers, these talking points may seem absurd or deliberately misleading," concludes Friedersdorf, "but there isn't any denying that so far they're working okay for the NSA.""

Alternate reason for closing the bridge

[plasticquart]

... a stunt meant to punish the mayor of an affected town for opposing his reelection.

It is now suspected that this might not be the motivation for the bridge closure.

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/maddow-nj-bridge-scandal-was-political-revenge-but-maybe-not-for-the-reason-you-think%E2%80%A6/ [mediaite.com]

Re:beacon of freedom

[guises]

He's a shill because he's phrasing his criticism of the president (in the middle of a conversation about the governor of New Jersey) in a way that implies neutrality. He claims to be talking about corruption in government, and yet for some reason every one of his examples (other than "the fed") is either related to the president or is claimed to relate to the president. Again, in a conversation that has nothing to do with the president.

The reason he ignored GP's comments is because it's been done to death. Anyone reading this who doesn't know the reasoning behind each of those is blinded by partisanship.

Briefly though, because the Solyndra BS pisses me off more than any of the others:

I would fucking *love it* if the federal government would start making solar panels and selling them to people directly, but certain agitators would start screaming about socialism if the money isn't given to private interests instead. When you give money to to private companies there's always the chance that they'll go bankrupt. That's how it works. If you look at the whole program, rather than just at Solyndra, most of the companies did fine - a better success rate than most programs like this one.