Is Chris Christie A Blowhard? Is Allahpundit A Punk?

By
September 24, 2010

I was drawn into a discussion about Chris Christie and Mark Levin last night on Twitter. I take it that it all started with Allahpundit being a punk, as usual. And, yes, Allah's childish eye-poking of a great many things conservative is punkish, everyone knows it, so, don't whine about my saying so. If that's the way he wants to roll, he can – and he can live with the criticism. I wouldn't, however, call him a ruffian. Maybe he did time somewhere along the way. Who knows.

 b : a usually petty gangster, hoodlum, or ruffian c slang : a young man used as a homosexual partner especially in a prison

Being his usual passive-aggressive, piss-ant and annoying self, Allah highlighted this 30 second clip in which Mark Levin basically refers to Chris Christie as a blowhard. But he didn't put any focus on this 3 minute clip, which provides the context. (Is the Rightscoop locking up his video? Hmm.)

Levin was contrasting the more genuinely conservative, Jim DeMint – who, despite any edge, also comports himself like a gentleman in public, versus the more establishment-oriented, if confrontational, it's my party and I'll cry if I want to, Chris Christie.

I like Christie. I think he's doing good things for New Jersey. I believe Mark, who promoted him when he was running, does too – in that sense. He's doing fiscally conservative things Northeast establishment Republicans have failed to do in the past. However, there's nothing wrong with anyone taking exception to the fact that he's soft on immigration, the environment, taxes, given some earlier history, and other issues, as well. He didn't join 20 some odd other states in challenging ObamaCare in court, for instance.

Now, as for his You Tube stardom. I get it. I've had fun watching his clips, too. But in the end, this is still a powerful guy, a governor, with a podium, using it to slap around indivduals either to make a larger political point, or because he really is a blowhard. I'm guessing it's a bit of both.

As for whether Levin is a blowhard. Well, why does any non-fan really care? You aren't earning a living as a reporter, compelling you to go to a news conference for a beatdown? He doesn't have power over your pension fund, or union contract. So, turn him the hell off if you don't like it. Unlike the people Christie publicly confronts, you have no skin in the game and are free to move on.

Finally, as for Christie's now famous face-offs – enjoy them. But don't forget that if you are a hardliner on immigration, don't buy into wind mills, or maybe Global Warming, or you think NJ is already overly intrusive on the 2nd Amendment, if you go to a Christie presser, you might be getting more face time with him than you want, as opposed to watching him bang on one of your favorite targets on You Tube.

I'm not opposed to strong rhetoric. And I want Christie kicking union heads around and playing hardball with the media. Whether he has to embarrass a reporter, school teacher, California citizen and quasi-politician, or whomever else, to do that, will emerge as a valid question if it continues and he wants to run for higher office. And what Levin was actually pointing out is, while backing Castle, Whitman and some others, he hasn't yet beat feet to back Joe Miller, Rand Paul, or Sharron Angle. So, I fail to see the issue with Mark pointing out that tongue lashing some liberal in public isn't an accurate test of one's conservative bona fides.

Chris Christie's confrontations at public forums are becoming legendary. He's now traveling to the left coast to boost Meg Whitman's campaign, and to intervene when the damsel is in distress.

Please consider supporting RiehlWorldView with a small donation
, by shopping at Amazon via our Associate link in the sidebar or by re-distributing our content across the Web with the options below. Thank you.


Comments:
  1. Ad rem says:

    First I read of this was over at Ace’s….7:30pm.

  2. Carl says:

    I agree with rant. It was somewhat confused last night as to just what was eating Mr. Pundit.
    Levin is a strict conservative ( and I think quite brilliant) ideologue. There’s no deception. You either love him or hate him depending on your world view. I think what Levin was pointing out was the moderate leanings of someone that many on the right are considering their messiah.

  3. Moobs says:

    no doubt john burke will be around to call us antiamerican for speaking the truth

  4. Moobs says:

    no but bawney fwank is a blowhard………………if you know what i mean

  5. Ricky says:

    Rush and Levine are solid, and non-apologetic about their conservative views.
    They keep my hopeful for America.

  6. David says:

    Good post, I think I was more upset with Ace’s than Allah’s. Levin is just trying to keep people grounded.

  7. dirtybenny says:

    Levin is god

  8. MikeGSP says:

    Riehl, your post was a refreshing breath of fresh air in comparison to all too many in the right-wing blogosphere and media who are fawning over Christie. That reaction is no different than how the left fawned over Obama 2 years ago. Conservatives are supposed to be thinkers and deal in facts, not look for a persona.
    My governor may talk a good game and make for viral YouTube videos but he is no conservative. As someone I know put it, he’s “all sizzle but very little steak.”

  9. Sandy says:

    As much as people are being credited for having woken up to politics, some of those awoken see someone taking on the Unions, who many think have aided to the destruction of our economy, and, immediately start calling for him to be President. It’s not only Christie, there are others. I like John Bolton, and think he would be excellent with national security/foreign relations, but, I don’t know anything about his positions on the rest of the important issues, such as the economy. Some are jumping all over themselves, when they see someone say one thing they agree with, rather than with holding judgement until the whole person, and all his positions, are known. Isn’t that how we got Obama? Christie clearly stated on Cavuto’s show that there was no chance that he would run for the Presidency in 2012, yet, he seemingly is making noises that now he may consider it, maybe not in 2012, but possibly in 2016. Great Christie, stay in NJ, and, let’s see just what you do over the next 6 years. We can easily judge you then on your record.
    I don’t know what Christie was up to with his tongue lashing at someone who didn’t support Whitman. Was he coming to the defense of the damsel in distress, or was he just performing his popular approach of tough man? If Whitman wins, will he be summoned to CA every time someone speaks out against something Whitman does? Will he come out with statements in support of Castle’s write-in campaign, that he will most likely do?
    The worshiping of hereos, before you even know how much of a full fledged hereo that person is, is ridiculous. On another website, I posted in full support of Christie, and his taking on the unions, but, also included some reservations as to his Environment and Immigration positions. Man did I get a thrashing. How dare I question Christie’s conservatism. No lie. Then again, many on that same website have trashed Levin as a know nothing idiot. Go figure.

  10. Moobs says:

    was that site hot air?
    because blatantblue and NoDonkey are some of the most obnoxiously ostentacious christiebots
    if it wasn’t alright then

  11. Sandy says:

    No Moobs, it wasn’t. I really don’t want to trash a website because of some really really dumb people that post their. I would do it to this site either.
    Right after I posted mu above comment, I did go back over their to read more articles and comments, and, low and behold, I am still being thrashed for posting past negative comments about Eric Cantor, Krauthammer and Christ Christie. For some, they just can’t accept facts, and the truth. It seems to shatter their little unicorn worlds. It’s very funny actually.

  12. Sandy says:

    What I meant to say was, no, it wasn’t hot air, I never read Hot Air. Also, I meant that I wouldn’t do it to this site either. Just want to be clear.

  13. Moobs says:

    ok yes anyone who doesn’t worship at the house of krauthammer is a far right libertarian
    dictatorial punks

  14. Jamie says:

    Really Dan. Defending Mark Levine calling someone else a blowhard? You don’t think that’s a little of the pot calling the kettle black? Is Chris Christie a blowhard? Probably, but I like what he’s doing over there in New Jersey. Mark, calling someone else out for boorish behavior in public is a tad hypocritical. Glass house, Mark, glass house.
    Correct me if I’m wrong thought, but you yourself have defended Mark’s moor boorish public behavior (and your own) on the grounds that its the substance that matters. I guess in this case style seems to actually matter.

  15. Moobs says:

    yes Jamie but i still like mark levin’s style you do not obviously

  16. Moobs says:

    i still like mark levin’s contributions to conservatism*
    you do not like his style obviously*

  17. MikeGSP says:

    Sandy –
    Has Christie laid off ONE state worker? Has he renegotiated any of their contracts? Many believe he’s “taking on the unions.” I want to know — where’s the beef?

  18. Dana says:

    “As for whether Levin is a blowhard. Well, why does any non-fan really care? You aren’t earning a living as a reporter, compelling you to go to a news conference for a beatdown? He doesn’t have power over your pension fund, or union contract. So, turn him the hell off if you don’t like it. Unlike the people Christie publicly confronts, you have no skin in the game and are free to move on.”
    Why does it matter? It matters because although Levin is not a pol who has control over pensions or decisions like that, he does reach and influence a great number of people for better or worse.
    You’re correct that we can turn him off, but I closely followed his response/interaction with Patterico and frankly, his blatant ignoring of the presented facts was troubling. When one rejects fact and resorts to childish name calling and tirades of emotionalism, then I think it is behooves conservatives to call that one out – I might go as far as to say it’s the “responsibility” of fellow conservatives to do so.
    So yes, it does matter. Deeply.
    We could ignore, turn off, look away but that only allows a divisive weakness to impact this wonderful movement of conservatism. It may not be an issue of policy but it is certainly an issue of integrity.
    All of us who are working hard to swing the pendulum to the right most decidedly have skin in the game.