June 24, 2011
— DrewM The unions won too, they are just too stupid and greedy to know it.
Unions have blasted the bill for ending their ability to collectively bargain their medical benefits. Health care plans for 500,000 public workers would be set by a new state panel comprised of union workers and state managers, rather than at the negotiating table. A sunset provision would allow unions to resume collective bargaining after increased health care contributions are phased in over four years.In addition, police officers, firefighters, teachers and rank-and-file public workers would all pay more for their pensions and health benefits.
Supporters of the bill say the state needs to cut costs because the pension and health systems are underfunded by more than $120 billion total. The Christie administration estimated the bill would save $3 billion in health benefits over the next 10 years and $120 billion in pension costs over 30 years. Much of the pension savings are from the controversial elimination of the cost-of-living adjustments for retirees, which unions have threatened to challenge in court.
Now that he's achieved his major priority, he's got some free time on his hands, right? I hear Iowa and New Hampshire are lovely this time of year.
Posted by: DrewM at
06:55 AM
| Comments (136)
Post contains 220 words, total size 2 kb.
This, like the man himself is frigging huge!
Unionized workers make up a large number of the population in NJ.
Posted by: runningrn at June 24, 2011 06:58 AM (ihSHD)
Only in a NJ court.
Posted by: Vic at June 24, 2011 06:58 AM (M9Ie6)
Now that he's achieved his major priority, he's got some free time on his hands, right? I hear Iowa and New Hampshire are lovely this time of year.
Yeah, i've kinda soured on him a bit after his coal speech a few days ago.
Posted by: Ben at June 24, 2011 06:59 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: Jean (Rudy, to stop Romney) at June 24, 2011 06:59 AM (7P7Ij)
Posted by: Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 07:01 AM (ujg0T)
Posted by: Jean (Rudy, to stop Romney) at June 24, 2011 07:02 AM (7P7Ij)
Never seen Rick Perry in action so can't rate how he'd do, but it would be awesome to see Chris Christie go one-on-one with Obama.......hahaha
Posted by: Boots at June 24, 2011 07:02 AM (neKzn)
I love Christie, but if Perry is really going to jump in, I'd rather Christie sit this one out.
Posted by: Y-not at June 24, 2011 07:02 AM (TFxd0)
Posted by: nati at June 24, 2011 07:03 AM (z2Sg6)
Posted by: CAC at June 24, 2011 07:04 AM (JEVge)
I love Christie, but if Perry is really going to jump in, I'd rather Christie sit this one out.
And frankly, Christie is still needed in NJ. NJ is so fouled up it needs at least two Christie terms.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 07:04 AM (ujg0T)
Posted by: CAC at June 24, 2011 07:05 AM (JEVge)
Ben, if your going nuke, coal loses. A coal/nuke/hydro base with NG surge near the point of service seems to be the solution till Al Gore can bottle those unicorn farts on a production basis.
Yeah, but if i'm not mistaken, he said in the speech that not only are they going to never build new coal plants in NJ, they are also not going to buy energy produced by coal and also phase out there current coal plants.
It's ridiculous. Especially considering they border us in PA and WV.
Maybe it was just a sop to the left, or moderates in his state, but it's not something i support.
Also, do you think we're going to go nuclear? What gives you that impression? When's the last time we built a nuclear power plant?
Posted by: Ben at June 24, 2011 07:06 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: CAC at June 24, 2011 07:07 AM (JEVge)
I love Christie, but if Perry is really going to jump in, I'd rather Christie sit this one out.
And frankly, Christie is still needed in NJ. NJ is so fouled up it needs at least two Christie terms.
Having lived in NJ, I would advise Christie to move up and out as soon as possible. The Union machine will not stop until they distroy him and they have a lot of help across the river. Just saying. I would advise a tepid prez run with the end game to be selected as a Cabinet Member slot in the new administration.
Posted by: Sub-Tard at June 24, 2011 07:07 AM (Q5+Og)
Don't count on that "minimum staff" thing. The NRC regulates minimum staff size and that is not very likely to happen.
This is why utilities build big ones because they get more MW for the staff size.
Posted by: Vic at June 24, 2011 07:08 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: CAC at June 24, 2011 07:10 AM (JEVge)
Posted by: runningrn at June 24, 2011 07:11 AM (ihSHD)
Posted by: MWR at June 24, 2011 07:12 AM (4df7R)
Because DrewM is a huge islam-loving, gun-grabbing Gore-worshiper?
Grow up or pull that foil off your head.
Exactly. I don't support Christie 4 Prez because of the mushy statement reasons nati outlined, and the fact that Christie neds to finish the job in NJ, but those were just mushy statements.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 07:12 AM (ujg0T)
13 Because DrewM is a huge islam-loving, gun-grabbing Gore-worshiper?
Grow up or pull that foil off your head.
---
Well, Christie is pretty much all of the above, so..........
Posted by: Sparkle Plenty at June 24, 2011 07:13 AM (mQMnK)
Posted by: runningrn
That would be priceless. That debate could be a PVV event.
Posted by: Boris Badanov at June 24, 2011 07:14 AM (6rX0K)
Posted by: CAC at June 24, 2011 07:15 AM (JEVge)
Of course, California demands to go full on tectonic plate displacement and sink into the Pacific...
Did you mean tuetonic?
Posted by: Hussein at June 24, 2011 07:16 AM (Q5+Og)
Posted by: GuyfromNH at June 24, 2011 07:18 AM (kbOju)
Of course, California demands to go full on tectonic plate displacement and sink into the Pacific...
Did you mean tuetonic?
Posted by: Hussein
That's not german to this topic.
Posted by: Boris Badanov at June 24, 2011 07:18 AM (6rX0K)
Posted by: Jean (Rudy, to stop Romney) at June 24, 2011 07:19 AM (7P7Ij)
I live here in Joisey, and we need the big guy to hang around.
I do agree with the doubters, though. He's not a true conservative. Squish on guns, mosques and Mother Gaia.
Still better than we could have dared hope for in this nest of Libs.
Just sayin'
Posted by: BIG ROB at June 24, 2011 07:19 AM (hr33h)
Posted by: GuyfromNH
I don't think that I want him as President. At this point, I just want him to make King Putt eat the teleprompter.
Posted by: Boris Badanov at June 24, 2011 07:19 AM (6rX0K)
CAC is correct about the micro-sized nuke plants.. self-contained and very safe. No one has authorized any yet, though!
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at June 24, 2011 07:20 AM (f9c2L)
We won't sink into the Pacific. We'll slide up to Alaska.
Posted by: John P. Squibob at June 24, 2011 07:21 AM (/U/Mr)
He just went full greenhouse retard. That is a deal breaker.
Posted by: MikeTheMoose at June 24, 2011 07:21 AM (0q2P7)
Posted by: Democrat hard on at June 24, 2011 07:22 AM (0fzsA)
Posted by: CAC at June 24, 2011 11:20 AM (JEVge)
Just add in that it blares Slayer and you've got their version of hell.
Posted by: Bevel Lemelisk at June 24, 2011 07:22 AM (FkKjr)
Posted by: TendStl at June 24, 2011 07:22 AM (N0z1T)
He just went full greenhouse retard. That is a deal breaker.
Naw, Ah-nold over here went full greentard. Christie? Simple-minded, mushy feel good. Not retarded. Lame yes, retarded no.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 07:23 AM (ujg0T)
Posted by: GnuBreed at June 24, 2011 07:24 AM (ENKCw)
I think a Christie-Obama debate would be less interesting in reality then it ought to be on paper.
The big problem is that, as these big debates usually are, the format would be arranged so that there aren't "curve ball" questions. Consequently, candidates can largely get away reciting their pre-written pre-memorized talking points in a debate.
Even if Christie shines, Obama probably wouldn't look too bad.
Ultimately, this is moot.
Frankly, I don't think Christie is a better qualified to be POTUS than say Perry, and in fact, in a lot of ways he's probably worse: More confrontational doesn't win you votes in Conservative parts of the country, and he's less experienced than many of the other candidates.
But more to the point, he's not running. He's made it crystal clear, saying again and again and again, that he doesn't want to run, and he isn't interested in taking the job of POTUS now. At what point do you take him at his word?
Posted by: looking closely at June 24, 2011 07:24 AM (6Q9g2)
He's a "squish" because he's in a liberal state. It's easy being conservative in Texas or Alaska. Don't get me wrong, I like Perry from what I know of him, but has he pushed Texas more conservative? Has he NEEDED to? On the other hand, Christie is doing some groundbreaking things, considering where he's doing it. He has to tell the libs what the want to hear from time to time.
Christie, Walker, Giuliani, Pawlenty, Romney sort of... they all deserve some credit for governing (or mayoring) a bunch of moonbats. They may have been "squishy" on some things, but is it realistic to expect them not to be given where they are?
Posted by: yinzer at June 24, 2011 07:25 AM (/Mla1)
Speaking of which, who is still playing footsie with running? Sarah Palin? Rick Perry?
Posted by: Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 07:25 AM (ujg0T)
Coal is dirty and dangerous, Ben. The waste from coal plants is at lease as dangerous as nuclear.. mainly because there's so much more of it. nasty stuff. NG, nuke, etc is what we should be doing for new plants
People need to understand this simple fact.
We will never stop using coal and oil.
Never.
For so many reasons, the first of which is how cheap it is.
The second is that coal and oil have many uses. Energy production is just one of them.
Almost every metal product requires coking coal and regular coal to be made. And just about every product we use has oil in it.
If there was some viable alternative I would be all ears but there isn't.
Nuclear is great, I happily support it, but it can only be used to energy production. That's all.
Also, I don't see a mad rush in this country to build nuclear plants.
Here is the environmentalists gambit. Shut down coal and oil plants first, then we'll replace them with nukes, wind, solar and hydro power.
But we all know the nuke plants will never get built. Heck look at Yucca mountain. We can't even store nuclear fuel anywhere.
Posted by: Ben at June 24, 2011 07:26 AM (wuv1c)
I should note, that I really really like Chrtistie, but there are like 3-4 issues which I can't accept compromise on.
Amnesty, Spending, Energy/global warming, and Obamacare repeal.
Posted by: Ben at June 24, 2011 07:27 AM (wuv1c)
Well, there are a few other uses
Posted by: Jean (Rudy, to stop Romney) at June 24, 2011 07:31 AM (7P7Ij)
Posted by: The Robot Devil at June 24, 2011 07:32 AM (136wp)
Also, I don't see a mad rush in this country to build nuclear plants.
Indeed, the eco-fiends are more hysterical about nukes than they are about Coal-fired power stations.
In my world, coal fired power stations could be built upwind from leftist enclaves.
In my world, leftist "wimmens" would be put into cells with muslim men and see how quickly the multiculturalism gets knocked out of them.
In my world....
Posted by: Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 07:33 AM (ujg0T)
That's it in a nutshell.
Christie might be termed a strong "fiscal-only" conservative. By NJ standards, and maybe elsewhere in the Northeast, that's attractive. People are responding to his plain "in your face" style, which is pretty unusual for a politician.
But I'm not convinced that either his politics or his personal style will get him all that far in a crowded field in say, South Carolina.
#41
Christie is fortunate that as NJ governor he is extremely powerful, considerably more so than the governor in many other states. He controls all State appointments, as one example. He also has the ability to direct funding and to control sessions of the legislature in ways that others can't.
So that's been helpful for him in getting things done, even with a relatively hostile legislature.
Posted by: looking closely at June 24, 2011 07:34 AM (PwGfd)
I'm thinking about ordering me a t shirt that has honey badger saying 'I'm a moron.' or 'Don't screw with the Head Ewok.' or some shit like that. There are actually lots of lurkers here from my area. This is one way to meet them.
Can someone with photo-shopping fu, whip this up?
PS -
Just heard on Beck about Accountable Care Organization that is in ObamaCare. Anyone know about this shit?!
Posted by: momma at June 24, 2011 07:34 AM (nWikJ)
I should note, that I really really like Chrtistie, but there are like 3-4 issues which I can't accept compromise on.
Amnesty, Spending, Energy/global warming, and Obamacare repeal.
Posted by: Ben at June 24, 2011 11:27 AM (wuv1c)
Like I posted above, he pulled NJ out of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative. Which is great move, so he's getting away from the AGW but still he's a RHINO
Posted by: The Robot Devil at June 24, 2011 07:35 AM (136wp)
"He's a "squish" because he's in a liberal state. It's easy being conservative in Texas or Alaska. Don't get me wrong, I like Perry from what I know of him, but has he pushed Texas more conservative? Has he NEEDED to?'
We have liberal refugees moving here for jobs at an alarming rate and a giant Latino population that often has a hard time focusing on business concerns in favor of "Latino Issues" The reason Perry does well in Texas is because he keeps the focus on the issue that unites Texans...Doin' Business & like him or not Texans know Perry has been very good for the local economy.
Posted by: workingclass artist at June 24, 2011 07:35 AM (nD95B)
Posted by: Sandy Salt at June 24, 2011 07:35 AM (iGZkF)
His "in your face" style at unions would go over good here, but not his gun grabbing which would kill him.
Posted by: Vic at June 24, 2011 07:36 AM (M9Ie6)
Did you see where al-q lost a boat load of money when the Chicago c&t scheme fell through? (If I'm remembering correctly.)
Posted by: momma at June 24, 2011 07:36 AM (nWikJ)
I'm thinking about ordering me a t shirt that has honey badger saying 'I'm a moron.' or 'Don't screw with the Head Ewok.' or some shit like that. There are actually lots of lurkers here from my area. This is one way to meet them.
Can someone with photo-shopping fu, whip this up?
Ace should just make them and sell them himself via the website. It could help pay for the website upkeep.
Posted by: yinzer at June 24, 2011 07:36 AM (/Mla1)
He withdrew NJ from the RGGI.
You should check your facts before you spout them.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at June 24, 2011 07:38 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: Annie Coulter at June 24, 2011 11:37 AM (wOaLi)
Yep, I and Anne on Steve Malzberg, she loves CC but said Romney would win because of name recognition...
Posted by: The Robot Devil at June 24, 2011 07:39 AM (136wp)
Posted by: Sandy Salt at June 24, 2011 07:39 AM (iGZkF)
We have liberal refugees moving here for jobs at an alarming rate and a giant Latino population that often has a hard time focusing on business concerns in favor of "Latino Issues" The reason Perry does well in Texas is because he keeps the focus on the issue that unites Texans...Doin' Business
At some point, the Left will have to be confronted. At some point, the Hispandering will destroy the business climate. A warning from Cali.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 07:40 AM (ujg0T)
The Model of the Future? The health-care law promoted accountable-care organizations. But it's hard to know what they are.
Posted by: momma at June 24, 2011 07:40 AM (nWikJ)
Well at least he didnÂ’t say it was illegal. That would be bad!
Posted by: Hussein the Plumber at June 24, 2011 07:40 AM (jx2j9)
Posted by: Vic at June 24, 2011 07:40 AM (M9Ie6)
Posted by: Sandy Salt at June 24, 2011 11:39 AM (iGZkF)
Here's the link with the announcement:
Posted by: The Robot Devil at June 24, 2011 07:41 AM (136wp)
Is everyone on the Perry bandwagon going to abandon him over the Texas version of the DREAM Act?
It's simply impossible to have a governing record of consequence and be electable without some deviation from conservative principles.
Hell, even Ron Paul! isn't as pure as Ron Paul would have people believe (and no, he's not electable).
Posted by: DrewM. at June 24, 2011 07:42 AM (Ccb4c)
Ace should just make them and sell them himself via the website. It could help pay for the website upkeep.
Posted by: yinzer at June 24, 2011 11:36 AM (/Mla1)
I agree. It has been brought up a million times in the last few years, but nothing has come from it.
The 'ettes have asked for earrings and undies, too.
Posted by: momma at June 24, 2011 07:42 AM (nWikJ)
Hell, even Ron Paul! isn't as pure as Ron Paul would have people believe (and no, he's not electable).
No, Ron Paul is man perfected.
He has no flaws.
He has blimp.
Case Closed.
Posted by: Ben at June 24, 2011 07:43 AM (wuv1c)
Posted by: Jean (Rudy, to stop Romney) at June 24, 2011 07:43 AM (7P7Ij)
Which is why I predict Romney will take the nomination.
Posted by: Annie Coulter at June 24, 2011 07:44 AM (wOaLi)
Posted by: The Robot Devil at June 24, 2011 07:44 AM (136wp)
Posted by: Sandy Salt at June 24, 2011 07:46 AM (iGZkF)
Yeah he pulled out of the compact but....
he had to double down on the AGW fraud.Posted by: Vic at June 24, 2011 11:44 AM (M9Ie6)
Yea, he's a politician good for NJ. For the country, not so good.
Posted by: The Robot Devil at June 24, 2011 07:46 AM (136wp)
Aside from the fact that everything you said is incorrect; I agree.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at June 24, 2011 07:47 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: SFGoth at June 24, 2011 07:47 AM (dZ756)
Posted by: Sandy Salt at June 24, 2011 11:39 AM (iGZkF)
Here's the link with the announcement:
Posted by: The Robot Devil at June 24, 2011 11:41 AM (136wp)
Here's a better link:http://tinyurl.com/6bln2x2
In this one, he talks all about how AGW is real, how 90% of scientists agree, how coal will never darken NJ's door again, etc.
Posted by: jeannebodine at June 24, 2011 07:47 AM (nvlAW)
Posted by: CAC at June 24, 2011 07:47 AM (JEVge)
"During a Statehouse news conference, Christie acknowledged the effects humans are having on climate change but said the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative was doing nothing to solve the problem."
If he believes in AGW he is off my list.
Posted by: real joe at June 24, 2011 07:48 AM (SlSoO)
Posted by: The Jackhole at June 24, 2011 07:49 AM (+qHxi)
"Deferring to the experts" about AGW while pulling New Jersey out of the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI) of Northeastern states is a position I can live with. He can always be won over by better science, but at least he recognized the economic stupidity of that initiative.
Posted by: Y-not at June 24, 2011 07:49 AM (TFxd0)
Posted by: jeannebodine at June 24, 2011 07:49 AM (nvlAW)
Posted by: jeannebodine at June 24, 2011 11:49 AM (nvlAW)
No worries, I've just prepared an agonizing and ironic punishment for you:
Posted by: The Robot Devil at June 24, 2011 07:53 AM (136wp)
Is everyone on the Perry bandwagon going to abandon him over the Texas version of the DREAM Act?
Everyone has their breaking points. For some of you it is pro-life, but in Cali, where abortion on demand has been the rule sine 1967, under Governor Reagan no less, I let that slide.
But what should be non-negotiable?
--Border security and resistance to Hispandering
--2nd Amendment self defense, we defend ourselves even before the nanny state
--Calling out man made globalwarming for the fraud and farce that it is
Posted by: Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 07:53 AM (ujg0T)
That Van Jones "The American Dream Movement" sounds like the headline for a laxative ad.
Posted by: Dang at June 24, 2011 07:54 AM (TXKVh)
Posted by: The Voice of Reason at June 24, 2011 07:56 AM (UpqKo)
Posted by: braindead MBM, gittin skeered. at June 24, 2011 07:57 AM (XyjRQ)
Posted by: nati at June 24, 2011 07:57 AM (z2Sg6)
Posted by: Jean (Rudy, to stop Romney) at June 24, 2011 07:58 AM (7P7Ij)
"At some point, the Left will have to be confronted. At some point, the Hispandering will destroy the business climate. A warning from Cali."
Point taken. So far the LaRaza infection has been kept at bay when compared to California because in Texas the churches have sway & we are a right to work state. Most Latinos in Texas actually work and many own small businesses & Perry has been good to small businesses. Despite their whining they will vote for him. They are mad at him now because of the sanctuary bill but it's posturing.
Posted by: workingclass artist at June 24, 2011 07:58 AM (nD95B)
Drew, I became a little emotional on the delta thread, it was not directed at you, apologies.
Posted by: willow at June 24, 2011 08:02 AM (h+qn8)
It does not matter what Chris Christie or any other politician "believes" about AGW (or evolution or the origins of the universe or what have you). All that matters is what he does about it. It looks to me that he has his priorities straight -- or is getting them straightened out -- about Cap & Trade. He's putting fiscal sanity first, as he should.
Posted by: Y-not at June 24, 2011 08:02 AM (TFxd0)
CAC is correct about the micro-sized nuke plants.. self-contained and very safe. No one has authorized any yet, though!
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at June 24, 2011 11:20 AM (f9c2L)
The exhaust from coal plants is run through a limestone scrubber which combines with the sulfur to form gypsum. The gypsum is then sent to drywall plants to make stucco and drywall (there are many agricultural uses for gypsum too).
The ash from the spent coal is used in cement.
Coal plants in the 1920's were pretty dirty. Coal plants in the 2010's are in the same neighborhood as NG.
Posted by: Lemmiwinks at June 24, 2011 08:03 AM (pdRb1)
Posted by: DrewM. at June 24, 2011 08:06 AM (Ccb4c)
Coal plants in the 1920's were pretty dirty. Coal plants in the 2010's are in the same neighborhood as NG.
Posted by: Lemmiwinks at June 24, 2011 12:03 PM (pdRb1)
I can't accept that, you argue from facts. I'd rather spout talking points from Kos.
Posted by: Libtard at June 24, 2011 08:07 AM (136wp)
Posted by: nati at June 24, 2011 08:09 AM (z2Sg6)
Posted by: Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 08:11 AM (ujg0T)
Posted by: Joejm65 at June 24, 2011 08:12 AM (A0wuE)
Posted by: Curmudgeon
Agreed. The point here is; should any Republican national candidate talk up this trend of reining in the excesses at the state level? I think that there is much to be gained by killing the fallacy that one governor on one state is doing this, which was the media spin in WI , until Ohio did the same. It also would speak to the need for a reformation of our finances and shared sacrifice.
The downside would be firing up the union base, using Republican ad dollars to do it.
Posted by: Boris Badanov at June 24, 2011 08:15 AM (6rX0K)
قد مخبول الرباع نظيفة والنطر أختك
Posted by: The Robot Devil at June 24, 2011 08:15 AM (136wp)
The only problem with a STATE deciding to go Nuclear, is that they cannot build them without the Federal Govs invovlvment.
To date, even with both Bush, and Obama, saying they want more Nucs, none have been built... and NONE have been actualy totally approved (it appears a couple have been approved for 'preliminary construction' tasks).
Posted by: Romeo13 at June 24, 2011 08:18 AM (NtXW4)
You crack me up.
I'm sure NJ Democrats and union leaders (not to mention Planed Parenthood) would be very interested in your theory about how he's only deviated from conservative polices in one area.
Maybe you should put together a newsletter they could subscribe to.
Posted by: DrewM. at June 24, 2011 08:19 AM (Ccb4c)
Coal Ash Is More Radioactive than Nuclear Wastehttp://tli.tl/x7xeCk
Over the past few decades, however, a series of studies has called these stereotypes into question. Among the surprising conclusions: the waste produced by coal plants is actually more radioactive than that generated by their nuclear counterparts. In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy
EPA releases list of 44 "high hazard" coal ash dumps http://tli.tl/032TJV
In response to demands from environmentalists as well as Senator Barbara Boxer (D-California), chair of the Senate Committee on the Environment and Public Works, EPA made public its list of 44 "high hazard potential" coal waste dumps. The rating applies to sites at which a dam failure would most likely cause loss of human life, but does not include an assessment of the likelihood of such an event. The list includes sites in 10 states, including 12 in North Carolina, 9 in Arizona, 6 in Kentucky, 6 in Ohio, and 4 in West Virginia.
Posted by: Chi-Town Jerry at June 24, 2011 08:20 AM (f9c2L)
Fix the economy/track record and pro life. Non negotional for me.
Like I stated, we all have our issues. Mine were (1) immigration realism, (2) self and national defense realism and (3) eco realism. If a candidate's stances on these issues are proper, the economy will fix itself.
I'm not a big Ayn Rand cultist, but her character John Galt was spot on--if the govenrment wants to fix the economy, it should "Get the hell out of my way!"
Posted by: Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 08:20 AM (ujg0T)
Posted by: phoenixgirl at June 24, 2011 08:24 AM (Cm66w)
Posted by: Sandy Salt at June 24, 2011 08:25 AM (iGZkF)
Posted by: AoSHQ's *second* worst commenter, DarkLord© at June 24, 2011 08:28 AM (GBXon)
Posted by: workingclass artist at June 24, 2011 08:30 AM (nD95B)
No, I don't think he did.
nati asserts that Christie is a social liberal, for example, when he is known to be pro-life and cut PP funding.
Posted by: Y-not at June 24, 2011 08:30 AM (TFxd0)
it is always are wrong time to be a libtard, they just don't know it
Posted by: lan sing at June 24, 2011 08:34 AM (YHrQZ)
More coffee for the Morons.
nati:
There is a difference between candidates (like Perry) who deviate from conservative values on a number of points, and candidates (like Christie) who deviate from conservative values on all except one issue.
Translation, who are essentially one-issue conservatives. (Accuracy left as exercise to the Morons.)
DrewM:
I'm sure NJ Democrats and union leaders (not to mention Planed Parenthood) would be very interested in your theory about how he's only deviated from conservative polices in one area.
Translation, who are conservatives except on one issue. (I suspect this was an error, and that DrewM meant 'liberal' in this case, but I'll leave that for him to say or nay.)
Bets are open on the next link on the chain of misreadings. Probably on something I wrote here, 'cause that's how things roll in these parts...
Posted by: AoSHQ's *second* worst commenter, DarkLord© at June 24, 2011 08:37 AM (GBXon)
nati asserts that Christie is a social liberal, for example, when he is known to be pro-life and cut PP funding.
"Social Liberal" might have more than one dimension to it. How many pro-lifers are also immigration romantic fools?
Posted by: Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 08:38 AM (ujg0T)
I think the point he's making is sure Perry has one deviation from conservative principles but Chrisitie deviates from them all except on one.
If he says otherwise, I'll happily retract it.
Posted by: DrewM. at June 24, 2011 08:42 AM (Ccb4c)
Those studies have been done "over the past few decades." The technology for clean coal-fired plants is constantly evolving. Citing a study from 25 years ago doesn't say much about the current state of affairs.
As has been pointed out up the thread; coal and NG are about the same when it comes to emissions.
Posted by: CharlieBrown'sDildo (NJConservative) at June 24, 2011 08:47 AM (LH6ir)
Posted by: AoSHQ's *second* worst commenter, DarkLord© at June 24, 2011 08:47 AM (GBXon)
Works for me cause we have an oil & gas boom to manage down here in Texas, enough to wean us off the OPEC tit.
Posted by: workingclass artist at June 24, 2011 08:50 AM (nD95B)
If Gov.Perry wins the GOP nomination & beats Obama to a wimpering bloody pulp he'll shrink the EPA to 2 filing clerks working in California.
Works for me cause we have an oil & gas boom to manage down here in Texas, enough to wean us off the OPEC tit.
That would be awesome if he could beat down the "NO OFFSHORE DRILLING" eco-fiends (and the irony of that on a *bumper sticker* is really something). Once the initial disruption passes, the drilling rig makes a great artificial reef.
And yet the eco fiends are all smiles about scuttling old asbestos laden warships to make the same reefs.
Posted by: Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 08:55 AM (ujg0T)
And yet the eco fiends are all smiles about scuttling old asbestos laden warships to make the same reefs.
Posted by: Curmudgeon
Actually, we had to rip out all the asbestos before scuttling them. It's a pain in the ass, and makes you itch BAD.
Posted by: ADM. Akbar at June 24, 2011 09:02 AM (fPOY0)
Perry grew up on cotton farm used to run the Agr. Dept. in Texas & over 80% of farms and ranches in Texas are family run businesses. If anybody is prepared to shrink these bloviated mismanaged federal agencies it is Perry. It's one reason he's for states rights & shrinking the Federal Govt.
Posted by: workingclass artist at June 24, 2011 09:12 AM (nD95B)
Posted by: workingclass artist at June 24, 2011 09:24 AM (nD95B)
Ah.
I was trying to mock him by saying his theory is unique and I bet the people most knowledgeable about how conservative Chrisite is (NJ Dems and unions) would love to hear why they are wrong.
Posted by: DrewM. at June 24, 2011 09:26 AM (Ccb4c)
6Oh puhleeze, is someone in the California GOP paying attention? Or are they still too busy trying to pander to voters who will never vote for them?
--
Wait, there is a GOP in Cali.? We do have a party that sits in the corner and plays with itself while Democrats continue to run paradise into the ground. Could that be them? A party that can't be bothered to, you know, mount any decent campaigns? Or even put up a decent fight for a special election?
All the Cali. GOP management cares about is lining their own pockets with contributions, and then shrugging after they lose each election. They suck so hard they could reverse the direction of the Mississippi river.
Posted by: HoundOfDoom at June 24, 2011 09:26 AM (KhioZ)
Posted by: thunderb at June 24, 2011 09:44 AM (OnkMW)
Here is the most interesting part to me:
Much of the pension savings are from the controversial elimination of the cost-of-living adjustments for retirees....
The tremendous bang-for-the-buck you can get by eliminating or reducing annual COLAs for retirees, compounded over decades, is the key thing here. Doing so is only marginally painful.... it reduces payouts to retirees only gradually, allowing them time to plan. But it appears to solve the pension funding problem almost by itself.
This sure seems like a fair formula to me, particularly when younger workers are going to have drastically limited pensions, if they get any pensions at all.
So why couldn't we do something like this on the national scale for Social Security too? Instead, politicians' fear of the AARP and other old-folks' lobbyists keeps talk of reforming Social Security within the parameters of.... "and remember: we're not touching anything having to do with people currently in retirement or nearing retirement." But if we don't touch them, we're letting a huge (and rich) portion of the public off scot-free, while the young will bear the entire burden.
Posted by: The Right Curmudgeon at June 24, 2011 10:44 AM (69ED2)
So far we have seen Christie make a union member disappear, pulled a union member out of his hat, saw a union member in two, levitate a union member and pick a union member out of a deck of cards.
Wish he would do some tricks involving Obama or other policies. Unions are just one of a hundred. It is a great thing though.
Posted by: Keven at June 24, 2011 11:30 AM (UMRed)
Posted by: Fiftycal at June 24, 2011 04:20 PM (Deems)
Hide Comments | Add Comment | Refresh | Top
64 queries taking 0.218 seconds, 264 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.








Posted by: AoSHQ's *second* worst commenter, DarkLord© at June 24, 2011 06:57 AM (GBXon)