‘Somebody’s Going Down Tonight, But It Ain’t Going to be Jobs, Sweetheart’
I’m not exactly sure what that means, but I’ll bet it sounded great at the time, as Chris Christie “Squares Off with Occupiers at Romney Rally:”
It was a rally for Mitt Romney, but it was Chris Christie who brought the hundreds of attendees to their loudest cheers in the cavernous high school gym.
“We can no longer put up with the most pessimistic man I’ve ever seen in the Oval Office,” Christie told the crowd.
Referring to President Obama’s class warfare rhetoric, Christie said that Obama’s solution was to take “pie” from those who had a bigger “piece,” keep the bulk of it, and then give some to those with a smaller piece. In contrast to that, “what Mitt Romney believes that the size of the American piece is infinite,” Christie said.
When he was interrupted during his remarks by Occupy protesters shouting, “Christie kills jobs! Christie kill jobs!” Christie deadpanned, “Really?”
“Somebody’s going down tonight, but it ain’t going to be jobs, sweetheart,” Christie rejoined from the stage as the chanting continued from a cluster in the audience. “There’s this confusion that’s out there because if she was in New Jersey … she would know that we created 60,000 new private sector jobs.”
Saying that the female protester was “blinded” by her enthusiasm for Obama, Christie continued, “And if she wasn’t so disoriented by the loss of hope and change, she’d understand that … Mitt Romney is the hope for America’s future.”
The Washington Post adds this anecdote from Christie’s rally for Romney:
New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie (R) on Sunday called President Obama the “most pessimistic man I’ve ever seen” and said he is faking anger to win reelection.
Christie, appearing alongside GOP presidential front-runner Mitt Romney at a campaign rally at a high school here, accused the president of a cynical effort to redirect the anger of the American people by appearing angry himself.
“I have a suggestion for the president: He doesn’t do angry well,” Christie said. “He understands that the American people are angry and they’re scared and they’re worried about the future. So he’s decided, in the most cynical reelection strategy that you could ever think of, that he doesn’t care if you’re angry, he just wants you to be angry at somebody else.”
Naturally, the Post’s cheerleaders for Mr. Obama seem surprised that somebody would say that he’s “faking anger.” Wouldn’t the shorter list be what Obama isn’t faking as a postmodern performance artist?
Update: Video of the Big Man overcoming his hecklers found via Nice Deb.
Obama is not faking his anger–its real. There is nothing so angry as little tin gods whose worshipers desert them or are subjected to the presence of people who always refused to believe they were gods at all.
Good point. Maybe we can think of ways to get Obama angry, especially when on TV. If I were running this show, I’d confront him at every opportunity with his lies, including the ones about Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn.
Christie is saying exactly what I’ve been saying for 3 years. Obama is all negative: negative on America in foreign countries; negative on jobs, negative on the middle class, the most productive segment of American society. And for what? So he can give your hard earned money to his cronies at the big banks, his friends at the United Auto Workers, the Teamsters, the AFL-CIO, and other similar types of union thugs. Did you think that Obama was kidding about that fundamental transformation? I didn’t. We need to rally around the Republican nominee in the end because if he isn’t elected, it’s literally the death knell of the the country. Obama is leading us (maybe from behind) into a nightmare that’ll be 20 times worse than Greece. If you don’t like his policies now, try to imagine what he will be like in a second term!
“If your enemy is quick to anger, provoke him.” ~ Sun Tzu, The Art of War
I don’t think Obama has the juice to get angry. Petulant, yes. Irritated, no doubt. But he just doesn’t seem to have enough emotional capacity to feel real anger. Psychologists call that “flat affect”, and that describes what I’ve seen of President Smugandcool very well.
The more I see of Christie next to Romney, the more obvious it is that Romney needs a mouthpiece. He’s still saying that Barry is a nice guy. He brags that he will work with the other side. Romney is a typical elitist, white-glove, establishment, milquetoast RINO. Romney and McCain – one and the same.
I don’t disagree with you. I believe that Romney is more like George H.W. Bush. A nice guy no doubt, but does he have the cojones to take the gloves off and fight on the inside. We KNOW that Obama will have to drop any pretense of civility and start dirty. And he won’t leave it to his surrogates. After all, as a community organizer, it was what he did. You don’t breakup board meetings at banks in a polite manner. This IS ACORN!.
Seeing Gingrich begin to operate as we all know he can, it makes me wonder whether he wouldn’t be the better candidate. Both (Romney and Gingrich) have the leadership skills but this fight (for that is what it will be) is going to be a knock down drag out fight all the way to the bitter end in November. And I just don’t know if the Republican elite have the stomach or the skills for it.
And no, Paul cannot do it. His supporters (as loud as they maybe) do not have the organizational or financial where with all to compete. As a matter of fact, I can foresee physical confrontation between Obama’s crews and Paul’s. Which would be a disaster. Gingrich just sems to be the sort of nasty infighter this election is going to require.
Romney has actually done some pretty good knife fighting so far, against his compeditors for the nomination, successively taking down Perry, Cain, Newt, with Santorum being next. If Romney can fight as effectively against Obama he should be OK. He is also pretty good at fending off attacks, as nobody has laid a glove on him so far. He is nowhere near as good a knife fighter as Christie, but he is doing OK so far.