The Triangulations of Christopher James Christie

Triangulation: (in politics) the action or process of positioning oneself in such a way as to appeal to or appease both left-wing and right-wing standpoints.

If you add the words “at different times, as required” it applies here:


.

The late Christopher Hitchens called out Bill Clinton for triangulation in No One Left to Lie To making the point that:

“Just as the necessary qualification for a good liar is a good memory, so the essential equipment of a would-be lie detector is a good timeline, and a decent archive.”

Christie is not a good liar now and he was not a good liar even when he didn’t know any better:
.

20 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Anonymous on November 25, 2015 at 3:31 pm

    what bs and I am pretty sure TL believes Christie still.

    Reply

  2. Posted by Anonymous on November 25, 2015 at 4:01 pm

    What is it that he said that you think is BS? …the part about choices must be made? or allowing the system to become insolvent if nothing is done? Just wondering….and no I am not a Christie fan in case you were wondering.

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on November 25, 2015 at 5:40 pm

      The “Anonymous” to whom you responded thinks ANYTHING and EVERYTHING that would result in a lowering of Public Sector pensions & benefits (even for FUTURE service not yet worked) is “BS” ….. no matter how grossly excessive, unnecessary (to attract and retain a qualified workforce), unjust, unfair (to Taxpayers called upon to pay for 80-90% of total Plan costs), and affordable.

      That mindset, if continued by NJ’s Democratic Legislature will result in them standing aside and simply WATCHING (doing nothing to FIX it …. as best as is possible at this late date) as Plan assets run down to zero.

      Even THEN they will STILL think that somehow (be it a Federal bailout or by NJ continuing retiree payouts on a pay-as-you-go basis via raising taxes by $10-$15 BILLION) they will get all that was “promised” …. always denying that what was “promised” was NEVER necessary, just or affordable,

      Insatiable greed is a very tough thing to overcome.

      Reply

      • Posted by skip3house on November 25, 2015 at 6:17 pm

        Government is infringing on the constitutional rights of NJ’s youth and future generations by not taxing/paying for present services with other than promises

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on November 25, 2015 at 9:21 pm

          Indeed, but being able to PAY FOR promises (in the year accrued) necessitates that we do not “promise” MORE than what is necessary, fair to taxpayers, and affordable.

          Our self-interested elected officials have violated those precepts … in spades … and all to keep the flow of Public Sector Union campaign contributions coming.

          Reply

        • Posted by Anonymous on November 25, 2015 at 10:01 pm

          Didn’t seem to be a problem for prior generations? I know it’s different now but with exceptions!

          Reply

          • Posted by dentss dunnigan on November 26, 2015 at 1:51 pm

            even the unions have thrown the younger workers under the bus ,paying more for someday receiving less pension benifits .

  3. Posted by Anonymous on November 26, 2015 at 9:14 am

    Turkey shoot in Trenton, the bounty is plentiful – LOL! Pumpkin pot pie and who really cares, the net plan assets are going away!

    Reply

  4. Posted by Anonymous on November 26, 2015 at 10:39 am

    http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2015/11/nj_chiropractors_sue_state_health_benefits_plan_fo.html#incart_river_mobileshort_index

    This one cracks me up! Downgrade their coverage and problem solved.

    The insurance companies including independent agents, facilities, and providers have such a racket on our health it’s a joke.

    Time for a single payor system with administrators (ie exsisting insurance companies) contracted by region. If they don’t want to participate then go bankrupt or take your business elsewhere.

    No worries on the economic ripple effect!

    Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on November 26, 2015 at 1:07 pm

      It’s not that simple. Insurance PREMIUMS are determined by the richness of the coverage provided and cost-offsets via the size of deductibles, copays, and coinsurance percentage.

      BECAUSE there is (or should be) a reasonable limit on how much Public entities can pay to provide such coverage, we need to “appropriately” limit the coverage and include deductible/copays/coinsurance (to make sure the users of such services make wise usage decisions).

      A good reason why the “Platinum+” healthcare coverage provided NJ’s Public Sector workers/retirees is patently absurd …. and another of the ways NJ’s taxpayers get screwed by being forced to pay for something FAR better than what THEY typically get.

      Reply

      • Posted by Anonymous on November 26, 2015 at 2:40 pm

        I’m not looking for easy. We need to do something BIG. Replace then repeal the ACA. Let’s take healthcare coverage off the table for the majority. Of course the seriously rich can continue to do whatever they want.

        One plan fits all, Medicare for the masses, a single payor system. Allow the majority of employers and employees to operate at an equal level as far as healthcare coverage is concerned.

        As far as the weathly, (individuals and companies) including the facilities and providers that wish to cater to them. That’s right a special tax, in addition to an expanded Medicare tax to fund the new program.

        Health insurance for profit is counter intuitive to the subscribers best interests.

        Reply

        • Posted by Tough Love on November 26, 2015 at 3:53 pm

          I would love to see (and believe ALL of America’s citizens desperately DESERVE) single-payer tax-funded (Medicare-style) healthcare coverage.

          Obamacare was nothing but a backdoor way of trying to accomplish the same thing but in a convoluted way because Congress would never support such a DIRECTLY taxpayer-supported single-pay system (with so many vested interests that would be in opposition).

          Reply

          • Posted by Anonymous on November 26, 2015 at 4:19 pm

            In reality it comes down to this; why should your economic standing decide if you receive health care and ultimately, in the case of life threatening illness, determine if you will live or die.

            Of course we as a society have to figure out how much we’re willing to (or can afford to) spend on a realistic care continuim.

          • Posted by Tough Love on November 26, 2015 at 4:56 pm

            Here we depart …. to some degree.

            If America were to put in place a single-payer system, the coverage provided and the costs need to be what America can reasonable afford, noting that there are many other needs competing for the same tax dollars. That means that we cannot provide Roll-Royce-coverage, hopefully more than Yugo-coverage … maybe Civic or Camry level coverage Call it “killing Grandma” if you will, but there has to be a coverage limit.

            That said, I see no reason why individuals should be prevented from personally buying coverage beyond that granted everyone.

          • Posted by Anonymous on November 26, 2015 at 5:26 pm

            Kind of right on track with my thoughts. Only exception is a premium tax for coverage purchased or provided outside the “Medicare” coverage. As well as a premium tax on facilities and providers opting out of the “Medicare” coverage. Otherwise the deliver system will be tainted, slanted to the wealthy who can afford the Cadillac coverage as well as the facilities and providers that cater to them.

          • Posted by Tough Love on November 26, 2015 at 5:37 pm

            Simply denying a Medical tax deduction for Premiums used to buy the additional level of insurance would be a good idea.

            Under a single-payer system, I doubt that they will be many medical providers (doctors, hospitals) opting out. ………… but a reasonable “tax” wouldn’t be a terrible idea.

          • Posted by Anonymous on November 26, 2015 at 10:07 pm

            Clarification, I was not referring to so called “Medi-Gap” insurance intended to cover what Medicare doesn’t. I was referring to an enhanced coverage that expands network eligibility as well as reducing coinsurance and out of pocket maximums, etc.

  5. Posted by Eric on November 26, 2015 at 11:14 pm

    Tough Love:
    I do not believe that Obamacare is a “back door” way to single payer since the drug companies are in control of the legislation, and bought off Congress long ago. As the US becomes even more “Third World”, government will perhaps become more involved with health care. The charity care cases are for the totally indigent. The medicaid cases are for those who have something, perhaps a card board box called home. The medicare cases are for the elderly, and the middle class continues to get screwed without single payer.
    Most people in the US do not even know what single payer or universal coverage means since the US is stuffed with the mentally impaired, who are glued to their televisions, and believe that they are watching news and not propaganda. It is sad. We live in a nation jam packed with imbeciles. Most cannot write a simple sentence with a noun and a verb, and perform simple addition without a calculator.
    Eric

    Reply

    • Posted by skip3house on November 26, 2015 at 11:38 pm

      Glad to see you guys finally getting together with the single payer solution. Great.

      Now, get together on replacing the NJ school property tax regressive system with a higher fair NJ Income tax, with no rebates. Create a bunch of examples of various people with total present income tax(NJ), and school property tax. You are sure to see most all under family incomes of , say, $150K, and homes to fit, will make out with double NJ Income tax, bur no school property tax. Trouble is, as noted here, ‘imbecile’ factor only because banks/rentals make property taxes invisible. I’ve had people wonder why I care as’ the bank pays those property taxes’.

      Reply

    • Posted by Tough Love on November 27, 2015 at 12:53 am

      Eric, what I meant when I said …

      “Obamacare was nothing but a backdoor way of trying to accomplish the same thing but in a convoluted way …..”

      was the elimination of the exclusion of those with “existing conditions” from buying coverage, and by making the cost more affordable to the masses via subsidies to those who need it most.

      P.S. …….. I certainly agree with your comments about drug companies. I was astonished that CONGRESS actually wrote into the SS Part “D” provisions that Medicare could NOT “negotiate” drug prices ….. especially since the Veterans administration does so. An astonishing give-away to the drug companies.

      Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: