Jon Stewart, of the Daily Show, who occupies a unique niche in American
entertainment and politics, interviewed, Republican Governor Chris Christie, who, at this time, occupies a
unique position in Republican American politics. Every so now and then Stewart
devotes a prolonged period of his show to a single personality. Usually it is
because of the gravitas of the office, such as it was with President Obama.
With the Christie interview it was a mixture of Christie’s position and to have
a debate that cuts through all the posturing and hypocrisy that is currently
part of the political debate.
DRAMATIS PERSONAE.
Jon Stewart.
This remarkable individual has an ever growing following in
the key 28 to 40 year old demographic and in that group is said to be their
main source of news. This is no mean feat for someone who does not pretend to
be a serious news or political commentator. From an entertainment point of
view, he and his show have won the Emmy award for the best comedy, variety or
music show on American Television for 10 years in a row. While his politics are
unashamedly liberal or independent, no-one escapes his satirical scythe
regardless of their political affiliation. Stewart organized a rally in
Washington, entitled Back to Sanity, which drew a crowd conservatively
estimated at 150,000. Clips of his satire are part of several television
programs daily. Stewart is one of the most influential TV personalities, if not
the most influential with Oprah having abdicated, on the circuit.
Chris Christie.
This New Jersey Republican Governor was the choice of every
wing of the Republican Party to be the 2012 contender against Obama. He had
more sense than to be flattered into it. Ann Coulter one of the standard
bearers of the Conservative Republican Cause openly championed him. Also the
Establishment, recognizing his popularity and skills at governing with a
Democratic legislature pushed very hard to get him to commit. Romney,
recognizing his abilities and following made him the keynote speaker at the
Republican Convention. There he was hammered for his lukewarm support of Romney
and his speech. His speech was characterized, by some cynics, as his first
salvo in the 2016 Presidential race. He gained national recognition for his
management of hurricane Sandy in New Jersey. He also unconditionally and
lavishly praised Obama for his role in the hurricane disaster. For this he
received abuse from the Republican commentators, even maintaining that he
“gave” Obama the election. Currently he has the highest approval rating of any Republican politician
WHAT PUBLIC EXPENDITURE DO THE REPUBLICANS ACCEPT THAT ARE
NOT “ENTITLEMENTS”?
Stewart was out to show the hypocrisy of the Republicans in
relation to what they deemed necessary as government spending as opposed to what they considered waste or
entitlement. He maintained that whatever the Republicans wanted they claimed
was essential and all other societal needs were deemed entitlements. (The
explanatory narrative that follows does not necessarily follow the exact time
sequence in which the issues were discussed and some of the positions have been summarised for brevity's sake).
* Funding of the post Katrina hurricane recovery.
Christie accepted that he was asking Obama for 30 billion or
more for the post Katrina recovery. He also stated that Obama had been
extremely supportive of trying him to get him a few billion more as that was
“necessary”. Christie was asked, in the light of the Republican policy on
Government spending whether he should let the free market look after the people
in New Jersey after hurricane Sandy. He immediately countered that this was a
totally different situation. He
maintained that all the citizens
of New Jersey were involved and that this disaster could only be managed by
Governmental intervention.
Stewart remained unimpressed stating again that in similar
situations the Republicans have asked that the expenditure be offset by
cutbacks in other “entitlements”. Christie came back at him saying this was a
necessity, an emergency or a disaster. At this stage Stewart let it rest and
went onto his next subject.
* Obamacare and Christie.
Christie had vetoed setting up a New Jersey state “exchange”
to provide insurance for the uninsured and left it to the Federal Government.
This action has become the passive aggressive way for Republican Governors to
register their displeasure at Obamacare in the hope to make it unworkable.
Stewart challenged Christie stating that the very same day that he vetoed the
legislation to create insurance “exchanges” he was in Obama’s office asking for
more money for what he thought was a “necessity” - The electorate and
legislature had considered Obamacare a “necessity” why wasn’t he doing his bit
and didn’t Obama point this out to him? Didn’t Obama ask for a quid pro quo?
Christie, now on the defensive, said he had vetoed the
“exchanges” because he did not know what it was going to cost. Christie replied that Obama
did not make his support of his,
Christie’s, plight contingent on anything. “Obama understood”, he argued.
The cost argument could not fly as Christie conceded that both he and the government had
given their best information as to the costs of both Katrina aftercare and the
state establishment of insurance “exchanges” for Obamacare. So why shouldn’t he
do what Obama was doing - trust these estimates? Obama could have turned around and said the Federal Government had done more than it's fare share let New Jersey and the freemarket do the rest. ( The Repubicans' key cry is to leave it to the individual states and even better the freemarket. Romney campaigned on that).
Again Christie maintained that you couldn’t really compare
Katrina with any of these issues as Katrina was a disaster.
Stewart countered that he considered someone, without
medical insurance, diagnosed with cancer was a Katrina. Would the Republicans
and Christie let the free market look after cancer? (This was the situation
that pertained to a sizable portion of the population prior to Obamacare).
Christie floundered in his response saying that was not what
he was doing as that person would be managed by the Government if not by the
State of New Jersey.
Christie was oblivious to the fact that he had fought the
introduction of Obamacare and had not officially changed his stance. He also
failed to take ownership that he and the 25 other Republican Governors had all
declined to accept their responsibilities under Obamacare making it as
difficult as possible to enact it.
DIFFERING PHILOSPHIES ON WHAT GOVERNMENT SHOULD PAY FOR
Christie in response as to what his philosophy was as to
what Government should pay for, maintained that only those activities that were
necessary and only those the Government alone could effect.
Stewart pointed out that this was a value judgment. The
Republicans declared whatever they thought was a “necessity” and had absolutely
no empathy for others’ plights. (They had written off 47% of the population as
the “takers”). However, if they could identify with a disadvantaged group then
they were all for making provision for them. Dick Cheney’s daughter was gay and
suddenly he was all for gay rights.
There is very little doubt that this double standard is
going to a central focus of the political dialogue in the coming years. Dianne
Reeme on her popular public radio program had a debate on the validity of food
stamps. A sizable percentage of Americans have been receiving these off and on for
the past few years.
On the one side was the Republican opinion that these
people were the “takers” and the system was abused. The other side argued that
the criteria for food stamps were rigid needing documentation and charitable
organizations could not begin to meet the current needs. Studies had been done
showing that there was less than a 4% prevalence of fraud or abuse. Food stamps
were between hunger and getting the appropriate number of calories per day.
They were a necessity to a large number of struggling American families.
CHRISTIE’S PERSONA
There is very little doubt that Christie has charisma and he
handled himself well in front of the Stewart faithful. He is likeable and
appears “flexible”. He appears genuine and is a straight shooter. He is also a
very successful Republican Governor in a very Democratic State.
Christie would a make a very impressive presidential
candidate and Jon Stewart ended by saying he was looking to 2016 when he has to
run against Hillary Clinton. However he is going to have to sort out, a political agenda that hangs together rationally.
What Jon Stewart failed to mention is what Republican
philosophy would dominate the Presidential Primary selection process in 2016
and what a prospective candidate would have to say to become the Republican
candidate. If the Republican Tea Party Godfather, former Senator Joe DeMint, has his
way Christie will have to take up a whole lot of positions, social and
financial, that may make him acceptable to the right and then who knows how the
electorate will view him then……
No comments:
Post a Comment