Doc Savage Fan: Moonie, he actually quoted his driving record.
M: Of course he did, that's not the point; he didn't quote it to show that Christie is a bad driver. He quoted it to provide the background for the favoritism allegations. His record of citations may indicate that Christie is a reckless and dangerous asshole behind the wheel, which you must have intuitively realized by the form your deflection took, but that wasn't the point. So please stop with this shameful insistence that if you quote somebody's driving record you do so to call them a bad driver. The charge was favoritism and the begging off of responsibility via political influence.
DSF: OK, let's talk about facts.
M: No, we are going to talk about fact as they relate to context and what facts imply in the real world, not facts themselves but what they say to an unbiased mind.
DSF: Link 1 - This alludes to an alleged incident of favoritism. I couldn't find any evidence that Christie was charged with any ethics violation or that the assertion was ever investigated. I can't find any facts that prove whether this allegation is true or not.
M: Well that is simple enough. All we have to do is ask the person granting the favor did so out of favoritism, fear, desire for some future perk, etc. However, I have discovered in a long life of analysis of the motivation of others, that it is very very difficult to get somebody to confess to a crime when the only other person who might know the truth won't tell. Thus it is that favoritism often goes unpunished because the only folk who know the absolute truth are the ones practicing it. For the rest of us it just comes down to appearance, and we still have 5 more claims of it to go.
DSF: Link 2 - This one is a story where Christie was not issued traffic ticket after an accident that injured motorcyclist in 2002. "The officer, who did not witness the accident, opted not to issue a ticket." The writer speculates that Christie used his position to influence the officer's decision. Again, there are no facts given to support this assertion.
M: Again, we just have to ask the officer that what looks like favoritism is or isn't. Until he tells us the truth the best we can say is that it looks like it.
DSF: Link 3 - Story about Christie's financial relationship with Michele Brown with several allusions to misconduct. I couldn't find any evidence that Christie was charged with any ethics violations or that this was ever investigated. Looks like a hit piece to me....long on speculation and short on facts.
M: You mean facts that imply criminal intent that would have to be volunteered? So what you call speculation remains the appearance of a conflict of interest where the participants simply have to stonewall any accusations to avoid prosecution. You can't convict without proof of a crime but the number of suspicious incidents with Christie keeps growing.
DSF: Link 4 - Story about GOP governor candidate Chris Christie failing to report loan interest on his income tax return. Christie said it was an oversight. No charges filed. Non-story.
M: I know how easy that is to do, Charlie Rangel made the same mistake. Of course the house ethics committee didn't buy it. It's hard to convince law and order Republicans you forgot to pay your taxes. So when an elephant forgets to pay his taxes it has to be a failure of memory? Favoritism at it's finest.
DSF: Link 5 - More partisan claptrap. No evidence that Christie was charged with ethics violations or that this even warranted an investigation. Another non-story.
M: Goodness me, so so very many non stories. hehehehehe
DSF: Link 6 - Involves a campaign ad where Christie accuses Democratic Gov. Jon Corzine of not paying state income taxes the previous year. Corzine’s campaign says the claim is an "outright lie." The writer of the article stated that they found Christie's ad true in a literal sense, but thought its implications were false. Another fucking non-story.
M: So we see the power of denial in action, the ability to deflect case after case of the appearance of unethical behavior against a person who claims to be an ethics reformer and seeks a reputation on that. This is why it isn't just unethical behavior that should disqualify a person from claiming to be ethical, but the fact that there are so very many points in his life where suspicions are generated. He may appear to you to be innocent, even though you cite 6 examples where it's bull shit. How many examples of bull shit smoke does it take to burn your ass?
So you went from accusing the OP of impugning Christie's driving record to claiming no favoritism can exist without prosecution of it, despite the fact that no no appearances of it should be the bar for which a ethics reformer should be able to present to the public to be worthy of that claim.
Everybody knows the Mafia is a criminal organization and there's lots of Mafia members, known to be members, living nice lives, because nobody has caught them at crimes affirmed by a court of law. That's why I always say to myself, self, if a Mafia member runs for governor of my state, on an anti crime campaign, I'm going to vote for him. All these allegations that he's actually a criminal himself are going to fall on my deaf ears, because, by golly, the facts are the facts, all the charges are just fruit cake liberals with their liberal bias childish fear of criminal gangs.
DSF: From these 6 links (which are essentially allegations and innuendos devoid of facts), Perknose thinks they somehow prove something horrible about Christie's character. The real irony here is that he insists on only fact-based rebuttals without rhetorical deflection...what a joke.
M: Prove is the wrong word, in my opinion. You see something and call what you see a fact. I see it and see something else. What I see is a hideously suspicious series of allegations that tell me I smell a rat. Rats I fear, will smell rat perfume. That is just one hell of a bad historical record to claim to be an ethics reformer in my opinion, and for some odd reason I favor my capacity to reason over lots of other people just as you no doubt do here, but man, don't tell me that a criminal record is required to raise ethical questions about somebody's character.
DSF: In my opinion, Perknose is a pathetic hack and in desperate need of a cephalanalectomy.
M: In my opinion you see things as you do because of your brain wiring which is different than mine and that your kind of wiring has caused the scientist to posit you don't have a firm grasp on reality, your altered reality yes, but not the real world as it exists where the appearance of impropriety should earn you a kick from the political system. Sure, we can argue what rises to the level of a rational suspicion. I mean, geez, Christie could easily claim a wide stance on morals.
Facebook
Twitter