Supreme Court’s gay-marriage rulings blasted by … Chris Christie?

posted at 5:21 pm on June 27, 2013 by Allahpundit

Alternate headline: “He’s running.”

No, seriously, though. As strange as it seems, I think he might honestly oppose legalizing SSM.

He blasted the U.S. Supremes for substituting “their own judgment for the judgment of a Republican Congress and a Democratic President. In the Republican Congress in the ‘90s and Bill Clinton. I thought that Justice Kennedy’s opinion was, in many respects, incredibly insulting to those people, 340-some members of Congress who voted for the Defense of Marriage Act, and Bill Clinton.”

“He basically said that the only reason to pass that bill was to demean people. That’s heck of a thing to say about Bill Clinton and about the Republican Congress back in the ‘90s. And it’s just another example of judicial supremacy, rather than having the government run by the people we actually vote for,” said Christie, who recently appeared with Clinton at a Clinton Global Initiative conference…

“You’re talking about changing an institution that’s over 2,000 years old. Seems to me that, you know … the Democrats are putting an increase to the minimum wage on the ballot,” Christie said, noting Democratic opposition to a referendum. “That’s important enough to put on the ballot. But gay marriage is not. That’s something the people should decide, but not whether same-sex marriage should happen in New Jersey.”

He does know that his new buddy Bill applauded yesterday’s decision, right?

Why do I think he might be on the level in opposing gay marriage? Because, at this point, I don’t see what he gains by holding that position if he isn’t. It doesn’t help him win more votes in Jersey. It doesn’t help him with an independent candidacy in 2016, which would be aimed at fiscal conservatives and social moderates. He’s burned so many bridges with conservatives that I don’t see how it helps him running as a Republican either, even in social conservative strongholds like Iowa. Does anyone see anti-gun, Obama-hugging Chris Christie winning the caucuses against more outspoken social cons like Santorum, Rubio, and maybe Huckabee, notwithstanding his opposition to SSM? The best I can do to come up with a theory for why he might be posing this way politically is that, if he does somehow win the GOP nomination, being on record against gay marriage will reduce the risk of social conservatives staying home.

But that’s assuming that people believe him. Christie’s problem here is that both culturally, as a northeastern Republican, and politically, by virtue of his many recent antagonisms with the right, his conservative bona fides is suspect. It’s like Obama pretending to be against gay marriage in 2008; a few dummies did believe that, but if you looked at the rest of O’s politics and his cultural identity as an Ivory Tower liberal intellectual, it was simply insane to think that he could sincerely oppose SSM. Christie’s political and cultural identity is different, but normally someone who favors gun control, believes in man-made global warming, and wants to expand Medicaid under ObamaCare is a safe bet not to be a hardliner on gay marriage. (And in fact, while Christie’s vetoed a gay-marriage bill before, he supports civil unions and has invited the public to pass a gay-marriage referendum if they really want to see change.) If he was in the business of taking phony positions on issues that might instantly disqualify him with lots of conservatives, we would have never seen headlines like this, would we?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Yawn!!

Deano1952 on June 27, 2013 at 5:23 PM

Who cares what christie thinks about anything? He’s a despicable, lying scumbag dem who likes long walks on the beach with low IQ, America-hating Indonesians – preferably right before important elections to drive the knife into America that much deeper.

ThePrimordialOrderedPair on June 27, 2013 at 5:24 PM

And yet when it came to your personal choice of approving conservative values over socialist ones you approved of Obamacare dude… go ‘way.

Skywise on June 27, 2013 at 5:26 PM

Second look at Chris Christie?

BKennedy on June 27, 2013 at 5:26 PM

Alternate headline: “He’s running.”

No, seriously, though. As strange as it seems, I think he might honestly oppose legalizing SSM.

I think your first thought was correct, AP. He may have decided he needs to make at least some modest effort to rope in the conservative vote. Something like this is a good way to try to burnish his bona fides.

Doomberg on June 27, 2013 at 5:27 PM

Still dead to me.

Donald Draper on June 27, 2013 at 5:29 PM

i think he’s gonna try to run as an independent.

chasdal on June 27, 2013 at 5:30 PM

https://twitter.com/kasie/status/350361418022924288

“Sen. Schumer spent a half hour on the phone with Gov. Christie earlier today, urging him to ask Sen. Chiesa to vote yes, an aide confirms”

Another one of Schumer’s Republicans.

Mark1971 on June 27, 2013 at 5:30 PM

My political world is spinning…

mjbrooks3 on June 27, 2013 at 5:30 PM

President Clinton (the First) signed the Defense of Marriage Act. Two other bills, the Defense of Interns Act (DOIA) and the Defense of Women Alone with a Horndog (DOWAH) never left committee in the 1990s.

IlikedAUH2O on June 27, 2013 at 5:31 PM

Ha, ha, ha. He’s funny. Sorry, Tub-O-Lard, you’re done. Forever. Ain’t no one buyin’ your shit.

Rational Thought on June 27, 2013 at 5:31 PM

Even more alternate headline: Christie makes Rubio-esque stand which will mean nothing later on.

JavelinaBomb on June 27, 2013 at 5:32 PM

Nightmare scenario: Christie vs Rubio

crrr6 on June 27, 2013 at 5:32 PM

Christie/Bloomberg 2016.

DDay on June 27, 2013 at 5:33 PM

What difference at this point does it make? CRISTie has about as much of a chance of being President as Rubio.

Doughboy on June 27, 2013 at 5:34 PM

I don’t think Christie’s democratic base is gonna like this…someone needs to tell him he lost conservatives when he went on his date(s) with Preezy Snoopysnuff.

workingclass artist on June 27, 2013 at 5:35 PM

“It’s just another example of judicial supremacy.”

Looks like Obama needs to visit New Jersey again..

Electrongod on June 27, 2013 at 5:36 PM

Does he really think he’s fooling anyone?

Of course he does.

The sad thing is, he probably is.

catmman on June 27, 2013 at 5:36 PM

Alternate headline: “He’s running.”

No, seriously, though. As strange as it seems, I think he might honestly oppose legalizing SSM.

Yup. He’s blocked gay marriage in New Jersey, so I wouldn’t be surprised that he’d block it Federally. It’s one of Christie’s few redeeming qualities.

Stoic Patriot on June 27, 2013 at 5:36 PM

Like all good Democratic politicians, I’m sure Christie’s views on SSM will evolve over time.

cynccook on June 27, 2013 at 5:38 PM

Christie/ Rubio 2016?

Bmore on June 27, 2013 at 5:41 PM

Following the Johnny Mac model..?

d1carter on June 27, 2013 at 5:43 PM

Christie’s problem here is that both culturally, as a northeastern Republican, and politically, by virtue of his many recent antagonisms with the right, his conservative bona fides is suspect.

Governor Chris Christie needs to be asked some very tough questions about why he appointed “Republican” Senator Jeff Chiesa just in time to have him vote IN FAVOR of the AMNESTY for ILLEGAL aliens bill in the Senate today.

Does New Jersey really have such a shortage of ILLEGAL aliens, that he needed to appoint an interim Senator who would vote to import more ILLEGAL aliens to take the jobs of New Jersey citizens?

If you live in New Jersey, give Gov. Christie a call to express your thoughts about Chiesa’s vote today.

wren on June 27, 2013 at 5:44 PM

He and Obama prefer sneaking around.

Flange on June 27, 2013 at 5:47 PM

Deep thoughts. Deep thoughts are what statesmen do, you know.

a capella on June 27, 2013 at 5:50 PM

Second look at Christie??? NOT A CHANCE.

New Jerseyan here who never voted for a DEMOCRAT ever. But Barbara Buono has my vote!!!

Dan Pet on June 27, 2013 at 5:51 PM

In the Prop 8 case, the court let stand a ruling that said that being against gay marriage violated the U.S. constitution. In the DOMA case, the court said that states that do not recognize gay marriage are OK. A question for Kennedy and Roberts: Who’s on first?

Jasper61 on June 27, 2013 at 5:52 PM

All this is is that he is feeling VERY confident and is out in the lead so far that he can start turning back into a “SEVERELY conservative guy”.

No thanks, Chris. Go sell that somewhere else.

Dan Pet on June 27, 2013 at 5:53 PM

Second look at Christie??? NOT A CHANCE.

New Jerseyan here who never voted for a DEMOCRAT ever. But Barbara Buono has my vote!!!

Dan Pet on June 27, 2013 at 5:51 PM

I understand the criticism of Christie for his RINOness, but how does voting for Buono over him help you on a local level in New Jersey?

Throat Wobbler Mangrove on June 27, 2013 at 5:54 PM

Chris who???

Murf76 on June 27, 2013 at 5:54 PM

Shove the flowers and eat that box of chocolate yourself Christie. It’s over between us.

PackerBronco on June 27, 2013 at 5:54 PM

Christis is Gandolfini to me.

44Magnum on June 27, 2013 at 5:55 PM

Cynical. It’s a throwaway issue that, from the GOP end of things, is already lost. Of course he’ll mouth a few words….

ElectricPhase on June 27, 2013 at 5:55 PM

It doesn’t matter what he says right now. If he starts to sink in polls in his next election bid, whatever it might be, and can always ‘evolve’ and catch another fifteen minutes on MSNBC. If he’s really really nice, Matthews might give him twenty.

Liam on June 27, 2013 at 5:56 PM

Second look at Chris Christie?
BKennedy on June 27, 2013 at 5:26 PM

It takes more than a single glance to take all that is Mr. Rotunda non grata.

can_con on June 27, 2013 at 5:56 PM

In the Prop 8 case, the court let stand a ruling that said that being against gay marriage violated the U.S. constitution. In the DOMA case, the court said that states that do not recognize gay marriage are OK. A question for Kennedy and Roberts: Who’s on first?

Jasper61 on June 27, 2013 at 5:52 PM

They didn’t want to rule on the Prop 8 case so they just got rid of it by arguing that the petitioners were without standing, so … no need to rule on THAT particular headache.

Probably figuring that the tide of public opinion is pretty clear and this will be settled in the next few years in the favor of gay marriage. No need to vex the court on this one.

PackerBronco on June 27, 2013 at 5:57 PM

I think he has a big enough ego and big enough supporters with money to run as an independent. I know some people think that hurts Republicans, but I don’t know. I cannot see him affecting anything in hardcore red states. It is only in the purple and blue states that he can make a difference. I could see him winning a few of those states like New Jersey, Ohio and Pennsylvania…and yes picking up moderate Democrat voters.

You have to remember that by 2016 Obama will have screwed up things so bad that Hillary is going to be running with that legacy tied around her neck, fatigue will set in, plus she is not a very good speaker or debater.

Remember folks Christie is a celebrity now. Sadly that matters to a lot of low info voters.

William Eaton on June 27, 2013 at 5:59 PM

So all of you, from Allahpundit on down, would nominate Rick Santorum, who has precisely zero chance of winning a general election, in preference to Christie. Time to shoot myself.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:06 PM

MichaelGabriel on June 27, 2013 at 5:37 PM

You will need a juicier worm.

MontanaMmmm on June 27, 2013 at 6:15 PM

MichaelGabriel on June 27, 2013 at 5:37 PM

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:06 PM

You will need a juicier worm.

MontanaMmmm on June 27, 2013 at 6:15 PM

MontanaMmmm on June 27, 2013 at 6:17 PM

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:06 PM

Oh Puh-Leeeeze, not the “He’s Electable/Appeals to Moderates” thing again!

Say how did you like President McCain’s First Term or President Romney’s?

NEITHER Christie NOR Santorum can win in 2016. Christie is Pro-Life, cut funding to Planned Parenthood, IIRC, and now has opposed SSM. What do you think Hillary, Cuomo, the NYT and LSM are going to do to him? That’s right CRUCIFY him….

So Mr Electable ISN’T Electable, not on the basis of he’s a “moderate” and if 2008 and 2012 haven’t shown you that you can’t be shown ANYTHING.

JFKY on June 27, 2013 at 6:30 PM

Who is electable? I guess Marco Rubio is out, too.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:33 PM

So all of you, from Allahpundit on down, would nominate Rick Santorum, who has precisely zero chance of winning a general election, in preference to Christie. Time to shoot myself.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:06 PM

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

The ole “electability” argument! That one’s a winner! Just ask President Juan McCain. And President 47%.

Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

You’re cute, still believing in that shit and all.

Rational Thought on June 27, 2013 at 6:37 PM

Who is electable? I guess Marco Rubio is out, too.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:33 PM

You are going to become one of those really annoying McCainiacs/Mitt-bots/Christ-is-He sorts aren’t you? Whomsoever gets the “nod” especially if s/he tells you that they can appeal to Independents/Moderates/Is “Electable” aren’t you?

And then in January 2017 when Hillary is sworn in, you’ll blame the SoCons and the Palinista‘s for your guyz defeat….rather than the fact that the LIV’s and the “moderates” aren’t going to vote for Democrat-Lite, when they can vote for Democrat….

And whomsoever is the GOP candidate is going to be a womyn-hating, Extremist, out-of-touch with America and womyn….no matter WHO IT IS!

And it’s pointless, in the extreme, to think that selecting a “moderate” will in some way deflect this vicious attack.

So stop worrying about who’s “electable” because we can’t know that until the day after and stop supporting whomsoever comes closest to matching your policy preferences….

JFKY on June 27, 2013 at 6:39 PM

Time to shoot myself.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:06 PM

This libertarian is finished with voting for your Party’s ‘electable’ nominees.

So, yeah, go ahead and shoot yourself.

Resist We Much on June 27, 2013 at 6:40 PM

So stop worrying about who’s “electable” because we can’t know that until the day after and STARTstop supporting whomsoever comes closest to matching your policy preferences….

JFKY on June 27, 2013 at 6:39 PM

/FIFM/

JFKY on June 27, 2013 at 6:41 PM

Time to shoot myself.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:06 PM

You will be banned?!?!

Bmore on June 27, 2013 at 6:42 PM

Time to shoot myself.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:06 PM

Do you HAVE Policy Preferences or is the whole goal to win the Election?

If you like Christie, by all means “LIKE” Christie, Coulter did for a while…for reasons beyond me. But puh-leeze don’t “like” Christie because you have some vain notion that he, alone, amongst the GOP contenders can get “elected.”

And wre he to be elected what would you have him do? Or is that pretty much left to day-to-day polling of issues and solutions produced by Frank Luntz?

JFKY on June 27, 2013 at 6:47 PM

Time to shoot myself.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:06 PM

You will be banned?!?!

Bmore on June 27, 2013 at 6:42 PM

Uh doesn’t the shooting him/herself make the whole banning thing moot?

JFKY on June 27, 2013 at 6:49 PM

You will be banned?!?!

Bmore on June 27, 2013 at 6:42 PM

Especially if he makes a mess on the carpet. Ed just had it cleaned.

Liam on June 27, 2013 at 6:52 PM

Yeah, shooting myself would make the whole banning thing moot.

Yes, I have policy preferences: conservative tax, budget, economic, and regulatory policies. I am pro-growth and want small government. If that’s enough to get me banned, then we are all in big trouble.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:53 PM

Oh, and one more really big policy goal: I don’t want any more Democratic nominees to SCOTUS.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:55 PM

like Santorum, Rubio, and maybe Huckabee

Come on Allah, get serious.

Barred on June 27, 2013 at 6:57 PM

If you like Christie, by all means “LIKE” Christie, Coulter did for a while…for reasons beyond me. But puh-leeze don’t “like” Christie because you have some vain notion that he, alone, amongst the GOP contenders can get “elected.”

JFKY on June 27, 2013 at 6:47 PM

I never said that Christie was the only GOP contender who’s electable. What I said was that Rick Santorum is unelectable in any known universe and that only a party with a death wish would nominate him in preference to Christie.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 7:06 PM

Please don’t bring Huckabee into a 2016 sentence. Maybe McCain and Romney will run again too.

runningpundit on June 27, 2013 at 7:10 PM

I guess he might have some core convictions.

balkanmom on June 27, 2013 at 7:11 PM

You’re not reading his position correctly, Allah.

He’s against the court, not SSM.

His position has always been, “If the people vote for it, then it’s legal”.

His beef is a canard to create space between him and Hillary.

In a debate, it goes like this:

“Mrs. Clinton, my position has always been the same: Let the people decide. Your husband supported and signed DOMA, while also heavily backed DADT, and you said nothing at the time. It wasn’t until it became politically expedient did he and you have a change of heart. I do not see that as being honest with the people”.

It’s his way of trying to undermine Clinton’s legitimacy with the LGBT, and show the can’t be trusted.

In essence, it’s a fundraising tactic.

I know how this guy thinks, very clearly.

He doesn’t support SSM, but he doesn’t oppose it. He’s a lazy Catholic who thinks the only thing stopping him from the nomination is money.

I trust Rubio before I trust Christie.

And what’s really screwed up, is Scott Brown was the most honest and transparent of the three. You many not have agreed with him, but you knew where he stood before the vote was taken.

budfox on June 27, 2013 at 7:12 PM

So all of you, from Allahpundit on down, would nominate Rick Santorum, who has precisely zero chance of winning a general election, in preference to Christie.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:06 PM

Welcome! You must be new around these parts. Be sure to take a free brochure and don’t forget to stop by the gift shop.

JetBoy on June 27, 2013 at 7:25 PM

budfox on June 27, 2013 at 7:12 PM

I think your analysis of Christie’s position is spot-on.

Personally, I share Christie’s view as you describe it. Your imagined retort to Hillary, though, isn’t “a fundraising tactic”, it is brilliant. What better is there to say?

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 7:35 PM

So all of you, from Allahpundit on down, would nominate Rick Santorum, who has precisely zero chance of winning a general election, in preference to Christie.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 6:06 PM

No no no!

Just the Spanish Inquisition and Star Chamber sections of the “War on Women” faction back that former Senator.

We have loons and prudes here who think him WAY TOO secular.

Stay tuned.

IlikedAUH2O on June 27, 2013 at 7:39 PM

Stay tuned.

IlikedAUH2O on June 27, 2013 at 7:39 PM

Uh Yeah-uh, as long as you acknowledget that there are Liberal Trolls here who bask the POTS as a corporate shill/sell-out, too…but they like the people you reference really only represent about 10% at best of the folkz hereabouts.

JFKY on June 27, 2013 at 7:42 PM

budfox on June 27, 2013 at 7:12 PM

It is a good post, bud.

Someone else will emerge.

I was after Clint Eastwood to run until he took a swing at me and security hauled me off.

IlikedAUH2O on June 27, 2013 at 7:43 PM

JFKY on June 27, 2013 at 7:42 PM

Yes, you are correct, of course. I am in a foolish mood.

IlikedAUH2O on June 27, 2013 at 7:44 PM

I am going to post a list of people I asked to run if I have a chance before my departure on June 30th.

Think you have problems?

Try being Reince.

IlikedAUH2O on June 27, 2013 at 7:47 PM

Welcome! You must be new around these parts. Be sure to take a free brochure and don’t forget to stop by the gift shop.

JetBoy on June 27, 2013 at 7:25 PM

Yeah, I’m a newbie. Showed up the same day Ed did.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 7:58 PM

Nobody cares what Christy thinks.

Certainly not me, which is why I did not read any of this.

TX-96 on June 27, 2013 at 8:00 PM

I don’t take what Christie said as a statement of opposition to gay marriage. He didn’t say he’s against gay marriage, he just didn’t like the court’s decision on DOMA because it painted anyone who voted for DOMA as a bigot and paved the way for traditional marriage amendments to be challenged in all states in the courts, rather than being decided by a vote of the people.

I don’t even like Christie, but I like what he said.

ThanksMo on June 27, 2013 at 8:58 PM

His position has always been, “If the people vote for it, then it’s legal”.

His beef is a canard to create space between him and Hillary.

In a debate, it goes like this:

“Mrs. Clinton, my position has always been the same: Let the people decide. Your husband supported and signed DOMA, while also heavily backed DADT, and you said nothing at the time. It wasn’t until it became politically expedient did he and you have a change of heart. I do not see that as being honest with the people”.

It’s his way of trying to undermine Clinton’s legitimacy with the LGBT, and show the can’t be trusted.

Ah, budfox is shrewder than I am. I took Christie at face value because part of me still sees him as a straight shooter and believes he’s actually saying what he thinks most of the time. But budfox is probably right, it’s a political maneuver—not to get in good with social cons by claiming to be against SSM, but to present himself as the only consistent voice on the issue, and the federalist voice to boot.

ThanksMo on June 27, 2013 at 9:04 PM

No reason to think he doesn’t also actually believe it.

wbcoleman on June 27, 2013 at 10:14 PM

i think he’s gonna try to run as an independent.

chasdal on June 27, 2013 at 5:30 PM

Isn’t that what we need: Time For A Third Party and all that?

thebrokenrattle on June 27, 2013 at 10:55 PM

“Schumer’s Republican”
I have to say that I agree with Christie on this single issue. On gay marriage we all need to just wait calmly and hold to our position, and then become more vocal about it when the inevitable ChickFila style backlash occurs.

But I don’t agree with Christie on most other things. That’s the problem.
Take global warming climate change, it would be half ok if he just relatively quietly believed the leftist line on climate change, but the way that he so aggressively pushes Obama’s agenda makes you want to…
And now we hear that after a half hour he spent on the phone with Schumer, the senator he appointed voted for amnesty. No joke. He’s “Schumer’s Republican.” No, “Obama’s Republican.” Whatever, he’s the Democrats’ Republican. Kind of like McCain. Or Romney for that matter. No wonder Romney gave him the keynote spot.

anotherJoe on June 28, 2013 at 1:06 AM

Christie is just playing the old Joe Lieberman game of playing both sides of every key issue to get publicity for his big run–only Joe was just an average hypocrite(he dropped his conservative principles the second Al “heat-sink” Gore asked him to be his VP) Christie, the blowhard bully, merely uses bluster to get his attention (that, and purring around Obama’s leg)

Don L on June 28, 2013 at 9:25 AM

It’s not that I’m such a huge fan of Lieberman but, honestly, how can you accuse him of “drop[ing] his conservative principles the second Al “heat-sink” Gore asked him to be his VP” when he took the trouble to appear at the 2008 GOP convention in order to endorse the GOP candidate? Yeah, it was his pal John McCain but, still, he was trying to save us from O.

wbcoleman on June 28, 2013 at 5:25 PM