Oh noes, not again.
I'm still not quite able to parse out what it is, exactly, that New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie and president of the United States Barack Obama have been doing that has much of the hard-right dousing themselves in gasoline and lighting themselves on fire. In the wake of a particularly devastating hurricane in Christie's state, they
met together? More than once, even? Is that it? Or is it that Christie did not personally punch the president on first meeting him, or is it the even more profound insult of Christie agreeing that people in his state affected by the storm really could use some damn help, even if it came from—gasp—the federal gubbermint? I don't know. I don't know because, and this is the key point, I am not freaking insane.
Rapidly devolving radio host Rush Limbaugh, however, most certainly is, and so the primitive talking land-fish is all over this "Christie and Obama were in the same place at the same time and this is an abomination unto Ayn Rand" or-whatever-the-hell-he's-talking-about story:
There isn't any bipartisanship here. Obama has money. Governor Christie wants the money, Governor Christie needs the money, so the people will be helped. So Christie praises Obama.
It's a master-servant relationship. That's exactly the kind of bipartisanship that the Drive-By Media wants. Master-servant. That's "bipartisan" That's what's going on here. (interruption) Master-SERVANT. Master-STAFF. Don't take it any further than that, Snerdley. I'm not going on, going there. I'm just telling you. Obama's got the money; Christie needs the money. "Obama wants to walk the beach; that's what we're gonna do. Obama wants a photo-op; it's what we're gonna do."
It's more than little funny to see the usual Washington wags bemoan the lack of "bipartisanship" and "working together" and all those nice things while conspicuously dodging awareness of just how much even the
vague perception of "working together" will result in full-on revolt from the nutcases of the Republican base (or, in this case, the grand and glorious nutcase leaders). Really, having a president and governor tour disaster-stricken areas together is not
generally considered a difficult bipartisan lift, much less an act of ideological treason.
Christie is for the most part a loyal conservative foot soldier. He hates the poors, he hates the unions, he does all the nice citizen-screwing things that are so popular among the party these days. But he hosted the president when a disaster struck the state, and that's just not done. At least not these days. It smacks too much of the premise that the government might really have an obligation to help people, or provides too much acknowledgement of the government existing and doing things at all. That thought puts a whole hurricane's worth of sand down the movement's collective pants, and they've not been shy in letting Christie know it.