“Boy, were we wrong,” publisher Joseph McQuaid wrote in an editorial titled “Christie was our bad choice.”
Who could have ever predicted that Governor Christie would be a vindictive, opportunistic, political whore?
3 Likes
When has the Union Leader been right about anything?
1 Like
Some of the comments in the editorial section of the Union-Leader:
The rest of the state knew you were wrong months ago.
F-I-N-A-L-L-Y, but it’s meaningless, McQuaid, because it took Christie’s flat out lie to you, and his ring-kissing, to change your mind, instead of logic and issues. Your debacle proves you are not an “issues” conservative, but rather focus on abstract emotions and histrionics.
Translation: The Union-Leader got stood-up a the altar, and now they want the engagement ring back.
All you had to do was read the NJ newspapers before making your decision. I live in NJ voted for Christie and regret that decision in hindsight. There were countless reasons why Christie was the wrong choice and you ignored all of the red flags.
Joe McQuaid seems to be very much like his good friend John Henry Sununu. They both have poor ability to make good choices to endorse.
I love it when they eat their own!
What the Union Leader, like Fox Noise, will never admit; they are as responsible as anyone for creating Trump in the first place.
Not in the least.
Jabba the Christie to Union Leader:
#SHADDUP!
1 Like
How is this a story? The Onion Loader has been wrong in every single presidential endorsement in the past 50 years.
2 Likes
New Hampshire Union Leader endorses an amoral politician who doesn’t give a sh*t about the voters or the best interests of the people or the people who once supported him?? He only cares about his own fat ass!!! I’m shocked! … Why! This must be an election year.
And concerning his ‘special’ new BFF relationship with Teflon Don, one only has to ask: "Does Christie spit or swallow? ___Oh Jeez’! I just looked at that. So…since it’s Christie we know he swallows just about everything, so I’m guessing both.
Which only goes to prove the real “Worth” of all these "Media endorsements in states that only matter for 15 minutes every four years. Who cares who it is that they endorsed, and for that matter, who outside of their own ownership and editorial staff cares that the clown they endorsed was a certified LOSER?
The two “Major” parties set up this hootenanny of small states who try once every four years to “Out stupid” each other in an attempt to get their 15 minutes before anyone else in America,
All of this garbage was set in stone before the PC, before the Internet, and before print Newspapers in America began dying the death they so richly deserve. All of these institutions political and media have one thing in common.
They are kept running by people, most of whom are over 65 years old, and most of whom are as thick as planks.
You want a reason that so many people are fed up to the teeth with the system as it now stands?
You’re looking at one in these pathetic little relics of Print “Journalism” who have a vested interest in keeping an obsolete system, and obsolete Political hacks, going at any price.As long as it grants some of them the momentary illusion of importance and power.
Denial isn’t just a river in Egypt. One in New Hampshire, too.
Pretty stunning. Yikes.
The bolded text is sort of correct, depending on the definition of “massive”. Several thousand chemical warheads (no biological) left over from the 1980s’ Iran-Iraq war were found and recovered. What was never found was an active WMD program, which was [one of the many] rationales of the Iraq war that the Bush/Cheney team used to sell it to the UN and US people.
Then, during the long occupation, American troops began encountering old chemical munitions in hidden caches and roadside bombs. Typically 155-millimeter artillery shells or 122-millimeter rockets, they were remnants of an arms program Iraq had rushed into production in the 1980s during the Iran-Iraq war.
All had been manufactured before 1991, participants said. Filthy, rusty or corroded, a large fraction of them could not be readily identified as chemical weapons at all. Some were empty, though many of them still contained potent mustard agent or residual sarin. Most could not have been used as designed, and when they ruptured dispersed the chemical agents over a limited area, according to those who collected the majority of them.
So, essentially, Reagan and Bush 41’s misadventures in Iraq had indeed led to small dispersed stockpiles of weapons which had long since degraded to unusability (not to uselessness; the agents inside were often still potent), and no active efforts to create new weapons or even maintain the old ones were uncovered, despite assurances on the floor of the UN to the contrary.
IMHO, the paper is correct, if you allow that any non-microscopic quantity of chemical agents can reasonably be called “massive” there were indeed stockpiles of chemical weapons. They appear incorrect in adding “biological” weapons to that list though.
Was Trump wrong? Well, these were technically weapons of mass destruction when they had been created under the purview of Reagan’s Iraq operations. But after decades of degrading in the sand, these were not at all capable of causing mass destruction. The agents inside might have been able to be recovered and repackaged into new weapons of mass destruction, had a program existed to do so (not something that Saddam could have spun up at will; it would have taken years to start such a recovery / recycling program). But, no, I think Trump is correct in saying that there were no weapons of mass destruction actually found (although I strongly suspect he did not intentionally thread the needle so finely).
Overall verdict: both right in a way; the paper wrong on a count but otherwise right. Seems like a draw to me.
All that having been said, clearly they are not a news source I would want to rely on.
When Trump loses, history will note that Chris Christie full-throatedly supported a fascist.
Misread this and didn’t realize it was a newspaper endorsement.
Trump dismissed McQuaid last year as Christie's "lap dog."
Krispie has a lap dog and and a lap band? He’s probably not getting a lap dance.
It’s not just that they made a bad decision endorsing Christie - it’s that they made an insanely stupid decision to do it. Every single person who wasn’t getting directly paid to say otherwise knew it was a terrible, laughable idea, but they did it anyway.
Goes to show how much endorsements mean.
Kasich is qualified (I disagree with him on every issue except his embrace of Medicaid expansion, but of all of the clowns running for the GOP nomination, he seemed to be the only one is qualified - executive experience, time in Congress, chair of the House budget committee for six years).
Until the GOP fundamentally changes direction and reject the crazy, racist, ignorance within their ranks and ideology, and fight their way back to (and prove) they are once again a sane, center-right loyal opposition party like they were pre-1964, no responsible media outlet should ever trust or endorse a Republican.
2 Likes
That might cause one to think that there is a systemic flaw in the Republican Party.
1 Like