Its kinda like a guy who pours buckets of praise on another, but stands close enough to ensure that some of it splashes on to him. Also, wants to be sure that those people who are fretting about the extreme radicalism of Black Lives Matter have a champion in Christie. And if that results in more white people being suspicious of BLM, and more black people worried about their kids getting shot by the police, well, that’s just good clean fun!
Jesus wept. Me, I just puke my guts out…
This post is homophobic and does nothing to advance the discussion.
Homophobic in which way? Enlighten me, cookie.
The NY Times urges him to pack it in and get back to his job in Trenton.
It’s a long way from the time when his willlingness to talk with Obama after Sandy got the pundits’ hearts to flutter about how he was their best hope in 2016. Even as for that,
Nope, OP clearly is accusing Christie of a stolen valor offense for cops, and will not retract it.
Snowboarder, do you think anyone here in the thread agrees with your interpretation?
If yes, who is it?
It seemed like it was a false statement; no prosecutor I’ve ever met has ever referred to themselves in that way. The whole thread was titled as a question. Why are you so obsessed with demanding and receiving some type of retraction as if even Asking was an offense?
Why are you so invested in this a week later? :dubious:
By technical definition, its right but the impression to most people who first hear seemed wrong.
Note: I posted this 15 Whole Minutes after it was said. I replied afterward from a phone because I was away (typos).
Agreed.
Ditto.
Seemed that way to me too, 15 minutes after it was stated.
So, you object because you think when I ask a question, I should be more humble ? Where’s the genuflect-genuflect-genuflect smiley/font? :dubious:
You’ve heard it that way, I’ve never heard it that way. There is a cite that was posted the same day indicating that technically they are officers. As for why its needed, its a title?
Why is the word “cop” needed when there’s a perfectly good word “police”? Paging Ben Webster.
I never took issue with a prosecutor being a part of “law enforcement”. I took issue with never having ever heard of a prosecutor introduce themselves as a “law enforcement officer”. At least one department that I know of does have cops
underneath the district attorney who are police officers assigned to the district attorney’s office.
Its really odd phrasing, even if its defensible, but moving the goal-posts by dropping the word “officer” from your attack there wasn’t appreciated.
No, he’s a strawman who likes to move goal posts in his spare time while running for president. For Halloween we’ll give him a nice big pumpkin.
Look, for those of you just reading this here’s the Long Story Short:
It seemed (thats a quote) one way, it wasn’t.
I asked a question, it was answered, you’d think it’d end there because these posters have lives, right?
No. Such. Luck.
I clearly used the word “seems”, the issue was answered the same day, and who are you to demand a retraction anyway? Patrick Lynch? :dubious:
Bricker, a week later still trying to get a pound of flesh. I asked a question, you didn’t like how I asked it, you posted a cite that answered the technical merits.
Q: At what point do you go away to the next thread?
Noah Webster?
Asking isn’t an offense.
But there’s a difference between asking in a way that does not accuse, and asking in a way that does.
I heard Chris Christie refer to himself as a law enforcement officer. This surprised me, because I always pictured ‘law enforcement officer’ to be a term limited to police and sheriffs – the guys with guns and badges. Is Christie exaggerating his past resume?
See? That’s asking.
Your OP did more than ask. It implicitly accused Christie of stealing valor by lying.
And when advised of your error, nothing you wrote indicated the slightest willingness to concede that error. You defensively replied that it wasn’t your fault, as though your ignorance on the point was a perfectly acceptable ground for your accusation.
I’m invested in fighting ignorance. Why aren’t you invested in it?
Are you Suuuure…? :dubious:
Again, you’re whole week-later-panties-in-a-bunch is because you didn’t like how I asked the question, much like how your GOP Best-of-the-Best
are throwing a tantrum about the questions they were asked on stage. You work in the industry & maybe you are too close to the matter to consider
that some of your “jargon” isn’t daily work terminology for people outside of your industry, or how someone so disdainfully put it… your “audience”.
Nor am I required to, by any means whatsoever. But just to refresh your memory, lets see what I DID say:
Still 100% true. I’m not an attorney; are you requiring we pass the bar to post now, Bricker?
Law citations aren’t a part of my nor anyone outside of your profession’s (and some classrooms) daily life… and lets face it: that cite wasn’t “Marbury vs Madison” well known.
Somehow you expected everyone to know it and 15 minutes after it was said too. I don’t find that reasonable, Bricker.
Still 100% true. Prosecutors in every state Do Not introduce themselves as “Hi, I’m Hack Bricker…Law Enforcement Officer. Some of you Ignorant types might call me a Prosecutor. You’re Wrong! I’m an Officer!”*
*Being a Gentleman sold separately
OK, I admit that’s just speculation. I Honestly don’t know what his fat flabby-ass has been jammed through or around for that matter, so I’ll defer to my esteemed colleague’s assertion which he seems more than happy to give.
Still 100% true: he wants all the cachet of being “America’s Cop” and is twisting sentences to their limit to do it. Or, if I stretch what is “implied” like silly putty Bricker-style,
“…how dare I besmirch his good name for calling him a Prosecutor! For Shaaaaaame…!” 
I do fight ignorance, Bricker. I fight it every day. Fighting Political Hacks is just something I do at night.
You haven’t fought any ignorance since you posted cites with the answer. Everything from “will you admit your error?” on has been you being antagonistic. Hell, you did it before the OP had a chance to respond at all.
He asked a question with an incorrect assumption. It was answered, and his assumption corrected. At no point did he indicate he thought the answer was incorrect. In fact, he conceded his incorrect assumption in his first post since the OP. Thus there was no more ignorance to fight.
The fact that he offered his opinion that it was still misleading–claiming most people would think he meant police officer–doesn’t change that he accepted the actual fact that New Jersey considers him to have been a Law Enforcement Officer.
I’m not sure why you like to get into these pissing contests. Yes, you admit error. So does everyone else. They just don’t make a big to-do about it, because it’s not that big a deal.
I do notice they happen more when you think someone has been insulted who is politically on your side. But, hey, I’m testier when you insult liberals, too.
In which specific post in this thread did Snowboarder Bo admit error?
Bad, Bo, bad! Go lay down by your water dish!
I question the underlying assumption that being a law enforcement officer is valorous.
That being said, prosecutors are part of the law enforcement team just as much as their buddies that carry badges, so Christie is entitled to associate himself with them if he so wishes.
Given the strict semantic and legalistic analysis, he is so entitled. On the other hand, Mr Christie is well aware of common language and common understanding, I very much doubt that he would be surprised to know that the ordinary citizen does not think of prosecutors as being cops. He is being needlessly poetic.
At least the image of the Orca of New Jersey chasing down a fleet young perp wearing felony shoes provides wholesome entertainment.
Are you implying that a politician might have chosen phrasing that could, in some people’s minds, paint him in a more favorable light than other phrasing might? Please, say it ain’t so!!
Cops are cops, Law Enforcement Officer is a larger grouping. I am no fan of Christie but this is a silly complaint. No stolen valor just an attempt to communicate he will support the cops. The whole thing is being misread and what he said is correct anyway.
There is no shortage of real issues with Christie, but this is not one of them.
I’m laughing more at elucidator accusing someone of being needlessly poetic. The guy probably doesn’t order coffee without a couple of dry runs and edits to finalize his flourishes.
Eat your heart out.
Except that the context makes it clear that he is casting himself in the “favorable light” of supporting the police from their persecution at the hands of black activism, inspired by if not led by Obama. Not exactly appealing to the better angels of our nature, no? Does the boiling shit really need someone to stir it?
I don’t get bent out of shape over political bullshit, but this is dark political bullshit.