Maybe, but I wouldn’t fret about it.
SNL is back just in time for another Bobby Moynihan character, maybe with a New Christie Minstrels reunion tour too.
I think you’ve pegged him . . .
Took nearly three hundred posts to devolve into a horrible pun-fest. I feared this outcome, but my wife told me not to fret.
I was trying to come up with a comment involving a guitar’s bridge, but I couldn’t figure out how to tie it to Christie.
Oh well.
You could tie two straps together.
I was expecting bad puns by page 3, but you guys kept stringing me along.
Sorry to interrupt the punfest, but I must announce that I’ve checked in with Fox News. I got the Fair And Balanced take on this thing. I feel that I am now qualified to share with you’s that OBAMA!!! BENGHAZI!!!
(Really put my neck out there for that one!)
*"The point being that he was wrong, he was demonstrably, without question, wrong about his hypothesis that perhaps Kos “made up the allegation”… *
That’s certainly one of the weakest statements produced so far.
*demonstrably - able to be proved:
The report contains numerous demonstrable errors*.
*without question - unquestionable - not open to question or doubt; indisputable:
Her achievements are unquestionable*.
*hypothesis - an idea or explanation for something that is based on known facts but has not yet been proven:
Several hypotheses for global warming have been suggested*.
*perhaps - used to show that something is possible or that you are not certain about something; maybe:
Perhaps the greatest swimming coach in history, Kiphuth retired after 41 years at Yale.
Soon, perhaps as early as this week, she is to testify in the trial*.
“Beyond dispute”??? I dispute your accusations. Without resorting to red herrings, strawmen, and taking statements out of context, it’s only been “demonstrated” that the internet is no more reliable than many of the media outlets. Surprise!
Meanwhile, I used Google Earth so I could better understand the layout of the NJ side of the GW bridge. I95 flows into the bridge and the bridge has an upper and lower level and 24 tollbooths (12 upper and 12 lower). No tollbooths were shut down during this NON-study.
Two of the three lanes dedicated to traffic entering from Ft Lee were A) made accessible to mainline traffic and B) restricted from Ft Lee traffic (including their E-ZPass lane). It seems that mainline traffic flow should have increased with more booths available. It’s know that Ft Lee traffic was backed up for miles. (On Illannoy Tollroads, the I-Pass system works both for dedicated I-Pass lanes and manual (cash) lanes.)
I also found several useful pic’s of the tollbooth area and Ft Lee entrance ramp w/traffic cones on a “tollroadnews dot com” site. The non-study seems to have consisted of only a 6 page powerpoint presentation with deputy executive director William Baroni playing the part of former UN Ambassador Susan Rice. Baroni has since been fired. (And I’m not the first poster to bring Benghazi into this thread.)
Also included:
Ted Mann at the Wall Street Journal was the first to report suggestions that the lane closures were political payback by Christie operatives against Fort Lee Mayor Sokolich. The Sokolich-payback theory was that Sokolich had incurred the wrath of the Christie camp through refusing to endorse Christie’s re-election as governor, and that wreaking havoc in his backyard was vindictive politics.
Since Mann was the first to report the Sokolich-payback theory, my earlier question remains as to why someone, now known to be Mann, created his theory, if he had any proof, and why would the LSM run with Mann’s theory without first verifying his assumption?
Someone obviously wanted to screw with Sokolich/Ft Lee but the “non-endorsement” angle seems pretty weak and more like grasping-at-straws. But right or wrong, the theory got lots of play.
Fort Lee mayor Mark Sokolich at one stage dabbled in the political payback theory but soon reversed himself saying he didn’t think he was important enough and the affair was more likely “plain stupidity” at the port authority.
So much for Mann’s Sokolich-payback theory.
Oh God.
Now we’ve devolved into the high-school debate tactic of citing the dictionary to prove an argument about nothing.
For my next trick, I will prove that there is no bridge!
Misteaks were made.
I wasn’t aware that citing a dictionary was unacceptable to you. Did you have any comments about the rest of the post?
Ummm, TLDR?
Yeah, unless you have something to say about the actual bridge closure, shush.
I’m interested in this thread and you’re annoying me by constantly bumping it with your pointless and weird diatribes.
It’s really simple. You suggested that the item in question, published on the Kos website, might just have been fabricated by Kos. It was immediately demonstrated to you, without ambiguity of any kind, that they were linking to an item from the WSJ.
You were wrong. Demonstrably. Whether the item itself turns out to have been accurate or not, *it clearly was not manufactured out of thin air by KOS.*The end.
Guys want to take it to the Pit or something? I’m pretty sure no one is finding the current back and forth on whatever it is you’re arguing about interesting, while “bridgegate” is still an ongoing scandal and people might still want to discuss it without getting swamped by people debating what the “meaning of ‘is’ is”
No, I apologize, hard to let go of a direct challenge. I really really promise I won’t address it again in this thread.
So when Christie admitted “Clearly, mistakes were made”, I couldn’t help but think that his regret was entirely due to the word ‘clearly’.
Am I the only one bothered by the use of the passive? It’s such a measly transparent attempt at obscuring the existence of the agent.
Does he think the residents of New Jersey and New York are that stupid? Or was it some twisted version of stand-up? Because the only people I ever hearing using that phrase do so to mock people like Christie, people with power who obviously haven’t a clue how to use it appropriately.
“Mistakes were made.”
“Votes will be cast.”
Ideally, offices will be emptied.
Anyone else notice the reporting on the results of a recent poll? It’s being reported that most people’s opinion of Christie hasn’t been changed by “bridgegate” and this is being spun as a good thing for Christie. I’m thinking that it may just mean that people dislike him as much as ever.