Hillary tweeted, “If you think Chris Christie can lecture anyone on ethics, we have a bridge to sell you.”
News media say this is a reference to the George Washington Bridge scandal a year or two ago.
Am I the only one that thinks Hillary is referring to the Brooklyn Bridge?
Obviously it’s both.
Some people can multi-task.
Some people can double entendre with ease.
Some people can manage social media with… Style.
Wouldn’t it be nice to elect a President who can do all three…? 
#ValueAddedCandidate
The phrase “we have a bridge to sell you” is a longstanding reference to the Brooklyn Bridge, the buying of which is a hallmark of the gullible. I think it’s fair to say that this is the intended meaning. Of course there’s a delicious irony in Christie’s ethics – or lack thereof – being associated with another bridge. But as the notion of selling the Brooklyn Bridge has been around for well over a hundred years, and nobody has even hinted at selling the George Washington Bridge, and the quote specifically says “sell” and not “tell you about,” it comes across as lame and rather stupid to suggest that the tweet refers primarily to the GW Bridge.
I’m glad people are clever enough to get the secondary meaning, but I’m disappointed if they really think that’s the primary meaning.
YES!!! Too bad no one like that is running…
I think she did intend the first meaning but with the second meaning being glaringly obvious yet plausibly deniable.
She obviously intends the primary and well-established reference to the Brooklyn Bridge. It’s just highly convenient for her that using this image to cast aspersions on Christie’s ethics serves to remind people of [one of the] reasons why we might cast aspersions on Christie’s ethics.
Thank you for the lecture, but considering the propositional nature of the statement, as well as the context, there’s no way to mention one without referring to the other. The common term–as mentioned above–is “multitasking.”
I can’t believe Hillary is throwing stones anywhere, anytime about anyone regarding ethics. Makes a fellow shake his head in disbelief.
It’s a double entendre. One of the few that’s not about sex.
I don’t think the jab at bridgegate intended to be oblique in the slightest. The role of Christie in shutting down the bridge isn’t subtext, it’s… it’s… what do you call it when something is above subtext? Oh yeah, it’s the text.
It’s referring the bridgegate by using a well-known phrase. Doesn’t matter what the phrase usually means. It’s known as “dramatic license” – people are allowed to ignore the origins of a phrase to make a point.
Yes. It’s a reference to the Brooklyn Bridge but it’s CC’s GW Bridge debacle that takes it from everyday mud-slinging to actually pretty funny.
It’s a three pronged attack. Subliminal, liminal, superliminal. (YouTube link to Simpsons)
Tells you just how out of touch she is with the real world and the average person. And how much she thinks she is above the law.
Maybe since I’m in the metro area, but that tweet is 100% about bridgegate. She’s riffing on the Brooklyn bridge saying to jab at him about it. It was an absolutely huge deal here.
It is a painfully obvious double entendre.
So…your view is that someone with ethics problems shouldn’t criticize other people for ethics problems, eh? Well, I know a political candidate who might agree with you.
What exactly is the consensus of bridgegate? I know there were a couple investigations but no wrongdoing on Christie’s part was ever proven, is the belief generally that he just gave a vocal order and was smart enough not to leave an e-mail trail or something?
ol’ Hillary seems confused. Or maybe she’s just playing politics? Or maybe she’s habitually lying about something? Christie had no roll in the Bridgegate lane closing. ol’ should be aware that several federal, and state, investigations have failed to find a link to Christie but why would anyone expect ol’ Hillary to tell the truth when a lie will suffice.
Well, yeah. I think someone with ethics problems - and highly publicized and serious ones, at that - would be a little more circumspect and cautious. But that is obviously giving too much credit to Hillary, who is about as tone-deaf on nearly any subject as any politician I have ever seen. She has none of the charisma or political skills that her husband possesses, yet at least as many moral and ethical shortcomings. It makes for a truly unappealing persona.