New Jersey Republican Gov Christie praises Democratic President Obama's leadership in an about face amid Hurricane Sandy devastation

'Praise' and 'scorn' all in a day's politics

amid Hurricane Sandy's devastation  

 by Mike Marcellino

New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie, the main surrogate for Mitt Romney in  tight race to unseat President Barack Obama, may have discovered that praising your political enemy beats "scorn." In the past Christie has been anything but timid in wailing against Obama's "lack of leadership."  In any case Gov Christie made the rounds on the morning shows to do his flip flop.

"President Obama has been outstanding" - New Jersey Gov Chris Christie

Republican Gov. Chris Christie, Mitt Romney's chief surrogate, walks hand in hand with Democratic President Barack Obama during a Hurricane Sandy stop.

Writing this opinion piece reminds me of reading Nineteen Eighty Four, the George Orwell fictional satire on totalitarianism and the dictatorship's "doublethink" and "doublespeak."  Now in 2012 and the Internet age, it's getting awfully hard to know the truth when you hear or read the words of our national political leaders.

In American government and politics, especially in these days of federal government gridlock, it's not what appears to be evident that matters; it's what lies below the surface, in the wheeling and dealing in our nation's capital and the state capital.  Case in point:  Republican Gov. Chris Christie, who almost ran for president in this election though he was only in his second year as governor. 

Christie today on CNN's Piers Morgan show praised Democratic President Barack Obama for being "very cooperative" aiding New Jersey, including the beach towns like Seaside Heights where Christie grew up, devastated by super storm Hurricane Sandy. 

On the surface folks think like Piers, who gushed over Christie, that the Republican governor is a straight shooter, not playing politics.

Think again.  Christie appeared to care deeply and sincerely about his state and its people reeling from 12 foot storm surges, heavy rains and high winds.  Sandy caused three deaths in New Jersey and a total of more than 40 in the U.S. and $10-20 billion in damage.  

But, praising President Obama for doing his job could play very well among independent and wavering Democrats for Obama.  His tact could also play well when Governor Christie runs for president most likely in 2016,  unless Mitt Romney wins the election less than seven days away. Christie appeared on television as a good guy and operating in a non-partisan governing fashion, rather than the political same ol' same ol', so prevalent in recent years.

If Christie had criticized Obama for his handling of the natural disaster that could have hardened his support among Democrats and independents. 

One must also look at Christie's record of being implicated but never prosecuted on one scandal after both as U. S. Attorney in New Hersey and governor.

So, when reading the headlines and stories or watching on television, look below the surface to try to get at true motivation for words and deeds.

One thing we know for sure - President Obama must be doing one hell of a good job dealing with killer super storm Hurricane Sandy. If you don't believe me, as his opposition.

New Jersey Republican Gov Christie', a sharp critic of President Obama's failed leadership, does an about face on Democrat Obama's leadership amid Hurricane Sandy devastation.  Christie, Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney's chief surrogate,  calls Obama's leadership "outstanding.   Maybe we should call off the election and declare Obama the winner.  With Romney suddenly adopting most of President Obama's domestic and foreign relations stances, I am starting to see a Republican strategy of embracing your political enemy in order to defeat him. 

Here's some "political intelligence" from the Boston Globe on Gov. Christie's about face on President Obama's leadership.

Campaign 2012 , Mitt Romney , Politics , President Obama

Chris Christie, fierce Obama critic, praises president’s response to Hurricane Sandy

By Callum Borchers, Globe Correspondent

New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, who has blasted President Obama’s leadership, heaped praise on Obama on Tuesday for his handling of Hurricane Sandy.

“The president has been outstanding in this and so have the folks at FEMA,” Christie said on NBC’s “Today” show.
Christie, whose state is among the hardest hit by the storm, made appearances on several morning talk shows on Tuesday and applauded Obama at each stop.

On MSNBC’s “Morning Joe,” Christie said “the president has been all over this, and he deserves great credit. He gave me his number at the White House and told me to call him if I needed anything and he absolutely means it, and it’s been very good working with the president and his administration.”

On CNN’s “Starting Point with Soledad O’Brien,” Christie added that Obama “has been incredibly supportive and helpful to our state, and not once did he bring up the election.”
Raise Your Voice
Click to contact candidates or elected officials about this issue. Christie is a prominent surrogate for Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney and was tapped to deliver the keynote address at the Republican National Convention in August. During that speech, Christie used variations of the word “leader” 17 times, often in the context of criticizing Obama.

“It’s time to end this era of absentee leadership in the Oval Office and send real leaders to the White House,” Christie said at the convention in Tampa.
“I believe in America and her history,” he added at another point. “There’s only one thing missing now: leadership.”



Callum Borchers can be reached at callum.borchers@globe.com. Follow him on Twitter @callumborchers.

Here's the Piers Morgan 'chat' with Gov Christie

Gov. Christie "not playing politics"? 

The War in Afghanistan: Another course

"Oriental River" photo by Mike Marcellino, South Vietnam 1968, copyright 1995

Plowshares, not swords
By Mike Marcellino

Vice President Joe Biden has it right. There is another course for America in Afghanistan.

Do I get this right? Vice President Joe Biden and President Barack Obama disagree over the right course in Afghanistan?

Vietnam should show us that we’ll never "defeat" the Taliban unless we are prepared to fight without an end, without victory in sight.

The Taliban is led by Mullah Omar, a peasant fundamentalist Muslim and fierce fighter who lost an eye fighting with the mujahedeen defeating the Soviet forces.

No matter how distasteful we find the strict Muslim laws, and especially harsh treatment of woman and girls, if we send in tens of thousands of more troops we must be prepared for a long winter.

The Taliban traces its origin to the 7th Century. The Taliban with large havens in a bitter, mountainous countryside, in many respects, like the Viet Cong with support from the North Vietnamese regular troops, in remote jungles and highlands of South Vietnam.

The Taliban, a religious fundamentalist movement, will resist modern, Western culture indefinitely. Its leader, Mullah Omar is nearly a prophet. Even if he is killed, as have other fundamentalist leaders, someone will take his place. The war in Afghanistan is a civil war with sharp cultural differences such as the American Civil War.

We look at the conflict and fundamentalism in Afghanistan through a Western view of the way the world should be. Already, elements in America view our actions in the Muslim world as a holy war - good against evil. Somehow I don’t think God created America to wage endless wars.

Omar recently told the Western press that Taliban's oppression against women and girls are misrepresented. We find their practices repulsive. We still have not achieved equality at home and there’s certainly too much abuse against females. The Taliban movement traces its beginnings back to the 7th Century. Forerunners of the Taliban defeated Alexander the Great, Omar points out. Actually, the small nation of Vietnam defeated China in the 14th century.

America should concentrate on rooting out elements actually threatening America's security. Otherwise, we should not send swords but plowshares, builders, not soldiers, tools, supplies and expertise to help Afghanistan rebuild and strengthen their own communities. We might be surprised what reaction we would get from the people. We should also set a good example at home use the money we’ll save from not using military force to rebuild our own communities. The various factions in Afghanistan will have to settle their own differences. They’ve been fighting for quite some time before we came along. Of course the very people we’re fighting now were only a decade or so ago our allies. The support of the people in towns and villages invariably determines the outcome in civil wars. Oppressive regimes fall eventually; decay from within without the support of the people.

I've noticed without relish, an interesting and deadly phenomena (a word used only by poets for 350 years) is going on in Afghanistan and it also goes on in Iraq, and probably a lot of warring states. The Taliban sets off bombs and kills civilians. It works, unfortunately. Then the Afghans don't want American (or NATO) soldiers fighting the Taliban because they think (or know) that if the foreign forces stop fighting to Taliban, the Taliban will stop killing their fellow citizens. Ditto for Iraq, except we sent in an overwhelming number of troops and there are many differences in the nature of things in Afghanistan and Iraq, dah (a word by the way derived from the Russian word for yes, now meaning, "yes, what else," dah.)

Another phenomena going on is what I call the "body count" or "body bag" syndrome (I hate it when certain politicians like former President George Bush junior kept referring to the "Vietnam syndrome" meaning (if he knows) that Vietnam veterans are a bunch of abnormal people, like he's saying to ex-troops, "enough said, you people and our nation just have to get over 'Vietnam syndrome.'" Excuse me George it ain't that simple. Have you ever heard of Agent Orange, George?)

Now, during the last presidential campaign, the Iraq and Afghanistan wars and how to get out of them was the hot topic, until US casualties diminished, i. e., fewer dead troops were returning home in body bags (as you recall, the Bush administration didn't want the media to photograph and film these sad events).

So, today, in Afghanistan fewer of our troops are returning in body bags, so the nation has now returned to American Idol and the ageless issue of health care reform, Part X). Noteworthy too is just the other day Americans polled rated Idol host Simon Cowell and an actor as a hero, both rated higher than President Obama. So much for fleeing stardom, Barrack, welcome to fickle America, tick, tick, tick, change, change, change.

You know some people have a theory that wars are necessary to hold down world population growth. I have a theory that dead American troops don't need health care anymore, in fact, dead civilians don't either. So, why isn't ending war our Number 1 Priority? Oh, I got it, if we kill people it will reduce health care costs, right? By the way, to make it “perfectly clear” I do not subscribe to either theory in relations to the benefits of war and killing people.

Now, Vice President Joe Biden, as far as he goes, is right. We need to do constructive, not destructive things in Afghanistan to win the support of the people. Then we can use more military resources to root out the bad guys trying to do in America and the West. The Taliban is a treat to the United States only in any support of terrorism. Use Special Forces and similar units together with precision strikes at real targets. Hey, we might wind up getting help from the Taliban as we did fighting the Soviets and communism in Afghanistan. Our constructive actions, not increased military force gives us a much better chance of winning support of the people, the “hearts and minds.” We should have learned that lesson in the Vietnam War. The will of the people eventually determines the outcome.

We may not like the Taliban and their harsh practices, but we have no choice but to live with them unless we are prepared to spend the lives of thousands of American soldiers and tons of money. If we engage them constructively maybe they change for the better.

In the Vietnam we learned that military power did not bring the outcome we sought. We found an enemy prepared to fight until they achieved their ends.

We could achieve a stalemate in Afghanistan, as in Vietnam, but many Americans will die without changing much of anything.

No one seems to talk about Gandhi and Martin Luther King anymore, but their methods worked. Why not use non-violence as a weapon. Setting a better example at home might also help too.

Mr. President, I ask you to take a good, hard look at what your vice president is saying. No one in our government today has more experience in the world than Joe Biden. And, he is one former senator whose son has served in our country’s armed forces.

President Obama, consider another way to demonstrate the power of our democracy - the American experiment to create a level playing field.

The whole world doesn’t have to be a mirror of America.

At times we must use force, but let’s use it with clear purpose and victory in our sights.

Let’s not again put the lives of American troops on the line with our fingers crossed.

Mike Marcellino served in the U. S. Army in the Vietnam War from 1967-68 as a combat correspondent and photojournalist

The War in Afghanistan, Another course, Copyright mike marcellino 2009