Too Big for the Presidential Britches?
Some say Governor Chris Christie is too fat to be our Commander-in-Chief. I say bologna (with mayo and cheese on white bread...yum).
UPDATE: The Huffington Post is reporting that Gov. Chris Christie announced he will not run for President in 2012.
I have been listening to some liberals voice concerns on an issue recently that kinda sticks in my craw. Apparently, for some, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie’s weight is tipping the scales (sorry) against him when considering his possible upcoming candidacy for the 2012 Presidential race. And to be fair, there have also been a handful of Republicans who have chimed in regarding his size. It is just bananas.
First of all, there are plenty of reasons to discount Christie as a Presidential contender. It isn’t difficult for me to come to the conclusion that he would make a most undesirable President. So, why use time, effort, energy and audience on a discriminatory non-issue? After all, I am much less worried about what goes into his pie hole than what comes out of it.
Prior to becoming the Governor of New Jersey, Christie was a lobbyist who pushed for the deregulation of energy and securities companies. Before that, he was an attorney who was accused and investigated for tracking cell phones and entrapment. Once elected, the story in New Jersey became very similar to here in Wisconsin. In fact, he and Walker would make great croquet buddies. Christie also passed a budget within a month of becoming Governor – a budget on which he did not campaign. Many people feel his tactics were sneaky and underhanded. He slashed public education at the knees. Just hours before the budget was due, he used a line item veto to cut another 1 billion from the budget. He made unilateral and uncompromising decisions as his ammunition in his attack on the middle class of his state. Yep. Sounds all too familiar.
So when I hear pundits, politicians and others bellyache about Christie’s inability to run the country because of his BMI, it leaves me wondering why they do not focus on the real issues. I have heard the argument that he could die prematurely. Well, so could someone who smokes, enjoys skydiving, hunts or eats cheeseburgers. Even the healthiest person in the world could drop dead from a heart attack. Yes, perhaps the numbers are against a heavier person, but, like I said, there are many factors and I don’t think we want to only elect those who live in bubbles.
I suppose we would like our President to be the ultimate role model for our children. Sending a message that obesity is okay isn’t ideal – this is true. However, we should also teach our children to be accepting and tolerating (tolerating, I really do hate that term) of all body types, shapes, sizes and colors and not base our decisions on those traits.
Some say Christie isn’t electable because of our fatist society. We are so determined, in America, to accept only thin structures and buff bods. That may be true while watching TV or paging through magazines, but this clearly isn’t the case while strolling the grocery stores or grazing the buffets. We are a country who likes to eat (and eat, and eat). I believe people would see him as one of them. I think many people are more at ease with a heavier person because it makes them feel better about themselves.
I was thrilled when Melissa McCarthy, of Mike and Molly, won the Emmy award for lead in a comedy role. As a heavy woman in a sea of skinny minis she's had a tougher road and her win was not expected. I am delighted when I watch something featuring "real" looking people. We are bombarded by expectations - rules - by society to look a certain way. When I see these rules being broken, I feel progress is being made on certain fronts. And while it can be difficult to reconcile the need for health with the need for acceptance, I, for one, appreciate the realization that I am not the only one bigger than a size 2 and that it might just be okay.
Maybe I am biased because to my own weight issues. I am looking at this through red velvet (with buttercream frosting) colored glasses. When I became pregnant 8 years ago, I also started a medication which caused me to gain over 70 pounds over the following 9 months. It took me 7 years (and medication changes) to lose 60 of those pounds. And I am still working on the last impossible 10. Being heavier, I have experienced circumstances and emotions that I would not have previously understood. It is truly remarkable how different one is treated because of additional weight.
I do believe Chris Christie in the White House would be a tragic and dangerous mistake, buut not because of crumbs on the Oval Office carpet or the need for a larger desk. There are plenty of reasons to vote against Christie. But, if you are voting based on his belt size, I think you have some reading to do.
Tom
7:10 am on Tuesday, October 4, 2011
@ Heather: Good writing ... Those that point to Christie's weight as a disqualifying factor to become POTUS are the very same that scream for equal rights, ADA and race matters. It is truly shameful that hypocrisy knows no bounds in the left wing political theatre. But, at the end of the day, the voters will decide who becomes the next President, the same way the voters of New Jersey elected Republican Governor Chris Christie, and life goes on.
jt
6:47 pm on Wednesday, October 5, 2011
tom, really? the left wing? have you been blind for long? have you not seen the racist monkey pictures of president Obama all over the right wing blogs?
Tom
10:53 pm on Wednesday, October 5, 2011
@John: I am neither blind, nor a resident of "right wing blogs". Nor am I a name caller that gets a boost out of throwing a personal attack, like some.
By the way John, do you have a complete name and picture or do you prefer to remain shrouded behind your keyboard?
Rees Roberts
10:34 am on Tuesday, October 4, 2011
We need to remember something.
Each time you read the newspaper, view the news on the TV or hear the news on the radio you simply must factor in "why did that media outlet either spin a story or even carry a particular story." The media has an agenda. Mainly, the large national ones for sure.
Controversy sells.
The Christie issue is being elevated to a higher consciousness simply to improve ratings as it is obviously an emotionally charged issue. We simply have not been taught to consider the effects of the advertising world. Do you sincerely believe if we did not have advertising that half of the stories we consume on a daily basis would even air? Heck no. Therefore, through this different lens you may better understand why Christie's weight is even being talked about.
Pete Selkowe
2:34 pm on Wednesday, October 5, 2011
Rees,
You're much too cynical. In truth, most news covered by the media is reported out of a genuine belief that the audience wants to/needs to learn about it. Media see themselves as a proxy for readers/viewers who can't go to the event or do the research. There is much less "push" from the business side than you imagine; while true there are lots of anecdotes about the advertising department or the circulation department attempting to influence the newsroom, on a day-to-day basis there is none of that. Zero. Nunca.
Personally, I could care less about Christie, but it is clear that Republicans of both ends of the spectrum were interested in his potential candidacy. So, of course, the media covered it; OK, over-covered it. So what?
Rees Roberts
12:00 pm on Thursday, October 6, 2011
Sorry for the delayed reply. Had out patient surgery yesterday.
Pete, as you, I too worked in the media. I worked for over 20 years in radio and television. Maybe from your enlightened position you may see your view one way but I saw it at the "street level" and saw example after example of how the media would cover something or not. Do you not see Fox News as being one of the most extreme examples on the conservative side? Or MSNBC on the liberal side? Most people understand these things. But trying to tell me that controversy does not sell newspapers means you have lost touch.
When I began my career I too felt I was working for the "watch-dog" aspect of our society. That part has been replaced by competing media companies (like Fox News and MSNBC) "taking sides." The bottom line is people have their favorite news source depending on their personal view of the world. That is not being cynical.
jt
6:44 pm on Wednesday, October 5, 2011
first of all, i am not a tea partier or republican, but i can understand why they want him to run. when he speaks, he is frank. he pulls no punches, and doesn't lie about his agenda. while i don't agree with him, he is a man of character.
and the right wings feild of candidates has no character! i don't think either of them could run their kids soccer team much less the free world! if i could choose between christie or walker as my governor, hands down it would be christie!
the man has integrity. that is why he chose to finish the job he was elected to!
Tom
10:56 pm on Wednesday, October 5, 2011
@John: what specifically do you disagree with Christie on?
jt
11:34 pm on Wednesday, October 5, 2011
i disagree with him on his out look on public sector unions.but, at least he stated his opinion out in the open when he ran for governor, unlike scott walker! And yes tom i would put up a picture, but it would be used against me by local government as i am a public sector union employee WITH OVER 25 YEARS OF SERVICE. I also don't feel the need to dress myself up in a suit to make myself look important as you seem to do. i am a highly skilled tradesmen who doesn't need a suit to prove my self worth. And i am willing to bet that you sir are not a local to the mountpleasant or racine area, but rather a paid lobbyist who gets paid by your party to spread your propaganda. you have never stated where you are from or what interest you have in the racine area! let's hear more about what exactly it is that you do!
Tom
11:48 pm on Wednesday, October 5, 2011
More name calling John? That's ok if that's what gets you through the day. Please continue to seek the anonymity and safety of your keyboard. Take care.
jt
12:02 am on Thursday, October 6, 2011
tom, i never called you any names in my last post. and as for anonymity, i have stated what i do for a living. now, please answer the question! what exactly do you do for a living? and do you live in the racine area? your profile says your from wauwatosa!
and in an earlier post, you claim to be a principal in a company here and in japan.
what exactly does that mean? what company? what does that company do? and is part of your job shipping american jobs overseas?
and yes, it makes my day to call out beurocrats! there, now i called you a name!
Heather Rayne Geyer
8:38 am on Thursday, October 6, 2011
I can actually see the appeal to Christie as well. I mostly admire his humor and matter of fact way of speaking. It is refreshing - however, he stands for too much of what I am against. But I agree that I can definitely see why they wanted him compared to the gaggle of loons they have now.