Why I don't like Christie

"I think it's part of why he's a bully."

You plainly said that his physical bulk is part of why he is a bully.  So you are saying that being large pre-disposes one to be a bully.  THAT is the definition of stereotyping, regardless of how you attempt to justify it or deny it.    I know a number of really good kids who are overweight in varying degrees, some because they are allowed too much screen time or have emotional issues.  I'm sure they'll be happy to know that adults like you think this makes them predisposed to be anti-social bullies.  In reality, far more are likely to be victims of bullies.

You can retract or correct your statement if you didn't mean it.

No. You are wrong. I can't say it any more directly. That's not what I wrote and it's not what I meant.

ml1 said:

No. You are wrong. I can't say it any more directly. That's not what I wrote and it's not what I meant.

It's what you wrote.  If you say its not what you meant, then that is good.

ML1, it is what you wrote. What your wrote directly ascribed him being a bully to his size. You said " I think he would be a different person if he had grown up as a person of smaller size". You said "I think his physical bulk is an essential part of his persona.  I think it's part of why he's a bully.  You may not agree with my assessment, but it's not arbitrary.  I believe his overbearing loudmouthed windbag style is directly connected to his physical size."

Have you not run into a small bully?

I did not write this.  You wrote it. 

ice said:

So you are saying that being large pre-disposes one to be a bully.

Gilgul said:

ML1, it is what you wrote. What your wrote directly ascribed him being a bully to his size. You said " I think he would be a different person if he had grown up as a person of smaller size". You said "I think his physical bulk is an essential part of his persona.  I think it's part of why he's a bully.  You may not agree with my assessment, but it's not arbitrary.  I believe his overbearing loudmouthed windbag style is directly connected to his physical size."

Have you not run into a small bully?

sure of course.  I didn't write that either.  you guys are the ones interpreting what I wrote to mean things I didn't write.

I actually think a person has to be in a bit of denial to suggest that Christie's bullying ways have nothing to do with the fact that he's a physically imposing guy.

ml1 said:

I did not write this.  You wrote it. 

ice said:

So you are saying that being large pre-disposes one to be a bully.

"I think it's part of why he's a bully." - ML1, 7/5/17

Your stubborness is really starting to make you sound foolish which is rare and unfortunate.  I will leave you alone now.  If you say it's not what you meant, I'm fine with that.

I feel as if now people are ganging up on ML1 which isn't helping much. He is trying to walk it back. That is good. 

I say, just think about language choice and question self when making statements about the reason people are the way they are. I think - point to the behavior, call it out for what it is. But why it is that way is beyond our ability to know and our "theories" about it can end up harming more than just the person being called out. 

ML1 if you say you did not mean what you wrote, fine I will accept that. But to deny that you wrote what is a direct quote is, well, Trumpian. 

HatsOff said:



I say, just think about language choice and question self when making statements about the reason people are the way they are. I think - point to the behavior, call it out for what it is. But why it is that way is beyond our ability to know and our "theories" about it can end up harming more than just the person being called out. 

+1

Agree. I don't interpret this as saying that all "big" guys are bullies, but that there are people who use their size to intimidate. Christie is an example, LBJ would be another.

ml1 said:

Normally I'd be against joking about someone's weight. But Christie's loudmouth bullying ways leave him open to it. Not to mention the fact that he seems to use his loud voice and body mass to intimidate. I think his size is relevant to how he behaves.  Such as in this video. Do we think a skinny guy would behave this way?  Maybe, but probably not.  In my opinion this is a guy who is accustomed to using his size and his voice to shut people up:

There's nothing foolish in what I've written. It's you who is stubbornly clinging to an interpretation that is not in the actual words I wrote 

ice said:


Your stubborness is really starting to make you sound foolish which is rare and unfortunate.  I will leave you alone now.  If you say it's not what you meant, I'm fine with that.

I didn't deny a direct quote. 

Gilgul said:

ML1 if you say you did not mean what you wrote, fine I will accept that. But to deny that you wrote what is a direct quote is, well, Trumpian. 

It is not an "interpretation". The it is the plain meaning of the words written.

Seriously.

But it's the height of denial to suggest that there aren't some powerful men who use their bodies to try to dominate. I could be wrong about Christie. But I'm not just coming up with something that doesn't exist in the world of politics or business 

apple44 said:

Agree. I don't interpret this as saying that all "big" guys are bullies, but that there are people who use their size to intimidate. Christie is an example, LBJ would be another.

ml1 said:

Normally I'd be against joking about someone's weight. But Christie's loudmouth bullying ways leave him open to it. Not to mention the fact that he seems to use his loud voice and body mass to intimidate. I think his size is relevant to how he behaves.  Such as in this video. Do we think a skinny guy would behave this way?  Maybe, but probably not.  In my opinion this is a guy who is accustomed to using his size and his voice to shut people up:

Jeff Bezos is know to be a bit of a bully in his company. He is 5'8" and thin. Steve Jobs was definitely know as one who would bully people and get in their face. He was tallish at 6'2" but even when in full health, thin. 

Nonsense. Show me where I wrote anything that suggests Christie's behavior is common to big men 

Gilgul said:

It is not an "interpretation". The it is the plain meaning of the words written.

ml1 said:

Nonsense. Show me where I wrote anything that suggests Christie's behavior is common to big men 

Gilgul said:

It is not an "interpretation". The it is the plain meaning of the words written.

"I believe his overbearing loudmouthed windbag style is directly connected to his physical size."

His. It's a singular pronoun

Gilgul said:

ml1 said:

Nonsense. Show me where I wrote anything that suggests Christie's behavior is common to big men 

Gilgul said:

It is not an "interpretation". The it is the plain meaning of the words written.

"I believe his overbearing loudmouthed windbag style is directly connected to his physical size."

Respectfully to all, it's hard for me to accept that Governor Christie's toughness and bluster stem from anything but his personality makeup. I see that TMZ video and I do not see someone acting out of confidence should a genuine physical altercation ensue -- not in the slightest. I say all this as a significantly overweight person myself. I, for one, wish Christie haters would rely just on the bountiful substantive bases for criticism he has produced, and forego the fat comments, jokes and memes. That's just me.

(ETA: Despite the thread name change, the Firefox tab at the top of my screen still identifies this "Beached Whale." Just saying.)

fwiw, I haven't made any jokes.  I've been serious.  IMHO a guy who blusters and literally yells at people in town halls is being physically intimidating. 

ml1 said:

Seriously.

But it's the height of denial to suggest that there aren't some powerful men who use their bodies to try to dominate. I could be wrong about Christie. But I'm not just coming up with something that doesn't exist in the world of politics or business 

apple44 said:

Agree. I don't interpret this as saying that all "big" guys are bullies, but that there are people who use their size to intimidate. Christie is an example, LBJ would be another.

Either way, if the lampoon is ultimately about intimidation and domination, what does bringing the body into it gain you? Are the jokes so funny that the target can't be pricked without them?

The problem in this particular instance is that the substantive arguments don't mean a damn thing to anyone you might debate.  

This is not a league-sanctioned, refereed heavyweight bout.  This is a street fight.  Kick him in the balls.  Poke out his eyes.  It's a what they have been doing for years and winning by doing so.  Go ahead and follow the high ground right to your demise if you prefer.  

conandrob240 said:

All people see are the "fat" insults. No one reads the substantive criticism when you " go low". Do you get that?

fairplay said:

conandrob240 said:

there are so many more important things we can despise about Christie. His size isn't even on the radar. He's a terrible human being. He's a selfish, morally devoid person who shows no concern for others. He's abrasive and downright rude. His policies put the wealthy first and show disdain for the poor. Mixing jokes or insults about his appearance diminish that more important conversation.

Yeah ok ok ok. If it's ok for him to trade on insults and cozy  up with the insulter-in-chief, fine, fine fine. He's still a fat slob, a sand tick and a stinkin' dead beached whale. In six months, good riddance to him, his friends and allies. May the ice cream melt all over his (and their) pudgy bully-fingers.

ml1 said:

fwiw, I haven't made any jokes.  I've been serious.  IMHO a guy who blusters and literally yells at people in town halls is being physically intimidating. 

Ah. Cross-posted above. My impression was that the fat jokes, not depictions that simply portrayed Christie as a loud, large man, were the issue.

Gilgul said:

But why would you assume that a large person is a bully because he is large? He is a bully because he is a bully. Not because he is large.

Because, for one thing, to get all the food at the table, you have to push everyone else off by being a bullying, offensive blowhard. If you want it all to yourself, you are a boorish pig.

ice said:

ml1 said:

I did not write this.  You wrote it. 

ice said:

So you are saying that being large pre-disposes one to be a bully.

"I think it's part of why he's a bully." - ML1, 7/5/17

Your stubborness is really starting to make you sound foolish which is rare and unfortunate.  I will leave you alone now.  If you say it's not what you meant, I'm fine with that.

Personal attack.

this is why I wrote about nuance.  There's a grey area between a fat joke and depicting Christie as a loud bully.  Political cartoons are one area in which the depictions can be considered demeaning to an obese man.  However, caricature is part of the toolkit there, so pretty much anything should be fair game -- Obama's big ears, Clinton's red nose, Christie's girth, etc.

Then there are the expressions that could be considered demeaning to a fat man, but are apropos given Christie's demeanor -- "bull in a china shop," "throwing his weight around," etc.

of course if it's a cheap "Chris Chrispy" fat joke, it adds nothing, and probably detracts from any commentary.

DaveSchmidt said:

ml1 said:

fwiw, I haven't made any jokes.  I've been serious.  IMHO a guy who blusters and literally yells at people in town halls is being physically intimidating. 

Ah. Cross-posted above. My impression was that the fat jokes, not depictions that simply portrayed Christie as a loud, large man, were the issue.

ml1 said:

this is why I wrote about nuance.  There's a grey area between a fat joke and depicting Christie as a loud bully.  Political cartoons are one area in which the depictions can be considered demeaning to an obese man.  However, caricature is part of the toolkit there, so pretty much anything should be fair game -- Obama's big ears, Clinton's red nose, Christie's girth, etc.

FWIW, personally I'd draw a line between the cartoon you posted at 1:47, which reflects the intimidation you've been talking about, and the top and bottom cartoons at 1:42, which hinge on his obesity in a way that goes beyond Obama's ears or Clinton's nose. (The middle one, it seems to me, targets Paul more than Christie.)

We are talking here about the guy who made his underlings think they should punish a Democrat by blocking traffic of thousands at the g. Washington bridge. Right? Who said "who me? Oh yeah, i was moving the orange cones around myself." Who argued with teachers and others in town halls who questioned him by belittling them, yelling At them, telling them to "sit down and shut up." Right? We are talking about someone who told the press where to find him showing his naked thunder thighs spread out all over a beach he cleared for his family, right? We are talking about the guy who shook an ice cream cone in the face of a NJ citizen who pays his salary, right? Really ! We care about calling him "fat?" The man who won the governorship by "calling a spade a spade?" How about "greasy thug mafia man?" Is that better than "fat?" How about "smug, arrogant brute?" Is that better than "fat?'  Frankly, you can call me "fat" as long as I don't fit the rest of it!

Reading this thread is almost enough to take away my appetite.

But almost doesn't count for much ... so off to dinner.