Christie says he can't 'let go' of Springsteen, talks about weight loss
February 20th, 2014
02:18 PM ET
6 months ago

Christie says he can't 'let go' of Springsteen, talks about weight loss

(CNN) - It doesn't look like Bruce Springsteen will ever lose a fan in New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie - no matter how much the rock legend and the Republican governor disagree on politics.

In his first town hall since last summer, Christie was encouraged Thursday to abandon his longtime loyalty to the liberal musician. The governor also drew some laughs when he talked about his weight loss, about a year after undergoing lap-band surgery.


While the governor was not asked about the recent George Washington Bridge controversy, he was petitioned by an audience member to get rid of his Springsteen collection.

"When you go home tonight would you please destroy all your Bruce Springsteen CDs? He is not a friend of yours, governor," said a veteran, who identified himself as Joe Williams.

Not long after the bridge scandal made national headlines in January, Springsteen took part in a parody with late night TV host Jimmy Fallon, mocking the governor in a song to the tune of "Born to Run."

While Springsteen has praised Christie in the past for his leadership after Superstorm Sandy, the rock legend has done little else to show high regard for his superfan.

Responding to the audience member Thursday, Christie joked, "Well, the CDs could be destroyed. I have it all on my i-Phone now."

Christie, who said he's been to 132 Springsteen concerts, acknowledged Williams may be right, but it's hard for him to let go of the musician he's long adored.

"Hey listen, I don't do drugs, I don't drink.  This is it for me, OK? That's all I've got," he said.

The governor added he's still holding out hope that one day the two will become friends.

"I live in hope of that because I think when we get attached to certain people as youngsters, which I did, it is hard to kind of let that go," he said. "So you are probably giving me wise and sage counsel that I should accept, but my heart keeps telling me not to."

Christie was holding the town hall Thursday to talk about Superstorm Sandy relief aid. The event took place in Monmouth County, one of the worst-hit areas in New Jersey from the 2012 storm.

Another audience member noted that Christie was "looking good," a reference to his weight loss in the past year.

"I'm getting there," he said.

He went on to tell a story about a middle school student who told him he was "getting a lot smaller."

But, he added, the student also had a question: "When are you going to get really small?"

Christie said he told her, "Well, my dear, Rome was not un-built in a day either so we've got a little work still to do'."


Filed under: Chris Christie • New Jersey
soundoff (36 Responses)
  1. Me

    Since we started talking about taxes, I have a simple question what is "fair share" for rich people according to liberals?

    "Washington, D.C., November 29, 2012—The average federal tax rate for all taxpayers rose slightly in 2010 to 11.81 percent, up from 11.06 percent the previous year. The tax rate paid by individuals with incomes in the top 1 percent averaged 23.39 percent, while all filers in the bottom 50 percent paid an average tax rate of 2.37 percent, according to a new Tax Foundation analysis"

    The top 1% already pays over double the average tax payer does and the top 10% pay over 70% of ALL federal tax revenue, so exactly what would you consider fair share? This is an area that I lean conservative, I think there should be a flat tax, everyone pays say 15% or 20%, that is fair, the rich will pay a LOT more in dollar amounts then middle or low income because they make more! Or at the very least have 3 brackets, 10% for 100k and below, 15% for 101K to 1 Mill and 20% for over 1 mil., or something like that. (to be clear the entire income is taked at the rate in your bracket so if you make over a million your whole income is taxed at 20% not just the amount over a million) I really am just curious what you think is a fair share for the 1%ers.

    February 20, 2014 03:46 pm at 3:46 pm |
  2. Lynda/Minnesota

    Uh-oh. Chris Christie has lost that loving feeling so soon into the general election?

    February 20, 2014 03:50 pm at 3:50 pm |
  3. Me

    Oh and too add to my last post, with no deductions, you pay that rate period, in either of my options.

    February 20, 2014 03:53 pm at 3:53 pm |
  4. tom l

    Since we started talking about taxes, I have a simple question what is "fair share" for rich people according to liberals?

    "Washington, D.C., November 29, 2012—The average federal tax rate for all taxpayers rose slightly in 2010 to 11.81 percent, up from 11.06 percent the previous year. The tax rate paid by individuals with incomes in the top 1 percent averaged 23.39 percent, while all filers in the bottom 50 percent paid an average tax rate of 2.37 percent, according to a new Tax Foundation analysis"

    The top 1% already pays over double the average tax payer does and the top 10% pay over 70% of ALL federal tax revenue, so exactly what would you consider fair share? This is an area that I lean conservative, I think there should be a flat tax, everyone pays say 15% or 20%, that is fair, the rich will pay a LOT more in dollar amounts then middle or low income because they make more! Or at the very least have 3 brackets, 10% for 100k and below, 15% for 101K to 1 Mill and 20% for over 1 mil., or something like that. (to be clear the entire income is taked at the rate in your bracket so if you make over a million your whole income is taxed at 20% not just the amount over a million) I really am just curious what you think is a fair share for the 1%ers.
    ====
    Flat tax is the way to go. Not only is it the fairest way to tax but it will get the lobbyists out of Washington who are buying every single politician. Every single one.

    February 20, 2014 03:56 pm at 3:56 pm |
  5. salty dog

    Me, let's talk effective tax rates, oh and care to mention what % of the money they control, if your going to control 99% of the money, why should others pay your tax . If your not wealthy your rooting for the wrong team, that's a fact your unable to digest.

    February 20, 2014 03:57 pm at 3:57 pm |
  6. salty dog

    What tax bracket does Romney fall into 39%, now what % did he actually pay, 13%, so stop crying foul . Economic expert has dispelled all your arguments already, quit handily I might add, without pointing a partisan finger. Robert rieght? Professor at Berkeley now.

    February 20, 2014 04:02 pm at 4:02 pm |
  7. Rudy NYC

    tom l wrote:

    "Spending went WAY up after the taxes were cut every year from 2002-2009. Are you gonig to admit to that fact?"

    In a heartbeat I will admit that. Spending did go up under Bush. And Bush wasn't in office in 2009 so it is Obama that continued that upswing. Will YOU admit that?
    -------------------------
    FY2008-09 was Bush's final budget, which had a deficit of $1.5 trillion. Are you going to admit to that, too?

    ==========================================================================
    Fair is Fair wrote:

    "The national debt increased each year from 2002 – 2007. Were you aware of that?"

    It's increased MORE under Obama. Were you aware of that?
    -------------------------
    Yes, he was handed a monster deficit from Bush. Are you going to admit to that?
    The annual deficit has also declined every since to nearly one half. Are you going to admit to that?

    February 20, 2014 04:07 pm at 4:07 pm |
  8. Rudy NYC

    tom l

    Since we started talking about taxes, I have a simple question what is "fair share" for rich people according to liberals?
    -------------------------–
    I have a stupid question. Why do you constantly try to manufacture straw man arguments? You must live in a serious bubble.

    February 20, 2014 04:10 pm at 4:10 pm |
  9. Me

    Rudy NYC

    tom l

    Since we started talking about taxes, I have a simple question what is "fair share" for rich people according to liberals?
    ---------–
    I have a stupid question. Why do you constantly try to manufacture straw man arguments? You must live in a serious bubble.
    ______________
    A little defensive aren't you Rudy, I asked the question not Tom l (he just answered it), how is it a straw man argument, I am simply curious what a "fair share" is according to liberals, 30%, 40%, 50%, etc?? Can't even answer a simple question, Salty did, using his usual liberal talking points but he answered it, I think you are the one that lives in a bubble! I have shown proof that they do pay a fair share, DOUBLE that of the average tax payer, all you can do is dodge the question!

    February 20, 2014 04:19 pm at 4:19 pm |
  10. Me

    salty dog

    Me, let's talk effective tax rates, oh and care to mention what % of the money they control, if your going to control 99% of the money, why should others pay your tax . If your not wealthy your rooting for the wrong team, that's a fact your unable to digest.
    ____________________
    I believe it is effective tax rates listed there. How in the world are other people paying their taxes, the study showed that they pay over DOUBLE the tax rate of the average tax payer so exactly how are other people paying their taxes??? If you looked at it in dollar figures, they pay more in one year then most people will pay in a lifetime! And no I am not a 1%er and no I don't root for either team thank you, I think ALL political parties should be banned, they are the issue in politics today, I think for my self, I am liberal on some issues and conservative on some!

    February 20, 2014 04:27 pm at 4:27 pm |
  11. Rudy NYC

    Me wrote:

    Can't even answer a simple question, Salty did, using his usual liberal talking points but he answered it, I think you are the one that lives in a bubble! I have shown proof that they do pay a fair share, DOUBLE that of the average tax payer, all you can do is dodge the question!
    -----------------------–
    You're cherry-picking facts, you cite the lowest income brackets and compare it to the highest. Reagan and Republicans set up our current progressive tax system, which allows the lowest incomes to pay little or nothing. Is it fair for a $40k/year earner to pay just as high a rate as your 1%'er?

    February 20, 2014 04:28 pm at 4:28 pm |
1 2