As I wrote earlier, public-sector-focused unions such as the NJEA should be barred from political activity to prevent the state and its workers from setting up political machines that impose high barriers to entry for opponents of the bureaucracy's agenda, and consequently squelch democracy in NJ.

Alan very correctly points out that Christie is impeded by the lack of a major statewide media outlet. At the same time, however, there are very attractive alternatives: nationalization and opening up to reporters. Christie went on Hannity before the election, and he could show up on talk show after talk show to say he is spearheading a reform movement, and that he needs help. This would shine the spotlight on the Legislature and reactionary groups like the NJEA.

Next, as I have said before, "transparency, transparency, transparency"! What if Christie simply ordered all state government officials to assist and provide free access to credentialed reporters seeking information in state files? Can you imagine the NY Times and Philly Inquirer articles that would result? Or the TV specials? Frontline? Breitbart videos online? Etc., etc. It would cast a brilliant and disinfecting sunshine on the state's danker corners. It might also help to shed some light on where all those Abbott funds have actually gone ...

Finally, I would like to take issue with one of Alan's statements. I am not sure that Christie has an inherent problem with "movement conservatives." He may not be in the Libertarian vein, and he is quite obviously not a Lonegan guy. He seems, however, to like restraining and cleaning up government, and he is certainly sympatico with social conservatives. Which "movement" of conservatives are you speaking about then, Alan? In the end, of course, this is a minor point. The proof will be in the pudding for Christie, as is always the case with politics.