EDITORIAL: Christie to South Jersey: No, you weren’t flooded

We’ve seen Gov. Chris Christie’s hypersensitivity on display many times in the past, as he lashes out against critics, some perceived grievance or some reporting that makes him look bad. He’s gotten some good YouTube moments out of it. He’s also said some really foolish things along the way.

His latest thoughtless retort came on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” Monday morning, when he defended his decision to hurry back to New Hampshire for more campaigning by maintaining “there is no residual damage, there is no flooding damage” along South Jersey’s coast from the weekend’s mammoth blizzard.

Do you agree with Christie that there is no flooding damage along South Jersey's coast? 'Like' us on Facebook and post the pics of flooding in your neighborhood if you disagree.

Shore towns were flooded. The mayor of North Wildwood said that in his community it was worse than Sandy — four to five feet of water in the downtown area. Neighboring communities experienced similar problems. There are countless photos and videos out there documenting the flooding. South Jersey Sen. Jeff Van Drew has asked Christie to request federal disaster relief.

Snow and floods; this nor'easter was historic

Are they all lying? Has all the visual evidence been faked? Or are we supposed to somehow believe that despite the flooding, nothing anywhere was damaged?

Is Christie imagining some grand conspiracy to torpedo his campaign? Lt. Gov. Kim Guadagno has been sent to assess the damage; is her mandate to “confirm” that it’s all a hoax?

Christie has been making bogus and contradictory statements along the campaign trail for months, but even within that context this seems extreme. Why make such a blunt claim on such a sensitive subject that’s so obviously untrue? Is he that defensive about having skipped town yet again before the roads have even been plowed? Or does he think the flooding will reflect badly on what his administration has not done to amend the state’s coastal development regulations in the Sandy aftermath?

More snow on the way, like it or not

This weekend’s blizzard was an immense storm that hit during a full moon, which meant even higher tides and an even greater flooding threat. Some damage was inevitable, regardless of the state’s sensitivity and response to climate change since Sandy. Christie was hardly responsible for the flooding, so why deny it occurred?

Expect the Christie camp to come up with some sort of rationalization for the governor’s damage denial, claiming he really meant to say something different or maybe just that his critics are being mean. Perhaps Christie will blame bogus preliminary reports and throw some staffer under the bus.

But Christie will only be compounding his mistake if he feels the need to double down on his claims and in the process denies South Jersey any additional help that would come with an emergency declaration. That would be spectacularly petty — but not at all unexpected from a politician with such singular focus on his own campaign.