It's so cute when hardcore red-state Republicans criticize bi-partisanship efforts by blue-state Republican Governors.
Democrats understand that Democrats in GOP zones have to compromise sometimes; Republicans throw GOPers in Democrat zones out of the party for compromising.
If that were the case, I suppose we should wonder why the Republicans haven't kicked out governors like Brian Sandoval, John Kasich, Rick Snyder, and Jan Brewer for accepting ObamaCare's Medicaid expansion.
I don't think that we should completely reject the bipartisan efforts of Republican governors in liberal locales, but I don't see a problem with criticizing Christie in this case for his re-appointing a Democratic judge.
You know things are bad when Republicans start using Jan [Inks]ing Brewer as their evidence that the Republican party doesn't purge people for showing a willingness to compromise 
There's also the fact that Kasich, Brewer, and Snyder are all arch-conservative Republican hacks. Even Kasich did face a mini-revolt over the medicare expansion, despite the fact that Ohio has always had a pretty anti-Tea Party Republican Party (relatively speaking, of course). For the sake of debate, I'll give you Sandoval, despite the fact that he refused to speak out against Bundy. However, by that point you're just naming the exception that proves the rule.
The point is that none of those Republican governors have been ousted from the party for compromising. They are all either retiring or running for re-election.
Sandoval had as much reason to stay quiet on Ted Bundy as Democrats have for not discussing Bill Ayers. There is no use in wasting time discussing trivial people when there are more important things to do.
I suppose Ted Bundy has about as much to do with Sandoval as Bill Ayers does with the Democrats. But what does any of this have to do with Sandoval's refusal to condemn Cliven Bundy?
