Israel's center holds. Peace processers look to Obama — and John Kerry.

Benjamin Netanyahu waves to his supporters as he arrives with Former Israel Minister for Foreign Affairs Avigdor Liberman at his election campaign headquarters on Tuesday.

Image by Uriel Sinai / Getty Images

Israel's national elections Tuesday left the Obama administration and its allies with a new prospect: a weakened Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose years of testiness and occasional confrontation with President Barack Obama failed to prevent the rise of a new centrist party.

Israel's election — and the emergence as the country's second-largest party of Yesh Atid, led by former television personality Yair Lapid — were driven largely by domestic economic and social issues. But it surprised many who had anticipated the victory of a militant right-wing bloc. And Washington was scrambling Tuesday to process what appears to be a new, more centrist coalition in a year that could test American-Israeli relations over a brewing conflict with Iran and an American desire to move toward Palestinian statehood.

According to the Israel's Channel 2, with 95% of votes counted, Likud-Beiteinu had won 31 seats, while Lapid's party won 19, and Labor won 17.

"The net impact is that a broader coalition may provide more openings as part of a renewal of peace negotiations with the Palestinians," said David Makovsky, the director of the Project on the Middle East Peace Process at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy, though he also predicted protracted bargaining in the "Rubik's cube" of Israeli coalition politics.

"Another incentive for a wider coalition is the biggest issue in play between Washington and Israel this year is Iran," Makovsky said. "Accordingly, Israel will need to prioritize relations with the Obama administration towards reaching a successful resolution."

That fact, and Lapid's demand that negotiations be restarted with Palestinian leaders, have offered backers of the peace process a rare reason for optimism.

"I think Netanyahu forming a coalition with partners who demand peace negotiations with Palestinians, that's good for Obama," said Peace Now spokesman Ori Nir.

And while Obama may have been burned once too often by the difficult politics of Israel and Palestinian, the eternally optimistic peace processers are hoping for a new champion: his incoming Secretary of State, Senator John Kerry.

"There's a lot of buzz going around that Kerry wants to own this issue," said Zvika Krieger, a vice president at the S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace and contributing editor to The Atlantic. "If Kerry does in fact request that, we might see some movement on this issue."

Another Democratic Mideast analyst said Netanyahu would be pulled in both directions by his new coalition. A centrist coalition may make "it easier to get some things done, which could please the White House, but he will also face real pressure from the right and within his own base, which will also give him a pressure release valve," the analyst said.

Others shrugged off the heated rhetoric surrounding the elections' impact both here and in Israel.

Writing in Bloomberg View, Jeffrey Goldberg argued that the effect of the election results on the peace process would be " not as much as you'd expect."

"In the past week, especially, Netanyahu has been running against President Barack Obama," Goldberg wrote. "Netanyahu had been trying to convey to the settlers and their supporters that he is the only one strong enough to resist another U.S. pressure campaign to freeze Israeli settlement-building."

"The next coalition — even if it is center-right, rather than hard-right — is going to have a hard time selling a revitalized peace process," Goldberg wrote.

Meanwhile, Netanyahu appeared to signal a preference for a centrist coalition, telling supporters Tuesday night that his government will be "as broad as possible."

“Barack Obama is saying that the only principled way to make children safe is to make lawful citizens less safe and violent criminals more safe,” says LaPierre.

The National Rifle Association executive vice president Wayne LaPierre.

Image by  Evan Vucci / AP

WASHINGTON — NRA Executive Vice President and CEO Wanye LaPierre aggressively criticized President Barack Obama's second inaugural address late Tuesday at a function in Reno, Nevada.

"Obama wants to turn the term of absolutism into a dirty word," LaPierre said in remarks, televised on cable news and broadcast on the gun owners organization's website. "It's a way of redefining words so that common sense is turned upside-down and no one knows the difference," he said, accusing Obama of double-speak, adding that the term is "Obama-code for extremist."

LaPierre's remarks centered on a single line from Obama's 2,108-word speech — one thought to be targeted at congressional Republicans.

"We cannot mistake absolutism for principle, or substitute spectacle for politics, or treat name-calling as reasoned debate," Obama said.

"We're told that to stop insane killers, we must accept less freedom," LaPierre charged. "Barack Obama is saying that the only principled way to make children safe is to make lawful citizens less safe and violent criminals more safe."

LaPierre also attacked Obama's gun control proposals, which include efforts to ban the new manufacture of assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, and mandate universal background checks for all gun transactions.

"Obama wants you to believe that putting the federal government in the middle of every firearm transaction — except those between criminals — will somehow make us safer," he said. "He wants to put every firearm transaction ... right under the thumb of the federal government."

"We're not children who need to be parented or misguided 'bitter clingers' to guns and religion," he added in a reference to Obama's notorious 2008 campaign gaffe.

And LaPierre said there are only nefarious reasons for gun registry like the one Obama is proposing.

"There are only two reasons for that federal list of gun owners —to tax them or take them — only two reasons," he added.

LaPierre defended the NRA's opposition to new gun control legislation in the wake of the Newtown school shooting, citing the purpose of the Bill of Rights: "To ensure that fundamental freedoms of a minority can never be denied by a majority," he said. "Mr. President, you might think that calling us 'absolutists' is a clever way of 'name-calling' without using names. But if that is 'absolutist,' then we are as 'absolutist' as the Founding Fathers and framers of the Constitution ... and we're proud of it!"

Watching your characters eat food is the best part of video games. Now Gourmet Gaming lets you experience the virtual glory FOR REAL.

Minecraft Pumpkin Pie

It's only a matter of time before Minecraft infiltrates every moment of my waking life, including the food I eat. Recipe!

Legend of Zelda (The Wind Waker) Elixir Soup

Recipe!

Pokémon Lava Cookie

Recipe!

The Sims Key Lime Pie

Recipe!

View Entire List ›

The “No Budget, No Pay Act” would mean Congress doesn't get a paycheck if they don't pass a budget. Given that the last budget was passed in 2009, that might mean a long time without pay. Here are some suggestions on how our lovable political figures could make some spare cash back in their home states.

Harry Reid could strip in Vegas.

Image by John Gara/Buzzfeed

Pelosi could fry chalupas in Northern California.

Source: iirraa  /  via: flickr.com

Paul Ryan could be a personal trainer in Kenosha, WI.

Image by John Gara/Buzzfeed

Eric Cantor could give spirited tours in Colonial Williamsburg.

Source: Harvey Barrison/Creative Commons via Flickr  /  via: hbarrison

View Entire List ›

“I stood next to President Obama as the Marines carried those flag-draped caskets off the plane at Andrews.”

View Video ›

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton briefly came close to crying on Wednesday when describing the bodies of Benghazi victims returning to the U.S.

"I stood next to President Obama as the Marines carried those flag-draped caskets off the plane at Andrews," Clinton said, her voice breaking. "I put my arms around the mothers and fathers, the sisters and brothers, the sons and daughters, and the wives left alone to raise their children."

Clinton is testifying before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee about the September 11 attack on the embassy in Benghazi, Libya, which left four Americans dead. Her hearing was postponed for a while because of health problems that landed her in the hospital.

Outgoing Secretary of State falls on her sword.

WASHINGTON — Secretary of State Hillary Clinton acknowledged Wednesday that she is ultimately responsible for security failures in the Sept. 11 terrorist attack in Benghazi, Libya.

Clinton made her statements during a Senate hearing on the attacks and the resulting controversy.

View Video ›

“We had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or because of guys out for a walk one night and decided to go kill some Americans? At this point what difference does it make?”

Image by Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP

WASHINGTON — Outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Wednesday ripped into Republicans for accusing the Obama administration of misleading them in the wake of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, charging it was inappropriate given the deaths of American citizens.

Clinton became livid during an exchange with Sen. Ron Johnson in which the conservative Republican repeatedly accused the White House of misleading the administration.

At one point, Clinton raised her voice and angrily interrupted Johnson to denounce the GOP's focus on what they were told by the administration rather than on the deaths of four Americans.

"With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. Was it because of a protest or because of guys out for a walk one night and decided to go kill some Americans? At this point what difference does it make senator?" Clinton said angrily.

Later in a less hostile exchange with Sen. Jeff Flake, Clinton said bluntly, "Senator, we didn't have a clear picture … and if you wish to fault the administration it's [because] we didn't have a clear picture and didn't do a good enough job of explaining we didn't have a clear picture."

View Video ›

“One of the things that disappointed me most about the original 9/11 was that no one was fired,” Paul said.

Image by Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

WASHINGTON — Sen. Rand Paul bluntly told Secretary of State Hilary Clinton Wednesday that he would have fired her over her handling of the Sept. 11 attack in Benghazi, Libya.

In a lengthy attack on a potential 2016 presidential election foe, Paul repeatedly hammered Clinton and the Obama administration.

"One of the things that disappointed me most about the original 9/11 was that no one was fired," Paul said, calling the 2012 attack the worst act of terrorism since 2001.

Later, Paul pressed Clinton over a conspiracy theory popular amongst conservatives that the late Ambassador to Libya Chris Stevens was involved in a CIA effort to ship guns to Turkey.

View Video ›

The four were allegedly promised citizenship three years ago. Now “they are stuck in the Bermuda Triangle.”

Image by Brennan Linsley / AP

The American lawyer for the four Chinese Uighurs who ended up in Bermuda after detention in Guantanamo Bay says they were promised citizenship in 2009 by top Bermudan officials, according to the Royal Gazette. The former premier, meanwhile, denies that any promises were made.

The lawyer, Sabin Willett, said that a series of conference calls in 2009 and meetings with premier at the time, Dr. Ewart Brown, and the government minister David Burch, indicated "that the men would not be able to leave the Island for a period of at least one year after arrival, but that thereafter their status would be regularised." Willett said a promise was made to give the men Bermudian status after the first year.

The men have been occupying a strange gray area in Bermuda since their surprising arrival on the island over three years ago, never receiving citizenship but getting married to wives from abroad they met online and settling down nonetheless. They're Chinese Muslims in a tiny and homogenous country, who have had difficulty fitting in.

Last week, the Bermudian lawyer for the men wrote an open letter to the new Premier, Craig Cannonier, arguing that the four had been poorly treated by Cannonier's predecessor Dr. Ewart Brown.

"The men remain in limbo. They are stuck in the Bermuda Triangle. The authors of their misfortune have now vanished into thin air. The men are left to fend for themselves," their lawyer, Richard Horseman, wrote. The letter asked the premier to pass legislation granting the men citizenship in Bermuda.

Khalil Mamut, Abdullah Abdulqadir, Salahidin Abdulahad, and Huzaifa Parhat were detained at Guantanamo for seven years after being arrested in Pakistan. Upon their release, after it was determined that they weren't enemy combatants, they weren't able to be repatriated to China and wound up in Bermuda, shepherded there by their two American lawyers after a payment from the U.S. to Bermuda to take them. The Uighurs can't get citizenship unless the United Kingdom agrees to it, and that country hasn't been forthcoming; Bermudian citizenship would allow them to apply for UK and European Union citizenship.

Amnesty International put out a statement arguing that the Uighur's human rights had been violated.

"Putting ourselves in the shoes of others: Bermudians have always enjoyed travelling and to curtail that is a true curtailment of freedom," the group said. "When offering the Uighurs asylum in Bermuda, we believe the intent was to provide them with a fresh start and grant them their basic human rights under the UDHR."

The anonymous blogger behind Vexed Bermoothes, a blog in Bermuda that has been following the situation, told BuzzFeed that Brown's unpopularity among Bermudans had colored the public's view of the Uighurs: "People here are so angry at Dr. Brown and the damage he did to Bermuda during his administration — that I'm afraid a lot of frustration is transferred onto these poor Uighurs."

As of right now, there are no plans for the Uighurs to move anywhere else — and they can't travel out of Bermuda anyway.

The Secretary of State seemed bored with her toughest critic's line of questioning.

This is Hillary Clinton looking at John McCain:

Via: @michaelhayes

This is John McCain looking at Hillary Clinton:

Via: @michaelhayes

This is Hillary Clinton listening to McCain's questioning:

Via: @michaelhayes

Here's the video of the exchange:

View Video ›

Image by

View Entire List ›

Carney mocks reporters.

View Video ›

WASHINGTON — White House Press Secretary Jay Carney mocked reporters for asking him about reports that Beyoncé lip-synced through the National Anthem at Monday's ceremonial inauguration.

"I actually have no idea what's true and what's not," Carney said, noting the conflicting reports about what transpired. "I'm glad you guys are foused on the important issues of the day."

Carney said he has not spoken to Obama about the controversy, when asked if the President — as the person closest to the performer — noticed if she wasn't actually singing live. He referred comment to the Joint Congressional Committee on Inaugural Ceremonies and the Presidential Inaugural Committee.

The Secretary of State knows how to get her point across.

The Opera Singer

Image by Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP

The "Thiiiiiiis Big"

Image by Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP

The Bored By You And Everything You're Saying

Image by Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP

The "Hold Up!"

Image by Pablo Martinez Monsivais / AP

View Entire List ›

“The fact is they’re terrorists, they’re extremists, they have designs on overthrowing existing governments, even these new Islamist governments.”

Image by Jason Reed / Reuters

WASHINGTON — Outgoing Secretary of State Hillary Clinton Wednesday warned that the Sept. 11 terrorist attack in Benghazi Libya is part of a broader terrorist threat facing the United States and established governments in North Africa.

"The terrorist attacks in Benghazi are part of a broader strategic challenge to America and our partners in North Africa," Clinton told the House Foreign Affairs Committee Wednesday afternoon.

Clinton offered an unusually bleak take, for this administration, on the "Arab Spring," saying the regional move toward democracy has also sent the Middle East and North Africa into a new period of turbulence "shattering security forces across the region" while northern Mali has become a safe haven for terrorist organizations.

Clinton also said the attack was part of a pattern of growing attacks on diplomatic staff over the last several decades and that "any clear eyed examination … must begin with this sobering fact."

Clinton's sober warning to the House, and earlier to the Senate, marks a somber note to the end of Clinton's tenure at the State Department. For instance, during the Senate hearing Clinton told Sen. John Barrasso that, "core al-Qaeda certainly has been [decimated] … what we are seeing now are people migrating back to other parts of the world."

"They are effectively affiliates," Clinton went on, adding that "the fact is they're terrorists, they're extremists, they have designs on overthrowing existing governments, even these new Islamist governments."

View Video ›

Rep. Dana Rohrabacher Wednesday alluded to the fact that no one involved in the Benghazi terrorist attack has been arrested while the the man who made the anti-Islam film “Innocence of Muslims,” was arrested by California police for a parole violation . The administration originally said the video was the cause of the attack.

View Video ›

Image by

“I think she just decided before she was going to describe emotionally the four dead Americans, the heroes, and use that as her trump card,” the senator tells BuzzFeed.

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pounds her fists as she responds to intense questioning on the September attacks on U.S. diplomatic sites in Benghazi, Libya, during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Capitol Hill in Washington January 23, 2013.

Image by Kevin Lamarque / Reuters

WASHINGTON — The Republican senator whose aggressive line of questioning prompted an eruption Wednesday from Hillary Clinton during a hearing on the Benghazi attacks suggested her angry outburst was just a dodge.

Wisconsin Sen. Ron Johnson pressed Clinton on why her office wasn't able to immediately discover whether the Sept. 11 attacks on the U.S. consulate in Libya were executed by terrorists or spontaneous protesters. He repeatedly asked her why she didn't pick up the phone that day and find out the facts, to which Clinton eventually responded sharply, "With all due respect, the fact is we had four dead Americans. What difference, at this point, does it make?"

"I'm not sure she had rehearsed for that type of question," Johnson told BuzzFeed Wednesday afternoon, after the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing. "I think she just decided before she was going to describe emotionally the four dead Americans, the heroes, and use that as her trump card to get out of the questions. It was a good way of getting out of really having to respond to me."

He said it was clear, at other points during the hearing, that Clinton was working off a set of talking points, but that his questions "got under her skin" because "they're just so common sense."

"I just don't think she had an answer to that," he said. "Maybe it embarrassed her. Maybe she hadn't thought of it that way."

He went on to criticize Clinton for ostensibly taking "full responsibility" for the State Department's handling of the attacks, but then continuing to avoid questions with "theatrics."

"She allowed politics to trump getting to the facts," he said.

View Video ›

The Israeli Embassy took issue with a Washington Post story. Diplomacy in the digital age?

Via: @IsraelinUSA

It's in the RNC Chairman's office according to a CNN report. Here's a photo the chair at the RNC via a Republican source.

Here's the chair now:

The chair in its natural habitat:

House Democratic leaders derided Wednesday's bill extending the debt limit, while the White House and Senate Democrats offer their support. Whither the disconnect?

Image by Alex Wong / Getty Images

WASHINGTON — Everyone in Washington seemed to be on the same page Wednesday as the House prepared to vote on a bill that would extend the debt limit until May and suspend pay for members of Congress if they didn't pass a budget. Senate Democrats lined up to praise the bill, the White House offered its endorsement, and House Republicans, with whom the plan originated, were unified in support of it.

Everyone was on board — except Nancy Pelosi.

"It is a gimmick unworthy of the fiscal and economic challenges that we face," House Minority Leader Pelosi said of the measure on the floor, leading 111 total House Democrats to vote against the bill.

Pelosi's defiance represented a rare break from her party's leadership in the Senate and in the White House — and highlighted both how little power House Democrats wield in Washington at this moment, and the lack of confidence they have in their Republican counterparts to pass legislation.

Not two hours after Pelosi remarks decrying the bill, Senate Democratic leaders gathered the press to trumpet praise for the same measure.

"In substance, this is a clean debt limit increase that will set the precedent for future debt ceiling extensions," said Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid.

Democrats' support was of particular note because the bill, which later passed in the House by 285-114, had been proposed by House Republican leaders.

The measure would also temporarily withhold pay for members of Congress if the Senate does not produce a budget resolution — but the senators dismissed that as a "gimmick."

At a closed-door conference meeting just a few hours prior, after accepting input from members, House Democratic leaders had reached a different conclusion: that such "gimmicks" set a worrisome precedent for future debt ceiling increases and the extension until May was not enough. They decided they would oppose the bill.

The result was an awkward dynamic: Senate Democrats landing on the same side as House Republicans, who sponsored the measure, with House Democrats the odd group out.

Even the administration offered its tacit support for the measure: On Tuesday, White House Press Secretary Jay Carney said the president would sign the bill were Congress to pass it and, Wednesday, called its approval by the House a "welcome development."

"Carney probably didn't need to go as far as he did," one House Democratic aide complained before the vote, "but it also makes sense for them to be above the fray."

Later, when asked if there was a disconnect between Democrats in the Senate and the House, Pelosi shrugged it off.

"I don't think this was a big deal today," Pelosi said after the vote.

Rep. Chris Van Hollen, the top Democrat on the House Budget Committee, insisted that the White House agreed with House Democrats that "this was not the preferred approach."

As for the contrast with Senate Democrats' position, Van Hollen said, "We have the opportunity over here to make our preferred position known." He added, "It is bad for the economy, the uncertainty."

Rep. Tulsi Gabbard, a freshman Democrat from Hawaii, agreed, and voted against the measure.

"You're seeing people who are doing what they believe is right, and I can only speak for myself," she said when asked about the Democratic divide.

House Democrats found strange bedfellows in a few conservative Republicans, including Reps. Steve King and Tim Huelskamp, who rejected the measure because it didn't include spending cuts to offset the debt ceiling increase.

At the Senate Democrats' press conference earlier Wednesday, a reporter asked Reid about the apparent distance between Democrats in the Senate and House on the measure.

Reid paused for a long moment at the lectern where he stood — and when he spoke, he did not answer the question.

"We believe strongly that this is the way forward," he said.

“I started jumping up and down and screaming,” says Brown's Kirkland.

Brown University students at a November 2012 rally for the school's administration to divest in coal.

Via: facebook.com

President Barack Obama's surprising new focus on climate change is galvanizing a nascent student movement that is trying to turn a university-based assault on oil companies into this generation's version of the 1980s campaign against apartheid in South Africa.

"I did not expect him to say anything about climate change," said Brown University senior Emily Kirkland of Obama's inaugural address. "I started jumping up and down and screaming. He spoke very boldly. He made it clear that it was going to be one of his priorities."

Kirkland is an activist with Brown University's Divest Coal Campaign, one of the more than 200 organizations at colleges and universities whose students are asking school administrations to stop funding fossil fuel companies.

"His words were ringing," environmental writer Bill McKibben, whose 2012 Rolling Stone article on climate change galvanized the divestment movement, told BuzzFeed. "We'll find out what they mean when he decides whether to approve or reject the Keystone pipeline, which is his first and purest test. And I hope they echo in the ears of college trustees across the nation, who need to understand that this is the most urgent problem we've ever faced."

Obama, who was quiet on the subject of climate change during his re-election campaign after losing a difficult battle over "cap-and-trade" carbon regulations during his first term, made it a central part of his second inaugural address Monday.

"Some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging fires, and crippling drought, and more powerful storms," Obama said. "The path towards sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult. But America cannot resist this transition; we must lead it."

The president spoke about the importance of job creation and new industries in green technology, but did not lay out a plan for his approach. Those details may come out in his State of the Union address Feb. 12. Whether or not his agenda will align with the students' focus of divestment is also uncertain.

It's a tactic that has worked in the past, however. In the 1980s, 155 campuses and 26 state governments divested from companies doing business in South Africa. Nelson Mandela later visited the University of California Berkeley to thank the college and other campuses for their involvement in the liberation struggle.

Universities are a natural setting for action— they manage big portfolios, are often publicly funded, and are home to thousands of young activists with the time and energy to organize.

"Being young, we're brasher and willing to create change," said Eric Recchia, a senior at Humboldt State University who serves on the California Student Sustainability Coalition board of directors. "There is a lot of inspiration that can be given to us from organizers who came before us, but if the students aren't pushing it, I don't feel anyone else is going to create that groundswell."

A Brown University student wearing a face mask holds up a sign supporting the student-led divestment campaign.

Via: facebook.com

And campuses appear to be the new hub of a climate change movement that has appeared at times adrift amid a rise in popular skepticism of global warming, an increasingly partisan political debate, and congressional gridlock.

After reading McKibben's article, Kirkland said she and about a dozen other Brown students joined to create her school's campaign, which now has more than 100 volunteers on a campus of about 6,000 undergraduates. Kirkland said the administration is starting to listen.

In October, the group presented to the school's Advisory Committee on Corporate Responsibility in Investment Practices, which is made up of faculty, staff and alumni. The committee makes investment recommendations to "The Corporation," or Brown's Board of Trustees.

"ACCRIP has recommended divestment on three previous occasions: tobacco, Sudan/Darfur, and HEI Hotels," Kirkland said, "and the Corporation has always followed their recommendations in the past."

Kirkland said she hopes the committee will release a recommendation this week urging the Corporation to divest.

View Entire List ›

The tech mogul and his wife “admire [Christie's] leadership on education reform and other issues and look forward to continuing their important work together on behalf of Newark's schoolchildren,” a spokesperson tells BuzzFeed.

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg will host a fundraiser next month in his Palo Alto home for Republican New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie, both camps confirmed to BuzzFeed.

Christie, who is up for reelection this year, first met Zuckerberg in 2010, when the Silicon Valley billionaire donated $100 million to Newark public schools. But the backing from Facebook's chairman and chief executive offers far more than money: It is a mark of how Christie, almost alone among his party, has emerged as the sort of natural figure who can cut deep into traditionally Democratic constituencies, like powerful young tech magnates.

"Mark and Priscilla have worked closely with Governor Christie on education reform in the Newark school system," said Sarah Feinberg, a spokesperson for Facebook. "They admire his leadership on education reform and other issues and look forward to continuing their important work together on behalf of Newark's schoolchildren. Mark and Priscilla are happy to host him at their home to support his reelection."

Since 2010, when Zuckerberg, Christie, and Newark Mayor Cory Booker went on Oprah Winfrey's talk show to announce the donation to Newark's schools, the three men have worked together on advancing a local education agenda, earning the praise of reformers, and ruffling teachers unions.

Along the way, Zuckerberg became a fan of Christie, and as the governor geared up for his 2013 reelection bid, the tech mogul approached the campaign about helping to get him another term, said Christie strategist Michael DuHaime.

"Mark and Priscilla expressed interest in supporting the governor for reelection, and he's gratified to have their help," DuHaime said. "This illustrates that Governor Christie's sincere efforts to improve education where it is so badly needed have not gone unnoticed. Education is an issue Gov. Christie cares deeply and passionately about, even though fighting for education reform has not always been politically popular or easy."

News of the fundraiser comes as Christie continues to ride a wave of popularity in his state, due largely to how he has handled the aftermath of Hurricane Sandy. One poll this week showed him with a 74% approval rating in New Jersey, and records released Tuesday indicated his campaign has a $2 million war chest, even as Democrats in the state struggle to coalesce behind a viable opponent.