Skip to comments.They’re trying to ‘Palinize’ Marco Rubio (And they'll do it for any Republican candidate as well)
Posted on 11/21/2012 10:02:43 AM PST by SeekAndFind
On Twitter yesterday, some of my conservative friends beat me up for writing about Marco Rubios comments to GQ about the Earths age.
Their point was that it was a silly question (it was.) And that it was feeding a liberal meme (it is.)
But the notion that this means we should ignore it is also silly.
In the heat of a campaign, it might be wise to parry such questions and pivot to talking about your strengths. This is called staying on message. But Im not on a campaign. And the election is over.
If there were ever a time to have a serious conversation about such topics, it is now. Sweeping controversial topics under the rug obviously wont help.
Conservatives have another point which is hypocrisy. Remember the time Democratic Rep. Hank Johnson worried that putting more Marines on Guam could cause it to capsize?
And as Slate points out that Barack Obama has ducked a similar question to the one Rubio dodged. But the they do it too! argument isnt an excuse to avoid actually coming up with a coherent worldview that squares God and science.
Because conservatives have willfully allowed this to metastasize liberals have effectively cast Republicans as the anti-science party. For this reason, incidents that seem to confirm this narrative are especially hurtful.
Mark Halperin nailed it on Morning Joe:
Theres one area where Democrats are really far ahead of Republicans right now. Science and technology, no. Its doing this thing that Democrats failed to do in 2000, to stop George W. Bush, which is really, really early on using the left-wing Freak Show to define anyone whos thinking of running for President, as quickly as possible, in negative terms on Twitter, on cable, on the Internet. Theyre all over this Rubio thing because they want to control his image in a negative way and they did it this cycle too. They went after Romney early, it really hurt him. And theyre doing it now.
And so, this is a strategy. Like Sarah Palin in 2008, Democrats view Marco Rubio as a major threat not just for one or two elections but someone who could undermine their advantage among the college educated, the young, and Latinos. Like Palin in 08, he is viewed as an existential threat.
And just like Palin whom they feared they want to destroy his credibility; to make him a joke.
For obvious reasons, it is vital that Rubio and, in fact, all conservatives going forward be able to articulate a serious conservative worldview that doesnt fit the anti-science stereotype. (This is part of what I mean when I talk about cosmopolitan conservatism.)
Rubio might think hes just getting his feet wet, but its game on.
The invasive exam begins. Only normal people get it. democrats and other insane creatures are given a free pass.
Two words should be said to any MSM mouthpiece that spouts about this “nonsense”: PROVE IT.
There are holes in the theory of Evolution and I don’t know enough about carbon dating, but I’m assuming it’s pretty much “educated guesses”. And...if there is a God...could he not accomplish things in a shorter period of time?
Just random thoughts...
Rape questions are next.
Who needs them, when he's so eager to push for comprehensive immigration reform. I can see the joke just fine, but the credibility is very fuzzy.
It's the U. S. A. Mr. Rubio, not MexAmerica.
Maybe Mitch McConnell can write somebody a tersely worded letter.
I heard Ann Coulter refute this once, I thought quite effectively. She referenced John Lott's study which remains the most comprehensive, objective, research exploring the incidence of violent crimes in relationship to the freedom of concealed carry. If, as the left contends, they were strict adherents of empirical data and findings, they should be falling over themselves to promote firearm ownership and carry.
It will continue endlessly. The Amerimoron public is far too stupid and uninterested to do more than take what the media spoon feeds them as gospel.
It’s clear to the average Amerimoron that Republicans are evil and stupid... every last one of them.
I never realized that Pravda was a willing accomplice. I thought that the State leaned hard on Pravda to control content. It’s clear to me, watching our media, that the media is the first to fall, and a very willing accomplice, on the slide to communism.
Rubio will not be Palinized becaus the GOPe probably won’t allow it, because he is one of them. Palin on the other hand wasn’t GOPe, so they let her be destroyed. Rubio will be defended by the establishment as he leads them into amnesty legislation and fully supports cry baby Boehner and McConnell.
Rubio is the GOPe latest dupe. Boehner has his boot on the neck of Republicans and Obama has his boot on the neck on Boehner. It’s going to be a long 4 years.
Marco isn’t my favorite as he is with some. But I agree that the Left is going to Palinize him and it looks like his rivals on the Right will be happy to stand by and encourage it. They don’t realize that, if they emerge as a contender they will get the same treatment.
Any conservative, any Repub, even a feckless Rino Repub who doesn’t believe in anything, is going to get the same treatment the moment he becomes a front-runner. McCain was the press’s favorite maverick until he was the nominee, and then they dismantled him. Romney was the moderate who would save us from the tea party until he was the nominee and then they took him apart.
It only works if you fall for it, and Repubs fall for it every time. As soon as they start demonizing your candidate, Repubs start wishing for another one with less baggage. Sorry, thats not how political propaganda works. They will always find an angle. There is no substitute for courage in this game. Pick the man or woman closest to your beliefs and then get ready for a firehose stream of mockery and invective and pure lies that is guaranteed to be unleashed on them and you. Since you’re going to get it either way, there is nothing to be gained by picking a moderate that you think is less vulnerable.
You’re going to get it no matter who you pick. So pick a fighter.
Several people watching the same event one day ago will report a wildly differing account on “what happened”. Thus, it seems sort of farfetched to discuss things like the age of the universe or what “really” happened hundreds or thousands of years ago.We should laugh derisively at them and tell them they are the party who wants to even quibble on what the definition of “is” is, the party who says things are all “relative” and that “we all create our own reality”, so these questions make no sense coming from them.
I'm glad you added that comment. The RATs think they can get away demonizing any candidate now. Even Ronald Reagan would be “unelectable” these days. Just follow your heart people!
How about: “I believe that the Executive Branch is Constitutionally limited in its powers, and your question is asking about personal opinion on something that’s irrelevant to the issues that would be before the President. You may as well waste time quizzing me about how much the Moon weighs.”
On abortion: “It’s all about choice. I believe the voters should have the choice of how to vote on their state’s laws on this moral issue.”
A minister once explained this to me:
God created Adam and Eve not as babies, but as full mature humans in the prime of their lives. Given that knowledge we must faithfully believe that the earth was created, as well as the entire universe, in the same manner.
The game here, is to throw Marco Rubio, or any potential contender, off message, early and often. Irrelevant questions (age of the earth, which is subject to a great deal of diverse opinion), and moving the dialogue from things that OUGHT to be considered. Senator Rubio was talking past the question, directing his response to his supporters and partisans, and attempting to steer the discussion back to the subjects at hand.
It may be necessary to contact the voters directly, WITHOUT the filter passing through the media.
The framework is being set up to picture Senator Rubio as a theocrat. And therefore, indistinguishable from, say, the Pope, or maybe Billy Graham. But definitely anti-science.
No were trying to win elections not giving Bible sermons.
The correct answer is easy. 4 billion years give or take. Also I think the story of Adam and Eve is a fairy tale.
Thank You , I will not vote for Marco Rubio.
How about, “Who gives a crap about how old the Earth is, what does it have to do with anything? Let’s talk about the future, not the past.”
When the GOP learns to fight like this then I may vote for them.
Is Marco Rubio even eligible to be President?
This is formulaic for the media.
Ask a republican candidate a question regarding a biblical passage such as the age of the earth.
Whichever answer he gives he alienates a large segment of the voters.
It is using wedge issues to create a half life scenario where a candidates ideological supporters are systematically eroded.
We need a new coalition among republicans. The current one is too easy to defeat.
What will change in 4 years?
No, but the "powers" don't care anymore.
The Dem main stream press has 4 years to take him out and likely will be successful.
Republicans act like they are being given fair questions. NO. Democrat reporters ask these questions to hurt Republicans (be it Palin, cain, Bachmann, Rubio, Romney any R).
When a reporter asks a question a Republican HAS to point out what the reporter is doing :” Look this is a gotcha question that you a “reporter” are doing just to make me into a joke or to alienate my base or other voters” you are not being a political activists instead of doing your job” now every time you ask such a question that will allow your biased media to spin my answer to hurt me politically I will instead answer with one of my solutions to help America and Americans”
And the hand-wringers on our side will complain about how each and every one has "too much baggage" and "will never be taken seriously", which settling for another milquetoast loser pushed by the central committee.
Thank you for your input. I directed this reply to another person. But since you required my attention i’ll retort.
Unfortuately, now matter what you believe, faith is going to be used against any conservative candidate and will be discussed by the major media. The question usually involves creationism. If a candidate believes in creationim the smear campaign begins.
Additionally, what you believe in is not my concern.
Online and on the cable nets, Marco Rubio is currently taking a hellacious beating for his answer to "GQ's" question about the age of the Earth. And anyone who doesn't think we'll be revisiting Rubio's "Earth" question in about 40 months should the Florida Senator decide to run for president, should stop right now and write a book about the bliss of ignorance.
As I mentioned in an earlier piece, the media now believes they have a winning tactic for disqualifying Republicans through the use of left-field "gotcha" questions that pit our faith and principles against immigration, gay tolerance, the lifestyle of the single woman (which sounds like a Diane Keaton movie circa 1978) , and the needs of the poor.
The problem, of course, is not our faith or our core beliefs; the problem is that too many on our side are rhetorically unprepared and regularly caught off guard when these media moments arrive. The result is a gaffe that frequently damages more than just a single campaign. As we saw during the 2012 election, the media was able to take one dumb answer from a senate candidate about rape and abortion and use it to bloody the entire GOP brand.
As far as religion and Marco Rubio's struggle with being asked the age of Earth, I've been a devout Christian for almost thirty years and have never found my faith in conflict with science or history. If anything, the more I learn about science and history only deepens my faith. This is why it's so frustrating to hear a bright guy like Rubio blow such an easy one. The problem isn't talent or smarts, it's training.
Before every baseball game, a good shortstop is the first one out on the field warming up and practicing. This is why he's a good shortstop; he never falls for his own press or forgets that hard work, drills, training, and the basics are what got him to where he is. And that's our problem. Our side forgets to drill, doesn't train, and suddenly we're losing games because we drop pop ups.
The GOP has plenty of talent. History proves our ideas are right. Polls prove people like our ideas best.
But we're losing rhetorically.
You mean say "I agree with Al Gore" over and over again?
They did it to Quayle.
That’s what he said.
But he didn't offer his own answer.
I agree with the writer's comment above, and I agree essentially with what Rubio said. I don't see anything wrong with it.
They did it to Goldwater, they did it to Quayle, they did it to Cheney, they did it to Ken Starr, they did it to Palin, they did it to Bush, they tried to do it to Reagan but it didn’t work.
Answer that and you’ll have your candidate.
They do it to whomever they recognize might win... preemptive. All lies and twists. I guess that if we could figure out how Reagan overcame it, we could inoculate the good guys.
We need a wildcard in 2016. NO MORE REPUBLICAN POLITICIANS. We need a non-political figure to run on the Republican ticket...an Eisenhower, a Reagan, a general, an actor. We need Dennis Miller. (or someone like him)
No, evolution is the fairy tale. Yet I’d guess you’ve not heard nor read any of the pro-creation science web-sites. See my links page if you care to see what you are missing.
They only palinized Sarah to asshole democrats....no human being thinks less of Sarah Palin....she is the best....
the reason it didn’t work on Reagan is that he built himself up from scratch as a True Conservative. It took over 20 years of truly getting to the point where he had mentally and emotionally struggled with all the issues and finally fashioned a body of conservative armor and a functioning conservative mind far sharper and deeper the fat dunce Tip O’Neill could ever plumb.
The memo needs to get out to all candidates: Making abortion illegal is COMPLETELY beyond the power of the President. Period.
On abortion and rape, say “I support the Second Amendment. Women need to have in their possession items which are sufficient to STOP a rapist BEFORE he commits the act of rape”.
On abortion and rape, say I support the Second Amendment. Women need to have in their possession items which are sufficient to STOP a rapist BEFORE he commits the act of rape.
That's a great response, and should become a standard.