Under Attack, Marco Rubio Malfunctions — And Repeats The Same Line Four Times

buzzfeed.com ^ | February 6

[Steven Tyler]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZuYbDP2kDfg

Cpt Kirk talks a robot to death

[DoodleDawg]

Rubio has always reminded be of a small boy dressed up in his dad’s suit. I do not see the attraction to him as president.

[mazda77]

I am with you in a larger sense, but as of late, Ted refuses to answer what his plan is for the illegals already here who have no criminal record other than the original laws they broke to be here. He keeps kicking that one down the road or just plainly doesn’t answer the question. I really wish he would answer it.

[Toespi]

Does it matter that Rubio has four kids?

[bert]

I observe and report.....

the lesson being taught and being learned is that America is not really concerned with ideology.

America is up to it’s eyeballs with leftist ideology and apparently does not want to swap left for right.

[petercooper]

That was painful.

[mad_as_he$$]

+2.

[fieldmarshaldj]

Bob Bauman had four kids, too.

[nathanbedford]

See Ted Cruz discuss the issue In which he refers to his eleven page immigration plan.

I take from this that his approach resembles very closely Mitt Romney's approach of self deportation for which Romney was roundly criticized as being too extreme four years ago. In the interview Cruz makes clear that he will enforce the immigration laws which call for deportation of those found to be here illegally. This does not go as far as Donald Trump in that Cruz would not have a Gestapo kicking down doors of every house in America to find illegals, any more than we have a police force kicking down doors of every home in America to find murderers. He makes this clear in the interview. People here illegally will be deported just as any other criminal is processed when he is apprehended.

Cruz proposes to do away with sanctuary cities, welfare for illegal immigrants. He wants real enforcement of E verify etc. All as outlined in his extensive platform cited above. This is the Romney approach on steroids.

I believe Donald Trump's approach is both unworkable, politically impossible, and incoherent. It is not exactly clear but if Donald Trump thinks that he can put a Gestapo force together to deport people who are here illegally the courts will stop him. It is logistically impossible to put people in boxcars and ship them out of here even if the courts would permit-and they won't. Trump's plan to readmit those who have been apprehended, ordered to be deported, transported out of the country is logically incoherent. It is certainly without specifics apart from Donald Trump's boast that he would readmit those who are "terrific."

[nathanbedford]

Nathan Bedford:

His participation in wrestling (yes wrestling!), Prize fighting, gambling, reality television, beauty pageants, and God knows what else.

sargon:

They are all legal and highly successful forms of entertainment in modern American culture. The fact that none of them are your cup of tea doesn't make them sleazy, by any stretch of the imagination.

Operating an abortion mill is not illegal but it is disqualifying in my view for such a person to become President of the United States. Operating a brothel in Nevada is not illegal but it is disqualifying in my view for such a person to become president of the United States. Entering a wrestling ring and shaving the head of Vince McMahon on display before thousands of people and on television is not illegal but it should disqualify Donald Trump from becoming president of the United States. We want a president not bread and circuses.

The sheer tonnage of sleaze stuck to Donald Trump like a tar baby should be considered when one decides whether Trump is worthy of the office. The cumulative total should be considered, it should be considered with all of his other character failings, it should be considered in connection with his biography including all his bankruptcies. It should be considered in connection with all his dirty tricks and cruelties. It should be considered in connection with is a lifelong leftism and support for Democrats . It should be considered in connection with his denigration of women. It should be considered in connection with his phony University. It should be considered in connection with his business failures beyond bankruptcies, his divorces, his unrelieved lying.

When all these things are considered together is impossible to deny that Donald Trump is sleazy. Too sleazy to entrust with our national destiny.

How many of the alleged triumphs or "deals" Donald Trump's life have been successfully concluded without a lawsuit? How many of those losses have been settled by Trump in secret? How many aspects of Trump's career have been conducted without accusations of dishonesty, unfairness, cruelty, bribery, intimidation, and God knows what else. I can think of no episode that does not include a lawsuit, but my memory is not sure. Can you provide some answers? I cannot think of a single significant action in Donald Trump's career that has not been riddled with controversy.

If you want to tell people they should vote for Donald Trump for all his triumphs and the empire he built, at least have the decency to tell them how he built it.

[Pelham]

“You do notice they all think they are our betters righteously and intellectually”

They make it hard to miss. Pretty funny since a lot of us also like Cruz. I guess we lack the genius gene that our Cruz Only pals possess.

[Pelham]

“When combined with your gratuitous sarcasm, I can’t help but think that you’re driving many undecided voters into the Trump camp.”

Shhh. Don’t give him any hints.

[Pelham]

Good grief.

Now you’ve gone so far as to compare Trump’s association with the silly entertainment of TV wrestling to investing in abortion mills and Nevada brothels.

Why don’t you step back and take a look at just how nuts your obsession with Trump has made you.

[nathanbedford]

The comparison is quite apposite all are legal all are sleazy all disqualify.

[sargon]

We want a president not bread and circuses.

We've been getting nothing but bread and circuses from the entire political class for decades.

What someone has done in the WWE for entertainment or promotional purposes simply doesn't disqualify them from being President.

To the mind of most reasonable people, none of those life experiences in the entertainment industry (which you arbitrarily hold in such contempt) disqualify someone per se from being President. Clearly, they disqualify someone from consideration for your vote.

People change their positions on issues over time (yes, even those who are not historically professional politicians).

The fact that you'd clumsily attempt to conflate serious issues with pure entertainment shows exactly how hysterical and deep your hatred for Donald Trump runs. It exceeds the rational.

If you restricted your criticism of Donald Trump to those things which are actually objectionable, you'd probably convince more skeptics.

As things stand, though, you've made us eminently aware of the fact that you have nothing but disdain for various aspects of the American entertainment industry.

You might be surprised to find that there are many decent Conservatives who watch WWE or reality TV, go to casinos, or, for that matter, declare bankruptcy during their lives.

You might also find that such people don't appreciate being talked down to, or told what constitutes Presidency-disqualifying entertainment ventures.

As for bankruptcies: the list of American Presidents, nbelievably enough, includes men who failed at business or professionally at some point in their lives.

Thomas Jefferson, for instance, declared bankruptcy several times in his life! Obviously not Presidential material, along with other losers like Ulysses S. Grant, William McKinley, and Abraham Lincoln, all of whom (in your book) committed such ostensibly Presidency-disqualifying transgressions.

You continue to overplay your hand with the Trump-bashing, and mixing the serious with the flippant does nothing to advance your agenda. Rather it undermines it.

Methinks you doth protest too much...

[nathanbedford]

Gentlemen:

I have rendered a bill of particulars of the sleaze of Donald Trump and I have suggested that in judging the man the whole man must be judged.

Rather than judging the whole man you would divert attention to judging the messenger.

I doubt many readers of this thread will be deceived much longer by this shopworn tactic.

[Pelham]

“The comparison is quite apposite all are legal all are sleazy all disqualify.”

Oh?
Somehow God forgot to include Roller Derby and TV Wrestling when he handed the tablets to Moses.

The TV wrestling that Trump was engaged in is nothing more than silly and harmless entertainment, while abortion and prostitution are real moral evils.

The fact that you are trying to equate them is a sign of how unhinged you’ve become in your zeal to discredit Trump.

[Pelham]

“declare bankruptcy “

These weren’t personal bankruptcy.

These were Chapter 11 business reorganizations with the large creditors accepting equity positions for agreeing to restructure debt. Bondholders get first crack at the corporate assets. It’s not like the lenders are unaware of risk seeing as three of the businesses they loaned against were Atlantic City casinos.

[MattinNJ]

I thought he championed-and he referenced at a debate-another rocked ribbed conservative rather than Roberts. I will have to go look that up. Thanks

[MattinNJ]

Brilliant analysis and I hope you are right.