[UnbelievingScumOnTheOtherSide]

Wonder if he knows yet he got it backwards? No one noticed in the live thread. You hear what you want to hear.

[arrogantsob]

That was a stunner. I was sure I did not mishear that.

[Republickerite]

I think many people noticed this error, and had to a double take: Did he really say that? And then, people didn't want to point it out. Have mainstream Republicans, like Romney and Marco Rubio really acted against big government? I wondered why Romney pointed out this own father received government help when he fled the Mexican Revolution. Romney likes government help? When he was young, he heard “stories of his family being fed by the American government,” Romney said. So he's for welfare? I read today that while he was working at Bain Capital he benefited from government help which was granted those who performed “leveraged buyouts.” Add to that, the “earnings” were counted as “capital gains,” taxed at the gift giving rate of 15%. Most decent Republicans are against that. They are against Corporate Welfare. However, some of these Republicans are for government aid, like hundreds of billion in aid for failing banks . . . well that dates back to the S&L crisis, for those too young, or too ignorant of history to remember. Government under Reagan and Bush the First grew tremendously; it did not shrink. Government under G.W. Bush also grew. Military spending doubled. This isn't a “democratic talking point.” The Democrats have done the same thing, or worse, depending on the democrat in question. The truth is, many Republicans say they are for smaller government, and really are not. When Gingrich was in the House, he brought home more government “goodies” to his own home district, Cobb County, than almost any representative in the entire Congress. The phrase that Rubio used, “more government, less freedom,” was not a meaningless error. It was a Freudian slip, accidentally revealing the not so well concealed truth about most mainstream politicians and what they believe.

[Republickerite]

I think many people noticed this error, and had to a double take: Did he really say that? And then, people didn't want to point it out. Have mainstream Republicans, like Romney and Marco Rubio really acted against big government? I wondered why Romney pointed out this own father received government help when he fled the Mexican Revolution. Romney likes government help? When he was young, he heard “stories of his family being fed by the American government,” Romney said. So he's for welfare? I read today that while he was working at Bain Capital he benefited from government help which was granted those who performed “leveraged buyouts.” Add to that, the “earnings” were counted as “capital gains,” taxed at the gift giving rate of 15%. Most decent Republicans are against that. They are against Corporate Welfare. However, some of these Republicans are for government aid, like hundreds of billion in aid for failing banks . . . well that dates back to the S&L crisis, for those too young, or too ignorant of history to remember. Government under Reagan and Bush the First grew tremendously; it did not shrink. Government under G.W. Bush also grew. Military spending doubled. This isn't a “democratic talking point.” The Democrats have done the same thing, or worse, depending on the democrat in question. The truth is, many Republicans say they are for smaller government, and really are not. When Gingrich was in the House, he brought home more government “goodies” to his own home district, Cobb County, than almost any representative in the entire Congress. The phrase that Rubio used, “more government, less freedom,” was not a meaningless error. It was a Freudian slip, accidentally revealing the not so well concealed truth about most mainstream politicians and what they believe.

[SeminoleCounty]

Being familiar with Marco “La Raza” Rubio’s political career...that comment is not a gaffe

Do not understand how people consider Rubio a “conservative”

[MasterGunner01]

That’s a RINO Freudian slip. He meant what he said.

[Jacquerie]

Rubio’s comment attacked the heart of conservatism.

By your logic he must go, for there is no room for error.

The NRC, NRSC and you of course will oppose him in 2016, right?

[AuH2ORepublican]

Yes, Senator Rubio said it backwards. I turned to my wife and asked if I had heard wrong, but she didn’t notice; her brain fixed it for her, kind of like when you read “going to the the zoo” and not even notice the extra “the.” I hope that most viewers reacted similarly and that his flub didn’t take away from the powerful message of his outstanding speech.

[xzins]

"Let’s make sure they write that we did our part. That we chose more government instead of more freedom."

He might have meant to say:

"Let’s make sure they write that we did our part (about) That we chose more government instead of more freedom."

That's awkward, but "we did our part to stop an America that chose more government" does make sense.

[JediJones]

As soon as I heard it watching FOX’s replay of the speech (got home too late for the live airing) I had to rewind the DVR to see if I was hearing things. I’m HOPING it was a gaffe. But you never know with the Romney wing of the party. Might’ve been a Freudian slip.