Preemptive strike


WaPo:

Marco Rubio on national ticket could be risky bet for Republican Party

Republicans who are eager to repair the party’s battered image among Hispanic voters and unseat President Obama next year have long promoted a single-barrel solution to their two-pronged problem: putting Sen. Marco Rubio on the national ticket.

The charismatic Cuban American lawmaker from Florida, the theory goes, could prompt Hispanics to consider supporting the GOP ticket — even after a primary contest in which dust-ups over illegal immigration have left some conservative Hispanics uneasy.

But Rubio’s role in recent controversies, including a dispute with the country’s biggest Spanish-language television network and new revelations that he had mischaracterized his family’s immigrant story, shows that any GOP bet on his national appeal could be risky.

Democrats had already questioned whether a Cuban American who has voiced conservative views on immigration and opposed the historic Supreme Court nomination of Sonia Sotomayor, the first Latina justice, could appeal to a national Hispanic electorate of which Cubans are just a tiny fraction but have special immigration status. And Rubio’s support in Florida among non-Cuban Hispanics has been far less pronounced than among his fellow Cubans.

That ethnic calculus was further complicated by records, reported by The Washington Post last week, showing that Rubio had incorrectly portrayed his parents as exiles who fled Cuba after the rise of Fidel Castro. In fact, their experience more closely resembles that of millions of non-Cuban immigrants: They entered the United States 2 1/2 years before Castro’s ascent for apparent economic reasons.


Marco Rubio is a freshman senator from Florida. He’s not running for any office at the moment. Ideologically he’s a mainstream conservative. So why is the media giving him so much attention?

He’s young, good-looking, Hispanic and Republican.

In the WaPo article they recycle two slime jobs. The first concerns his parents. Were they exiles or immigrants? Who cares? They came to the U.S. ten years before Marco was born Do you know all the details of your parents’ lives ten years before you were born?

The second slime job involves his brother-in-law. When Marco was a teen his older sister’s husband got busted for drug trafficking. Marco was not involved in any way. So why does the media keep bringing it up?

It’s a preemptive strike to Palinize him and keep him off the ticket. Florida is a swing state and Rubio could push it into the GOP side next year. His presence on the ticket could help cut into the Democratic hold on Hispanic voters. And he’s from the south and his conservative credentials are rock solid, which could be important if Romney is the nominee.

Shouldn’t the media wait until he’s actually the nominee to try and take him down?


Advertisements

About Myiq2xu™

Peaceful coexistence or mutually assured destruction. Your choice.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to Preemptive strike

  1. DeniseVB says:

    Funny none of this came out during Rubio’s run for Senate when he was running against the Florida Dem Machine ?

    Wonder what they’ve got on Alan West, I hear he’s another fan favorite for VP.

  2. WMCB says:

    The smear about him “lying” about his parents was debunked as bullshit. First off, he never said they were persecuted or lived there under Castro. Secondly, it’s not like things were just peachy in Cuba and then BOOM, Castro took over. It took more than 5 years of revolution and skirmishes and unrest and Castro controlling various locales before the final takeover. Rubio’s parents left 2 years prior to Castro’s final “victory”. They attempted/planned several times going back, but visited and decided not to.

    You don’t have to wait until the final curtain falls to see the writing on the wall and flee. Many Jews fled Germany before the bad stuff was implemented. They can’t say they fled Hitler, because they fled too early in the process?

    Please – it’s splitting hairs.

    • 1539days says:

      It’s completely unsurprising that Lardball sees no irony in his daily rants about Rubio’s biography at the same time he excoriates whomever he considered “birthers.” To him, that group includes the racists who want to see Obama’s transcripts.

  3. soupcity says:

    Yes, because we all know Obama’s story wasn’t embellished in any way, shape or form…as foretold by the prophets.

    Totally agree, I really believe that it is because of his good looks and charisma and the fact that he speaks well, Obama camp’s worst nightmare. Got to nip this one in the bud.

    • votermom says:

      …as foretold by the prophets.

      😆

      Rubio is straight out of central casting. The Dems are quaking in their Ferregamos.

    • Karma says:

      LOL!

      While channel surfing through MSNBC a few days ago they earnestly tried to pretend this reflects poorly on Rubio….

      I think this is the segment….was laughing at the tv too much.

      • soupcity says:

        Good grief. I see why you were howling about that segment.

        Anyway, he can’t beat my Baba’s immigration story. Legend has it, while floating over on the boat, they gave her her first banana.
        She ate it, peel and all, and asked why everyone thought they were so delicious.

  4. WMCB says:

    OT, but remember when ONE black guy showed up at a teaparty rally with a gun, and MSNBC and others showed video disguising his race and having fainting spells over the evil, VIOLENT, racist teapartiers? Even though the guy said he had no intention of using the gun, and never exhibited any violent rhetoric whatsoever?

    Here’s a militia group at the Phoenix OWS, absolutely saying they are there to use their guns to defend the protestors against the govt.

    Will there be a huge media outcry over this?

    • fif says:

      But Dionne from WAPO this week wrote a piece about all the “wonderful” signs and “disciplined” behavior of the OWS supporters.

      I guess he missed the part about the guy crapping on a cop car.

  5. kc says:

    This makes me sick–not because I like Rubio on policy. You know, four years ago I would have believed all this the media put out. Funny how watching Hillary get slandered really changed how I look at the media line. And that is the only good thing from the primaries.

    I can almost visualize Axelrod planting this story–complete with winks and nods.

    • DeniseVB says:

      I thought Rove was bad in that Dr. Evil sort of way, but Axelrod is so much worse. Not many people know he worked for John Edwards Prez campaign in 2004. From wiki:

      In 2004, Axelrod worked for John Edwards’ presidential campaign. During the campaign, he lost responsibility for making ads, but continued as the campaign’s spokesman. Regarding Edwards’ failed 2004 presidential campaign, Axelrod has commented, “I have a whole lot of respect for John, but at some point the candidate has to close the deal and — I can’t tell you why — that never happened with John.”[15][16]

  6. kc says:

    I live in Florida and so far, there is very little actual dirt on Rubio. Amazing since he was in the Fl. legislature for quite a while.

    • DeniseVB says:

      My son lived in FL, Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s district. ALL those homes are underwater, he had to short sell his after 2 years after his transfer to DC. Couldn’t get those Special 2009 Obamabucks since he made his payments on time. Derrrrr.

      Here’s how the Obama system works. You miss 3-6 payments, bank forecloses on you, lose the house. Wait a few months when the bank puts it on the short sale market. You buy it back for about 150k less.

      True story, that’s what his neighbors did 😦

  7. timothy2010 says:

    I have been told Rubio is not eligible as his parents were not nbc’s at the time of his birth.
    OT– but you’d think that if the OWS cretins had half a brain between them they would co-opt and embrace the homeless. Who else is going to tell them if they need an anti biotic and can’t get a scrip that they can buy fish food at a pet store. Lots to learn from people who know how to survive. Some are astonishingly thrifty. i knew a guy who collected bottles from apartment buildings and restaurants who smoked a pack a day and was perpetually drunk but in a maintenance kind of way. He collected the tobacco from extinguished cigarettes to then roll his own and drank mouthwash from the 99 cent store.Saved and saved for the the harsh winter at which time he’d rent a room. Smart guy who always seemed happy who chose his own way and his own medication.

  8. timothy2010 says:

    Google is not my friend
    Do not like them or their policies for general searches i use ixquick.
    I have attempted with my feeble brain to grasp what NBC means. i search and get conflicting interpretations., Supes haven’t ruled because as of yet there has not been standing. So i am left with must be born on US soil to two American citizens and of a certain age.

    • myiq2xu says:

      So i am left with must be born on US soil to two American citizens

      Where does it say that?

      • myiq2xu says:

        Wikipedia:

        Status as a natural-born citizen of the United States is one of the eligibility requirements established in the United States Constitution for election to the office of President or Vice President. This requirement was an attempt to allay concerns that foreign aristocrats might immigrate to the new nation and use their wealth and influence to impose a monarchy.

        The Constitution does not define the phrase natural-born citizen, and various opinions have been offered over time regarding its precise meaning. There is general agreement that the term encompasses, as a minimum, anyone born on U.S. soil to U.S. citizen parents. Most scholars and politicians currently agree that the term includes those born on U.S. soil, as well as those born to U.S. citizen parents regardless of place of birth.

        The natural-born-citizen clause has been mentioned in passing in several decisions of the United States Supreme Court and lower courts, but the Supreme Court has never directly addressed the question of a specific presidential or vice-presidential candidate’s eligibility as a natural-born citizen. Although numerous claims have been put forth that the current president, Barack Obama, is not a natural-born citizen, the relevant courts have so far dismissed all lawsuits brought over this question.

  9. timothy2010 says:

    Google once again is NOT my friend.
    They are brilliant I will give them that but they control the message, No rules I google anything and I can be shown what they want me to see or a well organized political entity that is tech savvy can create the news by creating millions of artificial searches. How difficult is it to create a program that searches out positive info on your candidate and then bombard the site with auto hits so it shows up first in a search.

  10. timothy2010 says:

    By the way i am not a “birther” and never spent much time exploring NBC. I have no problem being wrong(happens a lot) and at present I am suffering from the Bubonic plague and on a waste of money netbook which makes it impossible to type so i lack the energy to explore the various arguments.
    Do sincerely appreciate rapid fire responses. Relish healthy dissonance. i am a selfish prick and find it easier to learn by sponging off of smart people who did the leg work, Pre 08 it was enlightening. Now, not so much if you disagree with anyone you are banned or beaten over the head with the same argument. Boring.
    One last thing before I succumb to my rising fever — why does no one address the fact that every professor I have watched on Youtube is on the faculty of a university which severely and negatively impacted the impoverished neighborhoods in which they expanded.
    hypocrisy to the tenth power. Anyone who teaches at Columbia or NYU and decries corporate greed is full of shit.

  11. 1539days says:

    Citizenship by birth was created as part of the 14th Amendment

    Section 1. All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside.

    This applied to former slaves without specific documentation of citizenship and overturned Dred Scott which denied citizenship to any black person. The Supreme Court has expanded it to any human being born within the physical confines of the United States.

    At the time the Constitution was written, citizenship was bestowed through a number of conditions. Basically, it’s left to interpretation. At minimum, you have to assume that someone is a US citizen at birth, regardless of their parentage or their location. They may also need to be born to a US citizen or born within the confines of the United States. It’s possible Chester A. Arthur was our first illegal president, born as a Canadian citizen.

Comments are closed.