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 Rubio’s comments to GQ about the Earth’s 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 I’m 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 won’t 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 isn’t 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”:
“There’s one area where Democrats are really far ahead of Republicans right now. Science and technology, no. It’s 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 who’s thinking of running for President, as quickly as possible, in negative terms on Twitter, on cable, on the Internet. They’re 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 they’re 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 wan’t 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 doesn’t fit the “anti-science” stereotype. (This is part of what I mean when I talk about cosmopolitan conservatism.)
Rubio might think he’s just getting his feet wet, but it’s “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.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.