Marco Rubio

Marco Rubio “Hit Piece” Tracked to Hillary Pack, American Bridge

Published by Papa Giorgio

(BreitBart) During Friday’s “On the Record with Greta Van Susteren” on Fox News Channel, chairman of the Republican National Committee Reince Priebus spoke on The New York Times article, which Priebus speculated was done by Democratic primary candidate Hillary Clinton’s research group “American Bridge.”

The Daily Caller has more:

Surprise! NYT’s Embarrassing Rubio Hit Piece Came From Democratic Super PAC

…“Marco Rubio and His Wife Cited 17 Times for Traffic Infractions” is the headline of Friday’s Times piece, which credits three separate reporters. Missing from the headline is the important context that the candidate himself only had four violations to his name, over the span of two decades.

The Times took a lot of heat for the story from conservatives, who saw the piece as pointless and petty. But in an actual work of journalism, the Free Beacon’s Brent Scher noted that Rubio’s records weren’t pulled by the Times at all, but by Democratic opposition group American Bridge.

The David Brock-controlled American Bridge is known for its occasionally shoddy reporting work. In another embarrassing incident in 2014, American Bridge spread a video they claimed was of Republican Senate candidate David Perdue signing a young woman’s stomach… when he was actually signing her inhaler….

The Media Uncovers Biggie About Rubio… Digs Deep!

Published by Papa Giorgio

The first evidential piece vetted by the New York Times brought to the readers attention via Breitbart… the “press” seems thrilled to have uncovered such a salacious story! (Never mind Obama went to a Nazi like church for 20-years):

Remember how the media left Barack Obama completely unvetted, ignoring even the most damaging stories from his past, while a squirming mass of reporters fought over every scrap of trash in the dumpster behind Sarah Palin’s house? It’s happening again.

For some reason, the New York Times decided to devote two reporters to the urgent task of reviewing Senator and presidential candidate 

Sen. Marco Rubio’s driving record over the past 18 years. And they still couldn’t make much of a story about it, so they decided to add his wife’s record to the story.Voila! “

Sen. Marco Rubio and His Wife Cited 17 Times for Traffic Infractions,” screams the headline. For some reason, the headline fails to mention that they had to dig back to 1997 to come up with that total. I’m sure it’s just a bit of editorial oversight that “… Over the Past 18 Years” was chopped off the headline….

  • After an excerpt from the NYTs article, Breitbart continues:

…On and on it goes. It’s as long as anything you’ll ever read from the mainstream media about, say, the White House Travel Office, Whitewater, or the sale of America’s uranium to Russia for Clinton cash.

Meanwhile, Hillary “Dead Broke” Clinton was being chauffered between luxury private jets and her two estates, perhaps occasionally glancing up from reading the latest “personal” email from her favorite donors, on the iPad she would later claim she wasn’t carrying, to watch the Little People buzz around in their cars and chuckle over how much time they waste behind the wheel.

I thought the media was adamant that the wives and children of politicians were strictly off-limits. But when their big “expose” on Marco Rubio could only find four traffic citations since 1997, they didn’t hesitate to drag his wife into the story. “War on Women,” anyone?…

[….]

If wives can be lumped together with husbands to produce headline-worthy ticket totals, how about children who are old enough to drive? Is this really the ideal moment for the liberal media to declare that candidates’ spouses are fair game? What’s the speed limit on Pedophile Island, anyway?

One thing is for certain: if the media can catch Marco Rubio in the act of illegally removing a tag from his mattress, he’s done.

With that team of crack-reporters at the NYT, I am amazed ANY Republican is put into the office!

Rubio Blasts Jay-Z, Says His Hero (Che Guevara) ~ “White Supremacist”

Published by Papa Giorgio

Via Libertarian Republican:

One of his [JayZ’s] heroes is Che Guevara. Che Guevara was a racist. Che Guevara was a racist that wrote extensively about the superiority of white Europeans over people of African descent, so he should inform himself on the guy that he’s propping up.

“Secondly, I think if Jay-Z was truly interested in the true state of affairs in Cuba, he would have met people that are being oppressed, including a hip-hop artist in Cuba who is right now being oppressed and persecuted and is undergoing a hunger strike because of his political lyrics,” Rubio added.

“And I think he missed an opportunity. But that’s Jay-Z’s issue.”

A HIGHLY recommended book:

GQ Asks Rubio About the `Age of the Earth` (The Project to Destroy Marco Rubio Has Begun)

Published by Papa Giorgio

HotAir talks about the recent question GQ Magazine asks Marco Rubio a question I have never heard asked of a Democrat:

GQ: How old do you think the Earth is?

Marco Rubio: I’m not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that’s a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States. I think the age of the universe has zero to do with how our economy is going to grow. I’m not a scientist. I don’t think I’m qualified to answer a question like that. At the end of the day, I think there are multiple theories out there on how the universe was created and I think this is a country where people should have the opportunity to teach them all. I think parents should be able to teach their kids what their faith says, what science says. Whether the Earth was created in 7 days, or 7 actual eras, I’m not sure we’ll ever be able to answer that. It’s one of the great mysteries.

The Telegraph has this great insight!

Marco Rubio, GQ and the age of the Earth: the mainstream media “anti-science” smear returns

What would you do if in the middle of a job interview someone asked you, “How old do you think the Earth is?” Not wanting to look a fool, chances are that you’d give an answer as banal and evasive as this, “I’m not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that’s a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States.” That’s what Marco Rubio offered when asked the age of the Earth in a recent GQ interview – and it’s a clever person’s way of saying, “I don’t have a clue, dude. Can we move on?”

But you can bet your last Obamadollar that the dreaded rationalists in the liberal press won’t move on. They’ll interpret Rubio’s innocuous answer to translate as “I think the Earth probably began in 1922 – but Jesus put fossils in the ground to keep us guessing.” They’ll take this as further evidence that all conservative Christians are Creationists and Young Earthers – and they’ll try to embarrass ordinary Americans out of voting for them by playing an intellectual snobbery card that is as cruel as it is inaccurate. The inference is this: every time you vote for a religious conservative, a witch gets burned.

A few questions. First, why did GQ ask this question, and would they ask a Democrat the same thing? It always seems to be Republicans that the mainstream media fires these curious, pointless salvos at. Sarah Palin calls them “gotcha” questions – and she’s more than familiar with ’em.

Second, does not knowing an answer to a science question bar someone from running for office? If that’s the case, pick up the phone to your local Democratic Senator and ask them the chemical symbol for sulphuric acid. If they get it wrong, demand a recall.

More importantly, if it’s okay for Barack Obama to say that abortion is “above my paygrade” and refuse to offer a guess as to when life begins, why is it not okay for Rubio to dodge a bullet when asked a question about the origins of the Earth? Considering that the question posed to Obama back in the 2008 election had serious moral consequences and Rubio’s does not, I can’t understand why Obama’s evasion is heralded as a victory for common sense but Rubio’s is treated like a declaration of war on science. The hysteria and hypocrisy are tiring at best….

…read more…

Again, this question is never asked of Democrats even though a large percentage believes in creation ex nihilo:

Highly religious Americans are more likely to be Republican than those who are less religious, which helps explain the relationship between partisanship and beliefs about human origins. The major distinction is between Republicans and everyone else. While 58% of Republicans believe that God created humans in their present form within the last 10,000 years, 39% of independents and 41% of Democrats agree.

FAIL: Bill Clinton`s Endorsement Record ~ The Kiss of Death

Published by Papa Giorgio

Mega THANKS to the Free Republic and Roll Call’s  work on this, see each finger wagging point and side-smile smirk — picture — of Slick Willie from the specific campaign at the source:

  • Hillary Clinton 2008 Democrat Presidential Primary. (Lost to Democrat Barack Obama)
  • Terry McAuliffe 2009 VA Dem Gov Primary. (Lost to Democrat Craig Deeds)
  • Craig Deeds 2009 VA Dem Gov Nominee. (Lost to Republican Bob McDonell)
  • Jon Corzine 2009 NJ Dem Gov Nominee. (Lost to Republican Chris Christie)
  • Martha Coakley 2010 (Special Election) MA Dem U.S. Senate Nominee. (Lost to Republican Scott Brown)
  • Kendrick Meeks 2010 FL Dem U.S. Senate Nominee. (Lost to Republican Marco Rubio)
  • Alex Sink 2010 FL Dem Gov Nominee. (Lost to Republican Rick Scott)
  • Virg Bernero 2010 MI Dem Gov Nominee. (Lost to Republican Rick Snyder)
  • Ted Strickland 2010 OH Dem Gov Nominee. (Lost to Republican John Kasich)
  • Mike McWherter 2010 TN Dem Gov Nominee. (Lost to Republican Bill Haslam)
  • Lee Fisher 2010 OH Dem U.S. Senate Nominee. (Lost to Republican Rob Portman)
  • Jack Conway 2010 KY Dem U.S. Senate Nominee. (Lost to Republican Rand Paul)
  • Joe Sestak 2010 PA Dem U.S. Senate Nominee. (Lost to Republican Pat Toomey)
  • Dan Onorato 2010 PA Dem Gov Nominee. (Lost to Republican Tom Corbett)
  • Rory Reid 2010 NV Dem Gov Nominee. (Lost to Republican Brian Sandoval)
  • Diane Denish 2010 NM Dem Gov Nominee. (Lost to Republican Susana Martinez)
  • Tom Barrett 2012 (Recall) WI Den Gov Nominee. (Lost to Republican Scott Walker)

BREAKING: World Net Daily`s Joseph Farah Already Leading the `Birther` Charge Against Marco Rubio ~ Misguided Interpretation of the Constitution

Published by Papa Giorgio


The Hill reports the following:

Conservative Joseph Farah on Tuesday evening predicted that “10 percent of the Republican vote” would fail to get behind Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) as the hypothetical vice presidential nominee because they will believe the circumstances of his birth make him ineligible.

Farah has been one of the most prominent and persistent voices of the so-called “birther” movement, which argues that President Obama is not eligible to be president of the United States due to doubts about his birthplace and the citizenship of his parents.

Farah’s objection to Rubio might serve as a rallying cry to voters convinced that Obama’s presidency is illegal according to the rules set out in the Constitution.

“Rubio is not eligible,” Farah told Fox News host Sean Hannity. “He’ll lose 10 percent of the Republican vote because he is not a natural-born citizen. We’ve been through this with Obama now for four years.

Rubio was born in Miami in 1971. Farah’s argument against Rubio’s “natural born” status relies on a strict definition also used by Farah and others who raised doubts over Obama’s eligibility. The strict definition requires that both parents be legal citizens at the time of the birth.

Rubio’s parents became naturalized citizens in 1975, but were permanent legal residents of the United States when Rubio was born, according to Rubio’s office. Rubio’s official biography has already been scrutinized, due to questions over the date his parents arrived in the United States as Cuban exiles.

Farah’s website, World Net Daily, is now reporting on the potential controversy under the category “Certifigate.” The website first raised the question in May, but Farah raising the issue in a national television appearance could be a signal of things to come should Rubio appear on the Republican presidential ticket later this year.

…read more…

And via The Daily Caller:

Host Sean Hannity said Republican Florida Sen. Marco Rubio is more likely to share the ticket if Romney wins the GOP nomination. But Farah declared that Rubio would not be eligible.

HANNITY: I think that’s taken. It’s got to be Rubio. That’s my guess.
BOB BECKEL:  If it’s not, somebody’s lost their mind.
FARAH: Rubio is not eligible.
HANNITY: Whoa, what do you mean, ‘Rubio’s not –
FARAH: He’ll lose 10 percent of the Republican vote because he is not a natural-born citizen. We’ve been through this with Obama now for four years.
HANNITY: I don’t believe that. I don’t think that’s going to work.

…read more…

World Net Daily took the mantel of birtherism from the Democratic attacks against Obama, now they will lead the way against Marco Rubio:

MIAMI, Fla. – Some national news media are declaring that U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio is a natural-born citizen and thus eligible for the presidency or vice presidency, even though Rubio’s constitutional eligibility remains unclear and the popular Florida Republican has himself downplayed any interest in running on a White House ticket.

In a Daily Caller piece today titled “Coming soon: Rubio ‘birthers,’” journalist Matt Lewis warns, “There is already a movement afoot (led by some on the fringe) to disqualify him from serving as president (which would presumably disqualify him from serving as vice president). That’s right – some are arguing that Rubio is not eligible because he is not a ‘natural-born citizen.’”

Lewis explains the logic by citing a May 22 WND report examining the issue, which noted, “While the Constitution does not define ‘natural-born citizen,’ there is strong evidence that the Founding Fathers understood it to mean someone born of two American citizens.”

Matt Lewis of the Daily Caller thinks those questioning Marco Rubio’s natural-born citizenship are racists or misguided adherents to the Constitution.

That report examined both Rubio and Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, both of whose parents were legal U.S. residents but not legal U.S. citizens when the future politicians were born.

“Who knows how big this thing will get?” asks Lewis. “Maybe it’s just a small fringe movement – but it is a ‘thing.’ The good news here, of course, is that the rise of Rubio birthers proves that birthers are not merely partisan hypocrites who solely attack Democrats like Obama. They are, instead, either consistent racists – or consistently misguided adherents to the Constitution. But hey – at least they aren’t partisan hacks.”

…read more…

Michael Medved took a call from a birther who used the same line of thinking that Joseph Farah applies to the constitution, Medved uses the callers own source to explain why Obama (and now Marco Rubio) are eligible: