By Isabel Matos
Well, he didn’t say them in exactly that order, but he did frame his argument in such a way that you can put them all in one sentence taken from this context:
Citing a “growing intolerance” against opponents of same-sex marriage, Sen. Marco Rubio argued that those who advocate same-sex marriage need to be more respectful of those who oppose it.
“Supporting the definition of marriage as one man and one woman is not anti-gay. It’s pro-traditional marriage,” the Florida Republican said in a speech at Catholic University. “And if support for traditional marriage is bigotry, then Barack Obama was a bigot until just before the 2012 election.”
The senator, who was giving a speech on family values and morality, indicated he was clearly aware that people don’t accept his views.
“I promise you, before this speech is even over, I’ll be attacked as a hater, a bigot, someone who’s anti-gay,” he said. “This intolerance in the name of tolerance is hypocrisy.” CNN’s Ashley Killough reported
He’s right about it all. He also asserted that states should have the right to restrict marriage to heterosexual couples, and denounced judges who have ruled against state laws defining marriage. Right again. But why now? Why this? What for? Is he attempting to ingratiate himself with voters? His views depart from the GOPe’s which we saw in the last article, and that is a good thing, but will anyone care after his betrayal last year? And was taking the fall for Jeb worth it?
This was signature Rubio though: tying two stances on separate issues into one ‘coherent’ argument. Last year he attempted (misguidedly) to tie the rationale for defunding ObamaCare with his support for Immigration Reform. No need for the details, it just made no sense. He justified his support for both by linking each to (his version of) the American Dream. In this case, he calls for morality and values and links them with potential economic prosperity, in that order.
“In America, if you get an education, find a good job, and wait until marriage to have children, your chances of achieving economic security and professional fulfillment are incredibly high. In fact, if everyone in America lived lives that went in this order, in the order I’ve just outlined, some estimates are that the poverty rate would be cut by an estimated 70 percent.”
You can’t say he isn’t clever either. He is. And he will do what he has to to survive. But sincere? Meh.. The world sees him one way, we political junkies know the truth. I am not being facetious, nor am I judging him because I choose to believe that he defends these things. My cynicism does however makes me wonder how much time and money were spent on consultants to came up with this reinvented strategy. Many, I bet! If he just stuck to core issues of our party and simple truths that are ageless, he would not go wrong. But Rubio has a special bullsh*t chromosome and that’s his problem. No one can have faith in what he says because he will fudge whatever he has to fudge to be politically expedient. He doesn’t think long-term. Even though this was a pretty graceful attempt at a comeback, he still doesn’t get the big picture and I don’t feel sorry for him. His appeal is to the issues of the group covered in the last article. Rubio on abortion:
Rubio said abortion is a difficult issue because it involves two competing rights — women’s rights to make choices about their bodies versus the rights of the unborn to live.
“In weighing these two options, I know where I stand: An unborn child should be welcomed into life and protected in law,” he said. “It seems to me a decent, humane society will take tangible steps to help women with unwanted pregnancies even as that society defends an unborn child’s right to live.”
Whatever this re-invention cost, it was pretty crafty. I’ll just end the tirade on that note and let the RELIGIOUS BASE decide whether they believe him or not. Please check this Article link for the full post on his speech. (It’s pretty good.)