Let’s Have A Race

I was reading an article over on American Thinker, which I usually find a good site for commentary.  This evening I read this Rubio For President nonsense that has me shaking my head.  Where have these people been for the past three years?  I mean, come on.

Not only do they blithely overlook the problem that Rubio’s parent’s were not (as far as I have been able to discover) naturalized US citizens at the time of his birth, but it highlights Mr. Marco’s Hispanic heritage as a big ole plus.  Add to that his youth, handsome face, and way with giving a good speech.

Exactly like obama.  Crap.  Haven’t we been there, done that, like ……  Right Now?

What in hell is wrong with people?  What’s with wanting special interest, cutie-pie, young, non-white, smooth talkers for president?

Let me shout this in your ear:


That makes him ineligible, just as obama is ineligible.

Add to that, it smacks of absolute stupidity to think that because a person is of a particular race, this means that person can unite his own race with all the other races and we will all live in utopia.

GAH !!

They may as well just re-elect obama and get it over with right now.



November 26, 2010

Rubio for President

ByBruce Walker

Republicans want a candidate in 2012 who is a solid conservative, who can win the election, and who can express conservative values in many ways. Sometimes the choice for conservatives is so clear that we miss it. After Reagan was elected governor of California in 1966, he was the obvious candidate for conservatives in the 1968 presidential election. Reagan campaigned effectively in a very diverse state and won easily. Reagan articulated the conservative message much better than most Republicans could.
There was only one knock on Reagan in 1968: he had held elective office for only two years. In retrospect, the failure of those conservatives who in 1964 captured the Republican Party to rally behind Reagan in 1968 was a terrible mistake. Reagan, as handsome and as articulate in 1968 as he was in 1980, would have beaten Humphrey in a landslide. That 13% of the electorate who voted in a protest for Wallace would have overwhelmingly gone for Reagan (as these voters did the first chance they got, in 1976 during the Republican primary, and forever after that in Republican primaries and general elections).
President Reagan in 1969 would have used air and sea power to win in Vietnam. He would have appointed true conservatives to the Supreme Court. He would not have established the EPA, OSHA, or affirmative action. And he would have confronted the Evil Empire before it spread into places like Angola, Nicaragua, Ethiopia, and Mozambique. The Republican Majority, which Nixon never developed, would have come to be much sooner than 1994, and the nation would be spared the squalidness of Watergate (and the pompous Democrat posturing after Nixon resigned).
Marco Rubio in 2010 is like Ronald Reagan in 1996. He has proven his conservative purity in the Florida legislature and in a three-part Senate race which he won decisively. The Leftist media perceives him, correctly, as a candidate of the Tea Party. Rubio, like Reagan, is a physically attractive and articulate candidate, something which matters in an age of video campaigns. His life story bespeaks conservatism. His parents left communism (and left him with a strong aversion to the myriad incarnations of Marx). His folks worked as Hispanic blue-collar workers in Las Vegas, a theme that will surely resonate with many voters. Indeed, Rubio seems to be a blue-collar candidate capable of pulling all those folks in Flyover Country whom Obama saw as clinging to religion and guns.

Rubio is Hispanic. He is the child of legal Hispanic immigrants. That is a magnet in more ways than appear on the surface. Yes, in the “group voting” mania of the Left, Rubio is a huge monkey wrench — how can white-bread leftists persuade Hispanics that he is not himself Hispanic?


Rubio’s parent’s were LEGAL by virtue of special accommodation made to Cuban refugees at that time.  It is NOT the same thing as having taken ones oath to the USA, it is not automatic citizenship – at least not as far as I can find.

If I am wrong, I will happily apologize.


~ by ladysforest on November 26, 2010.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: