HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Huh? left-wing Freak Sho...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Wed Nov 21, 2012, 08:11 AM

Huh? left-wing Freak Show???



Halperin's true colors never fail to bleed through...

http://politicalwire.com/archives/2012/11/21/democrats_already_defining_2016_gop_hopefuls.html


November 21, 2012

Democrats Already Defining 2016 GOP Hopefuls


Mark Halperin notes Democrats are quickly trying to shape the 2016 Republican presidential field.

"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, you know, as a matter of just pure politics, it's very effective because Rubio's not full-time thinking about running for president. He's out there dabbling but people on the Left will just be defining anyone who looks like they might be strong in four years."

6 replies, 827 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Wed Nov 21, 2012, 08:18 AM

1. Winners do what is necessary to win. Rubio though won't run, but his creator Jeb will.

 

and it will take again a Clinton to defeat a Bush

only thing HIllary(who I was 100% against in 2008, but am 150% for in 2016) didn't have in 2008 was Obama's voters.
This time she does.

I hope we have no primary because 1968 showed what happens when we sold the best president of the modern age after FDR down the river in 1968.
Hillary only and victory in 2016.

the fight should be for the VP with her (but I wouldn't mind if Chicago runs the campaign again.
Chicago community organizers. It worked in 1960, 1964 2008 and 2012.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Wed Nov 21, 2012, 08:27 AM

2. Politics ain't beanbag, Markie

My heart bleeds for ya'.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Wed Nov 21, 2012, 08:34 AM

3. Sez' Mark Halperin, now outing himself as a full-fledged member of the Right-Wing Freak Show

of the past decade and who likes to pretend he's "fair and balanced." That man is so unctuous and smarmy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Wed Nov 21, 2012, 08:48 AM

4. "left wing freak show" = "people who know the earth is 4.5 bn years old"

Halperin thinks this is an area on which 'non-freaks' aren't certain. At least Scarborough, in the interview, said the area in which Democrats are ahead is 'science'. And the RW Commentary magazine at least managed to say Rubio was being stupid:

To this I would answer that I’m not a doctor, but I know that smoking causes lung cancer. In the same way, one doesn’t have to be a scientist to know roughly how old the earth is (the estimates are roughly 4.5 billion years old). The age of the earth, by the way, is a separate question from whether God is its Creator.
...
For Senator Rubio to duck on this matter, then, is, to me at least, a bit disquieting. There are many issues that don’t have to do with the economy that are still worth knowing about when it comes to major political leaders. This is one of them, since it offers an insight into the broader views one holds about the nature and validity of science.

One of the attributes of conservatism, at least as I understand it, is openness to evidence, including scientific evidence, and embracing reality. It can be discrediting to a political party—as well as religious institutions—to stand against (or deny) overwhelming empirical evidence on any subject. (It’s worth recalling that up until 500 years ago the Christian church, to its great detriment, argued that if the Bible were taken literally, the sun would have to revolve around the earth. The claim that the earth is 6,000-10,000 years old is about as believable as are those made in attacking Galileo and Copernicus.)

I like Senator Rubio and believe he has a very bright future. But it seems to me he not only needs to re-think his answer to this question, but come to terms with its larger implications. He and his party will suffer, and should suffer, if they are seen as agnostic on, or standing against, science.

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2012/11/19/marco-rubio-v-science/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Wed Nov 21, 2012, 09:23 AM

5. oh those evil Democrats! Highlighting what Rubio actually said!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to babylonsister (Original post)

Wed Nov 21, 2012, 09:28 AM

6. I'm sorry, but Halperin can thank the GOP for "defining" who Romney was early on.

Unless he was in a coma through the primaries where the entire GOP field destroyed Bain Capital. And we're all over Rubio because 1-They accused Obama of not having enough experience, yet want to run Rubio. 2-They are seriously under-estimating the amount of racists in their National base who would never vote for him. 3-He doesn't know how old the Earth is.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread