Marco Rubio Camelot Detour

Marco Rubio has a problem. He has to find a way to distinguish himself in Republican primaries when the major emotional flow is fueled by xenophobia.

He was supposed to be the leader for the new generation of young Republicans. Good looking. Latino. Basically the Republican version of JFK. Unfortunately as Wart learned, the road to Camelot is not paved with gold or even good intentions. The road is a test of character. It is a test that Rubio has so far failed.

There were his frequent flips regarding immigration, the Iraq war, and national security spending.

His most recent flip regarding exceptions to abortion bans for rape, incest, or the health of the mother may be his most profound.

He has claimed that science now supports the assertion that a human life begins at conception. That claim is the basis for reversing his previous support of exceptions to abortion.

He appears to base this little bit of verbal gymnastics on the fact that a fertilized egg can only produce a human embryo. If that embryo is carried full term a baby is born.

Science explains this because of human DNA. It is this DNA that determines how the fertilized egg will grow and evolve. If human DNA is present in the cells of both the egg and the sperm, a human embryo will result every time.

What is wildly inaccurate though, is the claim that science supports his view that this fertilized egg is in fact equivalent to a human being. It is not. It is a fertile seed of a human being much in the same way that an acorn has the potential be an oak tree, but still needs a lot of growing to reach its potential.

Science does not take a position on when life begins. It has a method for determining the when something is alive. A human baby passes that test. A human embryo does not.

Rubio’s position is getting him some needed press visibility, but it is also going to damage him if he manages to make it to November 2016.

The country may be split on abortion rights, but women support abortion rights 50% to 41%. Obama coalition is built on women, minorities, immigrants, young people, LGBT, and educated professionals. If Hillary Clinton is the Democratic nominee, she is doing a pretty good job of holding that coalition together.

Rubio’s opportunity in the election cycle this year will likely be as a VP. Whomever ends up being the Republican nominee will choose between Rubio, Kasich, or may Fiorina.

What is interesting is that while Rubio is of Hispanic origin, Kasich is the one who supports a path to citizenship. Kasich, and not Fiorina, also supports abortion exceptions in the case of rape, incest, or the health of the mother. Rubio is from Florida. Fiorina is from California. Kasich is from Ohio. What state decided the last couple presidential elections? – Ohio.

So the path in 2016 for Rubio may not lead to Camelot. That’s because when it comes down to character, it turns out not to have anything to do with looks, ethnic background, or gender. It is a basic choice grounded in principle and tested under stress. The one person in the Republican field who appears to have passed that test won’t get the nomination for President, but is in a good position to get the VP nod – John Kasich.

3 Responses to “Marco Rubio Camelot Detour”

  1. Keith says:

    An earthquake has occurred. You have identified ME!!!! The best
    Republican candidate in my life time who I am virtually in lockstep with is John Kasich…. So whenever you believe me to be in an echo chamber just pause and ask if John Kasich is in one as well….

    I am a fan of Rubio, I don’t think it’s fair of you to challenge his character.. While in the same post Mentioning Hillary, as the presumptive, while over looking hers. In fact she has none.

    Obama’s flip on gay marriage and a mandate are bigger flips then Rubios.

    Trump is the most entertainment I’ve seen in politics in my life time. This is what someone who’s beholden to Boone sounds like. He’s playing with an entirely different set of rules then anyone else running except Mr Sanders, but for different reasons. I’m not sure someone like that can actually govern but he’s certainly entertaining.

    Question – if the dems are the party if the young, the menilinals, and the “hipsters” then why are the dems only able to come up with 68 year old Hillary, draft Joe at 72, Bernie at 77/87/97?? Who knows… John Kerry sniffing around, Al Gore being mentioned at 67?? Where are the young hipsters???

  2. Jeff Beamsley says:

    Your question about young candidates is appropriate.

    There are up and coming Democratic candidates out there. The Castro brothers from San Antonio for example. Martin O’Malley is about the right age to run for President. Cory Booker, Kristen Gilabrand, Andrew Cuomo.

    But you are correct that the party leaders are probably older than they have ever been in recent memory.

  3. Keith says:

    I like Cory Booker

Leave a Reply