More on NY Times v Rubio

[Jim in CT]

The New York Times paints Rubio as a rich pluticrat becaus ehe bought a "luxury speedboat". What he bought was a 24 foot Edgewater center console. But to the NYT, that makes Rubio out of touch. Interestingly, the NYT has no quarrel with John Kerry's $7,000,000 yacht, that doesn't indicate that Kerry can't be in touch with the little guy.

https://ricochet.com/marco-rubios-bo...n-kerrys-boat/

Not often that political debate has a nautical theme, so i couldn't resist...

I like that Rubio is apparently a fisherman.

[Fly Rod]

I C he spent his first 500 thou on a boat so he could put fish on table...Y didn't the Clitons think of that.... LOL

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

The New York Times paints Rubio as a rich pluticrat I don't think it did that becaus ehe bought a "luxury speedboat". What he bought was a 24 foot Edgewater center console. But to the NYT, that makes Rubio out of touchdid the article actually state that?. Interestingly, the NYT has no quarrel with John Kerry's $7,000,000 yacht, that doesn't indicate that Kerry can't be in touch with the little guy. You do know he is considered one of the richest man in government due to his wifes $

https://ricochet.com/marco-rubios-bo...n-kerrys-boat/

Not often that political debate has a nautical theme, so i couldn't resist...

I like that Rubio is apparently a fisherman.

I don't think the article stated he was a fisherman.

The article focused on his financial misteps - like charging personal items to his Republican party credit card, liquidating a retirement card and paying a penalty and having a very low savings rate.

Here is what the article actually said about the "luxury speedboat" since it was such a tiny part of the article.

"In speeches, Mr. Rubio, a Florida Republican, spoke of his prudent plan for using the cash to finally pay off his law school loans, expressing relief that he no longer owed “a lady named Sallie Mae,” as he once called the lender.

But at the same time, he splurged on an extravagant purchase: $80,000 for a luxury speedboat, state records show. At the time, Mr. Rubio confided to a friend that it was a potentially inadvisable outlay that he could not resist. The 24-foot boat, he said, fulfilled a dream."

[Jim in CT]

Paul, why do you suppose the article referred to a 24 foor center console as a "luxury speedboat"? "Luxury"??? The article pointed out Rubio's financial struggles, then said after he got a book deal, he bought a "luxury speedboat".

When Kerry ran for President, do you suppose the NYT ran a piece about Kerry's yacht? The pictuees speak for themselves. Kerry lives like a czar, which is fine, he's not hurting anybody, but we shouldn't criticize someone foe making a much more modest purchase, right?

4 speeding tickets in 20 years, AND he owns a 24 foot center console? Let's send Rubio back to Cuba!

His financial mis-steps are, of course, fair game. It would be nice of the paper with all the Pulitzers you pointed out, was somewhat equally critical of liberals and their mis-steps. Or maybe they are, but Hilary doesn't have any mis-steps in her background, nor does her spouse? Is that it?

[Jim in CT]

The NYT is scared sh*tless of Rubio, and for good reason. He could deliver Florida, he could appeal to young voters, Catholics, and Hispanics. I'm suprised the DNC doesn't just assassinate him and get it over with.

[PaulS]

Go do a search of Hillary on the NYT's site and you'll see they have done plenty of articles on her that would be viewed as unfavorable. I'm bet they might have even been the one who broke the story about the foreign donations to their foundation. I rember they did one recently pointing out how much $ she and Bill made over the last few years.

I guess you only see what you want to see though.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Go do a search of Hillary on the NYT's site and you'll see they have done plenty of articles on her that would be viewed as unfavorable. I'm bet they might have even been the one who broke the story about the foreign donations to their foundation. I rember they did one recently pointing out how much $ she and Bill made over the last few years.

I guess you only see what you want to see though.

I agree, the NYT coverage of Hilary isn't 100% favorable, but they sure as hell don't do any laughable hit pieces on her, either.

"I guess you only see what you want to see though" I agree one of us is guilty of that.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"I guess you only see what you want to see though" I agree one of us is guilty of that.

[Jim in CT]

Paul, I asked you why the article would refer to a 24 foot center console as a "luxury speedboat", that is an exact quote. Why did the NYT (as you pointed out, winners of so many Pulitzers) use that verbiage? If they are as good as you claimed, clearly they chose those words for a reason, right? What's the reason? Kindly explain...Why did they say "luxury speedboat" instead of "fishing boat"?

I asked you that, and it looks like you chose not to answer. I wonder why that is?

Only possible answer: they are trying to paint him as an irresponsible, aristocratic, out-of-touch plutocrat. Unlike the Clintons, who we all know were broke when they left the White House, right out of the Grapes Of Wrath, poor babies...

If Rubio is reckless with money, lets discuss that honestly. Why lie about the boat he purchased? Hmmm?

I don't need to lie to excoriate Hilary, there's more than enough irrefutable fact to portray her as the vile, amoral, repugnant creature she clearly is. One only goes to the length of lying, when the truth doesn't serve one's agenda.

Rubio got an $800,000 windfall, and used 10% of that to buy a fishing boat. The fiend!!

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Paul, I asked you why the article would refer to a 24 foot center console as a "luxury speedboat", that is an exact quote.

Ok, I'll answer and I'm hoping you'll address the items I pointed out in my 1st post.

They used the term luxury bc most American's don't spend $80,000 on a recreational boat (just bc it is a center counsel we don't know what he is doing with it).

Now pls. show me where/how they painted him as a "rich pluticrat" as the use of the word "luxury" alone certainly doesn't imply when taken into context when you read the whole article. Also, show us where the NYT's shows "him as out of touch"? Finally, where did the article state he was a fisherman?

Did you do a search on what the NYT's said about the Kerry's boat?

Your posts are just full of anger and hate. Who calls a woman vile and repugnant?

Thanks

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Ok, I'll answer and I'm hoping you'll address the items I pointed out in my 1st post.

They used the term luxury bc most American's don't spend $80,000 on a recreational boat (just bc it is a center counsel we don't know what he is doing with it).

Now pls. show me where/how they painted him as a "rich pluticrat" as the use of the word "luxury" alone certainly doesn't imply when taken into context when you read the whole article. Also, show us where the NYT's shows "him as out of touch"? Finally, where did the article state he was a fisherman?

Did you do a search on what the NYT's said about the Kerry's boat?

Your posts are just full of anger and hate. Who calls a woman vile and repugnant?

Thanks

I tried to answer your questions. The article didn't say he was an out-of-touch plutocrat, but only a liberal apologist would deny that was the intent, especially when it was published th eday after part 1 of the hit piece, where we learned the shocking news that Rubio gets a ticket every 5 years or so.

If you deny that the NYT is a liberal publication, you're incorrect. Not many people woud deny the blatant left-leaning bias there.

"where did the article state he was a fisherman?"

It didnb't, I made that comment. He said on TV that he uses th eboat to fish with his family. Maybe he's lying and he's really a drug-runner.

"Who calls a woman vile and repugnant?"

Huh? A female cannot be described as vile or repugnant? Says who? Females don't do vile and repugnant things? Here on Earth, women are just as likely to be vile and repugnant as men. Hilary has no scruples whatsoever. I'm not angry, just stating facts. You don't happen to like thos efacts, and you cannot refute them, so in classic liberal fashion, you label me as the angry white male. Because to liberals, it is acceptable, even virtuous, to be humiliated by someone suffering a psychotic episode.

I do hate Hilary, guilty as charged.

[JohnR]

Stolen from elsewhere:

Rubio's boat, in Hillary's pool

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by JohnR

Stolen from elsewhere:

Rubio's boat, in Hillary's pool

Why are you picking on Hilary, you sexist?

[PaulS]

You need to talk to your priest about your anger. Look at your posts. Anyone can describe a woman and vile and repugnant. But for someone to constantly spew the anger you do shows you have anger issues.

I think that is reflect in the amount of people who post here since you've started spewing your anger.

It was best described to me about 2 years ago (out of the blue as there were no political discussions going on). The person said that you were the only person here he would turn down an opportunity to fish with.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

You need to talk to your priest about your anger. Look at your posts. Anyone can describe a woman and vile and repugnant. But for someone to constantly spew the anger you do shows you have anger issues.

I think that is reflect in the amount of people who post here since you've started spewing your anger.

It was best described to me about 2 years ago (out of the blue as there were no political discussions going on). The person said that you were the only person here he would turn down an opportunity to fish with.

I'm not even a little bit angry, just a bit bored responding to your baseless accusations, maybe you are misinterpreting boredom for anger.

A whole lot easier to insult me, than to tell me I'm wrong, especially when you're denying that the New York Times is a left wing publication. That would be like me saying that Sean Hannity conceals his personal ideology, and I hope I don't live long enough to say anything that absurd.

We have serious problems that require serious, thoughtful solutions. When the NYT does back-to-back hit pieces on Marco Rubio, and the best "dirt" they can come up with is a 24 foot center console and tickets once every 5 years, they are contributing to the problem. I enjoy pointing that out (I'm not angry when I do it, I'm actually enjoying it), and I often do it with sarcasm and hyperbole. I'll stop when John tells me to. In this thread, one of us has engaged in direct, personal attacks. It's you, and that doesn't bother me in the slightest, because it's evidence that even you know you can't dispute what I'm saying.

I don't like Rubio's flip-flopping on immigration, I also think he's nowhere near ready (though he's exavctly as ready as Obama was when we elected him, one term in the Senate). Those are legitimate issues. A handful of speeding tickets, a small boat, and his wife's driving record? His wife? i thought family was off-limits. When did the NYT do a piece pointing out the ethical lapses of Hilary's spouse? De-forestation of North America would be required to print Bill's ethical lapses on paper.

A boat and speeding tickets. Cracks me up...

[PaulS]

Here is my quote in red from yesterday.

Oh, well then, it must therefore be balanced Did anyone say it was balanced? Or had to have 1 political ideology to get recognized for journalistic exellence. So where did I deny they weren't somewhat biased? Any 12 years old knows all news organizations have some bias.

Calling someone vile is not sarcasm. I thought you said you detested Pres. Obama - that shows anger to me.

Seriously, stop denying your anger and talk to your priest since you've said a few times you go to church every Sunday.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Here is my quote in red from yesterday.

Oh, well then, it must therefore be balanced Did anyone say it was balanced? Or had to have 1 political ideology to get recognized for journalistic exellence. So where did I deny they weren't somewhat biased? Any 12 years old knows all news organizations have some bias.

Calling someone vile is not sarcasm. I thought you said you detested Pres. Obama - that shows anger to me.

Seriously, stop denying your anger and talk to your priest since you've said a few times you go to church every Sunday.

When I say I hate Hilary or Obama, it's not reflective of anger. It's reflective of my ability to think logically and judge character.

Obama says that "Republicans gotta stop just hating all the time", yet you never accused him of suffering any psychosis. When I respond in kind, you're all over me. You give Obama a pass, but not me. That says a lot more about you, than it says about me.

[Jim in CT]

he NYT needn't bother embarrassing themselves by attacking Rubio for getting a ticket once every 5 years and owning a 24 foot center console. He's not going to get the nomination, he's angling (his. hobby) for the #2 spot. He is a great candidate for VP, pulls a lot of levers.

So much for the NYT being sympathetic about Hispanics. When the GOP nominates white guys, they are racist, when minorities run, they are mercilessly attacked.

4 speeding tickets in 20 years. Has the NYT condemned Ted Kennedy for his driving record, or did they endorse him every 6 years? How many women has Rubio killed behind the wheel? On that basis, it's Kennedy 1, Rubio 0.

[PaulS]

Why is an article about Rubio not being sympathetic about Hispanics - just because Rubio was born in Cuba is he immune to be discussed in an article? Will any article about Jeb Bush also show a lack of sympathy about Hispanics (since he registered as a Hispanic? The articles they write about immigration reform seem to be 100% opposite of the Republican platform (not the earlier Rubio but the current Rubio) and support what the majority of Hispanics want. When Hispanics overwhelmingly vote Democratic, we'll again be hearing how it is bc they want things for free.

I don't think the NYT needs to feel embarrassed about anything (unlike Faux news where they refused to look into O'Reilly many lies).

Do a search on articles about Ted Kennedy and Chappy instead of making stupid comments and embarrassing yourself. I still don't know how this has morphed into a Kennedy discussion. Maybe I should bring up Hastert - Hastert 2 child molestations, T. Kennedy 0!

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Why is an article about Rubio not being sympathetic about Hispanics - just because Rubio was born in Cuba is he immune to be discussed in an article? Will any article about Jeb Bush also show a lack of sympathy about Hispanics (since he registered as a Hispanic? The articles they write about immigration reform seem to be 100% opposite of the Republican platform (not the earlier Rubio but the current Rubio) and support what the majority of Hispanics want. When Hispanics overwhelmingly vote Democratic, we'll again be hearing how it is bc they want things for free.

I don't think the NYT needs to feel embarrassed about anything (unlike Faux news where they refused to look into O'Reilly many lies).

Do a search on articles about Ted Kennedy and Chappy instead of making stupid comments and embarrassing yourself. I still don't know how this has morphed into a Kennedy discussion. Maybe I should bring up Hastert - Hastert 2 child molestations, T. Kennedy 0!

"Why is an article about Rubio not being sympathetic about Hispanics"

Here's why I made that claim...because if a conservative criticizes Obama, the mainstream media (not the lunatic fringe, I'm talking about the NYT and NBC) will say you are racist. If you criticize Hilary, you are sexist. If you are opposed to gay marriage for religious reasons, you are a homophobe. If you concede we are at war with radical Islam, you are an Islamophobe. If you admit that social security needs fixing, you hate old people. f you admit Medicare needs fixing, you hate sick people. The left, very commonly, responds to conservative issue-based debate with accusations of some kind of hate, and they do that because they can't refute what we are saying. Same thing you do here, when you accuse me of hate instead of responding to what I am saying. Yet the NYT can put out laughable hit pieces of Rubio, but they can still claim to have a monopoly on compassion for Hispanics. It's a joke.

You did the exact same thing here when I called Hilary vile and repugnant, you asked where I get off calling a woman that. I asked you why you believe that women are not capable of being vile, and you dodged. I am shocked, yes shocked.

Despite what you seem to believe, women can be vile and repugnant. Jails are full of them.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Why is an article about Rubio not being sympathetic about Hispanics"

Here's why I made that claim...because if a conservative criticizes Obama, the mainstream media (not the lunatic fringe, I'm talking about the NYT and NBC) will say you are racistyour imagining things. Maybe you got that from the site you posted instead of from the actual article. . If you criticize Hilary, you are sexistNo, you get critiized when you use words such as you seem to. But an article about Rubio is somehow not symphathethic to Hispanics - got it now . If you are opposed to gay marriage for religious reasons, you are a homophobeimaganing things again. If you concede we are at war with radical Islam, you are an Islamophobepeople don't say that, they say that when people say we are at war with Islam. If you admit that social security needs fixing, you hate old people. f you admit Medicare needs fixing, you hate sick people. The left, very commonly, responds to conservative issue-based debate with accusations of some kind of hate, and they do that because they can't refute what we are sayingno I think it is when the far crazy right starts throwing around the inflamatory words you seem to use.. Same thing you do here, when you accuse me of hate instead of responding to what I am sayingI've responded almost every time here. Look at the hate filled words you use. You say that to someone's face and they'll hit you. What kind of person calls someone else vile and repugnant?. Yet the NYT can put out laughable hit laughable that you think it is a "hit" piecepieces of Rubio, but they can still claim to have a monopoly on compassion for Hispanics. It's a joke I think it has more to do the policies..

You did the exact same thing here when I called Hilary vile and repugnant, you asked where I get off calling a woman thatYes, my parents taught me to have respect for people. . I asked you why you believe that women are not capable of being vile, and you dodged. I am shocked, yes shocked.

Despite what you seem to believe, women can be vile and repugnant. Jails are full of them.

Certainly women can be vile and repugnant but it takes a whole lot more to make that claim than their politics. Admit it, you just hate Democrats and that is the basis for all your hate.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Certainly women can be vile and repugnant but it takes a whole lot more to make that claim than their politics. Admit it, you just hate Democrats and that is the basis for all your hate.

If you think I'm imagining that conservatives get brushed with the hate label, you aren't very knowledgeable of what really happens. You aren't even knowledgeable of what you yourself do, because you yourself did it to me.

Do a little research, you'll see all kinds of examples of mainstream media making those accusations, simply because people are questioning policy decisions. Obama also does it, in the campaign against McCain, Obama told a crowd that McCain's camp was going to try and make people afraid of Obama because he I black. Shameful. And it happens, whether you know about it or not.

[PaulS]

You're just sounding paranoid now.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

You're just sounding paranoid now.

Oh, but of course, I am making it up.

Jimmy Carter was US President, so most would say he's not a radical nut. Here, he says racism is a major factor in any opposition to Obama. I can't object to his policies because they are asinine, it has to be racism...

http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/09/...ama/index.html

Here is Obama telling supporters that they (McCain) "will try to make you afraid of me because I'm young and inexperienced AND BLACK". Tell me Paul, did John McCain make that an issue in the 2008 campaign? If so, please post evidence of that.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com...-afraid-of-me/

Here is Obama (the great uniter) telling Republicans to "stop just hating all the time". Yes yes. We are all a bunch of haters, despite evidence that we give more time and money to charity, than Democrats.

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-gop-stop...xBHNlYwNzcg--#

Earlier this year, Bill Oreilly on Foxnews,was one of many people who criticized a state department spokeswoman for horrible job performance. The state department called OReilly sexist for criticizing her, saying that he would not have used that language about a man"

http://news.yahoo.com/obama-gop-stop...xBHNlYwNzcg--#

Paul Ryan had the nerve to say that social security is going bankrupt, and thus needs to be changed. Here is a commercial that Democrats made, showing Ryan pushing an old lady off a cliff.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/pu...rticle/2504637

Here, Obama says that Republicans want dirty water and air

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/vid...insurance.html

And here, United States Congressman Alan Greyson says that "Republicans want sick people to die". Classy.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/0..._n_303996.html

Al Sharpton has been to Obama's white house 80+ times. Tell me he's not there to peddle hate against those with whom he disagrees.

Harry Reid, majority leader in the Senate, described all the GOP candidates as losers. Marco Rubio responded thusly...

"“It’s particularly problematic on the left. They never argue with you about ideas. Their instant reaction is to attack you personally. I’m not saying people on the right don’t do it. It happens. But it’s so much more common on the left.”

https://www.yahoo.com/politics/rubio...567526801.html

Am I making any of that up, or did I support all of it? You have been annihilated, and shown to not be a serious person, nor are you intellectually honest. Go lick your wounds.

[PaulS]

like I said, Paranoid. Talk to your priest. He can help you with your anger issues.