In two rather baffling passages, Politico's Jonathan Martin (suffering deadline anxiety?) writes that Marco Rubio's SOTU response was "an exercise in erasing Mitt Romney’s legacy on the Republican Party" and ...
The selection of Rubio to speak for his party marked the latest, and perhaps most overt, step in the GOP’s rehabilitation project since Election Day, an effort to repackage its identity without altering its policies.
True, in terms of ethnicity and wealth the personal identities of Romney and Rubio are vastly differentiated. Yet personal identities aren't the GOP's chief problem, which is instead the selfsame policies, as manifested by the sorry legacy of Mitt Romney and perpetuated last night by Marco Rubio.
It's also true that Martin acknowledges this apparently inconsequential insult of repackaged identity but unaltered policies, yet his labeling it a material "step" in the party's "rehabilitation" tends not only to dignify the squandered effort, but to subtly attenuate it.
And so it begins.
Indeed Rubio did distinguish himself from Romney. He proved you don't have to be a rich asshole to be a Republican. You can just be an asshole.
Posted by: Peter G | February 13, 2013 at 11:21 AM
He was in as big a flop-sweat as Mittens was during the 3rd debate, which explains his thirst.
Posted by: shsavage | February 13, 2013 at 12:19 PM
Aren't they the same policies since at least 1980 when their St. Ronald of Reagan was pushing them? And I am still puzzled as to why anyone who says government can't help you, government isn't the answer runs for a government job. What do they think government is for if they still want to be part of it even though it is a useless, bloated beast that needs to be starved? Are they trying to work themselves out of a job, or are they just trying to be part of some ruling class that collects taxes from the people while doing nothing for them except make laws that intrude on their personal lives and start unnecessary wars? Republicans claim to represent the intentions of the founding fathers but if their actual behavior is any indication, if this were 1776, they'd be rooting for King George.
Posted by: AnneJ | February 13, 2013 at 12:26 PM
Go ahead and call me a cockeyed optimist if you want, but I hvae dream.
I dream of a day when old brown men will be yelling at me to get off their yards.
I dream of a day when the brown men - and women - on Wall Street drive our country into financial ruin.
I dream of a day when all people, including brown women and men, don't give a shit about anyone but themselves.
Posted by: Robert Lipscomb | February 13, 2013 at 12:27 PM
Ah Robert the dream is so close....
Herman Cain is his name,
He rode in on the Crazy Train,
'til stone cold reality came
And brought up the facts again.
In the election the election for 45,
We were hungry,
(His pizza hadn't arrived)
By Dec 3 his campaign had fell. It's a time I remember oh so well.
The night they drove that dickhead down....
Posted by: Peter G | February 13, 2013 at 01:35 PM
" if this were 1776, they'd be rooting for King George."
Of course they would. That was the conservative position at the time. It was those damn hippie tea-hating liberals who had other ideas and got all uppity.
Posted by: Turgidson | February 13, 2013 at 05:44 PM