November 28, 2012, - 2:03 pm

HUH? Marco Rubio Said What???

By Debbie Schlussel

Why does Marco Rubio say he admires rappers who embrace and promote cop-killing, Jew-hatred, and gang-raping little sisters? And why are conservatives giving him a free pass on it?

I’ve always thought Marco Rubio was an oily, slippery guy and should probably be behind bars for using tens of thousands of dollars of Florida Republican Party dollars (via a credit card) for personal use. It’s called embezzlement and conversion, and he’ll never live it down, if and when he runs for President. But, now, he’s added to his sleaze profile with what he told GQ about his admiration for the “depth” of Eminem (who rapped about gang-raping his kid sister on her birthday and killing his wife and dumping her body–and killing his mother and police, too) and how he also respects the “transformative” Public Enemy, you know–the openly anti-Semitic group.


Bleep the Marco Rubio, NOT the Police

eminemsluttyclothing.jpg

Marco Rubio’s “Deep Thinker” and Sister Gang-Rape Glorifier Eminem (w/ a Stripper)

And that’s aside from the blatant racism of Public Enemy and the other rappers he loves, NWA (which stands for “N-ggaz Wit Attitudes”) and Tupac Shakur. Barf. In case you don’t remember, NWA’s claim to fame is its pro-cop killing rap song, “F–k Tha Police,” and the group is credited with creating “gangsta rap.” Many of its rap songs are openly racist against White people. Do Republicans really wanna win that badly that they will pick this moron Rubio in 2016? It was bad enough when Mitt Romney was ensconcing himself with “Fine Ho Drillin’ Early Mornin’ Stoned Pimp” Kid Rock (which didn’t help Romney win or get him any votes). Why do so-called “social conservatives” give this guy, Rubio, a pass on the same stuff they rightly criticize Obama for–hanging out with and promoting hip-hop filth? I’m the only conservative calling him out on this. The only one. It’s a sign of the decline not just of America, but of the Republican Party and so-called conservative movement along with it. Sadly, these things are “acceptable” now, including on the right. And if you call anyone out on it, you’re a nerd, a geek, not cool, anachronistic, “living in the ’50s,” and an “Alinskyite, pro-Obama mole.”

Read what Rubio says, and what his strange new heroes say about Jews, cop-killing, gang-raping sisters, etc. Oy vey:


Marco Rubio: People forget how dominant Public Enemy became in the mid 80s. No one talks about how transformative they were. And then that led to the 90s and the sort of East Coast v. West Coast stuff, which is kinda when I came of age. There’s a great documentary on Tupac called Resurrection about the last few years of Tupac’s life and how he transformed. And, ironically, how this East Coast rapper became this West Coast icon, back when all that Death Row/Sean Combs stuff was going on. Hip Hop’s 30 years old now and it’s crossed over and sort of become indistinguishable from pop music in general. You know, many people say Nicki Minaj is a rapper, but she’s also a singer. Kanye’s another guy who’s also a rapper, but his songs aren’t pure rap anymore. There’s also all these collaborations going on, which confuses everything. You know you’ve got the guy from Miami, Pitbull, who’s on TV selling a car and then he’s advertising for Dr. Pepper.

GQ: Your three favorite rap songs?
Marco Rubio: “Straight Outta Compton” by N.W.A. “Killuminati” by Tupac. Eminem’s “Lose Yourself.”

GQ: Is there a song you play to psych you up before a vote in the Senate?
Marco Rubio: I’m not like an athlete. The only guy that speaks at any sort of depth is, in my mind, Eminem. He’s a guy that does music that talks about the struggles of addiction and before that violence, with growing up in a broken family, not being a good enough father. So, you know that’s what I enjoy about it. It’s harder to listen to than ever before because I have a bunch of kids and you just can’t put it on. But in terms of psyching yourself up, I don’t have time for that. You know you can’t put on earphones and the storm the floor and vote [laughs].

GQ: So, Pitbull’s too cheesy?
Marco Rubio: His songs are all party songs. There’s no message for him, compared to like an Eminem. But look, there’s always been a role for that in American music. There’s always been a party person, but he’s a young guy. You know, maybe as he gets older, he’ll reflect in his music more as time goes on. I mean, he’s not Tupac. He’s not gonna be writing poetry.

In case you forgot, here is some of the “depth” of Marco Rubio’s Eminem–some lyrics from the Eminem rap “song,” “Amityville”:

I f–ked my cousin in his a–hole, slit my mother’s throat
(AH!) Guess who Slim Shady just signed to Interscope?
My little sister’s birthday, she’ll remember me
For a gift I had ten of my boys take her virginity
(Mmm mm mmm!) And bitches know me as a horny a– freak
Their mother wasn’t raped, I ate her p—y while she was ‘sleep
Pissy-drunk, throwing up in the urinal (YOU F–KING HOMO!)
That’s what I said at my dad’s funeral . . . .

We don’t do drivebys, we park in front of houses and shoot
and when the police come we f–king shoot it out with them too!

Yup, that’s “depth,” in the world according to Marco Rubio, “future President.” Given that, why not just skip over Rubio to the real thing, “President Camacho” from “Idiocracy.” Seems it’s the same difference. By the way, the beginning of the Eminem song is almost as deep:

(kill kill kill)
Dahh-dum, dahh-dum.. dum
Dahh-dum, dahh-dum, duh-da-da-da-da
(kill kill kill)
Dahh-dum, dahh-dum.. dum
Dahh-dum, dahh-dum, dumm..
(kill kill kill)

Uh-huh, real depth. Marco. For more depth, Eminem also rapped about killing his girlfriend/wife/ex-wife/wife/ex-wife Kim and storing her body in his car trunk before dumping it.

Then, there’s this from Rubio’s “transformative” homies in Public Enemy:

[Public Enemy's Richard "Professor Griff" Griffin], an admirer of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, told the Washington Times that “Jews are wicked…[and responsible for] the majority of wickedness that goes on across the globe.” In particular, he said that Jews financed the slave trade and were “responsible for what’s happening in South Africa” and wondered aloud whether it is “a coincidence that the Jews run the jewelry business and it’s named Jewelry?”

After that interview, Public Enemy released the anti-Semitic rap, “Welcome to the Terrordome,” with the lyrics,

Crucifixion ain’t no fiction
So called chosen frozen
Apology made to who ever pleases
Still they got me like Jesus . . .
Told a Rab get off the rag.

In case you didn’t know, “Rab” means rabbi and “get off the rag” is low-class slang for accusing someone of being a woman on her period.

Griff also called then-rival rapper, Michael “MC Serch” Berrin, a “Jew bastard.” (Serch is, in fact, Jewish, and my aunt taught his kid in Hebrew school, when Serch lived in Detroit.)

In case you forgot, here are some of the lyrics of Marco Rubio’s NWA:

Ice Cube will swarm
On any muthaf-cka in a blue uniform
Just cuz I’m from the CPT, punk police are afraid of me
A young n-gga on a warpath
And when I’m finished, it’s gonna be a bloodbath
Of cops, dyin in LA
Yo Dre, I got somethin to say

F-ck the police
F-ck the police
F-ck the police
F-ck the police . . .

F-ck tha police and Ren said it with authority
because the n-ggaz on the street is a majority.
A gang, is with whoever I’m stepping
and the motherf-ckin’ weapon
is kept in a stash box, for the so-called law
wishin’ Ren was a n-gga that they never saw . . . .

To the police I’m sayin f-ck you punk
Readin my rights and sh-t, it’s all junk
Pullin out a silly club, so you stand
With a fake assed badge and a gun in your hand

But take off the gun so you can see what’s up
And we’ll go at it punk, I’ma f-ck you up

Make ya think I’m a kick your ass
But drop your gat, and Ren’s gonna blast
I’m sneaky as f-ck when it comes to crime
But I’m a smoke em now, and not next time . . .

I’m a sniper with a hell of a scope
Takin out a cop or two, they can’t cope with me . . .

Takin out a police would make my day
But a n-gga like Ren don’t give a f-ck to say

F-ck the police
F-ck the police
F-ck the police
F-ck the police

Since Marco Rubio claims to know so much about these rappers, he should know better than to admire any of them. And if he doesn’t know better, he’s too ignorant to be President. If he does know better (as I suspect) and likes them anyway, that says all we need to know about him. He’d be the same way about far worse malefactors on the national and international political stage, looking the other way.

The rappers Marco Rubio likes aren’t just racist bigots whose raps promote and delight in brutal horrors and murder. They’ve contributed to the irreparable cultural and social downfall of America.

That Marco Rubio admires this means that Marco Rubio shouldn’t ever be President. And he probably shouldn’t be a U.S. Senator either.

America doesn’t need another “President Wit Attitude.” Or another Senator like that, either.

We already have one of those in the White House for another four years. At the end of that we don’t need another NWA President, just because he has an “R” after his name on the ballot.

Whenever I hear the name, “Marco Rubio,” I think I’m playing the game, “Marco Polo,” instead. And trying to find where the heck the conservative is.

Related Posts with Thumbnails
Print Friendly



Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

72 Responses

Yup. Conservatives have become everything they used to be against!

I suspect we’ll never have another Republican President cuz hey, if the party’s supposed heir apparent stands for cultural filth like this, there’s no reason not vote for the Democrats.

There’s no longer a conservative movement in this country. A Denocrat will probably win in 2016.

And if the GOP is dumb enough to run Rubio, he will in all likelihood, lose. It ain’t rocket science.

NormanF on November 28, 2012 at 2:14 pm

When I heard Senator Rubio’s acceptance speech in 2010, I thought this was presidential material. You did too and posted a favorable blog about him. His support of a DREAM act, albeit a mini one, began the disillusionment process. After the election he and Bobby Jindal took out after Romney and conservatives for their failure to go after the minority group votes. This is the final straw.

It may be that in his heart of hearts he is more conservative than we are and thinks his actions are necessary to win an election on a national level. If so he is sadly mistaken – why vote for a RINO when you have a better deal with a democrat?

If Rubio and Jindal are out for conservatives in 2016 – who is in?

Gloria Stewart on November 28, 2012 at 2:15 pm

If history is past precedence Karl Rove and Ann Coulter are already pimping the next loser.

The country’s demographics have changed and the only way the GOP will win is if it nominates another Democrat-Lite Republican – or so the establishment argument goes.

We’ll see who the GOP elites favor in the 2016 presidential sweepstakes.

NormanF on November 28, 2012 at 2:23 pm

I should add I must be the only one who appreciates classical music, the jazz and the blues.

I can’t stand anything on the music scene after 1950.

Then again, I’m an old guy!

NormanF on November 28, 2012 at 2:28 pm

From Lee Rodgers …

“Our Constitutional Republic died a peaceful death on November 6, 2012. Having reached the point of no return in a comatose state after years of progressive and illegal immigration assaults, the fabric of conservative society is now completely unraveled and Uncle Sam’s America is no more.The United States of America is now relegated to the dust bin of history as a has-been empire.

“The Supreme Court will be forever altered after its last conservative members will be replaced by the liberal academics who call themselves “progressives.” The rule of law will be implemented by Executive Orders, making Congress irrelevant.

“The communist motto ‘Forward’ that resonated with so many ignorant Americans will plunge us into many years of darkness from which we will never be able to recover. We have proven our Founding Fathers right, they did give us a Constitutional Republic and we were unable to maintain it.

“The welfare dependent Americans, unions, and illegal aliens have chosen for the rest of us the dark path of serfdom to big government and to socialist utopia.

“Americans chose high unemployment, reduction of our military, communist indoctrination of their children, and loss of personal freedoms unlike we have never seen before in this country.

“Mediocrity, sloth, godlessness, dependence, cowardice, using the law selectively or ignoring it, and hopeless corruption will define the new country.” — Dr. Ileana Johnson Paugh

As goes ... so goes ... on November 28, 2012 at 2:39 pm

Thanks again Debbie. I would not have known these things about Rubio had you not written this article.

PDMac60 on November 28, 2012 at 2:40 pm

Well, the Republicans gerrymandered West in Florida, and I never heard Fla. Senator Rubio complain about that either.

The guy is a crook, not that this keeps someone from running for President, e.g. McCain, Clinton(s), Obama, etc. And the Senate?@*?

The Republican party not only is not conservative, but collaborates with the liberals in attacking conservatives. I don’t want to waste space with examples, but they are many. Their politics are indistinguishable from the Democrats’. and they feel now they can come out into the open with what they have always believed.

And just like the liberal media kowtow to politicians to preserve their access, and financial reporters kowtow to business execs to preserve their access, talk-show hosts and writers do the same thing.

In many countries, there has not been a decent political leader for centuries. There is nothing magical about the US that prevents us from descending to the abyss which characterizes many other countries. In that sense, Obama is right, we are not that unique. Historical exceptionalism be damned! Welcome to the rest of the world.

Little Al on November 28, 2012 at 2:41 pm

Rubio is a scumbag embezzler and crook.

DS_ROCKS! on November 28, 2012 at 2:41 pm

When I was a young man in the 90s, I thought this was filth… garbage.

Its taken only 20 years for it to become mainstream.

The sad thing about it is – aside from Debbie – I must be the only conservative who thinks the country would be better off with classical culture and good manners.

Which we no longer seem to hold in high regard as a country anymore.

NormanF on November 28, 2012 at 2:43 pm

    Norman, I basically agree with you, although do think there has been excellent jazz composed and performed in recent decades. I don’t know your preferences, but there are a lot of groups and individuals making good music today. Same with classical. There is still some good music being composed, although not as much as before 1950.

    But music like this is rarely performed or played, and probably in its entirety constitutes well under 1 percent of sales or playtime.

    Re movies, I agree with you, with the added comment that political propaganda in movies was plentiful before 1950 just as today. But the cultural standards were much higher. I can’t recall too many pre-1950 movies with masturbation and vomiting. But the politics were just as bad, especially Warner Brothers.

    Little Al on November 28, 2012 at 3:00 pm

    Norman, since you claimed that this country would’ve been better off with classical culture, I hope your not stating that pop-culture entertainment is a risk to morality?

    I’m not too interested in pop-culture (I listen to pop-culture music once in a while and watch pop-culture programming every now and then, so I’m not a dinosaur, lol), but I do believe in “freedom of the arts”, freedom of expression as I said in my last message minutes ago.

    That alone, I mainley listen to old school music from the 1920s-1950s, whether it’s Classic Country-Western and/or Big Band Jazz music. And Little Al is right, there are some artists today who makes good to great music, there are some country music artists today who makes alot of great music, and some R&B artists who makes good music, etc. So here in there, there are some good music in popular-music today, it’s not just all crap and nonsense!

    “A nation is defined by its borders, language & culture!”

    Sean R. on November 28, 2012 at 3:29 pm

Debbie, speaking of “Nicky Minaj”, she endorsed Mitt Romney for president a few months ago, and also, during the summber, muslim-zealots on Facebook created a anti-Nicky Minaj page by saying that she’s a threat to moraltiy, etc.

Now to the piece that you wrote, I agree with Norman and DS, I think the GOP is being kinda desperate for votes and support, sure they can somewhat cater to young people, but they don’t have to lower themselves into popular-culture music, entertainment, etc. As I said yesterday on the “Two & Half Men” thread that DS wrote, I may not be too interested in pop-culture, but I do believe in freedom of the arts, freedom of expression, etc., not advocating for censorship or boycotts.

And I also believe that Marco Rubio is ignorant for not knowing some of these hip-hop artists/stars for their hateful thinking, whether it’s against whites, jews, the police department, etc. If he’d knew what some of these folks stood for, I think he would’ve given a different viewpoint to GQ magazine and told them whole truth on what they stand for and said the exact samethings that DS is stating here in this piece she wrote.

“A nation is defined by its borders, language & culture!”

Sean R. on November 28, 2012 at 3:16 pm

Probably a reason why he wasn’t picked for VP this time. Please, NO:

Rubio
Christie
Rand Paul
McDonnell
Kasich

Paul Ryan might be the guy.

However, if the Republicans put up a white guy, all the Dems have to do is nominate a black or hispanic and they’ll win.

adam on November 28, 2012 at 3:20 pm

Now, for a little rap:

Here’s what I say about Rubi-o,
His fingers are stickier than an Ore-o
He took dat card and spent like de man
He should be doin 20 in de can.

Jonathan E. Grant on November 28, 2012 at 3:31 pm

    Very artistic, JEG.

    skzion on November 28, 2012 at 3:52 pm

Yep….WE talk about Obama and business as usual in Chicago..well folks take it from a South Florida ExPat who lived there 38 years….Rubio is business as usual in Miami. I watched S.Florida change from 59′to to the early 90′s and NOT for the better. Cubans brought their own style of business and politics from Cuba…ie.. “VIVA YO” syndrome common in all Latin American countries that emanates from Spain. It’s endemic to the culture. They turned S. Florida and Miami into just another corrupt politico “Banana Republic” just as they did Pre-Castro Cuba with Batista, which made it even easier for Castro to take over. It has infiltrated every aspect of Miami society, politics and government. So much for “Multiculturalism” !

X_S._Floridian on November 28, 2012 at 3:31 pm

Great post.

You have hit on a problem I have had with Rubio since he was elected. As a resident of Florida, I supported him and voted for him.

One of his first bills was with Chris Coons, a liberal from Delaware. I have had my suspicions of Rubio since then.

How do we expect to correct any fiscal problem, or any other problem, from the guys that got us into this mess. And do not worry that our elected officials will come out smelling like dirty roses while we the people eat SH-T and will have to pay for their F_CK UPS.

Another good question floating around is why does the government need to raise taxes if it is cutting spending? We the people will get higher taxes and the government will get to spend more.

the rap song should be:

F_CK the ELECTED OFFICIALS
F_CK the ELECTED OFFICIALS
F_CK the ELECTED OFFICIALS

panhandle on November 28, 2012 at 3:33 pm

Forget Marco Rubio! Jeb Bush 2016!!!!

(That’s sarcasm, folks.)

MY POWERBALL SONG:
Lord who made the lion and the lamb
You decreed I should be what I am.
Would it spoil some vast eternal plan
If I were a wealthy man?

Barry Popik on November 28, 2012 at 3:33 pm

Rubio is not a real conservative to begin with. I don’t know if he ever submitted it, but at one point he was writing his own version of the Dream Act.

My fear is that the Republican establishment will run him in 2016.

I_AM_ME on November 28, 2012 at 3:34 pm

Debbie – We are all living through a very historical time. No one says it or wants to admit it – but you are watching the demise of a country before your very eyes.

Mike on November 28, 2012 at 3:39 pm

There are still conservatives in this country.

But I think the problem with conservatism is it accepts whatever the Left and the popular culture instate as the new status quo all too readily.

Its a shame we can’t return the country back the way it was before the 1950s.

NormanF on November 28, 2012 at 3:42 pm

    Sure! Why not!

    Ahhh, let’s go back to the 1950s (or earlier). You know, when blacks knew their place. Schools were white and non-violent. Ozzie and Harriet depicted the typical home life in America. Commies were the enemy. No one ever heard of gun control. The economy was humming along, and houses cost $40000. Mexicans were rounded up in Operation Wetback. Everyone spoke English. Smoking a cigarette was legal anywhere. Gasoline cost 27 cents a gallon. The police had manners and wore ties as part of their uniform. The suburbs were safe from pavement apes. Universities actually educated American children to love our country. People respected religion and G-d. American were the good guys.

    Yep! If only….

    FrenchKiss on November 28, 2012 at 5:53 pm

      French,

      Get yourself a white sheet.Your post is truly repugnant.

      And where’s the condemnation from the people on this board? If French had made those comments about Jews instead of blacks,there’d be plenty of angry responses.

      Scott on November 28, 2012 at 9:31 pm

        Scott, where are your condemnations of Islam?

        FK is a blog bozo, and I have criticized his posts for various reasons, including his blatant racism, but people here don’t feel the need to condemn on cue. Perhaps you would feel more comfortable elsewhere.

        skzion on November 29, 2012 at 11:24 am

          Oh, I’m a racist and you’re not?!?!?!?!? LOL!!!!

          You, who want to kill every muzzie in Israel, or deport them??? That’s not racist, right??

          But when a Jew like myself is a race realist and is not afraid of what someone might think of me, that’s wrong, huh? You are a hypocrite and an ass.

          Name all the racist Jewish organizations in this country. You can’t because there are NONE. Name all the racist/anti-semitic black organizations in this country that are mainstream. Simple:

          The Congressional Black Caucus
          NAACP
          NBPP
          SNCC
          SPLC
          NOI
          Jesse Jackson and his traveling race-baiters
          Al Sharpton and his traveling poverty pimps
          The 98% of negros that voted for Chicago Jesus

          You have blinders on, I can see perfectly. This is one Jew who is not gonna let these people get away with their blatant anti-semitic vitriol. I intend to return it, in spades. (No pun intended)

          FrenchKiss on November 29, 2012 at 12:50 pm

          Skzion,

          Have a clue before you spout off. I’ve warned of the dangers of Islam in MANY of my posts to this website. I’ve also warned of the danger of Islamic immigration to the US and Europe, and the threat of Muslims throwing money around to the sticky fingers of dhimmi politicians of both the Republicans and the Democrats.

          Scott on November 29, 2012 at 9:23 pm

As filthy as hip hop is, I think its just a guilty pleasure. I’ll admit that one of my guilty pleasures is listening to rap music.

Matthew on November 28, 2012 at 4:03 pm

How about a candidate that inspires and uplifts people and I don’t mean uplifts people to get welfare benefits or to illegally immigrate from Mexico? What has Rubio accomplished other than being nice-looking, well-spoken and Cuban?

David on November 28, 2012 at 4:20 pm

Pause and reflect on this…

Nearly everything that is wrong with the US today can be traced to three key pieces of legislation (all from LBJ)…

The War on Poverty
The Civil Rights Act
Medicare

Before you condemn me, consider what has been wrought in the name of these three bills.

***Unlimited federal spending, to cure any and all “social ills,” whereby results do not matter at all

***A rampant culture of race-baiting, victimology, and affirmative action, with no possible end in sight

***The most expensive health care system in the world, and by no measure (except being able to quickly get an MRI for a hangnail) even close to being the world’s best

Red Ryder on November 28, 2012 at 4:44 pm

    No condemnation from me Red Ryder. Add to the that list the Supreme Court decision in Baker v. Maryland, where the court held that states having a bicameral state government could not have a state (not federal) senate based representatives based on counties, but instead had to be proportional to population, such that both houses of a state bicameral system had to be population based. This led to the weakening of the farm counties, allowing urban representatives to push for urban sprawl which has devoured our most fertile land.

    Jonathan E. Grant on November 28, 2012 at 5:36 pm

    I think it started earlier, all the way back to the Progressive Movement and the growth and reach of government accompanying World War I.

    Little Al on November 28, 2012 at 7:09 pm

    Ryder,

    The Civil Rights Act of 1964 wasn’t “from” LBJ. He pushed it through Congress,but he didn’t write it.It was in the works for years,as a continuation of previous decades efforts eliminating the ugly Jim Crow institutional racism.

    Despite your complaining about the “negative” effects of the civil rights act such as “race-baiting,victimology,and affirmative action”,there’s no way you’d trade places with a black person in this country, even with all their “advantages” you’re complaining about.

    Scott on November 28, 2012 at 9:48 pm

      Um, Scott, if I recall correctly Red Ryder IS black.

      I have no condemnation of his post.

      Skunky on November 28, 2012 at 10:45 pm

I’m not a big fan of rap anyway. It’s just not my thing.

Ghostwriter on November 28, 2012 at 4:47 pm

I’m a little surprised that Marco Rubio said these things….there are other ways to appear “hip” than to admit to liking hardcore gangsta rap. But Mr. Rubio is relatively young, so I can’t fault him for listening to the same music that a large percentage of young men in his age group listened to. Like Matthew said, listening to hardcore rap was a guilty pleasure of mine in my younger days, and is sure livened up many a party I went to. But old school Jazz, R&B, and Blues will always be my first love…

And Debbie, I wouldn’t worry to much about the “racist” element of hardcore rap. 99% of hardcore “gangsta rap” is young Black men talking about killing other young Black men rather than White folks or police. Just look at the title of Rick Ross’ latest hit. It ain’t “There White Folks Won’t Hold Me Back”, but it is “These “N**as Won’t Hold Me Back!”. Black folks are our own worst enemy…

D. O'Nay on November 28, 2012 at 5:42 pm

Holy Shiite, Debbie, thrills me to see you refer in VERY BAD TERMS to Rubio. I thought I was the only one who saw this guy as the consumate snake oil bullshhter.

Jack on November 28, 2012 at 5:47 pm

Jonathan E. Grant–

Very good point re Baker v Maryland. Of course, if we open the discussion to ruinous Supreme Court cases, let’s not forget

Dalehite v. US
Engel v. Vitale
Abington School District v. Schempp
Roe v. Wade
Kelo v. New London

You could also add Brown v Board of Education, in that even if you like the outcome, there was absolutely no law involved. It was simply political correctness.

Finally, there are a number of supposedly “anti” affirmative action decisions, that have nice words, but are routinely violated.

Red Ryder on November 28, 2012 at 6:08 pm

    Ryder,

    Brown vs Board was political correctness? You don’t know what you’re talking about. If you’re bothered by that decision,in all likelihood you’re a reactionary bigot.

    Ever heard of the 14th amendment? B vs B ruling stated that “separate but equal” was a violation of the 14th amendment.

    Black Americans were not allowed equal access to government facilities they paid for with their taxes, such as public schools,playgrounds, swimming pools,drinking fountains,etc.

    I lean libertarian, and I don’t know of a single libertarian who opposes that decision. Even the most strident “private property” libertarians who oppose some parts of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 support the B vs B decision.

    Scott on November 28, 2012 at 10:21 pm

      Scott, how can Red Ryder be a bigot? He’s black himself.

      We know you lean Libertarian. That’s where your reactionary Liberalism comes from.

      You can debate Red heatedly (and he is more than capable of holding his own) but it’s silly to call him something he isn’t. How come you don’t know he’s black? Did you not pay attention to hist posts? Anyway, he can break your argument with the facts.

      Skunky on November 28, 2012 at 10:56 pm

        Skunky,

        First, I doubt Ryder is black,even if he claims to be.

        Second,as you’re well aware, there are all too many Jewish anti-Semites such as Noan Chomsky, Norman Finklestein,etc,etc,etc., as well as the numerous Jewish dhimmis Debbie has pointed out on this website. There were also small numbers of Jewish supporters of or collaborators (kapos) with the Nazis.

        There are certainly blacks who are racist against other blacks and/or have crackpot views.

        Brown vs Board was a long overdue repudiation of the disgraceful Plessy vs Ferguson “separate but equal” Supreme Court ruling of 1896.

        Someone who considers Brown vs Board to be political correctness is racist and/or a crackpot, regardless of their ethnicity.

        What part of my argument can Ryder break? Let’s see him try.

        Reactionary liberalism???

        Scott on November 28, 2012 at 11:36 pm

AND–

How about Miranda v. Arizona? I better stop now, or I will go nuts.

The fact is, the majority of Supreme Court decisions were terrible.

Red Ryder on November 28, 2012 at 6:11 pm

This is why I stick to this site like Chris Christy sticking to a box of twinkies. Debbie you’re right. You are the only one who is giving us the real skinny on Marco the Rube Rubio. It is funny when I found out(because of you) that this dope used the Florida repub Party cc for his own usage. I use to purchase items for the Navy using a government cc and if I did what he got away with they would’ve locked me up in Levenworth so fast my butt would’ve been spinning. If he runs in 16 you can expect the democraps to hit him over the head with that one. He’s also trying to be hip and cool like our newly reelected presidential buffoon by saying that he loves NWA, Eminem, and my personal fav Public Enemy. The Republicans are already scrambling if they’re thinking of putting their hopes in Rubio. Why don’t they just get a real winner like Huntman ready and be done with it. I wonder how Rubio feels about Ice T. Remember back in the early 90s he had a rap called “Cop Killer”. Now this nitwit plays a cop on TV. Talk about irony.

Ken b on November 28, 2012 at 6:58 pm

I would be more concerned about embezzlement then rap. Honestly as a 27 year old who grew up around this music – I could care less what he listens to. Would you look at my guilty pleasures of watching Sons of Anarchey or Dexter and say I advocate gang violence, serial killers and strip clubs? Does he have integrity? Has he honored promises to his constituants? Has he promoted positive change in his districts? Discarding him bc of his musical tastes is idiotic.

Amanda on November 28, 2012 at 6:58 pm

Were conditions in the 50s better than conditions today? There is no doubt in my mind that they were. The traditions of the West that had built this country were still very much in evidence, and we fought our enemies, perhaps not as effectively as was possible, but still, at least a C or C+, not an F as is the case today.

But, but, but, look at all the inequities of the 50s, such as segregation, and other various forms of discrimination. The context for these faults, however, was that our society contained the capacity to rectify these wrongs. Just as it had had the capacity several decades earlier of giving women the vote (assuming for purposes of argument that this was a plus), it had the capacity to eliminate discrimination, and compensate for past wrongs to blacks and other minorities.

As it happened, once these wrongs were rectified, they were over-rectified, and the discriminated became the discriminators and introduced authoritarian methods to maintain their newly-found privileges. Do those discriminated against now have the capacity to rectify these conditions? I am talking about middle-class individuals who actually pay income taxes, people who are discriminated against by affirmative action and political correctness, and nations that share our historic values, but that now, with our radical foreign policy, find themselves looked at unfavorably by the US.

This is the crucial difference from the 50s, and the reason that things are worse today. In the 50s, society had the capacity, and, in overall terms, the desire to improve conditions for those not fully sharing in its benefits.

But the evidence that those marginalized today can improve their conditions and improve the values of society seems to me to be meager, and what little evidence is left of this is diminishing fast. This is especially true with the casting aside of religion, and the great thinkers of the past who accepted religion as part of their intellectual framework.

This certainly places our society below the society of the 50s.

Little Al on November 28, 2012 at 9:03 pm

Yuck. I agree w/ DS. I NEVER liked Rubio or trusted his oleaginous palaver. He sounds like a geek tryin’ to front to show he has “cred”. Viley Virus does that too but that don’t make her cool.

Yep, the Lumpenconservatariat love Rubio and that idiot Eminem. Nothing bores me more or gets my eyes rollin’ than someone crappin’ on about his music & lyrics. He’s no Nick Cave.

And Rap is Crap. I hate EVERYTHING having to do with it. It’s not cool but ridiculous…but most peeps don’t call it out because it has ‘minority’ status. I never fell for that. It’s ugly and stupid and the fashion is only fit for the blind or those with bad, bad taste. Utter trash.

I’m proud to be like DS and “uncool” and to say I don’t like the rubbish like this. I actually think it’s very punk rock in 2012 to be against such garbage. And that’s cool!

Skunky on November 28, 2012 at 10:33 pm

Are any of you born after 1970??? Rubio is simply expressing the passion for the music that his generation grew up to!! NWA have been called the Beatles of rap by many because they revolutionized the art! If you have no appreciation for rap music as a whole then it’ll all be a bunch of crap to you, but to most adults today between the ages of 30-40 , all the artists mentioned above were iconic. Tupac was a modern day poet and arguably the best rapper of all time! Eminen raps from his heart and he gives it everything he’s got. Rap music is not necessarily about what is being said, but more so about how it’s being delivered and the roots of that delivery. You can call it crap all you want, but the proof is in the pudding and all this so called “rubbish” sold millions of records and inspired an entire generation!!

Whether it’s old time rock & roll, disco, electro rock, punk rock, heavy metal, alternative rock, rap, r&b, etc… All these genres have influenced different people at different times (including past, current an future politicians). The way I see it Rubio was simply expressing his own personal taste and he too is starting to become out of touch with the Kanye’s, One Directions, Drake, Rick Rose, Rihanna and Nicky Minage that are influencing the youth today. The truth is Rubio himself is becoming old just like the music he listened to… Music will always evolve and everyone will always complain about how “music today is not like it used to be”. Once you have that sentiment, that’s when you know you’re getting old…. It’s evolution baby!!

Kershaw on November 29, 2012 at 2:56 am

    Oh, we can sure tell you were born after 1970. Not only did you miss the whole gist of the column but the lack of character of the idiots mentioned, their bad influence and bad art (I’m still laughing at the “Beatles of RAP”. Ho-ho-ho, Hee-hee-hee) had ZERO impression on you.

    Arrogance has NEVER been more ignorant than in 2012. Where the morons beat their chest like gorillas as their acumen is negligible.

    You also didn’t seem to care that Rubio is a slickster who likes to use credit cards in a duplicitous way.

    But those paying attention know where you’re coming from and your unimpressive in critical thinking skills and character.

    Skunky on November 29, 2012 at 10:02 am

Thanks for nothing Marco.You could’ve shined a positive light on Cubans,but you decided to appeal to the lowest denominator.

My family also left Cuba for a better life in the U.S.
You don’t represent us.

The American people are looking for leaders to lift us up,not tear society down.

These are not Cuban values you’re presenting and you know better.
Sell out.

ebayer on November 29, 2012 at 3:17 am

A good band has at least 5 saxophones in the front row.
Blacks made more economic progress in the years from 1940 through 1965, than they have made since then. Back in the ’50s, blacks could shop locally in the area where they lived. Now there are few store fronts occupied, except liquor stores. Even in the “bad” part of town, it was relatively safe to walk down the street in the evening. You didn’t have to nail your furniture to the floor to keep it from walking out the door. Black educational achievement was pretty close to that of whites.
Marco Rubio’s qualifications for office may actually be less than Barack Obama’s. As far as I can see, Rubio has strictly been an elected official all his working life. He has another problem like Obama–where Obama’s father was not a citizen, neither of Rubio’s parents were citizens when he was born. I think the Democrats are going to let Rubio suck the oxygen out of the Republican race then knock him off before someone gets around to that little fact, and leave some real looser standing.

John Illiois on November 29, 2012 at 9:49 am

I figured the Brown v. Board comment would get a reaction, and it did.

The point made was that there was no law involved in the decision. How could there have been if it REVERSED an earlier Supreme Court decision? (Plessy v. Ferguson). Rather, it simply reflected the changing politics of the time. That’s why they call it “con” law: Precedent always matters, except when it doesn’t. (When the politics change, that is.)

One of the major arguments in the Brown case (bet you never read it) cited psychologist Kenneth B. Clark for evidence that segregation damaged black children’s self-esteem and hampered their ability to learn. Clark and his wife Mamie had tested black children’s “racial preference” by asking them to choose between black dolls and white dolls, interpreting the choice of white dolls as evidence of damaged self-esteem.

Turns out, this was complete BS psychobabble… Subsequent research showed that the doll tests do not measure self-esteem and, further, that Black children do not have low self-esteem.

As to the 14th amendment, be careful on that one. Check your history, and you will see that the ONLY way the 14th passed was by making its acceptance a condition of admitting the Confederate states back into the Union.

Think about that for a moment…

The justification for the Civil War was that the Confederacy did not secede, but was “in rebellion.” SO–since they lost the war, why would they even have to have been re-admitted?

In any case, the notion of the 14th is “equal protection under the law.” How is it equal protection if I force a state to do something I did not force any other state to do–namely ratify that amendment? Indeed, the 14th was rejected by one-fourth of the states in the Union at the time it was first proposed.

Thus, the ratification of the 14th VIOLATED the 14th amendment.

Many also do not realize that in Marbury v. Madison, the case that supposedly established the precedent of judicial review, the immediate effect of the decision was to deny power to the Court, but its long-term effect has been to increase the Court’s power by establishing the rule that “it is emphatically the province and duty of the judicial department to say what the law is.”

In other words, Marshall did NOT find for Marbury, saying that he did not have the power to do so. But, by merely ruling, established the absurd precedent (never intended by the Framers) that the Court could overturn laws.

Although the decision temporarily benefited Jefferson, he later condemned judicial review to his dying day.

The larger point, however, is that the Supreme Court is basically a joke, since it is seldom about anything more than politics. Kelo v. New London and Roe v. Wade being two prime examples.

Oh yes, there were some real constitutional decisions of the Court, but that goes back to Schechter, during FDR’s era. Lochner v. New York (1905) was another.

If it were truly about “law”–as some sort of abstract truth concept–then why would it matter the affiliations of those appointed?

BTW–I never claimed to be Black. Not sure where that came from.

You may like the results of Brown or Roe, but there was no “law” involved…

Red Ryder on November 29, 2012 at 10:50 am

    Ryder,

    Are you a graduate of the Bill Clinton School of Word Parsing?

    Of course there was “law” involved. The law was Jim Crow aka gov’t-mandated segregation (“separate but equal”).

    The Plessy decision stated Jim Crow “laws” were constitutional, the Brown case stated it was unconstitutional.

    The Supreme Court doesn’t make laws, it interprets the constitutionality of laws in the cases it hears. The constitution was an imperfect,incomplete document,which left LOTS of room for debate over “interpretation” and mind-reading of what the founding fathers “intentions” were. Thus the very controversial Marbury decision.

    Whatever alleged “psychobabble” used in Brown testimony was irrelevant. The relevant question was if separate but equal was constitutional as far as equal protection under the law.

    As I stated earlier, blacks were denied equal access to public facilities such as schools that they paid for with their tax dollars.

    They were also forced by law to be segregated in private facilities.

    The forced segregation was a violation of their 14th amendment rights.

    Why the states chose to ratify the 14th amendment is also irrelevant. They could have chosen NOT to ratify. The fact they ratified it is all that counts as far the constitution is concerned.

    In my view, precedent is a load of BS. Dred Scott set precedent – BAD precendent, so did Plessy. The ONLY thing that should matter is the constitutionality of the case, not the rulings of previous cases, whether good or bad.

    Along with Dred Scott and Plessy, one of the worst Supreme Court decisions was the 1873 Slaughter House ruling that badly weakened the 14th amendment, and gave states and local governments carte blanche to deny Americans their economic liberty.

    Scott on November 30, 2012 at 12:39 am

      No word parsing. You don’t seem to appreciate that it is all politics, and “law” is just the vehicle. The “law” as interpreted in Plessy was that separate by equal was OK. But then, the politics changed, and gave us Brown.

      You don’t seem to care that the legal “reasoning” in Brown was mostly crapola–as is the reasoning in nearly all Supreme Court cases.

      But, here is how you fail, even as you agree with me:

      You say The ONLY thing that should matter is the constitutionality of the case, not the rulings of previous cases, whether good or bad.

      Exactly–and the “constitutionality” is strictly a matter of the politics of the era.

      What makes a Supreme Court decision “bad” in your view? Simple. It does not fit with your opinion or politics. How can Plessy agree with the 14th and Brown agree with the 14th—and how in the world can the 14th support affirmative action?

      Sooner of later, you will have to admit that judicial review is a bunch of nonsense.

      Red Ryder on November 30, 2012 at 10:02 am

        Ryder,

        Since John Marshall, judicial review is a fact of life, for better or worse, so you’ll have to deal with it. As great as the Constitution was and is, it’s not perfect. Incompleteness and vagueness are two of its largest problems, which leads to questions related to checks and balances including the limits of Supreme Court powers.

        “Politics” can mean several things. It could be personal bias, concern for precedent, the effect on society the ruling may have,etc.

        All jurists are humans not robots, and the laws they interpret in court are written by humans, so the likelihood of politics finding its way into cases is very high, so again you’ll have to deal with it.

        That you stated Brown was “ruinous” but made no mention of the disastrous results of Plessy shows your bigoted bias.

        You also repeatedly complain about modern day affirmative action, but say nothing about the exponentially larger and more disastrous “affirmative action” that took place in the US for more than 200 years.

        Scott on November 30, 2012 at 11:56 pm

      As to:

      “Why the states chose to ratify the 14th amendment is also irrelevant. They could have chosen NOT to ratify. The fact they ratified it is all that counts as far the constitution is concerned.”

      WOW! For someone so in love with the 14th amendment, how can you not care about its sordid history?

      Please. You seem too intelligent to be a Kool-Aid drinker.

      Red Ryder on November 30, 2012 at 10:09 am

        Ryder,

        The term “relevant” is in relation to the Constitution, not necessarily my own view.

        That also applies to the “doll test”, which was also constitutionally irrelevant. The doll test should have had no weight in the decision, and I’m guessing that ultimately it had none. Jim Crow would have been unconstitutional, even if data showed segregated schools had higher academic achievement than integrated ones, which of course they didn’t.

        The bottom line is the 14th amendment exists, so deal with it.

        Scott on November 30, 2012 at 11:11 pm

          Scott–

          You seem to be willfully ignoring the main points here. “Constitutional” is simply a function of the politics of the day. That’s it. There are no high principles here whatsoever—and there probably never were.

          You and I may like the results of Brown, or any other decision, but to hold that a higher principle was involved is absurd.

          You have no problem with the fact that your beloved 14th amendment has been interpreted over the years in completely opposite ways. Separate but equal is fine (Plessy) Not it’s not (Brown) Discrimination is OK (affirmative action)

          It’s all politics.

          More than that, there is no guarantee at all that a “conservative” justice will do the “right” thing. Consider John Roberts and Obamacare!

          As to Lincoln—if you think the Civil War was fought over slavery, you are either woefully ignorant—or to be more charitable—are a product of public education, who never gave a second thought to anything he was taught. The morality he abandoned was the one that would have restrained anyone else from prosecuting total war against his own citizens, and yes, folks, that’s all whole lot worse than chattel slavery.

          Does it bother you even one little bit that

          a) Slavery was on its way out

          b) No other country in the world “needed” to fight a war to end slavery

          Finally, since you seem to have little command of history, you have to resort to calling me a bigot.

          Late me make it REAL simple for you: The result of Brown was fine, but that doesn’t change the fact that it was just the politics of the time. If that makes me a bigot, so be it.

          Am I also a bigot because I’m against abortion, even though it’s the “law”?

          What if Obama decided that everyone had to be an atheist—or they would pay a fine? Thus, he could get around the 1st amendment, and use John Roberts’ precedent on Obamacare to call it a tax.

          The Constitution—like any contract—is only as good as the morality of the parties involved.

          Red Ryder on December 1, 2012 at 1:42 pm

whelp, i gotta plead hypocrite on this one… i liked public enemy and run dmc way back in the 80′s. i never took their lyrics seriously at the time, but now, regretfully, i’m appalled by music, from the 60′s and on, that i used to embrace.

so, who do we conservatives have as a solid candidate for the future??? anyone? buehler?

kirche on November 29, 2012 at 12:51 pm

Marco Rubio is just trying to be cool.

He’s not eligible for POTUS anyhow. He’s not a natural born US citizen. He is a native born US citizen.

lexi on November 29, 2012 at 1:03 pm

Need any more proof that the Supreme Court is a crock? How about this:

Despite the fact that the 14th amendment is cited dozens of times in Supreme Court cases, what could possibly violate this amendment more than Affirmative Action, which has been upheld multiple times by the Court?

Please stop drinking the Kool-Aid.

If the country is to be saved, it will be from our re-adoption of morality, and not by a Constitution, which from its very inception (ever read Article I, Section 8?) gave unlimited power to the federal government.

Once the moral standard was abandoned, by Lincoln, who decided that is was worth hundreds of thousands of lives to keep the country–voluntarily formed–”together” by force, (How’s that workin’ for you, Abe?) the destruction of this nation was just a matter of time.

Red Ryder on November 29, 2012 at 1:33 pm

    Ryder,

    So you’re not a fan of the Constitution, and our only hope is to go back to a previous “morality”. Tell the readers on this website what moral “standard” should be restored that was taken by Lincoln. Slavery perhaps?

    Scott on November 30, 2012 at 10:16 pm

Rubio appears to be spreading himself thin to encompass all bases to catch future votes for political ambitions. Just another media wh@re! Business as usual. . . .

Rochelle on November 29, 2012 at 2:02 pm

WHY DON’T THESE JERKS JUST LIGHT THEM SELVES ON FIRE!!

bruce on November 29, 2012 at 3:50 pm

Yeah, the establishment types are pushing Rubio and … Jeb Bush!

Fortunately, there is some pushback, even on places like Weekly Standard, where the shortfall in the turnout of whites, and specifically white men, has recently been highlighted.

skzion on November 29, 2012 at 4:23 pm

Did you know that Tupac’s stepfather, Mutulu was a Weatherman and Black Panther?

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutulu_Shakur:

“Shakur is the stepfather of late rapper Tupac Shakur, and father of rapper Mopreme Shakur.

and

“On October 20, 1981, after six previous unsuccessful attempts to rob a Brinks truck, Mutulu Shakur and five or six other men succeeded in robbing one, killing one of the Brinks guards. They drove to another location where they transferred the money to a U-Haul truck driven by Kathy Boudin and her husband David Gilbert. However, the transfer was seen and called in to the police, who set up a roadblock at the Tappan Zee Bridge. A shootout occurred in which two Nyack policemen were killed and Boudin was captured.

In the 1980s, he was arrested on Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) charges of bank robbery and aiding his sister, Assata Shakur, in her escape from prison on November 2, 1979. While at large, on July 23, 1982 he became the 380th person added by the FBI to the Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list. He was arrested February 11, 1986 in California and was subsequently found guilty of taking part in the armored-truck robbery and the prison escape. Shakur is to be released in 2016?

The rapper Common who was the esteemed guest at the White House last week, rapped about Assata Shakur who escaped with the help of Tupac’s stepfather. She now lives in Cuba.
Guess who else was involved in the Weathermen? Obama’s friends and mentor and ghost writer of his books, Billy Ayers and his wife Bernadine Dohrn.

They are all connected. They are all Commies. We may have an ex Weatherman in the White House.

See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brink%27s_robbery_%281981%29

How did Nathaniel Burns now aka Sekou Odinga, involved in the same Brink’s robbery, now serving a life sentence for murder, know about the name Odinga (the surname of Obama’s family and especially his cousin Raila Odinga from Kenya? HE HAD TO HAVE KNOWN OBAMA since this was pre-internet days and he would nOT have known about Odinga then. I’m pretty sure Obama was involved-he may even have been present at that robbery since several of the robbers/murderers were never caught. Is that why Obama hates cops so much?

charlotte on November 29, 2012 at 7:44 pm

We need a party like the Loyalist Party that was there for a bit, dedicated to combatting Islam. Their non-Islamic agenda looked reasonably conservative.

Infidel on December 1, 2012 at 9:42 am

Hey There. I found your blog using msn. This is an extremely neatly written article.

I will make sure to bookmark it and come back to learn more of your helpful info.
Thanks for the post. I’ll certainly comeback.

more about on March 6, 2013 at 5:48 am

People should listen to good wholesome black music like Milli Vanilli.

Lee on February 14, 2014 at 10:25 pm

Muchos Gracias for your blog post. aecgcdkcedfd

Johne651 on April 30, 2014 at 10:08 am

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field