Skip to main content

In Praise Of Marco Rubio

If this is the end for him, I wanted people to know all along why I have so vocally supported him. Firstly, and most importantly, he's completely pro-life/anti-abortion. It took a tremendous amount of guts to go on 60 Minutes and other places and say he didn't believe in exceptions, because that's a person we kill, and there is no "sweet spot," morally or otherwise, in that case.

Secondly, I think that, if we as a party have decided that the minimum wage cannot or should not be raised (which I believe is morally dubious, mind you) the only thing close to a defensible compromise position would be tax credits aimed right at married families, and that's what Rubio has suggested. Senator Paul may be right that it will be very expensive. Ideologues may well be correct that it's a clever redistribution tool, to give money to people who haven't paid it in taxes. Well, yes. If the economic hazards of the marginal working-class are such that emerging from it is almost pure luck, we have reached the point where fretting about "welfare spending" is just so much noise. Philosophically, we cannot assume that the general welfare or the common good is served by the increase of profit by itself. That position is no more defensible than to assert that government alone is the engine of economic progress. I can at least appreciate Sen. Rubio's rhetorical questions to the effect that his bartender father and hotel maid mother couldn't make it in America today. But we're not socialists, now, or ever.

In fact, the gravest crime against the people with the president's health care law is not that it should be the beginning step toward basic health care and preventative medicine, regardless of economic situation, but that it does so on immoral terms. So long as abortion and abortifacients are argued to be so urgently necessary that the United States government must compel citizens to participate as customers and subsidizers--and against the free exercise clause of the First Amendment!--our government is arguing appalling absurdity. To be immoral and ineffective, that should be the worst outcome in public policy, but it hasn't been. Yes, repeal it, and quickly.

Thirdly, I trust Marco Rubio to at least appoint judges who will not attack the free exercise of religion, traditional values, or federalism at the earliest opportunity. I don't look for judges who will always give me what I want. I want a Supreme Court where I barely know their names.

Fourthly, he's right on his weakest issue vulnerability: immigration. He's been right the whole time. There absolutely is a happy medium between outsiders streaming across the border looking for free stuff, and treating Mexican immigrants and others as subhuman outsiders. I'm tired of pandering to immoral, thoughtless nativists. If that makes me "establishment," good. I haven't heard a good, honest argument against being downright "liberal" on this. We will never end birthright citizenship, and we never should. And that's the beginning of what we ought to do.

Finally, I still believe he could easily win a general election. I don't think Cruz will. It's that simple. And no amount of hectoring about neoconservative cabals changes that. You can't fake the ability to connect with people. Marco Rubio inspires people, left, right, and center. I'm well to his left, and I'd be thrilled to back him. That's all there is to know.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

We Don't Need No Magisterium: (Jason's Version) (But Actually, We Do)

Hilarious Com-Box Quote of The Day: "I was caught immediately because it is the Acts of the Apostles, not the Acts of the Holy Spirit Acting Erratically."--Donald Todd, reacting to the inartful opposition of the Holy Spirit and the Magisterium. Mark Galli, an editor at Christianity Today, had suggested that today's "confusion" in evangelicalism replicates a confusion on the day of Pentecost. Mr. Todd commented after this reply , and the original article is here. My thoughts: By what means was this Church-less "consensus" formed? If the Council did not possess the authority to adjudicate such questions, who does? If the Council Fathers did not intend to be the arbiters, why do they say that they do? At the risk of being rude, I would define evangelicalism as, "Whatever I want or need to believe at any particular time." Ecclesial authority to settle a particular question is a step forward, but only as long as, "God alone is Lord of the con...

Who Is Out Here Having Sex And Children With People They Don’t Like?

 And look, I’m not married. I’ve never been married. I have no children. I didn’t choose that; things just worked out that way. If you must know, I haven’t had sexual intercourse either. I probably should say “coitus,” so I am not arguing with some progressive activist about what “sexual intercourse” means. But I figured out from influencer videos or something what a “dead bedroom” was. Unless a couple mutually agrees that they don’t want to have sex/coitus anymore (hopefully to pray and serve) this is usually bad. I’ve known enough couples that it’s probably an indicator of trouble, especially for couples who are still able to have children. Is it really that wild to at least hope that Mr. and Mrs. Vance love each other? That a fourth child yet born at least might indicate that they enjoy each other?  Children are definitely not responsible for their parents’ happiness. That’s absolutely true. But wouldn’t any child hope their parents were happy, when they came into being? As...

What I Should Have Said

 I was functionally fired from my teaching job in November, 2024, after an unjust administrative "process" initiated by HR , and triggered by false accusations the content of which I was never told. My "defense" therefore could have no reasonable basis or direction. I won't say the name of the Local Education Agency, but the town where I lived and worked was Cheraw, South Carolina. I think that once I was on administrative leave, they could use nearly any indiscretion of mine as the final straw to remove me. I did connect with students on social media in protest, and I did express hope that I would quickly be returned to the classroom. The principal of the high school where I worked--a true lackey of the bureaucracy, and fully committed to educational ideas, methods, and solutions that don't work--also allowed his personal dislike of me to take the form of a belief that I was a substandard teacher. He gave me an unsatisfactory review on October 12, and we ha...