Marco Rubio is Definitely Not a Scientist. Man.

My Tuesday column. Marco Rubio and the continued Republican refusal to accept science.

You might recall how Bobby Jindal suggested that Republicans should stop dumbing themselves down. I used this quote in yesterday’s column, but it bears repeating: “It is no secret we had a number of Republicans damage our brand this year with offensive, bizarre comments — enough of that. It’s not going to be the last time anyone says something stupid within our party, but it can’t be tolerated within our party. We’ve also had enough of this dumbed-down conservatism. We need to stop being simplistic, we need to trust the intelligence of the American people and we need to stop insulting the intelligence of the voters.”

Perhaps Senator Marco Rubio (R-FL), the first Republican to formally court Iowa in preparation for 2016, should’ve taken Jindal more seriously. Yesterday, GQ‘s Michael Hainey published an interview awith Rubio in which he asked the senator the seemingly non-sequitur question: “How old do you think the Earth is?”

Rubio’s answered, “I’m not a scientist, man. I can tell you what recorded history says, I can tell you what the Bible says, but I think that’s a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States…” [continued]

Print Friendly
This entry was posted in The Daily Banter and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • agrazingmoose

    I have “multiple theories” regarding how Rubio managed to graduate high school.

  • eljefejeff

    “We should at least expect our elected leaders to concede the value, existence and empiricism of science, irrespective of party or ideological persuasion.”

    But….but….conservatives tell me that scientists at East Anglia employed commonly-used shady tactics to get extra grant money, so obviously the flat earth is 7 days old

  • joseph2004

    Most people in this country are not scientists.
    Just say’in.

    Rubio has said that the Evolution/Creationism debate has nothing to do with jobs and the economy. The only way this is going to be “an issue” going forward is if Democrats and hacks like Cesca make it one, to the detriment of the larger issues facing the country.
    And leave it to the far left to ignore some simple facts, one of which is that there are plenty of liberal church-goers who are evolution “deniers” or skeptics – it’s not just a Right Wing phenomenon – and that a number of minorities, for whom the Left claims to speak, index high in the so-called science “refusers” category, at least on this topic.
    You tread this way at your peril.

    I had thought for a long time that the “Cescan” universe was an isolated one, but with this latest election, it appears that at least from the perspective of rhetoric, the mainstream Democratic Party has itself adopted a similar approach. Fabrication and amplification was one of the most successful of tactics Democrats used in this last election. The “War on Women” The “Rich people are shady” and so on – all bullshit. How is it that vast swaths of 18-30 year old women in this country came to believe that Mitt Romney was going to take away their birth control? It wasn’t anything Romney said.

    Such is the superficial and ignorant nature of much of our electorate. They don’t understand what’s going on. Some time ago I lamented that the Citizens United decision was only an issue for this very reason. Too many people in this country are susceptible to simple sound bytes.

    It’s interesting when listening to people interviewed on the street about how they see one party or the other. Most often, they echo the latest media-driven talking point, practically verbatum. “I just wish there wasn’t so much gridlock.” “The Republicans are taking people hostage.” “Barack Obama is a Muslim.”

    Ha Ha Ha Ha.

    Michelle Obama goes on the campaign trail reminiscing about her early years with “Barack,” being most impressed, she says, with his “honesty.” In 2007 “Barack,” then in the US Senate, gave a speech before a mostly Black crowd in which he lied through his teeth on the topic of Federal Disaster Relief aid for New Orleans, and his role. He said New Orleans and its largely Black population were being ignored, treated as outsiders, and that congress thought of them as non-Americans. Whooping it up.

    Barack Obama has no loyalties. His “gift” has been in orating to an ignorant audience, Black or White or Brown, an audience that focuses on his “performance,” not his words or deeds. “Community organizer”? Try slum lord defender. Michelle Obama? Patient dumping schemes. But never fear, says the President, “You know you can trust me!” Bill Clinton gets before a crowd and accuses Mitt Romney of being untrustworthy – irony of ironies. And people “believe” him.

    Ha Ha Ha Ha.

    What is good for the country isn’t the issue anymore. It’s put downs, take downs, zingers, ugly tweets – who can lie the most and get away with it – it’s partisanship and snark.

    Enough.

    http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell101112.php3

    • BuffaloBuckeye

      That is a lot of bandwidth to say nothin’. Thanks for stopping by.

      • 1933john

        For some reason I get the impression that Joe really does
        not care for people who are not white. I really can’t pin it down.
        He is a fairly smooth writing bullshit artist with his head
        screwed on backwards.
        Other than that, he might be OK.

        • Victor_the_Crab

          Don’t you mean his head up his own ass?

        • BuffaloBuckeye

          Not sure I see anything in his comment that would qualify him as “OK”.

    • muchrejoicing

      I stopped reading after a while. One thing stuck out – you said Mitt never said he’d take away birth control, and that the war on women is false. When every other Republican spokesman says it, and when Mitt says Obamacare will be repealed, that’s how we know. When Mitt doesn’t say “no no no that’s crazy!”, that’s how we know.

      The Republicans lost this election on social issues. The country doesn’t trust old white men with women or minorities anymore.

      Oh and I looove the Bill Clinton thing. That’s been going around – must have been a Fox talking point. Bill lied about sex. Most people would too. Big deal. Bush lied about WMDs. Mitt changed his mind (lied?) about almost everything he said. I’d trust Clinton with my (imaginary) daughter before I’d trust W or Mitt. W would send her to war, Mitt would relegate her to second class status as a trophy wife.

      (I know I know, don’t feed the troll…)

      • D_C_Wilson

        Mitt did say he’d sign a personhood bill, which would outlaw many common forms of birth control.

    • gescove

      “Most people are not scientists” is no excuse for scientific illiteracy. It is reasonable to expect a member of the US Senate to have a passing familiarity with the scientific consensus that the Earth is about 4.5 billion years old. It is also essential that lawmakers understand the line between science and faith. Otherwise they risk running afoul of the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment.

    • i_a_c

      Say it ain’t so, Joe, there you go again.

    • http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Norris/1597765442 Michael Norris

      Holy shit…I use a lot of words in my postings…and I know that. But damn…

    • Brutlyhonest

      You’re back? I had hoped you became despondent after the election and had put yourself out of your misery.

      • Victor_the_Crab

        He tried to put a bullet through his head, but, you know, in through one ear and out the other.

    • D_C_Wilson

      What is good for the country isn’t the issue anymore. It’s put downs, take downs, zingers, ugly tweets – who can lie the most and get away with it – it’s partisanship and snark.

      But you didn’t have to preface that conclusion with ten paragraphs that illustrated that point.

    • Victor_the_Crab

      Oh look, our resident troll is back after the elections. Nice to hear from you again, JoeyCrybaby. Looking forward to getting your ignorant head smacked around again, I see. Well, we aims to please!

  • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

    “but I think that’s a dispute amongst theologians and I think it has nothing to do with the gross domestic product or economic growth of the United States…”

    Neither does the price of beans in Mexico. Anybody know WTF he was talking about?

  • http://www.facebook.com/people/Michael-Norris/1597765442 Michael Norris

    Sound thologians are not in dispute about the age of the earth. When asked the same question Rubio was asked, the serious theologian might respond, “How the hell would I know…ask a geologist.”

  • MrDHalen

    What really “grinds my gears”, are people who poo poo science and scream “We just don’t know!!!” at the top of their lungs. They should not be allowed to use technology created via science. No cell phones, GPS, or computers etc.

    You don’t believe in science, then stop using its creations.

    • D_C_Wilson

      What kills me is when they exclaim “we just don’t know” whenever scientists are unable to say something is a fact with 100% certainty. For example, scientists can say that we are 98% certain that global warming is caused by human activity, but they’ll jump on the remaining two percent and say, “It must not be true!”.

      But if you had a 98% chance of winning a bet, most people would take those odds. But if we’re “only” 98% certain about climate change, they’d rather bet on the 2%.

      • MrDHalen

        Tell them to stand in a barrel of gasoline and drop a lit match in it. Now there is a 2% chance it won’t ignite, but scientist say there is 98% chance it will. Now tell me “we just don’t know” and we can find out together.

    • muchrejoicing

      I’d be fine with them saying “we just don’t know” if they 1) didn’t violently oppose any scientific theories or scientific research or proof and 2) didn’t insist that their non-scientific theory was THE RIGHT ONE

  • muselet

    I think everyone, from the copy editors at GQ onward, has mistaken what Marco Rubio was really saying in the first sentence of his answer.

    He didn’t say, “I’m not a scientist, man,” he actually said, “I’m not a scientist man.” It’s the secular equivalent of “preacher man,” as mentioned in the famous song.

    This doesn’t make Marco Rubio any less of a nitwit, it just means he’s a nitwit pandering to an urban (and we all know what that means, wink wink) demographic rather than an incoherent nitwit.

    –alopecia