“You have enemies? Good. That means you’ve stood up for something, sometime in your life.” – Winston Churchill
Churchill never had the opportunity to meet Marco Rubio, but I believe he would have felt a kinship with my Senator. Today, Reuters joined the unholy alliance of jokers and schemers who have been engaged in a vicious quest to smear the name of Marco Rubio in the eyes of the American public, and specifically in the Hispanic community.
First, there was the controversy with what appeared to be an attempt by Univision to extort Rubio into appearing on their liberal Al Punto show by running a decades-old story about his brother-in-law (see my posts here and here, and Marc Caputo’s Miami Herald post here). Then we had another admittedly liberal writer at the Washington Post attacking Rubio’s family history – by implying Rubio had made claims that he never had, and by completely ignoring what Rubio had actually said, not to mention ignoring actual facts about Cuban history (see my posts here and here).
Now, today, the latest wretched pile of bovine excrement was delivered in an article by David Adams titled, “Florida’s Rubio a star, but an unlikely VP pick.”
This article goes beyond mere misrepresentation and innuendo. I am willing to be so bold as to flat out call them lies. (Reuters: please try to sue me on this. I will have so much fun defending that statement. Bring it.) I had started on the long list of viciously falselies in this article, but Matt K. Lewis at the Daily Caller beat me to it, and he did an excellent job. Lewis does such a brutal fact-check on David Adams, that I’m almost inclined to call it a fact-colonoscopy.
Off the bat, I noticed that Adams accused Rubio of voting against ObamaCare and against the confirmation of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor – both of which happened well before Rubio was sworn into the Senate in January 2011. Adams also throws multiple allegations of financial improprieties at Rubio, many of which Lewis easily debunks as well.
[Note: as I have been typing this, I see that Adams has made some small corrections to his article, but as of 12:30 pm today, he still makes the accusation that Rubio voted on ObamaCare and Sotomayor's confirmation. Come on, dude, when a quick Wikipedia search can prove you're a lying twit, you really have no defense.]
A key point from Lewis’ article about the philosophy underlying these nasty personal attacks on Rubio:
Aside from the inaccuracies, it is interesting to note that Rubio’s debt is seen as a liability. Mitt Romney is frequently criticized by the media for being so wealthy that he’s out of touch with the common man. Meanwhile,Rubio — like most Americans — has faced financial difficulty — and yet that is also somehow a liability?Is there a magic amount of wealth that is just right?
Finally, a source pointed me towards some information this afternoon that may just be the ribbon that ties this whole ugly package together:
David Adams, the writer who concocted that pack of lies to publish on Reuter’s website (yes, I am going to keep calling them lies), is the Editor of the U.S. and Miami editions of PODER Magazine, which publishes throughout the U.S., Mexico, and Latin America.
Well, guess who was the founding partner and original Editor-in-Chief of PODER Magazine?
Isaac Lee, the current President of News for Univision.