Senator Rubio (R-Fla.) will give the Republican response to President Obama’s State of the Union address. He will do so in both English and Spanish.

Not everyone will be so pleased, this Twitter user suspects.

https://twitter.com/TiredmamainNC/status/299260927616905216

And, so it begins.

https://twitter.com/Sarabellah/status/299261682117660672

Contemptible. And sadly predictable. Scratch a leftist and you’ll find a racist, every time.

Update: It continues.

https://twitter.com/fpmora/status/299290140818411522

  • https://twitter.com/tweetyuo Tangchung

    Be nice liberals, he might be your next daddy.

    • rinodino

      As long as your remember who was your first daddy is.. Obama brought the tea party into this world and he can take you out

      • https://twitter.com/tweetyuo Tangchung

        Step away from the Mogen David 20-20

      • KansasGirl

        “As long as your remember who was your first daddy is” lol
        Keep trying, I’m rooting for you.

        • rinodino

          Can you blame me? I was educated or edumicated under the bush years

          • Zanshi

            By a proud Democrat public school teacher spouting the evils of Bush, no doubt.

          • 3seven77

            And just think, schools were better back then.

          • Lady 12

            Yeah, so was I, and your comment is still stupid.

          • KansasGirl

            Bless your heart.
            You remind of Al Sharpton’s flailing thought, “Resist we much, we must and we will much about that be committed”. 😉

  • HindaRifka

    But when the Libs trotted out Julian Castro and his twin brother at the DNC, that wasn’t pandering? They’re so clueless they don’t even see the hypocrisy, do they?

    • EastValleyConservative

      No….it’s not hypocrisy to them, because they believe they are owed every minority’s automatic allegience. It’s more of a “how DARE you steal my tools?” thing.

    • Jamoni Wench

      Remember who the libs originally trotted out. They may want to be careful on this one. Their “token” became President. So following their logic, they may want to start saying “President Rubio”.

  • NachoCheese (D)

    Blatant racism from “tolerant” liberals? Oh that’s right, it’s a day that ends in “y”.

  • NachoCheese (D)

    Autumn Young
    @atumns
    marco rubio isn’t even mexican omfg why are the republicans trying to use him as their token mexican

    —-

    This statement is idiotic. As if only “Mexicans” in this country speak spanish.

    • Bristel

      Yeah, Rubio is Cuban-American. Although the lefty couldn’t research a little bit before opening her trap revealing her prejudices.

      • reneehaigh

        i like it: you are speaking like an anti ism!! try to tell those people that and they are so STUPID! a squirrel is smarter: at least they know when to keep their feet on the branch! Rush Limbo calls it like it is: low information voters!!

        • Bristel

          I believe I was agreeing with the sentiment of NachoCheese’s ironic statement. 😉

    • Mellow Melon

      tell me about it. I have a white friend and black friend, both of whom grew up in Spanish-speaking areas (San Antone & Puerto Rico) and speak the language beautifully.

    • reneehaigh

      the republicans NEVER said he was mexican: I do believe the term is called HISPANIC do your homework before you spew ass gas from your lips!

      • NachoCheese (D)

        Reading comprehension not your strong suit?

        I was quoting one of the tweets then commenting on it jackass.

  • michael s

    But it was pandering when sotomayor swore in Biden. Same thing applies here.

  • John (it true me am)

    Fun Fact for Progressives: “Hispanics” are not a singular voting bloc but are instead heavily influenced by country of familial origin and the time at which they emigrated. A Cuban-American being Republican isn’t token, it’s the damn average. (As are those who fled from South American dictatorships during the Cold War.)

    Their usage of “Mexican” is also absurd if not simply itself racist as most people who come here *through* Mexico are in fact not Mexican… Pure ignorance.

  • Bryan

    If he’s a token anything, it’s a token democrat. Say “hello” to the new Arlen Specter. Marco only enjoys hearing about how great he is–sound familiar? He isn’t qualified to be POTUS for the same reasons Barack isn’t qualified to be POTUS. Last time I checked, English is the official language in the United States–even Harry Reid agrees. This does appear to be pandering.

    • Mellow Melon

      oh take a chill pill bro. And so long as Obama was indeed born in Hawaii, they are both completely qualified. It makes no sense for a child born on U.S. soil to not be allowed to be a citizen just because their parents aren’t.

      • NachoCheese (D)

        “It makes no sense for a child born on U.S. soil to not be allowed to be a citizen just because their parents aren’t.”

        No other industrialized country in the world has that as a part of their birthright citizenship laws. All, as in every single one, requires that at least one parent be a citizen.

        • John (it true me am)

          It’s not fair to define or criticise based on what other countries do or don’t do. I don’t care to adopt their gun laws, why should we care to copy their natural born citizenship requirements?

          We do not live in a country that we force upon the child the sins of the parents, and that is not a road I wish to travel. Rubio along with countless others are all legally natural born American citizens and there is no reason to change those requirements simply as a kneejerk reaction to how terrible our border enforcement and immigration laws are. In fact if we dealt with said enforcement and regulated immigration like we are supposed to, the citizenship by birth issue wouldn’t even be a blip on the radar(and it’s barely one now).

          Remember these other “industrialized countries” are countries often obssessed with bloodlines and lineage, who maintain concepts of royalty and nobility. Such countries, be they an Islamic “Republic” or the U.K. itself they place a value on birthright almost solely on heritage that the U.S. soundly rejected upon its formation. Requiring parental citizenship and what it would entail is simply a step back in the direction our founders quite literally fled. It would an unfair blow to those such as who we consider modern first and second generation Americans being true Americans in the future.

          • Mellow Melon

            Thanks John. I agree with this – your citizenship should not depend upon others. You should be a citizen because of yourself, not because of other people. And plus, imagine all the unsavory characters that could bring in. Imagine that someone brought up in a militant Muslim country like Iran had been born to American parents. That would make him eligible for the presidency, and yet we would not want someone who had been raised in a culture that is antagonistic to our values to lead our country, would we?

          • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ Penny Robinson Fan Club

            Or Indonesia?

          • Mellow Melon

            It wasn’t Indonesia that was the true problem. The problem was that when Obama was being raised at all, he was being raised by radical leftists who entertained the thought of communism: his grandparents, his mother, Frank Marshall Davis, and later Harvard. Because no one was there to help confirm his identity as a person rather than a color, he crafted one for himself in the idea of “blackness”; unfortunately, this led him to harbor excessive antagonism towards whites, and so he gravitated towards people who would help confirm this view. Worse, Obama was a baby in Indonesia – couldn’t remember culture. But he could remember in Hawaii, and Hawaii is not known for being pro-America. So it really wasn’t Indonesia that was the cause of his antagonistic attitudes towards America today.

          • reneehaigh

            i remember the day when if you even mentioned the word “communist” they took you away for a long time: now a days us citizens know a little too much about CIA and ops that keep our country secure: they give a little too much away! it is certain a lot of dangerous countries know “OUR” business: security and financially: there needs to be more control on the reins and less news clips!

          • kssturgis62

            He is NOT Natural Born, He was just born in the USA, and is a Citizen. But Natural Born is so different and THE FOUNDERS OF THIS NATION FOLLOWED VATTELS LAW OF NATIONS and John Jay wrote to Washington and Said this needs to put in the Constitution, and therefore you WILL NOT HAVE FOREIGN INFLUENCE OVER OUR MILITARY.

            You think about the Push for Illegal Immigration, what Obama is doing with our Foreign Policy and Military, WHAT COUNTRY ARE THEY BEHOLDEN TO, it is not the USA. for someone Who is not interested in following Foreign Law and what they have, your really pushing what they have over the GREATNESS of what we have.

            RUBIO IS NOT NATURAL BORN AND THEREFORE NOT QUALIFIED.

            Rubio is a PAWN pushed in your face, he is NOT conservative, and he is John McCain and Lindsey Graham.

          • John (it true me am)

            Born: Marco Antonio Rubio
            May 28, 1971 (age 41)
            Miami, Florida, U.S.

            Miami, FL. So yes. He’s natural born. That is the DEFINITION of natural born. You can’t change the definition of something just because you disagree with it. That’s progressive tactics 101, and anyone on the right who plays that game is no better than they are.

            You are falling into conspiracy theory territory with your Jay quote, and any even casual checking into the matter shows that he never defined his desires. You are putting words into his mouth based on your own desires. Or probably the projection of an e-mail you read somewhere during the birther debate. These are in fact the talking points of the conspiracy theorists who weren’t happy with a simple “Obama wasn’t born in Hawaii”(which I do believe was a legitimate query at the time) but that wanted to hedge their bets with “Even if Obama was born in Hawaii”.

            Bottom line: If you want to advocate for a change in the citizenship requirements, that’s one thing. That doesn’t make Rubio any less of a natural born citizen in the meanwhile.

          • kssturgis62

            no he is NOT Natural Born, His Parents were NOT Citizens when he was BORN. Natural Born your parents are NOT beholden to any other country – his parents had to be citizens for him to be Natural born. I am not a Conspiracy Theorist, but I will not promote another Nominee who is Not Qualified. Quit inserting the 14th Amendment into your argument. Quit saying Illegals Anchor babies can be Potus, quit Saying that Ahmandenijad can get a girl pregnant here and as long as the baby was born here it is eligible. That is what your saying. rubio is not eligible just because he was born in the USA and HE KNOWS IT.

          • kssturgis62

            Article II refers to a “natural born Citizen,” but does not define it. In fact, the definition of a “natural born Citizen” is not found anywhere in the original or amended Constitution or any Act of Congress. Rather, it is found in the common law upon which the Founders and Framers relied at the time of the adoption and ratification of the Constitution. Under this common law, the three constituent elements of being a “natural-born citizen” are time (at the moment of birth), birth place (in the country), and birth parents (U.S. citizen parents), what I will call birth time, birth country, and birth parents. See Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) (the unanimous U.S. Supreme Court explained that the definition of a “natural-born citizen” is not found in the Constitution and confirmed that “[a]t common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners”); United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 679-80 (1898) (the majority and dissent agreed on the Minordefinition of a “natural-born citizen,” but they disagreed as to the definition of a Fourteenth Amendment “citizen of the United States” at birth). Given this settled common law definition of a “natural born Citizen,” these elements are both necessary and sufficient to make a “natural born Citizen.” In the definition, the parents have to have as a minimum the status of a “citizen” (“born citizen” or “natural born Citizen” is not necessary) in order to produce a “natural born Citizen.” Note that Minor said that at common law, if one was not a “natural-born citizen,” one was an alien or foreigner. This means that if these persons qualified, the Fourteenth Amendment, Act of Congress, or treaty could make them a “citizen of the United States.”

            http://puzo1.blogspot.ca/

          • John (it true me am)

            You put forth a long winded collection of suppositions and dissentions based on the lack of strict definition in the constitution. What you completely neglect are the countless number of cases that have for over a century that have held the definition as anyone born on U.S. soil as settled law from judgements across the political spectrum. You cite what are in essence lone voices in the grand scheme of thing in the midst of otherwise overwhelming agreement.

            The simple fact is this. Under the current legal requirement for being a natural born citizen, Rubio is one. So just drop the twofer routine, it makes the rest of us look bad.

          • kssturgis62

            The number of Supreme Court Cases is 6 – the Most Famous Minor V Happersett which was a voting Rights Case, IN WHICH THE SUPREME COURT SAID AGAIN 2 Citizen Parents to BE NATURAL BORN. I love my country and My Constitution, but i suggest if your on Facebook, Visit Ulsterman’s page, and Visit Marco Rubio’s page, the guy is GETTING HAMMERED, you ARE all so out of touch. Rutgers did a Great Study, Then Byron York of the Wall Street Journal wrote a Great Article about the Study, RUBIO is not what he claims to be or what he says, and AMERICANS are slow to anger they have had enough.

            Why don’t you talk to the Tea Party People in Florida, Ask them how upset they are With Rubio. Go to the Right Scoops Page and look how he posts about Rubio, He isn’t going to win, if he does win it will be because of ILLEGALS. Because it isn’t going to be because of conservatives like me voting for him.

            If you People Want to call me a BIRTHER go for it, I don’t care. RUBIO knows he doesn’t qualify, Jindall Admitted to it, and YOU WANT TO TWIST THE 14th amendment into the NBC Qualification. IF Congress Thought the 14th amendment FIXED The NBC qualification WHY ARE THEY PROPOSING BILLS TO CHANGE IT !! WAKE UP. This is your Constitution, and Do a little Research. I have been on this for over 6 years. Do you know there are 7 Presidents that People have Questioned about the NBC Qualification. Do you know anything about Chester Arthur and how HE BURNED EVERYTHING TO COVER UP. Arthur and Obama are the 2 with the problem. NOT QUALIFIED NEITHER OF THEM. Now you guys are So willing to anoint a King you would pick a LIBERAL LIAR LIKE RUBIO TO BE YOUR KING. I thought the Destruction of the USA was only on the the Liberal Side, the more i see the Destruction is on the GOP side, and the So called Patriots are melding with Liberals. Yet they say they think for themselves.

          • John (it true me am)

            I was wondering when Chester A Arthur would pop up.

            This is the same sort of crap the sovreign citizen types use. Like I said, it has been accepted and settled law for 99.99999999% of the country for over a century. Just because you want to twist technical phrasing to suit your opinion doesn’t change the clear intent of that phrasing.

          • kssturgis62

            It hasn’t been settled. It is not for 99.999999999999% of the country. No one is twisting anything here but you.

            The Founders were Clear, the Letter from John Jay to Washington is Clear, The Founders Used Vattals law of nations. the 14th amendment is not a replacement for the NBC requirement.

            So you keep pushing that John, It is fine. You just Remember your the one now Saying that all Illegals Anchor babies can be President. Your the One now saying that Osama Bin Laden, and Ahmadenejad could both get a girl pregnant here, she can have that baby and they can be President.

            Because after all what your saying is ALL PEOPLE BORN IN THE USA ARE NATURAL BORN. Your setting a VERY DANGEROUS PRECEDENT. The founders Warned us about Foreign Influence over our Military, we see that with Obama now.

          • John (it true me am)

            Oh come on. I’m not setting precedent, that precedent was set long, long ago. You yourself mentioned Arthur.

            Foreign influence is handled as a combination of things, not just whether or not someone was born here. It is simply one of many facets of it.

            You act as though having a twofer policy eliminates foreign influence, but the notion is simply absurd. You are looking for a technicality used during the elections as an attack on Obama which is being carried over now to Rubio. It is opportunism, plain and simple.

            The far more pertinent requirement is extended residence as far as foreign influence goes.

            The burden is on the people to reject foreign influence, not on the legal defining of citizenship.

            You know the funny thing about letter from Jay to Washington? Jay was offering his opinion to Washington. By the very nature of the lack of explicit references, Washington and others clearly dismissed Jay’s letter.

            As for the 14th amendment, I’m going to be lazy and copy/paste some wiki because it is 5 am and I shouldn’t be taking time to reply right now. “However, concerning children born in the United States to parents who are not U.S. citizens (and not foreign diplomats), three Senators, including Senate Judiciary Committee Chairman Lyman Trumbull, the author of the Civil Rights Act, as well as President Andrew Johnson, asserted that both the Civil Rights Act and the Fourteenth Amendment would confer citizenship on them at birth, and no Senator offered a contrary opinion.”

            And to finish off, regarding anchor babies… You are woefully misrepresenting the situation. These aren’t the children of cold war era deep cover KGB agents, growing up in suburbia but kids usually returning to their parents’ home countries and being raised in that culture. What scenario are you picturing that they return to the U.S. down the line and winning a presidential election?

            Anchor babies also heavily play into that whole if immigration were properly enforced to begin with thing this wouldn’t even remotely be an issue even worth a casual mention that I refered to a few posts ago. Symptom, disease, etc, etc.

            Besides, when all is said and done, I’m a meritocratist. If someone’s parents use them as an anchor baby and that baby grows up to be a man worthy of being President, what’s the problem? I’d rather have a competent anchor baby than another bumbling Mayflower family heir.

            Obama is a nightmare, no doubt about it. But it has nothing to do with his father’s legal status and never has. Or do you think we’d somehow be better off just because idiots voted for someone identical to him(of which there are score upon score) whose father did happen to hold citizenship?

            I also have to question the notion of Obama being equated with foreign influence. Foreign influence refers to people who are essentially agents of or beholden to other governments. (Well, putting aside those nasty foreign donations anyway, but speaking specifically of his birth and upbringing as per the topic.) The founders were warning about being made a puppet state, not the Obamas of the world. These morons who are sympathetic to the wrong people(Muslim world usually but of course also the North Korea types) aren’t evidence of foreign influence but of shear idiocy.

            God, please stop making me defend Obama even a little, I just threw up in the back of mouth.

            (As soon as I posted this I noticed it looked a little disjointed and out of order, but as it is now 5:20 AM I’m just going to leave it be before making it worse.)

          • kssturgis62

            Anchor babies also heavily play into that whole if immigration were properly enforced to begin with thing this wouldn’t even remotely be an issue even worth a casual mention that I refered to a few posts ago. Symptom, disease, etc, etc.

            Besides, when all is said and done, I’m a meritocratist. If someone’s parents use them as an anchor baby and that baby grows up to be a man worthy of being President, what’s the problem?

            OH NO THERE COULDN’T POSSIBLY BE ANY PROBLEM NOW COULD THERE> You just keep on touting that line. And I said there were two people with issues, Chester arthur and Obama. You seem to think you know History. I found out about Arthur on the History Channel that is what made me look into it starting at his library. it is there at HIS LIBRARY, pay it a VISIT.

            But you go ahead and you advocate for those Foreigners to be in control and at the same time I will Call you the HYPOCRITE YOU ARE> Go join the Liberals your doing a fine job of Representing them here. Because YOU JUST SAID YOU DO NOT CARE. So Tell me again how you Love your Constitution.

          • kssturgis62

            Here is a Little More Education for you John. IT still amazes me that people who say they love their Country and Constitution, do NOT DO THE HOMEWORK to make sure that the Documents they love so dearly and want to remain in tact.

            Article I, §8, cl. 4 delegates to Congress the power “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization”.6 Pursuant to that power, the First Congress passed the Naturalization Act of 1790. Here is the text, which you can find at 1 Stat. at Large, 103:

            “SECTION1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any alien, being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof, on application to any common law court of record, in any one of the states wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such court, that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law, to support the constitution of the United States, which oath or affirmation such court shall administer; and the clerk of such court shall record such application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a citizen of the United States. And the children of such persons so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty-one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States … APPROVED, March 26, 1790.” 7

            So! This Act of the First Congress implements the Principles set forth in Vattel, embraced by our Framers, and enshrined in Art. II, §1, cl. 5, that:

            A “natural born Citizen” is one who is born of parents who are citizens.

            Minor children born here of aliens do not become citizens until their parents are naturalized. Thus, they are not “natural born” citizens.

            Our Framers rejected the anti-republican and feudal notion that mere location of birth within a Country naturalizes the children of a foreigner. 8

            The distinction written into Our Constitution and implemented by the Naturalization Act of 1790 is between someone who is borna citizen, by being born of parents who are already Citizens, and someone who becomes a citizen after birth by naturalization. Only the former are eligible to be President.

            http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=226

          • kssturgis62

            Here is a Little More Education for you John. IT still amazes me that people who say they love their Country and Constitution, do NOT DO THE HOMEWORK to make sure that the Documents they love so dearly and want to remain in tact.

            Article I, §8, cl. 4 delegates to Congress the power “To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization”.6 Pursuant to that power, the First Congress passed the Naturalization Act of 1790. Here is the text, which you can find at 1 Stat. at Large, 103:

            “SECTION1. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any alien, being a free white person, who shall have resided within the limits and under the jurisdiction of the United States for the term of two years, may be admitted to become a citizen thereof, on application to any common law court of record, in any one of the states wherein he shall have resided for the term of one year at least, and making proof to the satisfaction of such court, that he is a person of good character, and taking the oath or affirmation prescribed by law, to support the constitution of the United States, which oath or affirmation such court shall administer; and the clerk of such court shall record such application, and the proceedings thereon; and thereupon such person shall be considered as a citizen of the United States. And the children of such persons so naturalized, dwelling within the United States, being under the age of twenty-one years at the time of such naturalization, shall also be considered as citizens of the United States. And the children of citizens of the United States, that may be born beyond sea, or out of the limits of the United States, shall be considered as natural born citizens: Provided, That the right of citizenship shall not descend to persons whose fathers have never been resident in the United States … APPROVED, March 26, 1790.” 7

            So! This Act of the First Congress implements the Principles set forth in Vattel, embraced by our Framers, and enshrined in Art. II, §1, cl. 5, that:

            A “natural born Citizen” is one who is born of parents who are citizens.

            Minor children born here of aliens do not become citizens until their parents are naturalized. Thus, they are not “natural born” citizens.

            Our Framers rejected the anti-republican and feudal notion that mere location of birth within a Country naturalizes the children of a foreigner. 8

            The distinction written into Our Constitution and implemented by the Naturalization Act of 1790 is between someone who is borna citizen, by being born of parents who are already Citizens, and someone who becomes a citizen after birth by naturalization. Only the former are eligible to be President.

            http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=226

      • http://pennyrobinsonfanclub.net/ Penny Robinson Fan Club

        That wasn’t the question Hillary first raised about Sock Puppet.
        And according to the original debate over the 14th Am. , that was NOT the intent of it, that someone born here to parents just passing through would be a citizen.

      • kssturgis62

        He is a Citizen, no one is Questioning that. But what your Saying Lauren, is that it is Okay no matter who they are, for them to be POTUS. You obviously have not Read your Constitution which says ONE MUST BE NATURAL BORN to be President.

        the Means that TWO CITIZENS as PARENTS before you were BORN. Obama did not have that, and we are not even sure where he was born. Rubio’s Parents WERE NOT citizens when he was born,. Rubio was born here, and is a Citizen, he is NOT natural born.

        If we used your Premise to be POTUS, you would Say it was Okay for Osama Bin Laden to have come here, Gotten a Girl Pregnant, and that baby grows up and gets elected President. I know Osama is DEAD, but is that what you want. THAT IS WHAT YOU HAVE NOW with Obama. His Father was a British Subject, NOT an American Citizen. His Foreign Influence of Being a Citizen of Indonesia, and Attending the Muslim School is greatly Influencing his Lies when it comes to foreign Policy in the USA> do you really think he is dismantling our defense and Blaming videos because he loves the USA.

        By the way all of these people are Citizens, they are NOT NATURAL BORN and therefore DO NOT QUALIFY to be POTUS,

        Marco Rubio, Bobby Jindall, Nikki Haley, and Governor Martinez, to name a few. and Just Because Democrats break the LAW does not mean we as Conservatives do also.

        • Mellow Melon

          These people are natural citizens. They have grown up in the United States all their lives, with the exception of Obama. They were not raised in a foreign culture or off the mainland like Obama was. They have absolutely every right to be president if they so desire. They know us, they know America, they ARE American. Their American identity and citizenship does not, and should not, depend upon their parents.

    • John (it true me am)

      English is the official language, certainly. Anyone who thinks it should be changed to include Spanish is crazy, that we should take the Canadian route and require dual language signage and legally require Spanish language options.

      But someone, anyone, offering something in Spanish *of their own accord* isn’t a bad thing. It isn’t even really pandering. It’s marketing. The sad fact is we have a large portion of the country that, while most certainly should be, aren’t fluent in English.

      And while I believe it is a travesty that people live in a country for years and outright refuse to learn the language of that country, at the same time these are the very people we need to reach. Perhaps even if just to tell them eventually to learn some damn English. But we have to start reaching them somewhere, and it is certainly better it is in an informal(read: Not actually part of the governmental operations) event such as the SOTU rebuttal than in an official capacity, such as the SOTU itself even.

      Bottom line, it’s a smart move that costs nothing. It doesn’t mean we start adding on Spanish translations to road signs.

      Oh, and Rubio is hardly Specter. A McCain maybe, but definitely not a Specter.

      • kssturgis62

        HE IS McCain !! He is so LIBERAL and HE IS not Natural Born !! Rubio is not qualified to be President and he is Jeb Bush’s Boy. Arlen Specter that is going a little Far but I get the Premise.

        • http://www.rickbulow.com/ Rick Bulow

          Rubio IS natural Born. He was born in the United States of America, which means he is a Natural born citizen.

          • kssturgis62

            Rick I suggest you get Educated. So your saying all Illegals anchor babies are Natural Born, your Saying Osama Bin Laden or Ahmadenijad could get a girl Pregnant – then born here and be president. That is not What NATURAL BORN means. Citizen yes, Not natural Born.

            Look up Vattal’s law of nations, and What the Founders Said. Rubio is not qualified, he is a Liberal – he is John McCain. he is nothing what he said he was when he ran.

          • http://www.rickbulow.com/ Rick Bulow

            kssturgis62, I have been educated, and you are wrong. Allow me to re-educate you with FACTS:

            Based upon the language of Article II, Section 1, Clause 4 and the guidance provided by Wong Kim Ark, we conclude that persons born within the borders of the United States are “natural born Citizens” for Article II, Section 1 purposes, regardless of the citizenship of their parents. Ankeny v. Governor of State of Indiana, 916 NE 2d 678 – Ind: Court of Appeals 2009

            Simply put: Any child born on US soil or in a US territory who retains American citizenship is a defacto NBC. PERIOD. Parents status means nothing.

            That is one fact. Here is another:

            http://thepatriotfactor.blogspot.com/2012/04/normal-0-false-false-false-en-us-x-none_20.html – Marco Rubio IS eligible to be Vice President

            And another for you:

            http://grandoldpartisan.typepad.com/blog/2012/11/natural-born-citizens.html – Marco Rubio and Bobby Jindal are Natural Born Citizens

          • kssturgis62

            Allow ME TO EDUCATE YOU. they are NOT Natural Born and Bobby Jindall admitted it !! Rubio is not either, he is in the PROCESS of changing his father’s Citizenship Why is he doing that?

            Also allow me to tell you to Read John Jay to George Washington and what he wrote about the Natural Born Status, and also allow me to tell you John Jay was the 1st Supreme Court Justice, and also allow me to tell you that what your Advocating is for ANYONE born in this nation to be POTUS. so your Saying that an Illegal who has an Anchor Baby can be POTUS and your Saying that AHMADINEJAD COULD get a girl pregnant and that baby can be president. WAKE UP . Marco knows the Truth. He is NOT NATURAL BORN.

            http://www.scribd.com/doc/62055196/Rubio-Naturalization-Petition-CERTIFIED-from-National-Archives

            In order to understand the meaning of an Article II “natural born Citizen,” we have to understand the constitutional distinction between a “citizen,” “born citizen,” and “natural born Citizen.” The first constitutional distinction is between “citizen” and “natural born Citizen.” In Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 the Framers provided in pertinent part: “No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution shall be eligible to the Office of President.” Here, we see the Framers distinguished between a “natural born Citizen” and a “Citizen of the United States.” There is no other type of “citizen” mentioned. So, our Constitution, Acts of Congress, and treaties, call “citizens,” or members of the United States, either “natural born Citizens” or “citizens of the United States.” As we shall see, the former are defined by American common law (the definition being based on natural law and the law of nations) and the latter by the Fourteenth Amendment (the definition being in part based on colonial English common law), Congressional Acts, or treaties. From this we can see that a “citizen” is either a “natural born Citizen” or a “citizen of the United States.” Because of the requirement of having to be born in the country to citizen parents, a “natural born Citizen” will necessarily also qualify under these sources as a “citizen of the United States.”

            Article II refers to a “natural born Citizen,” but does not define it. In fact, the definition of a “natural born Citizen” is not found anywhere in the original or amended Constitution or any Act of Congress. Rather, it is found in the common law upon which the Founders and Framers relied at the time of the adoption and ratification of the Constitution. Under this common law, the three constituent elements of being a “natural-born citizen” are time (at the moment of birth), birth place (in the country), and birth parents (U.S. citizen parents), what I will call birth time, birth country, and birth parents. See Minor v. Happersett, 88 U.S. 162, 167-68 (1875) (the unanimous U.S. Supreme Court explained that the definition of a “natural-born citizen” is not found in the Constitution and confirmed that “[a]t common-law, with the nomenclature of which the framers of the Constitution were familiar, it was never doubted that all children born in a country of parents who were its citizens became themselves, upon their birth, citizens also. These were natives or natural-born citizens, as distinguished from aliens or foreigners”); United States v. Wong Kim Ark, 169 U.S. 649, 679-80 (1898) (the majority and dissent agreed on the Minordefinition of a “natural-born citizen,” but they disagreed as to the definition of a Fourteenth Amendment “citizen of the United States” at birth). Given this settled common law definition of a “natural born Citizen,” these elements are both necessary and sufficient to make a “natural born Citizen.” In the definition, the parents have to have as a minimum the status of a “citizen” (“born citizen” or “natural born Citizen” is not necessary) in order to produce a “natural born Citizen.” Note that Minor said that at common law, if one was not a “natural-born citizen,” one was an alien or foreigner. This means that if these persons qualified, the Fourteenth Amendment, Act of Congress, or treaty could make them a “citizen of the United States.”

            http://puzo1.blogspot.ca/

          • kssturgis62

            The 14th Amendment that your ARTICLES use DO NOT USURP the NATURAL BORN REQUIREMENT OF THE CONSTITUTION. Why are you guys who claim to Be Patriots, lovers of the Constitution So Wanting to Destroy it. IT is HYPOCRITICAL.

  • disqus_lLUSGwbabb

    Surprised they are not calling Rubio a “traitor” as it seems any Republican who is not white is said by liberals to be betraying their race.

  • Love of Country

    A token? Are you fricken kidding me? Unlike Dinglebarry, Rubio is a real American who bleeds patriotism. Somebody tell me how token Barack Owebamao defeated Hillary Clinton if it wasn’t ALL ABOUT HIS SKIN COLOR ….. I’m all ears.

    And leave it to un-American, fascist pieces of garbage (community organizers) to go door to door in the ‘hood to gin up fear, racism and hatred to consolidate power and when that doesn’t work they step it up and basically go around threatening the livelihoods, if not lives, of all inhabitants/minorities who are ever caught voting for a Republican ie the same way they wage the highly effective/disgraceful ‘snitches end up in ditches’ campaign. And right after that, those same fascist organizers run out into the public square to shamelessly lament w/ crocodile tears that the GOP just doesn’t appeal to said minorities.

    Let’s not forget … the DNC is the Party of:

    Slavery
    Jim Crow Laws
    The K K K
    Segregation
    Premeditated Welfare Addiction
    Race Oppression, Race Manipulation and Race Control

    This obscene 200 year record on race exposes everything the DNC has ever been or will be ….. fascist-like race control from the DNC is the worst thing that ever happened to the American bIack man and his broken family ….. unbelievable!

    Has any of the real Civil Rights history ever been mentioned and taught in our schools during ANY of the last 20 years of BIack History month ie that the GOP is who made or caused all of the civil rights to be passed????

    Why not and what is being done about this epic travesty and cover-up, in our schools and on the public stage? What is being done to finally reveal the REAL DNC and the REAL GOP and to stop the uber fascist and God-shunning, minority-slumming, capitalist-hating DNC patsies from brainwashing every last impressionable girl and boy in the country?

    I dare wonder that at the end of bIack history month each and every year, if just one child in the inner city was taught at school or at home that the GOP proudly ended horrific DNC segregation and horrific DNC Jim Crow Laws or were they all actually taught just the opposite either explicitly or implicitly?

    Somebody better address this soon or better yet …. just Beam Me Up, Scotty!

  • walterc

    Calling Sen Rubio the Token Republican Hispanic is like calling Harry Reid the Token Democratic Old White Guy. Plain stupidity.

  • Jack Deth

    Is Rubio “White Hispanic” or “Hispanic Caucasian”?

    • louisiana_mom

      He’s Republican, which makes him a traitor to the Democrats… They think all minorities should remain on their plantation.

    • Pamela

      He is “white” period, but a racist, who won’t admit it.

  • RightThinking1

    Better than a Toker-in-Chief

  • kssturgis62

    Rubio is NO Conservative, and he is the “Chosen one” the “Rock Star” yes the one who is going to be the PAWN for the GOP, especially since they are Pushing for Illegals to get AMNESTY.

    Rubio is a RINO, he is liberal.

    He doesn’t want to be part of the Tea Party Caucus, or push that.

    He has Voted every Way McCain has.

    He voted for Kerry to be Secretary of State.

    HE BLEW it big time after Flapping his gums, questioning Hillary.

    He Bashed Michelle Bachmann, and sided with McCain on the Muslim Brotherhood.

    He took Illegal Campaign Contributions and got busted.

    HE admitted to using the Credit Card in Florida.

    He Gutted 31 Immigration Bills in Florida – that is where he became Jeb Bush’s boy.

    He will stand by Jeb Bush and the Bush Regime at all costs.

    He doesn’t want voter ID – he halted it in Florida.

    Marco Rubio, is the PAWN of the GOP. the GOP is using him, to push Illegal Immigration, and make you Go along with it. He will use them to get that ONE ISSUE passed.

    Marco Rubio can say he is going to run for President, but he is NOT NATURAL BORN.

    Put up Rubio, your falling for the same crap candidates, and Me and thousands will not vote GOP and there are thousands of us already trying to go with a 3rd party.

    The GOP = GROUP OF PROGRESSIVES>

    When are people going to wake up and SAY ENOUGH IS ENOUGH and Quit voting and OBEYING what they tell you to do. I held my nose for the Last time with Romney.

    The Candidate is not ever going to be perfect, BUT HE IS GOING TO HAVE TO SOME MORAL STANDING AND CHARACTER. Rubio has NEITHER> My Candidates Don’t cheat, lie and steal. RUBIO has done it all THREE already.

  • digitalPimple

    So with all the senate so filled with Black democrats does that imply that Obama is the Dems token black guy? I guess so.

    • reneehaigh

      no he is the token GRAY guy: people forget he is NOT all black: he is an oreo cookie ok? need i say more…..

  • Maxx

    When you’re a liberal, the only thing to fear more than fear itself is Marco Rubio.

  • BenY

    Dang, the establishment RINOs have already co-opted him and he is starting to play along. He could get most of the Hispanic vote and still go the way of Romney by loosing more conservatives.

    • Pamela

      The GOP have already lost 2014, and every election after. There is not way, American are going to vote for GOP, when they are as Anti-American as Democrats. The moment the GOP, started talking Amnesty for Illegals, they started to lose GOP American votes. Now, this. This insult of catering to only one immigrant group, that are Illegal Aliens and speaking only, their language and not the many languages of Legal Immigrants, and insulting every English speaking American U.S. citizen.

      Goodbye GOP. You are, the dumb party. While catering to one racist ethnic group, hispanics, you have lost Americans. Dumb morons.

      • BenY

        Yep. The hell with the GOP, I think I’m switching Libertarian.

  • Mike

    This is like saying the Dem’s have a token Black in the White House. When will they stop the Racism?

  • DaProf

    Well, I’m sure Obama could give his speech in English and Arabic…..

  • BeeKaaay

    Leftwingwackos are racist.

  • reneehaigh

    i like Sen. Rubio: it’s about time that politics welcome colors of all people and races: as well as the smelly twats like nancy pelosi and diane feinstein: oh i’m sorry she’s Jewish or is that a token thing too? Sen. Rubio acts more presidential than that turdball in the white house now!! i am too tired of people wanting their own way all the time: this great usa is being compromised as a nation for one mans personal agenda and the sheeple in this great country allow it! the gays are the ones who create their own ism’s if you are gay why do you feel the need to shove it down our throats? i don’t run l around and say i am a heterosexual ! whohoo lets have an annual parade in washington whohoo we want more rights too!! woohoo! who the hell cares: i don’t “care” if you are black: hispanic red: yellow: or gay: why don’t everybody mind “THEIR” business this way you are not shoving any ism’s down the throats of people who just want to live their life according to the natural right that we were born with. NOBODY owes you anything: NOBODY!! so get up off your asses and make your own way in life: if you don’t like ;it: MOVE go to mexico go to Europe they need your money: get the hell out fast as you can and LEAVE US ALONE~!!!!

  • Lady 12

    Why is he giving it in Spanish too?

    • Pamela

      To cater to Illegal hispanic aliens. Every U.S. citizen knows English, and Legal immigrants know English. No where, in the history of our country, have we catered to the language of incoming immigrants. But, in the case of Illegal hispanic aliens, not only will traitors speak their language and insult every English speaking American, they allow them to break our laws. Time for a new 2nd party. The GOP is the same as, the Liberal Democrat party. Screw them, both. They are not for American U.S. citizens or our children.

  • Linda Bates

    So what’s the liberal’s point?!…if you’re Hispanic you MUST CONFORM and bend to the Democratic perspective?!!! My kids and their father, his family are Hispanic and REPUBLICANS with very Conservative Values! They will ALL be voting in the next election. It has been my very real experience that some minorities DO NOT WANT TO SEE THEIR OWN ADVANCE OR HAVE IDEOLOGY of their own because they fear those that do not conform might succeed which would be contrary to their claims of oppression and then pressure them to try to succeed as well….and they can’t do that because it goes against their RACISM & OPPRESSION propoganda that continuously gives them all kinds of advantages…so WHY WOULD THEY EVER STOP MAKING THIS POINT IF IT WOULD MEAN STRIPPING THEM OF THEIR ADVANTAGES??? It is not like one day any minority group is going to anounce collectively ” Ok Racism has stopped-we’re good-you can stop all the programs- let’s move on!” BTW- I myself have crossed those lines of racism and my mixed ethnic children are evidence of it-I”M PROUD OF MY HISPANIC KIDS especially for overcoming this kind of pod people attitudes and I’m still proud of my European heritage and PROUD TO BE WHITE!!!

  • Beth Larsen

    The left likes to call someone a token the moment a person fails to fit inside the little box the left has built for them. Yet most of these lefties feel they are warriors… fighting against racism, yet they are the ones participating in it.