How Many Times Can Six Republicans Say ‘Scalia’ In Two Hours? Your Debate Open Thread

So now we guess it is the Republicans having a debate every blasted Saturday when decent people just want to watch anything else? After the Great Winnowing of the New Hampshire primaries, the six remaining GOP candidates for president — five, if you only count the ones who’ll be awake — are gathering in Greenville, South Carolina, for another thrilling chance to yell at each other about who will bomb ISIS the hardest and appoint the most Scalia-like people to the Supreme Court. And Yr Wonkette will be right there with you, if by “with” you mean setting up an open thread and hitting the beer.


Marco Rubio Is Now Officially TOAST #GOPdebate

If you missed it, you owe to yourself to go back and watch last night’s GOP debate for one important reason: It marks the moment when Marco Rubio went from possible contender for the Republican nomination to has-been/never-will-be automaton who had his karma leveled so publicly and painfully that I’m surprised he didn’t have to be taken off the debate stage on a stretcher.

Within the space of just a few minutes, Rubio uttered the same phrase–in one form or another–on four separate occasions, which led to Chris Christie calling him out on it and making the point that the Florida Senator is nothing more than a preprogrammed Manchurian candidate. Here’s the line:

“This notion that Barack Obama doesn’t know what he’s doing is just not true. He knows exactly what he’s doing.”

Christie, like a shark, went in for the kill:

“There it is. There it is. The memorized 25-second speech. There it is, everybody.

“You know what the shame is — you know what the shame is, Marco? The shame is that you would actually criticize somebody for showing up to work, plowing the streets, getting the trains running back on time when you’ve never been responsible for that in your entire life.”

The more I think on it, the more I really understand what Marco was saying in his supposedly canned remarks.

He was responding to Chris Christie’s assertion that Rubio would be a bad president because he had the same amount of Senatorial experience as Obama. Rubio was basically countering with the idea that Obama was not a bad president due to an innocent “lack of experience”, but rather due to a calculated idea for how he wanted America to be. He kept reemphasizing the point because the others seemed to totally miss it. Sure it might have behooved him to phrase it a little differently upon repetition, but he was really making a very good point. Obama is not just an innocent buffoon who couldn’t help but be a bad president because of his lack of experience, and therefore Rubio would be a better president than Obama because he has a different vision despite having the same technical qualifications.