Gail Collins concludes her latest New York Times op-ed entitled "And Now, the Marco Memo," by observing:
"Rubio himself goes to two churches. Sometimes the family attends a Baptist-affiliated service on Saturday night and a Catholic Mass on Sunday.
Quick question: How would you feel about a presidential candidate who’s both Protestant and Catholic?
A) That’s great. Maybe it’s a sign he’s open-minded. B) That’s O.K., unless it’s just another way to fudge his positions. C) I am strongly against bringing a person’s religion into the political arena. Which is why I wish Marco Rubio would stop telling us about his."
So Marco frequents two different churches on weekends. Maybe, contemplating his ultimate arrival at St. Peter's Gates, he's hedging his bets. That's an issue?
Moreover, consider what Hillary preached to an Iowa crowd less than two weeks ago:
"I am a person of faith. I am a Christian. I am a Methodist. I have been raised Methodist. I feel very grateful for the instructions and support I received starting in my family but through my church, and I think that any of us who are Christian have a constantly, constant, conversation in our own heads about what we are called to do and how we are asked to do it, and I think it is absolutely appropriate for people to have very strong convictions and also, though, to discuss those with other people of faith. Because different experiences can lead to different conclusions about what is consonant with our faith and how best to exercise it."
Was Hillary's answer prepared in advance? You decide.
Collins also complains about the advance that Marco received for his autobiography:
"The $800,000 advance he got for his memoir — the one that fails to explain his trajectory on the union issue — is also not exactly typical."
Question for Gail: Was the $14 million advance received by Hillary for "Hard Choices," which flopped, more acceptable to you? My guess is that the $800,000 received by Marco could prove a windfall for the publisher if he is elected president.
Collins focuses most of her criticism on Marco's flip-flops involving immigration: "maybe he was just … growing." Needless to say, Collins avoids mention of how Hillary's positions have been "evolving," and how this evolution justifies her flip-flops on the Iraq War, same sex marriage, free trade, gun control and immigration.
Objectivity from Collins? Not in this lifetime.