Washington Post columnist Jennifer Rubin has once again ignited outrage with her inflammatory commentary. Rubin, whose outspoken criticism of Republicans has intensified since Donald Trump’s 2016 election, recently suggested that Republicans “want to kill your kids” during a podcast-style broadcast.
Here we have the @washingtonpost's Jen Rubin saying "Republicans want to kill your kids, it’s actually true."
— Rusty (@Rusty_Weiss) November 19, 2024
Which is weird when you consider liberals literally support killing babies, @JRubinBlogger. pic.twitter.com/E4PzNdHzRh
The comment, which she claimed to be “factually true,” has drawn sharp backlash and raised questions about her continued employment at the Post.
Rubin’s remarks came during a discussion on President-elect Donald Trump’s Cabinet picks, which she referred to as “a batch of clowns and freaks.”
She criticized media and political efforts to reach voters she perceives as uninformed, saying these individuals lack awareness of current events because they don’t consume traditional news sources.
Speaking about the need to simplify messaging, Rubin explained, “You can’t talk broad themes. You have to boil it down to nuts and bolts, and you have to be pithy. What do I mean by pithy? How about this – Republicans want to kill your kids. It’s actually true.”
Her statement, shared in a clip circulating on social media, has sparked intense criticism across the political spectrum.
Conservative commentators, including Rusty Weiss, highlighted the irony of Rubin’s remarks by pointing out that Democrats, as supporters of abortion rights, face their own controversies regarding the value of life.
“Liberals literally support killing babies,” Weiss tweeted in response to Rubin’s statement.
Critics have also questioned the Washington Post’s tolerance for such incendiary rhetoric from one of its prominent columnists. Some have argued that Rubin’s comments damage the paper’s reputation, alienating readers and undermining its journalistic credibility.
Rubin’s provocative remarks are not new. Since Trump’s rise to power, she has become a polarizing figure, often accused of hyperbole and partisan hostility.
What some see as unfiltered honesty, others interpret as a descent into extreme rhetoric fueled by personal animus.
This latest episode, however, has led many to question whether Rubin has crossed a line. Critics argue that her inflammatory comments do little to foster constructive dialogue, instead deepening divisions and alienating potential audiences.
The controversy surrounding Rubin highlights larger issues for the Washington Post. Many are asking whether the paper’s leadership and shareholders are comfortable being represented by such divisive commentary. Does Rubin’s rhetoric align with the standards of a reputable news organization?
As Rubin’s remarks continue to draw scrutiny, the Washington Post faces mounting pressure to address whether her approach reflects its values—or undermines them entirely.