Why was Marco Rubio's mouth so dry last night?

Because his thinking is dry?

He's not capable of being rational in anything he does. In the first place, he claims he enjoyed getting funding for going to college, but he wants to stop others from getting the same benefit. He also claims his parents received health care through Medicare, but he wants to cut their funding.

What's wrong with this guy? He's nuts!

That's so, but still............it's odd. I can't figure it out.

Rubio wants to overhaul Medicare.

I read about it but didn't see it. I get gravel voice once in a while if I haven't been talking or humming or laughing in a day or two and I suddenly answer the phone.
I'm guessing strain could do it. And, of course, meds. Maybe antihistamines.

Then there's public speaking - I remember giving an hour talk to a couple of hundred people once, and as I was being introduced could barely remember my subject. Luckily I was fast on my feet. Another time, state board examination, I turned ice cold waiting for the interview. Neither of those needing water, I would have spilled it.

Rubio has plenty of public appearance background, so that shouldn't be it, but perhaps it was a highlighted appearance for him, he suddenly realized it, and needed to do something to get back in gear.

Stress is a sure way of making you get a gravel dry mouth. Means hes lying.

Good observation. He also contradicted himself by saying he took advantage of government assistance for college, but wants to cut the programs for future students. Then has the gall to say Medicare helped his parents, but wants to overhaul it. He's not only a liar, but a taker without any conscience for the future of our children or seniors.

I wonder if you're all aware that Rubio's response to the State of the Union was taped before Obama ever made his speech. That's why some of it sounds out of joint; he's replying to points that Obama never actually made. He was working from a copy of the speech that Obama was supposed to deliver, but there had been last minute changes made.

(Source: NPR coverage of the State of the Union address)

I doubt very much that makes any difference; he had the choice and made the wrong one. He's responsible for his own actions.

All the more reason then. If it wasn't live, why was he so nervous. Or even more than that, why didn't they blip out the water moment?

It's funny. I was watching Rubio deliver his response as I was posting on my Cafe thread last night. I actually wrote, "somebody give Rubio a drink of water, his mouth is dry, he looks like he's foaming at the mouth." Then the water moment happened and I didn't post my comment. But I wondered why was he so nervous?

I thought it might have to do with the fact that responders in the past, both Dem and Repub have notoriously fallen on their faces when they delivered their responses. Was he afraid he looked like Bobby Jindal? I would have been.

No, I just read some comment on it today.

Amphetamine users tend to have dry mouth. So do liars.

I feel bad for him about the water thing. I've given public speeches before and done a lot of trainings in front of large groups, and I have to have water every time - talking dries my mouth out big time.

I don't feel bad for him about his endless recitation of the exact same talking points and ideology positions the GOP has been putting forth for the last decade. Tough to work with material like that.

He should have laughed the water thing off and tried to make a joke out of it, instead of going for the slick sip. If he had worked it into his speech correctly, it could have been a good reflective moment; but they were trying to get him to convey too much information in too short a time period, and he was rushing through every single thing he said. I don't know who puts these things together, but they would have been a lot better off by investing more in production values and a clear message than trying to cram all those different talking points in.

Cycloptichorn

Here's Ian Crouch of the New Yorker on it - I've only read the first sentence or two, but that makes sense.
http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/newsdesk/2013/02/marco-rubio-water-bottle-moment.html
edit - just read the whole thing, worth a read.

Also nod to Cyclo, re that kind of talking sometimes being a strain.

Me too.

And Osso, that's a good article.
Yes.

and
Regret. That's the worst.

Are you saying the left hasn't been using the same talking points as well? We didn't hear anything different from Obama. It sounded like a campaign speech, long on promise but nothing of substance.

yes, but Obama won and the other side did not. Time to re-evaluate.

Baldimo, You seem unwares of past presidents who have made their SOTU speech sound like a campaign speech. All you need to do is go back to what GW Bush said at his SOTU speech after his election(s).

Worse than that, GW Bush's campaign promises were broken.
http://www.americanprogressaction.org/issues/open-government/news/2004/08/09/1019/the-broken-promises-of-george-w-bush/

No, I didn't say that at all. My complaint isn't that the GOP engages in this, and the Dems don't, but instead that the format and content of the message wasn't effective, and it put him in a bind that didn't allow him to properly improvise when he had to. If they had cut the number of talking points down and given him time to speak a bit slower, he would have had ample time to take a sip of water after making a good point.

Cycloptichorn

I agree. It's too bad for Rubio though. It made him look silly. And it will take some time to live it down. Still, I think he'll survive, unlike Bobby Jindal.