FrankRep
05-25-2013, 04:10 PM
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/Marco_Rubio,_Official_Portrait,_112th_Congress.jpg/220px-Marco_Rubio,_Official_Portrait,_112th_Congress.jpg (http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/15467-neither-rubio-nor-his-amnesty-plan-is-conservative)
Marco Rubio Can't Defend His Own Immigration Bill (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/349334/rubio-cant-defend-his-own-immigration-bill)
National Review
May 25, 2013
Senator Marco Rubio appeared on a special edition of the Hannity show last night on behalf of the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill, otherwise known as Schumer-Rubio. His case for the bill was unpersuasive and, at times, incoherent.
...
This was the first of several times in the broadcast that Rubio distanced himself from his own bill, refusing to defend its security provisions and at least appearing to claim instead that, as it stands at the moment, the bill is unsatisfactory and undeserving of support. Yet Rubio has been defending the bill far and wide, even appearing in an ad on its behalf–an ad that touts the bill’s security provisions. If he’s filmed this ad for the bill, he ought to be able to defend its security provisions. If he can’t defend the security provisions as they now stand, why did he consent to be included in the ad?
...
So Rubio first implies that he agrees with critics of the bill’s border security provisions, and that he will only support a substantially amended bill. Yet when Hannity presses him on the need to secure the border unequivocally before offering amnesty, Rubio explains that amnesty can’t be held hostage to security.
As it stands, Rubio’s Hannity performance is puzzling and incoherent. Either he has declined to publicly defend the security provisions of a bill that he himself has formally endorsed, repeatedly backed in public, and continues to back, or he has implicitly withdrawn support for the bill. Does he support his own bill or not?
...
There were plenty of other problems with Rubio’s responses. When someone asked him whether we should reform entitlements before opening the doors to a flood of new citizens, Rubio agreed that our entitlement system is on a path to disaster but added that we’re headed for disaster with or without immigration reform. How does the fact that we’re going broke anyway make it a good idea to vastly increase the pressure on our entitlement system?
...
Full Story:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/349334/rubio-cant-defend-his-own-immigration-bill
===
Related:
Neither Marco Rubio Nor His Amnesty Plan Is Conservative (http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/15467-neither-rubio-nor-his-amnesty-plan-is-conservative)
Rubio's amnesty plan is debunked for the sham that it is.
Marco Rubio: No Conservative (http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/14186-marco-rubio-no-conservative)
It is shown that from his positions on various issues, Marco Rubio is just as much a proponent of Big Government as any other establishment politician.
Marco Rubio Can't Defend His Own Immigration Bill (http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/349334/rubio-cant-defend-his-own-immigration-bill)
National Review
May 25, 2013
Senator Marco Rubio appeared on a special edition of the Hannity show last night on behalf of the Gang of Eight’s immigration bill, otherwise known as Schumer-Rubio. His case for the bill was unpersuasive and, at times, incoherent.
...
This was the first of several times in the broadcast that Rubio distanced himself from his own bill, refusing to defend its security provisions and at least appearing to claim instead that, as it stands at the moment, the bill is unsatisfactory and undeserving of support. Yet Rubio has been defending the bill far and wide, even appearing in an ad on its behalf–an ad that touts the bill’s security provisions. If he’s filmed this ad for the bill, he ought to be able to defend its security provisions. If he can’t defend the security provisions as they now stand, why did he consent to be included in the ad?
...
So Rubio first implies that he agrees with critics of the bill’s border security provisions, and that he will only support a substantially amended bill. Yet when Hannity presses him on the need to secure the border unequivocally before offering amnesty, Rubio explains that amnesty can’t be held hostage to security.
As it stands, Rubio’s Hannity performance is puzzling and incoherent. Either he has declined to publicly defend the security provisions of a bill that he himself has formally endorsed, repeatedly backed in public, and continues to back, or he has implicitly withdrawn support for the bill. Does he support his own bill or not?
...
There were plenty of other problems with Rubio’s responses. When someone asked him whether we should reform entitlements before opening the doors to a flood of new citizens, Rubio agreed that our entitlement system is on a path to disaster but added that we’re headed for disaster with or without immigration reform. How does the fact that we’re going broke anyway make it a good idea to vastly increase the pressure on our entitlement system?
...
Full Story:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/349334/rubio-cant-defend-his-own-immigration-bill
===
Related:
Neither Marco Rubio Nor His Amnesty Plan Is Conservative (http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/15467-neither-rubio-nor-his-amnesty-plan-is-conservative)
Rubio's amnesty plan is debunked for the sham that it is.
Marco Rubio: No Conservative (http://www.thenewamerican.com/reviews/opinion/item/14186-marco-rubio-no-conservative)
It is shown that from his positions on various issues, Marco Rubio is just as much a proponent of Big Government as any other establishment politician.