Don't Let Rubio Fool You Twice
My good friend, Rush Limbaugh, is willing to give Marco Rubio grace for possibly making a "mistake" with the Gang of Eight amnesty deal.
Rush explained recently that Rubio is no moderate — calling him a "legitimate, full-throated conservative."
Rubio is indeed squishy on the No. 1 issue in the 2016 race — immigration. When even Jeb Bush criticizes his amnesty scam, you know he cannot be the Republican nominee — not no way, not no how. Not this year, which many agree, may be the last chance for American politics to get it right.
It's rare that I disagree with Rush. In the rare cases when I do, I have to ask myself if maybe I've gone off the rails. That's why I waited this long to think about it — to consider what Rush said.
While I believe Rush is sincere, I do not believe Marco Rubio is.
We simply cannot afford as a nation to make a mistake. And I believe Rubio as the nominee will be a huge one — one that is irreversible after eight years of Barack Obama.
But there's more to the Rubio conundrum than just that.
His interventionist foreign-policy ideas scare me.
When he talks about a showdown with Russia over Syria, imposing a no-fly zone that would impact Moscow's war on ISIS, I scratch my head in bewilderment. Shouldn't our first and foremost objective in the Middle East today be defeating ISIS, destroying it, obliterating it and eradicating any trace of it?
If so, why would we want to stop Russia from joining us? Why wouldn't we want to pledge to Russia we are joining them in this crusade?
Is it because our real objective is toppling Russia's ally, Bashar Assad? If so, that is a mistake. That's a battle for another time, or one we should never engage in.
We may not have many common objectives with Russia, but defeating ISIS is clearly one.
Taking on Iran, Syria and Russia at the same time we are going to war with ISIS makes absolutely no sense. And, believe me, Iran and Russia will not back off their support of Assad. I am mystified why Assad represents any threat to the U.S.
Fighting on two fronts in the Middle East would be another in a series of huge mistakes and miscalculations for the U.S. — one we can ill afford. ISIS would rejoice if the U.S. followed the path Rubio is advocating.
What Rubio is advocating smacks of the policy Barack Obama was advocating when he drew a line in the sand against Syria. Obama wanted to bomb Syria to force Assad out of power. Why? It seems Rubio, in his zeal to sound tough, has a similar plan in mind.
Forget Assad — at least for now. Assad actually represents an ally in the war on ISIS. So does Iran. So does Russia. Assad is providing safe haven to Christians and other religious minorities. I doubt there is a single Christian in Syria who wants to see him toppled.
But back to the immigration issue.
Many who supported Rubio in his Senate bid were worried about past immigration votes he cast in Florida. They sought a promise from him before supporting him for the U.S. Senate. They got it. He turned around and stabbed them in the back.
That begs several questions: How can we trust him, again? Why should we when there are other viable candidates in this race who have not double-crossed conservative and tea-party voters in the past?
And lastly, maybe Rubio sounds like a "full-throated conservative," but is he a "half-hearted" one?
Let's say he made only a "mistake" after he got into office. Maybe he was fooled by the Washington establishment. Can we afford to elect a president in 2016 who might make another mistake like that and get fooled again?
Worse yet, in this election, can we afford to let Rubio fool us again?
COPYRIGHT 2016 CREATORS.COM