Posted on 02/08/2016 6:47:17 AM PST by TBBT
Well they got one thing right. A choice between Cruz and Rubio is a lesser of evils.
But then again I guess it’d be silly trying to compare Trump’s immigration policy to Rubio’s record.
The only reason Rubio is in DC is to push amnesty and lop sided trade like TPP....find out who owns him!
Rubio’s deception
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3391812/posts
Since there will never be a President Rubio, this is a moot point.
Is a bear Catholic?
Does the Pope pray in the woods?
Is the person who posed the question remotely sentient?
“what’s this i keep reading about merkel being conservative?”
She’s conservative, for a socialist.
You have to keep in mind, in Europe, they are all Marxists. Their political spectrum goes from hardcore socialists to moderate socialists to fascists and stops right there.
Rubio should be allowed no where near the positions of President/VP.
Email released by Phyllis Schlafly ..... details Rubio’s record .... what he campaigned on & what he actually did when he got to the Senate ..... excellent summary with links:
Rubio Record (immigration)
http://www.eagleforum.org/immigration/rubio-record.html
From the “CONCLUSION”:
There is no single major distinguishing policy difference between Marco Rubio, John McCain or Lindsey Graham. They have the same trade policy, immigration policy and foreign policy. But on immigration most especially — the issue in which all four have invested the most — there is no daylight separating them.
The difference, then, is one of persona, not policy. And in the arena of immigration, this translates into a vital difference. The biggest change from McCain-Kennedy, which could not get out of the Senate, and the Gang of Eight — which was nursed along by conservative pundits despite being to the left of Kennedy’s bill — was the presence of Rubio. Rubio created the conditions necessary to produce a considerably more open borders bill: conservatives who were invested in the Rubio Brand provided no early pushback but accepted Kennedy’s old talking points, and Rubio gave red state Democrats the political space necessary to support it. This is how it got 68 votes in the Senate.
The stakes of course are raised considerably if Rubio is President or Vice President. Rubio would have a much, much better chance than Obama of getting an open borders bill through Congress — while Boehner could refuse to bring up Obama’s mass immigration/amnesty bill for vote in 2014, Ryan would never refuse Rubio’s bill. Rubio’s presence, as it did with the Gang of Eight, would create the cover for both certain Republicans and all Democrats to get behind a far more open borders plan. Given that nearly every House Democrat sponsored the Gang of Eight House version (including Pelosi and Gutierrez), Ryan would not need to gather that many additional votes (House GOP leaders might have refused Obama’s 2014 request for a vote but they would not refuse President Rubio’s).
All of which adds up to: there is likely no person in the United States of America in a better position to enact mass immigration legislation than a President Rubio — no one who could deliver more votes in both parties for open borders immigration. Senator Rubio is not Main Street’s Obama, he is Wall Street’s Obama: President Obama was a hardcore leftist running as centrist; Senator Rubio is a Wall Street globalist running as a tea party conservative.
Unlike other legislation, the effects of bad immigration policy cannot be repealed. They are forever. The Republican party would never nominate a pro-Obamacare candidate, and it must be an even stronger maxim that it should not nominate any candidate who is committed to a policy of mass immigration. Rubio wrote the Obamacare of immigration policies: a bill that would have eviscerated the middle class, plunged millions into poverty, legalized the most dangerous aliens on the planet, overwhelmed our schools and safety nets, and done irreversible violence to the idea of America as a nation-state. Rubio is the candidate of open borders, Obamatrade and mass immigration, making one last attempt to pull off one big con.
He’s done it once. He’ll do it again.
Either you forgot the sarcasm tag or you are deluding yourself.
Rubio has been for amnesty since before he lied his way into the US Senate.
Advice to young girls: If a guy abuses you on the first date, don’t finish that date, don’t give him a second date, and don’t marry him. Anyone who would marry/vote Rubio is a fool, regardless of his motive for Amnesty as his path to treason.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.