Rubio: ‘If I Was in Charge’, U.S. Would Have Intervened in Syria Earlier

Cybercast News Service ^ | June 17, 2013 4:32 PM | Fred Lucas

[DemforBush]

“...said if he were president, he would have intervened in Syria much sooner than President Obama did.”

Not that I was planning on sending you any money in 2016 anyway, but my checkbook just closed a little tighter where you are concerned, Marco.

[melsec]

I believe Rubio describes himself as conservative. What exactly about him might be conservative I wonder - does he wear y-fronts?

[freeangel]

“And if this country is to survive, you won’t ever be in charge you Amnesty Pimp!”

Perhaps he planning on sending the ILLEGALS to fight there. If they won’t go, then he sends them back to their home countries. (See, I’m not just pickin’ on the mexicans)

[9YearLurker]

The GOPe tends not to roll this way, but my hope is that there’s a flood of big RINO egos insisting on running in the same primary in 2016, so that our one true and viable conservative (Palin?) has the advantage of a split RINO vote.

Usually, it is the conservative egos—Santorum, Bachmann, Cain, Gingrich, Perry—who fall for the GOPe bait and crowd into the field together.

[9YearLurker]

Oh, and after Rove and his crew lamented the advantage Palin could have in 2012 as the only female in the primary, they managed to lure Bachmann in.

If Palin actually makes a run in 2016, who will they try to put in to diffuse that supposed advantage? My guess is one or both of the prominent, early-primary state, GOP women they have: Nikki Haley and/or Kelly Ayotte.

[0.E.O]

I smell recall . . . (don’t I?)

No, just the smell of a presidential run.

[0.E.O]

“It behooved us to kind of identify whether there was any elements there within Syria fighting against Assad that we could work with—reasonable people that wouldn’t carry out human rights violations and could be part of building a new Syria. We failed to do that,”

Probably because THERE AREN'T ANY. 'Reasonable' and 'Muslim' are a contradiction in terms.

[0.E.O]

I like Sarah’s solution - let Allah sort it out. We can afford this crap - there is no good side.

Except that Palin never said that she wouldn't have intervened or that she wouldn't have supported getting involved in Syria. She just didn't support doing it while Obama was running the show.

[0.E.O]

Only if the US Constitution prohibits recall. AFAICS, it does not and the Tenth Amendment applies.

The Constitution sets the senate term at 6 years. There is nothing in it that says '6 years unless...'. Recall of a Senator is unconstitutional. The 10th Amendment doesn't apply.

Alaska, Arizona, California, Colorado, Georgia, Idaho, Kansas, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, North Dakota, Oregon, Rhode Island, Washington, and Wisconsin are the states with some manner of recall availability on their books.

State officials only.

[Olog-hai]

Where is recall of a US senator unconstitutional?

[0.E.O]

Article II, Section 4: “The President, Vice President and all civil officers of the United States, shall be removed from office on impeachment for, and conviction of, treason, bribery, or other high crimes and misdemeanors.” Constitutionally that is the only way to remove a Senator or any other federal office-holder.

[Olog-hai]

I do not see the word “only” in that clause.

[9YearLurker]

The dude can’t handle the subjunctive tense, and yet he’s supposed to be one of our great orators?

[ASA Vet]

He'll likely be on the GOP ticket in ‘16.

Marco Rubio

born May 28, 1971 in Miami, FL

Parents were
Mario Rubio born in Cuba, naturalized Nov. 5, 1975.
Oria Garcia born in Cuba, naturalized Nov. 5, 1975.

Parents were NOT US Citizens at the time of his birth.

Marco Rubio is NOT a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN.

Marco's status is the same as that of Barry Soetoro, aka Barack Hussein Obama, who is NOT a Natural Born Citizen.

[McGruff]

*facepalm*

[0.E.O]

You do not see the word 'only' on how states may be admitted or how the president is elected either. But there is no question that states may be admitted only through a majority vote in both houses of Congress, and a President is elected only through a mojirty of the electoral votes or, under certain circumstances, through a vote in the House. The fact of the matter is that the Constitution states how a Senator may be removed from office; through the impeachment process. Not through recall. Not on my command alone. Impeachment, and no other method.

[Olog-hai]

Conjecture and opinion. Compare that to Article 3 Section 3, whose first clause emphatically states what the only definitions of treason are.

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort. …

The others are not black and white definitions, like this one is. Just because no deviation has had precedent does not mean it is illegal or unconstitutional; that is why we have a Tenth Amendment. (And no, the eighteen states’ recall processes apply to US Senators, not just state Senators.)

[DoughtyOne]

No that’s the type of out of the box thinking I go for. LOL

[DoughtyOne]

We have always sent someone else’s son to die. That’s nothing new. We just need to make sure there is a valid reason to do so.

By intervening in Egypt, we guarantee one of our enemies will win. Better to allow them to kill each other off and stay out of it.

Best we could hope for here is a stalemate, them wearing each other down.