Posted on 06/21/2013 5:28:44 PM PDT by Theoria
Sen. Marco Rubio has a problem. He has transformed from conservative hero to suspect in the eyes of many on the political right because he now supports "a path to citizenship" for people unlawfully in the U.S. after forcefully opposing it in 2010 when he was running for U.S. Senate.
The senator from Florida, who's considered to be a potential Republican presidential candidate, has tried to gloss over the shift. Unfortunately, he's getting called on it. By Factcheck.org. And by many conservatives, like those who booed his name when it was mentioned at a Tea Party rally this week on Capitol Hill. Or Ann Coulter, who said Friday the Senate shouldn't take up immigration until it becomes a Rubio-free body. Former Republican Rep. Allen West is even saying he might give Rubio a primary challenge over his immigration shift.
If Rubio does decide to make the run for president, he will certainly be attacked not only as a flip-flopper but for supporting a policy that's anathema to many conservatives. So, what's a senator to do?
Rubio has a few options, though they all have risks. Here are some possible approaches:
The people made me do it: Rubio could always say he decided to change his position to more accurately reflect the desires of his Florida constituency.
A Quinnipiac University poll released this week indicated that 58 percent of those surveyed agreed with the "path to citizenship" approach while 12 percent said people in the U.S. unlawfully should be allowed to stay, but not given citizenship. Only 24 percent were of the deport or self-deport persuasion.
Even among Florida Republicans, nearly half, 47 percent, supported a citizenship path with 15 percent being willing to let those here unlawfully stay but without allowing them to become citizens.
(Excerpt) Read more at npr.org ...
Marco Rubio’s problem is that he’s Marco Rubio.
On which page in the US Constitution it says “a natural born citizen is one whose parents are US citizens”?
I had to memorize the entire US constitution and all amendments for my citizenship test back in 1970.
Marco Rubio's Big Problem: He's a two trick pony, clean cut & Cuban!
Did you see the poll data? 47% of Florida Republicans support a path to citizenship. He will be a senator as long as he wants....but it will be without my vote.
Somebody did! He damn near broke his own neck when he made that sudden left turn.
He wants to catch up with Christie on the “fool them with the conservative speak” and then go full bore RINO once you have climbed under the blanket of socialism.
It doesn't say that a "Natural Born Citizen" is one whose parents are U.S. Citizens at the time of his birth. But...it says this....peculiar only to the presidency:
U.S. Constitution [Article II, Section 1, Paragraph 4]
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
When the framers wrote the Constitution this "Natural Born" provision was commonly known the same way we, today.....know that the "World Series" pertains to baseball....and the "Super Bowl" pertains to football. One does not have to say.....the "Super Bowl Football Game" because everyone knows that the "Super Bowl"......IS Football! By including "Football Game"....you're just being redundant!
"The Law of Nations", written mid 18th century (1758) was the initial description of the term, "Natural Born". It was penned by "Emmerich de Vattel" and read by statesmen throughout Europe and the Colonies and quoted frequently by the framers. Here is the pertinent section, #212:
“The citizens are the members of the civil society; bound to this society by certain duties, and subject to its authority, they equally participate in its advantages. The natives, or natural-born citizens, are those born in the country, of parents who are citizens. As the society cannot exist and perpetuate itself otherwise than by the children of the citizens, those children naturally follow the condition of their fathers, and succeed to all their rights. The society is supposed to desire this, in consequence of what it owes to its own preservation; and it is presumed, as matter of course, that each citizen, on entering into society, reserves to his children the right of becoming members of it. The country of the fathers is therefore that of the children; and these become true citizens merely by their tacit consent. We shall soon see whether, on their coming to the years of discretion, they may renounce their right, and what they owe to the society in which they were born. I say, that, in order to be of the country, it is necessary that a person be born of a father who is a citizen; for, if he is born there of a foreigner, it will be only the place of his birth, and not his country.”
This term, "Natural Born Citizen" was commonly accepted throughout the world as what the above paragraph indicates the definition to be. It has only been recently (last 50 years or so) that this definition has come into question. This is due to the fact that the U.S. Constitution is no longer taught in our public schools.
Sorry........I meant to ping you to post #48.
Every damned one of them succumbs to the DC lobotomy given time. Plus a few hefty checks from the OBL in this case.
Better we found out now how Rubio really thinks before we made him a candidate for Prez. Glad he outed himself.
even trey gowdy ?
Rubio is a political wind vane, he’s a republican Bill Clinton.
He that lieth down with Dogs, shall rise up with Fleas,
Poor Richard's Almanack
To which end, which "special interest" might have the most at stake in this immigration imbroglio?
Would it be a.) business, b.) the unions, c.) the La Raza sorts, d.) the Democrat party...or e.) the drug cartels.
And which side would the drug cartels be on? And how much money do they have to spend? And where do you suppose they are spending it?
And that, my friends, is the untold story of this particular political conflict: Where is the drug money going?
Rubio has become a classic, and all too typical American traitor. Bob
Gowdy, along with a few dozen others, is a patriot, facing off against several hundred traitors. Bob
Rubio is a corrupt piece of crap. He should be in jail, not in an exalted leadership position.
Rubio could try runing for President of Mexico. Or Cuba.
“Did he get blackmailed like Justice Roberts?”
No. He was already an Amnesty pusher back when he was in the Florida government.
He is just a weasel who concealed his past and fooled a lot of conservatives. We are lucky that he outed himself.
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.