It is said that there is nothing like wounded affection for giving poignancy to anger.
Waaaaay back in May of 2009, four days after the National Republican Senatorial Committee betrayed its mission, betrayed Republican voters, and betrayed the Reagan legacy; I, along with eleven other bloggers, came together to co-blog at a site known as Not One Red Cent.
Back then I was the proprietor of a blog called No Sheeples Here. That site was taken down in June of 2011. I felt that my effort to get the message out for conservatism was falling on deaf ears. I had poured so much of myself into politics that I was burned out.
Before I had reached the end of my rope though, I penned a blog post at Not One Red Cent that I thought was pretty powerful.
Our posts at Not One Red Cent gained the notice of Professor William A. Jacobson following the 2010 mid-term elections. Writing at Legal Insurrection, Professor Jacobson wrote, “In those first few months they blogged like crazy, and they were voices in the wilderness.”
“Over time Marco Rubio began to pick up recognition and support and went mainstream, and NORC posts dropped off as others picked up the cudgel elsewhere. The rest, as they say, is history.”
“When that history is written, I hope people will recognize the impact a few bloggers had in the revolution of 2010.”
The mistake was mine for trusting Rubio.
On Thursday, June 28, 2013 the Senate voted to pass an immigration reform bill that most true conservatives believe gives amnesty to illegal immigrants. The following day, The Insufferable Airhorn called Marco Rubio (R-FL) to congratulate him on passage of the bill in the Senate. Rubio didn’t answer the call.
The day before, when the bill passed 68-32, there was an impromptu press conference and Rubio wasn’t there. He avoided it like the plague.
Why didn’t he show his face at the press conference? Why didn’t he take the phone call? It’s obvious to this observer that the candidate who was adamant three years ago that an earned path to citizenship was “code for amnesty” was afraid that his slip in the polls would fall even farther.
evolution flip-flop has
caused his public support to take hits.
In fact, his favorability has dropped 15 points since February 2013, according
the latest Rasmussen polling data.
If the bill is enacted it would flood our borders with 10 million more immigrants by 2023 and 16 million more between 2023 and 2033. It would also provide a permanent welcome for 8 million illegal immigrants who are already in the country. Most infuriating of all is those immigrants are expected to be low-skill workers and Democrat-friendly. And if that doesn’t set your hair on fire, they would pay less in taxes than they would receive in benefits.
The bill would also reduce the nation’s average wages and education, increase unemployment and shift more of the nation’s earnings away from wages and into investments, according to a June 16 report by the Congressional Budget Office.
Is it any wonder then, that Sarah Palin jabbed Rubio with a tweet saying, “Hope it was worth the 30 pieces of silver.”
Allahpundit asked, “Should we still love Marco Rubio?”
“He was deceitful. Not to beat a long-dead horse, but this guy—and Ayotte, and Dean Heller, and even McCain—all lied to greater or lesser degrees about this subject to get elected by posing as stalwart border hawks.”
“One of the most dispiriting moments I’ve had in this process came this morning on Twitter when some righties argued to me that I’m overreacting to Rubio’s lies because all politicians lie. It’s part of their job description. If that’s the new standard—lie your ass off to get elected because we expect you to—then there’s no reason to prefer any one Republican candidate to another on actual policy grounds. They’re all liars, so let’s just elect the guy with the best retail skills and hope he doesn’t screw us too much once in office. (That’s basically Rubio’s 2016 campaign slogan.) Two problems with that logic, though.”
“One: Immigration isn’t just any issue. Rubio didn’t lie about whether he’d support a farm bill or a tweak to student-loan interest rates, only to renege. Immigration was a core part of his appeal to conservatives. He ran as an eloquent spokesman for border security despite left/media identity-politics expectations that any Latino politician must ultimately support comprehensive immigration reform. And now he supports comprehensive immigration reform. It’d be like someone running as a staunch hawk and then, once in office, deciding that Ron Paul had some really good ideas about foreign policy. Should hawks let that guy slide because ‘all politicians lie’?”
“Two: Rubio wasn’t elected as just any Republican pol. He was a self-described ‘movement conservative’ who caught the tea-party wave against the Republican establishment and surfed it all the way to the Senate. Three years later, despite lots of red-meat conservative rhetoric over that time, the two policy pushes with which he’s most identified, I think, are this sham immigration reform bill and international interventionism in various forms, including in Syria. He has, in other words, become a sort of successor to McCain in the Senate. Has anyone who ran on an anti-establishment tide ever embraced the establishment as quickly as that? Even now, even after everything, I strongly prefer his flip-flopping to the grotesque omnibus opportunism of Charlie Crist. But it’s worth asking: How different would the Senate have looked since 2010 with Crist in there instead of Rubio? What would have changed in terms of actual policy? If anything, without Rubio to woo conservatives, the Senate immigration effort would have been in deeper trouble than it is now. The fact that we have to pause and even consider this sort of ‘what if Crist won?’ hypothetical makes me think maybe we should hold off on the Rubio tributes. For now.”
In life, it’s the coward who abandons himself first. Following that, all other betrayals become easier. I’m grieved to find that Rubio lied to us and saddened that now we can no longer believe him. I don’t want him in the White House in 2016 or ever.