It’s not just Jeb Bush who is feeling the heat for his unprincipled positions this week. Marco Rubio backed up his mentor in a deja vu – inducing swing on whether he would have invaded Iraq in 2003. This is reminiscent of Rubio’s immigration reform flip-flop and it’s raising questions about his preparedness for the presidency. Rubio’s panicked sprint from his own immigration bill continues to haunt him after he tied his political fate to the bill’s success. Rubio and Bush — protege and mentor — can’t hide from their past positions.
Check out Rubio’s brutal headlines to prove it:
Yahoo Politics: Inside Marco Rubio’s stumble on immigration and what it says about his ability to lead
Jon Ward and Andrew Romano, 5/15/15
According to Ana Navarro, a Miami-based Republican strategist who is friends with Rubio but is supporting Jeb Bush in 2016. “There’s no doubt he put in a lot of time and risked political capital in his attempt.” But it all went to hell and turned into a perfect political storm. He managed to antagonize everybody on both sides of the issue. It was a mess — and ultimately all for nothing
….
But what Rubio did in 2013 seemed different. The problem wasn’t that he shifted his focus or emphasis. The problem was that he ditched his own immigration-reform bill while it was winding its way through Congress — and started desperately trying to convince conservatives that he was still one of them instead. In short, Rubio appeared to panic. “He just decided to run from it like a scalded dog,” says one influential Republican consultant. By the time Rubio defeated Crist, those who had worked with him in Florida were beginning to wonder what — if anything — he stood for. …
“His tone has changed on the subject,” said state Rep. Juan Zapata, another Miami Republican. “And to me it’s very obvious that it’s for political reasons.”
…
It’s not hard to see how a more seasoned leader than Rubio could have managed the immigration fallout better. He might not have been so swayed by his advisers’ conflicting opinions; he might have stood firm on principle, even after his poll numbers began to crater; he might have avoided the kind of transparent pandering that alienates friend and foe alike.
…
And so the central question of Rubio’s candidacy is simple: If the senator from Florida wins the White House in 2016, which Rubio is America going to get?
…
It’s not hard to see how a more seasoned leader than Rubio could have managed the immigration fallout better. He might not have been so swayed by his advisers’ conflicting opinions; he might have stood firm on principle, even after his poll numbers began to crater; he might have avoided the kind of transparent pandering that alienates friend and foe alike
…
Washington Post: How Marco Rubio’s shifting positions could hurt his presidential campaign
Sean Sullivan, 5/15/15
The broader question confronting Rubio (R-Fla.) is whether his shifting positions — on this issue, and others — will hurt his chances of winning the Republican nomination for president. Rubio’s Senate legislative resume is dominated by a sweeping immigration reform bill that he once pushed, but no longer backs. There are other areas — national security spending, for instance — where has also recalibrated his position
…
But fending off flip-flopping charges could be especially thorny for Rubio, some Republicans say, since he is already defined heavily by immigration — an issue where his position now is not what it was as recently as 2013
…
Mark Meckler, a leading tea party activist, said that whenever there is suspicion about whether Rubio’s views have changed, it could remind conservatives about his push for comprehensive reform and then his swift move away from it
…
On Wednesday, Rubio told Charlie Rose of CBS News that he would not have ordered the Iraq invasion knowing what the country does now: that there were no weapons of mass destruction there
…
“Not only would I not have been in favor of it, President [George W.] Bush would not have been in favor of it,’ said Rubio at the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, directly answering a question that has tripped up likely rival Jeb Bush in interviews and other appearances. But in late March, when Rubio was asked by Fox News whether it was a mistake to go to war in Iraq, he responded: “I don’t believe it was. The world is a better place because Saddam Hussein doesn’t run Iraq.Of course, Rubio’s campaign denies that the two positions are inconsistent.
…
But when they get to know Rubio better, discrepancies both small and large could come back to haunt him
…
Opinion: Wall Street Journal: Marco Rubio’s Problematic Pillar
Peggy Noonan, 5/14/15
Here is what is concerning: In our time ‘moral clarity,’ has, as a former member of George H.W. Bush’s White House put it, ‘tended to stack the terms of a debate without having to address the merits of a policy.’ ‘Moral clarity’ tends to start with ringing cries and end with manipulations.
…
In making his case Mr. Rubio disparaged ‘nation building at home.’ But it is not invalid to say that America needs to become more fully what we say we believe in, and put a priority not on projecting our values militarily but reflecting them more deeply at home. It is true that the world now has less respect for us as a moral actor in the world, but it is not only because of the bad leadership of the past seven or 15 years, take your pick. It is not only because the world knows of our economic problems and the dysfunction and corruption of our governing class. The world is less impressed by us because they’ve been here. Mr. Rubio referred to globalization as a force transforming the world, but it also means a lot of the people of the world—especially the political, military and business elites—have come here to visit, and looked around. They have a sense of our public schools, our culture, our infrastructure (they take Amtrak to Washington), our Fergusons, our fear that our next generation will have it worse
…
Also, is Mr. Rubio’s position really where GOP base voters are? I find them more hard-eyed than romantic.
ForeignPolicy.com: Marco Rubio Is No Jack Kennedy – and We Don’t Need One, Either
James Traub, 5/15/15
Whatever its political merits, Rubio’s chesty worldview would make the world less safe rather than more.
…
Rubio is quite prepared to say perfectly inane things for perceived political advantage — most notably, his proposal to require Iranian recognition of Israel as a condition for Senate approval of a nuclear deal.
…
Rubio has positioned himself to be the champion of the “pay any price, bear any burden” wing of the GOP. It will be highly entertaining to watch him spar with Rand Paul, the isolationist standard-bearer, or with halfwits like Rick Perry. And nothing will beat watching him torture Jeb Bush, his former mentor, over the failures of brother George.
Published: May 15, 2015