Given Sen. Marco Rubio's (R-Fla.) role in his party -- Republican officials see him as a likely VP and rising star -- it was certainly notable that he endorsed Mitt Romney last night on Fox News. But it was the way in which the far-right Floridian expressed his support that struck me as interesting.
Rubio appeared on Sean Hannity's show and spoke at length about Republicans choosing a nominee before the start of the party's convention in Tampa. The senator called a floor fight "a recipe for disaster," adding that it's "evidently and increasingly clear" that Romney will be the GOP nominee. It led to this on-air endorsement:
For those who can't clips online, here's the part where Rubio said nice things about the candidate he now formally supports: "In Mitt Romney, we have a candidate, an alternative, that in addition to being successful as a governor running an important state in this country, has also been successful in the private sector and offers a very clear alternative to the direction this president is going to take our country."
That was it. In making his high-profile endorsement of Romney on national television, Rubio offered one sentence about why he believes Romney should be president of the United States. Indeed, after saying this one sentence, Rubio went back to talking about how important it is for the party to pick a nominee before the convention.
The senator spoke at length and with great passion about why he detests President Obama, and similarly, went on and on about the perils of a prolonged nomination fight, but when touting the man he wants to be leader of the free world next year, Rubio came up with one underwhelming sentence.
This isn't a good sign. What's more, it appears to be part of a pattern.
Remember, last week Jeb Bush threw his support to Romney -- in a press release, with no public statement -- with generic praise. The former Florida governor said he supports Romney, not because he's a visionary leader for our times, but because 34 states have held primaries and caucuses, so it seems like as good a time as any to "unite."
Rubio's remarks on Fox News were similar: Romney's fine, but what really matters is wrapping up the process and attacking the president.
These aren't Republican leaders who look at their party's likely nominee and say, "Romney is an inspiration and will be a terrific American president." Rather, these are Republican leaders who seem to be arguing, "Romney's adequate, there's no one else, so let's get this over with."
The GOP doesn't believe in Romney; the GOP is willing to settle on Romney because it doesn't feel as if it has much of a choice.
The absence of passion is hard to miss.
Postscript: Asked towards the end of the interview about joining the Romney ticket as the vice presidential nominee, the senator said, "That's not what I want to be." As best as I can tell, that's the first time Rubio has said this publicly, and I'm inclined to think it was an accident.
Leave a Comment:
Ernest (the late Jim Varney) sed: "Hot water! You warn people about Hot water! But nobody warns people about Lukewarm water! Nobody says: Watchout! Its LUKE!"
There is a lesson here, with my compliments :)
Safely endorsed after it becomes apparent that Mitts the nominee.
Rubio is a duplicitous POS who will do or say anything to get elected . He rode the Teabag wave because it was convenient. You have to have lived in South Florida to really understand that the Cuban Americans really think they are something special because of a fluke of 1960's cold war politics. Ask all those Teabaggin' Cubans about the "Help" as they fondly refer to Government assistance that they get the minute that their feet hit American soil and they are granted refugee status .
It's time to engage in a national debate about the similarities between running a country and a business. We don't elect a president to make a profit for its investors. At least not where the investment is defined strictly in terms of dollars. Mitt Romney's nomination is truly a perversion of what our national goals should be.
While I agree with your statement, the fact is that statement is just way too complicated for the sheeple to understand. You might want to throw in the words "freedom, the constitution, and liberty" - it might perk up their ears.....
You're right, running a business has different priorities then running a country. However, they have one thing in common. Each earns revenues and must prioritize expenses to balance. The federal government has the luxary of being able to run deficits to add stimulus. However, deficits need to be managed so that the cumulative debt does not overwhelm the revenue stream.
We seem to be in an environment where entitlements know no end. There is no rational basis for the arguments being espoused. "Cut spending, but don't touch my medicare" I want universal health care, but don't charge me for it." "Stay in wars, but don't cut defense."
As reported in the NYT, Obama and Boehner came close to a deal to rein in the debt and deficit. But then politics won. As I read the article, it reinforced my belief that Obama is just over his head. When you negotiate, trust is utmost. When Obama turned to support the gang of 6 proposal, he needlessly pulled the rug from under Boehner's legs. That shows inexperience.
The most positive aspect of Rommey is, as a business person, he knows how to negotiate. He understands the importance of trust. While any negotiation involves winners and losers, the primary goal is to strike a balance so all get some of what they want.
Tom, if this is true about Romney, then why does he continually distort and twist facts and tell outright lies about Obama and even his GOP opponents? How does that demonstrate his understanding of the importance of trust?
Personally I wouldn't give this man a dollar to go across the street and get me a newspaper. I don't think I'd ever see him, the newspaper, or the dollar again.
It's called politics, when people embellish the truth. Like Obama claimed drilling increased during his term. It's mostly on private lands, with no credit to the Obama admin. Should I call him a liar?
These repuke politicians need to get more excited about their endorsements of Mittens!
For example, they could say:
- Mitt's my man. He's probably not a democrat and he is definitely not a n!gger!
or
- I wholeheartedly support Mitt Romney. It is damn well time that the 1/10 of 1%ers have one of their own as president and especially one who is not afraid to let everyone know the scorn that he has for the peon classes!
or
Mitt Romney is the best qualified person in our party to challenge Obama for the presidency. He best understands the solutions to the most pressing problems of our national economy - that 1) the wealthy do not have enough wealth; 2) we have too large a middle class and it must be reduced in size; and 3) the poor do not pay enough taxes. Mitt Romney has the answers.
I just have to wonder how low a person has to go to use thr n word. I am not naive enough to believe the word has been erased, but do believe people have enough discretion to only use it in private. Please stop using it in public. It demeans YOU. And, no one listens to you.
A business man president may have a good idea or 2 but cannot fire the Russians, Iranians or Koreans when they do not agree or capitulate. Someone who does not understand the role humility plays in diplomacy increases conflict. We may mean well but are not always right.We are not capable of policing the world alone and to even consider this is a catastrophe waiting to happen. If Russia is laughing at Romney the candidate, think of the lack of respect if he becomes POTUS.
Iranians have already slept with Americans and visa- versa
I thought GWB was a bidnessman...oh never mind
If you put Rubio and Romney back to back what do you have? A pack of lies....
This stand your ground law is about as ridiculous as it gets, just as the people who created it without any thought behind it. These people must live in a fantasy world where they think up imaginary and ridiculous things. Besides these people pandering to extreme radicals of hatred and racists, they lack any thought in the actions that they do and any careful thought and rational thinking behind it. Now they do indeed have a very destructive law that does promote the murder of people without any form of justice or civility. And on top of it let’s reduce law enforcement and encourage our law enforcement that is left to help aid in this destructive law. These people have to be about as sick as they can get and have no remorse, forethought or feelings in their actions that they take. Now that is about as dumb as you can get and has nothing to do with being smart.
His comments about the President are typical of what I have heard from every republican. He didn't identify one single policy or issue on which the President's actions have been wrong or bad. He just said that the President didn't have the experience to do the job before he took it. If this administration has been so bad shouldn't these guys be able to identify specific policies that hurt the country and how their proposed policies would make these better? In fact, every single policy proposed by every single republican candidate seem to me to be designed to make the country worse off economically, other than perhaps for the top 1%, to hurt the environment, and to take rights and freedom away, especially from women.
@Tom, no matter what occurred in the negotiations, one expects more of the Speaker of the House than to curl up in a ball of wet tears over whatever challenges may come during the course of those negotiations. But further, given that the whole premise of the phonied-up "debt ceiling crisis" was a false one invented by Republicans, it’s amazing that they were taken as seriously by the president as they were (the deficit has actually decreased under this president, and John Boehner, et al. didn’t pass a single piece of legislation that had anything to do with it – in fact, Republicans immediately INCREASED the deficit by insisting on extending Bush’s unfunded tax cuts).
But back to the point - when one is a seasoned negotiator, one expects twists, turns and challenges. Instead of having the guts to continue going mano a mano with Pres. Obama, Boehner crumpled and ran around crying to anyone who would listen, while at the same time, ducking the President’s phone calls, and blaming him for his own inability to lead the GOP caucus. That is a portrait of someone who is in over his head.
As for Romney, as a one-term governor, he was third from last in the nation on job creation. As a candidate, Romney has made the wrong call on everything – especially the auto industry - if his perspective had prevailed, millions of Americans would have been thrown out of work - but that prospect doesn’t seem to faze Romney in the least, and why would it, as that's how he swelled his privileged wealth in the first place - picking over the bones of companies.
Add to it, we recently had a "businessman" as POTUS, and the policies he supported and initiated caused a national economic meltdown - now Romney wants to come in as a "severe conservative" and triple-down on those failed policies - in what world does that even make an iota of sense? Put Romney’s record as a vulture capitalist and as a governor side-by-side with Pres. Obama’s, and there simply is no comparison. Pres. Obama has had more successful policies under more difficult circumstances than Romney ever faced in his four years as governor and in his several years of running for president. What would Romney do when faced with the kinds of enormous challenges President Obama has had to navigate? Not an inspiring scenario to contemplate.