ADVERTISEMENT

Marco...Marco...Marco...

THE_DEVIL

THE_DEVIL

HB King
Gold Member
Aug 16, 2005
66,034
82,711
113
Hell, Michigan
www.livecoinwatch.com
Marco Rubio Falls Apart When Asked Why He Has Missed The Most Votes In The Senate

In an interview that aired on CNN’s State of the Union, Jamie Gangel pointed out to Rubio that other Senators running for president (Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders) have only missed ten votes while the Senator from Florida has missed 59.

Rubio answered, “Well, I can tell you that in the history of presidential politics when they’ve been running for politics in the Senate, they’ve missed votes.”


Sen. Rubio tried to explain away his absences by arguing that the Senate votes don’t mean anything, “A lot of these votes don’t mean anything. They’re not going to pass, and even if they did, the President would veto them.”

Gangel reminded Rubio of his comments on the Senate floor that federal workers who aren’t performing should be fired, “Someone might say you’re not showing up. You’re not doing your job by voting.”

Caught in his hypocrisy, Rubio tried to dig his way out, “Not true. Because voting is not the most important part of the job. The most important thing that a Senator does is constituent services. ”


Gangel stopped him, “Wait a minute. Votes aren’t important. Intelligence Committee hearing aren’t important.”

Rubio was doomed by this point, “We do all the intelligence briefings. I was just there this Tuesday. I got fully briefed and caught up on everything that’s happening in the world. I’m fully aware. We have a staffer that’s assigned to intelligence who gets constant briefings. I think votes,of course, are important, but unfortunately, too many of them today are not meaningful.”

The main purpose of a Senator is to represent the people of his/her state in the Senate. The people aren’t represented if their Senator doesn’t show up. Taxpayers are not paying Rubio a six figure salary to have a staffer handle intelligence briefings.

Once Rubio realized what he had said, he tried to backtrack, but it was too late. Marco Rubio seems to be believe that he doesn’t have to show up and do his job as a Senator because Republicans don’t have a 60 vote majority in the Senate.

Rubio avoided the pointed about his not attending committee hearings by claiming that he gets briefings. Briefings are like skipping class and borrowing a friend’s notes to get caught up on what you missed.

The Republican establishment loves Rubio’s look and bio. No one in establishment politics can figure out why he is failing. Sen. Rubio’s constant habit of self-destructing every time he opens his mouth is why his presidential campaign is going nowhere fast.

Rubio wants to be in the Senate so that he can run for president, but he appears to have no interest in doing his job as a Senator. Marco Rubio’s lack of commitment to the people who elected to serve him is the reason he doesn’t deserve to be in the Senate, much less be considered a serious contender for the White House.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pinehawk and lucas80
Gee... who else does this remind me of? There was this Senator from Chicago who wanted to be President... I can't quite remember his name, though....
 
  • Like
Reactions: 22*43*51
gmpress.jpg
 
Never understood why having a drink of water is such a bad thing. If he had a frog in his throat and sounded like a 40-year smoker, he would have been made fun of for that, too.
 
He hates the Senate:

Marco Rubio is a U.S. senator. And he just can’t stand it anymore.

“I don’t know that ‘hate’ is the right word,” Rubio said in an interview. “I’m frustrated.”

This year, as Rubio runs for president, he has cast the Senate — the very place that cemented him as a national politician — as a place he’s given up on, after less than one term. It’s too slow. Too rule-bound. So Rubio, 44, has decided not to run for his seat again. It’s the White House or bust.

“That’s why I’m missing votes. Because I am leaving the Senate. I am not running for reelection,” Rubio said in the last Republican debate, after Donald Trump had mocked him for his unusual number of absences during Senate votes.

Five years ago, Rubio arrived with a potential that thrilled Republicans. He was young, ambitious, charismatic, fluent in English and Spanish, and beloved by the establishment and the tea party.

But Rubio had arrived at one of the least ambitious moments in Senate history and saw many of his ideas fizzle. Democrats killed his debt-cutting plans. Republicans killed his immigration reform. The two parties actually came together to kill his AGREE Act, a small-bore, hands-across-the-aisle bill that Rubio had designed just to get a win on something.

Now, he’s done. “He hates it,” a longtime friend from Florida said, speaking anonymously to say what Rubio would not.

Which makes for an odd campaign message.

Rubio must convince voters that his decision to leave the Senate — giving up the power he already has — is actually a mark of character, a sign that he is too dedicated to public service to stay.

Rubio is not a quitter, the argument goes.

In fact, that’s precisely why he’s quitting this place.

“He wouldn’t be doing what he’s doing now if he were a quitter,” said Norman Braman, a Florida auto dealer and one of Rubio’s longtime donors.

On the campaign trail, Rubio comes under attack from rivals who say he’s become an absentee federal employee. Former Florida governor Jeb Bush, in a less-than-subtle knock on his former homestate ally, has said senators who miss work should have their pay docked.

“It’s just, kind of, like, dude, you know, either drop out or do something,” Bush’s son, Jeb Bush Jr., told New York University College Republicans earlier this month, in comments first reported by Politico Florida. The junior Bush, a Floridian, cast himself as an aggrieved constituent. “We’re paying you to do something, it ain’t run for president.”

Rubio waves off the criticism, saying his rejection of the Senate is all about finding a better way to serve all Americans.

“I’m not missing votes because I’m on vacation,” he told CNN on Sunday. “I’m running for president so that the votes they take in the Senate are actually meaningful again.”

Asked about his absences recently by Matt Lauer on NBC’s “Today” Show, Rubio said: “My ambitions aren’t for me. My ambitions are for the country, and Florida.” If he is elected to the White House, he added, “we can begin to fix some of these issues that I’ve been so frustrated we’ve been unable to address during my time in the Senate.”

It is clear that Rubio’s frustration started early.

Rubio had arrived in January, after a stunning defeat of Charlie Crist, Florida’s sitting governor. Rubio had previously held the job of Florida House speaker, which had put him in the middle of one legislative fight after another.

But in Washington at that point, action was not an option. The House had been taken by Republicans. Democrats still had the Senate. And those Democrats — who’d previously passed huge bills on Wall Street reform, health care and financial stimulus — saw little upside to crafting new, complicated bills. That might force vulnerable Democrats to take votes that could be used against them. And, if they did, the House would probably kill the bills anyway.

So the Senate fell into a bitter somnolence, interrupted by moments of panic.

Rubio had proposed an ambitious freshman agenda: cutting spending, rolling back EPA rules in Florida, even a clever legislative trolling effort to cut the money for signs that said this-and-such project was bankrolled by President Obama’s stimulus bill.

All failed. Rubio’s only successful bill that year was one to name September as National Spinal Cord Injury Awareness Month.

In December of that year, a Florida reporter asked Rubio about the highlights of his first year in office.

“I can’t think of a single real high point,” Rubio said.

In his second year, Rubio had better numbers. He got four bills through the Senate. But all were symbolic resolutions, including such controversial items as “A resolution congratulating the Miami Heat for winning the National Basketball Association Championship.”

In his third year, however, it appeared that Rubio’s moment had finally come.

He joined a bipartisan “Gang of Eight” that negotiated a massive immigration-reform effort. He argued with talk-radio hosts, trying to sell conservatives on a plan that would give illegal immigrants a path toward citizenship.

Then, when the bill came to the Senate floor, Rubio gave the speech of his career. He used his own parents’ story: They emigrated from Cuba and worked as a bartender and a maid while Rubio was growing up. He talked about the American dream — and how immigrants treasure it and nurture it.

“Here in America, those who once had no hope will give their kids the chance at a life they always wanted for themselves. Here in America” — he tapped the lectern — “generations of unfulfilled dreams will finally come to pass. And that’s why I support this reform,” Rubio said.

The bill passed, giving Rubio the kind of victory that most freshman senators could only dream of.

For a moment, it also seemed to validate his strategy of working within the slow-moving Senate’s limitations. Two freshmen with presidential ambitions — Republican Sens. Rand Paul (Ky.) and Ted Cruz (Tex.) — had rejected that go-along strategy and instead used marathon speeches and other tactics to stop the system in its tracks.

But soon, Rubio’s moment was over.

The House Republicans didn’t move on immigration. Rubio didn’t push them. Then, Cruz seized the spotlight, as he started a parliamentary game of chicken that ended with a government shutdown.

After that, friends and staffers started to see something different in Rubio. There was a new level of frustration and a new sense that he was looking beyond the place. In his Senate floor speeches, Rubio talked often about his family’s humble backstory. In late 2013 and 2014, he told the Senate six different times that his father had been a bartender.

His colleagues already knew, of course. But Rubio was aiming at people who didn’t know — people on the other side of a TV camera.

In the past couple of years, some of Rubio’s other policy ideas have actually become law.

His Girls Count Act, which prods developing countries to register girls’ births and give them greater property rights, became law on his second try. His idea to allow the VA administrator greater freedom to fire incompetent leaders also became law, tucked into a larger bill.

But it’s also been clear that Rubio’s ambitions were aimed elsewhere.

He began missing votes. He skipped 10 percent of them in 2014 — making him one of the most absent senators, with the 88th-best attendance record, according to statistics kept by GovTrack.us. He began missing committee work, even on the subject he most identified with. In 2014, Rubio missed 34 of 68 committee hearings and meetings in the Foreign Relations committee, according to his office’s tally.

When Rubio tells the story of his career, the moment that he gave up on the Senate does not come until later.

“For two years, we just tried to slow-dance and wait for the 2012 election,” in the hopes of winning a Republican majority, Rubio said. “And then, when that didn’t work out, we spent two years trying to position ourselves for ’14.”

Then Republicans did win a majority that year. But, Rubio said, he was still told to be patient. The majority was still too small to overcome Democratic filibusters or override presidential vetoes.

“Now it’s [2015], and the argument is, ‘We’ve gotta wait to elect the president,’ ” he said.

That meant the same frustrations, under a new boss. And that was it.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2015/10/25/28cfaff0-6d59-11e5-9bfe-e59f5e244f92_story.html
 
  • Like
Reactions: THE_DEVIL
theIowaHawk said:
You are clearly anti-Obama, and now you are placing Rubio on the same plane....stands to reason you don't approve of him.
Click to expand...

My opinion of Obama is not related to his attendence. Hell, he could play golf for the next 378 days and my opinion of him would dramatically improve.
 
I don't think this will be the stumble that derails a promising campaign, but who knows these days? As I said elsewhere, I think his bid is looking good based on 2 good debate performances, but is still fragile.

He needs to be delivering a knock-out blow to Bush, so that he's the viable candidate who brings Florida. He doesn't need this sort of nonsense.

Of course he can't change the fact that he missed a lot of votes. Or that he is "quitting" the Senate. So he needs strong control of the message.
 
THE_DEVIL said:
Link to BHO calling for the dismissal of fed employees ?
Click to expand...
He didn't but he spent two years in the Senate. Both those years he was running. The larger point is.... These questions are never asked of a dem and if they are asked there is no follow up
 
The Tradition said:
Never understood why having a drink of water is such a bad thing. If he had a frog in his throat and sounded like a 40-year smoker, he would have been made fun of for that, too.
Click to expand...
It's because he looks like a kid caught shoplifting, or peeking into the neighbor girl's window. I don't know why he looks so deer-in-headlights, and guilty - but he does.

It's not a serious way to judge a candidate. But it will get used against him because it casts him in a light that flashes "I'm not really ready for this job."
 
What Would Jesus Do? said:
It's because he looks like a kid caught shoplifting, or peeking into the neighbor girl's window. I don't know why he looks so deer-in-headlights, and guilty - but he does.

It's not a serious way to judge a candidate. But it will get used against him because it casts him in a light that flashes "I'm not really ready for this job."
Click to expand...

And this performance is somehow better?

 
The Tradition said:
No, Rubio served in the Florida House (where he was speaker) before going to Washington.

That other guy didn't have any such experience.
Click to expand...

That is the line you are drawing? You complain about one of their experience, but overcome it by being a State speaker for 2 years? Jesus, they have about the same experience using your criteria.

Either get past it and support your guy or stop the blustering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman and moral_victory
theIowaHawk said:
That is the line you are drawing? You complain about one of their experience, but overcome it by being a State speaker for 2 years? Jesus, they have about the same experience using your criteria.

Either get past it and support your guy or stop the blustering.
Click to expand...

What? He has the same amount of U.S. Senate experience, but also has state House experience, and leadership experience as well.
 
theIowaHawk said:
8 years as state rep, 2 as speaker, junior senator = experienced. 7 years as state senator, junior senator = inexperienced.

Funny.
Click to expand...

My bad. I forgot Obama served in the Illinois Senate. Probably the whole "Manchurian Candidate" thing wiped that from my memory banks.
 
The Tradition said:
I don't know enough about what's in the TPP to have an opinion, but I sure don't like all the secrecy surrounding it.
Click to expand...
Almost nobody knows enough about what's in the TPP to have a well-rounded opinion about all of it, but enough has been leaked about a few sections that the rest would have to be awesomely wonderful to make up for what we do know.

The primary problem that we DO know about from leaks is that it circumvents, or can be used to circumvent US law and potentially even the US constitution. Sounds impossible, right? But it's true. If US law gives any trading advantage to US businesses, for example, it can be challenged. So, to take a simple example, suppose your state decides to promote a "buy local" campaign to encourage employment and offers contracts to build a stadium or something with the stipulation that the bidders agree to buy and hire locally. Bzzzzt. That's a trade infringement. Disallowed. Congress has significant constitutional power over commerce. If that power is used in a way that gives US companies advantages, bzzzzt. Disallowed.

Note that US companies can use those same rules to slap aside foreign laws, too. But who does that really help us with? Norway? Lichtenstein? BFD.

Is there some dispute over whether US law is harming a foreign company? Maybe you think that dispute will go to the Supreme Court? Wrong. That dispute will be heard by a private committee of international lawyers chosen by corporations, not governments, and not subject to our laws. But when they rule against us and impose damages, then we can appeal to the Supreme Court, right? Wrong again. Under the TPP, they can withdraw the damages directly from the US Treasury.

OK, I'm no expert. So maybe I have some of that slightly wrong. But that's the sort of thing I've been reading. Moreover, it's the sort of thing at a lesser level of corporate and international arrogance that we already see under NAFTA, IMF rules and so on. Just a lot more aggressive, and all-inclusive.

There are other bad things we know. The TPP ramps up some rules and terms dealing with intellectual property. So it may be harder for companies to produce generic drugs, for example.

This helps big corporations evade regulations. If you are a Republican in America, that probably sounds great to you. But a lot of those regulations are ones Americans have fought for over the decades, if not centuries. You really don't want them to go away and drive the American worker toward the lowest common denominator of worker safety, pay, benefits, or security.
 
  • Like
Reactions: moral_victory
The Tradition said:
What? He has the same amount of U.S. Senate experience, but also has state House experience, and leadership experience as well.
Click to expand...
Wait a minute.

Your side has been screaming that that wasn't enough experience. We should have rejected Obama for that. It was obvious. No way he should have been considered qualified.

You guys have been saying this non-stop for years.

But now it's OK?
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman and naturalmwa
What Would Jesus Do? said:
Wait a minute.

Your side has been screaming that that wasn't enough experience. We should have rejected Obama for that. It was obvious. No way he should have been considered qualified.

You guys have been saying this non-stop for years.

But now it's OK?
Click to expand...

Obama has made me see the light. Pair him up with an experienced adult as veep, like Kasich, and you have a winning combination.
 
aflachawk said:
He didn't but he spent two years in the Senate. Both those years he was running. The larger point is.... These questions are never asked of a dem and if they are asked there is no follow up
Click to expand...

Yes they are. In fact, marking "present" has been a goto outrage position on Obama for years on these boards. If a Democrat led the Senate in missed votes, you better believe it would be brought up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cigaretteman
THE_DEVIL said:
Can't handle the press but they will be sooo hard on Putin that he will turn tail and run away.
Joe-Biden-Laughing-Shaking-his-Head.gif
Click to expand...

Tough to be hard on Putin when they are all too busy trying to give him a reach around. To be fair, I haven't seen much of the Putin genuflecting on these boards but holy moses the right wingers on my Facebook practically worship the guy.
 
BioHawk said:
Tough to be hard on Putin when they are all too busy trying to give him a reach around. To be fair, I haven't seen much of the Putin genuflecting on these boards but holy moses the right wingers on my Facebook practically worship the guy.
Click to expand...
You allow right wingers on your FB?

Pretty sure that's your mistake.
 
What Would Jesus Do? said:
You allow right wingers on your FB?

Pretty sure that's your mistake.
Click to expand...

It keeps me informed on what the talk of the day is. Plus, I don't like to make the same mistake that so many on the right do and stay in an echo chamber. Although I have booted the racist ones I used to have.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

cigaretteman

DeSantis picks Florida attorney general to replace Marco Rubio in Senate

Replies
23
Views
497
Off Topic
runkpanole
runkpanole
cigaretteman

Lara Trump to Step Down as R.N.C. Co-Chair Amid Florida Senate Speculation

Replies
1
Views
432
Off Topic
tumorboy
tumorboy
Morrison71

[NYT] EXCLUSIVE: Donald Trump to name Marco Rubio as Secretary of State

Replies
33
Views
638
Off Topic
Chishawk1425
Chishawk1425
cigaretteman

Lara Trump drops out of contention for U.S. Senate seat for Florida

Replies
13
Views
827
Off Topic
peacehawk
peacehawk
cigaretteman

Scores of career State Dept. diplomats resign before Trump’s inauguration

Replies
20
Views
303
Off Topic
Sullivan
S
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back