Marco Rubio: DISQAULIFIED

Even though Marco Rubio has suspended his campaign I’m going to do a short spiel about why, in my opinion, he should not be the GOP presidential nominee. I will say upfront without any reservations that I felt Rubio was a good conservative and would have eventually become a wonderful national leader for the conservative movement. With that said I will now tell you why I do not want Rubio as our president. I’ve said on several occasions in the past that I believe illegal immigration is almost without equal when it comes to the destruction it will wreak on every aspect of the American way of life. It will destroy the United States as a sovereign nation with no borders; it will destroy our economy; it will destroy our job market; it will decrease wages; it will overburden and destroy our school systems and our healthcare; last but not least it will destroy any hopes of attaining a sustainable level of national security.

My stance against illegal immigration takes second place only to my right to keep and bear arms. Illegal immigration will destroy the United States of America but at least I will still have a weapon to defend myself, my family, and my belongings. But, alas, I fear that would be a short-lived existence.

The above brings me to why I wouldn’t want Rubio as US president. Rubio was new to the U.S. Senate in 2010 and as a freshman senator was wide-eyed and naive enough to listen to a group of socialists and RINOs about immigration reform. The sad part being he was a reasonably good Conservative role model up until that point. But because I feel so strongly about illegal immigration I can be a one issue candidate in this instance. As a freshman senator Rubio seemed to be easily influenced by the old dogs in the Senate who had a specific agenda to advance: amnesty. The old dog Senators I’m talking about were John McCain (R-AZ), Lindsey Graham, (R-SC) Chuck Schumer (D-NY), Robert Menendez (D-NJ), Dick Durbin (D-IL). Those were the five senior Senate members that made up the amnesty-pushing “Gang of Eight”. The other three members of the gang were Rubio, Michael Bennett (D-CO; 2010), and Jeff Flake (R-AZ; 2012). Jeff Flake has little chance of becoming a national leader in the Conservative movement while under the influence of what is an obvious mentor: John McCain. Bennet's excuse is simple: he is liberal. All three of these young “sad sacks” were courted and defiled by the five “dirty old men”.

The “Gang of Eight” legislation I’ve been talking about is Senate Bill 744 (submitted to the Senate on April 16, 2013). It was introduced as the Schumer/Rubio bill. You’ll notice that the big dog John McCain was wise enough not to put his name on the bill as the Republican cosponsor. I believe in current terminology it could be said that McCain “threw Marco under the bus”. That being another indication of John McCain’s lack of integrity. It remains to be seen if Rubio’s membership in the “Gang of Eight” will leave a permanent scar on his otherwise decent Conservative record but it cannot be argued that it didn't play a major role in his lack of Conservative support through this 2016 presidential campaign.

Here are the four tenets of the “Gang of Eight” platform and some of my snarky comments about each:

1.     .     A tough but fair path to citizenship.
2.            Improve America’s legal immigration system.
3.               Strong employment verification.
4.          Protecting workers rights.

Here are my comments on each of the four tenets:

      1.  The strongest argument in favor of amnesty was that it was not going to lead to                                     immediate citizenship. Schumer’s next bill would have granted citizenship to the illegals that               were just granted amnesty. That process may have taken all of 30 minutes. The American                     public really is not that stupid.

      2.       America has had an outstanding legal immigration system in place for over 100 years. The                 lesson we’ve learned in the last 40 years is simple: if the federal government refuses to                         enforce the immigration laws as written it doesn’t mean the laws are broken it means the                     government is broken. We don’t need to improve the system we need to enforce it. I will                     modify a line from the old movie The Treasure of the Sierra Madres: "We don't need no                       stinking amnesty". I left out the profanity even though it would have been appropriate in this               situation!

      3.       As in #2 above, the system of verification is only as good as those who do the verifying.

      4.       Amnesty does not protect American workers rights so that tenant is obviously addressing                      illegal workers rights. The following statement will make me a racist and/or a bigot: I’ve                      always wondered why non-Americans are granted US constitutional rights.

I transitioned nicely from Rubio himself directly into a rant about amnesty for illegal aliens. Now I’m going to take it one step further and tell you what I believe is the true nature of the liberals’ reason for amnesty. I talked about this in my book Freedom Permits and I touched on it in the #2 comment above: liberals don’t give a rat’s rear end about the individuals who receive amnesty other than the fact that they will become Democrat voters. Having made that statement makes me wonder why McCain and Graham are in favor of amnesty. They both have left-leaning ideologies so maybe in the future they plan to put a "D" behind each of their names and they will then be afforded perpetual federal jobs. No other explanation works.

God Bless America!!!