Marco Rubio hates his current job, so promote him... ?
Maybe Rubio is doing us a favor though. He was for immigration reform, before he was against it. He opposes normalization with Cuba. He doesn't support the Affordable Care Act, despite taking the subsidy to have it. Rubio has been a legislator for a long time, and he's not all that good at it. Take for instance his support for the "Scarlet Letter" Law in the Florida Assembly:
This is a unique argument. I hate my current job, it's hard, so promote me to President. That's hard to argue. So a Florida paper that endorsed him isn't buying it-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.
For $174,000 a year, I would show up for work. Marco doesn't have those rules though- those rules are for other people:The South Florida Sun-Sentinel editorial board agrees.In a ferocious editorial, the paper makes the same demand. "Marco Rubio should resign, not rip us off."Sorry, senator, but Floridians sent you to Washington to do a job. We've got serious problems with clogged highways, eroding beaches, flat Social Security checks and people who want to shut down the government.If you hate your job, senator, follow the honorable lead of House Speaker John Boehner and resign it.The editorial notes Rubio's Senate salary -- $174,000 a year -- and compares Rubio's attendance unfavorably with Sens. Rand Paul and Bernie Sanders, both of whom are also running for president but who have not seen the same level of absenteeism. (Since July, Paul has missed 12 of 81 votes; Sanders has missed four.)
The Sun-Sentinel also bashed Rubio for appearing in the Senate to criticize federal workers that weren't doing their jobs, something we noted last week. "You said, 'there is really no other job in the country where if you don't do your job, you don't get fired,'" the editorial board wrote. "With the exception of your job, right?"
"By choosing to stay in the Senate and get the publicity, perks and pay that go with the position — without doing the work — you are taking advantage of us," they wrote, concluding, "Either do your job, Sen. Rubio, or resign it."
Maybe Rubio is doing us a favor though. He was for immigration reform, before he was against it. He opposes normalization with Cuba. He doesn't support the Affordable Care Act, despite taking the subsidy to have it. Rubio has been a legislator for a long time, and he's not all that good at it. Take for instance his support for the "Scarlet Letter" Law in the Florida Assembly:
What a disgusting vote. What a disgusting guy. Marco, go home, and stop bothering America.Sen. Marco Rubio (R) was among the Florida state legislators who voted for the so-called “Scarlet Letter” law in 2001 that required single mothers to publish their sexual histories in the newspaper in order to place their babies up for adoption.Five U.S. congressmen – Reps. Mario Diaz-Balart (R), Lois Frankel (D), Jeff Miller (R), Gus Bilirakis (R) and Dennis Ross (R) – were state legislators at the time and voted for the controversial bill. Reps. Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D), Frederica Wilson (D), Daniel Webster (R), and Bill Posey (R), who were also state legislators back then, voted against it.The law, which passed with overwhelming majorities in the House and Senate, required unwed moms who wished to put their babies up for adoptions to post details about their recent sexual encounters in the newspaper in an attempt to contact the father, even if the woman was a victim of rape or incest. The purpose of the bill was to inform estranged biological fathers that their children were being adopted and give them the chance to intervene.
No comments:
Post a Comment