marco rubio caricature flickr cc
Earlier today I posted on Marco Rubio slagging Breitbart for its absence of journalistic integrity. He said they deal in conspiracy theories, a more accurate assessment is that they are like Buzzfeed that is All-Trump-All-the-Time. While I’m all in favor of candidates distancing themselves from an alleged news site that is becoming more odoriferous and disreputable by the day, I am agnostic on the story of which Rubio was the subject. The reason for that is that it rings all too true. Coming from Breitbart is could easily be the over-the-top crap they generate in order to make revenue targets. Rubio’s denial, on the other hand, is similar to the other meretricious denials he has made about his own history of being very soft and very weak on immigration.

Rubio has developed an uncomfortable habit of being very economical with the truth and of talking out of both sides of his mouth. For instance, today he had this to say about Breitbart:

RUBIO: We don’t even we don’t even credential them for our events. This is the same website that reported Fox News, and that you and you guys and your debate gave me the questions to the debate so I can prepare.

Really?

Only three days ago, Rubio wrote and op-ed for Breitbart’s Big Government franchise.

rubio breitbart op ed

How does that work? Does Rubio not credential Breitbart correspondents but he does provide content to their website? Can we expect Rubio op-eds in InfoWars? Will he be interviewed by Alex Jones? Or did Rubio decide to label Breitbart a site being prone to conspiracy theories when he was hit in the weakest area of his candidacy.

Oddly enough, on the same day that appeared I posted on Rubio’s outrageous claim that he had never intended for the Gang of Eight bill to become law. No one, least of all Rubio, believes this. Which leaves one wondering just how stupid does he think we are… a question that is quickly answered when you consider he what he just told you.

Similarly, Rubio has been in the forefront slagging Ted Cruz for the Iowa non-troversy involving Ben Carson’s campaign when we know that Rubio’s campaign was also circulating the same story. By the way, the most grotesque liar on this front, other than Ben Carson, is CNN’s Dylan Byers who insists that there was nothing in the CNN broadcast that implied Carson was quitting.

I’ve said many times that I would be very happy to cast a vote for Marco Rubio if he is our candidate. But I have to admit I don’t trust him. I see a lot of the Bill Clinton of 1992 in the way you have to parse and fact check his statements. I’d feel much more comfortable about his willingness to confront illegal immigration if he simply owned his role in the Gang of Eight and acknowledged he was snookered. But at some level he feels that he can’t do this. Having witnessed two presidents now, Clinton and Obama, who are estranged from the truth, I’d feel much more comfortable about Rubio if I felt his glibness had a bit of sincerity attached. But it doesn’t. And that is a problem.