Why Won’t Marco Answer?

It’s the Singer Not the Song: On Sunday, Bob Scheiffer asked Marco Rubio if as president he’d sign his own “Gang of 8” immigration bill. Rubio ducked, saying “That’s a hypothetical.” Yes, it is! A germane and highly informative hypothetical, which he should be able to answer. It’s his damn bill. He tried to foist it on us. Why won’t he tell us if he’d sign it? And if Rubio’s so keen on letting Republican primary voters know he’s learned his lesson, why isn’t the answer he gives simply “No, I wouldn’t sign it today”?

I don’t see the upside for Rubio in waffling — if he gets the nomination there will be plenty of ways to backslide and re-suck-up to Latino ethnocentrists. (And isn’t the point of nominating a Latino like Rubio that he doesn’t have to suck up?) Byron York notes that there was a lot of junk in the Gang of 8 bill, providing a smorgasbord of reasons for Rubio to cite when justifying  his change of heart. …

It’s hard not to suspect that Rubio’s potential money men — including pro-amnesty casino mogul Sheldon Adelson and pro-amnesty billionaire hedgie Paul Singer — are influencing him to leave the Amnesty First door open. That would also explain why Rubio hasn’t lately been saying what York heard him say back in August –– that he’d require immigration-control measures be actually “up and running — before legalization.” [York’s paraphrase] …