I have seen and heard Senator Marco Rubio's new radio/television ads pushing the
comprehensive continuous open borders Amnesty Bill forged by the 
"gang of eight". It appears that he has drunk the same Kool Aid that President Reagan drank as he signed his Amnesty Bill into law with great fanfare in 1986. At the time I got a sinking feeling in the pit of my stomach as the reality hit hard - it was just another "kick-the-can-down-the-road, do-nothing bill. Now, in 2013, over a quarter of a century later, twenty-seven years, I was proven right. I will make that same claim again, but next time it will be 2040. I will be ninety-four or dead by then. Unfortunately, I will more than likely be the latter, no thanks to Obamacare either.
More voters notice lately how the political direction of Senator Marco Rubio is a growing disappointment. It appears his shining Presidential star is burning out as he enters onto the national stage while another star appears as his true guiding light brightly coming out for everyone to see.
Is it a new star like a supernova or just another black hole, considered a dead star, like Bob Dole, George H. W. Bush, G. W. Bush, John McCain, George Romney, Jeb Bush, all RINOs, Republican-In-Name-Only.
A snappy picture on a National Review cover naming Senator Rubio a "Florida Conservative" doesn't start to cut it!
Rubio must now claim his conservative values to play for the GOP future!
The RedState blog below is an excellent heads-up report on how Facebook founder, Ubber-leftist Mark Zuckerberg; Google Chairman, Eric Schmidt and Founder of Microsoft, Bill Gates funded propaganda groups FWD.US and Americans for a Conservative Direction to advance the cause of a large scale rewrite of U.S. immigration policy to mislead and direct the electorate to support the upcoming Amnesty Bill currently being debated in Congress. This bill was crafted behind closed doors with the help of special interests, including big business, big labor, and ethnic front groups, instead of by the relevant subcommittee. This is not just a bill that remakes our current economy; it remakes the orientation of our society.
The majority of U.S. voters do not really pay attention to anything political, but they do watch a lot of reality TV shows and sensational exposé leaving very little time for news except for sound bites and news clips during a station break. These news cycles, right or wrong, drive home political views, win over public opinion, change laws and overturn candidate elections.
Mark Levin, a Constitutional lawyer and talk show host, discusses how these liberal Silcon Valley moguls' agenda persuade public opinions.
Time 3:20
Egregious Ads and Polls from Mark Zuckerberg’s Front Group
Imagine the biggest conservative donors in America banding together to form a group, “Progressives for Retirement Security,” for the purpose of promoting private retirement accounts. Imagine that group running ads starring Chuck Schumer promoting private Social Security accounts as examples of bold progressive reform.
Don’t worry, hell will freeze over from global warming before that happens.
If you’ve been watching Fox News or listening to talk radio this week, you’ve been subjected to the most nauseating duplicitous ads ever unleashed on conservatives. Ubber-leftist Mark Zuckerberg’s Orwellian-front group, “Americans for a Conservative Direction,” which is run by Arlen Specter Republicans, is running ads calling the 867-page immigration deform bill “the toughest immigration enforcement measures in the history of the United States” and “conservative reform” designed to end “defacto amnesty.” The ad shows Marco Rubio discussing all the triggers and qualifications for amnesty, even though he has now admitted that they need to be strengthened and that he’d like to work with conservatives to do so.
What’s next? Ads from ‘Conservatives for Obamacare,’ funded by George Soros?
To buttress the lies expressed in the ad, Zuckerberg’s group put out a push-poll showing how 71% of voters, and 74% of conservative Republicans(!), support the Senate gang bill. Take a look at the wording of the question:
As you may have heard, there is a proposal facing Congress to reform the nation’s immigration laws. This proposal would establish a pathway to citizenship for the estimated 11 million undocumented immigrants presently in the country as long as they pass a criminal background check, pay a fine and back taxes, learn English, and wait at least 13 years. The plan would also allow more high-skilled immigrants into the country in technology, science and engineering fields and create a guest worker program to address labor shortages in industries like agriculture and construction. Finally, the plan would require a series of increased border security measures before anyone here illegally can apply for citizenship – including greater enforcement, extended fencing along the border and a requirement that all employers verify the legal status of individuals before hiring them….Do you support or oppose this proposal?
Wow – sign me up…I’m surprised there are even 20% who would oppose such a plan when expressed that way.
Now take a look at real polling data that is as plain and innocuous as can be:
Do you favor or oppose requiring completion of new border security measures first — before making other changes to immigration policies?
68 percent are in favor; 22% are opposed. Even 66% of Democrats agree support enforcement first.
Should those who are now in this country illegally be granted legal status right away or should that come only after the border is secured?
Similar to the Fox News result, 66% favor security first. Byron York has the crosstabs:
The majority in favor of security-first cut across all party and demographic lines. Seventy-one percent of men support it; 60 percent of women; 59 percent of young people; 67 percent of middle-aged people; 75 percent of older Americans; 68 percent of whites; 62 percent of blacks; 56 percent of others; 82 percent of Republicans; 53 percent of Democrats; 65 percent of independents; 81 percent of conservatives; 59 percent of moderates; 51 percent of liberals; 77 percent of people who make under $30,000 a year; 66 percent of those who make between $30,000 and $50,000 a year; 66 percent of those who make between $50,000 and $100,000; 55 percent of those who make between $100,000 and $200,000; 51 percent of those who make more than $200,000; 75 percent of veterans; and 64 percent of non-veterans.
Then, when asked “how likely is it that the federal government would secure border and prevent illegal immigration,” just 30% answered in the affirmative while 57% said it was not very or not at all likely.
The reality is that no amount of left-wing money can ameliorate this pig. The GOP base is not like the pool of low-information voters they are used to manipulating, and they will not be sucked into this sham. That is…all of them except for the few Mark Zuckerberg conservatives in the country.