Rush Limbaugh mistakenly claims Marco Rubio walked back his amnesty pitch which heck was just a one time misstep the Tea Party reacted to. When Mark Levin has Rubio on his show he gets the same tingle Limbaugh does

.
4/26/15, "Limbaugh: Rubio can't help supporting amnesty because he's Hispanic," American Thinker, by Newsmachete

"Get this: Rush Limbaugh forgives Rubio's support for amnesty in part because...he's Hispanic. Yes, Rush Limbaugh strongly implied that  Rubio's Hispanic nature compelled him to push amnesty! Here's what Rush said:

Now, I know Rubio has lost a lot of luster with some people on the Tea Party side because of his flirtation with the Chuck-U Schumer gang on amnesty and immigration.  You can maybe chalk it up to two things. Chalk it up to novice naivete, trying to get his feet wet and establish himself within the power circles of the Senate.  Or another explanation for it could have been that, given his Hispanic heritage, he almost had to, in the sense of identity politics, if he had any chance at all of securing any votes from that sector, he had to come out in favor of it.

This is the very same bigotry of low expectations that we have come to expect from liberals – lower standards for women and minorities simply because they are women and minorities. Marco Rubio didn't have to come out in favor of amnesty because he was Hispanic; Ted Cruz is Hispanic, and he didn't feel compelled to come out in favor of amnesty. Despite his Hispanic background, Cruz found a better answer: following the law.

[Rush] But whatever, he's walked it back now, and we'll just see how this is all gonna play out with Tea Party people.

Since this was written, Rush may be unaware that since the time that Rubio has "walked it back," he has actually "continued walking it" by saying, in Spanish to Jorge Ramos, that he supports continued amnesty for "DREAMers," even before the border is secured.

[Rush]... he's an emotional speaker. In fact, at some point last night, a couple of points it looked to me like he almost might tear up.

We don't need another John Boehner.

The one thing about Rubio, whether you disagree with him on what he did with amnesty and then walked it back or not, he does not have a likability problem. He is instantly likable. He's motivational. He's inspirational in a Reaganesque way

Why do we want an inspirational leader who inspires people to do the wrong things?

He is a great communicator, significant communicator, has a conservative message. Just over here he has that misstep on immigration with the Tea Party.

Rubio didn't have a "misstep" with the Tea Party. He misled the voters of Florida. He campaigned against amnesty, was elected, and immediately went in the opposite direction. This is the only thing of consequence he has pushed since he was elected; what exactly is his "conservative" message?

Listen, I get it. He's young, he's handsome, he reminds people more of Ricky Martin than Cheech and Chong. But pushing leaders to the forefront simply because they happen to be Republican and they happen to be from a minority is the wrong policy.

I'm starting to think that Rush gets a tingling in his leg when it comes to Marco Rubio, just as Chris Matthews does for Obama. Mark Levin does it too when he has Rubio on his show and soft-pedals this "minor misstep." We're conservatives; let's treat everyone the same regardless of race, and let the chips fall where they may, okay?"

=======================

4/14/15, "Rush Limbaugh really really likes Marco Rubio," Washington Post, Aaron Blake

"Perhaps the biggest question Marco Rubio's nascent presidential campaign faces is whether conservatives will forgive him for spear-heading comprehensive immigration reform in 2013.
And one very well-known conservative has.

On his radio show Tuesday, Rush Limbaugh devoted plenty of time to praising Rubio in what can only be described as glowing terms. 

Yes, he said he wasn't happy about the "amnesty" thing, but he also seems to have pretty quickly moved past it. He even volunteered some excuses for Rubio.

A sampling:

"...Marco Rubio is a serious man, he has a serious message, and he has a very unmistakable joy in spreading that message, in informing people. He knows how to deliver it. He knows how to deliver it live. He doesn't have to announce on Twitter. He doesn't have to announce with a series of posts on social media. He can do it live in front of real people with a real camera. And he's an emotional speaker. In fact, at some point last night, a couple of points it looked to me like he almost might tear up. Now, I know Rubio has lost a lot of luster with some people on the Tea Party side because of his flirtation with the Chuck-U Schumer gang on amnesty and immigration.  You can maybe chalk it up to two things. Chalk it up to novice naivete, trying to get his feet wet and establish himself within the power circles of the Senate. Or another explanation for it could have been that, given his Hispanic heritage, he almost had to, in the sense of identity politics, if he had any chance at all of securing any votes from that sector, he had to come out in favor of it. But whatever, he's walked it back now, and we'll just see how this is all gonna play out with Tea Party people....The one thing about Rubio, whether you disagree with him on what he did with amnesty and then walked it back or not, he does not have a likability problem. He is instantly likable. He's motivational. He's inspirational in a Reaganesque way because he has that family story, and he relishes telling that story. He thinks it's inspirational. It was to him, and he wants it to be for everybody. He is a great communicator, significant communicator, has a conservative message. Just over here he has that misstep on immigration with the Tea Party. Time will tell if that can be overcome. Now, we will see also if his policies match his rhetoric. His rhetoric is great, his persona is great, his energy is great. He's a natural leader, it appears, and there will be a certain number of people who will relish and enjoy making Rubio their champion."...

Key word here: Reaganesque.

The Limbaughs of this world, quite simply, don't just forgive something like "amnesty." That Limbaugh is willing to set that aside in this case is a testament to two things:

1) That conservatives want to be able to like Rubio because they see his potential, and

2) That Rubio did himself plenty of good by bringing his immigration message directly to conservative talk radio.

As we wrote at the time, Limbaugh gave Rubio plenty of credit for having the courage to bring his case for immigration reform directly to Limbaugh's airwaves. "You're meeting everybody honestly, forthrightly," Limbaugh said with Rubio on the line in January 2013. "You’re meeting everyone halfway."
At the time, I remember being struck by how well Rubio handled himself during these interviews, bringing such a message into hostile territory. And it looks like he did himself plenty of favors with it, no matter that the bill wound up failing.
 
There will certainly be people who can't forgive him for the immigration thing, but a good messenger can overcome such obstacles. And Rubio, as Limbaugh notes, can be a really talented one."


=================== 
.
March 2015: Rubio hires former "prominent" Romney official" Rich Beeson:
.

3/13/2015, "Mitt Romney warms to Marco Rubio as young senator cultivates relationship," Washington Post, Costa and Rucker 
.

"Rubio has signed up two prominent former Romney officials in recent weeks. Rich Beeson, Romney’s 2012 national political director, has been tapped as Rubio’s likely deputy campaign manager, while Jim Merrill, Romney’s longtime New Hampshire strategist, is on board to play the same role for Rubio."...
.

==========================
 
Added: Marco Rubio's hiring of former Romney advisor and long time GOP parasite Rich Beeson makes it impossible to view his candidacy seriously. Beeson blatantly underperformed at the job of running Romney's 2012 campaign and wasn't at all embarrassed about it. Apparently Beeson knew he had a permanent ride on the GOP gravy train. 

----------------------------------

Rich Beeson is a central figure in the incestuous bleeding of the Republican Party:
.

11/28/12, "The Incestuous Bleeding of the Republican Party," Erick Erickson, RedState
.
"Strip away the candidate and coalition and it is on the fifth floor of 66 Canal Center Plaza where the seeds of Mitt Romney’s ruin and the RNC’s get out the vote (GOTV) effort collapsed — bled to death by charlatan consultants making millions off the party, its donors, and the grassroots."...  

Rich Beeson highlights:

Rich Beeson was a partner at FLS Connect, a vendor for 2000 Bush-Cheney, 2004 Bush-Cheney, 2008 McCain-Palin, and various NRCC business. Beeson eventually moved to the RNC where as political director he gave the RNC’s multi-million dollar phone vendor contract to his former company FLS Connect without entertaining bids from other companies. In 2012, Beeson moved from the RNC to Political Director of Team Romney. FLS Connect now got business from both the RNC and Team Romney. Another company, Targeted Victory LLC, enters the picture sharing an address with FLS Connect. Both companies receive millions from Team Romney. Unfortunately, Targeted Victory was in charge of the failed ORCA Romney get out the vote program:
 

Erick Erickson: "As of October 26, 2012, Targeted Victory had been paid $64 million by Team Romney and FLS Connect had been paid $16.5 million. And now the “L” in FLS Connect, Jeff Larson, will perform the autopsy on why Election Day and its related operations collapsed. I bet I know which companies won’t be blamed."

.
========================

Rich Beeson has a seat on the GOP gravy train:
. 

3/17/2014, "Revenge of the Republican consultants," Politico, Kenneth P. Vogel

"Ten of the consulting firms that formed the core of the push to elect Mitt Romney — reaping a combined $1 billion in the process — have survived a tea party assault and are again among the highest-grossing and best-positioned players in Republican politics.

.
The firms and their consultants have been paid more than $19.6 million for 2014 campaign work through January, according to a POLITICO analysis. They’ve also cemented relationships with some of the GOP’s rising stars, setting up the firms for even bigger paydays headed into the fall, when costly advertising and mail campaigns begin, and for a 2016 presidential campaign expected to be the most expensive in history.

It’s both vindication for top Republican operatives— who were ridiculed by tea partiers for squandering hundreds of millions of dollars and blamed for blowing the party’s chances at capturing the White House and the Senate — and an illustration of the irreversible privatization of politics.

. 
The firms of Romney’s digital director Zac Moffatt and political director Rich Beeson — Targeted Victory and FLS Connect, respectively — as well as the firm that made huge sums buying ads in 2012 for Karl Rove’s American Crossroads helped establishment favorite Bradley Byrne defeat a tea party primary rival and then a Democrat in a closely watched 2013 Alabama special congressional election.

Targeted Victory, FLS and a handful of other Romney-linked firms are also working for Sens. John Cornyn, Mitch McConnell and Marco Rubio; Rep. Paul Ryan; the Republican National Committee; the National Republican Congressional Committee; and a variety of establishment-oriented super PACs like Rove’s American Crossroads, while FLS and the firm of Romney’s top strategist, Stuart Stevens, helped New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie win reelection.

“People are either doing good work or they’re not and, if they’re not, the market will ultimately correct itself,” said Moffatt, whose firm was paid $112 million in 2012, and has collected $3 million in fees through January, according to filings with the Federal Election Commission and the Internal Revenue Service."...

============================

Republican campaigns start from scratch every election cycle. The Democrat Party is in permanent, year-round campaign mode:

"Our opponents manage a permanent year-round political machine through Labor Unions and progressive groups. For the left, the campaign never ends. We are still conducting campaigns based largely on volunteer efforts which fold up the tent and disappear until next time. We start nearly from scratch every two years. The Dems never stop organizing and building."...

12/1/2010, "Don't Congratulate Ourselves Too Much for 2010 Election Win: 2012 Won't Be So Easy," Mike's America

..........................................

==============================

The 2012 Romney campaign was a sham from day one. Romney refused to give any of his famous money to the campaign when it desperately needed it, even left the campaign trail when he was needed in the stretch to raise more money:

9/25/12, “Why doesn’t Mitt Romney contribute to his own campaign?” Reuters, Michael Waldman
 
"Lately, Mitt Romney has been so consumed with fundraising that his aides have had to defend his absence from the stump....

Romney, for whatever reason, has failed to use his personal wealth to pay his campaign’s bills. His refusal to self-finance is one of the mysteries of this campaign.

In fact, four years ago the former governor gave his own campaign nearly $45 million. He even donated a Winnebago trailer.  “I’m not beholden to any particular group for getting me into this race or for getting me elected,” ABC News quoted him as saying. “My family, that’s the only one I’m really beholden to — they’re the ones who let their inheritance slip away, dollar by dollar.”

The Romney boys can sleep easy: Their dad’s assets are worth nearly $250 million, according to financial disclosure forms. But he has put only $150,000 into this year’s run, through a joint gift with his wife Ann to a Republican committee last spring.

Romney’s campaign surely could use the money. His summer fundraising was less robust than it appeared, since much of it was committed to party committees not controlled by him. His campaign borrowed $20 million as a “bridge” loan to keep ads on the air before the general election began. Even the super PACs have less on hand now than seemed likely just a few months ago.

His strategist Ed Gillespie bemoaned the time Romney must spend fundraising."...


=========================

The grassroots appear to have battered wife syndrome by clinging to the GOP:

.

3/14/13, “Caddell Unloads on ‘Racketeering’ GOP Consultants,” Breitbart News, Leahy

“When you have the Chief of Staff of the Republican National Committee and the political director of the Romney campaign, and their two companies get $150 million at the end of the campaign for the ‘fantastic’ get-out-the-vote program…some of this borders on RICO [the 1970 Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act] violations,” Caddell told the crowd. “It’s all self dealing going on. I think it works on the RICO thing. They’re in the business of lining their pockets.”

“The Republican Party,” Caddell continued, “is in the grips of what I call the CLEC–the consultant, lobbyist, and establishment complex.“ Caddell described CLEC as a self serving interconnected network of individuals and organizations interested in preserving their own power far more than they’re interested in winning elections....If you can’t see racketeering in front of you, God save you.”"...
.

=====================
.

In 2008 the GOP ran the same sham it did four years later in 2012, proving it was never serious either time:

11/3/2008, "Democrats Far Outspend Republicans On Field Operations, Staff Expenditures," Wall St. Journal, By T.W. Farnam and Brad Haynes 
.  

"The national and state Democratic parties are spending far more heavily than their Republican counterparts on field operations, after years of ceding the advantage in ground-level organizing to the Republican voter-turnout machine.

Finance records show Democrats have hired five to 10 times more paid field staff in swing states than the Republicans.

Democrats have set up 770 offices nationwide, including in some of the most Republican areas of traditionally "red" states.... By comparison, Republicans have about 370 offices nationwide....

Democrats have increased their staff expenditures from $30 million to $56 million -- and they employed an estimated 4,500 workers making more than $1,500 a month as of mid-October, the latest information available. Sen. McCain and the Republicans had about 1,100 at that point 

The expansion was made possible by Sen. Obama's decision to decline public financing for his campaign, freeing himself from its spending caps. Instead he has relied on the legions of supporters who have already contributed over $600 million.

Sen. McCain is limited to spending the $84.1 million he accepted from the government after his September nomination. Sen. Obama is on track to spend more on television advertising than any candidate in history, likely spending more than $100 million on ads in October alone."...

.

=====================
.

Marco Rubio's pal Rich Beeson was front and center with the good fellas at the 2012 post mortem at the pathetic Bob Dole political monument in Kansas:

.

Robert Dole Institute of Politics, Dec. 7, 2012 Election post mortem, Part Three:
.

Rich Beeson, Romney 2012 National Political Director: Our system was set up for the primaries, needs a lot more work, was nothing like the democrats had: 
.

 

  

Beeson begins speaking above at about 2 min. YouTube image

Robert J. Dole Institute of Politics, Kansas, You Tube image

From You Tube page: 

"Published on Dec 13, 2012

Prominent political practitioners including strategists, journalists, and pollsters analyzed the 2012 election results....

Panelists include:

Rich Beeson, national political director for Governor Romney

Brent Colburn, national communications director for President Obama
Katie Gage, deputy national campaign manager for Governor Romney
Jeremy Bird, national field director for President Obama
Marlon Marshall, deputy national field director for President Obama
Erin McPike, national political reporter for RealClearPolitics
James Hohmann, national political reporter for POLITICO
Jerry Seib, Washington bureau chief of The Wall Street Journal
Jeff Zeleny, national political correspondent for The New York Times
Joe Lenski, exec. vice president & co-founder of Edison Media Research
Nancy Dwight, 2012 Dole Fellow and Republican strategist

Filmed on December 7, 2012 at the Dole Institute of Politics."  

=======================

In 2007 Peggy Noonan wrote that conservatives had been thrown out of the Republican Party by the Bushes but kept hanging around as if they had battered wife syndrome.:

6/1/2007, “Too Bad,” Peggy Noonan, Wall St. Journal, 

“President Bush has torn the conservative coalition asunder.”

“What President Bush is doing, and has been doing for some time, is sundering a great political coalition. This is sad, and it holds implications not only for one political party but for the American future. 

The White House doesn’t need its traditional supporters anymore, because its problems are way beyond being solved by the base. And the people in the administration don’t even much like the base. Desperate straits have left them liberated, and they are acting out their disdain. Leading Democrats often think their base is slightly mad but at least their heart is in the right place. This White House thinks its base is stupid and that its heart is in the wrong place.

 
For almost three years, arguably longer, conservative Bush supporters have felt like sufferers of battered wife syndrome. You don’t like endless gushing spending, the kind that assumes a high and unstoppable affluence will always exist, and the tax receipts will always flow in? Too bad! You don’t like expanding governmental authority and power? Too bad. You think the war was wrong or is wrong? Too bad. 

But on immigration it has changed from “Too bad” to “You’re bad.”

The president has taken to suggesting that opponents of his immigration bill are unpatriotic–they “don’t want to do what’s right for America.” His ally Sen. Lindsey Graham has said, “We’re gonna tell the bigots to shut up.” On Fox last weekend he vowed to “push back.” Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff suggested opponents would prefer illegal immigrants be killed; Commerce Secretary Carlos Gutierrez said those who oppose the bill want “mass deportation.” Former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson said those who oppose the bill are “anti-immigrant” and suggested they suffer from “rage” and “national chauvinism.”

Why would they speak so insultingly, with such hostility, of opponents who are concerned citizens? And often, though not exclusively, concerned conservatives? It is odd, but it is of a piece with, or a variation on, 

the “Too bad” governing style. 

And it is one that has, day by day for at least the past three years, been tearing apart the conservative movement."...

.

===========================