according to washington post today. i don t know the intricacies. would you have to ask rubio s office. all i can tell you about marco rubio is that he understands the experience. he is one of the best spokesman for the possibilities of america. i think that whatever the story says, he is going to be and continues to be a star in the republican party. okay. thank you very much. he will get to that story. a lot pour tomorrow night. dana milbank and john fearer. when we finish wsh let me talk about calm leadership. obama is doing that in his number one dauty, protecting the country. drinking a smoothie with no vegetable nutrition? [ gong ] strawberry banana! [ male announcer ] for a smoothie with real fruit plus veggie nutrition new v8 v-fusion smoothie. could ve had a v8.
of course. of course there are many republicans who are inconsistent on this point and supported previous wars by republican presidents and now want to attack barack obama. i mean, i think the more interesting criticism is the one that you saw around this time when this intervention started, when an obama administration official in the new yorker made the comment about obama leading from behind. and so many republicans jumped on that and claimed and it was absurd, the notion that you could lead from behind. well, we have seen now that obama s leadership from behind, meaning putting together alliances, putting together coalitions, not doing stuff in a unilateral way, that there are advantages to that. and if the goal of this was to accomplish stopping the slaughter in benghazi and getting gadhafi out, it was successful. and so it would behoove a lot of republicans who made fun of that notion to stand up and at least
there s a principle position on nonintervention grounds, on financial grounds, on a lot of grounds. you can make that argument. why didn t they begin to make the argument when it s an obama campaign? of course. of course there are many republicans who are inconsistent on this point and supported previous wars by republican presidents and now want to attack barack obama. i mean, i think the more interesting criticism is the one that you saw around this time when this intervention started, when an obama administration official in the new yorker made the comment about obama leading from behind. and so many republicans jumped on that and claimed and it was absurd, the notion that you could lead from behind. well, we have seen now that obama s leadership from behind, meaning putting together alliances, putting together coalitions, not doing stuff in a unilateral way, that there are advantages to that. and if the goal of this was to accomplish stopping the slaughter in benghazi and