In today's paper:
Elected to great fanfare, Rubio, 39, will be one of the most-watched lawmakers in Washington. A review of the roughly $20 million he collected provides a window into what issues he could champion -- and who may have his ear.http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/11/19/1934882/20m-offers-look-into-rubio-supporters.html
Of course, Rubio started as an unknown, unfunded insurgent bucking his party's establishment. His positions have been consistent from the day he announced. In Rubio's words, "people buy into our agenda, we don't buy into theirs". To imply, as these reporters do, that Rubio will oppose Obama administration initiatives (which he has long opposed) simply as pay back to late donors is unfair and untrue. He received money because of his positions, not to shape his positions.
This also appears in today's Miami Herald, regarding Scott's planned inaugural festivities:
Rick Scott, who won the governor's race after promising to cut wasteful spending, will celebrate his Jan. 4 inauguration over two days in Tallahassee with a parade, an inaugural ball and a candlelight dinner for Republican Party donors who pay up to $25,000 each to foot the bill.http://www.miamiherald.com/2010/11/20/1934878/25k-for-seat-at-rick-scotts-inauguration.html
Scott won the governor's race after promising to cut wasteful government spending. I imagine he's all in favor of wasteful private sector spending, because it creates jobs and drives the economy. The inaugural festivities will be paid for with private, not government, funds. There is no reason to present them as a violation of a campaign promise regarding government spending, unless the reporter is just trying to make him look bad before he's been sworn in. Frankly, I don't remember any criticism on fiscal grounds of the star studded over the top Obama inaugural festivities.
Again, I'm not a big fan of either of these guys. I am a big fan of fair and honest journalism. I didn't read any this morning.