Here is the reality. We either believe the founding principles of this nation or we do not. The founding principles of the United States are simple, and that is that our rights don’t come from our laws or from our government. They come from our creator, and that these rights extend to all men. And any government who denies these rights is an illegitimate government.

Anywhere in the world where that is challenged, the United States has to speak out against it. Otherwise, the very essence of our founding, our purpose for existing as a nation and our founding, is gone [bold mine-DL]. This is an important issue. ~Marco Rubio

Am I the only one to find this completely batty? First, one thing that Rubio is demanding in this interview is that the U.S. “speak out against” the Syrian crackdown. It would change nothing, but I suppose it would at least put the government on record (yet again) that it is opposed to this sort of thing. I don’t really see the point, but it might not do too much harm. The other thing he calls for is the recall of our ambassador and the severing of all diplomatic relations. This would also not do a thing for the protesters, but it would succeed in denying us the one point of direct access in the country that our government has.

According to Rubio, failure to do these things in Syria, and anywhere else in the world where they are happening, would result in the destruction of our Founding essence and the eradication of “our purpose for existing as a nation.” Yes, unless we speak out anywhere and everywhere against other governments’ abuses, we may as well close up shop. Apparently, a vital part of “our purpose for existing as a nation” is to speak out against foreign governments. No one actually believes this. I don’t accept that Rubio believes this. It is the most egregious sort of meaningless moral posturing with some flourishes of American nationalism.

Rubio says later in the interview:

First of all, it’s hard to imagine anybody being worse than a criminal like Assad.

The second thing, we don’t know anything about anything.

Rubio’s first comment seems to confirm that his second point is true, at least as it applies to him. It is extremely easy to imagine someone worse than Assad. There are quite a few regimes in the world right now that offer examples of what that might look like. To the extent that the U.S. has any role, our government shouldn’t be risking the fates of the population of Syria and neighboring countries on the weak, unfounded notion that we can’t imagine anything worse than the status quo. If Rubio can’t imagine it, that’s another good reason not to listen to his recommendations.

P.S. If Rubio does believe what he’s saying, he has taken what is ultimately a very dangerous teleocratic position regarding the activities of the U.S. government.