It’s not surprising that the position of Marco Rubio, a proponent of expanded offshore oil drilling, would be under increased scrutiny in the aftermath of the oil rig explosion in the Gulf of Mexico.
Neither is it surprising that Rubio’s response was well parsed and politically prudent. In effect, he said: “Let’s investigate this really, really thoroughly and not move ahead on more drilling right now, although I suspect this was a freakish occurrence — likely not enough to preclude future drilling, which, to be sure, is no less necessary.”
Among comments Rubio did literally make, this one as quoted by the St. Petersburg Times: “I believe you can safely drill for oil. It’s been done all over the world, it’s been done in the Gulf of Mexico. We should be very concerned with what led to this disaster, and until that question is answered I don’t think we can move forward on anything else.”
Also among Rubio comments, this one quoted by the Tampa Tribune: “The question is why did this happen and is this something that has the potential to be commonplace or is it an isolated instance…It would be irresponsible to make any line-in-the-sand statements until all the information is known.”
So, maybe it’s not surprising that the Times’ headline was: “Rubio Backs Off Drilling Support,” while the Trib went with: “Rubio Won’t Back Off Stance On Gulf Drilling.”
Something for everyone except old-school editors who still venerate truth-in-headlines convention.
All things to all readers — while not abandoning your “drill here, drill now, pay less” base. What a scenario. On balance, as it were, opposite-take headlines was good news for Rubio.