Posted on 01/29/2015 2:06:01 PM PST by Kaslin
No, but he has asked the Mexican government to establish a consulate in the state.
An interesting little tidbit from the article:
“Walker pointed out in his letters that Mexico is the second-largest export market for the state with $2.2 billion in products sent to Mexico.
For the last 23 years the state also has had a sister state relationship with the Mexican state of Jalisco, he said.”
There is pressure from both the Chamber of Commerce in WI and the farmers who employ Mexicans. Being that Walker is mainly focused on fiscal issues I think his comment about Mexico being the second largest export market for WI is interesting.
Walker has been all over the map with his statements about immigration and the border issue. Enough to make me nervous about him.
Rush is himself very much a Johnny-come-lately on the illegal immigration issue and has never owned up to his previous completely mistaken stance on it.
I’m here in Wisconsin and I keep hearing how conservative Walker is. Walker is establishment/GOPe.
“It’s all is about the 11 million [undocumented immigrants],” Walker said. “You hear some people talk about border security and a wall and all that. To me, I don’t know that you need any of that if you had a better, saner way to let people into the country in the first place.”
Walker added: “If people want to come here and work hard in this country, I don’t care if you come from Mexico or Canada or Ireland or Germany or South Africa or anywhere else. I want them here.”
I think people put too much faith in Rush. He is an entertainer.
I’m sick of talk radio.
Rush: “But the Republican Party is as afraid of Cruz as they were Palin.”
He’s saying Cruz has as much chanced as Palin. Which in Rush’s mind is zero.
Rush “hasn’t endorsed anyone yet” but he sure does talk down the most conservative candidates. Never fails.
When Rush says “But the Republican Party is as afraid of Cruz as they were Palin,” he’s planting the seed of doubt. This is stealth but very powerful, and Rush knows it.
I don’t know what motivates Rush other than money and fame, but it sure isn’t conservatism. At the most critical moments he campaigns against conservatism.
Rush had me fooled during the Bush years. Partly because he speaks against the Republican establishment. But he’s the establishment’s most powerful weapon.
I hope you're wrong.
If you're right, what that tells me is that Ted puts himself above the good of the country, which, BTW, is consistent with a number of Cruz's supporters right here on FR.
It's a damned sorry state of affairs when the the "Conservative Movement's" idea of a political philosophers is a former rock'n'roll DJ.
Tea party favorite Ben Carson has said some out-there stuff. The former neurosurgeon, author, and possible Republican presidential candidate once compared women who get abortions to dog-abuser Michael Vick, blamed the decline and fall of the Roman Empire on gay marriage, and concluded that believing in evolution was like thinking that “a hurricane blowing through a junkyard could somehow assemble a fully equipped and flight-ready 747.”
But in his writings and public remarks, he has also voiced views on hot-button issues—immigration, foreign policy, gun control—that place him well outside the tea-party mainstream. He once embraced a universal catastrophic health care plan, and some of his other past positions—gasp!—sound downright liberal. Here are some of the comments that may put him at odds with the conservative GOP base.
Stop the deportations:
Even today we exploit our fellow human beings for work. Is it moral for us, for example, to take advantage of cheap labor from illegal immigrants while denying them citizenship? I’m sure you can tell from the way I phrased the question that I believe we have taken the moral low road on this issue. Some segments of our economy would virtually collapse without these undocumented workers—we all know that—yet we continue to harass and deport many individuals who are simply seeking a better life for themselves and their families. (From his 2012 book, America the Beautiful.)
Occupy Wall Street:
[J]ust because people control our markets’ financial instruments, they should not be able to personally benefit by manipulating those instruments to their advantage. Many of these people suffer from the same entitlement mentality seen in poor people who are always looking for a government handout. These Wall Street moguls and corporate executives actually think that what they do is worth hundreds of millions of dollars a year, even though in many cases they are simply moving money around, producing nothing. (From his 2014 book, One Nation.)
Elizabeth Warren was right about everything:
The stock market crash of 1929 exacted a severe toll on the people of our nation and our legislators realized, in hindsight, that some of our banking and investment policies had contributed to the crash. Several laws were crafted, including the Glass-Steagall Act, which separated commercial and investment banking activities. Sixty to seventy years later we forgot about many of the horrors of those difficult financial times as well as the reasons why we imposed appropriate regulation on speculative financial activity involving private resources. (From One Nation.)
Make alternative fuels, not war:
Whether America’s ensuing steps into war in Afghanistan and Iraq will be seen as positive or negative remains to be seen, but I can’t help thinking there may have been a better way to react that would not have cost us so many lives and financial capital. I believe that if the president had seized the moment and declared that we would become petroleum independent within the next ten years as part of our effort to strip terrorism of its resources, that business, industry, academia, and everyone else would have been foursquare behind him, and we would have been much further ahead in the fight against terrorism than we are today...an enormous number of jobs likely would have been created in the process of switching over to a new energy source, and Wall Street would have been booming; third, the environmentalists would have been ecstatic; and fourth, but most importantly, the terrorists would have been deprived of much needed funding, which would have gradually strangled their efforts. (From America the Beautiful.)
(Of note: Carson’s argument is nearly identical to that of Thomas Friedman, who has repeatedly chided Bush for not using the moment of national unity after 9/11 to adopt a 10-year plan for energy independence, arguing that it would “dry up revenue for terrorists,” create jobs, and inspire young people.)
A federal stimulus for green technologies:
Providing appropriate incentives to the American people should result in a plethora of ideas and inventions to solve our energy problems. Can you imagine the amount of hydroelectric power alone that is available to us, situated as we are between two oceans? We simply need to invent efficient and inexpensive ways to harness that energy. (From America the Beautiful.)
Yes, pull the plug on grandma:
Our mind-set is to automatically pull out all medical stops—even if that means literally torturing loved ones during their last few months of life. What if rather than always putting terminally ill patients in intensive care units—where we poke, prod, test, and operate ad nauseum—we allowed most people the dignity of dying in relative peace and comfort, at home, surrounded by loved ones, with hospice care or some other medical attendant if necessary? Agreement on who should be treated and who should not be treated would require an extensive national discussion that could hopefully result in some helpful basic guidelines. Obviously any such guidelines should allow for flexibility and choice. And decisions should be based not merely on age but on the viability of the patient. (From his 1999 book, The Big Picture.)
People don’t kill people, handguns kill people:
I realize that some feel the United States and other world powers with nuclear weapons have no right to declare that others cannot have them. On the surface this seems like a fair argument, but can you imagine how many deaths would occur if everyone were given a handgun? Perhaps it would be fair to give everyone a handgun, but it certainly would not be wise. (From America the Beautiful.)
People don’t kill people, assault rifles kill people:
“It depends on where you live, I think. If you live in the midst of a lot of people and I’m afraid that that semi-automatic weapon is going to fall into the hands of a crazy person, I would rather you not have it. If you live out in the country somewhere by yourself, I have no problem.” (In an interview with Glenn Beck)
These ideas don’t seem to be the kind of red meat Iowa Republicans are clamoring for—and Carson is already beginning to walk a few of them back, emphasizing his love of the Second Amendment on a recent swing to the Hawkeye State. It will be interesting to see if Carson talks about them while courting tea partiers in the Hawkeye State.
Yep. And that's why Rush is boosting him. He's provably dangerous to the Democrat Party!
Thanks for pointing it out.
Motivates??? Stealth?
It’s a true statement.
Anyone can see that.
Something is amiss with your logic.
You are right. Ben is not ready, nor will he ever be. But he has it right about evolution.
I heard Walker’s speech, most of it. He said some good things. However, it sounded focus-group tested and contrived. I don’t think he will be a big seller. I don’t believe that Walker has what it takes to defeat Romney. Bob
That’s disappointing news about Walker. I hadn’t heard any of this about his stance on illegals.
He’s been so great against the Democrats there I’m at least willing to see if he will back of such comments.
I like Cruz a lot but the fact of the matter is he’s a Senator not a Governor. We need a person with executive experience and I don’t care that he’s not the most flashy charismatic candidate. I’d rather someone get in there and get the job done, not impress me with speeches of how he’ll do it. There’s a lot of hard work to be done, not a lot of speeches to give.
Of course Cruz is better than Christie or Bush or Romney, no question my vote goes to Cruz over those guys. And now it might go to Cruz over Walker too, if he doesnt roll back off the comments you linked to. But for the reasons I elucidated earlier I think he needs to be given such consideration. Especially if it looks like Cruz has no chance and its Walker or the other three CINO’s I mentioned. I’d hope everyone here would see that clear choice at least. And not play the favorites game that got us McCain and then Romney.
” Just FYI, for years, Rush pooh-poohed the threat of illegal immigration, parroting the US CofC line that it was “...the sign of a booming economy.”
Rush is himself very much a Johnny-come-lately on the illegal immigration issue and has never owned up to his previous completely mistaken stance on it. “
I was thinking exactly the same thing about Rush the other day, when he was boosting Walker.
Do you not think he’s planting seeds of doubt?
What tasks great or small would Cruz be unable to accomplish as president, simply because he hasn’t been governor?
Without answering this question, one cannot rightly say Cruz wouldn’t be as good a president as any given governor.
I’m just saying it seems like a good idea to me to go with someone who has proven a track record governing over one that has no such record. All things being equal.
The quotes I’ve been provided by Walker seem to change the analysis though. Clearly if he sticks to that viewpoint, that border security is useless and we should just make everyone legal, if he sticks to that and doesn’t recant it then the choice is clear: Cruz all the way.
Again, let’s not get caught up in the “my guy is best” mentality that stuck us with Romney. I’m willing to go with Cruz first if Walker doesn’t clearly recant from such a ludicrous proposal. Are you willing to support Walker if he recants and leads over Cruz?
What if Walker doesn’t recant, but is still strong against Bush, Christie et al? Are we going to say he’s just as bad as them just because his immigration stance is abysmal?
All I’m saying is we should fight tooth and nail for either man, whoever has the greatest momentum against the GOP anointed one. If both are equal, then Cruz should get the support unless Walker clearly recants his position.
No! He’s not....
Doubt about who....what?
He has had nothing but good things to say about Cruz.
You are totally misreading what he said about Palin and Cruz.
They are feared and disliked by the party! They are both tea party favorites and for that reason alone the GOP fears them.
You have mischaracterized Rush’s comments, as so many do...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.