Is Scott Walker afraid of social issues?

RedState ^ | May 19, 2015 | Ben Howe

[iowamark]

Politico says that Scott Walker is having a “crisis of faith” because social conservatives are questioning his bona fides.  Showing their ignorance of what “social conservatism” actually is, they quoted a lot of evangelicals and mentioned over and over how it was surprising he would have this problem given that he mentions God a lot.   You know, because that’s the criteria. Hold your hand up, say God led you, and the social conservatives will stop drooling on the floor long enough to scream “UNDER GOD!” defiantly when reciting the pledge of allegiance.

That Walker is under pressure to prove his social conservative bona fides is perhaps surprising. He’s worn his faith proudly as he crisscrosses the country, even suggesting that his ultimate decision on whether to seek the presidency is in God’s hands. “We want to discern that this is God’s calling,” Walker recently told World Magazine, a Christian publication. “Not just man’s calling.”

They did give some attention to the fact that there are perhaps aspects of social conservatism beyond singing “Jesus Loves Me”, noting some of Walker’s social conservative positions that have been highlighted on the trail.

The governor has also been highlighting what he calls his steadfast opposition to abortion and gay marriage, positions that he outlined in a Feb. 23 appearance before the National Religious Broadcasters convention. “We must stand up for marriage and the family,” he told those gathered, adding: “I believe in the family. And I believe in life.”

Not surprisingly, the parts of his social conservative record that they mention – abortion and gay marriage – are the ones most likely to make readers of Politico enraged at the mouth-breathers. Left out are the numerous other positions that social conservatives, yes, even non-Christian ones, cling to.

But what is perhaps more concerning is that the naiveté on display from Politico regarding the motivations and beliefs of social conservatives appears to be quite in line with Scott Walker’s own understanding of the group. A group that is arguably the largest and most influential portion of the conservative base.

Walker’s confusion is dumbfounding considering he’s been out hiring some of the smartest consultants in the business. You’d think someone would have told him that constantly appearing to be afraid of talking about social issues tends to make a less than convincing case that you’re the type that will fight for them. Especially when there are other candidates who aren’t as guarded with their beliefs.

So if there is a crisis of faith and one can’t attribute it to his lack of Christian credentials, then what’s the problem?

Well before I get into that, it’s important to remember something: running on social issues is not a bad election strategy.

In fact, running on social issues is exactly how some landmark elections, like President Obama’s, were won.

What people began to believe (including me) during the height of the tea party era from 2009 to 2011, was that no one cared about social issues. That social issues should be left to the “culture” to work out. We were led to believe, by no one in particular, that economic issues, devoid of any naughty words like “values” was the key to winning.

In 2010, our efforts were proven right, we thought. We won without really talking about conservative social values. In fact, many went out of their way to quash any attempt to talk about such a thing.

The media and the left decided to throw a wrench in the works in 2012. They started asking questions, mostly about abortion & gay marriage, designed to enflame. And it worked to some degree. Todd Akin being the obvious example.

And again we took the lesson. “See?” we said. “Social issues lose elections!”

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

The proof that it’s wrong was happening right in front of us. While we were freaking out and putting tape over social conservatives’ mouths, Barack Obama and the Democrats were running on gay marriage, legalized abortion, the imaginary “war on women,” and of course, social justice.

While we were hiding from our prolife shadows, they were winning hearts and minds by appealing to the same issues on the opposite side of the spectrum. Of course, the media runs cover for them so it’s a little easier to get away with (after all, when Democrats run on social issues, they don’t call them social issues).

“Ok, so what then” my hypothetical republican construct asks. “They win because people gravitate more to their side of the social spectrum?”

Of course not. Poll after poll and state election after state election shows that the electorate at large sides more with social conservatism than social liberalism.

Our problem is simple and simply solved. We lose on social issues when our candidates treat them like they’re toxic instead of embracing them.

Unfortunately, if there’s one thing that we do not see Scott Walker doing, it’s embracing social conservative views.

On Meet the Press in 2013, when asked about how to reach young conservatives who might be more likely to support gay marriage, Walker said “when I talk about things, I talk about the economic and fiscal crisis in our state and in our country. That’s what people want to resonate about. They don’t want to get focused on those issues.” To be clear, “those issues” being social issues.

But don’t worry! If people start trying to burn down pizzerias when the owners answer hypothetical questions about gay marriage, Governor Walker will bravely say he has no responsibilities here whatsoever.

Buzzfeed quoted him as saying on the question of laws pertaining to gay marriage:

On the marriage issue, he can probably best be described as ‘evolving.’ Pointing to a 2006 state constitutional ban on same-sex marriage, Walker was quick to note — much to his apparent relief — that he was effectively powerless in the debate. ‘From my standpoint, as governor I won’t ever have any say in that because if you’re going to change the constitution, all it requires is the legislature and then a vote of the people,’ he said.”

What a fighter! (Just kidding, we already knew he wasn’t a fighter)

To make sure that everyone understands that he totally doesn’t have a dog in the fight, Walker said in June of 2014 that his view on gay marriage “really doesn’t matter.” I would venture to say he’s correct, though whether that lack of consequence is his choice or not is another question.

Back again in 2013, Walker assured reporters that the GOP was in no danger of losing elections because of conservative social views. As Walker put it with regard to abortion “I don’t focus on that, I don’t obsess with it.”

On behalf of the pro-life movement, I would like to apologize for “obsessing” about all that baby murder. Glad to hear it doesn’t interfere with GOP prospects.

It’s not comforting that all of this fence straddling and “non-focusing” is coming from a guy that doesn’t know whether the “fading influence” of religious conservatives is good or bad.

But again, and as I mentioned earlier, these are two of the most divisive issues in the social value landscape. Unlike a lot of fiscal & economic issues, these are intensely personal. The battle between government and the church on whether Jesus was instructing Christians to openly defy God’s will when rendering unto Caesar (spoiler: He wasn’t). The fight to save the lives of millions of unborn children who are at the mercy of parents that believe murder is a question of autonomy.

Important issues that Scott Walker has made clear over and over he’s unwilling to pick a side on with any passion or purpose.

But hey… he said he’s a Christian. So what am I complaining about?

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Evangelicals Looking for Walker to “Do Nothing” in 2016 Election

"When speaking to religious audiences, Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker likes to remind people that he goes to church and knows his Bible. These reminders frequently come as Walker seeks to distinguish himself from political opponents in Wisconsin—the ones, he claims, who’ve sent his family death threats and harassed his kids on Facebook; the “literally thousands of protesters outside our family home” in Wauwatosa. Some of these protesters have, according to Walker, driven past the house and given him the finger as he and his family raked leaves on a Sunday afternoon after church and before the Packers game.

Speaking in 2012 to a teleconference with activists from Ralph Reed’s Faith and Freedom Coalition, Walker said his faith has enabled him to rise above the “vitriol, and the constant, ongoing hatred” during the recall election he faced in the wake of his anti-union legislation, which has crippled the state’s once-iconic labor movement. Along with the unmistakable contrast of his church-going family with the profane and progressive activists, Walker cited two Bible verses. He didn’t recite them, but for anyone who knows their Bible—as Walker, the son of a Baptist pastor, does—the meaning was clear. The verses that helped him withstand the hatred were Romans 16:20 (“The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you”) and Isaiah 54:17 (“no weapon forged against you will prevail, and you will refute every tongue that accuses you.”)

Should he run for president, Walker may very well turn out to be the 2016 cycle’s evangelical favorite—not because he ticks off a laundry list of culture war talking points, pledges fealty to a “Christian nation,” or because he’s made a show of praying publicly to curry political favor. Although by no means universal, some conservative evangelicals—those who eschew the fever swamps of talk radio, yet share the same political stances of the religious right—are weary of the old style of campaigning. They’re turned off by the culture war red meat, the dutiful but insincere orations of piety.

Emphasizing that ours is a “Christian nation” and pushing “hot button issues” as a style of campaigning has been detrimental to evangelicals, said Mary Jo Sharp, who teaches apologetics at Houston Baptist University and analyzes political campaigns as part of a class she teaches there. “It’s very difficult to hear” that kind of rhetoric, she said. “Christians are not supposed to be the dividers.” Over the course of his political career in Wisconsin, Walker “hasn’t presented as any kind of culture warrior,” said Hunter Baker, Associate Professor of Political Science at Union University, a Southern Baptist school in Jackson, Tennessee. “One of the worst things that ever happened with conservative Christians,” said Baker, was that they “give in to a tribal impulse,” by questioning “are we getting the respect we perceive we once had, are we losing ground, we need to mobilize, we need to increase our force.” That, he added, “is a losing strategy. It gives people the sense you’re working from resentment.”.......

[Old Retired Army Guy]

Walker is the son of a Pastor. He doesn’t need to go out everyday and prove his Christianity. The Economy and Foreign affairs are what voters worry about.

[Cincinatus' Wife]

You are correct.

Scott Walker: W. Without the Compassion

" ".....Speaking in 2012 to a teleconference with activists from Ralph Reed’s Faith and Freedom Coalition, Walker said his faith has enabled him to rise above the “vitriol, and the constant, ongoing hatred” during the recall election he faced in the wake of his anti-union legislation, which has crippled the state’s once-iconic labor movement. Along with the unmistakable contrast of his church-going family with the profane and progressive activists, Walker cited two Bible verses. He didn’t recite them, but for anyone who knows their Bible—as Walker, the son of a Baptist pastor, does—the meaning was clear. The verses that helped him withstand the hatred were Romans 16:20 (“The God of peace will soon crush Satan under your feet. The grace of our Lord Jesus be with you”) and Isaiah 54:17 (“no weapon forged against you will prevail, and you will refute every tongue that accuses you.”)

Don’t know about you, but I’d interpret those two verses as consolatory promises of Christian vengeance, not turn-the-other-cheeck pacifism. And so it may be Walker is giving exactly the right impression of representing stolid but not showy vindicator who’s in for a long fight with secular socialists and their union allies."

[HotKat]

Jack of all trades, master of none.

[unlearner]

“how it was surprising he would have this problem given that he mentions God a lot”

That is not the litmus test of conservatism. Obama mentions God a lot too. In fact, he even called Jesus “Lord”. But his track record in office has not been consistent with evangelical Christian beliefs whether he calls himself Christian or not.

Scott Walker is nothing like Obama, but conservatives are looking for someone who will stand strong on conservative values. We have been burned too many times to take this lightly. If candidates want our support, they must be consistently conservative. Period.

[Unam Sanctam]

Walker is my tentative choice, but I thought he was pretty weak on Indiana and religious freedom in comparison to Cruz and Jindal.

[Jack Hammer]

“You know, because that’s the criteria.”

That’s the criterion.

Apparently no one studies English anymore.

[sgtyork]

Speak softly and get things REAL things done…

Scott Walker’s Budget Defunds Planned Parenthood, Targets Contraception Access

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/04/contraception-wisconsin_n_831252.html

Wisconsin Abortions Drop 16% After Pro-Life Law Allowing Women to See Ultrasound of Baby

http://www.lifenews.com/2014/06/02/wisconsin-abortions-drop-16-after-pro-life-law-allowing-women-to-see-ultrasound-of-baby/

[sgtyork]

Governor Walker also signed bills that allow Wisconsin to opt out of abortion funding under Obamacare, to protect pregnant women from coerced abortions and to prohibit RU486 chemical web cam abortions.

http://www.lifenews.com/2015/03/16/scott-walker-im-pro-life-on-abortion-my-position-is-consistent-on-that/

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Scott Walker's talk to the Christian Businessmen's Committee in Madison on November 13, 2009 on his faith and his walk to Christ, how he got there. Begins at :50 [Audio - runs 25 minutes]

[MrEdd]

Politico has the exact same understanding of social conservatism exhibited by libertarians.

[Eric Pode of Croydon]

I guess that any voter who is upset because Scott Walker doesn’t mention Jesus enough is welcome to vote for Huckabee.....

[Cincinatus' Wife]

“Until recently, Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has maintained a well-defined stance on abortion. When asked in previous elections where he stands, he’s made it clear he opposes the procedure even in cases of rape, incest or protecting the health of the mother.

With that position, among others, he’s often lassoed the support of anti-abortion organizations. In 2010, he was endorsed by both Wisconsin Right to Life and Pro-Life Wisconsin. During his 2012 recall election, both groups gave him the nod again.

While both groups lobby and push for anti-abortion policies, Pro-Life Wisconsin tends to take a more strident approach with its efforts. The group is the state’s flagbearer for the “personhood” movement, which seeks to legally define human life as beginning at fertilization — rather than when a fertilized egg implants in the uterus. A personhood law would effectively halt all abortions and could also make some forms of birth control illegal.

In September, Wisconsin Right to Life issued its list of statewide candidate endorsements for the November election, which included Walker, Lt. Gov. Rebecca Kleefisch and Republican attorney general candidate Brad Schimel. The organization also offers a glowing review of “The Walker Record on Life” from 1993 to the present.......”

http://host.madison.com/news/local/writers/jessie-opoien/scott-walker-s-campaign-site-touts-pro-life-wisconsin-endorsement/article_a216217d-53f0-520c-b035-2c3bce48e266.html

[Cincinatus' Wife]

Walker: There is an overreaction to Indiana's religious freedom law

"Madison— Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker told a conservative crowd this week that people around the country protesting Indiana's religious freedom law are "looking for ways to be upset about things."

Indiana has come under fire — and the state has faced the threat of business boycotts — because of a law approved last week that critics say would allow businesses to discriminate against gays for religious reasons. Indiana Gov. Mike Pence, a Republican, has defended the law, but on Thursday signed a follow-up measure aimed at ensuring businesses could not engage in discrimination.

Walker, who is ramping up a run for the presidency, dismissed the controversy Wednesday night as part of "Insight 2015," a live taping of Charlie Sykes' WTMJ-AM (620) program.

"I just think this is people who are chronically looking for ways to be upset about things instead of really looking at what it is," Walker said.

Blaming the national media for creating "hype and hysteria" over the Indiana law, Walker noted Wisconsin's constitution has long included a provision for religious freedom. Indiana's law is similar to a federal statute and ones approved by other states, Walker said.

"I believe protecting religious freedom is inherent in our state constitution," Walker said. "Heck, it's inherent in our U.S. Constitution. And in Wisconsin we've done it and we're stronger for it."...

[rrrod]

True.....but some people need to hear it every day all day....they cant take yes for an answer. Find some here lining up behind the huckster.

[ASA Vet]

Scott Kevin Walker

Born November 2, 1967 in Colorado, CO (Meets the Jus Soli Requirement)

Parents were
Liewellyn Scott Walker, born in IL
Patricia Ann Fitch, born in IL

Both parents were US Citizens at the time of his birth (Meets the Jus Sanguinis Requirement)

Scott Kevin Walker is a NATURAL BORN CITIZEN

[Erik Latranyi]

Walker is the most politcially astute candidate in the race.

He is not allowing himself to be drawn into “gotcha” issues created and dominated by the left. These “fabricated” issues create a situation where any answer is used by the left to paint the candidate in a negative light.

That is why Walker is not quick to jump into things and shoot his mouth off....something that destroys many candidates.

Instead, Walker is more cold and calculating....a quality we need when the deck is stacked against you.

[Unam Sanctam]

Thanks for the article.

[Lakeshark]

He is not allowing himself to be drawn into “gotcha” issues created and dominated by the left.

There is no candidate with an (R) behind their name that is immune to to being savaged by the left.

It's how they handle the savaging that counts.

Walker does well with this issue, I prefer Cruz because he handles the MSM/leftist complex better than anyone, including Walker.