Posted on 05/08/2015 12:59:07 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Republican presidential hopeful Gov. Scott Walker of Wisconsin has already flip-flopped when it comes to immigration.
Once upon a time, he supported the Reaganite position which holds that immigration is a good thing and illegals should be given work permits at least. In 2006, Walker supported the McCain-Kennedy bill that would have granted a path to citizenship (nativists vilify that as amnesty) for illegals. But that was then, reported Politico, and the governor now supports curbs on legal immigration.
Walker has a new apparent flip flop in the works, this one about the auto bailouts. Back in 2012, he was unambiguous in arguing that the government bailouts of GM and Chrysler retarded economic recovery in the industrial Midwest and the country as a whole:
When Republicans nominated as their presidential candidate Mitt Romney, he of the now-infamous "Let Detroit Go Bankrupt" column, Walker railed against the bailouts in an interview with MSNBC's Rachel Maddow. Like Romney, Walker argued that the federal government's approach cost too much taxpayer money and, when pressed by Maddow, concluded that the program was not helpful in Wisconsin.
"I'm just pointing out it didn't [work] in Wisconsin and ultimately did in places like Michigan and elsewhere," Walker told Maddow, "but it could have come back more effectively and sooner had they taken the advice of Mitt Romney early on and done a managed bankruptcy instead of spending all those dollars of taxpayers' money that otherwise could have been done more effectively in the private sector early on."
What a difference a few years and greater ambitions make. Speaking at an Oldsmobile museum in Cleveland, Walker now moves his lips like this when asked about the efficacy of the bailouts:
"That's a hypothetical question from the past," the Wisconsin governor and likely Republican presidential candidate replied, according to accounts from multiple local reporters. "I think what we're going to talk about is the future."...
Walker's political team declined to clarify his current position on the bailouts when asked this week by the Northeast Ohio Media Group. So it's hard to say whether Walker has abandoned his past views or if he's only trying to avoid spelling it out for voters who might be disinclined to support him if they know precisely where he stands.
Read more here.
Just what we need, right? A Republican candidate who explicitly devolves from openness to nativism on immigration while zipping up over an apparent flip-flop regarding an illegal bailout of car companies by the government. If the best you can say is that he's "only trying to avoid spelling" out positions to voters who would then "be disinclined to support him if they know precisely where he stands," well, you're not really saying anything nice at all, are you?
This election seems to have Potomac fever starting early.
BUMP
” As I said for the last two elections running, the RINO crew can either get onboard our train or we all lose. Hardball. Because we are NOT voting for another psuedocon ever. “
Let me put this in McDonalds vernacular.
We lost the last 2 elections because the McVichy Republicans sponsored 2 of the biggest bozos in American McHistory.
The McConservatives wanted no part of McCain or McRomney, and consequently McStayed home. No more Crony Corporatists!! EVER!!
20 years of “lesser evil” and now all we have is EVIL!
UNIPARTY.
McPing to post # 23.
Evil people vote for evil. Good people reject evil. Simple math that works every time. And all their HOW DARE YOU!!! theatrics Don’t change a thing about it. Not one freeper is unaware of the political landscape. If they willingly vote for evil, lesser or not, they are as evil as any Democrat.
Their lesser evil voting nas enslaved their kids to eternal debt. Their lesser evil voting has given aid and comfort to Iran, isis and every tyrant in islam via GOP capitulation. And next week or so, they will also be responsible for every death that results from the Iranian nuclear program. Because THEY WILINGLY CHOSE to make excuses for, fight for and elect the very people that supported those things in DC.
They can bitch about them all they want, but they, not us and not democrats, put them there. They can call us whatever name they like. It changes nothing.
McSpot On.
: )
Ultimately when the SHTF, these people will be standing there crying the blues wondering what happened. They refuse to accept their responsibility now. So you can picture how ‘above it all’ they will be while everyone is trying to figure out how to survive.
Their solution will be to turn us over to whatever countries are invading us in the process in order to save themselves. Because that too is a lesser evil, just like their voting. We can look to history for that as well and what do we find? WW2 serves as an example. The French had their own lesser evil types. Same mentality at work. Go with lesser evil to save themselves.
They didn’t fare too well once France dug itself out.
Seems we are doomed to repeat history.
There does seem to be a trend.
“Ultimately when the SHTF, ....”
And it WILL....already started.
Thank again, “anycockldo” Republicans.
I agree. Uniparty it certainly is...
.
Walker is a 100% Chamber of Commerce dupe!
Nothing else.
Sometimes he is accidentally right, but mostly he is carelessly wrong.
.
I am at a complete loss as to how conservatives can spend thousands of words a day bitching about the COC/Immigration and then back a candidate that flipped on immigration and ran to the COC as his first funding port of call.
Anyone wanna try squaring that one? Behuler?
” Walker is a 100% Chamber of Commerce dupe!”
Last month, Walker had 2 private meetings with the Chamber of Commerce in 2 different states.
Both were....
1) closed to the public
2) closed to the media
There is only ONE explanation, for those of you who are NOT afflicted with “Terminal Obtuseness”
No offense to you, but this objection to Walker is so silly, it’s annoying.
I know people who actually say he come off half-cocked, without thinking. I’ve never seen that in him once.
His statements are informative and express his grasp of the dynamics of the situation he is addressing.
If you’re going to oppose him, do it on something that makes sense. What you offered up here makes no sense at all.
He comes off as a prosecutor? Since when?
I disagree with him on some issues. At least I do it on a basis that has foundation.
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.