Posted on 03/18/2015 9:40:54 AM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker has run into a little bit of trouble on immigration again, this time forcing a communications aide off his staff after Democrats pushed out old tweets from the aide disparaging Rep. Steve King (R-IA), a well-known opponent of amnesty.
"In other news, I see Iowa is once again embarrassing itself, and the GOP, this morning. Thanks, guys," the aide, Liz Mair tweeted, referring to King's January 24th Iowa Freedom Summit where Walker, Sen. Ted Cruz (R-TX), Carly Fiorina, and other possible Republican presidential candidates spoke.
Walker's troubles with immigration began in January when opponents began circulating prior statements of his showing that Walker has endorsed both a "path to citizenship" generally and the Senate's Gang of 8 bill specifically.
Walker has since tried to walk those positions back, telling Fox News Sunday's Chris Wallace on March 1st, "My view has changed, I’m flat-out saying it. Candidates can say that, sometimes they don’t."
And Walker's view on immigration has changed. Here he is on immigration in July of 2013: "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."
And here is Walker in March 2015: "I've talked to people all across America. And the concerns I have is that we need to secure the border. We ultimately need to put in place a system that works. A legal immigration system that works. And part of doing this is put the onus on employers, getting them E-Verify and tools to do that."
So Walker has shifted from believing a secure border wasn't really necessary to now believing that it is.
But what about those illegal immigrants already here? What is Walker's position on that? Again, from March 1st:
WALLACE: The question was, can you envision a world where if these people paid a penalty, that they would have a path to citizenship? And you said, sure, that makes sense.
WALKER: I believe there's a way that you can do that. First and foremost, you've got to secure that border or none of these plans make any sense.
(emphasis added) Notice the present tense. Walker still believes that illegal immigrants currently in the United States should be given a path to citizenship, but only if you secure the border first, which is a not uncommon Republican position on immigration.
But how is it any different than Jeb Bush's position?
Here is Jeb from March 13:
It’s easy to say, ‘Well, anything you propose is amnesty,’ but that’s not a plan. That’s a sentiment, that’s not a plan. I think the best plan, the most realistic plan, the grown up plan, if you will, is once you control the border and you’re confident it’s not going to be another magnet, is to say, ‘Let’s let these folks achieve earned legal status where they work, where they come out of the shadows.’”
So both Walker and Bush believe we should "secure"/"control" the border first (whatever that means), and then, only after that is accomplished, can we give legal status/citizenship to illegal immigrants currently in the United States.
If there is any difference between Walker and Bush on immigration, I do not see it.
(VIDEO-AT-LINK)
It’s noted that you didn’t any of the very simple questions asked.
“The concern is that the result he may achieve is legalization of 13 million people and an associated permanent demographic transformation of the country”
13 million... it feels like we have 13 million in California alone. The real number nationally is closer to 30 million.
And our experience with the 1986 Amnesty is that we got three times the number that we expected. Meaning that the new amnesty being pushed by the treason lobby could yield from 36 million to 90 million.
The first step is to get rid of PC. The ONLY reason all of this crap has happened is because nobody can talk anymore in a productive way about the challenges our society faces.
Yes I said it with Santorum, Walker, and many other conservatives. I know it tires you hearing it but I will continue until we finally pick a good conservative candidate. If Cruz is that person then fine, but I am not going to let you destroy our chances by getting your Bush guy in there....not like last time where you snuck Romney on us.
We’ve had this discussion.
I think you meant you're
It’s noted that you didn’t any of the very simple questions asked.
lol. You wrote it down? Gosh your an absolute nut. Go Walker 2016.
LOL, is that after he changed his mind and before he hired a pro-amnesty mouthpiece spokesperson/media boss?
How do ya change your mind on such a huge issue? How in tarnation does that work?
??
The illegals will repatriate themselves once they learn that the laws are going to be enforced. The got here on their own and they will go home on the home. The only "path" should be to the Greyhound bus stop.
Walker is a phony, next.
Liz Mair was a recent hire by Walker. Walker’s immigration ideas long preceded his hiring of Liz Mair.
Good point.
I don’t care. Obviously you will vote for Hillary because Walker isn’t as liberal as you hoped. Good luck on your future.
Ted Cruz is an “elitist” because he succeeded in getting into two of the best schools in the world and excelled above even the top-notch students there? So, next time you go to the doctor, you’ll ask for the guy or gal who had to go to Grenada or Mexico because he/she couldn’t get into Johns Hopkins or Yale Medical School? Do you even hear yourself talking?
I believe she had worked for him previously on other campaigns but I can’t find a link.
How's that work? I already told ya I think her plans and dreams of being president are history. She can cancel her itinerary and future engagements imo.
All anyone has to do on Walker is google him on illegal immigration for the past 2-3 years. Why so many here refuse to do this is beyond me. Even Rush is fos on Walker.
Liz Mair isn’t a phantom woman, and there’s a difference between your communications director and the unpaid intern getting the coffee.
Regardless at best it looks like a bad personal judgment call to hire her. At worst it confirms his “change on amnesty” isn’t real. One is worse than the other but given he’s not a political newbie, to be making a hiring mistake like this, now, isn’t encouraging.
D2, you’re the guy who snuck Romney in on us? Shame on you! LOL
You status quo lovers kill me. Pay attention. In spite of Republican majorities Pelosi and Ried run Congress. Conservatives keep losing for voting Republican. It is time to look elsewhere.
Good call but, I believe Walker’s intention is to close the border and then see if there is some way to give them a path to some sort of legal status.
Wish I could find my tome I wrote earlier this year about what the net effect of 1986 was nearly 30 years later but, it was nominal and never came close to achieving the Dems vaunted dream of “legalizing” “non-citizens”
It went something like “30 years after 1986 and the dastardly deal the Dems struck with Reagan, only 22% of illegal aliens achieved some sort of legal status with roughly 1/2 that number becoming citizens and the rest acquired “resident” status.
1986 was a bust for both sides.
The Dems didn’t increase potential voters by any significant amount and of those who became citizens under 1986, around 20% registered to vote and damned few of them actually cast a vote..
We need to secure the border with Mexico but, we just aren’t going to round an appreciable number of “non-citizens” and send em back.
Won’t happen for logistics reasons and no way it would fly politically if we could.
Would be great if we could and we all agree it ought to be done but, there is no way to do it and survive a militant scorched earth poliitical fallout here at home and from around the world.
It would absolutely be the humane thing to do and a benefit to citizens, actual citizens and not the lotto winner frauds who will benefit.
For sure, more jobs would suddenly open to millions of Americans and they would pay taxes on their income, as I don’t believe you would find any parity, in terms of citizens who would take over in the underground economy.
If they were offered legal status, my version says it’s painful and they never become citizens.
Further, this Horse Crap of giving them licenses ought to end post haste.
As should bene’s like welfare. That is for citizens alone, in my mind and heart.
No way in hell should they be afforded “Head of Household” status for taxes either.
If they are offered legal status, it ought not to come with the benefits of citizenship and their ability to participate as if they are citizens, should be severely restricted.
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.