Listen you TEA PARTY LOSERS:
Walker DOES NOT FAVOR AMNESTY! NEVER HAS, NEVER WILL.
Posted on 02/01/2015 6:34:49 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KZ4Gzelz1C0&feature=youtu.be
(Excerpt) Read more at youtube.com ...
That’s current law.
‘Well, I’m illegal, and my boyfriend who works under the table is, too, but the 40K in benefits per year would be slashed to 6K per year if you knew who I really am.’
A bit off topic, but for most illegals; they have a better deal now than if they became citizens. That's how perverse our system has become: all to serve the electoral objectives of the Democrats.
What’s astounding is where the Democrats send them: to States that heretofore had none of them. Scott Walker asked the US Dept of State for a Mexican Consulate in Wisconsin.
That’s as pro-illegal as you can get.
“If Eisenhower was alive today, you would decry his expansion of executive privilege, condemn his interstate highway system as federal overreach, and dismiss him as a rino.”
How clever of you to tell me what I “think”. Nice try at inventing a strawman argument but I don’t easily get distracted.
Unfortunately you’re not a mind reader, you’re just some clown who is uncomfortable defending the position that he has staked out for himself.
I find it easier to stick to what people actually say rather than invent stories about them. You, for instance, told us that it’s too hard to deport millions of illegal aliens.
And to justify that cowardly attitude you appeal to the fact that it’s not 1954, as if enforcing the law in 2015 takes more courage than is possible for your sort.
Well, you’re likely right about that part, I’ll grant you that.
yes, I oppose the current law. I oppose a number of current laws. I certainly oppose increasing the fines, which was what the poster was suggesting.
Yeah, it is. Highly suspicious.
Personally, I do not believe that Beck is a conservative. He comes out with too many oddball positions on things.
I had to pick my jaw up off the floor when he said that about Bush with regard to Schiavo.
My position on the matter is that anyone involved in that in any way that allowed it to come to what it came to UTTERLY FAILED, and to such an extent that it was an unforgivable sin.
I cannot believe that a civilized country let her suffer like that until her death.
That is a true outrage.
So the Cruz bill does forgive and that means amnesty.
Walker was asked: "But you haven't taken a position on whether the people that are already here should have a conditional pathway to citizenship?"
His answer:
"No. Again I think long term that's going to be a part of it but I think there are too many people here in Washington who are leapfrogging over everything else and trying to get to that right away. We fundamentally don't have a system . . . to legitimately deal with people who want to come - in fact, I think you would greatly reduce if not outright eliminate the number of people who come in illegally if we had an effective, time-effective particularly, system of dealing with legal immigration."
However that original interview went.
"Walker was then asked about the estimated 11 million immigrants living in the country illegally. The editorial board asked if he could "envision a world where with the right penalties and waiting periods and meet the requirements where those people could get citizenship?"
"Sure," Walker responded. "I mean I think it makes sense."
But it's taking it out of context. It's a hypothetical.
Save
Exactly. 2nd Division Are any of the potential candidates stating that they are in support of Amnesty? What are his plans for the illegals already here?
Did they ask him if he would support citizenship for the illegals that are here in the country now? Amnesty means just handing them over citizenship. Walker has repeatedly stated that he supports a “pathway to citizenship”. In other words, something like fining them, making them go to the “back of the line” or leave and come back.
Of course he isn’t going to be stupid enough to say he supports amnesty. Are people going to go with what he said a couple of years ago when he wasn’t running for POTUS or what he said today a year and a half before he hopes to be POTUS?
Someone asked “How are we going to deport them all?” The same way they got here. If over 100,000 illegals managed to find their way over our borders I’m sure they can figure out how to get back home. Several past presidents have had large deportations. It’s been done. Many of them would leave on their own if we didn’t make things so cushy for them like giving their kids free educations and free medical care. That would be a nice start.
And pointing out discrepancies in a candidate’s statements and comparing the candidates is not declaring JIHAD against them. It is part of the political process and the way we discriminate between candidates.
Sometimes it feels like some of us are debating with a cult instead of reasonable logical people.
I’m waiting for someone to ask Walker how he plans to deal with illegals and what his statements referring to “a pathway to citizenship” really means. It sounds to me like he went out there to do damage control. It’s no secret to him that many conservatives are concerned about his wavering immigration statements.
People need to ask themselves why he isn’t being clear about it. If he had a policy in mind that he believes conservatives could get behind and support why isn’t he talking about that?
he’s one of maybe three republicans i’ve supported with my hard earned dollars who’ve got a chance to earn my vote (full disclosure: i’m not a republican.) and yet some people here are putting words their in his mouth to throw him under their bus. sad. very sad.
2013:
Towards the end of the interview, Bannon noted that “Amnesty is about the sovereignty of the country.” But, he asked Walker, “the Washington Post said earlier that you’re pro-pathway to citizenship.”
“See now that’s where they take it out of context,” Walker said in response. “I’ve not said there should be amnesty in this country. I don’t believe that. I don’t support the legislation being kicked around. What I’ve said repeatedly is we need to fix the immigration system, but fix the legal system. So if people want to come in this country we should have a legal immigration system.”
http://legalinsurrection.com/2015/02/so-what-is-scott-walkers-immigration-position/
Even Legal Insurrection agrees, Walker was not making a claim to give illegals citizenship. End of story.
I have listened to the entire portion of Gov. Walker's 2013 interview that deals with illegal immigration. In context, there is no question that Gov. Walker supported a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants.
You understand the situation clearly.
One of the most transparent GOP establishment shills is Michael Medved. He always has an excuse for why immigration laws can’t or shouldn’t be enforced.
For awhile Medved was saying that the GOP shouldn’t enforce the law because there were too few illegals to bother with and only extremists were concerned with the issue.
Then his argument changed to the claim that there are too many illegals and therefore we have to change our laws instead of enforce them. And he changed this position on a dime. He immediately went from the “too few” excuse to the “too many” excuse. This is the GOPe party line.
I had a front row seat to watch southern California transform from American suburbia into a third world colony so I’m not the least bit impressed with the excuses of these cowards. If they won’t enforce the law then we need to elect people who will.
Amnesty it is then. That B$ just doesn't wash. If they can't speak a word of English that might be a clue.
if you’ve got such a crush on eisenhower, then dig him up.
that’s about the 12th incorrect definition of “amnesty” in this thread. the only consistent thing about them is that they’re all being used an a weapon.
Fair enough.
Walker DOES NOT FAVOR AMNESTY! NEVER HAS, NEVER WILL.
I think Cruz’s concern here was agricultural workers. There’s nothing wrong with that, as long as they go back home. It’s the same as a visa, which is also temporary and legal.
Besides barring citizenship while instituting some level of legalization for those here already, Mr. Cruz has proposed increasing the number of green cards awarded annually, to 1.35 million from 675,000. He also wants to eliminate the per-country limit that he said left applicants from countries like Mexico, China and India hamstrung when they tried to gain legal entry to this country.
Wants to eliminate the limit of immigrants from Mexico, India and China. Except for the citizenship part of the gang of 8 bill, wants the rest of it and easier immigration.
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.