" I know of no other politician who has ever had such scrutiny."
Seriously?
Posted on 03/19/2015 10:22:03 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Nationally syndicated conservative columnist Michelle Malkin, founder of the website Twitchy, tells Breitbart News that Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker—a potential 2016 GOP presidential candidate—needs to be vetted. She also says Walker’s “problems” run much deeper than the decision to hire—then quickly let go of—pro-amnesty communications aide Liz Mair, who had taken shots at Iowa.
“Scott Walker has much bigger problems than the ill-considered hiring and firing of one D.C. operative,” Malkin said in an email.
"What does he really stand for and is he fully equipped to bear the slings and arrows of his enemies on a national and global scale? Yes, he fought Big Labor and has managed his state well. But grass-roots activists in his state have long been warning me of his ideological gymnastics on core issues: immigration and education.
He has been on the same side as the progressive Left and the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Right: pro-amnesty, pro-massive legal immigration expansionist, and pro-Common Core. He’s been left, right, center, and all over the map."
She added that Washington-based GOP establishment forces are good at backing up establishment politicians, as they seemed to have tried to do to defend Walker and Mair.
“The D.C. consultant class and Capitol Hill GOP operators are adept at swooping in to ‘rescue’ the campaigns of neophytes and molding them into Beltway barnacle tools,” Malkin said. “They did it with Spencer Abraham and Marco Rubio and Paul Ryan. Face it: Many of the D.C. messaging ‘experts’ and ‘communicators’ DO have their own policy agenda and it is naive or stupid to believe they have no sway or influence on ambitious, outside the Beltway seekers of higher public office with no fixed principles.”
Malkin also stood up for the few reporters willing to pressure Walker to answer legitimate questions about Mair,
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
" I know of no other politician who has ever had such scrutiny."
Seriously?
Malkin supporting Jeb was no where near my thoughts, or point, but actually her fiddling with the spoiler factor results in the same.
Spoilers have junked up the place before, certain that they are too clever by half.
I just believe she can be entirely correct about Walker, but at the wrong time and it accomplishes nothing but to risk helping the wrong guy (Jeb) get a leg up early, by working over the only guy ahead of him. How smart is that really.
I really appreciated Newt at the primary debates saying “Every person up here would be much better than Obama”.
You don’t think he’s conservative? Fine. But his record is right there and he’s had more money and effort used against him than anyone in modern history.
If that’s not vetting, what is?’
With the exception of Governor Sarah Palin, no recent conservative Governor has undergone such deep, partisan, and well funded vetting by the Liberals.
While I have favorites(Cruz, Palin, Walker) they all must be able to survive a robust vetting, because, the nominee, whoever it is, will get one in the General election.
It is a big step for Walker to go from Governor to being a possible President.
But vetting is not putting out unsupported hit pieces.
TWB
Malkin’s a little off the rails and paranoid on one issue, and it’s about all she cares about. I think that’s it, not scared of Jebby, or considering supporting him either.
I would think she would prefer Cruz, but I would have thought she would like Walker a lot too.....
Which he did many times, in two different stages of the campaign, and when he was doing that, he was also aiming his considerable wit and talent at the liberals, Obama, judges, unions, academia nuts, the media......and oh, by the way....in those two periods, HE WAS WINNING BY DOUBLE DIGITS.
... and then Mitty made him lose his temper and then his focus on 0bama after SC and before fateful Florida ...
People loved seeing a Republican actually bring a gun to a gun fight instead of a pillow.
Half right...but remember, the Republicans all brought guns - they just used them on Newt and not the Democrats. And then when Mitt won the nomination, he didn't pull a knife, let alone a gun, against Obama.
Well yes, the emergence of the “bad Newt” - such a shame...the SC campaign showed how to win.
Yes that was 1000 thread pillow came out.
I don’t know what it was with some people and Santorum....Santorum is far more liberal than Walker, far more estab, etc....and far LESS talented....
Nationally syndicated conservative columnist Michelle Malkin, founder of the website Twitchy, should be telling Breitbart News that Barrack Obama—the current Democrat president—needs to be vetted. We know everything about Gov. Palin and Gov. Walker, but almost nothing about our current President.
Time to catch up on past due homework before moving on...
Lets be real. Jeb Bush has a better chance of getting killed in a drone strike than getting the GOP nomination. Its just not going to happen.
Besides you cannot avoid looking at one candidate’s bonifides just because it may or may not help another candidate. Nobody is off limits.
Of course you may be right about the drone strike.
Or, maybe not.
You mean it’s really, really a lock that Jeb loses the nomination, like Romney before him lost it, and McCain lost it before him.
Oh! You mean they DIDN’T lose?
We shall see.
I agree with most of that.....and she does have some blind spots. I’m not convinced that Walker is more conservative on immigration than Santorum however. I’m not convinced otherwise either. I’m not sure.
Frankly, it’s a little bit of a stretch for anyone from Wisconsin or PA to really understand the situation like those in border states can anyway - and it’s not really instructive to see what they’ve done about this issue thus far in such states.
We shall see what? That Michelle has never been wrong or that she’s never backed an unvetted candidate? Oh, l get it, doughy one has enlisted you as his secret shill again.....do you never feel the shame of that?
I met her one time and have great respect for her, but in this case she’s just entering the debate in the same way the Cruz or lose people are. She’s the one who’s letting her emotions rule. She appears to not be interested in vetting, but rather in putting out a hit on a fellow conservative to bolster Cruz. I understand the desire to push your candidate, but this is not helpful.
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.