Posted on 03/27/2015 5:44:04 AM PDT by bestintxas
I've taken a lot of heat for reporting on the many, many inconsistencies and "evolutions" in Scott Walker's positions, but I think Walker has finally broken an egg that can't be re-shelled. He reportedly endorsed amnesty not six years ago, not two years ago, but two weeks ago, in a private group dinner:
... during the March 13 New Hampshire dinner, organized by New Hampshire Republican Party Chairwoman Jennifer Horn at the Copper Door Restaurant in Bedford, Mr. Walker said undocumented immigrants shouldn’t be deported, and he mocked 2012 GOP nominee Mitt Romney’s suggestion that they would “self-deport,” according to people who were there.
Instead, they said, Mr. Walker said undocumented immigrants should be allowed to “eventually get their citizenship without being given preferential treatment” ahead of people already in line to obtain citizenship.
“He said no to citizenship now, but later they could get it,” said Bill Greiner, an owner of the Copper Door restaurant. Ken Merrifield, mayor of Franklin, N.H., who also attended, said Mr. Walker proposed that illegal immigrants should “get to the back of the line for citizenship” but not be deported. Three separate sources at the dinner confirmed Walker’s remarks to the Journal.
To be fair, Scott Walker's spokesman denies making these comments, but he's lost all credibility. Three separate sources confirmed he said this. He has been publicly pro-amnesty for many, many years, going back as recently as two years ago.
For more than a decade before seriously entertaining a presidential campaign, Mr. Walker publicly favored a broad overhaul of immigration laws.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
I love Ted Cruz and am happy to have him as my senator, however, Walker is the one who actually has a resume of implementing conservative actions. Walker's perception as less conservative may be because of the rational elements that need to be incorporated in order to actually implement change.
Ted has an impressive history of standing up for principle, but has yet to build a record of getting things done.
He may not be done, but he is well cooked After a behind closed doors meeting...WTP are left to wonder ‘Why?” Like the man, top contender for some time, but now, not so certain he is solid on the amnesty issue. Looked forward to a ticket of SW and Sen Cruz. Now it’s Cruz - one who is unafraid to tell it like it is.
If you want to know the truth, they are all so full of themselves in DC that the best policy might be anything that slows them down so that very little gets through. Exuberance seems to be a particularly destructive emotion for this batch of elites.
I do pray as well that we will turn back to God as a nation.
I am hoping for real leadership to kick butts and take names, I’d settle for someone expelling gas in the elevator. Sad really, but what are you going to do?
DullGrayAdderess just doesn’t have the same ring :(
Pretty much a pragmatist though (so hot pink would be all the same!), just one that loves her country and hates to see the honor of same dragged through the mud.
Perry won’t run and derail Cruz. I don’t know their personal relationship, but the Tea Party has been good to Perry and I don’t believe he’ll split their vote and undermine his own state’s senator. Anyway, Perry has no poll results to work with, much like Chris Christie. Unlike Christie, he doesn’t have blind ego. If Perry is smart, he’ll go all out for Cruz and get a good position as a reward, if he want it.
“Ted has an impressive history of standing up for principle, but has yet to build a record of getting things done.”
Here’s Rush’s answer...
http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2015/03/24/as_predicted_conservatives_attack_cruz
I can’t disagree with the fact Scott Walker’s done things. But Ted Cruz has been in the Senate. At this stage, if you ask me, I humbly point out, it’s not a matter of what has Ted Cruz done. It has a little bit more relevance to me to ask, “What has Ted Cruz stopped?” The objective here the past six years has been to stop Obama. We have not had the majority in anything until a couple of months ago. There was no way we had the votes to stop Obamacare. What do you mean, what has Ted Cruz done?
Let’s list his accomplishments, which is more than we get out of Obama. He’s beaten the GOP leadership in election after election. He was in Texas. He’s a Harvard graduate. He’s got all these qualifications. He’s got a great resume. What do you mean, what’s Ted Cruz done? These are criticisms coming from conservatives, by the way. The real question is: What has Ted Cruz stopped? That takes us to what the left loves to point out, and that’s the government shutdown.
Ted Cruz has done his level best to stop as much of Obama as he can, and he still is. That, to me, is more relevant than asking, “What has Ted Cruz done?” The whole point of Ted Cruz and anybody who’s able to articulate an agenda like he is, is we’ve gotta be pretty confident what he will do, if given the chance.
Rush’s response actually illustrates why the perception of Scott Walker and Ted Cruz may differ on how conservative they are. Ted has done a commendable job of standing in the path and stopping some bad things. That calls for standing firmly for your principles. On the other hand Scott Walker is viewed for the things he has gotten done. Getting things done in a democratic form of government always means compromising to some extent. Being effective means getting what you want while giving up only those things you can live with. That is where Walker has hit homerun after homerun. However his public image as a conservative gets softened by the things that he gives up, even if the trade-offs are rational.
I am not dissing either man, only pointing out that perception of the two varies because of comparing apples to oranges.
The way that Republicans jumped on the WSJ story based on "3 anonymous sources" of an old "closed private meeting " reported by a single journalist, gives me little hope that conservatives are smart enough to prevent yet another debacle.
The one person in the room named is Jennifer Horn, NH Party Chair, who lists herself as a “journalist” and was supported for the position by not-very-conservative Congressman Charles Bass of the powerful Bass family. His dad, Perkins Bass, and Grand-dad Robert Bass were both congressmen, Robert, with Theodore Roosevelt, claimed to be a co-founder of the Progressive Party.
Bass.3 is strongly pro-abortion and supportive of the EPA, one of the very least conservative members of the GOP in the House. Was Bass in the meeting, too? Is he part of this fabrication? I guarantee you he is not a Walker supporter.
Discussion of Scott Walker and the twists and turns of “amnesty”. When are they going to ask him publicly?
FReep Mail me if you want on, or off, this Wisconsin itnerest ping list.
Are you a democrat?
Nope
RU?
Must be.
Probably erased all her messages on her email server
‘Jebe Arbusto”
LOL! Love that!
That particular election wasn’t as real good metric to judge future performance. It was a recall election. Walkers base was beyond fired up and well into the pissed stage and the squishy middles and even some of Joe Unions saw the recall as either/both dirty politics and outside interference and then supported Walker because “The first election was won fair and square even if I don’t like it.”
anybody with a GOP moniker is an idiot anyway as they must be Boehner and McCain followers.
I think I spelled it out in an earlier thread, but here I go again.
The US Supreme Court WILL stop any attempt at wholesale deportation. The fact that nothing has been done to deport those here is tantamount to amnesty as is in the Court’s eyes, and any law that would retroactively kick out those here for 2+ years would be seen as violating the Ex Post Facto provision in the US Constitution. The best we can hope for is that we can stop them from voting, kick them off of welfare, make it an incredibly long process for them to get green cards (20+ years), and restrict their ability to hold work in the US. We can, however, secure the border, end chain migration, kick the most recent migrants and criminal aliens out, and end the current policy on anchor babies.
So even if Congress and Ted Cruz decided to enforce the laws on the books, it would be as if the law did not exist up to that point based on lack of enforcement.
Where in the constitution does that 2+ years thing come from?
Or, worse, one who espouses it, then doesn't espouse, then espouses it again.
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.