Liberals Sputter As Scott Walker Proposes Bold New Immigration Platform

breitbart.com ^ | 4/21/15 | Matthew Boyle

[DoughtyOne]

Scott has a problem.

He states his immigration policy has changed.

In this video clip his old (2013) policy is aired in a second video clip. He backs illegals staying in the U. S. if they pay a fine.

It is also mentioned that he favored the McCain/Kennedy immigration bill. (You know, amnesty but not an amnesty) He acknowledges that.

Then in this (03/01/2015) clip, Walker is asked if illegals can stay, if they pay a fine. He responds with, I believes a way can be found to do that.

This is the same policy as his old policy.

Then he states that his policy has changed. No Scott, it hasn’t changed. You just got through endorsing the same policy, illegals being allowed to stay in our country if they pay a fine. So you even fibbed about it.

Immigration is discussed starting at 9:20 and the “...a way can be found...” is located at 10:20

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uymMeeRV1RU

[TADSLOS]

[be-baw]

I agree Scott has a problem. Trust on E-Verify? Not sufficient we need to control the border first

[DoughtyOne]

LOL

[Dutchboy88]

What would you prefer him to say?

[eartick]

Ehh last time I looked Wisconsin was and is a border State and he DOES have a direct impact on immigration as a Governor. We all do as Citizens too.

Shuckin’ and jivin’ his new illegal invader amnesty plan.

Well this guy is for sure off my list as well as Rubio and Bush.

I be Cruzin’ along with Ted. Sent him another $100.00

[HANG THE EXPENSE]

I think that is very appropriate.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Upper Michigan and Minnesota are foreign nations?

[DoughtyOne]

I agree with that. Your and my version of this would be to get that border under control in a few weeks, and during that time we’d already be cracking down on the illegals here.

Almost every one of these guys spews what you suggested as a first step, and then gets lock-jaw when it’s time to discuss those who are already here.

Cut their services. Cut their free-bees. Block them from working. Institute raids. Close businesses or issue large fines. Put some teeth in it.

We have the laws on the books. We’re not enforcing them.

As for sanctuary cities, all federal dollars should be withheld until they comply with our federal immigration policies.

States that don’t comply can have pressure brought to bare on them as well. Police departments get funding too. Just put that on hold.

If unions start causing trouble, then shut them down. Withdraw their charter or business licenses.

There are things that can be done.

[Windflier]

Is this the Flip, or the Flop? I’ve lost track.

[Lurkinanloomin]

I would really like to believe him. This is very close to my own position, except that we already have an immigration system and we need no legislation. We just need for those responsible to enforce the laws.

[Windflier]

What would you prefer him to say?

What he really thinks, and what he would really do if he were President.

He probably couldn't answer because he doesn't know which way the wind will be blowing then.

[Patton@Bastogne]

my thought is that scott walker has now peaked in the GOP primary polls ...

this is especially important from a fund raising perspective ...

.

[crz]

Well, according to the trolls, at least the U.P.is.

As for minnetonka, it might as well be.

[Extremely Extreme Extremist]

Don’t forget the anchor babies.

[South40]

At a 2002 Mexican Independence Day event in Milwaukee, Wis., Mr. Walker, then the county executive, signed a resolution that praised the economic and civic contributions of undocumented immigrants and called for “a new program similar to the Federal AMNESTY program enacted by Congress in 1986.”

source

[DoughtyOne]

Ah, well something within the limits of the U. S. Constitution would be nice.

Article IV, Section 4 of the U. S. Constitution reads:

The United States shall guarantee to every State in this Union a Republican Form of Government, and shall protect each of them against Invasion; and on Application of the Legislature, or of the Executive (when the Legislature cannot be convened) against domestic Violence.

My read of this doesn't include the words "shall facilitate". It does include "shall protect against".

The Presidential Oath

I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my Ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States.

If you do not enforce Article IV, Section 4, you in effect nullifying part of the U. S. Constitution. You are not preserving, protecting, or defending it.

[Georgia Girl 2]

Secure the border and let them all stay. That’s the plan. Or at least say the border is secure and let them all stay. Don’t be fooled that’s the deal.

[Dutchboy88]

"“When it comes to immigration, as a governor I don’t have any direct role in that—but having talked to border state governors and having talked to other people, seeing how screwed up immigration has become under this president, it was clear to me talking to them and listening on this issue, traveling to the border actually going there with the governor of Texas Gov. Abbott, seeing the problems there, yeah from my standpoint going forward we need to secure the border, we need to enforce the laws that we currently have with an e-verify system,” Walker said.

Well, it sounds like he wants to secure the border from invasion and enforce the laws already on the books...the Constitution. And, "facilitate" does not preclude "protecting against". How exactly would you get goods across the border, or are you an isolationist?