Posted on 08/23/2015 11:06:12 AM PDT by Rockitz
Wisconsin Governor and Republican presidential candidate Scott Walker said he’s “not taking a position…one way or the other” on birthright citizenship, and all other issues pertaining to immigration can’t be addressed “until you actually secure the borders and enforce the laws” in an interview with CNBC’s John Harwood released on Friday.
Walker was asked about his support for ending birthright citizenship. He stated, “When it comes to birthright, or anything else, I said until you…actually secure the border, and start enforcing the laws, any politician who talks about anything else beyond that, the American people should be suspect, because we’ve talked for 25 years about those things. I’ve actually talked about doing it.”
Walker was asked about his position on a pathway to citizenship for illegal immigrants, he maintained that “in both of those instances,” “I don’t think any of those issues can be addressed until you actually secure the borders and enforce the laws.”
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Ha ha—at least you’ve got the right tagline!
BTTT.
How decisive, what a keen understanding of the issue. Wet that finger, Walker, stick it ...
“And this is about more than illegal immigration, it’s about national security.”
Did someone fill up the tank you dove in on? Truth be told, this is the same way Perry started his fall in 2012 by agreeing to giving illegals in-state tuition. Maybe Walker can remember the third alphabet soup agency.
This is not an either/or question. Addressing the anchor baby problem does NOT preclude enforcing border law and stopping illegal crossings.
In fact, addressing the anchor baby issue would help to reduce the incentive for illegals to invade in the first place. As it is, illegals receive all kinds of benefits when they enter this country. One of those benefits is the anchor baby practice. By removing benefits, fewer illegals will choose to enter in the first place, and the problem shrinks and becomes more manageable.
And the Koch brothers.
Walker needs to talk to the Koch brothers first. Then he will come up with a position.
Really? He has a negative net worth of -72 thousand? I knew he was in debt, but not to that extent.
So said another way, a sudden 100 thousand in “cattle future profits” would really rock his world. Hell, that’’s not even rounding error in the Chamber of Cronies budget. And it makes him very, very vulnerable to someone with an open checkbook.
“Consensus by the public is just not there yet.”
Uhh, and how is consensus supposed to be developed if the president in question won’t even put the issue on the table?
Leaders DEVELOP a consensus.
Scotty has a big hole in his pocket.
"Wisconsin Governor and Republican presidential candidate Scott Walker has an estimated net worth of -$72,500, according to the Boston Globe. Walker's net worth is the lowest of any of the 2016 presidential candidates, according to the Globe report.Aug 6, 2015"
http://heavy.com/news/2015/08/scott-walker-net-worth-credit-card-debt-2015-home-house/
I guess he is angling for the useful idiot vote -very smart, LOL. It worked so well for McCain and Romney.
Thanks for the link. How the hell do you end up $50k in debt to Sears?
So I guess we want him in charge of the Federal budget then. He seems to understand running up debt.
That appears so.
This may explains why Walker budgeted for a $1 billion surplus but is facing a -$2.2 billion shortfall and proposes massive borrowing. He thought he was doing good business just like in his personal life. smh.
Not ready for Prime Time. He’s young.
There goes lunch, and Dinner, and......
You do know WaPo is owned by Jeff Bezos of Amazon fame. Lots of H1Bs go through that revolving door, and they don’t want it to stop.
This is absolutely the most amazing thing to watch from the sidelines.
We have been talking border security for thirty years.
There was a James Garner movie "Support You Local Sheriff," where they had a jail that had no bars, so he drew a chalk line where they were supposed to be, and cautioned the prisoner that the line was just the same as bars and implied that he could get shot for crossing the line.
We would not need a fence if there were penalties for being here illegally, that the illegal was unwilling to pay.
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.