Politico...Scott Walker's immigration problem

[mystery-ak]

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/scott-walkers-immigration-problem-115303.html


Scott Walker's immigration problem

He backed the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill, derided as amnesty, in '06.

By Gabriel Debenedetti

2/18/15 7:27 PM EST

Scott Walker was definitive when asked about his position on illegal immigration earlier this month: “We need to secure the border. I think we need to enforce the legal system. I’m not for amnesty,” he told ABC News. “I’m not an advocate of the plans that have been pushed here in Washington.”

But the likely presidential candidate apparently stood on another side of that debate as the Milwaukee County Executive in 2006. That year, he signed a resolution calling on Congress to pass the Secure America and Orderly Immigration Act, a bill authored by John McCain and Teddy Kennedy that was denounced at the time by conservatives as “amnesty” — and remains anathema to party activists.

Walker faces a tricky balancing act in tackling immigration policy, as he tries to square his long legislative record with his current attempt to position himself as the candidate with appeal for both major Republican donors — many of whom vocally support comprehensive reform — and right-wing activists who favor stricter policies.



Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/02/scott-walkers-immigration-problem-115303.html#ixzz3SD4Bpt1t

[alicewonders]

And so it begins. 

Tell me who they are digging dirt on and I will tell you who they fear.

[Luis Gonzalez]

And so it begins. 

Tell me who they are digging dirt on and I will tell you who they fear.

It's not even that, even though you are correct.

The issues of immigration and anything to do with same-sex anything is easy fuel for the left.

Something has to be done about immigration.

The issue is incredibly complex, but it's mostly discussed in slogans, sound bites and generalizations because anything more in depth will get a politician in trouble with someone whose support they need.

Reality is that we're NOT going to round up and deport millions of people, but that is the second front and no GOP politician will EVER say that out loud. The front line is border security. Anyone and everyone agrees that if the boat that you're on is flooding, your first task is to stop the water from coming in, then after you've done that, you can start bailing.

The problem is that since so many oppose the only obvious solutions to the problem of what to do with those who are already here, any time that you have any legislation addressing the problem of securing the border which also addresses the existing illegal alien population, all Hell breaks lose, and nothing is ever done.

We give the opposition Party all sort of ways to defeat us.

We demand that our politicians stand against this issue and that issue, and for this issue and that issue, while all the Democrats ever do is stand against us.

To wit, the basis of most left-wing political campaign strategies is "Republicans are bad. We're not Republicans. Vote for us because we're not Republicans."

Now the narrative on Scott Walker begins.

"Scott Walker is a Republican."

"Scott Walker is a bad man because he is a Republican."

"Vote for the not Scott Walker, not a Republican candidate because they are not bad."

"They're not bad because they're not a Republican."

Then there's the side strategy.

"Pssst... conservatives... (fill in the  GOP candidate's name) is soft on (fill in the issue)."

[alicewonders]

Almost every politician says what is politically expedient.  That's why I'm looking for a candidate with a record of achievements that can be seen and weighed as the whole picture of what they will actually DO.  I know there are some that are supremely rigid (a lot of them are on TOS) and will disregard 99% of a candidate's record because of one comment - they may or may not have been taken out of context, misquoted, etc.

I think most of us look at the entirety of a politician's career, weigh this against the other candidates, and do the mental math as to who is the best of what we have to choose from.  When I find a candidate that I think is the real thing - I enthusiastically work to help him get elected. 

Sure, there are those who demand 100% purity.  I wish them luck in finding a viable candidate. 

This isn't enough for me to uncheck Scott Walker from my list of possible candidates that I can support.  I recognize it for what it is.

[Bigun]

Almost every politician says what is politically expedient.  That's why I'm looking for a candidate with a record of achievements that can be seen and weighed as the whole picture of what they will actually DO.  I know there are some that are supremely rigid (a lot of them are on TOS) and will disregard 99% of a candidate's record because of one comment - they may or may not have been taken out of context, misquoted, etc.

I think most of us look at the entirety of a politician's career, weigh this against the other candidates, and do the mental math as to who is the best of what we have to choose from.  When I find a candidate that I think is the real thing - I enthusiastically work to help him get elected. 

Sure, there are those who demand 100% purity.  I wish them luck in finding a viable candidate. 

This isn't enough for me to uncheck Scott Walker from my list of possible candidates that I can support.  I recognize it for what it is.

I'm looking for an American L E A D E R who believes in the Constitution and the rule of law and has the strength of character to stand up and FIGHT the forces trying to destroy my country!

Thus far Scott Walker comes closer to that ideal than anyone I know of!

[libertybele]

I'm looking for an American L E A D E R who believes in the Constitution and the rule of law and has the strength of character to stand up and FIGHT the forces trying to destroy my country!

Thus far Scott Walker comes closer to that ideal than anyone I know of!

Let's not forget another Constitutional Conservative with a lot of backbone -- Ted Cruz!  I think he and Walker would make a hell of a team!

[Formerly Once-Ler]

Almost every politician says what is politically expedient.  That's why I'm looking for a candidate with a record of achievements that can be seen and weighed as the whole picture of what they will actually DO.  I know there are some that are supremely rigid (a lot of them are on TOS) and will disregard 99% of a candidate's record because of one comment - they may or may not have been taken out of context, misquoted, etc.

I think most of us look at the entirety of a politician's career, weigh this against the other candidates, and do the mental math as to who is the best of what we have to choose from.  When I find a candidate that I think is the real thing - I enthusiastically work to help him get elected. 

Sure, there are those who demand 100% purity.  I wish them luck in finding a viable candidate. 

This isn't enough for me to uncheck Scott Walker from my list of possible candidates that I can support.  I recognize it for what it is.

I absolutely agree with your reasoning.  Actions speak louder than words, and Governor Walker has a great if short record to run on.  I think he is fully awesome, but I wish this wasn't his first run at the Presidency.   I hope the rest of the GOP can look past his inexperience as he stumbles through the minefield the drive-by-media will lay before him. 

Walker has some fantastic advantages besides his record.  The rats provided him with a national donor list when they tried to recall him.  He also has pull with RNC Chairman Preibus.

But it was Governor Walker's serene demeanor during my state capitol occupation/rat tantrum that impressed me.  I would have gotten angry at the union thugs and hippies urinating in the corners and defacing the walls, but Walker knew he had the votes in the state legislature and the support of a majority of voters.

He is going to make a great President.

[alicewonders]

I absolutely agree with your reasoning.  Actions speak louder than words, and Governor Walker has a great if short record to run on.  I think he is fully awesome, but I wish this wasn't his first run at the Presidency.   I hope the rest of the GOP can look past his inexperience as he stumbles through the minefield the drive-by-media will lay before him. 

Walker has some fantastic advantages besides his record.  The rats provided him with a national donor list when they tried to recall him.  He also has pull with RNC Chairman Preibus.

But it was Governor Walker's serene demeanor during my state capitol occupation/rat tantrum that impressed me.  I would have gotten angry at the union thugs and hippies urinating in the corners and defacing the walls, but Walker knew he had the votes in the state legislature and the support of a majority of voters.

He is going to make a great President.

Well, Once-ler - let's mark it down, what is the date?  Friday, February 20th!  I think we are in complete agreement - and I think that is another plus for Scott Walker - he pulls disparate people in the party together.  Most everyone I talk really likes him. 

You're right, he is wet behind the ears.  My main worries were in foreign affairs and what I perceived as a lack of charisma in what little I had seen of him.  But, the clips I've seen of him lately, he has plenty of charisma.  And it is a laid-back easy-going, yet passionate kind of charisma that is real and connectable to most people. 

So far I like what I see. 
On that we can agree!

 

 

[Longiron]

That is a winning team no matter who is the lead person.

Let's not forget another Constitutional Conservative with a lot of backbone -- Ted Cruz!  I think he and Walker would make a hell of a team!

[alicewonders]

That is a winning team no matter who is the lead person.

 

Welcome to The Briefing Room!