Scott Walker...Why Yes, I Do Support The Schumer-Reid-Obama-Rubio Amnesty Bill Endorses Broad Outlines Of Schumer-Walker-Reid-Obama-Rubio Bill/ UPDATE: Walker Denies Supporting Senate Bill

Above The Post Update:

I spotted that story yesterday while on vacation and didn't see there was some push back by Team Walker on this.

You can watch the whole video here. Starting at 1:48 one of the questioners says something like "you don't have to have a position on the specific bill" and then describes the bill and Walker says, that that's the sort of thing we need. He also says if you fix the legal immigration system to allow more people in, you don't need more border security.

So, no Walker didn't endorse the Senate bill but he did endorse every crappy amnesty idea and libertarian near open border idea.

Added: I transcribed the key bit, you can watch the video for the full Q and A.

Questioner: Can you envision a world where with the right penalties and waiting periods, and meet the requirements where those people [illegal aliens] can get citizenship?

Walker: Yeah, sure. I think it makes sense

Original post below the fold.

Via Mark Krikorian...You have got to be kidding me.

Walker said he is in favor of the Senate immigration bill but called it a backward “Band-Aid” approach, saying elected leaders should make it easier for people to enter the country and become legal citizens in the first place.

“Not only do they need to fix things for people already here, or find some way to do it, there’s got to be a larger way to fix the system in the first place,” he said. “Because if it wasn’t so cumbersome, if there wasn’t such a long wait, if it wasn’t so difficult to get in, we wouldn’t have the other problems that we have (with people living here illegally),” he said.

Walker’s stance on immigration reform evolved over the years.

He said as a gubernatorial candidate in2010 that he would sign an Arizona-style bill, which would allow local police to stop suspected illegal immigrants, if he were elected. Then, in December 2012, Walker said he no longer favored such a bill, telling reporters that such legislation would become a “huge distraction” from accomplishing his agenda for the state.

Next!

I knew he said a few things in the past about needing to deal with immigration and made noises about the dreaded "pathway to citizenship" but I figured he wasn't making a big deal out of it and maybe he'd change by the time the primary started in earnest.

But to endorse the Senate's "amnesty now, enforcement never" approach and not even wait to see what the House does or doesn't do? No thanks.

I didn't know he promised an Arizona style bill when he ran but didn't have time for it when he won. I don't think it would have been a good use of his time but he didn't run on his public worker union plans (which isn't the big deal liberals claim it is) and he found time for that. No matter how great he's been on the fiscal side, I have some serious trust issues with him now.

You can say, like I'm sure CAC will, that this is just one issue and he's great on so much else. Maybe but as I've sad, this is a red-line for me. If it's not for you, fine but admit you have one or two yourself (abortion & gun rights for example). For me, supporting amnesty is literately anti-American and I won't support anyone who is ok with it.

I don't get what's with Republican officeholders. GOP voters have made it clear many times that amnesty before enforcement (if even then) is simply unacceptable. And yet the GOP professional class simply says, tough.

It will be very hard for the Democrats to win the House next year but a GOP cave on amnesty could very well do the trick. Give it a shot guys, see how it turns out.

posted by DrewM. at 03:13 PM

| Access Comments