Bowsite.com

"sure beats the hell out of Christy, Romney, Bush, Paul jr. and a few others ..... "

Notice how Walker referred to the past, to old, failed ideas while showing pictures of Obama and Hillary, then talked about fresh, new ideas, clearly but subtly reminding voters that Jeb and Mitt are anything but fresh and new.

His frequent comments about how the states are where new ideas are implemented and tested was not only a way to point to his own record, but also subtly let voters realize that Senators are not part of that mix.

Very, very well done.

Kyle, thanks for sharing!

1. He's walked the walk in Wisconsin, not just talked the talk.

2. How is the left going to demonize Walker? He's not a firebrand, he's not voted to shut down the government (not that that's a bad thing, but it would be used against him in a most dishonest way), and he's not viewed as a radical.

3. He's won THREE elections for Governor in four years in a blue state without compromising his principles.

4. He's produced tremendous results for WI taxpayers, education, and blue collar workers.

5. He's the only Governor in American history ever to survive a recall effort.

6. He's definitely a Christian but doesn't wear it on his sleeve, which will make him acceptable to those who are 'economically conservative and socially liberal.'

7. He's the epitome of the American Dream, having gone from an average middle class family to the Governor of a big state.

8. He cut spending, freed WI taxpayers from the tyranny and costs of public sector unions and Wisconsin's employee's pension system may now be the only one in the 50 states that's financially sound.

9. He's got more common sense and human decency in his little finger that Hillary has in her entire body.

10. His message is Reaganesque without having to claim it to be so.

12. He knows how to win the votes of Independents and blue collar Dems without pandering to them or compromising his beliefs.

13. He's actually run something, administered something and achieved success on his own, unlike Hillary and the current occupant of the White House.

14. He's not a super-rich businessman who can be accused of caring only about 'the rich.'

15. He's not a 'legacy candidate,' hoping to get the nomination and then ride across the finish line based solely on his or her name.

I remember the thread and his values mirror my personal ones pretty darn close. I was surprised then and now that so many of you would like him.

I've got to think that if this phenomena is happening here, it's happening all over the country. I would also bet it will continue to happen as more and more people learn about Walker, who he is and what he stands for.

Undoubtedly this same phenomena is why he won three elections for Governor in four years in a blue state.

Read Buckhunter's link. Walker said we need to have a better system that will allow people to come here legally.

Not exactly what I want to hear from him on the issue and at that time, at least, he was vague and did not outline his ideas in any detail. Now that he's running for President, he'll have to be a lot more specific.

Let me repeat....

"I remember the thread and his values mirror my personal ones pretty darn close. I was surprised then and now that so many of you would like him"

Have you guys really looked into him? You may want to throw him under the bus for Romney....8^)

If nothing else he's got guts and isn't afraid to put it all on the line. I don't see he doing a "Romney" in the final debate!!!

"GOV WALKER: SUPPORTING IMMIGRATION REFORM ‘DOESN’T MEAN AMNESTY’

Breitbart

by PAM KEY, Feb 1, 2015

Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” Gov. Scott Walker (R-WI) said supporting immigration reform “doesn’t mean amnesty.”

Walker said, “I think, for sure, we need to secure the border. We need the enforce the legal system. I’m not for amnesty. I’m not an advocate of the plans that have been pushed in Washington. And I think, should I become a candidate, because I’m not yet, it’s part of the exploratory process. We’re a country of balance. We’re a country of immigrants and laws. We can’t ignore the laws or the people that come in. Whether it’s Mexico or Central America.”

When asked if he supported deporting 11 million people, Walker answered, “That’s not what I’m advocating.”

“I’m saying in the end, we need to enforce the laws of the United States. Find a way for people to have a legitimate legal immigration system. And that doesn’t mean amnesty,” he concluded."

The words 'immigration reform' are commonly taken to mean amnesty, but when using the words as they are defined in dictionaries, all it means is a change from the existing policy.

Most of us here on the CF want secure borders and a fence, which would clearly be major immigration reform. So let's not just assume the term is 'code' for amnesty.

For instance, in a July, 2013 interview with a Wisconsin newspaper editorial board, he said the following:

_______________________________________

"It's all is about the 11 million [undocumented immigrants]," Walker said. "You hear some people talk about border security and a wall and all that. To me, I don't know that you need any of that if you had a better, saner way to let people into the country in the first place."

Walker added: "If people want to come here and work hard in this country, I don't care if you come from Mexico or Canada or Ireland or Germany or South Africa or anywhere else. I want them here."

_______________________________________

In the part that I bolded above, can anyone tell me those comments sound like someone who is very serious about securing the border?

One could easily draw the conclusion from those comments that Walker is almost in favor of practically open borders.

I'm going to have to hear a lot more specifics from him on his stance on this issue - and not have it be in serious conflict with previous things he has said on the subject - before I could get real serious about supporting him in the primaries.

He also has some history of support for Common Core education standards, though he supposedly is no longer in favor of it, opting instead to have statewide standards for Wisconsin only.

"Arizona-style" immigration bill that would allow local police to stop suspected illegal immigrants because it would be a "huge distraction" from accomplishing his agenda.

http://host.madison.com/wsj/news/local/govt-and-politics/walker-says-arizona-style-immigration-bill-would-be-huge-distraction/article_a8630484-3f3e-11e2-8205-0019bb2963f4.html

Closing our borders to illegal immigration, and enforcing the immigration laws we have on the books would be a "change from the existing policy." Why don't we give that a try?

I applaud Walker's stiff spine in standing up against - and beating - the Unions. That is only one issue among many important ones, though. I'm not voting for him based on his strength on one single issue, nor would I vote for anyone based upon their strength on one single issue. My guess is, if he's the nominee, the Democrats will throw the kitchen sink at him with extra vigor exactly because of his willingness to take on the Unions. If that happens, he won't be able to afford to lose any Republican votes because of some positions he holds that are seen as antagonistic to Conservatism. Best to get that vetting out of the way well ahead of time.

Regarding Immigration "reform", do we really need immigration "reform"? Or, do we need to just properly secure the border and enforce the laws already on the books?

1. Seal off the Border.

2. If you are an illegal alien you can apply for a work permit but you cannot become a citizen or receive any federal benefits.

3. anybody with a criminal record is immediately deported and make it a federal crime of 10 years in prison if they come back.

4. Any new people that come over the border illegally must be deported. If caught second time they are charged with a felony and 5 years in jail.

5. Make refugee status very difficult to grant and receive and no chance to appeal.

6. Repeal the 1965 immigration act.

And my wife who is from Venezuela immigrated to the USA legally and I would bet most legal immigrants feel the same way.

I would encourage you to spend a few minutes reading his Wikipedia page. In my opinion, he is unusually accomplished for his age. In other words, he has done a lot in his life.

Good moves.

The Dem's are already starting with the dummy line and finishing college....

Is that better/worse than flat-out lying on an important stance to gain support?

never mind, look who I'm asking

Question though, What is his stance on hunting, wildlife, gun rights, etc. I realize there are way bigger issues then that but its a big issue for me. I know nothing of the guy other then what I have read here.