How about instead we cut funding for 140,000 illegal immigrants. Vets earned their benefits, illegals didn't earn their welfare. In fact I'd be a fan of eliminating all services for illegal aliens and only allowing birth right citizenship for those who have at least 1 parent who is a US citizen.
As I said, why not cut funding for illegal aliens who didn't earn what they receive and then we can increase funding for the vets who did earn what they get. Would you support this?
So do Walker’s comments Sunday represent his latest immigration flip-flop? I don’t think so. A better characterization of Scott Walker’s position on birthright citizenship would be to say that Scott Walker has no position.
Consider his campaign’s response to a request from the Washington Post following Sunday’s ABC interview for a clear, yes-or-no answer to whether Walker wants to end birthright citizenship. “His position is very firm: We have to secure the border and enforce the laws first,” a spokeswoman said in an email. “He has been saying this all week long. You have heard him say that countless times. I know what you're asking for but just because you're not satisfied with his answer doesn't make his any less worthy."
If you set aside his equivocations, then, Walker’s position on a practice enshrined in the U.S. Constitution is actually quite clear: He won’t take one. This is not a politically calculated flip-flop; it’s a politically cowardly nonanswer
Walker has turned out to be a lot like Perry, a complete zero on the trail, someone who is so poor at the gig you wonder why they are sucking up our time. Are they like those annoying people who try out for American Idol to try to shock us with their lack of talent, in other words for shits and grins?
