Gov. Scott Walker's altering stance on immigration just for election?

Governor of Wisconsin Scott Walker is changing his stance on immigration just for the election so that he can appeal more to the Conservatives as he preps to launch a Republican presidential bid for 2016. This month at a gathering in New Hampshire he stated that he supported giving them a chance or pathway to legal status but not citizenship for undocumented immigrants. However, the chairwoman, Jennifer Horn, described the Gov.Scott Walker's statements on Thursday after it was reported that he had endorsed eventual citizenship  for those immigrants which many Republicans opposed. This was later disputed by one of Scott Walkers spokeswoman saying that he has been clear on his stand point.  In reality, he changes it depending on who hes talking to in order to gain votes and favor from both sides.

Do you think his plan to appeal to both sides by changing his statements will work?

Undocumented Children's Truth

     Unaccompanied immigrant children arrive in the United Sates without parents or resources. Most of them travel to the U.S. to escape domestic abuse, gang violence, human trafficking, or extreme poverty in their home country.  Some come to the U.S. to seek asylum, some to seek a better opportunity, and some simply to reunite with family members that already live in the United States. Many of the immigrant children are deported without ever having to speak with an attorney.

What do you think about this? Is there a purpose for deporting children without an attorney?

Securing the Border

                                                     What the republicans want to do to feel safe

The Republicans want to secure the boarder and spent countless tax dollars doing so, wasting time and money of the people to try and stop something they cant if a fence is put up and people want to get through the fence don't you think that they could dig a whole to america. John Cornyn, a Texas Republican senator, wants 90% border security before allowing immigration. Cornyn does not define what 90% border security is, or how it can be achieved.

They are offering unrealistic ideas as a band aid to the real issue as to how to solve the border issue. The southern boarder of the U.S. is too big for a simple fence. There is too many people that can easily cross the boarder. The only real checkpoint is 100 miles north where security is low and it's not possible to stop all immigrants from crossing over. If the immigrant is smart he can say he is a citizen and does not have to present any info or their purpose of where they are going.  If they even have any licence considering they are immigration workers not police enforcers.

How do republicans plan on securing the border without any strategy or realistic expectations?

26 States Can Sue the President? Obama's Executive Action in the Courts

On February 18th, a federal judge in Southern Texas blocked President Obama's Executive Action announced last November.  The judge ruled on a case brought against Obama by 26 states.  The judge spoke about making sure that actions of the "Executive Branch...comply with this country's laws and its Constitution."  However, the judge did not actually discuss the constitutionality of the Executive Action.  Judge Hanen's ruling was more specific to procedures that are usually followed when laws are made.  To be specific, usually the public has time to object to laws if they do not agree, but Obama's Executive Action was announced in November and was to be implemented in February.  There is a federal appeals court in Oklahoma that is supposed to decide the next step sometime in late March.

What do you think will be the decision of the Federal Appeals Court?

Link- http://www.cnn.com/2015/02/17/politics/immigration-ruling-obama/

Date- February 18th, 2015