Monday, June 29, 2015

Walker Wants Bigotry To Be Constitutional Right - Sort Of

Scott Walker has spent well over a million of taxpayer dollars in order to preserve the right to be bigoted against marriage equality. When he lost in federal court, he said that “For us, it’s over in Wisconsin."

This did not please the red meat conservative Christians that Walker needs to have any chance at the presidential nomination. So Walker did what he does best - he pandered away to them by changing his tune:
Just before he took the stage, Walker told reporters he's holding out hope that the U.S. Supreme Court will rule that states can bar same-sex marriages. But if that's not the case, he suggested that voters should seek a constitutional amendment to allow state-level bans.

"I think the appropriate route is for people across America who care deeply about this issue to pursue a constitutional amendment allowing the states to determine what the definition is," Walker told reporters.
On Friday, in the wake of the Supreme Court's ruling that Love Wins and that all people can get married, Walker upped his rhetoric even more, surpassing any of his fellow wannabes in the hate:
I believe this Supreme Court decision is a grave mistake. Five unelected judges have taken it upon themselves to redefine the institution of marriage, an institution that the author of this decision acknowledges ‘has been with us for millennia.’ In 2006 I, like millions of Americans, voted to amend our state constitution to protect the institution of marriage from exactly this type of judicial activism. The states are the proper place for these decisions to be made, and as we have seen repeatedly over the last few days, we will need a conservative president who will appoint men and women to the Court who will faithfully interpret the Constitution and laws of our land without injecting their own political agendas. As a result of this decision, the only alternative left for the American people is to support an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to reaffirm the ability of the states to continue to define marriage.

Recognizing that our Founders made our Constitution difficult to amend, I am reminded that it was first amended to protect our ‘First Freedom’ - the free exercise of religion. The First Amendment does not simply protect a narrow ‘right to worship,’ but provides broad protection to individuals and institutions to worship and act in accordance with their religious beliefs. In fact, the Wisconsin constitution explicitly protects the rights of conscience of our citizens. I can assure all Wisconsinites concerned about the impact of today’s decision that your conscience rights will be protected, and the government will not coerce you to act against your religious beliefs.

I call on the president and all governors to join me in reassuring millions of Americans that the government will not force them to participate in activities that violate their deeply held religious beliefs. No one wants to live in a country where the government coerces people to act in opposition to their conscience. We will continue to fight for the freedoms of all Americans.
That tough talked lasted for a whole day. On Saturday, Pander Bear Walker had apparently yet again changed his position for the umpteenth time:
On Friday, Scott Walker warned that “five unelected justices” on the Supreme Court had threatened the “millennia”-old institution of marriage by extending it to same-sex couples. In a statement that lapped many of his more cautious rivals, he called for a constitutional amendment allowing states to decide the issue for themselves.

But barely a day later, in front of an audience of 4,000 conservatives in Denver on Saturday night — a Western Conservative Summit that had been ripping the court and lamenting same-sex marriage for two full days — Walker didn’t mention either.

After running through his stump speech without mentioning the Supreme Court’s recent controversial rulings, Walker had another chance with radio host Hugh Hewitt, who asked the likely presidential candidate if he’s “all-in” when it comes to defending religious liberty.

“Yes,” Walker replied, before launching into a brief boilerplate answer about the importance of freedom of religion.

It marked a sharp departure from Walker’s own rhetoric, but also from many of his primary rivals who seized on the right’s frustration with the court to rally conservatives.
About here, I'd make a quip about "would the real Scott Walker please stand up," but he has flipped-flopped so much on so many issues that I doubt he even knows where he stands on any given issue on any given day.

I'm just a little surprised that Walker hasn't talked about banning Skittles yet. You know, people tasting the rainbow making them gay or something like that.


  1. There was, of course, no talk about "unelected Justices" while the possibility remained that a majority would BAN same-sex marriages....

  2. Or the "unelected justices" that say that corporations are people...