All Episodes
Previous Next
April 5, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
35:13
April 5, 2006, Wednesday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
What is all this talk about Katie Curick?
Come on, folks.
I am America's anchor man.
Until Katie Couric gets my chair here at the EIB network.
She just made a lateral move.
She's not moved up.
Now she had this chair.
We could be making a big deal out of her move.
Greetings.
Great to have you with us, my friends.
It is the award-winning thrill-packed, ever exciting, increasingly popular, growing by leaps and bounds.
Rush Limbaugh program from the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Hi to all of you at the Ditto Cam watching today at Rush Limbaugh.com.
It'll be on all three hours of our Sterling unique broadcast today, as well as well, there might I always always think about adding the possibility that we have to do this.
You know, go the bars route in case something embarrassing happens in here, but it is yet to happen.
I do want to warn you, we are we have a trainee in today.
Brian's going to be gone for a couple days, and we got a trainee, a management trainee.
Oh, I'll tell you what, when management comes in, you know what they did to the phone company when they went on strike.
So we anyway, we have a management trainee engineer in here today, folks.
And I anything can happen.
Uh I just want to prepare you for it.
The news today got all sorts of fun, exciting things to discuss.
Uh uh another another case.
I what what what is what is going wrong with America's women and teachers?
I mean, another case of no child's behind left alone.
An elementary school teacher.
It's what it is.
No childs behind left alone.
An elementary school Oh, and we've got we got a port update today.
So get the ports uh port.
Yes.
No, I'm not making it up.
This is big.
This is it really is big.
The port deal news that we have uh today.
We'll do an update on that.
An elementary said, Dover Delaware, elementary screw teacher, accused of having sex with a 13-year-old student who's been arrested and charged with multiple counts of rape.
Rachel Holt, 34, science teacher at Claymont Elementary, arrested early Tuesday, charged with rape, providing alcohol to a minor and unlawfully dealing with a child.
Well, well, uh uh okay.
The teacher allegedly had sex with the boy 28 times during one week, yeah, during the last week of March, and on at least one occasion allowed the boy's 12-year-old friend to watch.
Uh authorities said she also gave the students alcohol adult beverages, according to Newcastle County Cops.
Twenty-eight, twenty twenty-eight times in one week.
Well, you know these young guys are capable of that.
That's that's the um that's the reason.
I think that's why these old babes go young.
You know, the uh well, you could call it new math, but uh it's still.
I tell you what, folks, it's uh strange things happening out there.
Uh I'm I uh really you know, I wasn't aware of this happening when I was a uh uh a screw kid of age whatever, 12, 13, or 14.
It I may have gone on, but it was it certainly wasn't reported, but I don't think it went on.
I it's certainly not to the degree that we're learning about it.
Now, you uh you people will remember oh, and by the way, we got Tom Delay on the program next hour.
He'll be here at the top uh of the next hour, but a little less than an hour from now.
Um to uh he wants to come on and explain what now what is so funny in there now.
What?
Oh these guys, everybody wants to get in the act.
Everybody's telling me jokes.
They're horrible in their rank, and this is why you people do not have live microphones.
And everybody says, how come we can't hear them?
Rush, it's very frustrating.
All we hear is your side of conversation.
Trust me.
Trust me, this program would be in court with the FCC.
I can't tell you how many times a week if these people had live microphones.
I know what I'm doing here, folks.
I'm the highly trained broadcast specialist.
Now let me move on with this.
How many times does 13 go into 48?
Come on.
Man.
Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.
All right.
Remember the story of Philadelphia?
We love Philadelphia.
The Philadelphia is almost uh as exciting to me as Ports Deal news.
Uh Philadelphia, the the new building there, this new that's gonna be the tallest skyscraper in the city, Comcast Center.
Remember the the their the they're gonna put in uh waterless urinals.
And a plumbers uh were on strike.
Plumber, you can't do that threatening to bring the whole project to a screeching halt.
Well, they solved the problem.
They solved the problem.
Folks, this is so typical of big city corrupt liberal bureaucracies.
It is and unions, it is just I have to laugh.
Here's the solution to the problem.
They're gonna go ahead and install the waterless urinals.
And the plumbers are going to install pipes that are unnecessary and will not be connected.
And the plumbers are saying, well, no, no, no, this is a backup in case the waterless urinals don't work because we don't think they're gonna work.
So the union, the union, you and you people in the in Philadelphia that are pay it's your taxes that are going for this unnecessary work.
This is akin to propping up the uh the uh the buggy whip industry.
So they're gonna put in pipes throughout the building that are not going to be connected to anything and they're not going to be necessary.
Uh the Jimmy Carter Center has uh waterless urinals.
I I throughout the story here, I can't find anybody explain to me how they work.
Well, you will bring it in here.
Well, of course, gravity, but that's it.
There's nothing else.
There's okay, so I'm being told now that what what makes the urinals work is gravity and nothing else.
A little filter in the bottom, but but still, you you you're still getting.
All right, it still doesn't explain it away to me.
But if they're in the Jimmy Carter Center, they're probably in some habitat for humanity homes as well.
Waterless urinal agreement now in the can, folks.
And that means that the Comcast Center will be able to install the environmentally friendly basins in its new headquarters, said a spokesman for Mayor Street last night.
Put in pipes that are not connected, that don't do anything, and solve the problem.
Now, here's an interesting story.
This is from the Washington Times to my immigration stack.
The Department of Homeland Security is near an agreement with China to return up to 39,000 Chinese illegally living in the U.S. to the communist country, which previously had refused to accept uh deportations.
The Homeland Security Secretary Michael Sherthoff yesterday said that the tent, which would let the U.S. deport Chinese illegals as they are arrested, will act as a deterrent to other foreign nationals contemplating.
How in the world is that gonna happen?
So we we can we can deport people.
We can round up illegals, and we can get rid of them.
Now it's just 39,000 here, but it's 39,000.
Mr. Chernoff said we can't be in the position any longer where we are paying the burden and bearing the burden for countries that won't cooperate with us and take their own citizens back.
Uh Shirdov said this as he completed a week-long tour of China, Japan, and Singapore to discuss security and immigration issues.
What does the Department of Homeland Security know what the White House is doing on immigration?
This is these two messages are directly at odds.
We we do not do this with Mexico.
Nobody even wants to try doing this with Mexico.
And yet here we are, we got these 39,000 illegal Chicoms and want to send them back to the ChICOM government.
So it can be done, and it is being done.
I'm telling you folks, there's something about this, and I uh there's a couple news stories that just I can't figure it out.
Rational logic and reason doesn't explain what's going on between our government and Mexico when it comes to uh illegal immigration.
Well, when it comes to the SHICOMs, we'll send them right back.
Anyway, I got a quick timeout.
We'll take it and uh continue right after this.
Don't sneak away.
All right, we're back.
Uh little information here on these waterless urinals.
It still doesn't make any sense to me, but uh this is uh this is how it works.
No flush urinals resemble convention uh conventional urals, uh.
Puy.
Start starting again, yeah.
Sound like Tom Broco.
Uh no flush urinals has trouble with the L's.
You know, that's that's uh then no flush urinals uh resemble conventional fixtures and easily replace them.
They install to the regular waistlines, but eliminate the flush water supply lines.
Flush valves are eliminated as well.
There are no handles to touch, no sensors, no moving parts.
The uh urinal bowl surfaces are urine repellent, urine 99% liquid.
Its drainage is affected without flush water.
Daily cleaning procedures are the same for flushed urinals.
The conventional water-filled urinals trap drain is replaced by a disposable eco-trap, which is uh trademarked eco trap inserted in a urinal outlet.
It holds a layer of the emisscible blue seal liquid floating on top of a urine layer.
Uh this combination trap seal blocks out sewer gases and the covering blue seal layer blocks out urine odors from the room.
A three-ounce dose of blue seal lasts over 1,500 uses, replacing at least 1,500 or up to 4,500 gallons of uh potable uh quality flush water.
Well, here's a job for the union.
Somebody's got to go in and remember uh, you know, clock 1,500 uses uh and and put this blue seal stuff back in there.
If if this the case, why did we ever need flush urinals?
If it's this, if it's if it's just it's just a urinal with some blue seal, some odor eater stuff and an eco trap, and and and you don't need any flush water, why did he ever put flush water in them?
If urine doesn't cling to whatever it sticks to or whatever and so forth, why did it w probably the plumbers union back then, making us put something in that we didn't need, they knew it all along.
Now the uh jig's up, and so we still gotta put in pipes that are not connected to anything.
Just though the plumbers will have some work to do on the building.
Of course, the plumber says, 'cause in case these things don't work, the uh repair lines will already be in there.
All right, uh story here for the uh uh Arizona Republic.
And I, you know, I'm getting a lot of emails like this, uh, folks.
Paul uh Paul Catalino thinks of himself as liberal.
He votes independent, supports gay marriage, and is anti-war.
His great grandparents immigrated to the U.S. from Italy in 1917.
He's always empathized with Mexican immigrants.
Then last week on television, the central Phoenix retail manager watched in stunned amazement as images of undocumented immigrants and their supporters at huge pro-immigrant rallies in Phoenix and across the country began flying the Mexican flag on American soil.
This liberal, Paul Catalino says, call it racism, call it whatever you want.
But the fact is that the waving of Mexico's flag showed the rest of us, even this diehard liberal and a large portion of the illegal immigrant community are not Americans.
If people want to be Americans, they need to support Americans, and that means waving the American flag.
It means much more than that.
We discussed this yesterday.
It was really, you know, you've got you've got it talking about Hispanic immigration, you're talking to two groups.
You're talking about the the people that follow the legal pathway.
And then the other, which is where the subject of this whole debate that's going on now, and they're not even immigrants.
They're not even, they're just coming here for jobs.
They are not seeking to assimilate into our culture.
They're not going through the uh the legal pathways uh to become an American, it's uh which is much more than just waving the flag.
They have no desire to learn English, they're setting up their own enclaves, and they're basically just uneducated, poor people from south of the border.
Mexico is gladly exporting, and we are taking in under the guise that we have an immigration debate going on.
We don't have an immigration debate going on.
That's really not what this is.
Uh and it's it's all because members of the political class in Washington won't face up to what is going on.
And I tell you, there's a there's a television term.
Have you heard the term jumping the shark?
When a show has it jump the shark moment.
The jump the shark moment is when a television show does something so stupid and so bad that it forever dooms the program and it can't recover from it.
And the term actually has roots in reality.
Back in the days of happy days, there was an actual scene in which Fonzi is out skiing and somewhere water skiing and has to jump a shark.
A shark shows up.
It was a stupid scene.
It made no sense.
The show never recovered after that scene, and now every television show has its jump the shark moment.
Well, this movement, I I I said last week, or the f yeah, last week.
With these 500,000 people in LA and all over the country said this is what the waving the Mexican flag is going to be the jump jump jump the shark moment for the uh illegal immigration movement.
And this is exactly this this backlash is starting to happen, and it's not public yet.
We're just starting to get little feelers of it.
But I'm telling you, these people running around waving the Mexican flag and then demanding that no law be passed that affects them and what they want to do here, including the illegal.
People aren't going to put up with this.
They're going to realize this isn't about immigration.
So the jump the shark moment and the illegal immigration movement has arrived.
I'll tell you something else that that constitutes the jump the shark moment the fact that all of these kook left-wing communist groups have now taken over the movement.
Answer and and and uh the the free Palestine movement.
I mean, it's a typical collection of wacko extreme leftist pro-communist groups that have co-opted now the illegal immigration movement.
And they're the ones that are putting on this big May Day march and protest and national boycott.
May Day.
The day that the communists and the Soviet Union drove all their military equipment past the reviewing standard to Kremlin.
Well, if the illegal immigrants want to be it tells you who they really are and who their leaders are, and and if if they want to be co-opted by a bunch of pro-communist, anti-hate American crowd people, then that's gonna be another jump the shark moment.
There can be two.
There can be, there's usually only one.
But once the American people get an idea that the hate America crowd in this country has adopted the illegals, uh you're not gonna find the you and you hear this guy in Phoenix, and he's just one of many, I'm telling you who are out there, these leftists, liberals who are who are they they've they're having their compassion thrown right back in their face, folks.
We must understand the poor from around the world, and if they want to come here and improve their lives, why who are we to stand in their way?
Well, they're having that compassion thrown right back in their face because these people to whom they're extending all this compassion and understanding and uh feeling uh pain, suffering, uh, understanding throwing it right back in their face.
And it's it's gonna cause even more reaction.
There's a story in the LA Times today.
Florida Governor Jeb Bush calls tone of immigration debate hurtful.
Accusing politicians of pounding their chests on immigration for short-term political gain.
Florida Governor Jeb Bush said Tuesday the tone of the debate had been hurtful to him and his Mexican-born wife Columba.
Um can I I can't I can't think of a single prominent voice on our side of this debate who's been anything but respectful and civil.
Can I I wish, I wish President Bush and Governor Bush, when they want to talk about the incivility out there, would name some names.
They talk about J.D. Hayworth.
Who are they talking about?
Are they well the story talks about the minute men, and it talks about the uh some some members of Congress, the Minutemen, I mean they're out there calling the Menemen vigilantes, vigilant, they're not breaking the law, they're not doing anything that's on the wrong side of the law.
And yet, here we have vigilantes or people being called vigilantes who are just obeying the law while they're trying to do something about this illegal incursion into the country.
The illegals are given a pass, they're called the backbone of America, we're not allowed to criticize them.
The minute men are called vigilantes.
It's it's 180 degrees out of phase.
I mean, it's it's the it's the left, it's their side that's urging all these protests.
Uh these protests people are carrying the flags of foreign countries.
It's their side trying to force on the American people illegal immigration that the people reject on principled grounds.
It's their side using names like nativist and know-nothings and racists to describe people who are concerned about the illegal immigration problem.
As far as I'm concerned, we have argued the facts and we have argued the law.
And and and we're said now to be using a negative tone by those who are using the negative tone.
I mean the negative tone is coming from all the people trying to get get everybody up to speed for supporting this.
I you know, look at who they're teamed with.
They're teamed with answer.
Told you this yesterday, a bunch of truly radical hate America groups.
Why why doesn't why doesn't Senator McCain, why doesn't President Bush, why doesn't Governor Bush chastise those people?
Senator McCain's out there advising the illegals say, Oh, you don't want to flying those Mexican flags.
Fly American flags out there.
He's advising them.
It's too late.
The jump the shark moment has uh has taken place.
But it's amazing to uh to see who is being criticized as uncivil and mean spirited in this.
We as uh well, I know that's right, because we're using the term illegal, we are mean spirits.
That's what I mean.
We're sticking to the facts and the law.
Quick time out, we'll be back.
Don't go away.
Well, if that's what you want, you are at the right place.
You were tuned to the right station, listening to the right program.
The truth.
That is our objective here.
You need courage to face it and understand it.
Um we have, you know, we have uh we have our own uh warrantless wiretap program here at the uh EIB network.
We're able to listen on anybody's telephone answering machine.
Wish I had that number.
I mean, we can tap it, but I don't know the number.
I'd like to call myself.
And we're back.
L. Rushmall at 800 282-2882, America's anchor man here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
See, here I was just I just made the point.
All you know, you got Governor Bush and President Bush and President McCain, all these people uh in the I call them the open borders crowd.
That's what they are, the open borders crowd.
People like me being uncivil.
And in a minute, man are vigilantes.
Uh and and I ask, name for me.
One person who's being uncivil, who's dealing with anything other than the facts here.
Well, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists urges news media to stop using dehumanizing terms when covering immigration, calls for stopping the use of illegals as a noun, curbing the phrase illegal alien.
As protesters march in the streets and debate intensifies in Congress over how to fix the nation's immigration laws, the National Association of Hispanic Journalists calls on our nation's news media to use accurate terminology in its coverage of immigration and to stop dehumanizing undocumented immigrants.
They're not immigrants, they're not coming here to immigrate, and they are illegal.
Now see, I've just been I guess I've just been uncivil.
Right.
I said I said it twice, but I also raised my voice.
I raised my voice in the attempt to make a point to be emphatic.
Here you have a bunch of journalists who are openly admitting that accuracy is not what they are about.
Spin and propaganda is what they're about.
Don't call them what they are.
Don't call them illegals.
And don't call them illegal aliens.
And don't even refer to them.
They're just they're just undocumented workers.
They're not even immigrants.
The ones we're talking about have no desire to immigrate.
They're coming here for work.
That's so they can't point out to me anybody who's being uncivil.
And I don't know why the uh the open borders crowd is not upset at who it is that's organizing this big Mayday shebang.
Uh this group called Answer is really part of the hate America crowd and and just a bunch of renegade communists.
Now it gets even better.
Uh, ladies and gentlemen, Drudge has uh uh a flashback up on his site.
Democrat Senator Harry Reed, quote, our federal wallet stretched to limit by illegal aliens getting welfare.
Even worse.
Americans have seen heinous crimes committed by individuals who are here illegally.
This is August 5th, 1993.
So 13 years ago, Harry Reed agreed with me and all of us about this, but uh thirteen years can make a big difference, can they?
Now when they think Republicans are on a ropes, well, it's time to forget what they stood for.
They can't you you cannot expect consistency or honesty from these people.
They are themselves are opportunists.
That's why they don't want to state a position on anything because they don't know which position they're gonna need.
Depending on the flow of events.
August 5th, 1993, from the office of Senator Dingy Harry Reed.
In response to increased terrorism, 1993, this is uh August.
Remember it was February of 93, the World Trade Center was hit for the first time.
In response to increased terrorism and abuse of social programs by aliens, Senator Harry Reed today introduced the first and only comprehensive immigration reform bill in Congress.
Currently, an alien living illegally in the U.S. often pays no taxes but receives unemployment, welfare, free medical care, and other federal benefits.
Recent terrorist acts, including the World Trade Center bombing, have underscored the need to keep violent criminals out of the country.
Reed's bill, the Immigration Stabilization Act of 1993, overhauls the nation's immigration law and calls for a massive scale down of immigrants allowed into the country from approximately 800,000 to 300,000.
The bill also changes asylum laws to prevent phony asylum seekers.
Reed said the U.S. open door policy is being abused at the expense of honest working citizens.
We're a country founded upon fairness and justice, Senator Reed said.
An individual in real threat of torture or long-term incarceration because of his or her political beliefs can still seek asylum, but this bill closes the door to those who want to abuse America's inherent generosity and legal system.
Reed's bill also cracks down on illegal immigration.
The 1990 census reported 3.3 million illegal aliens in America.
Recent estimates indicate about two and a half million immigrants illegally entered the U.S. last year.
Our borders have overflowed with illegal immigrants, placing tremendous burdens on our criminal justice system, our schools and social programs, Senator Reed said.
The immigration and naturalization service needs the ability to step up enforcement.
Our federal wallet is stretched to the limit by illegal aliens getting welfare, food stamps, medical care, and other benefits often without paying any taxes.
This is Harry Reed, who today, 13 years later, is doing everything he can to ram an immigration bill that is amnesty down the throats of Republicans and everybody else in this country.
And it is at totally at odds with his own proposed legislation back in 1993.
Here are some specific provisions of Reed's Immigration Stabilization Act.
Reduces annual legal immigration levels from approximately 800,000 admissions per year to about 300,000.
Reforms asylum rules to prevent aliens from entering the United States illegally under phony asylum claims.
It goes on and on and on.
There's another page and a half of this.
It says increases border security and patrol officers to ninety-nine hundred full-time positions.
Clarifies that a person born in the U.S. to an alien mother who is not a lawful resident is not a U.S. citizen.
This will eliminate incentive for pregnant alien women to enter the U.S. illegally, often at risk to mother and child for the purpose of acquiring citizenship for the child and accompanying federal financial benefits.
So back in 1993, uh in Clinton's first year, and the Democrats feel in their oats.
I mean, there you gotta remember what the context of the times was.
The Democrats were excited as they could be.
They were thrilled.
They just vanquished Bush 41.
They thought they had vanquished me, and they were on a roll, and Clinton was gonna set things up.
They were in fat city, folks, and so Harry Reed proposes this bill, and I dare say it bears no resemblance to anything he supports today.
Now, if he felt this way back then, what's changed?
The problem's only gotten worse.
I don't know what happened to his bill.
Obviously nothing nothing came of it.
But uh, and maybe he was just proposing the bill knowing nothing was gonna come of it, but he wanted it on the record anyway, but he still proposed it, and he still associated himself with that uh set of beliefs.
And he's out there, he's he's sounding the panic button and and warning and we better get this fixed.
It's a big problem.
And he's all concerned about the cost to American taxpayers.
And the welfare state drain that the illegal aliens were on the system back then.
Now what's changed?
It's only gotten worse.
And today, Senator Reed probably would have to dissociate himself from every word in that release statement from his office 13 years ago.
I don't know what he'll say when he's confronted with this, and he will be at some point.
I don't know what he'll say.
Well, times are different back then.
What's he gonna say?
Because the situation is only worse.
So the bottom line is these are opportunists.
You can't trust that they believe anything other than what you know liberalism is.
If you can, if you can just take solace in that, just be confident.
Forget what they say, watch what they do, understand that they're liberals, and despite everything else, that will help you identify who they are, what they want to do.
Quick timeout, back with more in just a second.
Some of the finest bumper music known to exist in the free or oppressed worlds.
Right here on the one and only Rush Limbaugh program of the EIB network and uh to the phones to San Diego.
Fred, I'm glad you called.
Uh, nice to have you with us.
Hi, Rush.
How are you doing?
Good.
Never better, sir.
Great.
Um, the point I wanted to bring up was when you were talking about the uh waving of the Mexican flag that's been going on.
It's been going on a lot here with all the kids at school and all that.
Uh some of our North County schools uh as a result of trying not to stem some of the upset feelings, we're banning kids from bringing or wearing anything that resembled the American flag.
Yeah, I have I have that story.
I've got this, I had that story in my stack.
I uh uh I wanted to take your call as a as a transition into it.
This is uh this is from the uh, I guess NBC uh TV station, NBC San Diego.
Schools ban patriotic clothes and flags.
School officials say move is temporary.
In the wake of last week's immigration reform protests, one it's not.
We got to think of a an accurate name for what these protests are, because it's not immigration reform.
Because I'm telling you folks, this isn't about immigration.
That's where this is all being missed.
That's where members of Congress and the Senate are going wrong.
We're not debating immigration.
That's not what this is.
The people that we're talking about want to come here illegally, not be punished for it, and not assimilate.
They're not interested in in in following the immigrant path in this country.
Uh and and because they're going to be future voters, and this is an election year, we cannot face the issue head on.
So, in the wake of last week's immigration reform protests, one scruel district is taking drastic measures, banning all symbols of patriotism, both U.S. and Mexican, beginning Monday, the oceanside, unified scruel district, is banning all flags and patriotic clothing.
According to Scruel officials, some students are using the garments and flags to taunt classmates.
Some critics of the move are calling it a violation of free speech protections guaranteed by the Constitution.
The ACLU points to the landmark Supreme Court case Tinker versus Des Moines.
In that case, scruel officials attempted to stop students who were protesting the Vietnam War from wearing black armbands.
A screw has to be able to show a strong likelihood that there is going to be material and substantial disruption of scruel.
And if they don't meet that standard and they can't censor student speech, said Kevin Neenan of the of the ACLU.
I understand what they're trying to do out there.
They're trying to um any any future unrest and trying to make it so that nobody gets provoked and nobody's feelings are hurt and so forth.
But in the process, one side is being treated ideal uh equally with the other.
They're both being treated as provocateurs, uh, and that's not the case.
It's just it's it's just stunning.
But this is this is probably typical of what you would get in your average uh classroom conflict resolution uh lecture or uh or class.
So anyway, these kinds of things are gonna continue happening, and I I I folks, I'm just gonna tell you right now, I think it all constitutes the jump the shark moment.
I think it's all I think it's already started, and the backlash is effervescent out there.
It's underneath the surface.
It's starting to bubble up now.
When you got liberals in Arizona telling news reporters, yeah, forget it.
I don't know, call it what you want, racism or whatever.
When they started waving those flags, that's when I got a different picture of who these people are, what they're doing.
And when when this May 1st day comes around and you see all these pro-communist hate America groups sponsoring the illegals, it's gonna put a different face on this, and it's gonna make it very tough.
I want to see the politicians of Washington handle this.
I want to see them, I want to see them deal with it.
Well, I want to see them react.
I want to see if how they handle the fact that a bunch of hate America people and pro-communists are behind the next round of big uh uh protests against the United States.
Now they're not I'll tell you what, they're not ignoring all of it because McCain was unable to get his little compromise through because not enough Republicans he doesn't have 60 votes for his and Kennedy's bill.
Uh and that's because conservative senators in the Senate, and there are some, uh, uh refuse to go along with it.
So it's I think it's gonna be somewhat like the uh the ports deal, only it's gonna be much slower to build.
We, folks, it's it's it's you know, politics like anything is impossible to predict.
But between now and November, anything can happen.
And most likely what will happen is the unexpected.
And everybody's assuming this immigration thing is sail right through, but I'll tell you what, the House has a totally different version in the Senate.
And when the Senate and the House finish their bills, then they have to be conferenced.
They have to be reconciled.
That means members of the House and members of the Senate get together and hammer out the differences in the bill, uh two bills.
And there are some experts who think the differences are so great that they're not gonna be an immigration bill this year.
Prior to November, there won't be one.
And maybe it is that nobody really wants one.
They just want to be able to say, here's what I'm for.
But I wouldn't be surprised if there isn't an immigration bill.
All this is posturing for votes, but the safe thing would be no bill.
Just don't change anything.
Just go out there and bloviate and articulate and pound the fist and talk about how we believe this or believe that uh in terms of whatever any politician wants to say to try to pander to whatever voting block he's pandering to.
But the idea that there's gonna be an immigration bill here, uh I wouldn't I wouldn't right now bet on it.
Quick time out, stay with us.
All right, we get back from the upcoming break.
Uh Tom DeLay will join us uh for a while to discuss his uh resignation from the House of Representatives.
After uh our interview and discussion with uh with uh Congressman DeLay will tell you about uh uh an arrest by the uh U.S. immigration and customs enforcement special agents last year of illegal aliens uh working at an Omaha nuclear power plant.
Uh we have a gentleman on the on the phone from San Diego who wants to talk about this.
I went and dug up the news release from the uh immigration and customs enforcement uh agency, and I, you know, with the port deal, never now wonder if Senator Schumer even knew that illegal aliens were working at a nuclear plant in Omaha.
We'll have the details and Congressman Tom Delay all coming next.
▲
Export Selection