All Episodes
Previous Next
May 17, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:17
May 17, 2006, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Hi, folks, and welcome back.
Glad to have you with us.
Rush Limbaugh emitting vocal vibrations, rhetoric, and resonance.
Coast to coast on the one and only Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
800-282-2882, email address, rush at EIBnet.com.
Tom Tancredo is on television right now saying, hey, they're asking about this business that you can't, and Mexicans are going to sue us in our courts if the National Guard apprehends any illegals.
And Tan Crato says, what the hell?
The Mexican military, the military, not the guard, the Mexican military is on the border, especially the northeastern section of the Mexican-U.S. border.
And we've had stories of those guys helping illegals find ways across the border under cover of darkness.
Now, Mr. Snerdley says that the reason that no elected official with power will stand up and condemn the Mexicans on any aspect of this, particularly this absurd story that they're going to sue us in our own courts if the guard apprehends anybody, says you can't, you just can't, if you're an elected official, you can't speak out against Mexicans because you're tainting the potential voter pool.
I mean, you got to look at the current Mexican population as no different than the illegal Mexican immigrant population in this country.
You got to figure that the way the Congress is going, Mexico's going to end up living here anyway, or as many Mexicans as want to come here are going to get in.
And even if they're not here yet, they soon will be, and they are potential voters.
And so you can't make them mad.
You can't do anything to make this potential voter pool mad out there.
You can't insult these people, elected officials.
They can insult us all they want, but we have to take it because we can't turn around and insult them because that runs the risk of insulting fewer voters.
This would be a laugh riot if it weren't so damn true.
Given the efforts that are not being made to stop this, you have to figure that the whole country of Mexico is being looked at as a potential voter block.
One point or another.
All right.
I want to touch on some of the rebellion.
There is a rebellion among Republicans taking place, ladies and gentlemen.
The Republican Party itself is missing it.
Of course, the drive-by media is missing it.
It all started in a little town called Herndon, Virginia, where incumbent Republicans who had thought that they were being magnanimous and big-hearted opened a day labor center for illegal immigrants.
And the people that started it and operated it, who held elective office, were thrown out of office in a primary.
Same thing happened in North Carolina.
People who were all in favor of in-state tuition for illegal immigrant children and so forth in Republican primaries were thrown out.
These country club blue-blood Rockefeller-type Republicans were dispatched, and conservative Republicans won.
In Pennsylvania, angry taxpayers yesterday tossed out the two Republican Senate leaders who helped engineer last year's legislative pay raise, an issue that apparently cost 15 House members their jobs, too.
Senate President Pro Tem Robert Jubalire of Altoona, and I'm not sure how you pronounce that, and Senate Majority Leader David Brightbill of Lebanon County conceded to their challenges becoming the first lawmakers in major leadership posts to lose a primary election in 42 years.
The House defeats would be the most since 1980.
We have had a dramatic earthquake in Pennsylvania, said Jublaier, a 32-year legislator.
The defeats of Jublaier and Bright Bill will send shockwaves throughout the political establishment for years to come, said Mike Young, a retired Penn State University political science professor.
The people have spoken, said Jublaier, 69, or shortly after congratulating his challenger, Blair County Commissioner John Eichelberger.
They've said this is a time for change.
It's a historic year.
Eichelberger, 47, said the race was about redefining the Republican Party.
Another quote: The pay raise got people out, but at the end of the day, it was our message that sold.
I think the Republican Party said enough is enough for politics as usual.
Meaning, enough of this rhino-Republican stuff, enough of this moderate liberal country club Rockefeller blue blood stuff.
We've had it, and there's a whole number of issues that are causing this to happen.
It's not just immigration, there's pay raise in this case, but it's unresponsive status quo.
It's we know more than you do.
You don't know what you're talking about.
We're elected officials.
We're better than you are.
And people said, I'm tired of being dealt with this way.
A clear pattern.
John Fund writes today in the Wall Street Journal, a clear pattern is developing in primary contests for state legislature this year in North Carolina.
GOP voters turfed out a series of incumbents who had not opposed taxes enough.
In Indiana, the state Senate president was tossed out of office earlier this month by a political newcomer.
Now in Pennsylvania, we see another voter revolt.
Republicans are clearly upset at their party.
And if GOP members of Congress don't heed that message, they may come to regret that in November.
Now, this all boils down to this.
We are, as conservatives and the dominant factor in the Republican Party, we are a national security, law and order, free market party.
And yet, we're fighting in a minimalist way in Iraq.
Shelby Steele is right about that.
We're not using the full force of our power.
We are not enforcing a law on the border, and we are spending like idiots.
The only thing holding us together is the detestable, contemptible left.
We know the country simply cannot be turned over to them.
But these stories are not all.
In Utah, Chris Cannon, longtime Republican congressman, now in a primary runoff because he's a big open borders guy.
He denies it now, and he would object to this characterization, but he is.
In Nebraska, the Republican governor, who was thought vulnerable to Coach Osborne, the great former coach of the University of Nebraska, the Republican governor won because he vetoed legislation giving in-state tuition to illegals.
Coach Osborne was more supportive of that.
And this is happening all across the country.
It started in this little town, Herndon, Virginia.
And these 18 senators who voted yesterday with the open borders crowd, 18 Republicans, there was a simple, clear amendment.
We'll deal with this amnesty program and the day worker program, guest worker program after we secure the border, which is what most common sensible things people believe should be done first anyway.
Secure the border.
18 Republican senators voted against that amendment.
And these 18 senators down the road could use some primary challenges.
See, folks, this is how we protest.
These ragamuffin, long-haired maggot-infested, dope-smoking, worthless losers, they go out and they protest on communist holidays.
They've got to protest on May Day, or they'll pick a day they don't want to school and go protest there.
We, ladies and gentlemen, protest on Election Day when it counts.
We let the third world take to the streets.
Let them demand rights.
We will go to the polls and civilly speak through our votes.
There is a rebellion underway here.
The media, the GOP establishment do not see it.
There is something that can be done about this, but you're not going to do it by staying at home on Election Day.
If you want to express yourself and you want to protest, you have to show up.
And folks, as I said yesterday, the one thing, and Tony Blankly echoes this in a column that he wrote today: the one place now that conservatism is being defended and advanced or being attempted to be advanced is the House of Representatives.
That is imperative.
It is an imperative to hold the House of Representatives.
And we can do this.
We can conduct our little rebellion here, if you want to call it that, one election at a time, one politician at a time.
McCain, he's going to have to ask Republican voters for their support one day.
Lindsey Graham, he was one of these 18 senators.
He comes from one of the most conservative states in the country, and he one day is going to have to go back there and ask for their votes again when he wants to be re-elected.
And this is the kind of thing that people will remember and will help them remember votes like this.
McCain's getting his own wake-up call, by the way.
The media is now continually full of stories about how he's no longer a maverick.
And there actually was a side-by-side debate in one internet website.
Is McCain still two journalists were debating whether or not it's still accurate to call McCain a maverick or not?
And one journalist, he's not a maverick anymore.
Look, he's sidling up to Falwell, sidling up to Robertson.
No, he's still a maverick.
He's just doing this because he knows what he has to do to win.
The bottom line is: McCain's usefulness to the drive-by media is finished.
His usefulness was when he was the bad boy of Washington, ripping his own party, ripping his president, doing left bidding for it within the Republican Party and the Drive-By Media's bidding.
But now that he apparently has decided his strategy is going to be to mend fences with conservatives, now they're debating is worthy of maverick status or not.
He's going to have to ask for people's votes one day, too.
This happens one politician, one election at a time.
Make no mistake, there's a rebellion going on out there, and you people know it.
And as usual, you're the first on the case.
The GOP establishment hasn't figured it out, and they won't.
And of course, Drive-By Media hasn't the slightest clue.
I mean, they look at these election results, and they haven't the slightest ability because they don't understand conservatives.
They don't want to understand conservatives.
Even if they note the change, they'll come up with some asinine reason to explain it that'll be so far off the mark.
So they're not up to speed on it either.
It is happening out there.
Brief timeout.
We'll be back and continue in just a second.
Ha!
Hubba-hubba-duba-duba.
Welcome back, EIB Network, El Rushball leading the rebellion.
At 800-282-2882, here is Don and Dickinson, North Dakota.
Welcome, sir.
Nice to have you with us.
Hi, Rush.
Hi.
Hi.
First time, so I'm a little nervous, but I wanted to pass along my opinion that our government basically is complicit in this, and that's why nobody is standing up in our government.
They're addicted to the money that's being pumped into the Social Security and Medicare systems.
Because when these individuals are ferried across the border, they're supplied with fake documentation that's either totally bogus or it's stolen information, particularly Social Security cards.
They go to a place of employment.
The employer gives them a little nod and a wink.
Sees the card, fills out a W-4, employs them for their low wages, pays Social Security taxes, Medicare taxes.
The government is fully aware that this number is either bogus or a duplicate, and they know they're not going to have to pay out on it.
So they just, it's free money.
That's why that's going to get done.
There is a problem with that, though.
I know that some people think that this is simply a hidden way that politicians can avoid dealing with the crunch coming in Social Security and Medicare by importing all these illegals, getting them numbers, have them sign up, pay Social Security taxes.
What people forget about that is that they will be paid out too.
We have a social safety.
Have you ever heard of Prop 187 in California?
The children of illegals and illegals themselves were given medical care, hospital treatment, education with no questions asked.
And the people of California just threw their hands up.
This is absurd.
And of course, a federal judge said that the people's vote in Prop 187 was unconstitutional.
That just roiled them even more.
The fact is, there is a payout.
In fact, the stress and the strain on the safety net in this country would be insupportable.
It may look like that this is a secret plan to fund Social Security and Medicare, but the strain, like Robert Rector analyzing the Hegel-Martinez bill, said this would be the biggest expansion of the welfare state and the entitlement structure in this country ever in the next 35 years at a time where it's going to go broke.
It's simply insupportable.
And Don, I appreciate your thinking on this, but let me put it to you this way.
If your theory were true, the Mexicans would be building a wall on the border to keep these people in.
If cheap labor was the way to support a country's safety net, then no country would let them out.
The Mexicans would build a wall, and we couldn't build one faster than they could because it would be built already to keep these people in.
So it's the exact opposite that will happen.
I'm not saying there aren't some short-sighted idiots and dimwits in Washington who think that this is like a stopgap method or measure of funding these social programs.
But by the time you bring these people's family members in who are not working, they're going to be on these programs because just like we don't have the guts to enforce our laws, we're also a compassionate people and we're not going to sit around and let people in the country suffer and not get educated and all that.
And people understand this instinctively and know this is where we're headed.
It's another one of the many reasons that everybody's scratching their heads and starting to shout from the rooftops, what the hell is going on?
Here's Dan in Kingman, Arizona.
Dan, I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Oh, it's a pleasure, Rush.
The reason I'd called was I retired Air Force Intelligence.
I worked there for 32 years, and I worked out of the Phoenix area.
And the topic is posi comitatis, and I haven't heard anybody in the media really getting into it.
The entire principle of posse comitatus is using the military against citizens.
There isn't a country in the world that doesn't have their military on the borders.
You know, obviously I'm not supposed to be used as policemen, but I'm waiting for somebody in the media to come out and say, hey, posi comitatis is protecting our borders.
It's national defense.
I got involved with it.
One of my guys that worked for me, he's a tech sergeant, was a deputy sheriff here in Arizona.
And as a reservist, he worked in intelligence and was assigned to a temporary duty with the DEA.
And he got involved in a chain of custody issue during a drug bust down in Tucson.
And I had to start training people in our unit on, here's what Posi Comitadas means.
You can't send the troops into a city to do an actual invasion.
If you've ever gone into Mexico, not flying in or taking a cruise ship, but if you go across the border, the first thing they do is stop you with the Mexican federales who are uniformed police with M16s.
They search your trunk, check yourself.
I know.
I know.
And while, you know, they're on the northeastern Mexican border helping illegals find ways into our country.
But on the southern border of Mexico, they're keeping all these Central American immigrants out of their country.
They don't let anybody cross.
Well, they can bribe.
Of course, you can pay bribes, but I mean, the standing policy is keep them out.
The whole place down there is corrupt as it can be.
But no, you're right about posse comitadas.
But still, I don't think the, I guess you're referring to this lawsuit that the Mexicans are threatening to file if the National Guard gets involved.
Sometimes all you can do is laugh.
Every time I see the story or just repeat the words.
Manny in San Diego, you're next.
You waited a long time.
I appreciate it.
Welcome.
Good morning, Rush.
Mega, Mega Dittos from a long-time conservative listener in Southern California.
Rush, to take a quote from an old hero of mine, Eddie Childs of the Western Companies, I'm mad, real mad.
And just to give you a little background, as an American of Mexican descent, combat wounded veteran, I've had it with the corrupt Mexican government that is rudderless and ill effective.
And to show that the American people are mad, at least I am anyway, we ought to indicate and show them, point out that lack of quality leadership, and consider freezing the funds that are wired back to Mexico as a first step in reinforcing and funding and protecting our southern border.
It's my version of a leverage buyout, Rush.
And just we need to show these people that we're not going to sit back and take it.
Well, but the problem, even though it's a delectable idea, the problem is that I'm sorry to laugh, but since, and I mentioned this earlier, since the political class in Washington looks at the Mexican population today as future illegal Americans and thus voters, they're not going to do anything to offend them.
I'm convinced that Washington is looking at the Mexican population and they see gazillions of new voters out there over the course of the next 20, 30, 40 years.
And so they're not going to say anything to offend them because you don't go out and insult the voter pool and freezing their money.
You forget getting their vote if you do that.
Ha, how do you?
Amidst billowing clouds of fragrant, aromatic, first and second-hand fragrance cigar smoke.
I am Rush Limbaugh, enjoying every puff, speaking truth to kooks at 800-282-2882.
Have you been following the reviews of the movie, The Da Vinci Code?
This movie must be damn good because every critic is panning it.
I haven't run into one critic who likes the movie.
They are destroying Hanks.
They're destroying his female co-star, some woman named Tatu.
And they're praising Ian McKellen, who was in the Lord of the Rings movies.
Long white-haired bearded guy, forget his name, the Bulldorf or whatever.
I don't know.
I get those movies confused with Harry Potter.
Nevertheless, all these critics are just ripping this movie to shreds, saying audiences are laughing at the most dramatic moments and walking out early.
Tells me it's got to be good.
Here is Cecilia in Redding, Pennsylvania.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Hi.
I am enjoying your show today because you have really hit the nail on the head with the Pennsylvania election.
We very much got out and put competition in the way of our legislators who were not doing what the voters wanted them to do.
And you were right.
This one reflects the pay increase.
And we wouldn't have minded so much if they would have eliminated our property tax.
But they didn't do that either.
Yeah, I'm sure there's a bunch of arrogance, too.
Not only are they not responsive, they're not responsive in an arrogant way.
Oh, absolutely.
They were terribly arrogant.
I've been on to the Spectre office and to Santorum's office this morning because of the vote on those bills.
And Santorum is up against a very heavy opponent.
Bob Casey Jr. is a very well-liked gentleman, and he's a son of former Governor Casey.
And I'm telling Santorum's office, the wishy-washy report he's putting out, we want walls put up.
We want our guardsmen to spend their time down there on that three-week training period.
Okay, now, now, Cecilia, let me interrupt you here first, because you've raised something that's very crucial here.
When my loose lips describe a rebellion going on out there and talk about what you did in Pennsylvania, what the conservative Republicans did in North Carolina and Ohio, Herndon, Virginia, in Nebraska, in Utah, this is not intended to mean a sweep all the GOP bums out.
There are plenty of great ones, and Santorum is one.
Santorum, don't make the mistake of including him in this because he's not one of the 18.
Despite that, I mean, Santorum is a guy worthy of reelection.
He's a good senator.
He's a good guy.
He's a solid conservative.
And I don't mean in this diatribe today, which you've listened to indict every Republican.
It's politician by politician, election by election when they come up.
Most of the people who are doing the damage when it comes to immigration are not up this year.
And that's why they're free to go out and engage in this sort of.
But their day is going to come where they are up for reelection and they will have to go ask the voters for their votes again.
And as usual, the Senate has six-year terms, and most of these guys are not up this year.
DeWine is, and he's having trouble.
DeWine is having trouble in Ohio against Sherrod Brown.
Lindsey Graham is not up, for example, but he's going to have to go back at some point.
Well, I'm just reminding them that we are conservative.
We are not wishy-washy.
And I'm asking them to go and check all the different elections and start coming out with not sugar-coated things, but come out with definite statements like we're for the wall.
We're for the troops going down there.
Make it definite.
Don't try to seem because the only ones they shouldn't be pandering to special interests.
They should be pandering to the voter.
I know there's some special interests involved, but I don't think that's what's going on.
Let's take Santorum, for example.
Pennsylvania, as you well know, is a blue state.
I mean, it's a big blue state.
And Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, the two largest cities, are predominantly Democrat and dominated by labor.
Santorum has a huge challenge.
You can say, okay, Senator Santorum, you just go out there and you just campaign as a pedal of metal conservative.
And you make no bones about it because it wins every time it's tried.
Well, there are some exceptions to that rule.
Pennsylvania may be one of them.
He's going to have to, as he's done in his previous elections where he's won, he's going to have to attract some Democrat votes if he has a chance to win because there just aren't enough conservative Republican votes if he gets every one of them in Pennsylvania to win.
And you're right, Bob Casey has got a big name ID and pretty good image and reputation.
And Santorum has put himself on the line far more than Bob Casey Jr. has because Casey hasn't served in this high in elective office before.
So he's got some challenges.
That's why I'm saying don't include Sam Torum in this because he's not a factor in this immigration business so far, these 18 senators that voted yesterday the way they did.
He's worth supporting and preserving because on balance, he's a good guy.
He's a winner, and he's a staunch and unashamed conservative and need more of them.
I appreciate the call, Cecilia.
Thanks much.
Let's go back to the audio soundbites.
I've been promising to do this yesterday.
We have some Democrats here.
Start with Ted Kennedy on the Senate floor.
This is sort of frightening.
I have my differences with the president, but he's absolutely right.
He understands history.
He's a border state governor, and he knows you can't do this by itself, only at the border.
All right, so Ted Kennedy, who for most of the last five years has been doing his best to politically destroy George W. Bush, is all of a sudden embracing him over this immigration bill, the Hegel-Martinez compromise bill.
And of course, this was about the amendment that would have said, okay, we'll deal with guest worker, but not till we seal the border.
And 18 Republicans joined the Democrats to vote against the concept of stealing the border, and Kennedy is praising the president for understanding the importance of that.
Then here's Dingy Harry.
The president, if he wants to help us in comprehensive immigration reform, needs to look first at his Republican leadership in the Senate and say something negative about this monstrous House bill.
That's your answer right now.
That's the best bite I can play for you today.
That tells you where the action on this issue is.
The action on this issue is in the House.
It is the House version that has the Democrats apoplectic.
It's the House versions they want killed, and they're trying to entice the president into going out there and killing it for them.
Because when the House bill, it's already done, when they start conferencing that with whatever idiocy comes out of the Senate, it's going to be real hard to reconcile these two bills.
And that's why a lot of people think, even if the Senate passes a bill, it may be meaningless because by the time you start trying to reconcile these two in the conference, will there even be a bill by election time?
Still people with the theories that they're not going to be an immigration bill, that all these politicians just want the credit for talking about it and being on the quote-unquote right side of the issue.
But when it comes time to actually doing something, ain't going to do it.
Well, I don't want to roll a dice on that.
And that's why the House bill and the House itself, don't let it change hands out there, voters.
Whatever you do.
Here's Senator Session.
He's last night on CNN.
Anderson Cooper said, you had blasted this legislation.
The Senate's debating it, saying it would have allowed more than 130 million new immigrants into the U.S. over the next 20 years.
Today, the Senate changed that provision.
And now the number of new immigrants would be less than 10 million.
That's not right, but whatever.
Do you still think this compromise legislation is standing as fatally flawed, as you've said in the past?
Well, I think that was tremendous advancement, but the one area they fixed was the one that was most egregious, and it did go from perhaps 100 or more, a million people over 20 years to eight.
But there will be more other provisions in the bill that will allow immigration here in the future.
We need to tighten up a number of things from enforcement to actually how we handle the amnesty portion of the bill and how we do future immigration.
So the next question, well, Senator, it seems that the word amnesty has become such a buzzword.
President says that his road to citizenship is not amnesty, is it?
Well, I think it's pretty close to it, but it's getting a little bit away from it, maybe.
It's not an automatic path to citizenship, but it basically allows that to happen with a small fine.
I think we probably need to do better than that.
And I'm not, I think that's too close to what I would call amnesty and what I have said I would not support.
Now, the Senate continued debating this today, and Senator Sessions continued to hammer this whole point on the Senate floor today.
All the economists that we've heard testify, and we haven't had a lot, but they all agreed basically that low-skilled workers tend to be a net drain on the economy, that utilize more in government benefits, welfare, and health care than high-skilled workers.
And that any program that we pass ought to emphasize high-skilled workers.
This bill does not do that.
This bill does nothing about the chain migration in which people who work their way to citizenships can bring in their parents, their brothers and sisters, adult children, regardless of the needs of the United States for workers, regardless of what skill sets they may have and whether or not we need them in the United States.
It's an automatic right.
And we wouldn't be who we are, folks, if we didn't have a grand finale to all this, and we do from Senator Kennedy this morning on the floor of the Senate.
400 miles of urban area on the border.
Let's be serious.
400 miles, that's almost a quarter of the whole southern border, stretching from California to the Gulf of Mexico, and you're trying to convince a person from Massachusetts that's an urban area?
Come on.
Let's put the 1,800-mile fence down there and triple wire it so now we can go show how tough we are on it.
Is that the challenge that's out here now when we're trying to deal with a comprehensive program?
I don't think so, Mr. President.
What?
He's screaming here about barbed wire fences?
Is that what he says he's for?
Now, he's trying to be facetious, but Senator, it wouldn't hurt.
Wouldn't hurt.
More in a moment, right after this.
Your guiding light through times of trouble, confusion, murkiness, tumult, chaos, despair, inexplicable policy behavior by some elected officials and even the good times, Rush Limbaugh, the prestigious Attila the Hun chair of the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, Anderson in Orlando, Florida.
You're next, sir.
Great to have you with us.
Belessa Dittos from the heart of Florida, Rush.
Thank you, sir.
If they're polling these people and finding out that individually they're all happy, they must be including some illegal immigrants in that.
But the reason I called is I'm in the construction business here in Florida, and the people that work, the illegals that come here, I talk to them, and for one thing, I got to disagree with some of your callers.
Some of these guys aren't lowly paid.
They're making $15 an hour.
Sometimes they make money by the job, so they're making upwards of $20 something an hour.
When I talk to them, they're sending at least half of their money, sometimes more, back to Mexico.
And I ask them about it, and it's not to support their families back there so much.
It's to put it into savings so they can move back there and be one of the rich people in Mexico when they go home.
And I just don't hear anybody talking about the fact that a lot of these people that are here don't want to stay here, don't want to become citizens.
Well, forgive me because you may not be hearing a lot of people saying it, but I, El Rushbo, have said it in this way.
I have said everybody's missing the boat on this anyway because it's not an immigration issue.
Everybody's looking at this in the context of immigration, but it's not an immigration issue.
This is simply a bunch of people coming here for work.
The idea that many of them don't want citizenship and will go home after they've amassed some wealth here, probably true.
Doesn't surprise me that some of them are not crazy about getting citizens.
Why would they want to go through the hassle if they're going to be made to play by the rules and so forth when it's not necessary in order to seek the primary benefit that they've come here for?
And that's a job.
And so we're missing the boat on this in terms of the language and in terms of the way we're debating it and trying to set up policy on it.
And I'll tell you something that is just typical of Washington.
Here we have a massive immigration reform bill debate going.
We don't need any new laws.
We've got more laws in this country than you can shake a stick at.
We've got more laws than anybody in this country can possibly know.
It is absurd.
We've already got, well, we had Simpson Mazzoli in 86.
Every 20 years, we need to come up and reform immigration.
That means we've got to fix something that we screwed up 20 years ago.
If you just use existing laws on the books and so many of these issues, you wouldn't need all this rigmarole and gobbledygook.
And one of the things, along with all the other things that bothers me about this, is this silly notion that we can't solve these problems without government doing something and issuing some proclamation from on high.
That's always been a big bugaboo of mine that people look to government.
Now, in this case, it makes more sense to do that than anything else because this is something the government is specifically charged with under terms of the Constitution, and that's border security.
And there isn't any.
Well, it's not actually there isn't any, but I mean, it's not being taken seriously.
Immigration is where people come here to become Americans.
And they go through a process and they start out small and they work their way up.
It's the story of how people became successful in this country and established family legacies and so forth.
A lot of people, not just recently, but from the founding days of the country.
That's not what's happening here.
Real immigrants come here, learn the language, they assimilate, they acculturate, they seek to become part of the distinct American culture that exists here.
That's not what's happening with all of this.
And for otherwise bright people to look at this and just consider it an immigration issue is to miss the point, what's really going on.
So if you're not willing or if you're unable to accurately define the problem before you set out to solve it, then you're not going to solve the problem.
You're going to window dress it or you're going to paper it over or you're going to take action that's designed to mollify people for a while and punt it only to have to come back and fix it later.
Classic example of that, the gang of 14 when it comes to judicial nominations.
Because at some point, the Democrats are going to filibuster a judge again, and this whole thing is going to have to be dealt with at some point.
But they punted it with the gang of 14.
This is punting the issue.
What they're doing here is punting the issue while making it worse because they don't really understand what this is about.
It's the job market being flooded.
It's not about immigration, as our last caller's story indicates.
Back in just a second, my friends.
One hour of broadcast excellence remaining, ladies and gentlemen.
We'll start moving in some different directions here.
There are other items in the news, and we always want to touch on those.
We'll do so when we drive-by media hit falling apart.
This USA Today story continues to fall apart on them.
▲
Export Selection