All Episodes
Previous Next
July 6, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:11
July 6, 2006, Thursday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Where the hell is it?
All right, greetings to you, thrill seekers and music lovers and conversationalists.
All across the fruited plain, bullseye, my memory comes through once again in the great archiving programs of the EIB network.
Show their stuff once again.
We found it, ladies and gentlemen.
We found Madam Albright admitting to Tim Russert that North Korea duped her and Bill Clinton.
Greetings and welcome back, 800-282-2882.
If you want to be on the program, all right, need to set this up.
We've got to play the two Wendy Sherman soundbites.
Now, again, if you're just joining us, Wendy Sherman is a principal in the Albright Group LTD or LLC or whatever the hell it is, and their new business, consultancy business, worldwide contacts, advisories, telling customers who are nations, nation states, companies.
If you want to know what's going on in the world, what's going to happen wherever, should you do business there, blah, blah, blah.
We're the people at Two.
And the point of this flooding the zone of all these people, Madam Albright, Wendy Sherman, on television during this North Korean crisis is because the legend is, the myth is, that North Korea was totally harmless and held at bay and subdued during the Clinton administration because of the brilliance of Wendy Sherman, the brilliance of Bill Clinton, the brilliance of Madeline Albright.
And their business hinges on this.
If it can be established that this is folklore, that this is spin, that this is propaganda, that actually under their watch, all of this happened and got worse, then it's the end of the Albright group.
Or at least it's tough sailing for them.
So to set this all up, we go back this morning, Brian Kilmead, Fox and Friends, talking to Wendy Sherman, principal in the Albright group.
How do you feel about former Secretary of Defense Bill Perry you worked with, came to North Korea during the Clinton years, saying essentially that if they go line up with an intermediate-range missile, it could reach Alaska, we should just blow it off the pad.
I understand Secretary Prairie's enormous frustration.
At the beginning of the Bush administration six years ago, North Korea had enough plutonium for one or two nuclear weapons.
Plutonium that was created during Father Bush's term in office, no plutonium, was created during the Clinton administration.
And now, six years after the beginning of George W. Bush's presidency, North Korea has enough plutonium for six, eight, or ten nuclear weapons.
So we certainly haven't made progress over the last six years.
All right.
All right.
To sum this all up, George H.W. Bush got this trouble started.
The Clinton administration came in and saved the day because they treated this guy like a child.
They responded to him as he is, and they kept him at bay.
And they gave him nuclear components, but only for power plants.
And they didn't build any nukes.
That's what Wendy Sherman just said.
Even Brian Kilmead's not buying this says, you mean the North Koreans only started enriching plutonium during the transition from Clinton to Bush?
It is not entirely clear.
Intelligence sources tell me that they were attempting to getting centrifuges at the end of the Clinton administration, but the full-fledged, highly enriched uranium program didn't begin until later.
Right.
So it all happened right there in the transition from Clinton to Bush 43.
Even Brian Kilmead, not buying this, as intelligence sources told her that they were attempting to get centrifuges at the end of the Clinton administration.
Didn't the same intelligence sources tell her and Clinton and Albright that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction in 1998?
Yes.
All right.
So, what have we established here, based on testimony on Fox and friends and from Madame Albright herself last night at Lurie King Alive, that the problem in North Korea started with Bush 43.
It was subsided and dealt with perfectly during the eight years of the Clinton administration.
There was nothing that went wrong there.
Didn't ramp up any nuclear weapons, didn't enrich any plutonium.
We did our job really well.
And then Bush 414 came in, and it was all over.
That's when they started enriching plutonium, and our intelligence sources say so.
Okay?
Let's go back to September 12th of 2004.
Meet the press, Tim Russert, talking to Madam Albright.
Question: But didn't North Korea develop the nuclear bomb on Bill Clinton's watch?
No.
What they were doing, as it turns out, they were cheating.
And the reason that you have arms control agreements is you don't make them with your friends, you make them with your enemies.
And it is the process that is required to hold countries accountable.
The worst part that has happened, under the agreed framework, there was these fuel rods.
The nuclear program was frozen.
Those fuel rods have now been reprocessed, as far as we know.
And North Korea has a capability, which at one time might have been two potential nuclear weapons, up to six to eight.
Now, we're not really clear.
But in this period of time, when there has not enough action been taken, I think that the threat from North Korea has increased.
So nothing went wrong during the Clinton years, according to Wendy Sherman in the two sound bites today on Fox.
But then two years ago, almost two years ago, Madeline Albright actually said, well, they were cheating.
Imagine that.
They were cheating.
They were cheating.
I also know that on, I think it was Hannity and Colms, and I don't think we have this bite, but she actually used the word duped on Hannity and Colms to describe this.
What you have to understand is that the Clinton people, Wendy Sherman and Madame Albright, have been trying to establish for the last four years that North Korea only became a nuclear power after they left.
And now Madeline Albright started up this big company of hers.
And of course, it's mandatory that that spin and that false, obviously false story that North Korea was held at bay during the competence of the Clinton years has to maintain itself.
Otherwise, Albright Group Limited, or LTC, whatever it is, is going to have a much tougher time getting off the ground.
So there you have it, Madam Albright admitting they cheated.
Even after admitting that they cheated, she says, well, they just cheated.
They put those rods back into gear.
Well, we promised, they promised they wouldn't put those rods in anything nuclear weaponized, but they did.
The Bush administration came in.
But they cheated.
So you can draw your own conclusion from this, but we are in the midst, ladies and gentlemen, of a giant flood the zone on the part of Madeline Albright and Wendy Sherman and willing accomplices in the drive-by media to create a version of events that is 180 degrees out of phase.
I want to go to the phones.
People have been waiting patiently.
We haven't yet taken a phone call here.
We'll go start in Pittsburgh.
And, Mark, I'm glad you waited.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Mega nano dittos rush.
Just imagine how many dittos you can get on the head of a dime using nanotechnology.
Thank you, sir.
My call is in regards to Bill Richardson and Sandy Berger making the childlike comments in reference to the North Koreans.
I hold their comments, and I believe Madeline Albright said the same thing, of inciting or provoking the North Koreans into doing what they've been doing with the missiles and with their nuclear ambitions, more so than the dumbest president that's according to the Democratic Party that we currently have in office.
And if ever there was a childlike presidency, I would think of the Clinton administration with their pizza parties, sleepovers, and so forth, and the transition time after Clinton was voted out of office when the keyboards were damaged in the White House and so forth.
You know, that's actually a good point.
I mean, to summarize what you're saying, the Clinton administration essentially bought into the notion that Kim Jong-il is acting like a spoiled child, treated him that way, which simply encouraged him to keep acting that way.
If they responded in the ⁇ if you're a parent, of course I've never been, but I've seen this, folks.
I've seen his little crumb-crunching rugrats raise holy hell in restaurants or on airplanes.
And the parents, rather than disciplining them, end up begging, pleading, stop it, or rewarding it.
Have a piece of candy, shut up.
And what's the kid going to think?
All I got to do to act up is get what I want.
Same thing with Kim Jong-il.
If he gets to act like a kid and gets treated in response in a way that gets him what he wants, then bamo, he's going to do it.
And he did it throughout the Clinton administration and duped them time and time and time again.
We get a real cowboy in there, George W. Bush, who says, I'm not going to respond to this guy.
I'm not going to give him the time of day.
I'm not responding to any of this.
He's not in our league.
I am not going to sit here and have one-on-one talks.
Then this little impudent child, so Onyen, he starts breaking some windows and launching his little firecrackers and so forth.
Anyway, I got to run quick time out.
Much more after this.
Stay with us.
Dropped a bomb on me.
Making fun of them.
We're making fun of the little dog-eating, pot-bellied dictator, Kim Jong-il.
Have you heard about you want to talk about Albright says he's not crazy?
Have you heard the story about the first time Kim Jong-il went out to play golf?
The North Koreans put out the story that he shot a 46 and had seven holes in one.
His first playing the game.
That sounds like the way Clinton keeps score.
No wonder they had a good relationship.
Bryce in Salt Lake City, you're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Mega Ditto's Rush.
Thank you.
I just have a little comment about what Madeline Albright said.
It was kind of interesting.
She said how isolated Kim Jong-il is.
And he only has a few people that tell him what he wants to hear.
Yes.
Then she turns around and she says, well, he loves to watch CNN and loves American pop culture and wants to be involved in all this stuff and is so excited about it.
So I'm curious, is CNN one of those people that's telling him everything he wants to hear?
Yeah, no, that's very clever of you.
You're very observant.
Very sharp of you to pick up on that because you're right.
She has said that he likes the Oscars and has suggested various movies be nominated to her, that he watches CNN, that he does like American television, American pop culture, and yet it was Dan Blather.
No, you're right.
It was Madeline Albright who said that he's isolated and in a bubble and only hears from people who tell him what he wants to hear.
Very, very sharp.
Folks, we're being scammed big time here by Madame Albright.
This is a huge scam.
Follow the money.
I mean, you could say follow the money first or second, but secondly, is the ideology involved here?
They've got to save their reputations, not only for her business, but for the legacy of all of them in the Clinton administration.
John in Cleveland, Ohio.
You're next, sir.
Nice to have you with us.
Oh, thank you.
I would like to say that we really need, I think, in my belief, humble opinion, as Americans, I think we need to apologize for some of our misgivings to the rest of the world.
Especially like, you know, in a sense like North Korea or in certain areas, if they're looking at us from the outside, and say they look at our pop culture, as you said, on American TV, there's a lot.
It's not the Fred McMurray days of my three sons anymore.
You know, if you're raising children, you can't even watch anything in prime time television without seeing a lot of illicit and immoral behavior.
This is the 21st century.
We need to raise above the nuclear carrot, the old Cold War paranoia.
We need to learn to work with people across the globe.
And it takes more than just pointing a finger or pointing a missile at somebody.
All right.
Wait a second now.
Part of my problem here is that I wasn't able to understand everything you said.
That's not your problem.
It is one of mine.
But are you suggesting that any society, country, that watches American primetime television or accesses American pop culture in the 21st century should be offended, should be outraged at the depravity that we are creating and exporting.
And it's no wonder that they would want to do us harm because we are destroying the world culturally.
I think, yeah, I think that's right because, you know, they have deep roots.
My second question is: are you serious?
I'm absolutely serious.
You know, Oriental people have a very good sense of honor and dignity.
Wait a minute.
Do you think our pop culture is responsible for Islamo-fascists and the way they treat women and the way they behead people and the way they basically want to turn their world and ours back to the 12th or 13th century?
Is our pop culture responsible for the communist system of Kim Jong-il and the way he has programmed and robotized his people, and they're starving and eating dogs and cats and mice?
Is that our fault?
You know what, Rush?
I've never been over there.
I don't know what those people do.
And I don't think you've been over there either.
And I don't know if you can make those assertions to say that that's the truth.
Oh.
Well, have you been to North Korea?
No, have you?
I haven't.
I told you I haven't.
How do you know that what has been reported by any number of different sources?
Dan Rather, left and right is not true.
Why do you want to reject it?
Why do you think it's good there of some degree?
Just because it's not what we believe doesn't mean that it's completely wrong.
Comes the moral equivalence.
The Cold War carrot of uranium and the paranoia exist simply because there's this mindset that, you know, they're going to get the bomb, and it went back to when in June of 1950, when Korea came into the other part of Korea and we intervened, that's where it started.
We went over there.
Now, if somebody came over here, like the terrorists, well, we don't think like, you know, we don't hold those people.
Hey, hate.
I hate to tell you.
No, The terrorists have come here, sir.
It was 9-11, and there were 19 of them.
And that was just the first instance.
They came actually in 1993 and tried to blow up the World Trade Center then.
They did come in September of 2001.
And members of the party that think the way you do still don't want to consider it a threat, to think that we probably are responsible for it.
You are exhibiting some of the self-loathing guilt that much of the American left has.
For some reason, you find so much fault with your own country that you have to not only find fault with us, but blame it and us for all of the ne'er-do-wells in the world and say that they are that way and they are acting that way because of us.
Asian people have honor, like Ho Chi Minh.
Asian people have honor, like Mao, it's a tongue.
Asian people have honor, like Pol Pak.
You can't make these blanket statements unless you believe that the United States is responsible for these people being the way they are and doing the things that they're doing.
And it just doesn't wash.
And I'll tell you, people don't understand it.
I don't understand how in the world you're going to live in this country, be born here, raised here, grow up here.
You know, I was just in the Dominican Republic.
I saw poverty that we don't even come close to in this country.
We don't even come close.
I've been to Afghanistan.
And Dominican Republic makes Afghanistan.
Dominican Republic is Rodeo Drive compared to Afghanistan.
You don't know what poverty is.
You ask me, where have I been?
Where have you been?
You know, you think this country is so rot-gut.
You think this country is so responsible.
You think this country is so culpable.
You haven't been to the places I've been and seen real horrible suffering, environmental decay, and absolute human conditions that no American anywhere would tolerate for a second.
And for you to call here and to get all buzzed about the fact that we're responsible because of what we did in 1950 or because of our pop culture or our primetime television or whatever, and that gives people the right to despise us and hate us culturally.
I have no doubt, by the way, that some of these wacko-Islamo-fascists are threatened by our primetime culture.
There are a lot of Americans who don't like it.
There are a lot of Americans who think it's depraved.
We have an on-off switch.
We haven't gotten to the point where people like you can dictate what we get to watch, read, see, or listen to.
But I know that many people are trying for this, and they're using the exact line of thinking that you've treated us to today.
Well, we're responsible for the evil.
Somebody has to set an instant and establish standards.
And of course, the standards are not those of decency, but the standards that will help others acquire power.
And that basically is to try to silence political enemies who are better than you at arguing positions because you can't win in the arena of ideas.
The point that you're missing is if Kim Jong-il is indeed watching primetime American television, I would say to you that he can be just as disabused of reality by watching CNN in prime time as he can by watching American primetime television.
So it's not just primetime TV.
It's some of our news broadcasts as well.
But thankfully, we haven't gotten to the point where leftists can tell us what we can and can't watch.
And we're back at a cutting edge of societal evolution.
Mr. Snerdley fears I was too harsh on the prior caller, the previous caller, because in the end, it's probably not his fault.
It was John from Cleveland, I think, was his.
And Snerdley says, you know, it's not his fault, depending on how old he is or where he went to school.
He's been told that China is a great nation.
He's been told that there's nothing wrong with communism, that it's the fairest system for the most numbers of people, that the United States is evil, is destroying the world environmentally, is plundering the world of its resources, denying lesser nations their right to defend themselves by having their own nuclear stockpiled.
And Snerdley may have a point.
I understand that this is what people are taught and have been taught for a number of, well, more than years.
We're talking decades here.
Nevertheless, I try to engage these people, as you just heard.
I mean, other hosts would have said, what am I doing?
And hung up the phone, moved on, berated the call screener for giving me such an idiot.
But that's not me, folks.
It's not how I do it.
I engage people who call this bro, especially when I sense that there is an opportunity to take what they're saying and expound upon it to a much larger audience, i.e., you, and give you ways to refute such people when you encounter them in the bowling alley, at the mall, at the Dunkin' Donuts, wherever it is that you might, well, Starbucks.
And of course, the libraries.
Now, the interesting attempt here to refute my portrayal and description of life in North Korea was say, well, have you been to North Korea?
No.
Not been to North Korea.
It's not easy to get in there.
But I wasn't at the Alamo either, folks.
I wasn't at Normandy on D-Day.
That doesn't mean I don't have access to information about what's going on there, either of these places.
So I guess it is that whenever we lose tens of thousands of our citizens trying to prevent the spread of communism and despotism, when we lose tens of thousands of our citizens trying to defend innocent people, like those now living in South Korea, I guess it's our fault.
This is what's taught.
It's our fault that Kim Jong-il and his pathetic father ruled over the North Korea like the sick dictators that they are.
It's our fault.
It's not China's fault, which supported this dictatorship during the Korean War and supports it.
It's our fault.
It's our fault everywhere in the world of people who think like that.
You got to have a self-loathing.
You have to be miserably unhappy yourself.
And you have to have had proper instruction in this at various points in your educational cycle.
And that explains why there are so many leftist voters and prognosticators and prevaricators and so forth out.
They've been taught that their professors told them.
You know, I'll make you a bet.
I will make you a bet that the vast majority of Americans know or think they know more about North Korea because they watched MASH, Hot Lips Houlihan, Alan Alda, Wayne Rogers, or whatever that, and what was the little kid's name?
It was the Gary Radar, Radar O'Reilly.
I'll guarantee you that that has formed a greater impression of Korea in people's minds than fact.
Well, Rush, aren't you then confirming his opinion that our primetime TV is corrupt?
No, not whatsoever.
It's an entertainment show.
And people buy into it.
There wasn't a whole lot of political proselytizing in that show that preceded that stuff.
Now, I found another Newsmax piece from Saturday, October 19th of 2002.
And here's the headline.
Evidence Clinton knew about North Korea's nuclear violations.
It's by Wes Vernon.
And let me join this piece in progress, if you will.
Also on Friday, I remember the date here.
This is Saturday, October 19th.
So he's talking about what happened on Friday, October 18th of 2002.
On Friday, radio talk show host Rush Limbaugh produced a speech by Tom DeLay showing that as far back as 1998, intelligence sources were contradicting Madam Albright's assertion at the time that the North Koreans were not in violation of the Carter negotiated treaty.
Way back in 98, Delay had called for the suspension of the $4 billion to $6 billion agreement to build two light water nuclear reactors and to provide other assistance to North Korea until the president certifies that the North Korean government has agreed to cease its efforts to build these weapons and the means to divert them, which means they were in the process of building them.
Limbaugh commented that Wendy Sherman had made a buffoon of herself by insisting the Clinton administration had no reason to believe North Korea was breaking its word, despite warnings from Defense Intelligence Agency people, CIA people, as DeLay was reporting in 1998.
They're all circling the wagons to protect Clinton, Limbaugh told his listeners.
Now North Korea boldly admits, remember this is 2002, North Korea boldly admits it has a nuclear weapons program just as the U.S. is preparing to go to war with Iraq, whose madman dictator prepares nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons to attack the free world.
And the bottom line here is, is that these Clinton people knew full well they'd been lied to, that they stupidly made deals with communists and Stalinists, thinking that they don't lie and that they don't cheat and that they don't break their word.
And now, folks, it is panic time.
I think with North Korea doing this now, it is literal panic time among Albright and Wendy Sherman and others in the Clinton administration to try to whitewash this truth and establish a false reality that only they knew what they were doing when it came to North Korea.
Virginia Beach, Virginia, Mike, thank you for waiting.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hello.
Great honor to talk to you, Rush.
Thank you, sir.
And talking about honor, I think the gentleman that you talked to earlier does not know the meaning of the word.
I've traveled in Asia.
I'm the son of a West Point graduate, and I think I've learned firsthand what honor is all about.
Being exposed to my dad and his group of alumni from the United States Military Academy at West Point.
And they are the epitome of duty and honor and country.
And they know what the definition of honor is.
There's honorable people in all societies, but there's also dishonorable people in societies across the world.
And Asia is right now.
Yeah, but see, you've got to understand.
You have to understand how these self-loathers think.
They think, yeah, there are dishonorable people out there, but they have a right to be dishonorable because how else are they going to deal with us?
Because we're truly dishonorable.
How else they're going to deal with us?
They're small.
We're mighty.
We're mean.
We are selfish.
We are greedy.
We are unfeeling.
We have no compassion.
We violate human rights, civil rights, common law rights, violate every kind of right there is in order to steal the world's resources so that we can then destroy the planet.
Yes.
And of course, then anything else anybody does, particularly if they're much smaller and really, really members of minorities and so forth, well, we have to understand we caused it.
We made it.
They have a right to be dishonorable.
They have a right not to have to be held to the same standards because they are competing with us and we have made them that way.
These people, you have to understand out there, Mike, these people are, you talked about West Point and the honor of the tradition.
No question about it.
You're talking about people who look at West Point and want to spit on it because they wear military uniforms and they're taught how to conduct themselves in military campaigns so as to achieve victory.
They are taught to kill people and break things and to spare as many of our own lives as possible.
That is just immoral to these people.
Just immoral.
They have no concept of duty and honor in Kawhi.
American exceptionalism?
Why?
There's no such thing as far as these people.
What's exceptional about us?
These are people with head in the sand who have been taught and been encouraged to think this way, who really haven't traveled and who have not seen just how fortunate as human beings they are to be Americans.
And yet, they will call it.
Have you been to North Korea?
Have you seen what you're talking about?
Have you been to space?
How do you know the space shuttle docked?
Have you seen Ken Lay's body?
How do you know he's actually in that coffin?
How do you know he's actually dead, Limbaugh?
What gives you the right to talk about these things?
I mean, where does this kind of thinking stop?
It doesn't stop.
And when you start getting in arguments, this is the risk I ran.
I think I survived in this case.
When you start an argument with an idiot, it's almost a lose-lose situation because after a short while, people listening won't be able to tell a difference.
One of the gentlemen that I accompanied on my trip to Afghanistan a year ago, February, was by the name of Andrew Natsios.
Andrew Natsios was the administrator for the U.S. Agency for International Development.
He has since left U.S. aid and is now teaching, I believe, at Georgetown.
I had a lot of in-depth discussions with him about Afghanistan, the Taliban, the search for bin Laden, and the U.S. efforts to establish a functioning economy in that country.
But the theory is that, and it's been borne out here in Somalia again, that al-Qaeda will take over stateless regimes, stateless nations.
Much easier to move in where there is no government and set up the Taliban.
And that's what happened in Afghanistan after the Civil War, after the Soviet invasion ended, and they drove the Soviets out.
They had a civil war, and that country still has not put itself back together in the process with our assistance.
Well, Mr. Natsios testified before the Senate subcommittee of the Foreign Relations Committee, Subcommittee on East Asian and Pacific Affairs, in June of 2003.
And it was life inside North Korea.
He has been to North Korea.
For those of you who wonder why, I believe it he's been there.
I hope this qualifies a member of the U.S. government to went to North Korea.
And here are just some highlights from his testimony before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
Mr. Chairman, life in North Korea today is less free and less humane than life in any other country now or in modern time.
Every aspect of life is controlled and every bit of individualism destroyed.
This is not simply the result of a totalitarian regime.
There have been many totalitarian regimes that have aggressively, even brutally controlled their citizenry.
Upon review, however, most other recent totalitarian regimes have allowed some measure of private freedom in the lives of the people if they avoided dissent and did not threaten the political system.
In the case of North Korea, we have no evidence of underground dissent, as there was in the Samadhazat literature in the Soviet Union, for example.
So it's unrivaled and it is unparalleled.
Beginning in 1987, the U.S. insisted on labeling each bag of U.S. food donated to North Korea with the phrase, Korean gift of the people of the United States.
By some estimates, there are over 30 million Korean-marked bags circulating around North Korea.
Each visit by a foreign humanitarian monitor and each food aid bag distributed around the country represent informational contamination that requires an explanation by the regime.
In the case of the food bags, refugees have reported that the U.S. food aid is explained as reparations for damages caused during the war.
In other words, they take the food because they have no other means of getting any.
They take the food, they ration it out to their people, but they tell their people, this is from the United States apologizing for oppressing us and so forth.
The health care system in North Korea all but collapsed.
Only the elites at the highest level have access to modern health care.
The regime in North Korea operates approximately 10 concentration or re-education camps for political prisoners.
The Far Eastern Economic Review has published satellite photographs of one camp that is estimated to hold as many as 50,000 people.
The 10 camps are estimated to hold between 200 and 250,000 prisoners in total.
The regime uses the camps to punish anyone who fails to adhere strictly and completely to every law, but arrest and confinement can come at any time with no explanation.
In some reports, people have been arrested and detained for years for failing to show appropriate respect to the great leader or the dear leader.
In other cases, entire families have been arrested because flaws have been found in their family history.
The camps differ in that each serves a specific type of prisoner, generally ranging from those considered redeemable to those who are expendable.
And it goes on.
There's also a column here by Christopher Hitchens about North Korea entitled Worse Than 1984, which describes some of the things we've already mentioned.
So if you want to put your head in the sand about who this country is and the leaders are and what they're doing, and if you want to try to humanize the people that have created this kind of society for whatever romantic reason, go ahead and do it.
But understand, you are engaging in a blatant form of self-enforced ignorance.
You are trying to be ignorant.
You are attempting to avoid the truth, all for the sake of not upsetting your little cocoon view of the world that blames the United States for all of this suffering and misery around the country and world.
Matt in the Redlands, California area.
Welcome to the EIB Network.
Great to have you with us, sir.
Hello, Rush.
Paul.
This is a little off subject, but in regard to the question of immigration, now that Bush has signaled that he would accept the border enforcement only bill from Congress, I think it's time for House Republicans to capitalize on this by modifying the original border enforcement bill they passed last December and by removing the part of the bill that made illegals or people who helped them felonies or felons.
Now, this would totally put the Democrats in a political catch-22 right before...
Wait a second.
The Republicans tried to get that provision removed, and the Democrats voted against it because they wanted the felony aspect in there so they could blame the Republicans for it.
So if the Republicans try to remove that, the Democrats might once again try to thwart the whole thing and end up voting for the whole concept of illegals being called felons.
Couldn't we, maybe the House Republicans, write a new bill without it and try to get us through it?
Well, at this stage, there's a ⁇ I think what has to happen is the Republicans doing their tour out there, and I think what has to happen now is the conference with the Senate.
And at that point, that's when the machinations begin.
But Bush, and I had this in the stack yesterday, didn't get to it.
Bush's attempt here to now go border first is a, well, I'm hoping that it is a realization of reality out there in terms of the electoral season and climate.
But before we go to the break, you've got to hear this, though.
This is a Senate Judiciary Committee field hearing in Philadelphia.
New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg testified.
Here is a portion of his remarks.
Although they broke the law by illegally crossing our borders or overstaying their visas, and our businesses broke the law by employing them, our city's economy would be a shell of itself had they not, and it would collapse if they were deported.
Okay.
All right.
So the mayor of New York has just suggested that New York City would crumble without illegal immigration.
Now, I don't know on what basis they think they could enforce any other law now.
You're going to selectively say, well, these laws, they should have been broken.
They should have been broken.
Should have been broken.
I keep hearing talk that Bloomberg's got presidential perspirations as well.
Anyway, I got to run here, folks.
We'll be back and continue right after this.
Yes, there's lots more going on out there besides North Korea, folks.
And, of course, I have access to all of it here in the patented stacks of stuff.
We have one hour of broadcast excellence remaining.
We'll get to it right after this top of the hour timeout.
Don't stray far away.
▲
Export Selection