All Episodes
Previous Next
Dec. 26, 2006 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:37
December 26, 2006, Tuesday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
And welcome back to the Rush Limbaugh program here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
And don't forget to drop in to Rush Limbaugh.com for the latest on the web.
And of course, give us a call right here at 1-800-282-2882.
All right, my story of the day, by the way, our program dedicated today to the memory of James Brown, one of the great figures of American music died yesterday, and just some terrific American music and the source and inspiration for so much more.
We are also today this is the story of the day.
I mean, I just I had to laugh out loud.
I wonder if they think this is you know that when they write this stuff, they think they're being funny.
The New York Times.
Headline, Bush watchers wonder how he copes with stress.
The entire article by Cheryl Gay Stolberg.
That's her name, not her description, is uh devoted to the comment really about how how can he be doing this?
How can he be so how can he sleep at night?
Uh and they uh they they even ask this question does he lie awake at night as President Lyndon Johnson did during the Vietnam War, fretting over his decisions?
Apparently not, and it drives the Liberals crazy.
They actually asked him, Are you sleeping well at night?
To which he said, I'm sleeping a lot better than people would assume.
And I have to they went back to Lyndon Johnson, so let me go back to another Democrat president for uh the answer, I think, to this question, uh Cheryl, that you raise in the New York Times today.
Mr. Bush is at peace with himself because he thinks, for better or worse now, that he has made the right decision.
He is a man.
He has made his decision, he's done the best he could, and he sleeps well at night, uh, convinced that that's the best that should be done.
Who else does this remind you of, history buffs?
Well, for Ronald Reagan, it reminded him of Harry Truman.
Harry Truman, at this point in the um in Harry Truman's life uh with uh wrestling with the uh invasion of uh South Korea by the North Koreans, backed up by the Chinese and the uh Russians, we were in the middle of a very unpopular war, the Korean War.
People were dying of Yankee fans were worried that Ted Williams would never come back.
A whole bunch of uh of things American in those days was at stake.
It was not like World War II.
It did not have victory at the other end.
It seemed like stalemate and just continuous death was the order of the day.
And if you know that our president has dropped uh to the low 30 percentile in terms of popularity because of this war, lost control of the House and the Senate, because, say the pundits of uh the public reaction to the Iraq war.
Fly back with me, uh back to the future moment here uh to President Harry Truman, who by 19 uh 51, early 52 had an approval rating, a job approval rating of 22 percent.
22 percent.
What was his reaction?
Well, you know, we're gonna hang in there.
We're not gonna concede defeat.
We're not going to uh uh back off of this.
And I know the South Koreans today are not exactly grateful, but the truth is South Korea was saved in its independence.
It did evolve, and this is again uh, you know, contrary to what I said earlier in the program.
Here was an instance of our intervention that helped a people to freedom.
They didn't get it immediately.
They had dictators, they had military coups, they had problems uh establishing a democratic society out of what was basically a 3,000-year-old feudal society.
Uh but but that's the transition.
Transition that Iraq is going through now.
South Korea today is a democratic free market place.
It is, in fact, the 14th largest economy in the world.
It's a postage stamp country.
It's the 14th largest economy in the world.
Was Harry Truman right?
Everyone will tell you, Democrats particularly.
Yes, he was.
But they can't stand it that George Bush might be right about Iraq today, too.
Now, George Bush, if the uh New York Times is right about this one, is uh is wrong on the border subject, and here's where we need to get into something, because here's where I do disagree with the President's continuing uh efforts to maintain what amounts to an open border, because the adverse impacts of that border are I'm sitting about sixteen, seventeen miles away from it right as we speak.
The adverse uh aspects and uh and effects of uh this open border are apparent to everyone now in this country, not just those of us living along that border.
But the new Democratic majority, says the New York Times uh this morning, and uh Republican allies in the administration are working on a revival of the McCain Kennedy immigration bill, which provides basically an amnesty to everyone illegally in this country, uh, under very uh v uh significantly uh nothing kind of terms, and no real protection of the border.
Now let me take you back.
Again, 1986, history to me tells us everything we need to know.
1986, Ronald Reagan fell for the line that if we gave amnesty to the illegals here, we would solve the illegal alien problem, they would become Americans, they would be legal immigrants, they would make the country stronger, everyone would be better off.
The problem, by the way, much of that is true.
But the problem is if you don't also control the border, the four million that were four four to five million who were amnestied in 1986 became 20 million today, because the border's still open.
Oh, you're gonna do amnesty, we'll just come in, and whenever you guys get around to it, uh in the meantime we're driving and we're you know, we're doing this, that, and the other.
And there are, of course, don't don't get me wrong about this, positive and negative impacts of illegal immigration.
To me, there are nothing but positive impacts for legal immigration.
I am an image you know, the the son of immigrants.
I am uh uh very much a pro-uh-immigr when it comes to uh the impact on the United States historically.
But this illegal immigration thing is threatening our country because people are coming here knowing they're breaking the law, having no respect for any other law that they don't want to uh obey, and basically leaving their allegiance in other countries.
And uh this is a growing problem.
The idea that we can solve it with an amnesty to those that are here without controlling our border means that the number next time won't be 20 million, it'll be 40 million, and uh there won't be much English being spoken around wherever you are, which is only one of the problems.
So if if we want to get into this, let's get into it, because the uh New York Times again editorializing today that this exam for legal immigrants, you know, you take an examination to prove that you know something about the country you're going to become a part of.
Uh exam about the Constitution and and uh history and so forth.
The New York Times makes the point that after decades of well, this isn't how they put it, but the point is that after decades of dumbing down America in our K-12 education system, this exam may ask of immigrants more information than Native Americans know.
Well, duh.
This by the way, here's some of the questions.
And then they're no just like the K-12 system, there's no wrong answers.
Name one famous battle from the Revolutionary War.
Well, good grief.
Uh Lexington and Concord, Trenton, Princeton, Saratoga, Cow Penns, Yorktown, Bunker Hill.
Name a hundred.
Name one is the question.
Name one of the major American Indian tribes in the United States.
Good grief, one, I mean.
How many can you name?
Cherokee, Seminole, Creek, Choctaw, Iroquois, Shawnee, Mohegan, Chippewa, Huron, Oneida, Sioux, I mean, it goes on and on and on.
And yet the editorial is these questions are too tough.
We can't be asking this sort of thing.
This is too tough.
Uh an indication of the problems we have.
Now, it is not enough that today the leaked information is that congressional leaders in the White House are conspiring, I'll use the word, and I mean it, to impose upon this country an amnesty for illegals without penalty, to impose on this country a continued open border with a catastrophe in the making, because uh ladies and gentlemen, if you don't know it, the border patrol or successor agency uh now called ICE, uh immigration uh, etc.
Uh the border patrol, when they do catch people trying to cross the border illegally, they classify them.
Uh this is uh uh after the fact profiling.
They find out who they are.
Most are Mexicans, some are middle uh Latin American countries, others are Venezuelans trying to get in uh for who knows knows what.
Others are what is called OTM, OTM, other than Mexicans.
This is a category.
Thousands and thousands of them in the last five years have been from nations that promote terrorism.
They have been Iraqis, Iranians, Libyans, Somalis, uh, et cetera, Afghanistan, etc.
They have been people who have come into Mexico, assumed Mexican names and identities and clothing, and in every way tried to slip into the border with the, you know, slipping in with the uh title wave of uh of Mexicans and others.
They're not.
Now, if you think that's a negligible threat to the United States, with 19 of those folks wreaking the havoc they did on 9-11, I just think we ought to be a little more concerned.
I think we ought to be a lot more concerned.
And I get really concerned, and I'll come back and tell this story about two border agents who were protecting you and are now going to jail for it.
I'm Roger Hitchcock, in for Rush Limbaugh, back after this.
Living in America.
Oh!
And I'm a citizen.
Living in America.
And he's...
James Brown, heidi hi.
All right, we're back uh one-eight hundred-282-2882.
I'm Roger Hedgecock, in for Rush Limbaugh on the Rush Limbaugh program here at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
I have just made the biggest bonehead mistake I've ever made filling in on this program.
I'm embarrassed to admit that in trying to make my point about uh the unpopularity of the Korean war, I mentioned uh Ted Williams uh in the same connection as the New York Yankees.
That of course is a real bonehead problem, uh Boston uh Red Sox, of course.
So uh I think this is what Bob and Warwick wants to uh rake me over the colds for.
Bob, go ahead.
Well, Roger, you you owned up to it, so I won't rake you over the colds, but that that's about the most sacrilegious thing that that's ever been said on this show.
I think that's probably true.
I know.
See, I remember him.
That's right.
I remember him as being the Pacific Coast League Padres.
Oh, yeah.
Ah, I don't think you're quite that old.
No, but uh but I knew he was there.
And so I, you know, once they go, but when once people go back east, you have to understand the West Coast mentality.
They're just back there somewhere, you know, and I know you guys take this stuff seriously.
So I will just uh say that was a that was a terrible bonehead mistake.
You are forgiven.
On behalf of all of New England, I forgive you.
Bob, I appreciate it.
Thanks.
1 800 282-2882.
Here's uh Glenn in uh Gourney is in Illinois.
You've been waiting a long time.
Glenn, go ahead.
Hi, Roger.
Glenn, go ahead.
Yeah.
Hi, Roger.
My name is Glenn.
Thank you for taking my call.
Go ahead.
And the comment I'd like to make is I read an article today in Chicago Tribune by the name of Stadi oil decline threatens Iran by Ben Schweid.
Yes.
And he claims that Iran now is producing 300,000 bells of oil less than his limit by OPEC.
And they have major leaks at their refineries.
And the total loss of income for Iran is ten to eleven billion dollars a year.
And in addition, he says it's estimated that within five years, their export will be heft, and by two thousand fifteen, it'll be zero.
They will not export any oil to any countries.
No.
And they'll self-employ.
Now, can we wait?
Will they get the A bomb?
Will they threaten their neighbors to take over other countries to produce oil?
What is your take on it?
Well, first of all, I don't know I saw this in the Washington Times as well.
It's an associated press uh article.
The National Academy of Sciences has this analysis.
I don't know that you could ever say that an oil-rich country like Iran would actually get to a point where they would not export any oil.
They are having a short-term problem because they refuse to allow foreign uh investment or foreigners to come in to help them with their uh oil production, and frankly, they're not as good at it as uh some of the uh some of the uh major companies,
and so they're having the same problem that a lot of countries are having, and that is trying to keep, I mean, Mexico, Mexico could be producing, you know, way more oil than they do, but they keep it a very in-house kind of operation, and they have a giant bureaucracy and they don't do a lot of exploration using the latest technology.
And uh and so it's a problem.
It's going to be more of a problem in Iran because they thought this oil would just magically come out of the ground and we would pay a hundred bucks a barrel for it, and that isn't happening.
So to that extent, I think they are being squeezed.
They also subsidize gasoline, they don't have enough gasoline refining capacity in that country.
They actually have to import gasoline.
So, yeah, they've got an economic problem uh as bad or worse than the one we face with regard to our dependence and the rising cost of fuel, uh, and they're up and they're a net uh producer of uh of oil.
Whether it's going to make them more reasonable or not, I don't think so.
And I'll tell you why.
I don't think they're going to be more reasonable because oil has nothing to do with how re unreasonable they are today.
They're unreasonable today because they believe, the president of their country believes, for one, uh, that the Mahdi or whatever his name is is coming back, some kind of uh figure from uh uh f you know, twelve hundred years ago is returning to Earth, that all of the planet will become uh Islam, uh, that the West is collapsing, that he has a duty to uh nuke Israel and eliminate Jews, etc., etc.
So as long as he has those views, I don't think those views are in any way shaped by the availability of oil.
They're shaped by his uh religious beliefs.
And and as long as those religious beliefs are something he's willing to act upon in that way, then I think we've got to be concerned, whatever their short-term economic uh issues are.
But anyway, uh Glenn, thanks for the call.
Let me get to this story because it is a story I want to uh I want to get uh uh uh to talking about, and that is the uh the business about the uh two the two uh border patrol agents who uh doing their job are now going to jail.
And this is uh uh this is a tough one to uh uh to uh get to, and I think it's uh it's something that uh Americans just won't believe.
Okay, so let me just tell you the story and we can get into it.
These two Border Patrol agents on the border in Texas, a van operating erratically on a dirt road, they stop it, it's full of marijuana, driver takes off, they tell him to halt, they shoot some rounds at him, he keeps running, runs away back into Mexico.
They say, okay, well, I guess uh we didn't get him, they confiscate the van.
Some months later, this driver shows up in the United States, claiming to have been shot in the rear end at that incident, uh, claiming that he had been uh illegally, his civil rights had been uh violated, that the uh officers uh should not have shot at him, that uh he's suing uh civilly, and the U.S. attorney down there, a Bush appointee.
Am I talking, I think El Paso, I'm doing this off the top of my head, but think it's El Paso.
Um, the Bush-appointed U.S. attorney prosecutes the two border patrol agents who, even if you accept the board the smugglers' story, shot this guy in the rear end because he was transporting and he continued to run back into Mexico because he was transporting drugs into the United States.
The the the jury convicted him of depriving the drug smuggler of his civil rights.
And these two are now in January going to jail For doing their jobs.
That's the Bush administration enforcement on the border, ladies and gentlemen.
And I'm sorry, I'm a hundred percent in disagreement with it.
If the president knows anything about this, he should step up, pardon those two officers, and put some morale back in the border patrol because today I will tell you, every border patrol agent I have talked to says, yes, the next time I go to enforce the law, I'm going to be thinking is the guy I'm enforcing the law against going to turn into state's witness with me going to jail because I was doing my job.
That's the Bush administration on the border of the United States, and people need to understand it.
All right.
1-800-282-2882.
We're going to take a break and come back after the bottom of the hour with more about the border and the first Muslim congressman in the United States Congress.
He's a big hit in Detroit.
And we'll tell you why when we come back.
On the Rush Limbaugh program, I'm Roger Hitchcock.
Back after this.
Roger Hitchcock in for Rush Limbaugh now on the Rush Limbaugh program at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Our phone number, of course, 1-800-282-2882.
And again, I've been I bring up this issue.
The two Border Patrol agents, Jose Alonzo Compian and Ignacio Ramos, sentenced to twelve and eleven years respectively in federal prison for uh shooting a man smuggling drugs into the United States.
The drug smuggler was granted immunity in return for his testimony.
He has now sued the United States government for millions of dollars for being shot in the butt.
Now I'm sorry, ladies and gentlemen.
In my world, the Border Patrol agents were doing their job.
They should get a medal.
The drug smuggler should be the one in jail.
Now, just to give you some background, uh eight-year veteran of the U.S. Naval Reserve, a former nominee for Border Patrol Agent of the Year.
He responded on February 17, 2005 to a request for backup from uh the other border patrol agent, Jose Alonso Compian.
And uh they were chasing this suspicious van near a levee road along the Rio Grande River, uh 40 miles east of El Paso at Fabins, Fobbins, Texas.
Uh the illegal alien, let's call it what it is, an illegal alien drug smug smuggler, Oswaldo Aldrete Dávila of Mexico, never, never said he was not an illegal alien, number one, and number two, driving that van.
He's never he said, I just want immunity to put these uh these two guys who shot me in the butt uh in jail.
And the U.S. attorney has uh has done that, a uh Bush uh appointee.
Now, and the uh U.S. district judge in this case is a Bush appointee, Kathleen Cardone in El Paso or Cardone in El Paso, Texas.
Now, Congressman Dana Rohrbacher of California has uh joined in an effort to try to get the president, he and 49 other members of Congress writing a letter to the president asking for a presidential pardon for these uh border patrol agents.
There is an online petition at Grassfire.org as well to call on Bush to pardon these agents with hundreds of thousands of signatures already gathered there.
It is something that needs to be brought up.
I am on the side of the border patrol.
I am on the side, as much as their hands are tied, as much as they already can't do the job of securing our border, to the extent that they do it, they need to be defended.
They need to be told this is the American public's will to support control of our international border.
It is an essential this one, by the way, is in the Constitution.
It is an essential mission of the federal government to uh protect the United States of America.
It's a mission that the president, in connection with the war on terrorism, has very often articulated.
Why he can't see the danger, why we can't get a control of our own border, especially during this war on terror, is beyond my pay grade.
I have absolutely no idea.
Now, maybe you do.
I keep asking Republican bigwigs in the Congress and so forth this very question, and they'll give me this look like how the hell do I know, basically?
Here's Chuck in Auburn, Alabama, is it?
Hi, Chuck, welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hello, Roger.
It's an honor talking with you.
I'll let you know that I've lived in uh the San Diego area when there was actually raw land between National City and Chula Vista.
There you go.
I remember those days too ago.
Long time ago.
Yes, sir.
Uh my first job was delivering the San Diego evening tribune.
There you go.
Yes, sir.
Uh in reference to uh your talk about uh Ronald Reagan and the amnesty he did in eighty six, uh you have to understand that Lyndon Johnson did the first amnesty when he signed the treaty of Cordova in El Paso back in, I believe it was either sixty-five, sixty-six, and he announced whenever this treaty that was a land swap.
That's what the Cordova treaty was, a land swap between the two to straighten out the Rio Grande.
He announced this and he said now, like let's say for instance, like right now, he said, as of February the first, everybody that's here is gonna be legal.
Well, of course, there was about a hundred and fifty thousand more showed up between his announcement and the effective date.
But back then, it was basically the head of the household person, you know, uh and uh I don't want to be uh sexist, but it was basically the man came from Mexico or South America, came over here to work and he was sending the money back.
It was just the head the head of the family.
Right.
But the way that they gave amnesty, they said if you have a rent receipt, if you have utility receipt, it's something that you can show that you're here, then you have amnesty.
Well, in eighty-six, these people, since nothing was going on at the border between, say, '65 and eighty-six, still people came across, but they got smart.
So when Reagan did it, he said, okay, if you have some kind of a receipt, something.
Well, what happened in the meantime was they brought the entire family over here, so you have like, say, two families in a household.
So the telephone was in one person's name, the utility.
Now, Chuck, the point about all this is that if we continue to give amnesty without controlling the border, the numbers go from a couple of hundred thousand in the sixties to four or five million in the eighties to twenty million in two thousand six.
The amount uh no, it was a hundred and fifty thousand time that he made the announcement.
But it was a focus on the point.
Focus.
Focus on the point.
If we don't get control of the borders, the numbers next time will be double what they are today.
Right?
I agree with you one hundred percent.
And I'll just move on.
Let's get Jimmy in New Orleans in here.
Uh Jimmy wants to talk about trans fat.
Go ahead.
Hey, Roger, pleasure and an honor, man.
How are you?
Thank you.
Good.
And uh Merry Christmas.
No happy holidays here.
Merry Christmas to you, sir.
Hey, point I wanted to make is uh in reference to the trans fat issue in New York City with Mayor Bloomberg, and that if this is being done in the interest of public safety, why aren't we concerned with real hazards such as unprotected sex?
I would think that would be much more of a fatal uh uh issue than eating a bunch of trans fat.
Well, it absolutely is.
What we need what we need then, uh Jimmy, what you're saying is we need the sex patrol in New York.
And any time that somebody is is uh feeling like they're going to have sex, they need to place a call so that a sex monitor is in place in order to make sure that they're having protected sex.
Is that is that where you're going with this?
Well, I I'm I'm being farcical here because my response to the neo fascist liberals who will say, get out of my bedroom, I'll just come back with get out of my kitchen.
Yeah, exactly.
Get out of my restaurant, get out of my kitchen.
Get I mean, leave me alone.
If there's there's nothing about freedom left if there's going to be somebody like Mayor Bloomberg telling me what I can eat when I can make that decision for myself.
That's exactly what I'm saying.
So, Jimmy, I'm with you.
I'm with you a hundred percent.
I appreciate the call.
All right.
So uh I don't know, what do you think about these two border patrol agents?
And I brought this up and I know we don't have a lot of time left.
I just wanted to to get uh Get this into your hat that the this administration, and for whatever else uh the virtues are, and there are many, has a blind side with regard to this border.
And I'll tell you all of the talk about uh amnesty, all of the talk about uh placating all of the activists and so forth, uh the Carl Rove theory that we've got to bring these new immigrants into the Republican Party and we can't be seen to be anti-immigrant.
We're not anti-immigrant, we're anti-breaking the law.
We're anti-breaking the law.
Legal immigrants, God bless every one of them.
By golly, they're probably going to become better Americans than we are because that's the way this has worked in the past.
Uh uh God bless them.
But but illegal immigrants tend to come here, having broken the law to get here, they'll obey whatever law they feel like obeying when they get here.
I don't know whether you've been uh you're up on the statistics.
But out here in California, I don't know where you wherever you are, this is happening.
Uh while there are uh a majority of these folks coming here, coming here for jobs, that's the obvious thing.
They're not coming here doing jobs, as the President has said, that Americans won't do.
If you followed the Swift and Company raids on the uh the the meatpacking plants in six states, it turns out that over twelve hundred of these folks were using this is an identity theft problem now.
They were using identities of real Americans to get these jobs.
And it was kind of a wink and a nod situation.
Well, they were the the raids took place.
Over twelve hundred of these people were uh in effect uh taken out of the workplace because they were uh stealing someone else's identity.
They were illegally in this country.
Then what happened?
Here's the part that the stu uh the drive-by media didn't even cover.
What happened next was the most important thing.
What happened next was lines out the door at every one of these plants by American citizens to do those jobs.
That's the issue that I think we need to address more of in this country.
All right, Roger Hedgecock in for Rush 1800-282-2882 on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Back after this.
We're gonna have to get used to it, I guess.
Uh Arm Schwarzenegger has now come out of surgery uh in his broken leg skiing accident.
Uh, and he's uh gonna be back, but apparently on crutches for a couple of months.
This is gonna be uh uh uh well an image uh dent, I would think.
Uh the Terminator on crutches.
Uh he's uh I I know uh Arm Schwarzenegger and I've been with him many times on uh the issues and around the campaigning, and he is a big, strong, uh formidable guy.
And I don't think he's gonna take the crutches very easily here.
This is gonna be interesting to follow.
All right, back to the uh phones here, and I want to get the border patrol uh uh calls in here.
Let's try Jerry in uh Raleigh, North Carolina.
Jerry, welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi.
Hey, how are you doing, Roger?
You're my favorite recovering politician.
Thank you.
I am.
I I used to live out in Oceanside, California.
I was a regular listener.
I'm pleased to hear you today, uh, although I'm in Raleigh now.
And I have two things to bring up real quick, and then uh you can either answer online or or hang up and listen offline.
Uh one, this is not an unprecedented or uh a new issue with these border patrol agents a few years ago when I was living out there, you will remember uh truckload of illegal aliens running from the police.
The police caught up with them, and a couple of people got beat up by the police because of the emotion of the moment and the adrenaline pumping.
Those police officers were fired, one ended his career, and the illegals were allowed to sue for millions of dollars, even though they were illegally in the country and smil smuggling other illegal aliens in.
And the other issue was while living in Oceanside, there was an accident near my house, a car accident, where a gentleman was driving under the influence of alcohol that didn't break any laws.
Somebody else ran a stop sign and hit him.
But since he was ill under the influence of alcohol, he was told he shouldn't have been on the road, so he had no legal rights.
He got a DUI, was not allowed to collect on insurance and had to continue to pay for his car and for the car that hit him.
So we've got more rights for illegal aliens smuggling drugs and smuggling other illegal aliens than our own citizens have here in their home country.
Yeah, Don, it's exactly right.
And I I didn't mean to say this was the only instance that that has happened.
It is clearly a uh tsunami of instances.
You'll be uh sad to know that uh after we lost uh Tony Zapatella, an Oceanside police officer uh in a uh traffic stop in which an illegal alien uh drug smuggler, Adrian Camacho And gangbanger killed him and uh fled to Mexico.
Mexico would not extradite.
Uh we're still uh in the throes of that problem.
A second Oceanside police uh officer uh uh Bessant uh Don Bessant uh was killed last week in a similar circumstance, uh uh apparently gang-related ambush.
Uh whether it's illegal alien or not, we still do not know because the uh locals put a uh local law enforcement put a tight lid on it, and we've been unable to find out more than the person is involved with gangs.
But you are absolutely right.
This instance with the Border Patrol agents uh being made the bad guys because they're enforcing the drug laws of the United States and the drug smuggler gets immunity and gets to sue for millions.
This is not new.
The problem is I'm fed up with it.
The problem is I've had it.
If this is the President's policy, if this is the President's policy, that we're gonna not only have an open border, but if the Border Patrol agents dare to try to enforce even the the mediocre uh enforcement that they do have uh with both hands tied behind their back.
If they try to use their feet to enforce the law, they're going to be put in jail.
I just find this atrocious.
How does a drunk driver lose their rights, even though they're a citizen and live in this country all their lives?
An illegal alien comes across the border, breaks the law on multiple counts, and is allowed to use our court system to take money from us.
Well, amen to all that, my friend.
I'm uh I'm with you a hundred percent, and I don't know, and I appreciate the call, Jerry.
All right, to uh Greg in Sacramento, California.
Hi, Greg, uh, and welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program.
Good morning.
Yeah.
What I've learned about this open door policy with Mexico in the last five years is that maybe the threat to America wasn't as great as we've been led to believe.
Uh after all, we've left everybody in, millions, as you refer to, as other than Mexicans, and yet we've still not had a terrorist attack.
On the other hand, we went to the Middle East and Moore started World War III.
Five years ago, it was just Osama bin Laden and he had maybe three thousand loyalists.
And yet, look what we've got now.
I think we've terribly exaggerated everything.
And this open border policy just proves that I think I'm right.
The threat wasn't that great because look at nothing's happened, and look at we let everybody in.
Well, we'll uh I I I hope you know what?
I hope you are right, Greg.
Uh I don't think you are, because I'm aware of the kind of people that have come in.
The fact that these Hamas sleeper cells exist in this country, the FBI being forced to admit that they have no idea where a lot of these people are, but they are biding their time.
Hamas made a statement uh two weeks ago that they would begin attacking inside the United States because of the United States not paying off the Hamas government in the Palestinian area.
So, you know, uh, Greg, I hope you're right.
I don't think you are, and I think we're going to find to our great chagrin that this threat is much, much greater than we think it is.
Let's go to uh it's because we have made recruiting for the enemy so easy by occupying the government.
No, no, no, no, Greg's.
No, no, you can't no, you can't get away with that on this program.
You cannot say that the war on terrorism is America's fault on this program because you will be laughed off the air.
It is absolutely patently absurd to suggest that the war on terrorism, which has been waged against the United States by Islamic extremists dating back to at least the takeover of the of the American embassy in Tehran in 1979, that somehow were overreacting in 2002 by taking on Saddam Hussein and by taking out the terrorists uh that he's supporting.
Uh I c I c I don't want to go over the whole history again, but this audience knows full well that the argument that we created the enemy is complete and total historic nonsense.
I'm Roger Hedgecock, In for Rush Limbaugh back after the dedicating this show to the memory of uh James Brown and giant uh music in the United States and throughout the world.
And uh thank you, Rush, for the opportunity for uh me to fill in here today.
Let's take one final call.
Nick in Chicago, Illinois, you're next on the Rush program.
Hi.
Good afternoon.
I'm afraid what's happening to these uh border guards is also happening to our military.
We send our people out there to fight for us, to fight these terrorists, and every time they want to use their weapons to defend themselves, they have to stop and think about the army of lawyers that's sitting back waiting for the military people to do something wrong so they can throw them in jail for the rest of their lives.
This is this is this is unfortunately true and very depressing, and right here in San Diego at Camp Pendleton, twenty-four uh Marines, I think I I forget the exact number were indicted last week for uh Haditha killings and in Iraq, good grief, we're in a war.
And there's there's there's too many damn lawyers in the military.
I agree with you a hundred percent on that.
As a recovering attorney, I can say these things.
I'm Roger Hitchcock, and again, I want to thank uh Rush Limbaugh for the opportunity to uh fill in.
I want to wish you all a very Merry Christmas and a happy new year.
As we confront every day at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies, we confront these issues head on.
You get a chance to talk about them.
We together as Americans will solve these problems.
▲
Export Selection