All Episodes
Previous Next
May 24, 2007 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:34
May 24, 2007, Thursday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
All right, is everybody ready in there?
Are you ready up in New York?
All right.
Wait a minute.
I don't see HR sitting there.
Well, good.
Well, we're almost ready.
Actually, we only need me to do this, so let's go.
Rush Limbaugh, America's anchorman and truth detector with another three-hour excursion into broadcast excellence.
A thrill and a delight to be with you today, folks.
Here's the phone number if you want to be on the program today, 800-282-2882.
And the email address, rush at EIBNet.com.
Late night last night.
This could be one of those giddy days, folks, when I get not much sleep.
Up late last night with some friends consuming adult beverages.
And, well, friends, I had a couple.
It was a great, great, great time.
Anyway, about three or four hours sleep last night.
That always makes me a little giddy.
I actually feel quite good.
The president today with the press conference, most of the questions on Iraq.
His prepared statement started out with Iraq and then went into his immigration bill.
And I waited, I wanted to see what the questions were, primarily focused on.
They were primarily focused on Iraq.
We have one with David Gregory here.
We're going to play for you in mere moments.
But remember, yesterday on this program, as we opened up, we had the shocking, stunning news that female sharks can fertilize themselves.
News, which, of course, was not a surprise to me.
We have more shark news here today.
Scientists desperate.
Given the news yesterday, sharks can fertile.
Female sharks can fertilize themselves.
So this next story is a bit puzzling.
Scientists desperate for reluctant sharks to mate plan to pipe the romantic music of Mozart, Beethoven, and Puccini into their Northwest England aquarium tank.
No, how can you call this Mozart, Beethoven, and Puccini porn?
This is not shark porn.
This is a romance.
Well, display supervisor Carrie Duckhouse, somebody named Duckhouse runs the shark tank, says 20-year-old male brown shark Bloodnose has spurned the advances of 15-year-old Lucy since they were introduced a year ago at the Black Pool Sea Life Center.
She says other sharks have also turned out to be cold fish.
And we want to play them the kind of soft and emotional music that inspires powerful emotions in humans.
We hope it's going to put them in a passionate frame of mind and get them mating.
What a bunch of idiots.
These are sharks.
Have you ever tried to play music for your pets?
They're clueless.
They haven't the slightest.
This ongoing effort to humanize animals is hilarious to me.
I just had to mention this too.
By the way, the Sacramento whales, the whales that are out there in the Delta, scientists, they tried that.
Well, they played humpback music and so forth.
They did everything they could to get those whales back to saltwater, back to the ocean.
They're still having trouble.
You know, and I can't help but wonder.
We have all this power to destroy our climate or to alter it, and yet we can't find a way to get two whales back to their natural habitat.
I guess that's because of global warming as well.
Mrs. Clinton, a staffer, puts out a memo that was unsolicited, they all say, that she ought to just bypass Iowa because she's not doing well in Iowa.
And Hillary says, I'm not going to bypass Iowa.
I'm going to be in there all weekend.
Anyway, the point of this is that the inevitability of Mrs. Clinton's candidacy is starting now to be felt in real terms.
She's polling very poorly in Iowa.
And you don't want to go in there and lose.
I mean, that's what happened to Howard Dean, if you'll recall, and he never recovered from that.
And that gave us Jean-François Carrie, who served in Vietnam, as you might remember.
Anyway, let's go to the president's press conference.
The first question I want to play for you is from David Gregory, who I have a new nickname for, Brave Dave.
Here is the question from David Gregory.
It's about Iraq that happened mere moments ago at a Rose Garden press conference.
Mr. President, after the mistakes that have been made in this war, when you do as you did yesterday, where you raise two-year-old intelligence talking about the threat posed by al-Qaeda, it's met with increasing skepticism.
Majority in the public, growing number of Republicans appear not to trust you any longer to be able to carry out this policy successfully.
Can you explain why you believe you're still a credible messenger on the war?
There we have brave Dave, brave Dave Gregory, who, man who supports the troops as much as he supported Don Imus.
When Imos got in trouble, Imos helped make him a star.
When Imos got in trouble, there was Gregory running for the hills.
Now, we talked about this yesterday.
This business that the two-year-old intelligence dump that the president referenced yesterday is received by the American people with skepticism is absurd.
It's received with skepticism by people like David Gregory in the media.
Here's the president's answer to the question.
I'm credible because I read the intelligence, David, and make it abundantly clear in plain terms that if we let up, we'll be attacked.
And I firmly believe that.
You know, look, this has been a long, difficult experience for the American people.
I can assure you, Al-Qaeda, who would like to attack us again, have got plenty of patience and persistence.
And the question is, will we?
Yeah, I talked about intelligence yesterday.
I wanted to make sure the intelligence I laid out was credible, so we took our time.
Somebody said, well, he's trying to politicize the thing.
If I was trying to politicize it, I'd have dropped it out before the 2006 elections.
I believe I have an obligation to tell the truth to the American people as to the nature of the enemy.
And it's unpleasant for some.
I fully recognize that after 9-11 and the calm here at home, relatively speaking, you know, caused some to say, well, maybe we're not at war.
I know that's a comfortable position to be in.
That's not the truth.
You know, we talked about this yesterday, too, and I'm still stunned that more people, I can understand the media.
The media, by virtue of the number of questions they asked on Iraq today, is still interested in forcing the president's surrender, admit defeat.
They just want to blow this up prior to the 2008 elections.
We talked yesterday about the fact that the people after World War II, our generation, baby boom generation today said, look, how could the German people have let that happen?
What went on?
And you can ask the same question about what's going on today in America.
How could the American people not understand what's going on?
It's not as though 9-11 didn't happen.
It did.
And you've got Ahmed Dinejad, who today, again, has threatened Israel, threatened to wipe them off the map.
He's done this frequently.
Bin Laden, Ahmed Dinejad, Al-Zawahiri, it matters not who is on the enemy's list.
They're telling us plain as day what they're going to do.
We've got intelligence here that backs it up.
And the people in the drive-by media just don't want to believe it.
It's stunning.
And you know my theory on this.
I think, well, we know the media is who they are.
But in this country, why are so many of the American people, I'm not sure what the percentage is, why are they so seemingly removed from this?
And the answer is, we've got so much prosperity, we have so much affluence that people don't have to pay attention to this if they don't want to.
But it's tough to pay attention.
You pay attention to it and act like something's wrong, and then it requires you to take action or be vigilant or what have you.
And some people just don't want to think of it as themselves or their neighborhoods or their country or various cities being threatened on a daily basis.
And so I've always thought it's going to take a couple more attacks to wake everybody up.
The president continued, by the way, the answer to David Gregory with this.
They are a direct threat to the United States.
And I'm going to keep talking about it.
That's my job as the president, is to tell people the threats we face and what we're doing about it.
And what we've done about it is we've strengthened our homeland defenses.
We've got new techniques that we use that enable us to better determine their motives and their plans and plots.
We're working with nations around the world to deal with these radicals and extremists.
But they're dangerous.
And I can't put it any more plainly, they're dangerous.
And I can't put it any more plainly to the American people and to them, we will stay on the offense.
It's better to fight them there than here.
And this concept about, well, maybe, you know, let us kind of just leave them alone and maybe they'll be all right is naive.
These people attacked us before we were in Iraq.
They viciously attacked us before we're in Iraq.
And they've been attacking ever since.
They are a threat to your children, David.
And whoever's in that Oval Office better understand it and take measures necessary to protect the American people.
Throwing down the gauntlet to the American people, throwing down the gauntlet to the Democrat Party, throwing down the gauntlet to David Gregory.
Your children are threatened, David.
Now, as to this notion that the November elections express the will of the people and get, oh, by the way, the kook fringe of the Democrat websites is going nuts today.
Moveon.org has finally gotten in gear.
A number of people are suggesting Reid and Pelosi are total failures, exactly what I knew was going to happen because they retreated from retreat.
They surrendered from surrender by removing a definite timeframe for withdrawal of U.S. troops.
So there's all kinds of problems out there on the Democrat side.
The drive-bys are not going to tell you about.
This notion that the November elections were about the will of the people and the will of the people wanted us out of Iraq.
I've had this in my formerly nicotine-stained fingers for a couple days sitting on this.
It's a poll from the Investors Business Daily.
Great, great publication.
And there are nine simple questions here.
Question one, how important is a U.S. victory in Iraq?
All Americans, this is this month, 61% say it's important.
Democrats, 44% say it's important.
Republicans, 84% say it's important.
How hopeful are you the U.S. will be able to succeed in Iraq?
All Americans, 56%.
Break it down by party.
Democrats, 42%.
Republicans, 80% think that.
Who would you like to see the president rely more on for advice on the conduct of the war?
Field commanders, 72%.
The Congress, 21%.
Now, what is this?
How can this possibly be if the results of the election in November were that the will of the people was expressed to get out of Iraq?
They don't want the Congress involved in this.
Which of the following must be a higher priority for the United States?
Immediate troop withdrawal, 46%.
Winning in Iraq, 40%.
Now, that doesn't make sense with any of the other questions, but it's in there.
Would you agree that the war is lost in Iraq?
Percent who disagree, all Americans, 54% disagree that the war in Iraq is lost.
Would you agree the U.S. is fighting a global war on terror?
All Americans, 64%.
Even 52% of Democrats say so.
81% of Republicans.
A couple other questions here, but you get the drift.
We'll be right back and continue.
Ha, how are you?
Rush Limbaugh.
Half my brain tied behind my back just to make it fair.
You're tuned to the most listened-to radio talk show in America, and you are the most knowledgeable audience in all of media, according to research from the Pew Research Center, people in the press.
I am host, highly trained broadcast specialist Rush Limbaugh.
I got a lot of emails today after the president's press conference, his opening remarks on immigration.
One of those emails stood out.
They were all of the same variety, had the same theme.
Rush, you know, I can't dislike the president on this.
I mean, I got a lot of those who say they do, but the ones that intrigued me were I just can't dislike the president.
He seems to really believe that this is the right thing for the country and the right thing to do.
And it's hard for me to work up any animus against him because he's sticking to his guns and so forth and so on.
We talked about this yesterday.
Well, actually, last week, I offered you my theory as to what is behind the president.
And it's a pure wild guess, just like your weather forecast every day.
But the president's a man of deep faith.
That's the source of his strength.
That and the close circle of friends that he has.
And if you're not in that close circle of friends when he was in Texas, you're not going to be in it anywhere else.
You're not going to be in it, period.
And I think that to him, this is a matter of good works.
He's leading a flock.
I don't want to use religious lingo because that's not how I really mean this.
He's helping, in his mind, people who are downtrodden make a better life.
And he's proud that his country offers the opportunity.
I also think independently of that, and perhaps this may be a part of this political calculation in this, as you know, Trent Lott has come out just now and said, we need to pass this bill.
I want to warn you, people, he's going to be the Drive-By Media's new favorite Republican senator.
He's going to be able to recapture all the lost respect over that Strom Thurman joke that he told and Pran got run out of Washington for.
Well, yeah, he got run out of essentially.
He was a Senate Republican leader and it got stripped from him.
But this will bring him back.
The drive-by said he's grown, he has matured, and he is right on the issue.
And I'll tell you, folks, there's one thing to consider here, and it's a flawed, flawed calculation on the part of those making it.
But one thing you cannot take out of this immigration debate, let's say you're in Washington.
Let's say you are a senator or a member of the House, and you understand, we all know, they understand, and we understand that there are going to be tremendous pressures on our social safety net in the next 10 years, 20 or 30, Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, you name it.
And the efforts to reform those programs have failed.
It's like touching the third rail.
You get electrocuted and you're dead if you try to mention any reform of these entitlements.
And these guys don't want to touch the third rail, people in Washington.
Now, next, you have to realize that we have a replacement birth rate in this country that just isn't, it ain't cool.
And nor do the Canadians.
I have a story.
And one of the common reasons in both countries why the replacement birth level is not what it should be is abortion.
You figure since 1973, 1.3 million abortions a year.
That's taxpayers we don't have.
I think these guys in Washington are deathly afraid of the explosion straight ahead of us, of the tax rates that are going to be necessary to pay all these benefits.
The baby boomers are going to retire, and I think they're scared to death of it.
They are scared to death that people are going to revolt and not pay a 70% tax rate.
Right now, the number of workers that it takes, taxes from workers, to fund just the Social Security benefits of one recipient is three.
So the burden of paying the taxes necessary to support a single Social Security recipient is three workers.
With the birth rate being what it is, and everybody living longer, and the retirement age not adjusted at all, that burden's going to be down to two workers.
It's going to take the taxes of two workers in order to fund fully a single Social Security recipient's benefits.
I don't want to hear from you Social Security recipients who think you're only taking out of the system what you put in.
That ended a long, long time ago.
And I think they're looking at it, and they don't dare say this publicly.
They're not going to come out and say we've aborted too many kids and we need new taxpayers to keep these.
They're not going to say that.
So they cloak it in all of this other rhetoric that they think will sell the jobs the American people won't do and so forth and so on.
That's why, plus the Democrats want these voters.
They want the tax.
They want as many warm bodies in here to be able to fund future retirement benefits and Medicaid and Medicare benefits because we simply aren't reproducing faster.
Well, we are, but we're aborting way too many.
Now, here's the problem with that.
It's flawed because the people that we are letting in are not skilled workers who are not going to take well-paying jobs.
These are poor people, uneducated, who are going to be coming in as cheap labor.
And there's a lot of people who look forward to that too.
Big business, a lot of other people like cheap labor.
This notion that uneducated, unskilled labor is the future of this country is absurd.
Unless you are a person that thinks we need all these new taxpayers, 50 million new taxpayers would overcome the number of citizens we've aborted since 1973.
But here's the ultimate problem why that won't work.
We're importing a bunch of unskilled, uneducated, and therefore they'll be low paid.
The transfer payments to them are going to wipe out whatever benefit their taxes, their Social Security taxes and income taxes, will generate.
So it's bad.
It's not going to accomplish.
If that's what they're thinking, we need all these new warm bodies to pay taxes to cover these entitlement programs that aren't going to be reformed.
These new arrivals are themselves going to be participating in the safety net programs.
So the net is going to be a greater outflow to them than what they are contributing in taxes.
But I will bet you a dollar to a donut that that's why some of these people in Washington are for this, but they don't dare say it.
A man, a living legend, a way of life, also known as the scariest and most dangerous man in America to the American left, and that's because I'm right.
And they've tried and failed to take me out.
800-282-2882, if you want to be on the program, let's go to Crestwood, Missouri, outside St. Louis.
And Martha, great to have you here.
I love that name, by the way.
Martha, one of my top 50 favorite female names.
Top 50.
Actually, it's in the top 10.
Well, I would hope so.
Listen, I'm calling about the monologue you gave yesterday, which was brilliant.
And which one?
They all are.
I'm trying to remember which one are you talking about?
Oh, well, one of the many.
The one that really explained how dangerous the terrorist threat is to our country and that people better wake up and realize it before it's too late.
And the people, and you've been saying the same thing today, and so has the president, that the threat is so real, people better wake up to it and hope that there's somebody in the Oval Office in the next election.
I'm very flattered that you would say this.
You mentioned the President did talk about it today, but everybody asks me, everybody, because they know that I know him personally, and I've made no bones about it.
When you get him personally, he's a totally different guy.
Put him behind the camera.
Everybody marvels at the difference.
I was talking about this the other day when talking about the Republican elites and so forth versus Ronald Reagan.
Ronald Reagan had the ability to connect to people.
He had the ability to make 25 million people listening to him on TV think that he was speaking to them individually.
And I think that's what Bush misses because he said all of those things that, well, many of them that I said yesterday, but he didn't personalize it.
He didn't say it in a way any differently than he has.
And he didn't reach through the television in such a way as to make people stop what they were doing when listening to it and reflect.
Well, he was probably trying to copy you because you didn't do that.
No, But can you, will you let me ask you my question?
Yeah.
I mean, I just didn't want to.
Even though I'm giddy and I'm working on little sleep, you inspired a whole bunch of little brain movements there.
I apologize.
Yes, go ahead and ask the question.
I'm sorry you didn't get very much sleep because this is a serious question.
But anyway, along with your brilliant monologue yesterday, I've heard you say a lot of times that the Democrats are eventually going to be sorry because they're digging their own graves and they're going to self-destruct.
And when that happens, the Republicans are going to be right there waiting to retake their control and their power, but that it might not be in 2008.
That's right.
It might be later than that.
And in view of what you have told us about the dangerous threat and the president, too, it just seems to me that that's not much of a consolation.
And we should not be taking, I don't find much comfort in that thought that, gee, maybe after half of us are dead, the rest of us might live to take back power.
What's the question?
Well, why?
You made me stop another brilliant monologue for a question, and you made a monologue.
What's the question?
I'm saying, I've heard you say many times as if we should all feel better about the way that the Democrats are beating up on Bush.
Oh, no.
And the drive-by media is always telling us lies and stuff that we should feel better because we're eventually going to get our power back, but maybe not in 2008.
And I'm saying, isn't that going to be much too late?
That's not what I've said.
And it's interesting that that's how you heard it.
What I said was that the Democrats are sowing the seeds for their own landslide defeat.
Now, part and parcel of that is that the Republicans win.
But I attach, it depends on who the Republicans are at that point, whether that makes any difference.
I'm not assigning automatic improvement if the Republicans win.
I can't predict this stuff.
I'm just giving you the...
You've also said there's a pretty good chance Hillary's going to be our next president.
Yeah, I've said 80% chance as we sit here today.
And I'm listening to every day, Rush.
I know what you said.
Not that you don't know what you said, but I know that.
Are we arguing?
I guess so.
I'm sorry.
Our first fight, I apologize.
We're not even married.
Our first fight, and we haven't even had a lot of sleep.
But no, I'm serious.
I do listen to you all the time, and I know that's what you say.
I'm not denying it.
But I didn't ever say the Republicans would be back in power.
That's not the point of it.
I was just offering an analysis of where the Democrats are going.
I was not saying what that's going to mean.
Yesterday I did.
If they do win in 08, in the context of this monologue that you are referencing from yesterday, we're in deep doo-doo because they do not want to admit what we face.
They're out there actively the past six years denying that we face it.
Remember what the peg was?
The peg was the brick girl at the Council on Foreign Relations saying the war on terror is nothing more than a bumper sticker slogan.
Exactly.
Well, all right.
So it scares me.
I am frightened to death if these people, if somebody like that, with that attitude about the United States is a great nation at great risk in a dangerous world.
And if we elect somebody that doesn't understand that, then it frightens me.
Well, that's exactly what I'm saying.
I mean, we can't feel good about maybe we'll get somebody in the White House other than Edwards, you know, not this election, but the next election.
We have got to get one in this election.
Let me ask you a question, Martha.
Okay.
Well, I wasn't suggesting we're not going to try to make that happen, but I don't know when they're going to implode.
I just know they are.
I don't know when the effects of their implosion are going to be felt.
Could be 08.
We'll wait and see.
It's still a long time off.
But my question for you, as an American citizen sitting out there near St. Louis in Crestwood, Missouri, what's your daily attitude about the country?
Are you worried?
Are you wringing your hands?
And this is not a setup.
There's no wrong answer.
I want to know how you really feel.
Do you think the country has lost some of its oomph?
You think the country's not as great as it used to be?
I think this breaks my heart every day because I think this is the greatest nation there ever has been and exists today, and I think it's going down in flames.
And I think there are things that we could be doing about it that we're not.
And it frustrates me every single day, and I'm terrified.
Literally?
I mean, you're terrified?
Exactly.
I am.
I am always terrified.
Every time I listen to the news.
How much news do you watch, would you say, in the course of a 12-hour day?
Well, I listen to talk radio and I watch Fox.
I never watch CNN.
But I know what's going on every single day.
And I know what the drive-by media is saying as opposed to what is actually happening.
So I know what's happening.
Well, the reason I ask you is that while I agree with your assessment that there are warning clouds on the horizon, the immigration bill portends a tremendous amount of destruction demographically or change.
But despite all that, people ask me constantly, how do you stay optimistic?
And it's not something I have to try to do.
I go through periods like everybody else does of feeling, well, not helpless.
I never feel helpless because I have this microphone.
But I still look at this country, as you just said, as the greatest country on the face of the earth.
And while we hear stories about Iran's building up and the Russians are starting to beat the drums again and all the stuff going on in the Middle East, there still is nowhere in the world that can compare to us.
And we're fed the daily notion that we're the only nation in the world in trouble.
We've got Venezuela, it's going great guns.
We've got China, man, their economy's growing.
They're in trouble.
China isn't, don't let anybody tell you they're not.
The Russians, they've got, everybody has problems, and they are far worse than ours.
The problem we face is not from these external threats, from these, well, I can't say that because there are always going to be those external threats posed by nations that think that we're enemies.
The thing that concerns me most about the country and its future is the American people.
When I see 35% of Democrats, 35%, this is a huge number of Americans, think that George Bush knew about 9-11 before it happened.
And you have to conclude then that they also might think he let it happen if he knew about it.
And then what you conclude after that, you need somebody that studies the insane to be able to tell us.
But aside from that, you know, people like you, there are more people like you than you know, who are willing to fight for the country, to maintain the institutions and traditions that have defined it and have made it great.
There are more of you than you know.
And it's, you know, we still have an opportunity here for a rosy future.
The nation has always been threatened from outside and from within.
It has always faced these threats, and it's because of our freedom.
It is because the freedom that we, I asked somebody the other day over the weekend, I was out in Los Angeles, and I was stunned.
This person had never, this person around in the late 40s or early 50s, did not even consider this question.
I said, I don't remember how we got onto this.
I said, have you ever asked yourself, you've traveled to Europe, right?
Oh, yeah.
Have you ever asked yourself how a country 250 years old runs rings in virtually every way you can imagine around countries that have been around thousands of years?
How is it we are the nation's the world's lone superpower?
How is it that we come to feed the world?
How is it that we, Americans, the United States of America, is the economic engine, the technological engine of this world?
How is that possible?
What?
We're no different.
We came out of the womb as human beings, just as everybody else around the world did, those of us lucky enough to make it out of the womb.
What's the difference?
How can this be?
And the answer to it is freedom.
There is and has been more free in our Constitution, our founding documents.
The founding documents, the Declaration of Independence is so crucial.
We are all endowed by our Creator.
These guys can spend all the time they want telling me that our founding fathers were theists, agnostics all day long.
That ain't going to fly with me.
We are all endowed by our Creator with certain inalienable rights, included among them the right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness.
That's the opening of the Declaration of Independence.
We have enshrined in our founding documents our definition, our foundation.
And then the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, it's freedom.
We have had more freedom than the rest of the world combined so that individuals here have been allowed to pursue their passions with as much ambition and application of excellence as they like.
Now, a lot of people think that we have lots of restrictions on our freedom here.
We do.
As the government grows, so do restrictions on our freedom.
This is one of the things that really worries me today.
And I've got a story coming up in the stack about Al Gore, who is out.
He wants censorship in the media.
He considers a balanced media to be only liberal media.
Anything else is unrealistic.
You will not believe that.
Well, you will believe it when you hear it.
And I'll get to it, I promise, before the program ends.
But there are constant assaults on freedom in this country, particularly freedom of speech and expression, political correctness.
And if those freedoms are truly ever infringed upon, where people are afraid to be who they are, if they're afraid to say what they want to say, if they're afraid to pursue their passions because they're going to offend somebody, because they're going to make somebody mad, because they're going to get in trouble or what have you.
If people surrender the basic freedom to be who they are, to pursue their passions and so forth, and I'm telling you, the American left would love to stifle that.
Individual freedom on the part of more and more Americans is a direct threat to their whole worldview of a big central state that runs and controls everything and views average Americans with contempt, average people, with contempt and condescension.
And that threat to me is as large as any we face.
So when I get calls like this and people concerned about the future, be vigilant as well about what's happening.
How many of you, how many of you now will only say certain things to certain people when you know there's nobody around listening?
How many of you might want to come follow me to the bathroom?
I got to tell you something.
Or when you're in public, restaurant, wherever you want to say something and you pause.
Gee, I wonder, can I say this?
You don't say, should I. Can I say this?
You're letting them win if you do that.
That's what happened in the old Soviet Union.
They're not that bad yet, but this is also scary stuff to me, which is why I am not going to allow it to happen to me conducting this program or anywhere else that I happen to be venturing out.
I got to run.
Martha, thanks for the call.
A little long here.
So next segment's going to be short.
I apologize for it in advance.
Hot damn.
I knew it.
I absolutely knew it.
And I ran across this story today, and I didn't read the story because of the headline.
It's USA Today.
Chirtoff to Immigration Bills critics.
Get real.
I said, well, what else is he going to say?
He works for George W. Bush.
He's the Homeland Security Secretary.
Had dinner with him with a nice guy.
Why read this?
I know what he's going to do.
He's going to say, we don't know what we're talking about.
So I passed it by.
And somebody, a friend of mine listening to the program, said, boy, you hit the nail on the head and sent me the story and highlighted a couple of passages and quotes in this.
Listen to this.
The U.S. needs more foreign workers as baby boomers retire.
The Commerce Secretary said, the Commerce Secretary is Carlos Gutierrez.
And he was, I guess this is a story before the appearance before the USA Today editorial board.
The U.S. needs more foreign workers as baby boomers retire, said the Commerce Secretary.
His department's figures show the population between 25 and 54 growing at 0.2% a year, while the workforce is growing at 1.2% a year.
The reality is we don't have enough people, he said.
Well, I knew it.
I knew this had to be a fact.
They don't mention abortion in this, but why do we not have enough people?
There's one reason.
And then there's the rest of the quote from Mr. Gutierrez is this: the reality is we don't have enough people.
He added that many of the U.S. economic competitors, France, Germany, Japan, and China, will be facing similar demographic shifts.
And the big challenge of the 21st century is who gets the people, who gets the immigrants, he said.
We don't appreciate today that these people are coming in for free.
So we view our apparently our government leaders.
I knew this was the case.
I knew it.
It's all about entitlements.
It's all about making sure there are enough people here to pay taxes for the baby boomers to be able to retire and get their Social Security and Medicaid and Medicare.
And I knew that's what happened.
It had to be a component.
So now what Mr. Gutierrez is admitting is that we are in a worldwide competition for the world's immigrants.
They're coming in free.
We can't rely on them to come in free.
We need to pay them to come in.
Well, actually, we are.
That's why they're coming.
We're going to pay them whatever they need to live that they don't earn.
So we're in a competition.
We don't want them to go to France.
We don't want them to go to China.
We don't want them to, where else did he mention?
France, China, Japan, Germany.
We don't want them to go there.
And they're coming in for free.
It's a bargain.
Do you people understand what a deal we've got here?
These people want to come into our country and they'll come in for nothing.
You really think they're going to face fines now?
You will not see one fine paid.
By the way, it looks like in the Senate that they're going to get 60 votes for this.
It looks like it's going to sail through the Senate when they get back from their Memorial Day break.
So I knew it.
I just, I always trust my instincts on this stuff.
So if we need these, why don't we go out and find the world's educated immigrants?
Why don't we go out?
Well, I've answered the question.
That's asked and answered.
Never mind.
Back at this.
We have another one here, folks, from the Chicago Tribune headline, blacks debate impact of Obama's race on campaign.
We have another.
I am not mentioned in the story.
Unbelievably, I am not mentioned.
▲
Export Selection