Welcome back to the Rush Limbaugh Program here on the EIB Network.
Jeff Sessions, born and bred Alabama person with his law degree from the University of Alabama and U.S. Attorney in Alabama's Southern District for a long time and then elected Alabama Attorney General in 1995.
He became a United States Senator, entered the Senate in 97, re-elected in 2002 with 59 percent of the vote, as Rush puts it.
One of the good guys, Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama, joins us now.
Senator, welcome to the program.
Thank you, Roger.
Let me ask you a little bit about something I just asked Secretary Chertoff on this program, and it is really of concern.
The Secretary continues to describe this comprehensive bill, the necessity of having more ability to control the border, the necessity of bringing folks out of the shadows.
And I talked to him about the probationary Z visa, and I know you've done a lot of research on a bill that has now been renumbered.
It was S 1348, and I guess it's now S 1639.
In this renumbered bill, as it's put back in, and I hope you have had a chance to look at it, has there been any improvement in this idea of almost an instant amnesty under the probationary Z visa?
No.
Within 24 hours, everybody that applies will get the probationary visa, which makes them a legal resident in the country, at least if they came to our country prior to December 31st of last year, which Roger, in effect, says that if you got past the National Guard that we called out, somehow sneaked across the border last December 31st, you'll be given a permanent residence in the country and really eventually have passed to full citizenship.
That changes by three years what was in last year's bill that failed.
It was January of 2004.
So that's a big change right there.
Also, the bill seems to imply that the government has the ability to do this.
Chertoff said that, well, we'd have to give the probationary Z visa, but if there was a problem with this person in terms of a local repeated DUIs or repeated sex offender or something like that that was in a local database that we don't access within 24 hours, we'll come back and that person will be booted out of the country.
Well, I believe last year's bill that this one was supposed to be better than, gave six months for that or 90 days, I forget the number, but gave a considerable more time before you're given that legal status, which I think is important.
The fundamental problems, I believe, with the bill deal with first enforcement.
Comprehensive reforms certainly should improve by reducing the number of illegal entries.
And in this legislation, according to the Congressional Budget Office, a nonpartisan group that's supposed to be able to evaluate these things, they concluded we'd only have a 13 percent reduction in illegality.
I mean, that is just stunning.
That indicates that we have a bill that is not going to work.
It's going to be like 1986.
We'll have this massive amnesty, but we'll not have law enforcement.
I mean, how much more basic can it be than that?
So that's the problem.
All of us would like to improve immigration enforcement, and we can do some improvements, although current law, if actively used, could be much more effective than they are today.
And we'd like to do a lot of other good things with immigration, but if you're going to have a system that won't work, we cannot pass it.
Senator Jeff Sessions.
Now, I mentioned the Congressional Budget Office conclusion that the bill, if passed, would only reduce the illegal immigration by 13 percent.
He said they were just budget guys who assumed the 13 percent and then were working out the cost of that.
What do you know about this report?
Did they assume the 13 percent or do they have something behind that?
They did an analysis.
They concluded there would be a 25 percent reduction of illegal entries at the border, but they also concluded there would be a substantial increase in visa overstays because we would have a lot of people coming as temporary workers with legal visas, but they projected they would not return home as they promised to return home.
And so we are not going to have any system to go out and look these people up and find them.
So you are definitely going to see an increase in visa overstays.
I think that was a rational analysis, actually, in my view, of what will actually occur.
Now, we have been around the Mulberry Bush once here with this Kennedy-McCain bill, S-1348.
It was withdrawn by Senator Reed last week.
It is apparently back on the calendar this week, renumbered as S-1639.
And I hear something about clay pigeon and what is going on in the Senate now with this bill.
Can you describe it for us?
Well, they made one change they claim is significant, but really is not, and that is there is a $4.4 billion mandatory spending.
But they have promised faithfully that that money would be spent.
It is only the money that would be spent to carry out this trigger, which is not nearly enough to create a legal system in the country.
They have weakened the trigger.
It has been trigger-locked.
It is not going to work effectively.
So just promising that money is not effective.
Now they have got a plan that's very unusual, almost unprecedented, to maximize the ability of Senator Reed to control the debate, to limit amendments.
Only amendments that they pick can be voted on, and to limit the amount of time for debate.
So it's a scheme by which one amendment would be accepted and broken up, I understand, into 25 parts requiring 25 votes.
Those of us who had other amendments would have no chance, it appears, of getting those voted on.
I don't think that is good, frankly, if we are going to have a debate.
And also the group that put the bill together are saying that even if they like one of the amendments that is offered, if it goes against the fundamentals of their compromise that they reached in secret somewhere, they are all going to vote it down.
So there seems to be very little real possibility of an amendment passing that would affect the fundamentals of the bill, which I am afraid won't work.
Senator Jeff Sessions.
Now, Senator, in that regard, the last time Senator Reed asked for a cloture vote, a vote to cut off debate and move to a floor vote on this bill, he only got, what was it, 45 votes, needed 60.
Where do you think we are in counting votes on this renewed bill?
It is going to be very close, Roger.
It is going to be very close.
A number of people voted on the Republican side not to have cloture because they felt some of us, like myself, had not had a fair chance to offer amendments.
With this 25 amendments, 12 of them Republican, apparently, they may well conclude that that is a sufficient number of votes for the Republicans and justify a change to vote foreclosure.
I just don't know.
I think, though, that the bill is not gaining support.
I don't think senators are more happy with it today than they were a week ago.
Matter of fact, they may be less happy, and I think perhaps the American people's voices are being heard.
By the way, could I say one thing on that?
On the floor one night, I was debating away just extemporaneously, and I made the comment that what they really wanted to do, you know, they tried to pass it the first week.
The first week it came up.
And I said what they really want is to ram this through before Rush Limbaugh can tell the American people what's in it.
And I really feel like Talk Radio has done a valuable service in pointing out a number of the weaknesses in this bill because it's a thousand-page bill if printed in bill language, and the American people don't have time to study all of that.
Well, we have time and we're devoting the time to it because the American people deserve to know what is going to go on here on the border.
It's a huge issue in every community in this country.
And I know in your state and throughout, of course, ours, it's been a huge issue for a long time.
Senator Sessions, thanks for your leadership.
Thanks for the time today.
And again, as Rush said about you on the air here, one of the good guys in the U.S. Senate.
Thank you for being with us.
Thank you, Roger.
Jeff Sessions from Alabama.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, you've heard all that, and I'd like to get your reaction to it.
Jeff Sessions has on his website, I have it on mine, is 20 loopholes in the bill, in the amnesty bill, and that's exactly what it is, is an amnesty.
The same government that cannot seem to get out the passports that are now you now have to have if you want to travel to the Caribbean or to Mexico or Canada where you didn't used to have to have passports.
And so a number of thousands of Americans have come forward because they have vacation plans this summer to get their passports.
And now they've had to extend the time because that same government can't crank out a couple of tens of thousands of passports.
But they're expecting to tell me that I ought to believe them when they get 12 million probationary Z visa applications and 24 hours to check the backgrounds of these people.
Huh?
I mean, I'm sorry, I wasn't born yesterday, and I don't act like it.
1-800-282-2882, what do you think?
Darlene in Grand Junction, Colorado, you're next.
Darlene, hi, welcome to the Rush Show.
Hi.
I have read an article in World Magazine about the legal immigrants that are here on green cards, and they're mostly highly skilled workers.
They wait years to get permanent residence status.
And this Z visa, if it's passed, could allow 12 million illegal immigrants to achieve superior status to many legal immigrants overnight.
Yes.
And the legal immigrants that are here on green cards, they wait years, and then if they lose their job or if they change employers, they can have their green card put to the bottom of the stack.
That does not apply, apparently, in this bill.
They need employer sponsorship under the Z visa, but they can have promotions, job changes, or a run-up business or whatever.
And the time limit on the legal green cards that are now in effect is six years.
And the one for the illegals, the Z visa, is supposedly renewable every four years.
For infinity.
Yeah.
And it just seems so unfair that the legal people have to stay with the employer whether they have a better job idea or want to get out to another area to live.
They're stuck.
The green card could chuck them out of the country.
My confidence, Darlene, and you've made my day.
My confidence was this audience would know perfectly well what they're listening to.
This audience has been educated to what this bill is.
This audience knows perfectly well that this bill stacks the deck against people who are legally trying to come to this country and favors and jumps the line for those people who are illegally in this country.
I think the attitude of most Americans is legal immigration is good for this country.
Legal immigration is how we all got here.
Legal immigration, God bless you, welcome to the country, make it a better place, make us all better Americans.
Illegal immigration undermines everything this country is about.
Starts with an illegal act, and believe me, goes on to false identification papers, false names, false lives.
And then this bill seeks to jump those people to the head of the line.
Most Americans go, no.
I'm Roger Hedgecock.
Let's get your reaction to that on the Rush Limbaugh program after this.
Secretary Chertoff on the griddle today.
I've seen him in a couple of these news programs.
He was on with us here at the Rush Limbaugh program.
Because of this, you know, and he keeps saying, well, you know, no, we can take the 12 million, we can take their applications, we can review it.
24 hours to do a security check.
We'll protect the country.
I'm sorry.
This government cannot do that.
The State Department and the Department of Homeland Security were required by Congress as part of tightening up our security for Americans who return by land or sea from Canada, Mexico, and the Caribbean to have a passport.
Many people who have used to vacationing those places without a passport had to go and apply for a passport.
So now, you know, a couple million more people applying for passports than usual, maybe a 10% increase, a 15% increase in the number of people applying for passports.
The entire passport review system collapsed.
It had 90 days to get these things out, and it couldn't do it.
Chertoff is saying they'll take in a 24-hour period, a one-day period, and do a security check on 12 million people who apply, or however many apply.
One day.
They had 90 days to get a couple of million of these passports out and couldn't do it.
So now apparently you can go travel, go down to Cozumel, do some diving, but don't try to get back to the United States unless you want to pay a coyote.
Come across to Brownsville, you know, $1,500, something like that, and you'll be back in.
By the way, I recommend it.
Actually, you'll have more rights than citizens.
Your kids will get better treated.
You'll get housing subsidies.
You'll get free medical care.
Stop paying your medical insurance.
If you're illegal, we'll pay for it.
I mean, consider coming back as an illegal into the country after your vacation.
It could be a plus.
Check with your financial consultant.
Cheritoff's on the griddle for something else.
ABC News reporting that the Homeland Security Department, keep in mind the lead U.S. agency for fighting cyber threats against the United States government, suffered more than 800 hacker break-ins at their computers over the last two years.
Hacker tools for stealing passwords and other files were found on two internal Homeland Security computer systems.
The Carnegie Carnegie Mellon University had to come into the picture.
They had computer workstations at the Coast Guard and the Transportation Security Administration infected with viruses, laptops missing, break-ins at websites.
This is the agency that is supposed to protect us when the Chinese declare war by eliminating the Internet in the United States, which is what's going to happen.
By the way, it's not going to be any more Pearl Harbors.
That's all so messy and physical.
It's just you won't be able to use your computer, and that's when you'll know the Chinese are invading when your computer goes down and does not come back up again.
So the State Department's scrambling now, according to the Washington Post, with regard to those passports.
So when you look at this bill and you see the kind of promises being made, I'm sorry, it makes no sense.
Even the bill has to admit that a program to identify frequent border crossers called U.S. VISIT, it's a border check-in checkout system.
It was first required by Congress in 1996, 11 years ago.
It is still not in operation.
Hello?
It's still not in operation.
Smuggler's Gulch, go back to my personal thing here, the only gap we have in the San Diego fence, and by the way, this fence works.
This fence that goes out into the surf line here at the Tijuana River and runs all the way uphill to the Otai Mountain, some 14, 15 miles, has one gap in it we've been trying to fill for years.
But the fence itself works.
In fact, I'll tell you why I think it works, because the people smugglers had to shift dramatically to the east into the desert, where, of course, all those people had die out there in the desert because the coyotes just dump them off.
And then we get blamed for the deaths.
But even more of an indication of this fence working is the fact that we have now discovered how many is it, seven or eight tunnels underneath the fence so that the drugs can get in on time.
I mean, they've got timely delivery.
It's a real problem.
Some of these tunnels, by the way, shored up like mines, concrete floor and railway tracks.
This is not an unsophisticated situation.
In other words, the people smuggling, drug smuggling thing has merged, ladies and gentlemen.
And at least here in Tijuana, San Diego, this big metropolitan area divided by this border and united by the busiest border crossing in the world, legal border crossing, we also have this huge illegal demand because, and let me tell you a little truth about Tijuana that maybe some of you know.
Tijuana was founded after San Diego.
San Diego came first.
Tijuana was founded after the border to provide Americans that which they can't get in the United States, to provide the abortions when they were illegal, the gambling when it was illegal, the drugs when they're still illegal, the drinking when you're 16 and your ID is a $20 bill.
So Tijuana has long been for civilian and military customers a place where you go to get stuff you can't get in the United States or to get cheaper stuff that is legal in the United States, like the lineup for gas last week in Tijuana, like the lineup for pharmaceuticals.
And by the way, don't buy them in Tijuana, please.
It's like buying a Chinese toothpaste.
So this is, you know, this is an issue that we have here, is that Tijuana exists to do what it does, to give United States customers that which they can't get here, whether they have to tunnel under that border or not.
But that border fence works.
I'm Roger Hedgecock, Infor Rush.
Back after this.
Welcome back to the EIB Network.
Roger Hedgecock filling in for Rush Limbaugh today on the program.
And today and tomorrow, we'll get a chance to get back into some of these topics tomorrow as well.
John McCain, according to the newstribune.com out of, I think, Tacoma, Washington, this is Deroy Murdoch's column.
John McCain recently said, quote, America is still the land of opportunity, and we're not going to erect barriers and fences, unquote.
Now, ladies and gentlemen, that's closer to the truth than Secretary Chertoff's assertion that the amnesty bill, the McCain-Kennedy bill, is going to protect the border.
It is not.
McCain has never favored a fence at the border, effective barriers at the border, effectively knowing who comes across that border, and he's not shy about saying so.
He has not been dishonest.
He has been forthright.
He doesn't believe in protecting the border.
And as a consequence, he's in a death spiral in his quest for the Republican nomination for president, getting down into single digits.
Because the real problem, the real problem, is not just people coming across trying to work.
Most Americans don't really get concerned about that.
We had a 9-11.
And the real problem is, you get FBI Director Robert Mueller, March 2005, he comes in and says, Yeah, we think that these al-Qaeda types are coming across the Mexican border with changing their names to Hispanic-sounding names and obtaining false Hispanic identities and learning to speak Spanish and pretending to, you know, with the flow.
Robert Mueller, FBI director.
So you look at the figures and you look at the State Department.
They've got in 2005 alone over 3,200 Cubans, 25 Iranians, 4 North Koreans, 4 Sudanese, and 13 Syrians caught at the Mexican border.
Now, you can shrug it off, but then you go back and look at the 9-11 Commission.
This is some part of that report that really didn't get a lot of play.
The role that Luis Alonzo Martinez-Flores, a 28-year-old Salvadoran who had been illegally in the United States since 1994, well, in 2001, he was approached by the terrorists Hani Hanjour and Khalid Almadar, who helped take American Airlines 77 into the Pentagon.
And they paid him $100 to direct them to the nearest Virginia DMV, the Department of Motor Vehicles, where Mr. Martinez-Flores, Mr. Martinez, vouched for the two terrorists that they lived at a certain address, which had been an address that the illegal alien had formerly lived at and didn't.
None of them lived at that address.
They just used it.
He vouched for them.
They got Virginia driver's licenses.
Their Virginia driver's licenses allowed them to get on the airplane.
How serious is this bill?
I think it's deadly serious.
All right, Hanya in Bellevue, Washington.
You're next.
Hi, Hanya.
Hi, Roger.
It's great to talk to you.
Thanks for calling.
I wanted to make a comment on something you said earlier, although with what you've been talking about, it seems insignificant in comparison now.
But with regard to labor shortages, I think industry, business, and capitalism are the answer to labor shortages, not a visa program that's interminably renewed in spite of market needs.
Because in the past, businesses have responded when labor programs like Bracero have been eliminated by coming up with mechanization that supplants having these cheap labor.
And, you know, when white-collar workers commit crimes, they're punished to the fullest extent of the law.
Now, the blue-collar equivalent is illegal labor, and this has been allowed to go on for too long, as far as I'm concerned.
Yeah, I agree.
Thanks for the call.
I don't know what I can add to that because I absolutely agree with you.
Now, John McCain is still, and I love this little parody that Rush plays from time to time.
I think this parody actually nails John McCain's actual attitude about, and it's an interesting multifaceted attitude.
Listen to this parody.
So, getting back to the and Heritage Foundation has nailed this national security issue because when Ted Kennedy says this bill is a matter of national security, this is a national security bill, we are fixing a national security problem, it is exactly the opposite.
It is exactly, I'm sorry, the opposite.
Now, Chris Kobach in the web memo by Heritage Foundation has some more numbers on this national security issue.
He says the four JFK terrorists who tried, who had the plot to blow up the airport there to blow up the fuel, include two nationals of Guyana, one of Trinidad, and one former Guyanan who was granted U.S. citizenship.
The Fort Dix Islamic terrorists, the six who were going to shoot up our soldiers at Fort Dix, New Jersey, arrested in May, included five foreign nationals from Yugoslavia and Jordan, a sixth from Turkey, eventually obtained U.S. citizenship.
Of the five aliens, three were illegals who had snuck across the southern border near Brownsville, Texas, years ago.
He says the Border Patrol in 2005 apprehended 3,722 aliens from nations that are designated state sponsors of terrorism.
Now, if you look at that one year and you look at the fact that Border Patrol says we get maybe one out of three aliens, that could be as many as 10,000 aliens in that one year crossing the border.
We have no idea the number.
We have no idea where they're from, but could be, based on what we did catch, from high-risk terrorist-associated countries illegally entering the United States in the fiscal year 2005 in one year.
Now, let's say only one in 100 is an actual terrorist, just to take a really conservative position.
I don't think they're coming here to pick the strawberries or clean the toilets myself.
But let's say it's only one in 100 who's an Islamic jihadist type.
That means over 100 terrorists snuck across the border in that one single year.
He says this bill, Chris Kobach goes on to detail the fact that this bill is outrageously easy for illegals who are terrorists to operate in this country.
He says terrorist option number one is to just continue to operate as an illegal alien.
There is no enforcement.
There's no problem.
Terrorist option number two, obtain the amnesty using your own real name because under section 601H1 of the bill, the government has 24 hours, one business day, to conduct the so-called background check on each applicant.
Just use your own name, pal.
Hey, I'm from Libya.
I'm Moamar's second cousin.
I'm a jihadist.
What else do you want to know about me?
Got a website.
Got some nice YouTube videos.
And that's, you know, beheadings and stuff like that.
And fine.
Stamp, boom, you've got it.
Probationary Z visa.
24 hours is a terrorist fast track.
Okay?
So then he talks about, well, of course, you can always use any other name you want to use.
Doesn't matter.
Doesn't matter.
And I've told this story before.
Did I tell it here on this?
I'm not sure.
Mahmoud Abu Halima fraudulently obtained a legal status under the 1986 amnesty.
That was limited to seasonal agricultural workers.
He's illegally in this country driving a cab in New York City.
He applies for the seasonal agricultural worker permit under the amnesty of the 1986 bill and gets one.
And then he becomes the ringleader of the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center.
His brother did the same thing.
59 out of 94 foreign-born terrorists, according to Janice Kepert, counsel to the 9-11 Commission, had committed immigration fraud to acquire or adjust their legal status.
There's nothing in this Kennedy bill that protects us from that.
And that's my problem.
I'm Roger Hedgecock, fill in for Russia, coming back with your call.
Stay with us.
President Bush has vetoed, again, this is the second time, the stem cell research bill because it is a not even disguised abortion agenda bill because it continues to rely on human, the destruction of human embryos to provide the research.
The latest science on this, by the way, and it's amazing how the liberals want to push pseudoscience on global warming and pseudoscience, frankly, here too.
The latest actual science on stem cell research is that there are a lot of promising therapies coming out of stem cell research, mostly from cells that are recovered not from embryos, not from embryos.
The embryo stem cells, apparently, and we put a lot of money into this, folks, out here in California, have not yet produced any results.
Whereas stem cells from spine, what do you call it, the cord that attaches to the baby, the umbilical cord, all that stuff.
All those cells, including adult stem cells, have now been able to fight diabetes and all kinds of stuff.
And that's great stuff.
So Bush is making it clear he's not against stem cell research.
Nobody is.
What he's against is destroying human embryos to use those stem cells when, and this is the crowning irony, those stem cells don't appear to be as useful as others that are more easily obtained and don't destroy human embryos.
So Bush is standing up for that, and he's right.
All right, here's Lewis in Neptune, New Jersey.
Lewis, welcome to the Russian Buff Program.
Good morning, or good afternoon, Mr. Hedgecock.
Forgive me, I'm a little nervous, first time calling, but I've been listening for many years now since I've converted over to conservatism.
And my comment is, when you said before about how these terrorists can look Spanish, yes, I'm a Hispanic male, and I can tell you what, I look at these guys and I'm like at awe at the resemblance that they can pass for a Hispanic male.
And I've been saying this for a long time with many of my friends.
I'm like, these guys can actually pass for us.
So the mindset that the senators and the people in higher offices there don't want to do anything with the border is ludicrous because that's where you have to stop it at.
We're not punishing the people in Mexico.
You can't look at it that way.
It's that you have to protect the border because these guys can infiltrate the Hispanic population.
They can learn to speak Spanish.
I don't see them going into Norway or into the Scandinavian countries trying to sneak in there.
Why?
Because they don't look like them.
You try to blend in with who you want to attack and who do you want to conquer.
And these guys, that's all they want to do.
They just want to conquer.
They just want to kill all of us.
No matter what.
And I tell you, Lewis, again, I want to make this clear.
Regardless of race, creed, or color, I think this country, if it's going to survive, needs to know who's coming across the border and why.
And I think we do need to be a welcoming country to refugees of various places.
We do need to be, and we will be, a welcoming country to legal immigration because the country's been built on that, and the economy would grow faster with a lot of people with certain skills and so forth.
And we have benefited from that in this country.
But I'll tell you what, this illegal tsunami not only presents a culturally transforming moment for America because of the numbers involved, but it also involves, as you have pointed out, it involves, you know, you're swimming in that school of fish, in that huge school of fish.
Are these fish that shouldn't be there?
Are these fish that could be killing us?
And I think it's something that needs to be faced by people because you too often get intimidated, you call racist, nativist, no-nething, you know, whatever from the open border crowd.
And I'm sick and tired of it.
It doesn't have anything to do with that.
Here's Assad.
Hey, Lewis, thanks for the call.
I've got to move on.
Here's Assad in Allentown, Pennsylvania.
Hi, Asad.
Hey, how are you doing, buddy?
Okay, what's up?
I'm calling because about the immigration issue.
To me, I think it's a total crock from both ends, regardless of if you're a Republican or Democrat, I think this transcends party lines.
Basically, when there was a civil war going on in Lebanon, I'm from Arab descent, and when my uncle passed away in Lebanon, and we had to bring over my cousins, my dad and my aunts and uncles and everybody else had to put in other 40 to 50,000 in her name to basically sponsor her so when she comes here to the states that she's not a welfare of the state.
And basically when she came here, she couldn't apply for any social services.
I forget the amount of times.
It was like three to five years after being here for any types of social services or help.
And that's why I think this whole immigration thing is a total crock.
Basically, thank you.
Exactly.
I mean, this is the way we've done this.
My grandmother came.
She had to be sponsored.
She had to, you know, not be a public charge.
She had to have a job.
She had to be sponsored in the job.
I went through all that.
And as far as I'm concerned, Assad, that's exactly the way it should be.
I'm not asking for people to come up from around the world to be loafers.
We've got plenty of those homegrown.
So we need some people coming here working.
And so the idea that people who have come here illegally, and many of them working, but many of them not working, they're filling up our jails.
They're filling up the, I mean, it's craziness here in California.
This idea that they would jump the line and get special privileges.
Do you know that if you can prove you're here January 1, 2007, you get this probationary Z visa, but if you're legally in the country, you only have two years and you've got to have all these restrictions and you've got to pay all these fines and you've got to have deals.
We have made it harder to be legal than illegal.
We have favored illegal over legal and we're reaping the whirlwind here.
This bill does not correct that.
And that's the big problem I'm having with it.
Let's take a break.
Thanks, Assad for the call.
I'm Roger Hitchcock in for Rush Limbaugh.
Back after this.
Techno popping back into your radio.
I'm Roger Hitchcock filling in for Rush Limbaugh.
Let's get Lisa in Alexandria, Virginia in here.
Lisa, welcome to the Rush Show.
Hey, Roger, thanks for taking my call.
I have to vent my spleen here for a minute because I believe that this immigration bill is disingenuous from both sides of the aisle.
If they were really serious about cutting down on illegal immigration, they would say, okay, to the 12 million or so here, you can stay.
Here's a work visa.
But you will never, never, never become a citizen unless you leave and go back through the legal channels.
You cannot allow these people to be citizens just because they came across the country and they're living among us.
I believe there's an unholy alliance between the Democrats and the Republicans.
The Republicans, I'm sorry to say, want the cheap labor.
And the Democrats want new voters.
And that's what this is all about.
You know what I love about this, Lisa, is everybody's listening.
What I love about this is you representing the great we the people understand what's exactly at stake.
You understand exactly how the political system is trying to twist its way to a conclusion that the public does not support.
And our senators are now on a hotspot they're not accustomed to to try to deliver to the special interest that which we, the people, do not want to have happen.
That's going to be the most interesting thing to watch, and we'll do it again tomorrow.
Rush, thanks for the privilege.
I'm Roger Hedgecock, filling in for Rush Limbaugh.