All Episodes
Previous Next
March 7, 2008 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:24
March 7, 2008, Friday, Hour #1
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Welcome to today's edition of the Rush 24-7 podcast.
Oh, yeah.
It is still cold here at the Northern Command.
I'm telling you, folks, it is freezing in Minneapolis, St. Paul, Russia's Northern Command.
You want to know how cold it was?
Kit and Mike R Funny you guys should ask.
Kid and Mike asking me, how cold was it?
When I was driving into the studio today, on the way in, I saw two squirrels roasting their nuts.
Now you just you just do not see that that often.
That's how cold it is.
Hello, once again, everybody.
I am Jason Lewis, Minnesota's real anchor man, Minnesota's Mr. Wright filling in for America's Mr. Wright.
L. Rushbow taking a a day off, two days off, actually, well deserved, I might add.
He's been working hard lately.
He will be back on Monday, even though the King is gone, and we are holding down the fort here in the Northern Command.
See, people don't realize that.
Russia's got the Southern Command, but we he's got the Northern Command.
He's got command posts all over America, from Milwaukee to Minneapolis to Seattle to San Diego to Dallas.
We just got the Northern Command here.
You see, that's how it works.
Anyway, even though the King is gone today, it is Friday, and the tradition remains.
From the Southern Command in sunny South Florida.
It's open live Friday.
That's right.
Your chance, you ranked amateurs to phone in, call in with your comments, your debate, your discussion with another rank amateur.
That would be me, Jason, uh, filling in for Rush today.
It is, it is.
Yeah, it is.
You can be guest host, I can be a guest host.
Anybody could be a guest host today on Open Line Friday, I guess.
1-800-282-2882.
That's 1-800-282-2882 on this Open Line Friday, the Rush Limbaugh program up and running.
You know, let me give you up to date on the the latest news campaign and otherwise.
By the way, before we get to the campaign, apparently, this is getting more interesting, curiouser and curiouser, a number of House members were mailed this letter and a photo of the Times Square recruiting station in Manhattan before it was bombed on Thursday morning.
We talked a little bit about this yesterday.
According to House Insiders, uh quoting the politico here, House Insiders, uh the letters were sent, as far as we know now, only to eight House Democrats.
Now, there have been some procedures put in place since the 2001 anthrax scare, so maybe all the letters haven't arrived yet.
But so far, only eight House Democrats from the New York City area received the letters.
Some House aides are telling the press that many more members than that could have received the missives, a 20-page rambling rant.
Is there any other left-wing rant other than rambling?
I suppose a dissembling rant.
Anyway, the the uh what's fascinating about this, if it comes out, turns out to be true that only Democrats are getting what can only be described, frankly, as an ominous threat, really.
I mean, the c you could say it's a coincidence, I guess, but there's too many too many things that you can connect here.
Is is the fact that maybe the Democrats have created this monster within their own party.
They have kowtowed so long now to the hardcore pacifist anti-war, anti-Western, anti-American tradition left that they've created a monster within their ranks.
One of the reasons Democrats have had trouble in presidential elections.
I mean, believe it or not, Bill Clinton ran as a moderate in uh 1992, at least before he met Monica, uh, and and he won.
Jimmy Carter was the last Southern moderate.
Boy, these guys are great con men, aren't they?
And but the Democrats, when they run in the primary in the Caucuses, they have to appeal to the daily cost.
They have to appeal to move on.org.
And these people will will literally spare no one.
Uh they give no quarter.
They demand outright fidelity, overt fidelity to, frankly, the anti-American viewpoint.
And so you've got this, you've got these these radical groups now, perhaps forgetting about Republicans or mainstream Americans.
They are demanding complete blind loyalty to Democrats.
Talk about uh I mean poetic justice in so many ways.
And you know, these guys have been coddling left-wing terrorists from Fidel Castro to Hugo Chavez.
Uh, we here in America say Chavez.
Nevertheless, how long can this go on?
I remember there was a a survey back in the Reagan era uh in the Columbia School of Journalism on the most admired leaders.
Now, these are the future anchormen and women, the future reporters for for the LA Times and the Washington Post and the New York Times.
Oh, okay, I take that back.
The New York Times doesn't have any real reporters, excuse me.
And they said they ranked Fidel Castro, the future journalist, had a higher opinion than Reagan.
So they've been coddling these lefties.
I can remember in the Twin Cities here back in the what was it, the late nineties, early uh part of this decade.
Uh Kathleen Salaya, Sarah Jane Olsen, ring a bell, part of the Symbionese Liberation Army on the Lamb for a couple of decades, caught in St. Paul.
I mean, remember the SLA was bombing police cars.
Remember that?
It was really almost the post Vietnam era.
They disliked violence.
And she was an accomplice.
She's in prison now.
But when they captured her in St. Paul, all of the local liberals came to her defense.
Well, you know what?
Sometimes you be careful what you wish for, because now some of these radical left-wing groups may be demanding certain things of Democrats.
Barack Obama forced to decry an advisor's monster remark of Hillary Clinton, the senior foreign policy advisor to Barack, was forced to apologize yesterday for describing Hillary Clinton as a monster.
Does that mean the rest of us will have to apologize?
Hillary Clinton apparently was described as a monster in an interview with a Scottish newspaper.
Now, this is the Illinois Center, Senator, of course, Barack Obama's advisor, who is transcended politics as usual.
He believes in in decrying the usual dirty politics.
He wants hope and change, narrowing it right down.
I mean, that you just don't get specifics like that from anybody, folks.
What do you stand for?
Well, I stand for hope and change.
Ooh, very provocative.
Nevertheless, they are apologizing now for calling Hillary a monster.
I don't know where that puts Bill.
And 20% of white Democrat voters say they would defect to John McCain if Obama is the party's nominee.
Now, this is according to a pew a pew uh research piece that came out yesterday.
This I I find this fascinating because I have maintained for some time, growing up in a number of union uh not well, union communities where the unions have been very strong, whether it's, you know, pick your favorite local, they've been very strong.
For all of the talk from the the effete elite in the Democrat Party and in the media, how the Republican Party or Neanderthals, the Republican Party don't want diversity, uh, they engage in prejudice.
It's been my personal experience.
If you want to see some virulent racism, and you take a look at the history of the labor unions in America, that will be your empirical data to uphold what I'm about to tell you.
Go down to your favorite union hall.
Don't wear a bug if they catch you, it could be ugly.
But the fact is there are a lot of rednecks in the modern Democrat labor movement.
I don't want to traumatize anybody.
The truth hurts sometimes.
And now 20% of white working class Democrat voters say they will defect to McCain if Obama is the party's nominee.
Let's have an investigation of this this sort of backwards potentially race-bated viewpoint.
Not race-bated, I guess, uh racial viewpoint on the part of the Democrat Party here.
And the more things change, the more they stay the same.
What's this here?
Oh, yes, Bill Clinton earned 700 grand for his foundation by selling stock he had been given from an internet search company that was co-founded by a convicted felon backed by the Chinese government.
Isn't it great to get back to the nineties?
And you know, if Hillary's elected, back to the future we go.
That's one of the things that amazes me about this and why Barack Obama is not exploiting this.
In your heart of hearts, when you're in that booth, you know, we still have secret ballots for now.
Uh of course, when you're the the labor unions don't want that, if you're voting to organize at your company, they're demanding an open ballot, i.e., pressure, coercion.
But for now, when it comes to uh electoral politics, we still have secret ballots.
And when you're in there, I gotta believe a lot of people, if Hillary is the nominee are going to say, do I really want to go back to File Gate, FBI files missing, Rose Law Firm billing records missing, Billy Dale, the White House travel office, uh Lippo group, you know, Indonesian Gardners giving 400,000 Chinese money.
Again, I haven't mentioned Paula Jones, Kathleen Willie, any of that.
Do we really want to go back to that?
And that that's something that Barack Obama should be exploiting right now, but he is not.
Apparently, Clinton had gotten the non publicly traded stock from uh a corporation, uh apparently an Internet corporation.
Boy, has the Internet crowd been kind to Al Gore and Bill Clinton.
He gave a speech and they gave him all this stock.
And then he sells the 200 shares, 200,000, I should say, shares, to an undisclosed buyer in May 2006.
An undisclosed buyer.
We don't know much more about this buyer other than his first name is Mao or Deng Shung.
Other than that, we have no idea who this buyer is.
The William J. Clinton Foundation declined to identify the buyer and and uh they're just well, it's kind of like what Hillary did in the White House, the Foundation and the uh Clinton Library stonewalling a la Richard Nixon again.
And one more thing on the campaign.
Florida and Michigan in the Democrat in the Democrat process are coming under scrutiny, or as you know, it looks as though neither it's it's pretty assured that neither nominee will go into Denver with two thousand and twenty-four delegates needed to get the nomination.
So they're talking about having another primary in Florida and Michigan.
The DNC decertified these delegates because they were leapfrogging ahead of a normal process.
Everybody wants to be first ahead of Iowa, ahead of New Hampshire, and Florida and Michigan said, no, we're we're we're not gonna pay attention to what the Democrat National Committee wants.
We're gonna put our primary where we want it.
We're gonna put our caucus or and our primary where we want it.
And so the DNC says you can do that, but if you do it, your delegates, as a result of that primary, will not have a vote, won't be seated at the convention.
Now there seems to be unanimity that, well, you gotta do something about Florida and Michigan because you can't go in there without having those states represented.
You're gonna have the superdelegates, the politicians, the Democrat politicians decide this.
Uh why not let the people decide it?
I'm confused here.
You know what this amounts to?
And only in the Democrat Party.
I'll tell you what this amounts to.
Amnesty for Florida and Michigan.
Only in the Democrat Party could they be considering amnesty for lawbreakers.
These states, why should they be seated?
These two states knowingly violated DNC rules.
They were told if they did this, your delegates will not be seated.
They did it anyway.
And now they're saying, Well, we're just kidding.
You're gonna get a vote after all.
This is a harbinger of things to come uh vis a vis the border, I guess, if the Democrats get control, the entire control of Washington.
I'm Jason Lewis on this open line Friday, in for El Rushbow behind the golden EIB mic in the Northern Command.
Your phone calls at 1800-282-2882 coming right up after this short pause on EIB.
It is open line Friday on the Rush Limbaugh program, back behind the Golden EIB mic and the Attila the Hun chair in the Northern Command at the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
I am Jason Lewis.
Good to be filling in for Russia.
My thanks to Kid and Mike as always for making this go so smooth.
Rush will be back on Monday.
In the meantime, your comments, your concerns, your well, your discussion right here at 1800, 282-2882, first up today in Tampa, Florida.
Roger, you're on the Excellence and Broadcasting Network with me, Jason.
Hi.
Jason, how are you doing?
I'm doing pretty well, given the fact it's about five degrees up here.
Okay.
Well, I won't tell you what it is here.
No, do not.
Uh I wanted to take uh issue with you on your previous comments about city seating the Florida delegation.
And where are you from again?
Tampa.
Oh, yeah.
I was making a joke there, yeah.
Okay.
Uh the issue here is that the Florida legislature in the state of Florida is a constitutionally uh empowered entity.
It makes laws and specifically it's entitled to make laws uh in regard to the holding of elections, the procedures, and the timing.
Yes, you're right.
The Democratic Party is not a constitutionally delegated entity.
Right.
It has no such authority, no such power.
And when a private stop right there.
Let's make sure hold it right there.
Um you are quite right.
The the primary government unit concerning election law and elections in the United States are is the state, the state unit of government.
Uh, they control election matters in in this country for all practical means and purposes.
There are a few federal issues as we found out in two thousand, but fundamentally it's a a function of state government.
However, because they are constitutionally charged to decide when they want a primary, when they want a caucus, does not mean a a private organization such as the Democrat National Committee has to abide by that.
They are they they can decide when Floridians will vote.
They cannot make the Democrat Party say, oh, okay, you've got to take our our delegates now.
Normally when a private organization has rules that conflict with the law, it's up to the private organization to change its rules to to coincide with the law.
Whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, you're assuming there is a constitutional right to be a delegate to the Democrat National Convention.
You're assuming there's a constitutional right to to in fact choose who the Democrat nominee will be.
There is no such right.
These private organizations make their rules, not unlike the Boy Scouts making their rules, and it is not up to government to run roughshod over private organizations.
In fact, just the opposite is true, Roger.
Well, wait a minute.
As a taxpayer, I paid to hell hold an election.
And these people that were elected now have an official status.
They are no longer private private individuals attending a convention not covered by by statute.
Your beef is with the Florida legislature.
That's where your beef is.
They did what the Democrat Party gave them plenty of warning, and the Republican Party did this to some degree as well, uh and it hasn't come to this particular issue uh because of uh the early decision.
But the bottom line here is how else are these political parties going to control states from leapfrogging?
We'll be having primaries in two years out if somebody doesn't get a handle.
If if the if the Florida Democrats are upset, they can form their own party.
I still think it's the government's right to set the date of election.
And you know, if people uh if organizations like the Democratic Party don't want to follow the law, then they probably should organize outside the state of Florida.
Well, what else should the State of Florida uh pass with regard to edicts for private organizations?
I mean you saying the state of the State of Florida should set the primary schedule for the Democrat Party, they should set the primary schedule for the Republican Party.
Guess what the state of Iowa is going to say?
Guess what the state of New Hampshire is going to say?
They're going to say the opposite.
You you do not this is a an eternally frustrating thing for me as a freedom-loving American.
You do not have the right.
You are not entitled to to have access to private organizations with a particular viewpoint.
You do you are not entitled to a job.
You're not entitled to compel any particular private organization to do anything in America.
It's called voluntary association.
And you don't have it if the government can say, well, we've decided to make a law to govern your process.
And the same is true for political parties.
We disagree on this, Roger.
Have a great uh great time down there this weekend in beautiful Tampa.
Bob in Dayton, Ohio, you're up next on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi.
Hi.
Yes, you are.
You are uh are you guys getting it today with snow?
Oh, God, yes.
We're supposed to have uh four tomorrow afternoon uh anywhere from ten to twelve inches.
Well, somebody email Al Gore.
Yeah.
Come on, global warming.
Anyway, my question for you is i it's my uh observation that the following falling dollar is leading the oil price up.
Well, I don't think there's any doubt about that.
There was a report today that suggests we're we might be reaching another asset bubble instead of the the tech stocks instead of housing.
Now it could be the price of oil, because believe it or not, supplies are up and consumption is down.
The marketplace is working just the way it should, as gasoline prices go up, U.S. consumption and to a degree, worldwide consumption is actually down uh when it comes to oil, and yet the price is 104 uh dollars per barrel.
I think that is an inflation phenomenon.
Especially when you consider the price of gold is also going up, the price of corn, and the corn's at five dollars a bushel.
You can go right across the commodity spectrum and you're seeing all these prices.
So if there's an asset bubble, I'm not altogether certain it's just in oil, it is in all the commodities which are the other major currency when we debase the dollar.
You can always compare whether we've got an inflationary scenario here by looking at the most solid of currencies, gold probably being the easiest, but you can have what it can be pork bellies, it can be any Other commodity that people flee to in spite of or in lieu of the falling dollar.
So I think you're right, Bob.
I don't think there's any doubt about this.
In fact, if we don't get a handle, as we talked about yesterday on this, you know, and I got a guy up here that wants to ask me when did U.S. dependency start?
When did we go to the entitlement mentality?
And I think a a clear, a clear uh line of demarcation would be something called the New Deal, when Frank Franklin Roosevelt packed the Supreme Court, you know, the the switch in time that save nine in order to get the New Deal legislation that guaranteed all of these things uh for us.
But you you've got this dependency also when it comes to monetary policy now, believe it or not.
We think we should never have a credit crisis.
We think we should never have a a a housing price decline.
We think things should always be good.
So we inflate and we inflate and we inflate.
And right now, we're seeing the results of that.
Commodity prices sky high.
That's right.
Talent on loan from Rush this Thursday and Friday, Friday being open line Friday, of course.
I am Jason Lewis, rush back on money.
Lots of things to talk about today.
I want to get to health care, this vote uh demanding that insurers cover under ERISA anyway, uh, mental health issues will do nothing but raise the cost of health insurance in America.
I want to get to that.
I want to talk about Brett Favre a little later and tie that into the Democrats'redistributionist fantasies.
We've got some uh mortgage default news going on and the sanctity of contracts, a ton of stuff coming up on this open line Friday.
But in the meantime, your calls as well, 1-800-282-2882.
Let's go to uh Tracy's Landing, Maryland, and John, you're on the Excellence and Broadcasting Network.
Hi.
Hey, Mega did this to you, Jason, uh up there in the frigid north, uh, our northern outpost, so to speak.
Let me put things in proper context.
I'm a staunch conservative, uh, I'm retired, uh I uh uh am uh you know uh malt sipping uh sailing uh cabana smoking uh sailor, you know, and I I really enjoy that lifestyle and I'm I'm concerned right now.
But let me get to the point uh that I uh told your screen.
Uh I agree with a lot of the things that you're saying uh uh uh you know concerning the Democratic Party and every everything, but the one thing I haven't seen, and and my colleagues when we gather around the you know uh smoky table playing cars or something we've discussed this.
It's the unbelievable awesome disparity in the turnouts at these polls between Republicans and the Democrats.
Uh I what I'd like to see is some reference to that every now and then and pump up the troops, you know, get the troops fired up about this problem, because if you look at the turnouts, uh Jason, one could easily conclude that there's some apathy, some uh, you know, uh some uh disinterest to a certain extent uh on the Republican side.
Maybe it's maybe Yeah, maybe you well, maybe maybe it's because talk radio is taking a beating a little bit for not going or not supporting John McCain.
I mean, they they're circling the wagons, the establishment GOP crowd is circling the wagons, saying we should all just shut up and get on board.
And really the question is is always a question of judgment in this.
I mean, we were told to vote for Gerald Ford that Ronald Reagan was was uh, you know, he he was an apostasy to the establishment that Reagan was a renegade, he was uh you know, trigger happy, could not do it, shut up and vote for Ford.
We were told to vote for Bush 41.
Again, you can say that about Bush 43 if you don't like some of his uh open border policies, if you don't like some of his McCain or uh Kennedy education policies.
The the bottom line is I think conservatives have finally reached a tipping point where they're just saying, look, I I'm not gonna be fooled again.
If I were to ask you who said this, quote, I believe America is going to enter into negotiations to try to reach a global agreement on Kyoto.
If I were to ask you who said who said this, um I don't think the governor's tax cut is too big, it's just misplaced.
It goes to too many wealthy Americans.
I'm not giving tax cuts for the rich.
The answer to that for both of those would be John McCain.
Yeah, I understand that.
But you know what?
That's why conservatives are a bit lukewarm right now.
Yeah, but do you think well that's what's bothering me, though, uh Jason, is because you know, it's the lesser of two evils, quite frankly.
At least there are some uh attributes of John McCain, some positions he takes that I'm in total agreement with.
True, I disagree with others.
I wasn't a McCain supporter.
Okay.
I but but uh I'll tell you what, I went to the polls and voted.
I'm not telling people how to how to vote.
Don't get me wrong.
No, no, no.
I'm I'm I'm saying, but you know, what they have to consider is the alternative, the the the the obvious outcome if the But here is here's the judgment you need to make.
If if in fact there is a massive difference between candidates, even if you don't agree with your particular candidate, whether it's GOP or whether it's the Democrat, you're going to vote for them because you're not willing to sacrifice principle for that much damage.
But if the difference between the candidates starts to become blurred, if the Republican moderates get their their candidates up there, the rhinos, people are not going to sacrifice their principle for a tiny little difference between the candidates.
And and forget about what McCain has said.
I'm just describing why conservatives are concerned about him.
Forget about what he said.
If you look at his record, his quotes, his previous votes on tax cuts, both he and Hillary Clinton were opposed to the Bush tax cuts.
On global warming, both he and Hillary support some sort of measure globally to get a handle on this fictional crisis.
On campaign finance reform, he and Russ Feingold partnering up.
On immigration, he and Ted Kennedy.
He's against waterboarding.
He's opposed to estate tax relief.
Now you know, the gang of 14 on judges, you say it's a lesser of two evils.
Some people might be asking how much of a lesser of two evils.
I I agree to preach you to the to the choir as far as all those things you just said.
No, the only the the point I'm trying I'm trying to cut through all that chafe and this blurring tri, you know, and all that.
As a staunch conservative, what I'm looking at is, you know, a a far I mean extreme left uh candidate in mo Barack, a little lesser to the left in in uh uh uh Clinton, and you know, moderate uh you know, somewhere around the moderate, uh, you know, a little bit left, uh, some to the right.
I understand.
I look let me explain this again.
Let me see if I can't explain this again.
There are a number of ways, uh freedom loving people like yourself and myself, I hope.
A number of ways our freedoms and privileges and immunities can be jeopardized.
Obviously by by invading armies, obviously by the terrorist threat we now face, uh the war in Iraq is where McCain will be steady.
I think everybody agrees on that.
Those are areas where people say you can't vote for the Democrat, and I think they're on to something there.
However, your freedom can also be taken away by global warming regulations, by growing governments, by open borders, uh by a whole host of campaign finance regulations, uh not not a a serious enough loyalty to reduction in taxes.
And so what conservatives are saying this time around, I believe, is that we want the whole package because it doesn't do us any good to preserve our freedom internationally if right back here at home it's going to be consumed by government.
Government is a threat to freedom.
And that's the big debate.
John McCain, what he has to do going forward, and this is his big sixty-four thousand dollar question.
Does he veer port side already and try to get those independents that the New York Times tells him to get, further alienating the conservative base, or does he come out with a very, very bold, and by the way, one of the things that I've been suggesting is while the Democrats battle it out, and that's certainly good for the GOP, while they battle it out, McCain ought to be coming forth with conservative, bold proposals, boom, one after another.
And you know what he's gonna have to do?
He's going to have to backtrack, do a 180 on some of his previous statements on some of his previous votes, and back it up by promises and legislation.
Now, if he does that and appoints the right VP, he will get talk radio and he will get people to unite behind him.
But if he keeps listening to the Republicans in name only, if he keeps listening to the establishment crowd, if he keeps listening to the media who say he's gotta reach out to the middle, you gotta do something about more education spending.
Uh we've got to have more activist global warming legislation.
This angst amongst the conservatives is not going to go away, and frankly, nor should it.
Thanks for the call in Sugar Loaf, Pennsylvania.
Here's Drew gearing up for the April 22nd primary up there.
I just have a question for you.
I'm enjoying the chaos that's been going on with the Democratic Party.
And I had a thought because I really don't understand how the delegate system works completely.
Now, obviously we are gonna they are gonna get to the convention and have to go through the convention to get a candidate.
Now, the delegates that are there, they are not required to actually vote for the candidates that the state voted for.
Well, there are there are some pledge delegates, and then there are some uncommitted, especially through the caucus system where those people can switch anywhere along the process.
Now, in theory, anybody can actually go to that convention, can't they?
And if they want to, they can put their name into the hat to be elected the n to be given the nomination.
Well, I'm not an expert, I'm not an expert on the Democratic rules, but once you go two, three, four times you you you entertain two, three, four ballots.
Um you do have a a free-for-all where anybody could be nominated in a generic sense of of both conventions, really.
The likelihood of that is probably pretty pretty small, but conceivably it could happen.
Anybody with enough juice to actually get votes would have been running in the first place.
The reason the the the reason if Democrats get so tied between these two can't where they can't decide and i they don't seem to really want to vote for either of them.
What happens if a guy like Al Gore goes there and just throws his name in?
He's a good thing.
Well, that's simple.
That's simple.
I moved to Australia.
I really do not believe that's going to happen.
Uh what Barack Obama and or Hillary Clinton will, or I should say or Hillary Clinton will be the front runner.
Oh, they may have a joint ticket.
We don't know about that.
But this thing is going to be settled.
The Democrats know they are in big trouble right now.
They can't afford this internecine warfare that's going on.
We'll will be one of those two.
Now, you're right about some of these delegates, but Clinton would have to win ninety-four percent of all the remaining pledge delegates to hit the magic number.
So she's not going to go in there in my view, and perhaps and perhaps not even if they revote Florida and Michigan, because of the Democrats' proportionality where it's not a winner-take-all system, even if you lose a primary, you still get a bunch of delegates.
So by by almost every analysis, it seems to me, neither one of them go in there, goes in there with the 2024.
It will be up to the superdelegates, and they're gonna have a well, hopefully a 1968 style convention.
I'm Jason Lewis in for Rush Limbo on the Excellence in Broadcasting Network.
You know, speaking of voting, I mean, forget about the Democrat delegate process for a moment, although it is uh uh enjoyable to watch these guys going after one another.
The big question is going to be voter fraud in two thousand and eight.
A lawsuit filed yesterday in federal court in New York by Latino immigrants seeks to force immigration authorities to complete hundreds of thousands of stalled naturalization petitions in time for new citizens to vote in November.
Can you say Dej Vu shades of nineteen ninety-six when all of those applications were expedited to so that Clinton could get all of these new immigrant votes?
Uh the class action suit was brought by the Puerto Rican legal defense and education fund.
Now, you you've got a situation here where the people have been waiting for some time for the federal citizenship and immigration service agency to finish their applications.
So they're making a due process claim, which is rather odd because while certainly immigrants and and illegal illegal immigrants have some due process rights, i.e., you gotta go through due process to make certain they're illegal in that particular case, otherwise you could be punishing a illegal citizen.
They don't have all the rights of a citizens.
I mean, that's why we can deport them.
Uh you can't deport a citizen for all practical means and purposes.
So they don't have all of the rights.
The idea that they have the right to to make certain these things are expedited suggests to me something's going on here.
And I wonder where the pressure is being put.
Now remember, the Supreme Court has heard already the arguments, I believe, and getting ready to issue their opinion on the Indiana voter ID case.
A number of lower courts and appellate court has upheld these, Thankfully, and I believe the majority of the Supreme Court may be ready to uphold the Indiana law requiring voters to show voter identification.
Naturally, the same sorts of quote unquote civil rights folks are out there saying this will dish and disenfranchise people to have to prove that they're eligible to vote.
You know, one of the things I've never understood about this in cracking down on voter fraud, and it is ubiquitous in America.
I know people people talk about Florida in 2000.
Go to Dade County, go to Cook County, go all over the country where acorn is being investigated.
The what is it, this acorn group, the so-called grassroots group that, you know, for for a long time in California wouldn't pay their workers minimum wage.
The American community organization for reform now, I believe, or associations for community organized for reform now, some ridiculous acronym.
They have been caught literally registering people uneligible, ineligible to vote for years.
It is a cottage industry and primarily of the left wing.
And all of the people that you know trot out these old civil rights shibboleths about, oh, you're disenfranchising people.
Hey, folks, if you allow people who are not eligible to vote, you're disenfranchising me.
You're disenfranchising you, the people that play by the rules.
You're diluting the legal votes.
So cracking down on voter fraud, it's a tall order to suggest it it violates the voting rights act, although that's the claim they'll make.
Uh because you can't disenfranchise legal voters in order not to disenfranchise quote unquote illegal voters, if you get in my drift.
In Las Vegas, here's John.
You're on the Rush Limbaugh program with me, Jason, I. Hey, Jason, how are you doing today?
I'm doing well.
How are you?
I'm sitting on my patio.
It's fifty-five degrees.
Do not start with me.
Do not go there.
Hey, I was curious.
When did America decide that they wanted to advocate their rights and freedoms to go to the government?
To have the government control everything.
Well, can you say Franklin Delano Roosevelt?
Yeah.
You know, there's two things that happened that that come to mind.
Um Galveston, Texas in the early 1900s was wiped out by a hurricane.
San Francisco was wiped out by a pretty bad earthquake.
I know where you're going with this.
I don't recall the government coming in and and rebuilding and getting everything going.
The people did it.
Why when Was it not October 1871, the great uh Chicago fire when O'Leary's cow kicked over the lantern, so the fable goes?
Yeah.
How do those places get rebuilt without federal disaster aid declarations?
What happened to entrepreneurship?
Well, look, you can't have a flood or a drought for a month without what a president of either party holding the press conference, declaring a federal disaster area, and then FEMA goes in there, we rebuild in the same floodplains, and then we wonder why the next time around there's more or th there's a larger cost when it comes to damages.
I'm at a loss as to why all this is going on.
It just it boggles my mind.
Well, let us we've been co-opted as a people.
I mean, let's go back, maybe it maybe goes back.
One of the reasons I'm not a big Teddy Roosevelt fan was because he kind of heralded in the progressive era.
Big bad business has got to be stopped.
Uh, you know, uh d don't don't uh crucify us on a cross of gold and the William Jennings Bryant nonsense.
You go right down to the progressive era at the turn of the century was probably the start of this.
It came to fruition with Roosevelt, though.
When you when literally he had to pack the Supreme Court to make certain that every misfortune that befalls any other human being in this country was your responsibility in Las Vegas, John.
And that's where it started.
And it started with a total subversion of what the role of the federal government should be in this republic.
And it it started, I could go right through the cases for you.
I mean, there were literally a number of cases involving the federal minimum wage.
There were a number of cases involving Social Security, there were a number of cases involving all of those where the the Supreme Court had said, sorry, this is not in the Constitution.
You may like this program, but the federal government can't do it.
Roosevelt changed the character of the United States, and I don't think for the better.
I gotta take a short pause back right after this.
You know, just when did we turn into this sort of collectivized enterprise?
The the caller from Las Vegas asked me, by the way, welcome back, Jason Lewis in for Rush on this open line Friday.
I mean, there's been a s systematic process, and the Supreme Court has helped, obviously.
Uh liberal politicians have have dreamed of this to redistribute wealth.
You can go right back to all these decisions, and it's not the same country.
▲
Export Selection