All Episodes
Previous Next
July 28, 2010 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:37
July 28, 2010, Wednesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Now look, folks, I don't mean to keep piling on here, but if you think, if you think the recalls are bad on the supposedly stuck accelerator pedals in a Toyota, wait till the recalls on the electric cars begin.
Okay, so we got a 40-mile range in the electric car.
What happens if you get stuck in a traffic jam?
You know, the battery keeps going whether you're moving or not.
The battery continues to discharge whether you're moving or not.
Now, probably doesn't discharge as rapidly if you're stalled in a traffic jam.
The bottom line is, before you know it, you're going to be turning on the gasoline-powered part of the car and creating a, as I say, you know, used to 10 cents and a red ribbon.
You can show you cared more or superior to everybody.
Now look what it costs you, liberals.
30 to 41 grand to show you're superior that you care more than the rest of us.
Great to have you back, folks.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network, and the Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
It's a sad thing.
Everybody in broadcast worries about this.
Everybody.
Well, I'm sorry, not everybody.
People at CNN and MSNBC do not worry about it because they can't lose ratings.
They're nowhere else to go.
But most everybody in broadcasting worries about losing ratings.
It's not as bad as it used to be.
Success used to be, you had to earn it in the old days in broadcasting.
Now you don't.
You just have to be a member of the ruling class.
But I tell you, Oprah, for the second time or third time in a month, her ratings have reached an all-time low.
And I don't think it's any coincidence that her ratings are tumbling along with Obama's.
As Obama goes, so go his supporters.
Hi.
How are you, folks?
Great to have you here.
El Rushbo, our ratings, they're not falling.
We are growing by leaps and bounds.
You know what?
No, no, no.
I did not say to Oprah, I hope you fail.
I've not said that.
I said it to Obama, I hope he fails.
I've said it since January 16th of 2009.
But Oprah's got a good capitalist enterprise going out there.
She's getting out of broadcast TV.
She's going to cable now.
She knew it was coming.
She's a smart businesswoman.
She's still got another season to go of this.
But she'll, I mean, she's not going to be hurt financially.
I mean, she'll be supported out of tradition.
She's Oprah.
But still, as Obama goes, so go his supporters.
It's not, I don't think a coincidence.
What I like to do sometimes, folks, is take news stories and parse them.
A lot of people tell me that they would pay money, like a charitable contribution, to be able to sit and watch a State of the Union speech with me or a newscast just to see what I do, just to see how I react to it as it's happening.
So sometimes I like to parse news stories as I read them to show you what it's like when I'm doing show prep.
It's a gift.
And here is a typical story.
I've got two of them that I want to do this with today.
One is from the Washington Post on the GM Vault, and the other is from Roger Simon about the journalist and how terribly disappointed, sad, and upset it's keeping F. Chuck Todd up at night.
The journalist is keeping F Chuck Todd up at night.
He's losing sleep.
He's depressed over it because he's a mainstream guy.
He's not partisan.
He's not an activist.
He's the whole journalism business being tarred and feathered by the journalist listserv.
We'll get to that in just a second.
Peter Waritsky, the writer of the Washington Post story, the long-anticipated Chevrolet Volt General Motors electric car will cost $41,000, leaving consumers to decide whether its environmental appeal is worth a price far above that of similarly priced conventional autos.
I read that and I say, well, I could go out and spend a little bit more and get a real car.
Lexus, Mercedes, Infiniti, Beamer.
Just a little bit more and get a real car.
GM and Nissan are relying on a $7,500 tax credit, federal tax credit for buyers of electric vehicles to offset some of the added cost.
And they're hoping that the allure of their novel power source, battery, would somebody tell me what's new about a battery?
What is novel about a battery?
I mean, cars have had batteries in them for I don't know how long.
There's nothing new about having a battery in a car.
What is new is having a battery power the whole damn thing.
And so they're hoping the allure of a novel power source, a battery.
If any of you people think a battery is something novel and new, you deserve to be saddled with one of these.
They're hoping that the allure of their novel power source will make up for the rest.
Get rid of the tax credit and let's see what the free market would say about this.
The Volt is a game-changing product, says an Obama vehicles executive.
The iPhone was a game-changing product, and it didn't take a tax credit.
And they've sold over 90 million of the things.
A game-changing product does not need a tax credit.
They're mutually exclusive.
Ah, the judge has handed down the ruling in the Arizona immigration case.
She has granted an injunction blocking parts of the Arizona law.
There are going to be some people who are surprised.
I don't know what specific parts of the law have been blocked, but we will find out, and we will have the details for you when we come back.
Maybe before we go to the break, but a judge has granted an injunction blocking parts of the Arizona law.
This to me is big because normally federal courts do not side with the federal government against states like this.
This is not, I don't think, I could be wrong about this, but I don't think that's standard.
And we heard, this judge's name is Susan Bolt.
We heard going in, oh, this is a great judge.
Well, she's a, you know, she's not an ideologue.
She's not a partisan judge.
She's right down the middle.
She nominated by a Democrat.
Yeah, but she's right down the middle of judge.
We were set up for this.
So as soon as we figure out what parts of the law in Arizona have been stayed or have been injuncted, have been blocked, we'll pass it on to him.
Although the prices are high, enthusiasts say that electric cars can reach a large untapped market for vehicles with little or no tailpipe emissions.
Well, if there was a large untapped market, there would be no need to be propped up with a tax credit.
If there were a large untapped market for an electric car, we would have had one on the market by now because markets respond to demand.
There isn't and hasn't been a demand.
Once again, the judge has blocked police from determining immigration status.
Well, they've just taken the guts out of the law.
The judge just took the guts out of the Arizona law.
A judge has blocked the cops from determining immigration status.
I guess she's siding with the government that only the feds can enforce immigration law.
We'll get more on this as it continues to unfold.
Back to the Washington Post story.
The Volt can travel 40 miles on its battery charge and an additional 340 miles on a gasoline-powered generator.
And they report this like it's a positive.
You know, people don't buy cars for this reason.
Cars are a symbol of freedom, not central planning.
How many, when's the last time you ever heard anybody go, yeah, man, yeah, man, I'm going to buy this car because 40 miles to the charge and 340 miles on a gasoline-powered backup?
Yeah, man, that's me.
People don't buy cars this way.
Some analysts said that they doubt that electric cars can reach a broad audience in the near term.
Hybrid cars took about eight years to reach the million-unit sales mark in the U.S. George Magliano, the director of automotive industry forecasting for North America at IHS Global Insights, said, I'm not sure the Volt is going to be a volume vehicle.
A technology still isn't there to make them cheap.
At the end of the day, the consumer pays a hefty premium to make a statement.
Exactly right.
A hefty premium, a hefty electric bill, and no charge stations.
Again, I point out it used to only cost a little red ribbon to show how much you cared to make the statement.
10 cents, 25 cents.
How many of you to wear whatever color ribbon it is?
Red, light, blue, yellow.
How much did you actually pay?
Most people gave you the ribbon.
As far as you were concerned, the ribbon was free.
Now look what you have to do.
You have to go 30 grand on a Prius, $41,000 on a Volt to show how superior you are to people, to show how much you care and that they don't.
The only upside here is the price, the cost to liberals is also skyrocketing.
Be right back, folks.
Well, the Associated Press, partisan political operatives, and the Democrats are just doing handstands.
They are ecstatic.
Susan Bolton, the federal judge, the judge, has blocked the most controversial sections of Arizona's new immigration law from taking effect tomorrow, which is a major victory to opponents of the crackdown.
The law is still going to take effect tomorrow, but without many of the provisions that angered the opponents, including sections that require officers to check a person's immigration status while enforcing other laws.
The cops cannot do that now.
Why not?
Now, this is just until the courts resolve the issues.
This is a temporary injunction pending a trial to have final adjudication on this.
But this is, it's just flat out amazing.
Who is going to enforce immigration law?
If the feds are not going to do it, if you, I mean, there are states that already do this, cops that already determine.
What about raids in states that are hiring illegals and they're found and they're deported?
Oh, yeah, Rush, but those are federal agents doing it.
No, not entirely.
Local police in Rhode Island are enforcing federal immigration law.
But now a judge has said that that cannot happen in Arizona, pending the results of a trial.
So this, and it's, by the way, if this gets all the way to the appellate court, that's the Ninth Circus Court of Appeals that'll decide this, which is to say, they will uphold her.
So this is, you know, wherever if this ends up as far as they go.
I mean, there's going to be a trial on this, and after that, then it'll get to the Ninth Circus.
So local cops will no longer be able to go after kidnappers.
I mean, that's a federal offense.
This is absurd.
This is patently absurd.
And I'm going to tell you something.
All of you Democrats, all you liberals, you think you've won something here.
This is just going to add to your defeat, the size of your defeat come November.
You know, there are very few pollsters who are going to be very honest about this.
Michael Barone has a piece out today.
It is looking like a disaster for the Democrats, and they know it.
And there are two Democrat pollsters who still count as Americans first, Pat Cadell and Doug Schoen.
And they have a story in the Wall Street Journal today about the divisiveness of President Obama and his regime.
So you think you've got a big win here, and your voter registration drive called amnesty.
Dingy Harry, Pelosi, Obama, they're going to celebrate this.
Oh, yeah, now we can register these people to vote.
Nobody can stop them from voting.
Just wait till November.
That's when the statement about all this will be made, the first of many.
It's time to deport Washington.
As long as we're talking about deporting people, it's time to deport a town.
To the phones we go.
Scott in Virginia Beach.
I'm glad you waited, sir.
You're next on the Rush Limbaugh program.
Hi.
Rush, it's an honor to speak with you.
I just wanted to add another layer to your subprime premise.
If you remember 10, 12 years ago prior to the buildup of the real estate and the mortgage boom, consumer credit was at an all-time high.
And if you remember, it was going to undermine the country and everybody was panicking.
And I think a lot of what we're talking about, they just connived to come together and roll all the consumer credit into mortgages.
And I know tons of people who did that.
Yeah, that's exactly right.
Consumer credit card debt was just rolled over into mortgages.
That's all, and we just extended ourselves another 10 to 12 years of an inevitable outcome, which we're now facing.
Yeah, and it was all, what was the purpose of that?
There was a political purpose to that.
What was the political purpose of that?
Probably just, you know, because everybody was upside down.
I mean, even in just consumer spend.
The political process, the political part of this was to ensure that Democrat voters never had to pay their bills.
Pure and simple.
So effect here, we had subprime credit cards, subprime car loans, subprime mortgages.
And it all came to a screeching halt.
The bubble burst.
Thanks, Scott.
Appreciate it.
This is Audra in Bernie, Texas.
You're next on the EIB network.
Hi.
Hi, Rush.
How are you today?
Very well.
Thank you.
Great.
I just wanted to say I am just sad and furious all at the same time that this law in Arizona is not going to stick.
We were really hoping here in Texas that it would come, that we would be able to do the same thing and have it help us.
I have a child that special needs in our schools, and we are cutting services right and left for him.
And at the same time, we're expanding our dual language and English as a second language classes for parents that most of them aren't even citizens, and we're not allowed to ask if they're citizens.
I'll tell you what's fascinating about this is, and I know I'm not right about it.
I wonder if this Arizona judge has, I wonder if she said anything about having to produce your proof of health insurance.
Who's going to enforce that?
Well, Rush, that's federal agents, IRS agents.
Okay, so that's permissible.
Oh, yeah, the IRS is going to go out there and demand proof that you have health insurance on your tax return.
But we can't have local or state police determining immigration status in Arizona.
It happens in every other state.
It happens in Rhode Island.
It happens in, and she's right, a lot of states were looking to take up the Arizona law.
Folks, if you're mad, if you're angry, I'm with you.
And I understand totally why.
It goes beyond the concept of fairness and unfairness.
This is simple right and wrong.
And here is another classic illustration of how the left gets what it wants outside of elections.
The elected representatives of the people of Arizona spoke.
They enacted a law.
And here comes a judge who can simply wipe it out.
Now, the Department of Justice's suit says the federal government can't enforce the law because they don't have the resources.
That's part of what the federal government, we don't have the resources.
We can't enforce the law because they don't have the resources.
We're allocating our resources elsewhere, but we don't have the resources to man the border.
Obama has said so.
A bunch of Democrats have said, in fact, Janet Napolitano, the border's too big.
We just can't.
The Arizona law would simply help supplement immigrations and customs enforcement.
ICE.
The Arizona law would help supply the resources.
The Arizona law mirrors the federal law.
The Arizona law does not usurp it.
Now, you and I, we are members of the country class.
We're just average yokels here.
We're merit-based.
We have street smarts and common sense, and we're looking at this, and it doesn't make any sense to us.
We got a big problem.
The elected representatives of Arizona finally said, all right, we're going to do what the federal government won't.
The federal government then says, and it's, well, we can't.
We don't have the resources.
So Arizona so, okay, fine, we'll help you out.
We're just, we have a law that mirrors yours, and we're going to help you enforce it.
And a judge comes along.
No, no, no, no.
We're going to stay that.
I'm going to injunct that pending a trial.
So now, nobody in Arizona is going to determine whether somebody's there legally or not because the feds are not doing it.
The judge is a Clinton appointee, Susan Bolton.
And I remember after it was reported, learned that she was a Clinton appointee, I remember everybody said, ah, but she, you know, this woman, she's not a political judge.
She really not a partisan judge here.
She's a fair judge.
Oh, yeah, right.
Right, right, right, right.
It sounds to me like, and, you know, I've just had a chance here to cursorily read a fake media dispatch from the partisan political operatives at the AP and some crawls on the Fox News and some of the other cable channels.
It sounds to me like that the judge, Susan Bolton, has simply adopted the ACLU's argument that said that the law's requirements that law enforcement check on people's immigration status set a mandatory policy that goes beyond what the federal government requires and would burden the federal agency that responds to all this.
That was the ACLU's claim.
Look, you're going to burden ICE.
You're going to burden immigration people with this.
This goes way beyond what the feds would even do.
They're not capable of dealing with it.
The feds came back and said, yeah, we don't have the resources to handle this.
And the Arizona people, well, we'll help you.
I mean, we got a mirror image of your law here.
So you could say that we're going to stop enforcing the drug laws.
They burden the legal system.
The ACLU's point was, well, how many millions, potential millions of illegals do you have in Arizona?
We're going to burden this system.
Joe Arpaio said, I'll build tents.
We can handle it.
There are millions of Americans out of work here.
And Obama can't wait to hire more government workers.
Why not go out and hire more ICE workers?
If you say that you don't have the resources, I mean, the ACLU was right in there saying, this is going to be a burden.
He got a Clinton-appointed judge here about whom we were so, wow, but that doesn't count.
Limbaugh, she's a non-party.
She's a fair judge out there.
At some point, folks, this is going to be overturned.
And it's going to become settled law.
And even if it goes to the Ninth Circus, this is going to be overturned at some point.
If it goes to SCOTUS, it will be Dylan, North Carolina.
Linda, welcome to the Rush Limbaugh program.
Great to have you here.
Hey, Rush.
You know, I wish Jamburg would just call their bluff, Susan Bolton's bluff, and just, you know, maybe we could have her arrested for treason for failure to uphold the oath of office that she took as a judge.
I mean, I am so sick of all of this.
Why can't the 70% of Arizona people who support this law just take out an arrest warrant for her?
Welcome to the ruling class versus the country class.
Yeah.
Classic example.
That 70% doesn't know what's good for it.
That 70%.
That's a mob.
We can't let that 70% have its way.
We, the 20% to 30%, we're running a show, and we're going to make sure that the 70 to 30%, the 70% do not rule the day here.
This is a great illustration of that.
Well, I mean, what are our options?
I mean, we're going to have to do something.
I mean, I don't know at this point, the way they play the game, I mean, are we going to have a creative crisis before November?
Are they going to cut off the election?
See, this is the frightening question.
What are the options?
The remedial sources don't seem to be working.
The legislature, the elected representatives of the state passing laws are overturned by federal judges.
What do we do?
More and more people are asking this.
More don't want to wait till November is what she means.
You know, if I say, you wait till November, folks, you're going to see the first statement.
And people out there say, hell with November.
What can we do now?
And with each ruling like this or each new development like this, that passion multiplies.
What can we do now?
You heard what she said.
Did you hear what she said at the beginning?
Just enforce the law anyway.
Just go ahead and enforce it.
Screw the judge.
Just go ahead and do it.
We got another call, same thing.
This is Patrick in Indianapolis.
Welcome to the program, sir.
Hello.
Hello, sir.
Truly an honor to speak with you.
I've listened to you for many years.
Member of the United States military, so I won't give you more details on that in case of repercussions.
However, sir, I agree with her point.
Call their bluff, force a constitutional crisis.
That it's like a chess game.
It's like a strategy in the military.
You sit there, call their bluff, make them find the governor in contempt of their ruling and force that constitutional issue and crisis onto the plate.
The other states will fall in line, I think, that are actually looking at possibly supporting this law.
See, this is the question.
To a lot of people, we're ignoring the rule of law.
To a lot of people, the law is being trampled on.
So they say, What is our recourse?
What's the recourse to lawlessness?
Is it more lawlessness?
We just screw you.
You say the law is not going to effect, but I, the governor of Arizona, I'm going to go ahead and implement it anyway.
And you force a confrontation.
Even if this goes to the Supreme Court, Patrick, the Supreme Court's not in session.
And they're not back until October.
By the time this thing would reach the Supreme Court, Obama's going to have amnesty.
He's going to have all these brand new Democrat voters.
So what do people do?
I'm sorry, sir.
By forcing the issue now, it puts it up into the press and it forces the issue to be on until the court gets back into session, which is in line with the electoral timeframe.
By enforcing the federal law through the state right now, you don't have those voters getting on board, therefore, and you keep it into the media as the headline the whole time.
It's definitely going to do, like you stated earlier, backfire on the Democrats so much so that you will see other states potentially that were on the fence of supporting this actually come forward and support it and be in coalition with Arizona.
Yeah, I understand the theory.
I understand the theory.
And what you, Patrick, and the woman previous to you said, you're basically paraphrasing Andrew Jackson, who said to John Marshall, okay, you've made your decision.
Now you enforce it.
This is not the first time something like this has happened in the country.
So essentially what you all on the phones, you too, and if you any of the rest of you in the audience who are saying, screw it, go ahead and implement the law in the first place.
What you're basically saying is, okay, Judge, here's your ruling.
You enforce it.
You don't have the resources to control illegal immigration.
Do you have the resources to kick us in jail, American citizens, for trying to enforce your law that you won't?
So, okay, Judge, you've ruled that the cops cannot determine somebody's illegality.
Well, we're going to say to the cops, you go ahead and do it.
You enforce your law.
That's happened.
Andrew Jackson said it to John Marshall.
Okay, you enforce it.
Well, I know it is dangerous.
But the point is, this has been building.
This is not the first example.
Prop 187, same thing happened in California.
In California, a majority of voters via Prop 187 were no longer going to pay welfare, education, health care, all of that to illegal immigrants.
A judge, a federal judge said, nope, you can't do that.
Unconstitutional.
That ballot initiative is unconstitutional.
This kind of thing has just been building.
Now, I don't know what is going to happen, but Joe Arpaio and Jan Brewer, Arpaio, the sheriff, Maricopa County, Jan Brewer, the governor out there, are not wallflowers.
Let's take a timeout here.
We'll do that.
We'll be right back and continue in just a jiffy.
Well, I have to check into that.
I'm trying to do a whole bunch of stuff here while hosting the program at the same time.
But I think, I think you're right.
I think the judge has also blocked the part of the rule that says illegals have to carry documentation.
Now, let me need to find out at the top of the hour when I have some time to look into it.
But there is that report.
We have to carry documentation.
We have to carry our driver's licenses.
We have to prove who we are when we go into bank.
We have to prove who we are by an airline ticket.
They don't.
She has blocked.
Apparently, the judges made Arizona a sanctuary state, not a sanctuary city.
So we shall see.
Al in Albuquerque, a kirki.
Next to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Hey, Rush, black African-American Negro here, or at least that's what the census form allowed me to choose for myself.
Well, great, great to have you on the program here, sir.
I chose American, by the way.
Yeah, good for you, sir.
I'm calling on this Chevy Volt launch.
Yeah.
And you had questions with regard to the charging stations?
Right.
Well, the Department of Energy, in anticipation of the launch of the Volt, has set up a program called Charge Porn America Infrastructure Program.
And essentially, what it does is it provides free, quote-unquote, 240-volt home chargers for the first 4,400 to 4,600 people who buy the Volt.
Well, that I hadn't heard this.
So another incentive, first a tax deal.
And now the first 4,400 to 4,600 people, 4,400, 40,000, basically the first 4,500 people are going to get free electricity every time they charge it.
Well, they get the free charging station.
The freeness of the electricity is not there.
Well, what the hell is a charging station?
Did they not have this in the garage already?
No, it's 240-volt.
Oh, well.
The partisan political operative stories I'm reading did not point that out.
They just are going to plug it in in the garage.
Yeah, these two, there are two companies that make these things.
One is Ecotality, and the other one is Coulomb Technology.
What's it basically a converter?
Basically, it probably is.
I haven't seen any of the diagrams on these things, but I was just taking a look.
Well, man, I'll tell you, there's really a lot of demand for these cars, right?
By the way, here's a question for you.
Serious question.
40 miles to the charge.
Now, I don't know about you, but like I have an iPhone.
Well, I have a laptop computer.
And the manufacturers say I'm going to get X amount of hours.
But you never do.
I don't care who it means.
I don't know who the manufacturer is.
The manufacturer says they're going to get 40 miles to the charge.
But it's not going to be 40.
It's never what they say.
Then you factor in traffic jams, and they throw in, but don't worry, because there's a 340-mile gasoline-powered backup.
Now, let me ask you a question.
What is the total range of your gasoline-powered car now?
After you fill it up, what is your range?
Because this thing, the backup, is 340 miles.
My contention here, my contention here is that the backup, the gasoline backup in the Chevrolet Vault has a greater range than your gasoline car now.
It does mine.
I have a car that gets eight miles to the gallon and I love it and I'm happy.
And the range, I'll never get 300 miles to the gallon out of this thing if I'm doing highway or city.
It won't happen.
I've checked it.
I got a computer on there that tells me what the range is.
And I think the top is 256.
What's yours?
Now, imagine if you're driving around a little putt-putt, but how big's your gas tank?
It all depends on how much gasoline you can carry around.
But the backup, my point, the backup on this thing is 304.
Why wouldn't you use the backup first and use the battery as the backup is the point?
Well, because you're making a statement.
You're out there saying you're better than everybody else.
You're better than everybody else.
Now, this Arizona, let me, I don't want to get distracted from the Arizona case.
It's not complicated.
She did, the judge here, the Clinton appointed, did adopt the ACLU argument, which is the argument the government made as well.
That Arizona is creating its own enforcement mechanism that runs contrary to the federal government.
And she says that you can't have a law that's legal that is preemptive.
So the Arizona law, she says it'd be preemptive.
Now, that's a flat-out deception.
And everybody knows it's a deception.
More than that, you have to have, you have a very high bar to stay a law, to stop a law enacted legally by the elected representatives of the people of the state.
Any law, you have to have a very high bar before conducting a trial.
And that bar was not met.
But she ruled as she did anyway, which means that this is an activist decision.
This is not a judicial decision.
And you all know it.
You instinctively know this.
The judge, in order to rule as she did, had to ignore what Arizona was actually doing.
And instead, she had to accept the spin of the government and the ACLU and the fake media, which is that there's profiling going on.
That is a manufactured lie.
Nothing, nothing in the media is real.
There is nothing real.
Media is not real.
Liberalism is not real.
It's all spin.
It's all fake.
It's all lies.
There is no racial profiling.
And yet, this judge has ruled on the spin.
This judge has not ruled on the law.
There is no racial profiling.
We didn't make a big deal of it because we figure a judge is going to look at the law, not the stupid media, in making her decision.
But she listened to the media.
She had to ignore the high bar that was not met in staying the law.
This underscores why Sonia Sotomayor should not be on the Supreme Court.
This underscores why Elena Kagan should not be on the Supreme Court because they are activists.
They have no judicial temperament, judicial experience.
They're not judges.
Well, Sotomayor pretended to be one on TV, I guess, but she's not.
So we now have a situation where the federal government, through the executive branch and this court, is saying that state and local law enforcement is essentially barred from inquiring into the legal status of individuals who are stopped incidental to other potential violations.
That's the net effect.
You run a red light, you rob a convenience store, you cannot be asked for your papers.
You cannot be asked about your identity.
And this, I believe, will seal the fate of the Democrats in November.
Now, this is the basics of this.
You have an activist decision, not a judicial decision.
And every time they do something like this, they are sealing their fate in even greater numbers once we get to November.
Muslim terrorists, you stop and think about this angle.
Muslim terrorists are going to have a field day in Arizona.
We cannot ask them where they're from.
Cannot even act like we know where they're from.
Cannot ask them for their papers.
We can ask you for yours, not them.
Let me encapsulate this for you.
Very simple.
As far as the Arizona law is concerned, it is no longer illegal to be illegal.
No longer illegal to be illegal, but it is illegal to ask somebody about their status.
No longer illegal to be illegal.
Thank you, Judge Bolton.
▲
Export Selection