All Episodes
Previous Next
April 1, 2013 - Rush Limbaugh Program
37:55
April 1, 2013, Monday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
You know, on this probationary legal status for current illegal immigrants in the country that Chuck Hugh Schumer is talking about, it sounds to me like no matter how you slice it, there's not going to be any trigger on border security first before probationary legalization takes place.
I mean, Chuck Hugh Schumer basically said that.
We're going to make them probationary legal, which means they can work legally and they can travel all across the fruited plain.
They're just not citizens.
Which means that right now they can't vote.
And we're going to do that before border security.
Now, a lot of Republicans, including Rubio, have said nothing happens until border security is done first.
And yesterday, Chuck Schumer on Meet the Press put border security second.
And again, to repeat, he said, oh, don't worry about that.
We've got metrics.
We've got all kinds of metrics, specific metrics, to make the border secure.
Don't worry about that.
Well, why haven't they been used before then?
What is this big secret?
What's the big secret here?
What is the magic that you guys have found to make the border secure?
And if you know what it is right now, why aren't you doing it now?
And why haven't you done it before?
Well, we can't get into that now, he said.
We're not going to get into the metrics here with you, Chuck Todd, not on NBC, but just trust us, we've got the metrics.
So I think it's pretty obvious that we're going to get probationary legalization before border security.
That's what Chuck Hugh wants.
And Rubio said that he and four other senators, the gang of eight, who are going to insist on a trigger first, meaning border security first.
When have metrics, whatever the heck they are, when have they ever stopped anybody?
Do you even know what they are?
I mean, that's throwing out a word.
Oh, they got it handled, Mabel.
They got the metrics working.
Yeah, you remember that it's the metrics that stopped those people from crossing the border in the first place, and they got them now.
And Mabel sits there and goes, yeah, yeah, okay, the metrics.
I got it.
And everybody thinks they're onto a new discovery when nobody has any idea what anybody's talking about.
Anyway, greetings and welcome back.
Great to have you.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network and the Limbaugh Institute.
Telephone number 800-282-2882.
So who is killing Texas prosecutors?
I think these two subjects might be related in some way.
You don't think so?
We've, now, now, now, now, wait a second.
The white, yeah, white supremacists are killing Texas DAs.
Yeah, right.
No, just, of course, the first possible explanation would be, and it's from CNN, white supremacist gangs are targeting Texas law enforcement officials.
Now, CNN has that story, fears that a white supremacist gang or someone else is targeting Texas law enforcement officials.
And these fears spread Monday to Houston, Where the chief prosecutor is now under 24-hour protection in the wake of the weekend shooting death of his counterpart in suburban Dallas County.
Kaufman County, where DA Mike McClellan and his wife Cynthia died Saturday, and Harris County were among numerous Texas federal jurisdictions that participated in a task force targeting the Aryan Brotherhood of Texas.
Now, there's another possibility.
The Associated Press has a pretty long piece today, and they make the case that this could be Mexican drug cartels getting big, getting strong, and infiltrating the country with a big foothold here.
Let me read to you from the AP story: Mexican drug cartels, whose operatives once rarely ventured beyond the U.S. border, are dispatching some of their most trusted agents to live and work deep inside the United States, somehow making it past the metrics of Senator Chuck Schumer of New York.
And now these Mexican drug cartel enforcers have an emboldened presence that experts believe is meant to tighten their grip on the world's most lucrative narcotics market, that'd be us, and maximize profits.
Jack Riley, the head of the Drug Enforcement Administration in Chicago, said it's probably the most serious threat the U.S. has faced from organized crime.
So here are your options: Texas DAs are being murdered.
It's either white supremacists or Mexican drug cartels.
The Mexican drug cartels have AP's got the details.
They used to never, they didn't want to get anywhere near the actual enforcers.
I mean, the cartels would hire local gangbangers as independent contractors, local gangs to run and do their work.
Now they're actually infiltrating the country with their own staff members, with their own trained assassins.
The metrics or whatever it is that Chuck Schumer says we're now keeping the border secure with, or we will, are not stopping these guys.
Now, there have to be, there has to be a connection here.
These, because over the weekend, we had the story of the two prosecutors assassinated and a story about the Mexican drug cartels actually bringing enforcers across the border to live and work in the United States.
They're not using freelancers.
Well, they still are, but they're also bringing their own staff, as it were.
So they're your options, folks.
The Texas Aryan Nation on one hand or Mexican drug cartels on the other.
It just depends on the network reporting it as to which is the more likely of the two responsible for this.
Now, I, El Rushbo, am going to come down on the side of the drug cartels.
I think if anybody is going to be proven responsible, it'll be them.
Now, it could well be that they're going to target the Aryan nation because that's just the cool thing to do these days.
Call them Republicans, and then that's licensed to kill And go after them.
But I don't think you can eliminate the possibility that the drug cartels are sending their own people into the country now to do their bidding and to do their intimidation.
And look, down in Houston, DA's in hiding.
The DA and his family are in hiding.
So it is a scary circumstance.
Anyway, moving on to gun control.
Again, this, I guess, would be related to, well, they're wiping out, they're killing judges in Mexico.
Yeah, that's not new, though.
The drug cartels have been, they kill who they kill in Mexico.
But it's just added evidence.
If the drug cartel is willing to take out a judge in their own country, they're probably not very reluctant to take out prosecutors here.
I mean, everybody in Mexico is afraid of them.
Nobody really tries to imprison them or punish them.
They own everybody.
And hell, let's not forget Fast and Furious.
They probably got guns because of us.
In one instance, Fast and Furious actually ended up arming Mexican drug cartels with guns from gun shops in Arizona.
Anyway, let me take a brief time out here, my friends.
We've got, as always, much more.
You just hang tight.
Hang in there, be tough.
We'll be right back.
Don't go away.
Hi, welcome back.
Great to have you.
Rush Limbaugh, the EIB Network.
I just got an email.
You know, you talk about stuff you watch on TV.
You ever watch The Walking Dead?
I tried, folks.
I tried to watch The Walking Dead, and that show has me utterly, totally confused in terms of its popularity.
I watched enough of it to get the storyline left me cold.
Don't get it.
But the thing about The Walking Dead that surprises me the most is that it is one of the goriest, most puke-inducing television shows I've ever seen.
Now, I don't care about that, but I'm amazed that a show like that is all we hear about from people that want to keep our kids safe and all that is to shield them from this kind of stuff.
And yet, that aspect of the show is never commented on by the critics.
Other aspects of it are, and why it's great, in their opinion, are.
And it's just, you know, we all have likes and dislikes.
Whatever Walking Dead is just escaped me.
Somehow, I guess I didn't get in on it soon enough.
I don't get it.
Now, Game of Thrones is another one that I tried.
I snerdly said, it's awesome.
I tried it.
I just, I have a problem in medieval stuff or post-apocalyptic or whatever this is.
Fantasy.
I have a real problem.
I am so immersed in reality.
And I know this is contradictory when talking about television shows, but I don't know.
I just, maybe I should go back and try Game of Thrones again.
What did you say?
See, this one, you like Game of Thrones.
Dawn is telling me she likes Game of Thrones.
Would think based on everything I know about her that that show would make her repulsed, that she would lead the effort to get it taken off the air.
They had a decapitated head of George Bush on one of the polls there of their vanquished enemies.
I don't know.
Anyway, those two have just, they've kind of escaped me.
The Walking Dead, I'm not interested in getting.
I'm to the point now where I oppose it just because so many people like it.
Maybe I'll give the Game of Thrones another shot, but I'm going to have to go back to season one, right?
I mean, to really appreciate it.
And see, my problem: here's the difference.
Season one isn't, well, it is in the DVDs.
I'd have to buy the DVD.
It's not captioned.
If you don't get the words of a show like that, the visuals are not enough for me.
And then I saw this guy, George R.R. Martin, the author of the story, is talking about it.
And I felt like I'm listening to a foreign language.
And I'm so much of a literalist.
Here's another prop.
I'm so much of a Game of Thrones.
It's not anything about that.
There is no game, and there are no thrones.
There are.
And there's a game.
Okay, so all these people trying to get to the head throne in Westeros or Westeros.
They're all power hungry.
Right.
And it's all medieval, right?
There's no air conditioning.
They eat each other.
There's cannibalism.
Not a lot, okay.
But there's no restaurants, foot wenches, yeah.
Yeah.
No basketball, no football.
You know, I'm listening to people describe this show to me in my IFB here.
And if I didn't know better, I would think this show was produced by Republicans, serving winches, people of color in the back of the chariot, whatever it is they have.
Here's Alicia in Rio Ranchero, New Mexico.
Great to have you on the EIB network.
Hello.
Oh, thank you for taking my coal, Rush.
You bet.
When I heard Schumer, I was so mad I could spit.
And all I could think of was the adage my grandmother used to quote: Fool me once, shame on you.
Fool me twice, shame on me.
If the Republicans sell us down the river again, like they did with Reagan, it'll be time for a third party.
We have to.
You know, may I be devil's advocate with you on that, Alicia?
Seriously, I have been hearing off and on threats to go third party on immigration, on any number of issues, and I don't see, I mean, I keep hearing the threat, or I hear the reference.
I don't see any real substantive movement to form a third party.
If it ever happened, it likely would not be good unless it's so outrageous what the Republicans do that they lose the whole party in essence.
But you don't think they're going to lose the whole party if they try and sell us down the river again?
Well, they're going to do this.
They're going to try this.
It's in the cards, Alicia.
Lindsey Graham, McCain, they might as well be Democrats.
And for border security, what I want to see is three years with all four border state governors.
Never mind Napolitano.
She is useless.
All four border state governors sign off that it's getting more and more secure in their states for three years before they even talk about anything else.
And I'm in New Mexico, so.
Yeah, I know.
Well, if this happens, if the Democrat version of this happens, it's going to be amnesty.
And if that happens, it won't matter.
The Republican Party's finished anyway, whether it's official or not.
They're never going to win another election.
It's mathematics.
I'm not even speaking ideologically or philosophically.
It's simply mathematics.
If the Republican Party signs off on the Democrats getting 70% of 12 million new voters, how does the math help the Republicans?
70% of the current illegals by history and in polling data are going to vote Democrat.
So if there's 12 million of them, let's just round off numbers here.
9 million new Democrat voters versus 3 million.
And while we're hearing, by the way, there's that gruesome shot of that young man's broken leg in the basketball game.
That maybe they could make the basketball floor softer somehow, put foam on it or mats or something down.
This is just unacceptable.
Anyway, the math doesn't work out there, Alicia.
No matter.
And the Republicans are sitting there, and their consultants are telling them that these Hispanics are Republican voters in waiting.
If that's true, why are the Democrats so damned eager to get them registered?
Right?
Yeah, it's true.
You know, we had it happen here in New Mexico this last election.
What do you mean?
Illegal voting.
Oh, get driver's licenses.
Oh, yeah.
Well, who needs one of those to vote?
Well, there's local elections.
Hell, in Chicago, all you have to do is stay alive, and that's becoming a challenge.
Well, it's not quite that bad here.
No, I know.
By the way, I agree.
The first thing I said when I heard about the other two in Texas who got killed, judges, I said it's a drug cartel.
Yeah, prosecutors.
Yeah, prosecutors.
Judges in Mexico prosecutors here.
Yeah, and they kill them in Mexico all the time.
Right, they do, of course.
But they want us to believe, they want us to believe that a bunch of guys driving around in white vans, the Aryan nation in Texas is out offering these people.
See, Alicia, thank you.
Steve in Lakeland, Florida, you're next.
It's great to have you on the program.
Hi.
Hey, Russ.
How are you doing?
I'm fine.
Thank you, sir.
Long time listener, but first time caller.
I'm a small business owner, and I'm here on an E2 Treaty Investor Visa.
It's the only visa that allows you to come to the states, invest, but never leads to a green card.
And all this immigration talk is kind of getting us riled up because we want to be included, and we think we are, but we're not sure.
Well, I guarantee you, you are not on the list for probationary legal status.
Well, I would hope not to have probation.
I would hope that having been here 10 years and employed a number of people for a long term, I would hope that I would be at the front of what we think is an imaginary line because I don't see a line.
No, no, I understand, but I'm just telling you, I know how you feel.
You've been playing with the rules, following along as you're supposed to, and you're watching whatever it is, 12, 20, nobody really knows for sure, that are automatically going to get what you've been waiting in line for overnight.
Well, the thing is, the visa I'm on, there is no line.
The visa I'm on has been in force since 1952 and has never been changed.
And as far as I'm concerned at the moment, there's not enough evidence that people like you vote Democrat rocking and rolling, rollicking, and having a great time here on Monday, brand new week, busy broadcast week here at the EIB Network.
Limbaugh behind the golden EIB microphone here at the distinguished and prestigious Rush Limbaugh Institute for Advanced Conservative Studies.
Telephone number 800-282-2882 from the Washington Examiner for the first time since 1981, when it dubbed sex change operations experimental, Medicare has opened the door.
What is Medicare?
Does anybody can, somebody tell me off the top of your head, what is Medicare?
By definition, what is it?
As opposed to Medicaid, see, nobody here even knows.
They're afraid to tell me because they're not confident that they would know the end.
Medicare is health care for the elderly.
For seasoned citizens, Medicaid is health care for the poor.
Keep that in mind.
For the first time since 1981, Medicare has opened the door to covering transsexual operations, adding to the growing list of operations that would be allowed under Medicare, Obamacare.
Oh, but I have to correct folks.
I said something so egregiously wrong that I you do not have to be alive to vote in Chicago.
I was really making a reference there to the murder rate in Chicago.
I mean, they're calling Rahm Emanuel the murder mayor now.
The murder rates are off the charts.
And of course, the media is not asking, you know, why don't you guys, you talk about gun control left and right, and you want new gun control laws, and none of the new laws, even the latest senator to admit this is Dick Blumenthal, a senator from Connecticut.
And even he is saying that none of these background check laws, none of the new laws that they want to implement would have stopped what happened at the school in Newtown, Connecticut.
Stop and think about that.
Nothing that they're doing, nothing that they want to pass would have stopped that incident.
So you have to ask, what's the point?
Well, in Chicago, the murder rate, particularly among young Chicagoan teenagers, is skyrocketing.
It's out of control.
It's becoming the murder capital of the country.
And there is a legitimate question that is not being asked of anybody in Chicago.
Very simple.
Why aren't you enforcing the gun laws already on the books?
You do not need new gun laws to deal with what's happening in Chicago.
We have plenty of gun laws.
All you have to do would be to enforce the ones you have.
Folks, this is a serious question.
Let me tell you why this is really hideous.
Because there is a theory about Rah Emmanuel, the mayor of Chicago, big Democrat, former chief of staff for Obama and Clinton, and there's a theory about that, you know, Wayne Lapierre said this once of Clinton, too.
He said that Clinton is comfortable with a certain level of violence because it promotes the idea we need new laws.
Well, the same thing is being said about Rahm Emmanuel, that there's not a lot being done to stop the murders in Chicago because they provide an excellent backdrop for the quest for more law.
And so people are starting to say to the media, why don't you ask the mayor and the president and others, why are they not enforcing existing gun laws in Chicago?
Why is there no effort being made to really reduce the murder rate in Chicago?
Is it because it's too useful?
Now, that may sound horribly cynical, but there are more and more people asking that question.
Young people are killing young people in Chicago left and right.
And there are no prosecutions, folks.
Well, not none, but I mean, there's so few prosecutions in Chicago that it has raised a lot of red flags for a lot of people.
Why aren't you pursuing punishment under existing gun law?
And one answer that people are concluding is: well, it provides an excellent backdrop to demand more gun law.
And you could rephrase what Wayne Lapierre said about Clinton.
Maybe the Democrats are comfortable with a certain level of violence in Chicago because of the crisis that it allows to be used.
Remember, it was Ron Emmanuel himself who said, never let a crisis go to waste.
Well, you definitely have a crisis in Chicago.
You've got a murder crisis, and it is young people killing young people.
And furthermore, it's young black kids killing other black kids.
And there is no effort, special or otherwise, to enforce current gun laws or to prosecute people.
Why not?
Why this push for new stuff that everybody admits would not have stopped what happened at the Sandy Hook Elementary School?
Of course, the answers to all this are clear as a bell.
The push for new gun law is not about guns.
It's about bigger government.
It's about taking over more and more control of people's lives, pure and simple.
Well, take it back.
It is about guns because ultimately the government would like to take from you as many of your guns as they could.
We all know that.
So yes, it is about guns.
But are they, this question is popping up, are they actually sitting idle and using the horrors of the Chicago murders to provide a photo, an optic that will help them get more gun laws?
Every law necessary to prosecute people caught using a gun illegally.
Chicago is already on the books.
They've got plenty of laws that they could prosecute these people on.
But they've somehow create the impression that there aren't enough laws to deal with this level of crime.
Now, clearly, the law is not the problem with this level of crime in Chicago.
I mean, No law ever stopped anything by virtue of its existence alone.
We've got laws against murder, still happens.
We've got laws against robbing banks, still happens.
The law is a moral marker.
It's a guardrail.
It's how a society defines right and wrong in many ways.
But they don't enforce themselves.
But the regime wants you to think that the law isn't powerful enough.
Folks, it's sort of like when we've been talking about the searching for a way to characterize this: the erosion of our culture.
I mean, our culture is being perverted and it's crumbling.
The guardrails, the institutions that provided the glue, marriage is one of them, that kept society together.
All those things are under assault, and many of them are vanishing.
What is the biggest obstacle right now to welfare reform?
May not be the biggest, but it certainly is in the top three.
You know what it is?
Out-of-wedlock birth.
Do you know how many out-of-wedlock births there are in this country?
70% of black babies are born out of wedlock.
Now, right now, I can guarantee you what's happening within certain sectors of the audience is that people are shouting at me at their radio and calling me names about being old-fashioned fuddy-duddy or some sort of discrimination artist or what have you, or to hold up old-fashioned law that are not relevant anymore.
But stick with me on this for a second.
53% of Hispanic babies are born out of wedlock.
70% of African-American babies are born out of wedlock.
And the what is the see 70% of babies born to poor white women are born out of wedlock.
Half of the babies, get this stat.
Half of the babies born to mothers under 30 are born out of wedlock.
Let me run through this again because I maintain to you that you cannot get, you cannot get rid of the welfare state with these birth statistics.
Somebody has to take the place of the second parent.
And the government has willingly, and in fact, Democrat-led governments have eagerly done so.
So 70% of African-American babies are born out of wedlock.
53% of Hispanic babies born out of wedlock.
And by the way, they tell us that Hispanics, that's it, natural conservative voters out there.
They're just conservative Republicans in waiting.
Poor white women who have babies, 70% out of wedlock.
What does that mean?
It means that the institution of marriage doesn't mean anything anymore to way, way, way too many people.
It therefore is extreme.
It's been weakened profoundly.
Do you know what the out-of-wedlock birth rate was for the, I don't know, first 200 years of the country?
Would you be interested in knowing what that number is?
The out-of-marriage, out-of-wedlock birth rate was 2% to 3% in the first 200 years of the country.
Now, again, the numbers, 70% black babies are born without a father.
53% Hispanic babies born without a father.
70% of poor white women's babies born without a father.
You are not ever going to reverse the welfare state with statistics like that.
Not possible.
Chew on that.
I'm going to take a brief time out.
We'll come back and continue in mere moments.
Don't go away.
You know what people are saying out there now to me, don't you?
The word, they may not be saying it yet.
Wait till Media Matters gets their interpretation of what the statistics I just offered are.
How dare he talk about women's reproductive freedom that way?
How dare he?
That'll be the reaction to the out-of-wedlock birth numbers.
That I, El Rushbo, was attempting to criticize women's reproductive decisions.
By the way, the overall illegitimacy, sorry, it used to be called illegitimacy.
The overall out-of-wedlock birth rate in America is 40% now.
And when you subgroup it as the numbers were that I offered, folks, there's no way you're going to have serious welfare reform.
Now, the question is which came first?
Did the existence of welfare help to create these statistics?
And I'm one who believes that the answer is inarguably yes.
But others, of course, oh, no, there's nothing could be further from the truth.
Mark in Tampa, it's great to have you on the program.
Welcome to EIB Network.
Hello.
Thanks, Rush.
Megadittos to you today.
Thank you, sir.
Hey.
You know, I was listening to the comments from Schumer, and I've just got to tell you, I don't think I'm alone when I tell you that I am just simply weary of the way that Congress is continuing to do the things that they're doing, and this is a perfect example.
You know, when they passed health care, they forced that through.
And we'll never forget, you know, you've got to vote it in and pass it to find out what's in it.
Well, we find out immediately after the election when they can release 13,000 pages of regulations.
I contend that if we'd known that, Obama would not have been reelected.
We watched the president during the debates, you know, say there will not be sequestration.
No.
And yet today, we still don't know what spending cuts, you know, there are no spending cuts all along.
His plan was simply to tax.
Now, you used, Mark, you used the word weary to describe yourself.
Is that accurate?
Because if you are, they've won.
Well, I say weary.
I mean, it is so tiring, and I'm sure people just wonder how it is that we can fight this.
Well, you know, I think Rubio is right.
I personally think Rubio is absolutely right.
I think that when he says we've got to force this discussion back into the public, I don't think that eight senators, I don't care who they are, Democrats or Republicans, can decide this issue by themselves behind closed doors and think they've got the problem solved.
They think they can, and they want to.
They don't want what you want.
They don't want what Rubio wants.
They want to ram this thing down before anybody has a chance to know what's in it.
A la healthcare.
But I think you're right.
Mark, I think people are getting weary as opposed to fired up angry.
They've been there.
You know, it's impossible for a human being to maintain that kind of emotion.
I don't care whether it could be lust, love.
It could be hate.
It eventually subsides.
And I don't doubt there are people who hear this and they say, oh, gee, what are we going to do?
No matter we beat it back and the judges tell us it's unconstitutional in California.
We beat it back and they come back in the next Congress and they just keep battering us.
I mean, the Democrat Party is a battering ram and they're ramming us each and every day with another set of stuff that we don't want.
And people are a lot of people.
What can we do?
And they're just, they're retreating into an attitude that leads them to try to protect what they've got and then leave everybody else to fear for themselves.
I think you're right.
But I will say this.
I think if the Republicans go along with this and they play this game one more time, I know that I've been a Republican all my life for 30-some years.
Okay.
Burn me once, burn me twice, third time, I'm done.
Okay.
Well, I hear this over and over and over, and I don't doubt it at all.
Okay, my friends, that's it.
Another exciting excursion into broadcast excellence.
Another hour, anyway, is in the can and on the way over to the Limbaugh Broadcast Museum at rushlimbaugh.com.
▲
Export Selection