All Episodes
Previous Next
June 30, 2014 - Rush Limbaugh Program
30:40
June 30, 2014, Monday, Hour #3
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
Right, right, right, right.
I got it here.
I just went and found it.
Well, because somebody said Obama said he wants to deport these illegal alien children.
I said, Yeah, right.
So how's he going to do that?
Well, I found out, and as always, he's going to make it.
He now wants Congress to act and do it.
Ha!
Greetings, my good friends, and welcome back.
Rush Limbaugh serving humanity.
How?
Simply by being here.
A phone number if you want to be on the program today, and we're going to be getting to your phone calls El Quico in this hour.
800-282-2882, the email address L Rushbo at EIBNet.com.
I've got other stuff here in the stack, but I just wanted to get to this.
The LA Times has a story.
Obama's bid to deport children complicates immigration reform effort.
Aha.
So my natural curiosity made me want to read more.
President Obama's surprise request that Congress give him authority to quickly deport thousands of Central American children illegally crossing the border.
He is likely to renew the on again, off again immigration reform debate that many Republicans had hoped to avoid.
The request expected to be formally made today that may have been made, seems intended to blunt criticism that the White House immigration policies have inadvertently encouraged the crush of youngsters.
No doubt that's what the point here is.
I don't think Obama expects these children to be deported, but once again, limbaugh theorem.
Here comes Obama saying he wants them sent back.
Uh acting as though he's had nothing to do with whatever resulted in this mass arrival of immigrants.
So now he wants to make Congress do it.
And of course, now this is kind of confusing because we've had Chuck Schumer, and you name any number of Democrats who've been trying to help the Republicans on this.
I mean, it was just last week, ladies and gentlemen, that we had an audio soundbite from Chuck Schumer worrying that the Republicans would never, ever win the presidency if they didn't start doing the right thing on immigration.
Which was what?
Agree with the Democrats and let them all in and bring them out of the shadows and essentially pardon them for being here illegally, and then we might talk about securing the border.
I mean, that's the order of things.
And the Democrats from Chuck Schumer, any number of you Republicans, you know, you it's a changing country.
It's a country of tolerance and social justice and demographics, and you're losing the demographics battle.
If you don't get on the right side of this immigration issue with us, you're never gonna win the presidency.
Okay, so I took it from that, or took from that, that the Democrats seriously want to help the Republicans win elections.
Why else would Chuck Schumer say that?
So now, here is this LA Times story.
Obama's bid to deport children complicates immigration reform effort.
The proposal, reading again here from the LA Times, the proposal prements law uh presents lawmakers with an unpleasant vote on whether to deport children, something the U.S. has historically resisted.
He would also undo part of a bipartisan 2008 law passed under George W. Bush that mandated certain protections for minors fleeing violence and poverty in Central American countries and other nations.
Some conservative lawmakers may decide, particularly in election year, that deporting the children is an inappropriate response that would send a hard-line message against illegal immigration.
But for many others, particularly Democrats and Republicans representing areas with large immigrant populations, the prospect of such heart wrenching vote could fuel the arguments that the time has come for broader immigration reform.
So Obama has presented to the amnesty crowd an unpleasant vote on whether to deport the children.
In this case, he's not going to go outside the Constitution and just do it.
Oh, no, no, no.
Oh no.
Oh, no, no.
Well, Congress does have it.
Well, if Boehner was standing up, you know, I've got a pen and I've got a phone, he's Baylor's not going to do that.
But there you now he's he's he's he's slepping off the responsibility here in Congress.
And the point is he's challenging them because the Democrats have told the Republicans, look, you dare not engage in any deportation.
You have to sign on to immigration reform if you're ever going to get any meaningful votes ever again.
And so what has Obama done?
He's just now he's not helping them.
Now he's making them take action.
It's going to lose them votes.
I knew the Democrats weren't really trying to help the Republicans.
I knew it, my friends.
Something about it didn't ring true to me.
Uh-huh.
I say with heavy sarcasm.
I knew that the Democrats weren't serious about trying to help the Republicans, and lo and behold, here's Obama now.
He doesn't want these kids sent back.
Proof he doesn't want to, despite what he says, this is a challenge.
He's throwing down the gauntlet.
Okay, you guys do it.
You guys send them home.
You guys, you get in the pictures with these kids getting on the little buses and sending them back down to Central America or wherever.
And the headline says it all.
Obama's bid to deport children complicates immigration reform effort that administration will ask Concord two billion dollars in emergency border funding.
It's kind of crystal clear, is it not?
So that's I just wanted to share that with you because uh Obama had said that he wanted to deport them.
Well, it appears that the kids will stay.
No, they're all right.
The Democrats have sent their trial lawyer donors down their left and right to defend these kids and their families pro bono.
There's no way the kid, that's the point.
When I heard you say, when you told me Obama said he wanted to send them back, that's not true.
He doesn't.
It's limbaugh theorem time again.
You know, Obama is he's pretending that it is a matter of massive deportation or blanket amnesty.
These are now the options that he's presented.
It's an it's another false dichotomy.
There has to be massive deportation of these kids or blanket amnesty.
Those are the only two choices that we have now.
And I oh, I was just asked, uh what are these kids going to do for the next 10 to 15 years with no parents?
Oh, they'll parents will be found and brought here.
Do you have any doubt of that?
Don't tell me you don't tell me that.
Don't tell me that's news to you.
I mean, they're gonna interview the kids, they'll find out where they came from, who their parents are, and it won't be long before Pelosi says, you know, I would love to be able to take all of these children home, but Paul and I simply don't have the room.
The only thing we can do is try to unite these kids with their parents here in America.
And so the two billion dollars Obama wants, ostensibly for deportation, will be used to reunite these children with their parents.
Think of them snurdly as a new kind of anchor baby.
Well, we know we know we we can't send them back because to send the send them back to be send it back to undignified, unsparkling circumstances.
Poverty and and uh war-torn uh there's rebels down there and then gorillas and there's thirst.
There's a lot of dust, you know, because it the wind blows it very hot, a lot of dust.
Um well, we uh uh why have borders at all?
Well, no, no no no you gotta have borders so that you can show on a map you know what the country looks like to people that you're in the second grade that's why you have to have borders but look at there's look with Obama now throwing this over to Congress saying okay you know it's time for you guys I I want to deport these kids I want to get it done I want to send them back you do it and I want two billion dollars send them home so The
clear proposition here that Obama has put forth is two options.
Massive deportation in which the Republicans take the total hit, including no regard for children, no regard for people coming from poverty.
All of the accompanying criticisms is either that or blanket amnesty.
Those are the two competing possibilities that we are now faced with.
And all of this, don't forget, all of this is designed to really pressure the Republicans to do this before the election.
Because the Democrats know, no matter what the Republicans do or don't, don't do the Democrats know they are going to be thrown out in mass in November it doesn't matter it this is going to be a strictly anti Democrat vote.
Against like 2010, those midterms, there's no real pro-Republican idea out there.
They haven't advanced it.
There's no known Republican agenda other than they're not Obama and they're not the Democrats.
And you look at polling data.
There's a Gallup poll out today that 29 percent.
Let me find it here.
It's really low.
29 percent of the American people have confidence in the presidency.
Now, it says here at Cybercast News Service that this new poll may not be directed at Obama, but it's more bad news.
Nevertheless, a new Gallup poll on the three branches of government reveals the American public's faith in the presidency is at the lowest point of Obama's term, just 29 percent.
How in the world do you say that has nothing to do with him?
If you're going to poll people on whether they got confidence in the presidency why does it not matter who the president is yet that's what we're being told now Congress's job approval ratings is like seven percent the presidency's 29% the Supreme Court is the branch of government people have the most confidence in according to this Gallup poll and that's 30%.
So one percentage point higher than the confidence people have in the presidency.
Seven percent is the confidence they have in Congress.
And that's an all-time low, but it's hardly big news.
Congress always polls very, very poorly.
So they want to get this done before the November elections, because after that, if they don't get amnesty done, then it's judged with a Republican majority everywhere.
it's gonna get tougher and tougher and tougher to get it done and Chuck Schumer will not be able to benefit politically from all the new registered voters the Democrats and all that so that's what the pressure points are and that's why Obama is ratcheting all of this stuff up I got to take quick time out my friends you be good sit tight back with much more before you know it.
Don't go back to the phones we go this is uh this is Bob in Chicago thank you for waiting and welcome to the program hi.
Oh Rush uh, I like to start by saying it truly is an honor for me to speak with you.
Thank you, sir, very much.
I've been listening since uh 1990.
Um I'm calling because you know, here in Illinois, believe it or not, we have uh some very good local conservative talk shows here, and since the Harris case came up, which is why I'm calling, um, since this came up, there have been uh numerous people on from not only the state of Illinois, um, I don't believe Ms. Harris got this letter, and this is what I'm getting to is a letter that uh some of these people received.
I think there's about eleven or twelve other states, I don't know the exact number in the country, who have been following the same thing Illinois has been doing, which is taking these fees or dues from parents who are taking care of their disabled family members and also receiving some type of uh well,
in Ms. Harris's case it was uh I believe it was Medicaid, that they had actually received letters uh stating that BCFS, uh the Department of Child and Family Services, could actually come into their home and remove their child from their home if they did not comply with the fees or dues to be paid to the union and take their children and put them in facilities that were unionized to continue the care of
their child.
And a lot of this never got nationally.
I mean, I don't listen to you know the national shows all the time, when I can I do um or cable all the time.
Um but I've never really seen this brought up to anyone's attention.
And going to what you said in the first hour, well, not the first hour, but the last since I've been listening to you as far as how far these individuals will go to show what power they have or they think they have to use a dream of power.
Power that they want home.
It's power that they want even if they realize they don't have it.
It's simply never-ending power grabs.
I felt so deeply about to call you today because this morning, when the decision came on, I was listening to a local conservative show here.
And this came up again and um about these letters, and you know, I kind of forgot about it a little bit, and I'm like, you know, people need to know this kind of thing.
I mean, you you say it all the time, and and I'm so appreciative of it, appreciative of it.
Um in and it it drives me crazy that um you know they would go to that extreme to threaten that to uh to a parent, whether they could or couldn't do it.
I mean, it's it's it's just mind-boggling, and um I really wanted to bring it to the Well, I seem to recall reading you bring this up.
I seem to recall reading uh what you say happened.
The threat, the union threat to remove kids and put them in other union run treatment facilities if these parents didn't cough up dues and essentially uh in engage in behavior that would tantamount to union membership.
Uh but this this kind of power grab is is common uh and it's it's maybe not in this specific way, but just the entire the the entire effort here is illustrative of how, particularly the SEIU, but I guess all of them are attempting to collect money, a mass power, uh left and right.
They they consider themselves they equate themselves with the civil rights movement.
They equate themselves with victims of the founding of the country, a union man, a working man has always been the victim of these major corporations.
And and there's always uh the the case that they need to be compensated for all of the discrimination they faced and all of the wages that they haven't been paid and all the uh ways they've been taken advantage of.
I mean, there's real anger at the top.
I don't think that's something that that you should ignore, maybe not you specifically, but there's a rage and anger that is motivating these people in these uh sweeping attempts.
So I mean there's a the Illinois News Network, for example, on June twenty-seventh, which was just a a few days ago, could the state replace home caregivers with union workers?
And there's this little passage from the article.
Could the state of Illinois remove mothers of disabled children from their roles as caregivers?
At least one such mother has been threatened with that very thing.
And it cites a woman named Deborah Tashera, who has cared for her daughter full-time for twenty years now says the Illinois Department of Rehabilitation Services is threatening to replace her with a state worker.
That could mean removing her relative but but simply replacing because she's not unionized.
So I think it's it's uh I don't know how common the knowledge is, but you've helped spread the word that this kind of thing was taking place.
I appreciate the call, Bob.
Thanks.
Thanks very much.
The Daily Caller has a story.
Headline fired black employee Sue's Paint Company over racist paint names.
A black man in New Jersey's filed a lawsuit against his former employer, Benjamin Moore Paints, which he says named one of its paint colors after him and then fired him when he complained.
His name is Clinton Tucker.
He managed online sales for Benjamin Moore, which is owned by Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway, said that he was bothered by the names of several of the company's paint colors, Clinton Brown and Tucker Chocolate, and Confederate red.
Being a black man named Clinton Tucker, the plaintiff found this to be extremely racially offensive.
Reads the complaint filed in Essex County.
A Warren Buffett Company would do something like this, somebody so close to Obama.
I have a story.
We mentioned earlier in the uh in the program that they're cutting off water for people in Detroit.
And a couple of people that responded to me thought that it was a problem with water availability.
A shortage.
And no, there's no shortage of water in Detroit.
There is a shortage of people who either can or are willing to pay for it.
And a lot of people, about half the population, has had their water cut off because they're not paying for it.
Either because they refuse to or because they can't.
Now the department in Detroit that handles this called the Department of Water and Sewerage.
I don't know that I would want water from this bunch anyway, but that's the name of the bureaucracy that handles it.
We had this last week.
The UN heard about this.
The UN is all upset.
The UN is thinking about going in there and making sure the water's turned on for everybody, even those who can't afford it.
Because they think this is outrageous.
How do you turn the water off on people?
Water is a is a necessity, whether you can pay for it or not.
And so there's a story here.
What is the story is in the Los Angeles Times, in fact, about one such victim who has had her water turned off.
And I just want to read a few excerpts from the story.
It has been six weeks since the city turned off Nicole Hill's water.
Dirty dishes are piled in the sink of her crowded kitchen where the yellow and green linoleum floor is soiled and sticky.
A small garbage can is filled with water from a neighbor, while a bigger garbage can sits outside in the yard where she hopes it'll collect some rain.
She has developed an intricate recycling system of washing the dishes, clean uh cleaning the floor, and flushing the toilet with the same water.
It's frightening, she says, because you think this is something that only happens somewhere like Africa, said Nicole Hill.
A single mother who is studying homeland security at a local college.
But now I know what they're going through in Africa.
When I when when I get somewhere there's a water faucet, I drink until my stomach hurts, she says.
Nicole Hill is one of thousands of residents in Detroit who've had their water and sewer services turned off as part of a crackdown on customers who are behind on their bills.
In April, Detroit set a target of cutting service to 3,000 customers a week who were more than $150 behind in their bills.
In May, the Water Department sent out 46,000 warnings and cut off service to 4,531 customers.
The city says that cutting off water is the only way to get people to pay their bills as Detroit tries to emerge from bankruptcy.
The utility is currently owed $90 million from customers.
And nearly half of the city's 300,000 or so accounts are past due.
$90 million is owed the water and sewerage department.
Yeah.
But cutting off water to people already living in poverty came under criticism last week from the United Nations office of the high commissioner for human rights, whose experts said that Detroit was violating international standards by cutting off access to does Obama know about this?
Does Obama know that they've cut the water off to so many people in Detroit?
Does Obama know that the UN says that uh Detroit's violating international standards in his country?
Does he know this?
You would think he'd be really mad about this, would tell a UN to go pound sand.
Caterina de Albuquerque, the uh the expert in the United Nations office of the high commissioner for human rights, said when there is genuine inability to pay, human rights simply forbids disconnections.
Are we the kind of people that resort to shutting water off when there are disabled people and seniors?
So a disability to pay.
Did she really say that?
No, sorry, inability.
When there is a genuine inability to pay, human rights simply forbids disconnections.
Well, of course.
Anyway, uh I got I got to thinking here.
She's a single mother, Nicole Hill, studying homeland security at a local college.
Snerdley, did did you know that you could get a degree in this anywhere?
I didn't either.
Did you did you did any of you know?
Did any of you know that homeland security was an academic pursuit?
At your local college.
What do you think the courses?
What do you think the courses in the Homeland Security major are?
Principles of Homeland Security 1 and 2, advanced principles of Homeland Security, beginning Pat Downs, Advanced Pat Downs, Ogling Scanner X-rays for beginners, body search 101, body search cavity search 101.
Advanced body cavity search 101.
Horizontal advanced body cavity search 201.
What are the disciplines in this course?
How in the world can somebody seeking a major in Homeland Security at a local college in Detroit not be able to pay the water bill?
And why would anybody in Homeland Secur this woman unless I've got a picture of her?
And she could sit on an unruly 80-year-old trying to smuggle something on board an airplane.
But there's a picture of her holding up the demand from the city of the water bill.
I'm not going to show it to you.
Believe me, there's nothing to gain by me showing you this picture.
It's in the LA Times if you want to go find it yourself.
You are on your own.
Well, $90 million worth of not paying the bill in order for them to shut it up.
How many years do you have to?
How does it how many years it take to rack up $90 million in unpaid water bills?
And then, of course, it's never your fault.
So I don't know, folks.
Single mother studying homeland security at a local college who now knows what it's like to live in Africa.
That's what she said.
I mean, all right.
Uh, ladies and gentlemen, I've left out one potential uh.
One potential course the woman could take in uh her pursuit of a major in homeland security.
That would be advanced non-enforcement of immigration law 101.
That's probably the biggie.
After all the advanced body cavity searches, advanced non-enforcement of immigration law 101 taught by Janet Napolitano.
Syllabus written by Barack Obama, constitutional lawyer, Esquire.
Uh, what have you?
And this is Victor Silver Springs, Maryland.
Great to have you, sir.
Hi.
Hey, Rush.
Blind kiddos.
Thank you very much.
Okay, to today's Supreme Court ruling concerning hobby lobby.
Right.
Could the bakery in Colorado and the photographer in Arizona sue because their religious rights were violated as well.
That's a good question.
And I don't know.
I'm not enough of a legal expert to know if uh something ex post facto doesn't work in reverse here.
I don't uh there, I think these people decided to go out of business anyway.
Could they sue?
Uh my gut tells me no.
But I get your point because it's this specific thing is addressed by Ruth Busy Ginsburg.
It's actually addressed.
She's worried something like that could happen.
By the way, uh, folks, I checked.
Apparently, water bills in Detroit are the one thing not subsidized by government.
And that I think probably is why so many in Detroit are now up in arms.
They get pretty much every social service free.
They can't understand why they've got to pay for water.
I think that's largely true.
Anyway, I take a brief time out.
We'll be back and wrap it up after this.
That's it, folks.
Another exciting excursion into broadcast excellence meets its conclusion.
Because it really never ends.
We just stop for a while and come back and uh continue where we left off, or with whatever's happening.
Some global warming stuff tomorrow that's gonna be somewhat interesting.
So sit tight.
▲
Export Selection