All Episodes
Previous Next
June 7, 2016 - Rush Limbaugh Program
36:11
June 7, 2016, Tuesday, Hour #2
| Copy link to current segment

Time Text
What's up, America?
Buck Sexton here in Four Rush today on the EIB.
Getting into our two.
I want to talk a little more about California.
Because, first of all, today's California's primary, so it's like, yay, California, a lot going on.
Um lovely place, bad politics, but lovely place.
Uh, but there's something else that's happening there that ties into oh, a whole bunch of things that we'll be talking about today.
California is trying to be the first state in the country to officially allow illegal immigrants to buy uh health uh health care or um health insurance on the Obamacare exchanges.
Now you will, I'm sure recall, you'll think back, wait a second.
Wasn't there wasn't there a bit of a a sort of a nasty dust up about this?
Wasn't there a back and forth in the earlier days of Obamacare?
And we were told in no uncertain terms, we were told a couple things.
Of course, we're told if you like your plan, you can keep it, as you know.
That definitely wasn't true, and the administration knew it wasn't true.
But we were also told that there was no way that illegal immigrants, because of course the Obamacare exchanges have federal subsidies built into them for lower income, well, supposed to be lower income Americans, now it's going to be lower income whoever's here.
Um but they say that that won't happen, even if even if they're able to buy health care plans on the exchanges now.
See, they just keep just keep edging the edging closer and closer here, moving the football slowly down the field.
Uh they say, don't worry, they won't be eligible for subsidies.
But of course, the whole health care market, in a sense, right, is meant to sort of share costs.
So your health care is depending on how sick or not sick you are, and it's especially in the Obamacare exchanges, subsidized.
I'll get into all that in a second.
Let me just step back there for a second.
Do you remember this exchange?
Uh President Obama said that there was no way, there was no way that we would ever get to a place in this law, uh, under this law, where illegal immigrants would be able to get Obamacare.
Play play the clip, please.
There are also those who claim that our reform efforts would ensure illegal immigrants.
This too is false.
The reforms I'm proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally.
It's not true.
Go, Lord!
And one more.
Misunderstanding I want to clear up.
All right, so that's that's the whole remember that you lie, it was uh Representative Wilson who said it, and people said, Oh, it was horrible, it was disrespectful.
Um, this is the president, how dare he?
Uh okay, say what you now I know what the what the Obama defenders, the reactionary knee-jerk Obama's always right people will say, which is, well, this isn't, you know, mate oh what Obama said is true.
He didn't know that this I mean, come on, really?
You don't think the Democrats thought through this whole process and weren't thinking that they would first of all they're trying to push for amnesty, which means that at that point, any sort of legalized status, they'll be wide open for Obamacare anyway.
So that that's step one.
But even beyond that, you really think that they didn't know that this would happen?
This is how uh this is how much the Democrats think about these things, or how far ahead they think about these things.
They're trying to find this way to ensure illegal immigrants.
All they really have to do in California is to say that they're do they're they're they need to get a state innovation waiver, it's called.
And that means they petition the federal government, currently run by the Obama administration, signature law is this law, so or signature uh you know, legislative achievement, I should say, is this law.
They have to they have to get a state innovation waiver from the federal government.
So they say, hey, federal government, um, it would allow us to be innovative in the health care insurance market if we brought illegals into this process.
And they they get the waiver, and then all of a sudden they can do this.
That's it.
You you gotta be kidding me.
Section 1332 of the health care law allows states to request five-year waivers from key aspects of the Affordable Care Act, including the individual and employer mandates, which beg uh so this is uh hat tip uh Melissa Quinn at the Daily Signal for that.
So yeah, this was baked.
This is in the law.
This isn't like some new law they've passed.
This is in the law.
You can request a waiver, and now they're gonna request a waiver so they can insure illegals.
Illegal aliens in this country.
Am I not?
Is that a microaggression?
Am I not allowed to say that anymore?
It's in federal law, but federal law doesn't matter anymore when it comes to this issue.
People just pretend it's not there.
They get so, yeah, might micro, maybe it's even a macro aggression.
So they're going to get a state innovation waiver.
Now let me ask you this.
So years ago it was, I mean, how dare anyone think for a second that the president and the Democrats would want to give well they wanted they've already put they want in state tuition for illegals.
The Democrats love that.
And the Democratic Party is open borders and everything except name at this point, isn't it?
What do they maybe they want to stop people and say, hey, we need some information on you so we can at some point tax you if you actually qualify to pay taxes.
But beyond that, who's not allowed to stay?
That's what I want to know.
If you listen to like the Nancy Pelosi's of the world, and the Hillary Clintons for that matter, I remember in the Bernie Hillary debate a few months ago, one of them, which sounded like you're two people who are advocating for an open border state.
Now I know that some of my libertarian friends, I have I have a few, would say that oh, this is good, and they'll point to increased economic activity as being a benefit to America.
Now we then have to get into, well, who is it good for?
And of course, more people means more economic activity, but let's just say adding uh millions of people into the uh into the economy who then would be also able to officially get federal benefits, that might that might just hurt a little more with the whole debt and deficit situation, right?
Obama's going to be leaving us twenty trillion dollars in debt when he finally is out of office.
Unless the assumption is that illegal immigrants are so much more hard working and so much more beneficial to the economy, so much more able to compete in an increasingly information driven economy instead of a uh an economy based on labor, that they will save the American economy because they're better for the economy than Americans.
Of all backgrounds and and ideologies and ethnicities and everything else.
Illegals are better.
If you don't believe that, well then I don't understand how you can say that it's a good thing.
Or rather, I mean i you'd have to believe that uh to say it's a good thing to legalize all the illegals in the country, but that seems to be what the Democratic Party wants to do.
But a few years ago, we were told that they would never use this law in this way, that illegals wouldn't be getting subsidies.
Now, do you remember these are the same people that want to give drivers' licenses to illegals, want in-state tuition, which of course is subsidized by the state, right?
There's a reason why if you live in Virginia, you pay X amount of dollars to go to University of Virginia.
If you live outside of Virginia, you don't get that money and it costs a whole lot more.
Uh so they wanted to give in-state tuition to illegals, which means subsidized tuition to illegals.
And where does that come from?
Taxes.
They're just giving money to people.
And they even were hoping, as you know, that that people would be able to stay here and and once they keep saying that once they legalize the illegal population, and Obama has tried this through executive order, and that's currently making its way through the courts.
Um I think, by the way, for those of you who are sort of on the fence about what happens uh in America if if Hillary wins, uh let's just say she just wins the presidency and maybe wins the Senate, or we'll see.
You don't think she's gonna continue on with that?
I mean, the Democrats can count and they're aware of the percentages and they understand that if they finish what Obama has started with the mass amnesty, they have a an unsinkable majority.
That's it, it's done.
So keep that in mind as we sit around and talk about whether Trump is in fact going to be uh palatable enough to conservatives within the GOP that I'm not sure there is much of a GOP left.
If if Hillary achieves amnesty, someone will have to explain to me where we're going to be able to win a national level election again.
But I digress.
So we were told that they wouldn't uh do this, and here we are, California already coming out, and isn't the timing of it interesting, of course.
You've got the California Democratic primary happening.
Uh you will have Hillary Clinton trying to do everything in her power to pander to every ethnic identity group in the country in order to uh get their votes.
And California is now trying to get this state innovation waiver.
Isn't that just a fancy term for we're just gonna ask the federal government to not make us abide by the terms of this law.
The terms that were sold to the public by the president himself.
This is in the law right now.
This is not a change to the law, this was in the law.
You're gonna tell me they didn't know they'd do this?
They just came up with this out of thin air.
They did they just didn't oh, oh, oh, you mean we have a state innovation waiver?
Who knew?
They knew.
They were well aware.
And either through amnesty or indifference, they will end up subs they will give subsidies to lower income illegals or l or newly legalized, depends on who wins the White House.
Illegals will get access to this, though.
They will get subsidized health care as well.
And it's going to be amazing to watch because the Democrats will have been dishonest with the American people at every step of the way on this issue, and yet because they've been slow and because they they've done this sort of slow role and because they've lied about it and the media backs them up at every turn, and there's media on both sides of the aisle that is pro amnesty.
In fact, most of the media on both sides of the aisle is pro amnesty, really.
With all that happening, uh now we see where this is going.
So I I just want to know how where this ends.
The Democrats, unless you are a murderer, and even then ICE isn't always capable of deporting uh people who are violent criminals, as we know, they release some of them because, you know, don't want to be mean to illegals, even illegals who do harm people and are criminals.
Um I want to know where this ends, because the Democrats won't tell anyone they can't stay, and now they're trying to open the door to anyone who comes and stays will also get subsidized health care.
By the way, these exchanges are already failing, as you know.
Oh, that's right.
The risk corridors.
Well, right now, uh they've sort of put a they've put a stoppage in it so that there can't be federal dollars used to shore up these Obamacare exchanges.
But that can change real quick, can't it?
Who do you think would like to change that?
Who do you think would like to funnel billions and billions of your taxes into Obamacare exchanges, which will then include illegal aliens and basically anybody who can get here who wants subsidized health care.
When when do we realize that we can't do this?
Anyone want to talk about Sweden?
Sweden is going bankrupt, everybody.
Sweden can't continue the way that it is.
These other countries realize that their social welfare states are unsustainable, and oh, by the way, immigration has played a role in that.
But they don't want to tell you that here because you know Bernie's awesome.
And he loves Northern Europe.
Oh my.
800 282 2882.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush.
Be back in a few minutes.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush.
800 282 2882.
Please download my daily podcast, the Blaze.com slash Buck Sexton or you can go on iTunes, SoundCloud, or Stitcher, type in Buck and Sexton, and it will pop up.
And you can subscribe and ask you to give it a shot.
Uh one more thing on uh illegals, by the way, because that's somehow not in the in the headlines very much these days, the discussions over immigration, and one of my frustrations, and yes, we're gonna talk about Trump and the judge in a few minutes, because that is just wall to wall with the media these days, is that last week you had uh people said, Oh, they're not Sanders supporters.
No, no, I love it.
Anyone who's anti-Trump is just anti-Trump.
They obviously don't they show up at political rallies to counter protest and punch people in the face and throw uh throw objects at at women because they're at a rally that they don't like, but they're not political, man.
I mean, you're just like not party establishment, bro.
Like you know, give me a break.
They're either Clinton supporters or Sanders supporters, and I think it's more likely they're Sanders supporters, but uh either one doesn't matter.
They're Democrats, obviously.
You don't show up at a political rally and throw things at people and throw punches and then tell me that you don't care about politics.
Uh you're not caring about it in the right way, obviously, and it's atrocious, but I love it.
Anti Trump protesters.
Aren't they pro aren't they pro aren't they Democrat protesters?
I mean, aren't they pro Hillary or pro Sanders?
That no, we can't make that analytic leap too far?
Okay.
But that happened last week, and the IG report over Hillary came out last week, and instead we all have to talk about Trump University.
I find that very uh I find that to be a a blunder and a distraction and irritating.
But uh I also want to spend more time talking about I think the uh campaign, uh the Trump campaign for sure should spend more time thinking about immigration.
And I think a very simple question that I would like to be answered is so Hillary, is your position that only people who are here illegally and then commit an additional crime of illegality, really at a felony level, right?
Because as we know, illegals actually commit many crimes in addition to their illegal status, document fraud, social security fraud, any number of uh forgery, any number of other things that come along with it.
But, you know, whatever.
Also, if there depends in some situations, they're being paid off the books and not paying taxes, but I digress.
Um that you'll you'll never see the IRS going after people for that.
In fact, there's a chance that if illegals are legalized, they'll get checks from the government for the money they're they're owed for what is it, earn income tax credit in other places.
Um but here's a hat tip daily caller on this, and they're citing a Boston Globe report uh saying that illegal immigrants, or rather that the uh immigrations and customs enforcement under the Obama administration has not been able to run the numbers, uh, or another way of saying that might be lied.
I guess it depends on whether you want to go with incompetence or intent here, but lied about the rate that criminal immigrants re-commit violent crimes.
This is from Daily Caller Hat Tip there.
The Boston Globe reviewed the cases of immigrants who have been set free in New England from 2008, 2012, uh, rather than being deported to their native countries.
Of the 323 criminal immigrants tracked, 30% were found to recommit violent crimes, including rape, attempted murder, and child molestation.
Um ICE does not normally publish the criminal records of immigrants and the globe only learned the names of the three hundred and twenty-three case studies by suing the federal government to release that information back in twenty thirteen.
I mean, this is like when what was it last week or something?
I remember seeing some headlines about uh Kate Steinley, and they referred to they referred to like her death on the on a pier in San Francisco.
And if you just glanced at the headline, it would seem like this young woman, and I I'm being just being honest with you, it would seem like this one woman might have had a a medical emergency.
I mean, you'd have no idea.
It you'd have to really read into the piece and see that she was shot by an illegal immigrant who had been deported, I don't know, four times or five times, or whatever the number was, many times, three times.
More than once is astonishing, but and he was in a sanctuary city, and cities defy federal law.
You'll notice, isn't that a fascinating dichotomy, by the way?
On illegal immigration, cities can obstruct, defy, do whatever they want in and get away with that without the federal government, without the Obama administration, to be sure, trying to get them to fall in line.
But on transgender bathroom rights, the Obama administration right off the bat just threatens to pull millions of dollars of funding for schools that don't want boys using the women's showers, locker rooms, playing on their teams.
Oh, we'll get to that too.
So the federal government is very selective about when it decides to uh drop the hammer on a state or a locality, and with this government in particular, it's just a mean it's just always a means of advancing politics and advan I should say advancing legislation without going through the legislature, essentially dictating from the Oval Office what should be left to the Congress or should be left to state uh legislatures.
So they will come in on that.
But on the issue of illegal immigration, no, no, no, that one that one the Obama administration's hands are tied with the what are there, hundred hundreds of sanctuary cities now, right?
There's a couple of hundred.
I mean, they're they're all over the place.
Um there's no effort to do anything about that.
Uh Boston Globe here doing a little research and finding out that ICE seems either incapable of using a calculator or just doesn't really want people to know the rate at which illegals who commit a violent crime recommit a violent crime.
You might ask yourself a question here.
Wait a second.
They're supposed to be deported under federal law just for being here illegally.
So they're illegally and they commit a violent crime and somehow are not deported.
How is that possible?
And then in addition to that, we are not allowed to be told that the federal government does not want to tell us how likely those people who should have been deported the first time weren't should have been imported when they committed a violent crime weren't, how likely they are to commit yet another violent crime.
As yes, Mr. Snardley, it would take seventy-five years for them to compile that information, I am sure.
Well played, sir.
Absolutely true.
They'll get you the numbers.
Just wait seventy-five years.
That's all it'll take.
They'll give you all the transparency you want, man.
Just got to sit around for a few decades.
Our government is a Kafka esque nightmare sometimes, isn't it, my friends?
Much more common.
Buck in for rush.
Stay with me.
Buck is here, 800 28282.
Follow me on Facebook at Facebook.com slash Buck Sexton, please do.
Speaking about what the federal government can accomplish in less than 75 years, but in three years, which is still pretty long time when we think about it.
Three years, it's been three years since the IRS admitted that it was targeting Tea Party groups along with other groups for extra special scrutiny.
You know, just a just like a nice friendly trip to the dentist to get a root canal done with the IRS.
That was that was the plan.
And they've released the names.
So this is all officials.
This is all on the record now.
This isn't uh something from out there in the hat to the Washington Times for the reporting on this one.
The government has released names of four hundred and twenty-six organizations, and there were another 40 that were not released because they opted out of the class action suit, probably because they didn't want everybody everybody who's a part of those, was like, you know what?
I don't think I really need a uh personal IRS audit right now.
I don't think that sounds like fun.
So maybe I won't be part of the class action suit against the IRS.
But here's what we know about the groups.
Oh, wait, this was this was in an election year, right?
Yeah, that's right, it was.
This was during the time of Barack Obama's reelection campaign, and the IRS, really the most intrusive and frightening federal uh bureaucracy that exists, although I know there are horror stories about all kinds of federal bureaucracies.
Um, but the IRS, which is the one that you're forced to interact with, give intimate details of your life, your transactions, everything that you're up to if they ask for it, and they can hound you endlessly and eventually, even if you're found to have done nothing wrong, um, you don't, you know, you don't it's not like, oh, you win a prize.
You're just spent a lot of time getting audited, spent a lot of time wasting uh, you know, losing nights of sleep and wasting money defending yourself if you have to, and all the rest of it.
So the IRS just want to put that in there.
Most remember, uh, in this country, if you don't pay your taxes, and you're a citizen, uh, you can go to prison.
Right?
They'll they'll throw you in prison for that.
So the IRS will, if you don't pay your taxes, eventually send men with guns to take you away from your family, and uh they're breaking apart families, but they'll do it.
They'll do it.
They do it to plenty of people.
Uh here you are.
I guess I'm I'm probably sitting here begging for an audit myself, even by talking about this.
Just kidding, IRS, you're great.
Please leave me alone.
But of the groups, the 426 of them, 60 of the groups on the list uh that have been released had the word T in their name for Tea Party.
33 have Patriot, eight have Constitution, thirteen have nine twelve in their name, uh, which is you know, the conservative movement, and you know, and one of a conservative movement, I should say.
Uh another twenty-six groups have liberty.
So our taxation authority, which has nearly unlimited power to harass and destroy, was going after people who had such horrible inclinations as liberty and patriotism and the Constitution.
If you were a group with that in your name, or you referred to that, or maybe it was part of your charter, whatever.
IRS wanted to have a little special chat with you.
Oh, and they also delayed your status.
Uh they delayed your status as a nonprofit so that it was harder for you to organize.
This was in an election year, everyone.
Let's keep that in mind.
You think didn't really think this was accidental?
We were told ah, it was just a few Obama said, not a smudgeon, not a smidgen of corruption.
He was wrong.
But it gets better.
And by better, I mean it gets worse.
Um First of all, the inspector general only identified 298 groups in May of 2013.
So the number has gotten considerably larger.
Now it's 426 with 40 dropouts.
So it's really 446 groups.
That's across the country.
That's a lot of groups to go after.
And by the way, word I'm sure spread, at least in some circles, you know, if you try to set up a tea party group, all of a sudden the IRS has a lot of weird questions for you.
And they show up.
But this is what's essential.
Um, based on these filings, that once the IRS realized that the uh this was going to come out, all of a sudden, they looked into a few liberal groups.
Um all of a sudden they decided that this is from this uh piece in the Washington Times.
Um they said uh one of the individuals involved in the case is as we have de as we have identified in our filings in this case, important questions still exist regarding changes to the IRS case listings that occurred after the IRS learned that the inspector general and congressional investigators had begun based on these changes, which to date remain unexplained.
A very real possibility, if not probability, exists that the IRS modified its targeting in light of the investigations, packing its own internal lists of targeted groups to support its preferred narrative, including by adding ideologically diverse groups, and quote.
Wait a second.
Wait a second.
This is that was uh Edward Grime, uh, the lawyer who's pursuing the case on behalf of NorCal Tea Party Patriots.
Hold on a minute.
You mean the IRS was trying to basically cover its tracks and muddy the waters here?
What would happen if you did that, by the way?
If all of a sudden you're like, oh, well, I don't know, I mean, I didn't pay, but I've got all these checks that I signed.
I thought I sent them in, but I didn't, but you know, I don't think they I don't think they would accept that.
I think you'd be in some trouble.
But here it is.
They were aware that it was all over for them in terms well, I shouldn't say it was all over, because there's been no accountability for this, pardon me.
Wrong, wrong phraseology here.
Um they were aware this was going to come out, and so they figured, oh, well, if we only targeted right wing groups, it will be too obvious and people will freak out.
Let's target a few occupy groups, which is what they did.
So at least then we can pretend that this wasn't purely ideological.
I ask you, my friends, do you really think that a bunch of IRS bureaucrats just decided to do this on their own?
You really think so?
Hundreds and hundreds of groups across the country in an election year, the economy wasn't doing well, Barack Obama uh had tough numbers going into this.
Uh and you know, the best talking point he could come up with was, you know, I'm not Bush, and the economy was really bad when I got it, but it's still pretty bad.
You think that they just did this on their own?
Nobody, no one no one higher up the chain was like, you know what, I think you should how hard would it be to get that word out?
I just want to know.
Because what this really tells us is not only was the IRS targeting of conservative groups during Barack Obama's reelection bid in 2012, not only was it more widespread than they initially admitted, but now we find out it was more deliberately anti-conservative,
anti-liberty, anti-patriot, those are things they're going after, but more deliberately anti-GOP than they were willing to admit, and there's reason to believe based on the timeline of the targeting that they went after liberal groups to make it seem like this wasn't a purely straight up ideological targeting of people who were going to not support Barack Obama and support Mitt Romney.
Bottom line.
Bottom line.
And you're probably thinking, well, I mean, all those people, we always talk about all the, you know, oh Wall Street, we're none of those bankers after the financial meltdown were marched off to jail.
Nobody in the IRS.
I mean, anyone get in trouble for this?
Not really.
Lois Lerner pleaded the fifth.
Anyone else?
No.
You hear crickets chirping?
I do.
Nothing.
No one, no one got in trouble.
You still better pay your taxes.
It's not like people say, oh, the IRS has lost credibility.
They don't care.
Still better pay your taxes.
And by the way, just let me keep I've like keep returning to this.
Remember how the Clinton the Clintons, you will recall, were sort of sort of perfected.
Oh, magnifique, monsieur, parfait.
They perfected the idea of using the IRS to go after political enemies.
You want to go back to those days?
All of a sudden, if you have a problem with the Clinton administration, you get a knock at the door, you get it, you get a letter in the mail, we're gonna need to do a full audit.
Yeah.
I'm gonna need you to come in on Sunday for that as well.
Yeah.
That's where we're heading.
Oh, the Clintons are too scrupulous for that.
They have too much integrity.
It's fun to say, isn't it?
They're too honest for that.
They would never do that.
Oh, yeah.
I would never sick the IRS on anyone.
I am an ethical man.
I don't think so.
800-282-2882.
Buck sexted in for Rush.
We'll take some calls in just a minute.
Buck Sexton here in for Rush today on the EIB.
You can download my podcast at the Blaze.com slash Buck Sexton.
It is free.
It is fun.
It is there for you whenever you want it.
800-282-2882 here on the EIB.
Please do give a call.
Catherine in Scottsdale, Arizona.
What have you got for me?
Hi.
I'm having a little trouble hearing you, but hopefully you can hear me.
I do not agree with how Trump said what he said about the judge, how However, I did receive um an email from one of my conservative groups here in Arizona that the HNBA, which is the legal group, the judge does belong to, not La Raza, the political group.
On July 2nd, 2005, they set out and supported an edict to um boycott every single business that had anything to do with Donald Trump.
And that was a year ago.
Well, that would certainly seem to be I need I need to check on this.
But let me see.
Where do we have this?
Let me find a source on this before I I I go too deep into it.
Uh, because I actually I hadn't heard I heard about I know about La Raza uh, but it's a different La Raza, they say, but that he's a uh he's part of a La Raza for La Raza for lawyers or lawyers for La Raza or whatever it is.
I hadn't I hadn't heard about this one, so I'll have to check into this.
It's a legal group that just helps give legal advice to immigrants and um um no affiliation with the radical group.
But HNBA is the legal group, and they did come out July 2nd, 2015, and tell people that they should boycott any business affiliated with Donald Trump.
And my information came from Arizona Alliance.
Okay.
Well, I will I will look into that one because I hadn't seen that.
I do know that uh Judge Curiel is a part of a la is was tied to a La Raza group.
And you're talking so the HNBA, that's the um what's the what's the name of that group?
That Curio is a part of.
Okay.
I'll I will look I will look into it.
But so you you agree that what Trump said, the the verbiage he chose, the words he used, unwise, but the underlying sentiment of the judge being unfair, you think that is an accurate assessment or at least a fair point for Trump to make.
Is that I think it's a fair thing for him to to even posit, you know, if he thinks that it's been unfair, he can go ahead and posit that.
Um if this is true about the what that they've went went wanted to boycott him, then having the yes he should be saying that.
I don't understand why he doesn't say things in a way that actually makes his point without making him look like he's crude and you know, doesn't think about what he says and and is uh is a racist.
Well, this is the the problem with loose cannons is they're loose, right?
I mean, this is this is the issue.
I mean, you know, sometimes sometimes you get uh you get a bullseye, and sometimes it the canon is is not uh not pointing the direction you want.
Um I I I I'm gonna have to talk about this.
I was planning on doing it at the top of the next hour, so Catherine, I'll give you my take on this in just a few minutes, but I appreciate you weighing in, and I'll have to check out this um I I need a I need to get a uh source here that I know and trust on seeing some of this, but I'm like uh I don't know if that I don't know if that really counts.
Uh but thank you for calling in, Catherine.
Uh he certainly the the judge Judge Curial certainly was a part of or i maybe still is I believe a part of a uh a La La Raza ref uh affiliated group um and or a group that is a La Raza group.
But they say it's different than the than the other La Raza, uh, which is always interesting because th the La Raza that we all know when we think of La Raza does mean the the race.
Um but they say, well, no, but that's not but that's not what it means, but that is what it means.
But no, it's not what it means.
I'm I get confused.
What which is it?
Someone tell me.
Um but I'll get into the judge thing at the at the top of the hour, because I I'm gonna run into breaks and I need to go stream of consciousness with that.
That's a nuanced discussion that we're gonna have to have there.
Ooh, it's gonna get it's gonna be dangerous.
It's probably gonna get me into trouble, so that'll be fun.
Uh let's take Sonny in Illinois.
Sonny, you are on the Rush Limbaugh show.
You're speaking to Buck.
Thanks, Buck.
You know, um, I my political evolution at this point in my life is just I'm I'm done.
I I'm done playing the system.
I what I want, and I want I think people like you, people like Rush, people who have a voice.
What we need to do if we really care about the sustainability of our nation is go back to go back to the core.
And I mean, there's a lot of lip service paid to this to states' rights in the Constitution.
Everything you've talked about, everything I've heard Rush talk about, and every other conservative libertarian uh pundant throughout the networks, TV, radio, all comes down in your and today.
Everything stems from this out of control, all powerful federal government.
And neither one of these parties, Buck, are giving us any relief.
In my time, I was born during the Johnson administration.
I'm alive now.
Two every presidential administration, every Congress, every Senate we had has passed two thousand or more new federal laws or regulations.
So insanity is doing the same thing over and over, expecting different results.
We cannot play the game anymore and expect it to happen.
We need drastic change.
I mean, unfortunately, we've seen when when the states invoked their their rights in the past, what happened.
It was devastating.
But but something needs to be done to continue down this road.
We can sit there and talk about the Republicans and the Democrats and Hillary with Benghazi and global warming and the war on church.
All these things do not matter.
We are losing the core of what we are.
And our direction on both parties is in the wrong direction.
We are not going anywhere with this but spiraling down.
I have children.
Okay, I don't have grandchildren yet, but I have children.
Well, they they should despise Buck to generations before them.
They should I don't look at these millennials and say, why are you voting for Bernie Sanders?
I look at this government, the Republicans and Democrats who passed trade laws, and this is one thing I do agree with Trump on, who passed trade laws that have got us to a point where no one has a choice but to vote for a Bernie Sanders.
I think Sonny, the bigger, I mean, if you're talking about your children and government being unfair, the debt that we are putting future generations into, um, my generation, generations below me, uh, is completely irresponsible and unfair, and I think is probably the sing the single place where the the government's uh dishonesty with what it's doing and with people and the the results of this sort of uh profligate spending.
I mean, 20 trillion dollars in debt.
If 20 trillion doesn't matter, let's just make it fifty.
If it doesn't matter, let's just make it let's just double it again.
I mean, Obama's double it, let's double it one more time.
At some point, we're people can all read, they can all see the graphs, they can see the math, and just the interest on the debt alone will be the fastest growing part of the federal budget, and that's just paying off what the generation before uh, you know, the what the boomer generation has done, uh, the generation that's been in power.
So that's uh that's really bad.
I mean, at your other points about Trump and people being sick of the system and and burning people being sick sick of the system, I I get all that.
Look, this is the year of the outsiders uh in sense of their beliefs.
I mean, Sanders is a senator, so it's hard to think of as an outsider.
I know Trump has had plenty of connections to politicians, and people argue that that means he's not an outsider, but uh, I think it's a little more complicated than that.
Uh I better go to a break, or else we'll run out of time on the flip side.
Okay, Buck's exit in for rush, we'll be right back.
Stay with me.
I don't have a whole lot of time here.
Buck's exit in for Rush.
We're gonna be coming to the top of the hour in just a moment or a few moments.
Um we're gonna talk about uh Trump situation with Judge uh Curiel.
That's going to be lively, I think.
Um I'm gonna try to take a nuanced walk through that discussion, and I'm sure along the way it'll be uh, oh, I'll take some, I'll take a beating, take some bruising on that, because I I just think that it's m there's more to it than the media is certainly saying right now.
At least there's a bigger discussion to be had.
I could borrow from the left.
I want to raise awareness about the judiciary and the politicization of it.
I'm just raising awareness, man.
Can't you always do that?
Isn't that okay?
Uh so we'll get into that.
And if you have thoughts on that, 800 282 2882, Buck Sexton In for Rush.
Back at the top of the hour.
▲
Export Selection