GOP activist leaders are targeting McCain for defeat over his immigration bill!


Hello Everyone:

The leaders of the Neocon GOP activist base are trying to target John McCain for defeat in the 2008 GOP primary right now because they are very upset with him over his immigration bill.  Unfortunately for McCain, these are the key people who mostly control Republican primaries just like how Democratic activists mostly control Democratic primaries!

Right below is an article from Rush Limbaugh from Thursday, May 17 titled "What Are Republicans Thinking on This Bill?" where he has a picture of McCain with a bullseye circle around him and an arrow pointing to it.  Below that is an article from Hugh Hewitt from Friday, May 18 titled "Responding To John McCain's Decree" where he is calling on his followers to contribute to Giuliani or Romney (or both) to help defeat McCain! 

The Neocon GOP activist base hates with a passion the guest worker program in the McCain-Kennedy immigration bill and they call it "rewarding illegal behavior."  The issue of illegal immigration to them is nearly considered to be a "mortal sin" issue (or "Political Kryptonite" as I have called it):   

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/6061

ANALYSIS: The illegal immigration issue is "Political Kryptonite" to GOP Neocons

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on May 15, 2006 - 5:48am.

The Neocon GOP activist base has never really liked John McCain very much.  I said last year that John McCain "has virtually no chance to become President in 2008" and I fully stand behind that right now:

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/5563

ANALYSIS: John McCain has virtually no chance to become President in 2008!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 17, 2006 - 12:09am.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/11165

ANALYSIS: Why I think John McCain's Presidential campaign is in big trouble now!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on February 23, 2007 - 5:34pm.

The bottom line in my opinion is that John McCain is hated so much by the vast majority of the Neocon GOP activist base that he will NOT get the 2008 GOP nomination short of some very huge miracle happening in his favor!

It does not really matter to them that McCain has talked up his support of Bush on Iraq because they know they can get the same thing from Giuliani or Romney (or Newt Gingrich or Fred Thompson if they decide to run)!   

John McCain has also lost a lot of support among Independents and Democrats because of his strong support of Bush's Iraq war policies so there are probably not enough people left in the country who will vote for him even in GOP primary states that allow Independents to vote in primaries where it could make a big enough difference to really help him.

Michael Ware of CNN also made John McCain look like an idiot to most of the country in my opinion:

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/11663 

TRANSCRIPT & ANALYSIS: John McCain goes Round Two with Michael Ware about Iraq!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on April 3, 2007 - 2:46am.

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/11611

Michael Ware calls McCain's comments about Iraq "beyond ludicrous" & "Neverland"

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on March 28, 2007 - 5:02pm.

Chuck Hagel has definitely replaced John McCain as being the "Maverick" in my opinion! 

If McCain really wanted to go to the White House so badly, then he probably should have accepted Kerry's VP offer back in 2004! I kind of wonder if he regrets not accepting that offer right now?

Mitch Dworkin

http://www.securingamerica.com/

http://securingamerica.com/ccn/node/10756
StopIranWar.com: "War is not the answer"
Submitted by Wes Clark on February 21, 2007 - 11:40am.

http://www.securingamerica.com/ccn/node/7191
Listen to Gen. Wes Clark fight for Dems on Sean Hannity's radio program: An excellent example for all of us to follow and what we all need to be doing to help fight back against extreme right wing Neocon smear propaganda!

--------------------

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_051707/content/01125111.guest.html

What Are Republicans Thinking on This Bill?

May 17, 2007

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: This is Lynn in Chester County, Pennsylvania.  It's great to have you with us.

CALLER:  Rush, it's an honor to speak to you, and I am apoplectic about this immigration bill.  I agree with you a thousand percent.  Do you realize, Rush, that former ace prosecutor Rudy Giuliani couldn't properly vet out Bernie Kerik for Homeland Security advisor, but we are expected to believe that 12 million illegal aliens from countries replete with corruption which keep no verifiable legitimate record whatsoever --

RUSH:  I think it was the president that couldn't vet Bernie Kerik.  I mean, Rudy knew.

CALLER:  Well, that's true.  That's true, with all respect to --

RUSH:  But your overall point, I agree with you.  Where is the belief that a brand-new bureaucracy, an inefficient bureaucracy is going to be able to do something that it can't do anywhere else?  We had the Fort Dix Six.  We had the Fort Dix Six. They're here. They're plotting terrorism.  If it weren't for an informant, we wouldn't have the slightest idea.  

CALLER:  But where are we going for these background checks?  I mean presumably to the consulates of these countries and the officials in these countries who are corrupt from the word go.

RUSH:  We're going to relax that.  We're going to relax that. You watch. They're going to slough that off on the employer.  The employer is going to do it.  But it's going to prove too onerous; it's going to prove too costly; it's going to cost businesses money. Look , it's an amnesty program.  There's not one thing in this bill that's redeeming.

CALLER:  I agree.  It's an absurdity. It's absolutely treasonous insofar as I'm concerned, and I also thought that I heard -- I don't want to misquote him -- Tony Snow yesterday allude to the fact that they've committed felonies by virtue of obtaining fraudulent documents to the extent that they have here, and I thought that that in itself was a bar to citizenship. So I don't know how that hurdle is going to be overcome.

RUSH:  Well, don't get me going on any of this because we'll be talking here 'til the program ends and we won't have time for commercials.

CALLER:  Well, we're counting on you, Rush. That's all I want to say.

RUSH:  But obtaining fraudulent documents is going to still happen.  It does now.  What enforcement measure is going to stop it?  There's going to be no incentive to stop it, is the point.  Once your objective is to make it as easy as possible for these people to get legal, what's the incentive to stop it? What's the incentive to man the border? What's the incentive to shore up all the holes in it?  I mean, you've taken the incentive away!  That's not the objective of this.  That's just in there to try to placate people, but people like you are too wise and smart. You're not going to be bought. You're not going to be fooled by it.  The objective here is to get these people as legal as soon as they can possibly get it done.

CALLER:  You're exactly right.  I don't know what there is for the rest of us to do, but that's exactly the right conclusion.

RUSH:  That's the real troubling thing: what to do.  If this were the Dubai Ports Deal, they listened to you on the Dubai Port Deal.  By the way, Halliburton's CEO moving to Dubai soon to set up operations. I have that story in the stack.  I love those two words: Halliburton and Dubai.  Remember the Dubai Ports deal?  You people were livid, and on Capitol Hill the Republicans and Democrats were in a race to see who could first get to the finish line to take credit for stopping it.  There's been just as much outrage over this whole immigration philosophy, but in this case, they say, "You don't know enough to really have an informed opinion about this.  We here in Washington know best what's going on in this deal, and you're just going to have to live with it."  Wait 'til the Republicans -- I mean it's going to show up in the primaries, and McCain is big on this. He was involved in the first effort to get this done.  You just watch the primaries. See if this doesn't put up a huge roadblock for him.  The desire to go out and please this constituency of 12, whatever it is, million illegals, and ignore the people who have voted for you and supported you, I can't explain this, folks. Don't ask me. I cannot give you an answer, other than arrogance and the usual answers.  It doesn't make sense, which is why I can't explain it. I'm not good talking about things that don't make sense, other than liberalism because I have that down pat. 

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I'm looking at a picture on the Fox News Channel right now. It's Senator Kennedy, and they're all excited up there in the Senate.  They're celebrating this deal that they've made now.  The Senate has come to an agreement on granting legal status as quickly as possible to 12 million -- and standing right behind his right shoulder is Senator McCain.  When this picture gets out, Republican primary voters are going to see this, and Senator McCain is going to have what I predicted mere moments ago on this very program: a problem.  This is not something... Here's Ted Kennedy out there. He's taking the credit. "This is great!" He's the guy that's happy on this, and any Republican that's in that same picture is going to have problems.  (interruption) Who doesn't look good?  No, he doesn't. He's not happy, McCain, but he's there.  He doesn't have to be there. He could be in the group, but not in the camera range.  They know where the camera is and where it isn't.  But Ken Salazar is standing behind Senator Kennedy's left shoulder. McCain looks like he's frowning now. He's looking like he has a question in his mind.  Somebody could have said something to him.  It's tough to judge this. I can't hear. I'm not listening to what's being said.

END TRANSCRIPT

Read the Background Material...

AP: Deal Struck on Immigration Bill
WT: White House backs off alien safeguards
NRO: Immigration-Reform Update - Kate O'Beirne
WOAI: Hundreds of Illegals Have Registered to Vote in Bexar County
Reuters: U.S. town opposes "Big Brother" Mexico border fence
AP: Santa Fe Police Department looking into hiring Mexican nationals

*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/57fcb83f-232b-49a6-b003-c2b184481528

Friday, May 18, 2007

Responding To John McCain's Decree

Posted by Hugh Hewitt  | 10:11 AM

John McCain decreed yesterday that his immigration bill would be the law and that there would be no dissent.

My new Townhall.com column, "Damning The Jam-Down," deals with the extraordinary repulsiveness of such a stance, but in practical terms, the only way to respond is by contributing to a serious opponent of McCain, either Mayor Giuliani or Governor Romney. Or both.

If you don't like being treated like a political serf, fund the opponent of the candidate who embodies contempt for the Republican base.

To remind you of the law as laid down by Senator McCain, here is what he said:

We can and must complete this legislation sooner rather than later. We all know that this issue can be caught up in extracurricular politics unless we move forward as quickly as possible.

You are the "extracurricular" --your views, your reaction, your vote.  Simply put, Senator McCain's contempt for you is complete.  React accordingly.

The Senate's GOP leadership has not yet followed Senator McCain over the cliff. I hope they wake up in time to realize the party-splitting peril they are in with the proposed jam down on the table.

| Email It  |   Print It  |   Take Action |   Comments (17)  |   Trackbacks (2)

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on May 18, 2007 - 3:11pm.

These crazy people mock John McCain, have nothing but sheer hatred toward McCain, and they would never let him win the 2008 GOP nomination!

They attack McCain just like how they would any Democrat who they do not like:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/today.guest.html   

Parody: NSA Wiretap Catches McCain: http://mfile.akamai.com/5020/wma/rushlimb.download.akamai.com/5020/New/mccaincall.asx

Parody: McCain Explains http://mfile.akamai.com/5020/wma/rushlimb.download.akamai.com/5020/New/mccaindetainees.asx

McCain Sings: You're Our Guest Worker Now!

McCain Sings: Bomb Iran

Where Have All the Conservatives Gone? http://mfile.akamai.com/5020/wma/rushlimb.download.akamai.com/5020/New/WHEREHAVEALLTHECONSERVATIVESGONE.asx

It's Open Line Friday!

Dittoheads Have McCain on Their Minds

Why McCain Wins in Arizona: http://mfile.akamai.com/5020/wma/rushlimb.download.akamai.com/5020/clips/06/05/052606_2_mccain.asx  (1:20)

McCain's Gambit: Democrat Votes: http://mfile.akamai.com/5020/wma/rushlimb.download.akamai.com/5020/clips/06/05/052606_7_gary.asx  (9:39)

Does McCain Just Want To Get Even? http://mfile.akamai.com/5020/wma/rushlimb.download.akamai.com/5020/clips/06/05/052606_8_mccain_grudge.asx  (3:13)

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on May 18, 2007 - 3:21pm.

I have been saying this for months now in many of my posts!

This is why John McCain will NOT be the 2008 GOP nominee short of some very huge miracle happening in his favor:

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_051607/content/01125111.guest.html

My Power to Pick the GOP Nominee

May 16, 2007

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I've had some e-mails about this, and I want to go back and review something I said in response to the caller who was chastising me -- well, he wasn't chastising me, but he was talking about my lack of support for the Congressman Ron Paul, who's a presidential candidate.  He pointed out something that I very rarely address, ladies and gentlemen, and very rarely acknowledge.  It was a big moment in the history of this program.  When this man said that I have the power to move the Republican base toward a nominee, we all know that's true.  I seldom acknowledge this because I'm very humble about it, and I do not use my forum here to exercise such power in those ways.  The exercise of my, quote, unquote, "power," is not something I'm really conscious of on a daily basis, but it would be foolish and silly of me to deny that I possess it.  The primary effort in the usage of my power is to educate and inform as many people as possible to get in the arena of ideas and actually go vote, because I believe in ideas, and ideas triumph -- and when elections are won, I want them to be won on ideas, not labels and other things that are devoid of substance.  This is a very responsible position that I must be cognizant of and use in a responsible manner, this kind of power, which is why it's not first and foremost on my mind.

But I did want to make note that I, finally, have now acknowledged what everybody knows, and it is one of the reasons that I am the biggest target of the American left. It's simply because of that power.  This is a power, my friends, that could be used for good or evil.  I choose to use it for good.  "Did you really say that?" Yes, I said it.  "Did you really mean it?"  Yes, I meant it.  It's the elephant in the room.  Why deny it?  That would be false humility, and there's nothing that grates on me more than a person that engages in false humility and tries to laugh it off.  Some people consider it good manners, but you and I have always dealt with each other straight-up and honestly.  I'm not going to sit here and deny what you all know.  That would insult you -- and insulting you, the people in this audience is the one thing that I don't do.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Josh in Logan, Utah, thank you for waiting, sir, and welcome to the program.

CALLER:  Thank you, Rush.  Mega conservative dittos from beautiful northern Utah.

RUSH:  Thank you, sir.

CALLER:  Hey, I just have a quick comment.  I had a little more respect for you today back when you were talking about your power in -- you didn't want to mention any candidate because you know it would just mean an absolute surge for them in the polls. 

RUSH:  Well, wait, wait, wait, wait! Whoa, whoa. That's not quite what I said.  I didn't choose a candidate because I haven't decided on one yet.

CALLER:  Exactly.  But what I'm saying is you recognized your power that, you know, if you were to say anything positive or negative, it has a lot of sway.  I just wanted to compliment you on that.  I came across a quote a couple years ago, and it hits you to a T.  It said, "The highest proof of virtue is to possess boundless power and not abuse it."

RUSH:  I think that's fitting in this circumstance. That's brilliant that you remembered that.  I think it's perfectly fitting here.  Well, this was a big event today, folks.  Everybody has told me of the kind of power I have to move things, to be used for good and evil in this country.

CALLER:  Exactly, and you recognize when you need to use it and when you need to use restraint.  Nobody gives you credit for the restraint, which shows a huge amount of character.

RUSH:  Well, the powerful don't look for credit.

CALLER:  Exactly, and you never do anything self-serving.  I know, that's what I call it --

RUSH:  Gods do not answer mail.

CALLER:  -- you would never draw attention to it yourself.

RUSH:  Well, you know, I answer mail. Don't misunderstand that.  People know I answer e-mail all the time.  I was just trying to point out: people are always telling me that I have all this power, and I've always pooh-poohed it.  I thought that's insulting to the audience.  False humility is not attractive.  It's not inspiring.  It can turn people off, and it was a major thing for me to admit -- and it came in a call from a Ron Paul supporter who was asking me to use my power in order to get his candidate some motion and movement in the campaign.  So, yes. There's no question I have, single-handedly, the ability to move things in this regard, but I'm not conscious of it each and every day.  It's not why I have this position, do this show, or have this job.  But, it would be silly to deny my power, so I don't anymore.

END TRANSCRIPT

*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on May 18, 2007 - 3:24pm.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_051707/content/01125106.guest.html

This is Worse Than Doing Nothing: Immigration Bill Will Make Things Worse

May 17, 2007

BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I have an immigration stack today that we're going to be spending a lot of time on.  I'm going to answer questions.  I have a lot of people upset that I didn't fully answer the question from the woman that called yesterday from Flint, wondering why can't the oil companies just "be fair" and lower their profits a little bit so as to help us all out.  I'm going to answer that in great detail here from a number of different points of view, contexts, or what have you.  I have lots of other interesting things that are all over the board here today.  The immigration bill, I guess, is the thing.  This is I think D-Day for it as of now. The AP has a story:  "A bipartisanship group of senators, scrambling with White House officials to reach an elusive agreement to fortify the border and grant quick legal status to millions of illegal immigrants living in the US. Senator Kennedy, the Democrats' lead negotiator, called Thursday D-Day in the talks, saying it was likely the last chance for a compromise before Senators scattered for a three-day weekend.  If no deal emerges, Senate Democrats were to vote Monday evening to bring up an immigration measure that passed last year over the objections of most Republicans who have said they will block it.  It would be a highly partisan start to the immigration debate, divides the two parties," and so forth and so on.  Dingy Harry, the Senate majority leader, said that he wants to complete a bill before Memorial Day, and President Bush says he wants to sign one by summer's end.  

This bill is worse than doing nothing.  We're back to the same old thing, and this is one of the things about Washington that's very frustrating.  "There has to be a bill. Congress has to do something. We must get something."  No, Congress doesn't have to do anything.  The immigration circumstance right now is bad enough. This bill is going to make it much, much worse.  What's happening now is in order to get a bill; in order to be able to say they've moved forward on immigration. In order to be able to say that something's "been done," the Republicans are in the process, along with the White House, of backing off some of their original demands in this.  The Bush administration, trying to win this immigration agreement with the Democrats, is now backing away from safeguards which are designed to target businesses that hire illegal aliens and to prevent a repeat of the rampant fraud that resulted from the '86 amnesty.  This is what Tony Snow was talking about with us on the program yesterday.  They were going to enforce this. We talked to him yesterday and asked him, "How are you gonna enforce this?  The power of the law itself is not going to force these illegals to show up, sign up, and pay their fines." 

"We're going to have businesses do that.  We're going to have businesses that hire illegals find out about them and we're going to check on the illegals before they get on the path to citizenship." 

That's the stuff that now the Republicans are expecting to throw out in order to get Democrat support. Republicans, according to the Washington Times, "are pleading with the Bush administration to hold firm on these safeguards, arguing that otherwise any new guest worker program will be unworkable.  John Cornyn said, 'We need their help on that,'" meaning the White House.  "Democrats say Republicans are asking for too many restrictions and checks on illegal aliens before they can get on the path to citizenship, and object to restrictions on future guest workers... Twenty years after the 1986 amnesty, which legalized 2.7 million illegal aliens, lawsuits are still pending from some who were denied. And one in four of those granted legal status submitted fraudulent applications, according to the Center for Immigration Studies.  Federal law also prevents the Social Security Administration or the Internal Revenue Service from sharing information about illegal aliens," sort of like we couldn't share information on terrorists during the Clinton years between the FBI and the CIA because they would take everything to grand juries where evidence was presented, and, of course, it's private. 

So some of the things that we were told yesterday that were in here to safeguard, are already being relaxed. The Republicans and the White House are threatening. The Democrats argue that removing confidentiality and sharing information could deter illegal aliens from coming forward to join the legalization program.  The Democrats are basically saying, "If you investigate fraud via information sharing, then the illegals may not come forward."  I'll tell you what, let's make an exception for fraud, then.  Let's just make an exception for fraud.  We're doing everything else in this bill that's cockamamie and out of the world, so let's just excuse the fraud that exists here.  We're already excusing the illegal status.  It's like I said yesterday, the thing about this that just doesn't make any sense is that we're treating the illegals as though we are doing something wrong, as though we've been bad and we're guilty of something.  We want them to forgive us!  Folks, I'm going to tell you something.  If this happens, I've already told you that I think, as we sit here today, there is an 80% that Hillary Clinton will be the next president of the United States.  If this happens, if this immigration bill goes through as the latest reports indicate that it might, we are doomed in '08.  We are doomed because this would just be the next and maybe the last straw as far as the Republican base is concerned in being able to trust Republicans that it elects to represent them because there's not much of that happening in this particular area.

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Kate O'Beirne, National Review Online, is calling the latest incarnation of this immigration bill, "faith-based immigration reform," which is a great line, because what's going to happen here, all of these protections that are ostensibly built in, they're probably going to be removed.  I asked Tony Snow yesterday, "What about these fines?"  I can just see it happening now, after this bill passes -- if it does; you don't know what's going to happen in the House, and it may be stalled in the Senate for a while. It depends on whether the Republicans, enough of them, can raise enough ruckus in there to get the minority leader, Mitch McConnell, to demand a full and open debate on this thing, which is not happening.  It's 600 pages long. 

But all these fines, I'm just going to predict to you right now that it will not be long -- if this thing passes that, after awhile -- people will say, "These fines are just too oppressive.  We can't treat these poor people this way! They're just coming here to better their lives. We have no business!"

Well, you wrote the law! 

"I know, but we're rethinking it now."

This is the way it's going to happen.  This really roils the Democrats and some of the Republicans in the White House who support it, but it's an amnesty bill. That's the end result of it.  They can argue the finer points of the definition of the term, but I don't know. We're doomed here, folks, if this goes through as is, because the base is a significant number and will remember this, and say, "We just can't trust Republicans. There's no reason to elect 'em."

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH:  Well, here it is, the AP just has the flash news alert: "A bipartisan group of senators and the White House have reached agreement on an immigration bill to provide quick legal status to millions of illegal immigrants."  That's the only detail I have now, but that's pretty much all we need.  Now, it has to go over to the House, and remember it was the House that killed this in August.  Well, we don't control the House anymore, folks! Elections have consequences.  The Democrats run the House of Representatives, and who knows what will happen there.  They might rubber stamp this bill, or they might have their own version, go to conference or what have you, but the Senate wanted to get this done before their Memorial Day recess.  I don't know when the House is going to take it up.  The president wants it on his desk to sign by August or some such thing.  Everybody is hoping that we'll forget about this in November of '08.  Anybody that ends up supporting this, it's going to be very, very difficult for me to support.  This is a bad deal. It's unfortunate. We just have to see what the next stage of this is and how it develops.  

BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Henry in Warren, Michigan, it's nice to have you on the program, sir.  Hello.

CALLER:  Rush, it's a great honor and pleasure to be on the radio with you, and thank you for taking the call.

RUSH:  Thank you, sir.

CALLER:  First of all -- and four quick points. I'm a listener since '88 when you were still on only two hours, and I remember one of your first calls. We had an unemployed and depressed black man that the next day called and you had a guy offer him a job. Do you remember that one particular call?

RUSH:  Yes, well, maybe not that one specific but that's happened a lot of times with this program.

CALLER:  That's what got me to listening to you, in August of '88 when you first started.

RUSH:  Yeah, that's right. That's when it all started. History was made that day.

CALLER:  I'll tell you what, I don't have an older brother but in many respects I look to you as my older brother -- and kind of like you listen to your dad, I kind of listened to you and grew more conservative as I've taken on a lot of ideas that you brought up.  I'm drinking coffee out of a super soaker-induced Rush mug, if you remember those.

RUSH:  Absolutely.

CALLER:  What I wanted to say is this.  I fear today the country, the US, is going to go 100% socialist from a political standpoint because of the floodgates. Because you import a mind-set, and that's what they've actually done now with this law. If it actually gets signed by Bush, I think economically we're going to be like Europe.

RUSH:  You're talking about the immigration bill?

CALLER:  Yes.

RUSH:  Okay.  So we're importing socialism?

CALLER:  In effect, we're giving the last vestiges of a 50-50 country.  It's now going to split.  It's going to turn over to the socialist side.

RUSH:  Yeah, but we're also exporting a lot of liberalism and screwing up the countries we're competing with out there.

CALLER:  Well, I don't know about that.

RUSH:  Yes, we are. We've been doing it for a long time. Wait 'til the Chinese get their own version of the NAGs.  That's going to happen.

CALLER:  Okay.  Last real quick point, I think I'm having a Reagan moment.  Remember when Reagan said that he didn't leave the Democratic Party, the Democratic Party left him?  I had that same moment.  The GOP has just left us and they're going to hear silence on voting day because a lot of us who volunteered on the last couple of elections, that wrote checks and are voting Republican are just going to wave at the guys coming to the door and say, "Go somewhere else. No GOP lives here."  I'm very disappointed.

RUSH:  Not only that, if this goes through as is, the Republican Party in '08 could well be doomed, but so could we as a country.  I have this great fear that the first thing that's going to go by the wayside in this immigration bill is the whole concept of border security, the signs are there.  The fence is only going to be so big. They'll do cursory roundups and tell us the big numbers, but it's going to be easier for malcontents -- I'm not talking about Mexicans; I'm talking about terrorists to get in here -- with the relaxation here with loss of incentive to control the border, to get it. They even have a definition of legal and illegal, I don't know. I'm troubled by it.  But I don't think the country's finished yet because I don't think the American people are going to put up with the country being finished, and I know that I as host am not going to put up with the country being finished, because there's nowhere else I want to live.  So we're going to do everything we can to save the country, and I think we will.  But you can do that a lot of ways other than just voting for people.  You have a lot more power in your life than just who you vote for, because you can't win every election.  If you start losing them, and you get bent out of shape over losing every election, you're defining your life by that -- and there's much, much more to life than who wins and loses elections, believe me.  That's why my success is not defined by who wins elections. It never has been, nor is it my objective. 

END TRANSCRIPT

Read the Background Material...

AP: Deal Struck on Immigration Bill
WT: White House backs off alien safeguards
NRO: Immigration-Reform Update - Kate O'Beirne
WOAI: Hundreds of Illegals Have Registered to Vote in Bexar County
Reuters: U.S. town opposes "Big Brother" Mexico border fence
AP: Santa Fe Police Department looking into hiring Mexican nationals

*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on May 18, 2007 - 9:25pm.

http://www.spectator.org/dsp_article.asp?art_id=11458

Political Hay

No Amnesty for McCain
By W. James Antle III
Published 5/18/2007 12:08:55 AM

With the White House's blessing, the Senate has reached a deal on immigration. And Sen. John McCain has handed his opponents for the Republican nomination a mighty club to wield against him -- if they choose to use it.

As Rudy Giuliani's lead over the Arizona senator slipped into the single digits in many national polls, McCain assumed a lower profile on the immigration issue. Sen. Sam Brownback went even further, repudiating his support for last year's Senate bill containing a path to citizenship for illegal immigrants. Now there is a new bill offering such a provision and McCain, like fellow Arizonan Jon Kyl, is on board.

However the rest of the field responds, this much is clear: When Ronald Reagan revived his flagging 1976 presidential campaign by railing against the Panama Canal Treaty, many observers were shocked by the issue's resonance. Today, no one can be surprised when conservatives speak out against anything that can be construed as amnesty for illegal immigrants.

The reaction to the immigration announcement was swift. Newt Gingrich, the former House speaker and perhaps future presidential candidate, denounced it on Sean Hannity's radio show as "a sellout of every conservative principle." The Heritage Foundation agreed. Congressman Mike Pence issued a statement calling the bill an amnesty.

While the deal was being picked apart by talk radio and the blogs, John McCain was appearing on television with Ted Kennedy to promote it. Arlen Specter's presence -- and insistence that the Senate isn't talking about amnesty -- doesn't give McCain much cover with conservatives. Neither does the news that the bill was drafted with the help of liberal groups like the National Council of La Raza.

Is it amnesty? Like past versions of McCain-Kennedy, the bill offers illegal aliens a path to citizenship and creates a new guest-worker program. Supporters argue that the measure only applies to illegals who have passed a background check while paying fines and back taxes. In a new twist, guest workers could only be admitted and unlawful immigrants legalized after certain enforcement provisions have taken effect. And in the long term, the legislation may shift the immigration system's focus away from family reunification and toward employment skills.

But there are already concerns that the "enforcement triggers" may prove more fungible than advertised. If the Democrats win in 2008, do conservatives trust Hillary's Department of Homeland Security to certify that the borders are secure? Worse, the bill creates probationary "Z visas" for illegal immigrants present and working in the United States since the beginning of this year as well as their parents, spouses, and children.

The probationary period begins before any of the enforcement triggers are pulled. The visa-holders are eligible to stay in the country indefinitely, possibly undermining the appeal of the path to citizenship. And all this assumes that the country's existing immigration bureaucracy, with a backlog of 4 million unresolved cases, can properly determine the status of at least 12 million people in a timely manner.

It may be 1986 all over again. After that year's Immigration Reform and Control Act became law, nearly twice as many people applied as officials expected and over 90 percent were accepted. Today the numbers are even greater. So is the potential for amnesty to occur without the promised enforcement ever materializing.

Mitt Romney was quick to pounce. "I strongly oppose today's bill going through the Senate," he said in a statement. "It's the wrong approach." All eyes are on Rudy -- and the rest of the GOP contenders, all the way down to the bottom tier. McCain has helped give his rivals an opportunity to appeal to disaffected conservatives on a populist issue.

"Life is unfair," John F. Kennedy observed. However mistaken this deal, McCain is as much a conviction politician on immigration as Tom Tancredo. Giuliani once sued to block welfare and immigration reform laws he believed were too strict with New York City's illegal aliens. Romney took a position similar in principle to this bill's language as recently as Tuesday's South Carolina debate.

But conservative voters will remember the immigration partnership between John McCain and Ted Kennedy. In a Republican primary, that is dangerous company to keep.

W. James Antle III is associate editor of The American Spectator.

Stan4Clark's picture
Submitted by Stan4Clark on May 19, 2007 - 12:14am.

My sister, who lives in Chattanooga, was a big volunteer in the Bob Corker for Senate campaign. Tonight (Friday) was the Hamilton County Lincoln dinner, so lots of people she knew from the campaign were there. She told me that the phones in the Corker office had been ringing off the wall all day demanding that Corker vote against the bill, once it's completely fleshed out and put up for a vote. (Corker will oppose it.)

Stan Davis
Lakewood, CO
If not us, WHO? If not now, WHEN?
BE THE CHANGE you wish to see in the world.


Submitted by Ellen on May 19, 2007 - 2:05am.
Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on May 19, 2007 - 10:14pm.

Hi Ellen:

John Cornyn is my Senator here in Texas which I am very ashamed to say!

He is up for reelection in 2008 and I have not heard of any serious names to run against him yet.

Cornyn in my opinion is an example of a GOP Senator who has a safe seat in a very red state who can do practically anything he feels like and not have to worry about a GOP primary challenger or a serious Democratic challenger which is a very dangerous thing in my opinion!

I really hope that something changes very soon about that situation with John (Bush rubber-stamp) Cornyn!

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on May 19, 2007 - 7:07pm.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/05/18/AR2007051801970.html?hpid=topnews

Immigrant Legislation Splits GOP
Right Lashes Out At Bush and Senate Over Compromise

By Michael Abramowitz
Washington Post Staff Writer
Saturday, May 19, 2007; Page A01

President Bush's embrace of compromise immigration legislation has split the Republican Party, as several GOP presidential candidates quickly came out against the deal and the conservative base reacted with fury.

Key figures on the right, including conservative talk radio hosts, analysts at the Heritage Foundation and National Review columnists, derided the agreement as a sellout of conservative principles, while GOP presidential candidates criticized the plan as a form of amnesty -- a characterization rejected by the White House.

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who last year said similar efforts for a comprehensive immigration bill were "reasonable," called the deal reached this week the "wrong approach" to the problem. "Any legislation that allows illegal immigrants to stay in the country indefinitely, as the new Z Visa does, is a form of amnesty," he said.

Although the White House is also facing an uproar on the left, the conservative reaction underscores both the volatile role immigration continues to play in GOP politics and Bush's only mixed success in moving his party toward a vision of an open, immigrant-friendly society, which he has promoted since he was governor of Texas. Bush once hoped the vision might help realign American politics by bringing Hispanics into the GOP tent, but as it is, GOP opposition is a key impediment to his realizing a final big domestic victory before the end of his presidency.

White House officials said they fully anticipated the conservative reaction and acknowledge they face a big challenge in educating even their strongest supporters about a bill that would provide increased border security, create a temporary-worker program and allow many of the 12 million illegal immigrants in the United States a chance to earn a green card if they pay fines and return first to their country of origin. The Senate will debate the measure next week, and the House is expected to take up the issue sometime this summer.

Tensions have already run high among Senate Republicans who have been immersed in negotiations over the bill. Presidential aspirant John McCain (R-Ariz.), one of the Senate's strongest champions for the immigration bill, has been pilloried by his rivals for pushing a comprehensive approach to the issue. In a bipartisan meeting on the bill Thursday morning, the tensions apparently boiled over.

According to several sources, McCain and Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) got into a shouting match when Cornyn began voicing concerns about the number of judicial appeals illegal immigrants could make. After McCain swore at Cornyn and accused him of trying to blow up the pact, Cornyn accused the presidential candidate of "parachuting" into the negotiations at the last minute. McCain, who helped craft an immigration deal last year in the Senate but has been represented by staffers in most meetings this year, blew up at Cornyn, saying, "I know more about this than anyone else in the room."

McCain's camp denied that he claimed superior knowledge of the bill but acknowledged that the two Republicans went at it. "These negotiations can be very tense, and there was a spirited exchange. That's it," said Brian Jones, McCain's presidential campaign spokesman...

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on May 20, 2007 - 12:49am.

http://newsbusters.org/node/12862

Globe Echoes McCain's Disdain: Voters Not 'Rational' on Immigration

Posted by Mark Finkelstein on May 19, 2007 - 07:18.


This is the first step. We can and must complete this legislation sooner rather than later. We all know that this issue can be caught up in extracurricular politics unless we move forward as quickly as possible. -- Sen. John McCain [R-AZ], May 17th.



Now is probably the last window for action on comprehensive reform before presidential politics thwart any rational debate. -- Boston Globe editorial, May 19th.

That the Boston Globe would want to ram through the amnesty-based immigration bill comes as no surprise. But what does it say about Republican presidential hopeful John McCain that the Globe's entreaty tracks McCain's so closely?
Hugh Hewtt has described the operative sentiment as "a repulsive attitude of contempt towards the voters who elected the senators."

It is hard to see it as anything else. For implicit in "McGlobe's" decrying of "politics" is a shared disdain for the people. The great unwashed proletariat, nativist yahoos that they are, cannot be permitted to intrude as their enlightened betters do what is necessary and right.

Except that what is being proposed in this amnesty-first immigration bill is unnecessary and wrong. And as for keeping people and politics out, it's way too late. For with his avid support for this legislation, McCain has sealed his fate with Republican primary voters. He will not be the nominee, and I would predict will not even be in the race by the time New Hampshire rolls around.

You might say the Globe has played a useful role with its predictably pro-amnesty editorial. It has clearly exposed in just what kind of circles John McCain is running.

Contact Mark at

      

Mark Finkelstein's blog | login or register to post comments
Categories: 2008 Presidential | Boston Globe | Campaigns & Elections | Immigration | John McCain

Submitted by Mitch Dworkin on May 21, 2007 - 3:15am.

http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/home/daily/site_051807/content/01125106.guest.html

The 700-Plus Page "Destroy the Republican Party" Immigration Bill

May 18, 2007

BEGIN TRANSCRIPTRUSH: Illegal immigration. Lots to say about this today, but I don't want to go overboard on it. This thing is 700-plus pages. One of the things that I think is crucial here: this is not going to go to the Senate floor for debate, not going to be much of that, either, until Monday. So from now through the weekend, and all through the Sunday shows, we're going to be hearing about a piece of legislation that hardly anybody has ever seen, yet they're going to be talking about it as though they are experts and as though it's etched in stone. There are walls of opposition that are being built on all sides to this. Frankly, some of the most irritating things... There's a big story in the New York Post today, there's the story in the Los Angeles Times. When you want to find an illegal to interview 'em, somehow you can, and they pop up, and they'll give you their names and so forth. They're telling people they're not happy with this. Now, yesterday and the day before, one of the points I made about this whole thing is it doesn't make sense to me. We're acting like we're the lawbreakers, and we're acting like we owe them something because we're mistreating them. We're acting like we're the criminals here -- and they have taken the bait.

You can't blame 'em. They're being promised a brand-new, giant, welfare state paid by the rest of us, and they're out there saying, "I don't like this. I don't like having to go home. I don't like having to go back. I'm not sure I want to pay these fines." Don't worry! You're not going to have to go home. You're not going to pay any fines. It's not going to happen. Once this bill passes, they'll be talking about, "It will split up families! We can't split up families," and of course you can't pay the fine because the libs will say, "Well, we're taking food out of the mouths of poor children by making their parents pay these ridiculous fines," even though it's in the legislation. You might wonder, why are the Republicans doing this? I'm going to get into this in great detail as the program unfolds. There are different reasons for different Republicans, depends on who you're talking about. I once told you that you could legalize rape in this country if you simply called it the Civil Rights Act of 2007, because nobody on Capitol Hill's got the guts to vote against anything that claims to be broadening or creating civil rights. It's codeword. What's happening here is that the proponents of this -- and it's not new. They've actually been laying the groundwork for this.

"If you oppose this, why, you're a racist! Why, you're cold-hearted. You're cruel. You're mean-spirited. You don't like people of color," and, of course, you start telling an elected official that he's a racist and a bigot and anti-Hispanic or whatever, he's going to turn on a dime, because the last thing in the world he wants or she wants is to have that said about them, and to show up in a campaign ad the next time they come up for reelection. Then you have people like Senator McCain. I'm going to just read this, and see what I have very quickly here with McCain. I'm going to read it. McCain said, "We can and must complete this legislation sooner rather than later. We all know that this issue can be caught up in extracurricular politics unless we move forward as quickly as possible." Now, that is unbridled, unknown arrogance. Can I define a term for you here? When he says, "We all know that this issue can be caught up in extracurricular politics," that means you -- YOU -- can stop this, the American people. You start debating this, and you are "extracurricular politics." What that means is, "We in the Senate, we in this exclusive club, we are not going to listen to you. We don't care what you think about this. You are extracurricular politics. We gotta move forward as quickly as possible before you people find out what's in this bill and get really mad and stop it." It's too important. Senator Kennedy is saying the same thing. Here's Kennedy. Grab audio sound bite number five and not number four. Here's Senator Kennedy yesterday. The Senate held a news conference out there.

KENNEDY: We must strike while the iron is hot. I've been around here long enough to know that opportunities like this don't come very often. The American people are demanding a solution.

RUSH: They're not.

KENNEDY: The president is committed, Senator Reid has made this a priority. Senators from both parties are now determined to solve this crisis. Politics is the art of the possible, and the agreement we just reached is the best possible chance we will have in years to secure our borders, bring millions of people out of the shadow and into the sunshine of America.

RUSH: All you gotta do is send journalists to where they live and they'll come out of the shadows. You don't have to give them free access to our hammocks and our welfare state. But here you have it, "We must strike while the iron is hot. I've been around here a long time." He's right. He's been there 47 years! It is too long, folks. These people are dinosaurs. The Senate is becoming Jurassic Park. "The American people are demanding a solution." Yes, but not yours! "The president's committed." Yes, and I'll tell you why in a moment. Senator Reid has made this a priority. Oh, by the way, Dingy Harry and Nancy Pelosi are also in the crowd, saying, "Well, I'm not sure we like this," and that's just strategic maneuvering. The reason they're doing this is, they want the bill to appear to be moderate -- and with Senator Kennedy involved, of course, it's moderate. So they're out there objecting to it. "Ah, there are provisions in here I don't like here." They're just trying to toughen it up. They're trying to make it even more unwieldy, but it's a strategic maneuver. They love this. It's going to have some problems in the House, if it gets out of the Senate in its current form.

Here's Ted Kennedy on immigration. Let me give you some quotes from Senator Kennedy from 1965. 1965! Let's do the math here. Thirty-five plus seven. That's 42 years ago. Senator Kennedy in 1965: "The bill will not flood our cities with immigrants. It will not upset the ethnic mix of our society, it will not relax the standards of admission, it will not cause American workers to lose their jobs." This is immigration bill in '65. It did exactly that. In 1986, Simpson-Mazzoli, "This amnesty will give citizenship to only 1.1 to 1.3 million illegal aliens, will secure the borders henceforth. We will never again bring forward another amnesty bill like this." That's Senator Kennedy 1986! Senator Kennedy said yesterday, "Now is the time for action: 2007 is the year we must fix our broken system." Let me tell you the dirty little secret. This is exactly what Ted Kennedy wanted in '65 to happen. It's what he wanted to happen in '86. He knew it was going to happen. All this is a bunch of BS. He's very excited that this is happening now. These are future Democrat voters. It's an opportunity. They need new victims. With new victims they get to create and expand the welfare system paid for by all of us.

BREAK TRANSCRIPTRUSH: We're discussing the Comprehensive Destroy the Republican Party Act, today, and the Republicans are too idiotic to figure out that that's what this is. What the liberals are trying to do is tear this country down institution by institution and rebuild it in their image, and this is one of the steps that they're trying to do this. Now, this bill, if it comes out of the Senate in its current form -- and it's highly doubtful that it will, because we're going to turn this into the next Dubai Ports Deal, folks. Get ready to get mobilized here. If it comes out in its present form and goes over to the House, they have a whole bunch of House freshmen in there that are not going to vote for this because they want to get reelected. The opposition of this crosses party lines. There are Democrats in California and Arizona and Texas and Virginia. Look, we've lost California. It used to be a Republican state. We've lost it. It's gone. We don't even compete there, do we? When we elect a Republican governor, look what he has to do to stay in office: become one of them. If we lose Virginia and we lose Florida, folks, it's over. I'm talking about electorally here. This is very, very serious stuff. These Democrats will get hurt, some of them will, particularly the freshmen in the House. The Senate Democrats, the Democrats would love for the Republicans to be the ones seen as passing this bill.
 
They would love two things to happen: the bill get passed, and they get to build their new welfare state. You know, one of the provisions in this is scary. It allows family members to come on in -- and, by the way, don't believe this business that they gotta go back home, come back, get in line and so forth. The minute this bill passes in whatever form -- the minute the president puts signature on it -- they are legal. That is something everybody's missing. They are legal without having to leave the country or go home or come back and do anything. The fact of the matter is that the Democrats would love for this thing to get passed and create their new welfare state -- and then the anger in the country over it be directed at the Republicans. The key to this is, there's a Republican president that's going to sign it! So if you don't think that Democrats can shift the credit for this, they're focused on the end results here. Now, let me share a couple things here out of the news. Los Angeles Times: "Illegal Immigrants Skeptical About Overhaul." Who cares? You know, who else can we confer legal status on? How about bank robbers? I just saw that a guy held up a bank somewhere. Why are we trying to do this, stigmatizing these people? Who else are we going to find in our society breaking our laws that we feel guilty about that we are going to confer legal status on them and get rid of the stigma?
 
Al-Qaeda! (Very good answer, H.R.) Let's confirm legal status on Al-Qaeda -- and, by the way, I have to ask. You know, we have Club Gitmo. We have terrorists and Al-Qaeda, and they're going to get released at some point. Bring 'em in! They're just seeking a better life, in their terms, in their own way. Are they going to get immediate access and their family? This family business, these people are going to bring in their families. We're not talking 12 million. We're talking 48 million -- and if you think that's not going to happen, the bill provides for it. If you think it's not going to happen, wait 'til you hear the Senator Kennedys and even some on our side caterwauling about how we're splitting up families. "We're already doing that. We gotta let these people in! We can't charge these fines. Why, that's taking food out of the mouths of hungry babies," blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. So we're looking at a profound demographic shift in the makeup of the population of the country, and that's another one of the things that's getting some attention. So much of this... I went to the Library of Congress website where I looked at the bill. I didn't even have time to print out the text of the bill, just the headers. It's massive! It's over 700 pages. There's nobody that's read the whole thing. Anyway, the LA Times has a story with the illegal immigrants "skeptical" about the overhaul bill.
 
Of course, what I said yesterday is given life in quotes today: "Well, you know, those fines are a lot of money. I'd have to leave and go home! I don't like that provision. I don't want to have to leave and go home, and I don't want to pay that fine. That's a lot of money. Being a single mother with three kids, that would be very hard on me." Oh, well, we're sorry! We'll rescind the fine, and we won't make you go home. Why, that's just going to cost somebody some transportation. You can see how this is going to shape up, but we sit here and we're on the defensive. We're acting like we've committed the crime here, that we owe these people an apology. "Legally, the program isn't going to work. We need amnesty for everybody without requirements." This is another illegal immigrant saying this. "Amnesty without requirements." Then in the LA Times: "Immigration Bill Faces a Wall of Opposition. -- Bill Nelson of Florida wants legal immigration fixed before amnesty. Charles Grassley doesn't want info sharing." You know, that's Patriot Act times ten. He doesn't want violation of civil rights. There's opposition from both sides of this story.
 
Here in the New York Times in a story by Robert Pear and our old buddy Jim Rutenberg: "John J. Sweeney, president of the A.F.L.-C.I.O., denounced the bill from a different angle, saying it would create 'a massive guest worker program.' 'All workers will suffer because employers will have available a ready pool of labor they can exploit to drive down wages, benefits, health and safety protections and other workplace standards,' Mr. Sweeney said. Senator Byron L. Dorgan," Senator Helmet Head from North Dakota, "said he would offer an amendment to eliminate the guest worker program from the bill." So there's opposition out there. Some of the opposition on the part of Democrats is clearly stragegic posturing. Hugh Hewitt on his blog today at Townhall.com said something really, really good, and I want to share this with you. He wrote: "GOP Leader McConnell has got to recognize the spreading disaster and call a very public halt to it, and do so with transparency, something along the lines of 'Well, we tried, but it is clear that our party is opposed to the only bill the Democrats would allow to get to the floor, so it is shelved until after 2008. The presidential candidates will have to debate it as will our respective parties, but the GOP is for border security first.'"
 
That's what he would like McConnell to say -- and that's, by the way, make this a debate issue for the presidential candidates, absolutely right. Why ram this thing down everybody's throats? Because it can't stand that kind of scrutiny, that's why. The reason it's not being debated, the reason... Do you realize no common Senate procedure was followed in putting this together? We always have oversight hearings. They have witnesses come in to discuss the impact of this element of the legislation. There was none of that. None of the usual stuff that goes into this boiling cauldron of garbage that produces legislation happened here. The compromise occurred behind closed doors, between members of the Republican Party and the Democrat Party in the Senate, and they come out and say, "We have a bill." That's not how it happens. It's not illegal, but this is just not normal Senate procedure, and Hewitt's point here is right on the money -- and McConnell can do this. McConnell can kill it.

He's got all kinds of procedural options at his disposal, and to say, "Look, our party doesn't like this, and this is the only bill, the only bill the Democrats are gonna allow to get to the Senate floor? Well, we're going to put this off until 2008. We need this to be a part of the presidential debate." It's an excellent, excellent point. So when you boil it all down here, we're looking at a total sellout. The Comprehensive Destroy the Republican Party Act of 2007. You know what? Citizenship is not the issue here. This is another thing.
 
You know, there's so many terms that the supporters of this are using to try to capture your heart and to wrest control of your emotions. This is not about citizenship. To say it's about citizenship is a diversion. All of these people will become legal the moment Bush signs the bill. Whether they become citizens or not, they become legal -- and the courts have ruled that we gotta educate the children of illegals in some states. We have to educate the children of illegal immigrants! Even though they're not citizens, we have to pay their health care. Hello, new welfare state sanctioned simply by the signature on the bill. Don't get caught up in citizenship. Get caught up in the word "legal" and what that will mean legally and financially.BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: I want to make this point again that citizenship is not the issue here. That's a diversion. When the president signs this immigration bill -- all this is down the road -- all of these illegals become legal, and that's the key. When they become legal, they are conferred with rights and benefits. Those rights and benefits are immediately conferred upon them. They are here legally. They cannot be deported. They can work wherever they want. They can live wherever they want. They receive the same due-process rights as the rest of us. This is the big lie in the bill, where they tell us all the measures an illegal has to take to become a citizen, have to pay $5,000, have to go home, come back and so forth. They become legal immediately. All of that is just window dressing to make you think there's going to have to be some sort of effort made on these people's part for this to happen, but it's not. Once they become legal, citizenship or no citizenship, then it's over. They are legally entitled to the welfare state. They are legally entitled to whatever any other citizen is entitled to, even though they're not citizens. Ted Kennedy knows this. The ethnic groups that had veto...
 
Do you know that the Democrats had La Raza and other activist organizations in the negotiations with Republican senators to put this bill together? In other words, they let activist illegal immigration organizations craft the legislation. Can you imagine if Dick Cheney...? Well, he wasn't in the Senate. Pick a senator. Let's say Mitch McConnell, putting together a new energy bill, and in there writing it is Big Oil, the CEOs of ExxonMobil and Shell, wherever. Can you imagine? That's exactly what happened here. So Kennedy knows what's up here. The ethnic groups that had veto power, if they didn't like something that they heard, they had the right to veto it, in the negotiations between House and Republican senators. In addition, they plan to allow 400,000 new aliens to come to this country every year who will be on a fast track to legalization. We are not just talking here about legalizing the 12 million or 15 million or whatever the number is. We're going to now add 400,000 more per year on a fast track, in addition to that number -- and each one of them, the 12 million, 15 million who are here, the 400,000 who come each year legally can bring certain members of the family with them, on average at least four.
 
You bring husband. You got wife, you got kids, you got parents. We are talking tens of millions. We're talking a profound demographic shift, radical demographic shift on this, and what's this about? Let's get into the politics of this, because it ain't about citizenship, and it isn't about compassion. It isn't about leading the poor, the tired, the worn out to brighter futures and brighter lights. The liberals and the Democrats in this country are changing the electorate so they can destroy the Republican Party and guarantee victory for as far as the eye can see. Anybody out there who thinks that these new millions who are coming in here are going to somehow become conservatives, when they don't have to... Why do we have so many people in the welfare state now? Because it's easier! Conservatism is hard. Self-reliance is a tough thing. When you come into the country that you've always wanted to come into anyway, and the minute you get here, you're legal, and then you have access to all these benefits. You contrast the value of that, compared to your lifestyle from the country that you left to come here, why in the world take up this notion of hard work, working for yourself independent of all that? They are going to be wards of the Democrat Party, and the Democrat Party knows it.
 
Check out who's behind the sponsorship of this bill, check out who had veto power, check out all liberal organizations. Check out who runs these protests on illegal immigration, and look at how many people show up. If you think you're looking at a pool of future Republican conservatives out there, you need to look again.  This is about getting a brand-new electorate, reshaping it and being able to win election after election after election. These are socialists, folks. I'm not talking about the illegals. I'm talking about the liberals. They are socialists who want a big government, and they want a big state, and they want people in need and dependent on that state. They are running out of victims. Hence, this is part of it. I assure you that I am right about this. This bill, this piece of legislation assaults virtually every aspect of our belief system. Let me run down the list here for you. I wrote some things down. We are giving benefits and rights to lawbreakers. That's not conservative. That's not even American. We're expanding massively the size of entitlement programs. Meanwhile, Social Security is on the brink, Medicare is about to fall apart, and what are we doing? We are redistributing wealth to subsidize all the poor people who flow into our country from the Third World. We are leaving border security to another day -- and these phony arguments that they're beefing up the border, that's just strategeric posturing as well.
 
They haven't built the 700 mile wall. They're not in a rush to do so. In fact, they built like 28% of it. This is going to be a huge push down the road to give all these people the vote. "Look how hard they're working." Even if they don't become citizens, that's the next thing that's going to happen because that's what this is all about. "Yes, these people, must have the right to vote! They're hard workers. They are among us. They are contributing to this country's GDP. They must have the right to vote on their representation." I can hear it all now. They work hard. Get the violins out, folks. "They work hard. They pay taxes. They contribute to our society. Why shouldn't they vote? This is slavery," Ted Kennedy will say. "It's slavery. Why, it's bigotry," and it will all, of course, be blamed on the Republicans.

"Republicans are racists and sexists and bigots! They don't want these people in the country! Oh, they don't want them voting and all that," and of course, sadly, there will be some Republican types -- you can name the names -- out there agreeing with them when they try to change the definition or terms in this legislation, like giving them the vote before they become citizens. At the end of the day here, what we're talking about is the marginalization, if not the destruction of the Republican Party. Look, it's time to be blunt here. I said I'm going to stop carrying the water last November, and I'm not carrying the water. The current crop of Republican leaders has not only lost the Congress, the current crop of Republican leaders is on the way to destroying the base by signing on to this kind of legislation.
 
People are livid out there, and actually it crosses the aisle. Democrats are, too. The Republican leadership is destroying the movement that Reagan built. We've gotten No Child Left Behind. We've gotten the McCain-Feingold bill, which legitimized infringement on free speech, the First Amendment. We've gotten massive new farm subsidies, and a massive new prescription drug program. We're just growing the government here. It will be worse when the Democrats get in charge, if you think it's bad now, but all of these virtues, all of these aspects of our belief system are assaulted in this bill that is coming out of the Senate.BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: Look, folks, I'm sorry. I can't shut up on this. I'm going to get to your phone calls, I promise you. We don't need 700 pages of legislation to make this happen. Monopoly, Parker Brothers, had one card, one card saying "Get Out of Jail Free." Well, let's just confer a card, get into the country legally. Give 'em a card, one page, because everything else in this legislation is meaningless. Well, it's not meaningless and worthless, because it's a piece of legislation that creates brand-new government programs, brand-new bureaucracies. It just expands this already bloated government beyond its current imaginable size, and I'll tell you something else. Nobody's talking about this -- and that's why I'm here, folks, to bring up things that nobody else thinks of. I do that well. I do it often. We have an entire mentality in this country now that discourages assimilation. You notice nobody is talking about assimilation here? That used to be the point of immigration.  They have to learn English. Yip yip yip. Do you realize how that's not going to happen?
 
Don't give me this. You sound like you're buying into this, "They gotta learn English." Right! There's no focus on assimilation. We have an entire mentality in this country that discourages it in fact. It's called multiculturalism, it's called bilingualism. What in the world is there? What's necessary about assimilating? We used to have -- we still do; it's at risk -- a distinct and unique American culture, and immigrants wanted to become Americans. They didn't want to become hyphenated Americans, and they didn't come here and Balkanize it. They kept speaking their native tongue but they learned the language. They assimilated into society. There's no discussion of that. Affirmative action is another program that argues against assimilation, or is an obstacle to people assimilating. We don't even have in our society this desire for this to happen now. This is all about bringing in workers, guest workers, it's all about appearing compassionate. If you're Republican, it's all about not being a racist or a sexist or a bigot or being called that. Folks, I'm going to tell you something. This is, along with the war on terrorism, this is the battle of our time, because these two issues -- the war on terror, which the Democratic Party has already surrendered the United States to defeat -- are going to define America for generations.
 
This illegal immigration argument and the war on terror. This is not some sterile policy debate. We have to stop this. We're being run here by a bunch of political elites -- both parties, apparently -- who are undermining the foundation of our country for their own special desires: reelection, power, growth of government, and who knows what else. Some of this is so inexplicable to me. I've even come up with theories to explain the inexplicable. I'll get to at some point in the program, but the people haven't voted for this, and the people will not get a chance if the politicians have their way. The whole thing was negotiated in secret. We don't still have a finished bill to even look at. In the meantime the spinners are already out there telling us why this is such a great thing before we can even read it. They don't have the guts to show it to us. We're supposed to believe them. It's such a great example. Show it to us. Show us what's in this thing! It's 736 some-odd pages. If it's so great, let's see it. If it's so great, start singing every detail. If this bill is so wonderful, put out ads! Have the government printing office in Pueblo, Colorado, wherever the hell it is, print up copies and mail them to every citizen. It's so wonderful, tell us what's in it. Here's Laura as we start on the phones, in Parkville, Maryland. Nice to have you on the program.
 
CALLER: Hi. Thank you for taking my call.
 
RUSH: My pleasure.
 
CALLER: My question originally was based on an assumption that these illegals who will be signed legal if the bill goes through, will there be a registration process? Will they need to come forward? And if so, will there be consequences to those who don't come forward?
 
RUSH: Well, yeah, these are all great questions. We've discussed them on earlier busy broadcasts. Yes, they have to come forward and say, "I'm here illegally," and then they have to, supposedly, go back to their home countries and get back in line, and come back in -- some of them do -- and then they have to pay a fine. What I'm telling you, Laura, is that none of that's going to happen. After the president signs the bill and it starts being implemented, we're going to hear a bunch of complaints, "It's too arduous. I mean, we can't deport 12 million. How do we expect 12 million to go back home? We can't do this! The fines are too repressive. We're taking food out of the mouths of starving babies." Your question is, "What if they don't do it?" It doesn't matter.
 
CALLER: Will they need documentation, then, legal documents saying that they are legal, or it doesn't matter?
 
RUSH: Yeah, it's called the Z visa. Stands for zero. You gotta do nothing to get it.
 
CALLER: (Laughing.)
 
RUSH: Absolutely --
 
CALLER: Will they have to pay taxes or --
 
RUSH: Oh, yeah! Absolutely, they have to pay taxes. Now, the first thing the Democrats will do is take them to a massive voter registration place. I'm joking about that. There isn't any enforcement. There's no incentive. When the purpose of the bill is to grant permanent -- or guest worker -- status, it's amnesty. The purpose of the bill is to grant amnesty to 12 million people, why enforce it? What is there to enforce? Once they're legal and they're legal with the president's signature, they're legal whether they have documents or not. If they got a document that says, "Hi, I'm here illegally!" Not anymore. The president just signed the bill. This is what everybody's misunderstanding. It's not about citizenship. It's not about going out and getting documentation, green cards. Once the president signs the bill, they're legal. Anyway, Laura, I can tell you're worried about it. You should be. Here's Harry in Washington, DC. Harry, welcome to the EIB Network.
 
CALLER: Hey, Rush. Mega dittos from Washington.
 
RUSH: Thank you.
 
CALLER: I actually work on Capitol Hill, and I just want to thank you for all the work you do to promote conservative principles.
 
RUSH: Thank you, sir.
 
CALLER: We're getting absolutely flooded today with people all across the country who are very upset with the Senate immigration bill, and I have a feeling it's a lot of your listeners.
 
RUSH: Are they identifying themselves by party?
 
CALLER: No, they are not, Rush. Most of them are from the districts they live in, but they're not identifying themselves by party. I don't think Americans really care about party affiliation on this.
 
RUSH: That's what I think, too. I think this issue, like the Dubai Ports Deal, crosses the spectrum. I think many Democrats are having their lives affected by this, too. California, Arizona, New Mexico, Arizona, Virginia, Florida, everywhere you go. Well, obviously if you're calling to tell us about the heavy volume of phone calls, it must be much more than normal?
 
CALLER: It is much more than normal.
 
RUSH: What impact is it having on the elected officials? Like, you're a congressional guy. What impact is it having on your congressman or senators -- and I don't know if you have, I'm assuming, since you've said you work on Capitol Hill. What impact is it having on elected officials?
 
CALLER: Well, I know a lot of times when people call, they don't think it has much impact. But when it comes from people that are taking their own initiative to call, it's not from an organization, it makes a huge difference; it gets everyone's attention, and --
 
RUSH: Exactly right.
 
CALLER: -- public policy.
 
RUSH: You tell people up there that there may be other people giving out the phone number up there, but I don't. People, if they're calling on their own -- which is happening, I am certain of it -- then the country is being heard from. I'm glad you called, Harry. Thanks so much.BREAK TRANSCRIPT

RUSH: We just heard from a staffer up on Capitol Hill in the last caller. The guy said the phones over there are going nuts. They are hearing from you. I have not given out the phone number. I'm sure other people have. I, as a practice, don't give out the phone number because I want the calls to appear genuine. The staffer said, these calls appear genuine, there's so many of them -- and it reminds me, back in 1994 or '95, TIME Magazine did a cover on me. They Photoshopped it. They had me smoking a cigar with a churlish look on my face and smoke wafting out of the corner of my mouth, and the headline was: "Is Rush Limbaugh Good for America?" H.R. just reminded me that Newsweek also did a story (they were trying to be competitive with one another), and their cover story was, "Is there too much Democracy in America?" Is there too much democracy! It was aimed at me, too. You know, talk radio was new and people were getting riled up, and Republicans had won the House. "Oh, my God! There's too much democracy going on out there." Well, the Drive-Bys are getting in gear here, ladies and gentlemen. The sob songs, the victims, the rest of the propaganda aimed at convincing us the bill doesn't go far enough, and that's what the criticism from Dingy Harry and Pelosi is really all about, strategic maneuvering.
 
"It's a moderate bill. We should all just get behind this," and I've got a story, this is an AP story: "Mexicans Fear U.S. Immigration Plan -- Congress' new immigration plan was bad news for tens of thousands of poor Mexicans who depend on a U.S. guestworker program for temporary jobs in agriculture and other seasonal work, such as landscaping and construction. Millions of would-be migrants have been holding tight to President Bush's promise that they could one day apply for temporary visas to get a glimpse of the American dream." Aw, grab the violins. See? The bill is still too harsh, folks. "At the U.S. Consulate in Monterrey, which hands out more temporary visas than any other consulate or embassy in the world, Edmundo Bermudez, a 36-year-old from the northern city of Durango, said the plan rewards those who have already entered the United States illegally, while shutting out those who stayed home hoping to gain legal passage. He was especially offended by the plan to give preference to migrants with degrees and skills. 'The United States already has enough people with college degrees. Who is going to cut their tobacco?' asked Bermudez, who has been working intermittently in the U.S. for the past eight years.
 
"In Mexico, he makes about $10 a day, while in the U.S. he earns almost that -- $8 -- in an hour. ... Many in Mexico -- and U.S. employers who say they need workers for low-skilled jobs -- had hoped Congress would expand the guestworker program and allow more to cross legally..." They have, word just hasn't spread. Four hundred thousand of them, folks! It's in there. I found it. "'We don't want the house or the latest car in the U.S. We want to go and work so that our families can have a good life in Mexico,' said" another Mexican. So the sob stories have begun and the Drive-Bys now are kicking in full gear. ABC Radio News at the top of the hour said that the compromise, the Senate compromise, "is receiving positive response from the Hill and from the president, but the critics may try to pick the measure apart." Hey, AP! Hey, ABC Radio! Get with what's happening here. "Critics may try to pick the measure apart"? So the Drive-Bys have chosen sides, and if this doesn't tell you something about what's in this legislation and what its aim is... I'm telling you, this is the Comprehensive Destroy the Republican Party Act of 2007. I so dubbed it that when I opened the busy program. I got an e-mail last night and somebody said, "Rush, I don't understand this. I don't understand what happened here. Senators of both parties get together and negotiate, and they come out, announce they've got a bill, and then they're going to debate the bill? I don't understand this Senate procedure. I've never heard of this."
 
I thought it was a great question because I myself was asking the same thing. What the hell? They go behind closed doors, and then we find out La Raza's in there with veto powers on things they don't like. The fact of the matter is that what happened here is not Senate procedure. Senate procedure requires committee hearings by oversight committees and appropriations committees, votes in those committees. It would require the marking up of the bill. When we look at the bill, we see things we don't like, and kick that out of it, put that in it, or whatever. They would have to entertain motions for amendments, and in the Senate possible filibuster, and it would require publicly debating the bill on the floor. That's how normal Senate procedure is supposed to work. But, this bill is so contrary to the interests of Americans in this country, they're not going to do it this way. They will do all they can to railroad this through without anybody ever having seen it. Now, there are always enough Republicans to go along with this, because they want to be viewed as compassionate, as opposed to hard-hearted, right-wing racists, which is what the media will characterize anyone as who opposes this, and that's why McCain and Graham get on board this. The people say, "What about the president? What is this about the president?"
 
I remember discussing the president's stick-to-itiveness on Iraq, amidst all the criticism, all the pressure. He doesn't waver. He just doesn't care what they say. He's immune to it. People ask me, "Why do you think that is?" and I could only hazard a guess, and I'll repeat what my guess was. The president, as we know, if you listen carefully (ah, you don't even have to listen all that carefully) is a man of deep conviction, deep faith, and I believe that he, in the case of Iraq, is confident he's doing the right thing. He is helping to establish a beachhead of democracy in that cauldron of hatred and racism. He thinks that he's doing the right thing here. When you hear him talk about the yearning spirit of freedom that every human being is created with, that is one of the indications -- and I think here pretty much the same thing. I think he looks at the United States as the bright, "shining city on the hill," as Reagan