RUSH: Byron York today has an opinion piece that is excellent in the DC Examiner, and it's a takeoff, it's a reaction to a Michael Gerson column that ran in the Washington Post. Here's Byron York: "In the Washington Post, columnist and former Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson pronounces the new Arizona immigration law 'understandable -- and dreadful.' Gerson says states do not have the authority 'to take control of American immigration policy -- an authority that Arizona has seized in order to abuse.' The effect of the new law, he argues, will be bad for everybody: It makes it harder for illegal immigrants to live without scrutiny -- but it also makes it harder for some American citizens to live without suspicion and humiliation. Americans are not accustomed to the command 'Your papers, please,' however politely delivered. The distinctly American response to such a request would be 'Go to hell,' and then 'See you in court.'
"Which leads to the question: What America is Gerson living in? No, we are not confronted by actors with heavy German accents demanding our papers. We are instead confronted routinely by people of all stripes asking to see our driver's license. When we board an airplane, we are asked to produce a government-issued photo ID, usually a driver's license. When we make some credit- or debit-card purchases in department stores, we are asked to produce a driver's license. When we enter many office buildings, both private and government, security guards often ask us to produce a driver's license. When we go to doctors' offices and hospitals, we are asked to produce a driver's license. When we check into hotels, we are asked to produce a driver's license. When we purchase some over-the-counter drugs, we are asked to produce a driver's license. If we go to a bar or nightclub, anyone who looks at all young is asked to produce a driver's license. And needless to say, if we have any encounter with police or other authorities, we are asked to produce a driver's license. Some situations involve an even higher level of scrutiny. When we get a new job, we are asked to provide not a driver's license but a passport or birth certificate to prove citizenship. In other situations, too: When I renewed my District of Columbia driver's license last year, I had to produce a passport to prove citizenship, even though it was a valid, unexpired license I was renewing. And in many places, buying a gun -- a constitutionally-protected right -- involves enormous scrutiny."
By the way, I can personally attest to this driver's license business. I had to go get mine renewed. There were three forms of documentation required. A tax return, a passport, I forget what the other one was, and without all three you didn't get your renewal, even though mine had not expired, my picture was on the expiring license. It was a level of scrutiny I have never faced in getting a driver's license before. (interruption) Well, yeah, I was upset by it, of course I was upset by it because it was silly. And yet it was there. "Has Michael Gerson never experienced any of those situations? And by the way, has he read the Arizona law? Does he know that it specifically states that in any encounter with police, when a person produces a valid Arizona driver's license (or, for non-drivers, other forms of ID listed in the law), that person is immediately presumed to be in the United States legally? Given all the situations listed above, can anyone argue that being asked to produce a driver's license, if one is in some sort of encounter with police in which police are acting lawfully (that is also specified by the new law) is overly burdensome? Being asked to produce identification is a burden that falls on everyone," and now all of a sudden it's racist.
It is racist to ask people who may be here illegally to prove that they are here legally? We have to produce a lot of this identification, by the way, especially when we get a job because of illegal aliens. Can I be clear about this? You go apply for a job and you have to prove that you're a citizen because of the influx of illegals. We aren't used to being asked for our papers? "Our papers, please." About the only time we aren't asked for identification, my friends -- I've gone through everything Byron York said here, I agree with it -- about the only time we're not asked for ID is when we vote. We are asked for our papers. We are asked to prove who we are constantly, multiple times a day, and yet somehow it is racist to do this in Arizona. And the president of the United States may move to undo the immigration law. This is how the regime does things.
RUSH: Okay, I'm going to play this question and sound bite again, because it just... I don't know. It is infuriating, the use of the word "papers." I mean ,Obama I can understand, but why Gerson, a former Bush speechwriter, is falling into this trap. This is a George Lakoff (rhymes with) situation.
Papers = Nazi.
(German accent) "Your papers, please!" It equals Nazi. That's why Obama's using the term. I can understand Obama being touchy on the subject of producing your papers. Maybe he's afraid somebody's going to ask him for his! So here's the question. "I was wondering what your plan was, [Mr. Regime Leader], for our undocumented workers who helped establish our country."
OBAMA: This law that just passed in Arizona, which I think is a poorly conceived law, you can imagine if you are a Hispanic-American in Arizona, your great grandparents may have been there before Arizona was even a state. But now suddenly if you don't have your papers and you took your kid out to get ice cream, you're going to be harassed, that's something that could potentially happen, I -- that's not the right way to go.
RUSH: Right. Well, you know, I have friends who have great-great-grandparents who were in England before England had any laws about immigration. My friends, can I live in England and enjoy their services 'cause my great-great-grandparents were there before there were any immigration laws? Get this. Try this. So we have illegal aliens here who we can't ask them for their papers like every other citizen has to provide ID. We can't ask them. The Jews, however, have to stop building in Jerusalem when they were there thousands of years before there was a Muslim religion or a Christian religion. So by Obama's own logic, he trips himself up. Anybody whose great-grandparents were in Arizona before it was a state has a right to walk on in there, and yet the Jews were there before any other religion thousands of years ago in Jerusalem, and Obama wants to deny them the right to do...? It's dangerous what's happening here, ladies and gentlemen. This use of this word "papers" is not by accident. Here. He said some more in answer to this student.
OBAMA: This is such a volatile issue. It will bring the majority of Democrats to the table in getting this done. But I've gotta have some help from the other side. I've gotta have some help from the other side because we're not gonna solve this problem. It could be exploited for political purposes, and the only way to rise above the politics and actually solve the problem once and for all is to make sure that it's a bipartisan effort, and that's what we're pushin' for. I hope that we can get it done, uhh, sometime soon. And I'm, uhh, going to continue to advocate on behalf of finally fixing this system so that we don't have either the kind of bad laws that we've seen in Arizona -- or, alternatively, we've got half a million illegal folks coming into Arizona without any control.
RUSH: Well, what the hell's happening now? Bad laws that we've seen in Arizona. He can't get amnesty without bipartisanship. Why can't you just jam it down our throats like you did health care? Why can't you just overrule Arizona? Why can't you just, as a leader of the regime, tell 'em that their law no longer stands? And, by the way, the DC Examiner White House correspondent, headline: "Obama May Move to Undo Arizona Immigration Law -- Arizona's tough new immigration laws may prompt the White House to intervene, potentially igniting a divisive election-year battle. President Obama has spoken in favor of a comprehensive immigration plan, but so far has put forth no policy guidelines or proposals, hoping instead that Congress would take the lead as in the early days of health care reform.
"But pressure from immigration reform advocates and the seriousness of Arizona's new law may force Obama to act. Attorney General Eric Holder said the Justice Department may pursue legal action. 'I'm very concerned about the wedge that [the new law] could drive between communities that law enforcement is supposed to serve and those of us in law enforcement,' Holder said at a news conference." Now, Eric Holder and Barack Obama don't give a damn about the New Black Panthers intimidating voters and violating their civil rights in Philadelphia. They got off scot-free, thanks to Eric Holder. When it comes to civil rights violations, what do we call voter intimidation, which was caught on tape? Obama and Holder have no standing or credibility when it comes to civil rights at all, especially after that.
They have ignored and stonewalled investigations and inquiries about the New Black Panthers who were caught on tape violating American citizens' civil rights at the voting booth. It's absurd to listen to these two people talk about civil rights and Arizona's immigration law -- and then demanding or suggesting that we overturn it from the highest levels of the regime. So basically what we have here is we have a federal government that refuses to enforce federal immigration law. We have a state that is enforcing federal immigration law. You know what the president ought to say? He ought to say, "Look, even though I took an oath to uphold the Constitution and the law of the land, I'm not going to," because that's what he's doing. Just come out, Mr. President, be truthful. You did take an oath to uphold the Constitution and the law of the land. But you're not. So just tell people that you don't care a whit about the citizens of Arizona or the people in any of the Border States.
RUSH: As always with the left and with the regime, you have to look beneath the surface. You've heard the old story about a duck. It looks like it's so smooth gliding across the water, but underneath the duck's going nuts, paddling furiously to get where it's going. So why? Why this furious reaction to the Arizona immigration law? I'll tell you why. That's why I am here and you are there. The left, the Democrats, Obama, recognize that this notion of proving one's identity is a lethal blow to their agenda. (interruption) You know how, Snerdley? (interruption) Exactly right. It's regarding the vote. Illegal voters are the only hope the Democrats have of retaining power. Why do you think this push, all of a sudden leapfrogging immigration over cap and trade and whatever else?
They're even admitting, Dingy Harry needs to jack up his Hispanic voter base out in Nevada. They don't really intend to pass anything right now because it would rip the country apart. They just want the Democrats and the Hispanic population to think they're working on it. You see, the Democrats are betting everything on their ability to maintain vote fraud. Ask John Fund about this. Read anything John Fund has written about this in the Wall Street Journal on Democrat vote fraud. That's why they are having a conniption fit over this law in Arizona. The Democrats know that their agenda would barely garner 30% of the vote if it were public. If they were honest from top to bottom about that they intend to do, Obama himself would barely have gotten 30% of the vote. They can see the polling data.
They know the vast majority of the country is center-right. They know that on issue after issue after issue Obama is losing. A vast majority of Americans disapprove of agenda item after agenda item. They know they cannot win in policy debates. They cannot win in the arena of ideas. They must use thuggery as they did in health care, or bribes or what have you. I'm telling you, my friends, this whole notion of opposing this racist bigotry in Arizona is based simply on one thing: The fact that having to prove your identity is a lethal blow to their agenda. As I made mention in the first half hour of this program, the only place you don't have to prove ID is when you vote. You have to show a voter registration card where I vote, but the Democrats have fought in every state efforts to produce photo ID to vote, to prove that you are registered, to prove that you are a citizen.
They have fought it, and this is why. If this Arizona law stands -- and there is a representative in the state of Texas, a member of their legislature who wants to adopt this law now.
"A Republican Texas lawmaker plans to introduce a tough immigration measure similar to the new law in Arizona, a move state Democrats say would be a mistake. Rep. Debbie Riddle of Tomball said she will push for the law in the January legislative session, according to Wednesday's editions of the San Antonio Express-News and Houston Chronicle. 'The first priority for any elected official is to make sure that the safety and security of Texans is well-established,' said Riddle... 'If our federal government did their job, then Arizona wouldn't have to take this action, and neither would Texas.'" Amen. It's also the first responsibility of the federal government. They have rejected that responsibility. That's why Arizona has acted. So make no mistake what this is really all about. They have been trying to demonize and even criminalize providing your ID, especially when you vote. They cannot win without vote fraud. They cannot win without illegals voting.
They cannot win unless they round up a bunch of people in buses provided by unions or whoever and put people on board those buses who have no idea where they're going. While they're en route, they're told what to do when they get there, and then they do it and they take 'em back home. Very simple. Very, very simple. Where is President Obama reaching out to the people who oppose amnesty? How is he trying to listen to them? This was going to be a transparent administration. He was going to unify us. He was going to bring us all together. Instead he's throwing the race card out there! He's dividing us by race and ethnicity. Where is the empathy for the people who oppose amnesty? At the very least, isn't the Arizona immigration law what they always say: A desperate cry for help? It's a desperate cry for help.
Obama is known to have only worked on two cases as a lawyer: Redlining in the case of loans as a precursor to the subprime mortgage business, and the Motor Voter Bill. Those are the two cases that Obama as a lawyer has worked on. Make no mistake: The Democrats know that you are not them. They know that they do not represent a majority of the thinking in this country. They know they have to govern against you. They have to govern against the will of the people. They know that you know that the way they're doing things is not the way things get done in this country. They know that if producing your papers when it comes to time to vote ever happens in one state, then they have a big, big problem. They're betting everything in their future on their ability to maintain vote fraud. Let's go to the audio sound bites, this whole "produce your papers thing"? Nazi! Lakoff. So last Friday-Saturday-Sunday-Monday, we have a montage of all kinds of media people talking about this...
MARTHA MACCALLUM: Critics have said that it's akin to the Nazis, in terms of demanding people's papers.
F. CHUCK TODD: ...The party of "show me your papers."
KEITH OLBERDORK: ...the "show us your papers act."
CAMPBELL BROWN: Show us your papers.
RACHEL MADDOW: Papers, please.
LESLIE SANCHEZ: Stop and show us your papers.
HOWARD FINEMAN: Let's see your papers.
RICH SANCHEZ: ...to show papers...
PHIL DONAHUE: We're walking up to people and saying, "Let me see your papers."
"MAUDE" BEHAR: This very much smells of, "May I see your papers?"
PAUL KRUGMAN: ...apocryphal regimes where the police are always saying, "Hand over your papers."
ELEANOR PELTA: A let-me-see-your-papers environment.
CHRIS MATTHEWS: Can he stop the car and say, "Let's see your papers"?
GERALDO RIVERA: Can you say, "Papers, please."
SETH MEYERS: Can we all agree there's nothing more Nazi than saying, "Show me your papers"?
RUSH: So there you have it. So now the Arizona legislature, the governor, are a bunch of Nazis. Michael Gerson, Washington Post, former speechwriter George W. Bush, was right in on the action, referring to all of this as Nazi-like. "Produce your papers." In the meantime let me ask you something, folks: What really is more Nazi-like. Is it more Nazi-like to produce your ID when you check into a hotel or cash a check or what have you, or when you take over two automobile companies? Which is more Nazi-like? What is more Nazi-like: Demanding that you prove that you are a legal citizen if you are in a situation where you may have committed a crime, or is it more Nazi-like to commandeer and take over one-sixth of the US private sector and run health care from the headquarters of the regime?
Which is more Nazi-like? What is more Nazi-like: Asking people for IDs when they get on airplanes, buy an airplane ticket or what have you, or cash a check, or when American businesses follow the law and say, "You know what? You just passed the health care bill. I gotta take a one-million-dollar from my bottom line according to the law," and then Henry Waxman sends you essentially a subpoena and says, "You can't embarrass our president like that! Everybody knows this health care bill's going to reduce costs! You bring yourself up here and bring your papers, you bring your e-mails, and you bring your books." What is more Nazi-like than the regime coming after you even after you've obeyed the law? All of a sudden -- and you will not find "Produce your papers" anywhere in the law. It has been totally created and been picked up by government-run media. Now that's Nazi-like. My friends, this regime, in its day-to-day actions, is far more Nazi-like than any identification law that is enforced anywhere in this country.
RUSH: Let me ask you something, if you're in California, if you're in New York or Florida, if you're driving around anywhere in this country and you are pulled over and you can't produce documentation, if you don't have a driver's license, what happens to you? Well, not necessarily jail, but you get a ticket. You get cited. If you have an expired license, if you can't prove the car is yours, what happens to you? What's different about this than anything happening in Arizona? Not a damn thing. These people, folks, you know, you try going to Mexico without proper documentation. You want to talk about some tough immigration law, you want to talk about violation of civil rights, try moving to Mexico and find out what you can't do when you get there.
Funny how the left only mentions the Nazis asking for papers. In the Soviet Union, if you move to another town, why, you had to go to the local police and give them your papers just to move from one town to another. Anybody ever heard of the Brandenburg Gate? Anybody ever heard of the Berlin Wall? The Soviet communists were far more frequently using "Produce your papers, please" than even the Nazis. And of course the American left idolized the Soviet Union. The American left dreams of its rebirth to this day in this country. The Soviet Union popularized this whole notion of, "Produce your papers." Their ID requirements in the Soviet Union were far more extreme in times of peace than the Nazis were at the height of war. Don't doubt me.
RUSH: Just to reiterate, ladies and gentlemen -- it's a very important point, perhaps a theme of today's program concerning illegal immigration -- why the regime and the media and all of its supporters are just in a tizzy about the new Arizona immigration law: It is all about voting. If papers (ahem) are required to vote, the Democrats are finished. It's their only hope. I mean, look, they're the radicals. They are siding against the American people. This regime is siding against the American people. The only hope they have is for fraud and illegals voting, and you can't really get away with that if everybody has to have a photo ID and legal proof (i.e., papers) that they are citizens. So under the heading of why this is so important to the Democrats: "A federal immigration probe in 1996 into alleged Motor Voter fraud..." By the way, do you know what the first real act of legislation of Bill Clinton was in '93? Motor Voter. Motor Voter: Register when you get your driver's license.
Bill Clinton. Democrats. Anyway: "A Federal immigration probe in 1996 into alleged motor vote fraud in California's Orange County revealed that 4,023 illegal voters possibly cast ballots in the disputed election between Robert Dornan and Loretta Sanchez for Congress." Dornan lost that race by fewer than one thousand votes, and there were alleged to be 4,000 illegal votes. That is the point.
RUSH: Jim in Jacksonville, Florida, welcome to the EIB Network. Hello, sir.
CALLER: Thank you, Rush. Listen, just a comment on the immigration problem. A US citizen cannot leave the US and enter another country without a US passport or you're asked by the other country what your business is in their country. Yet these illegals walk in the US by the thousands, they trespass on our goodwill and our laws without punity. They receive the financial benefits and profit from American bounty, paid for, I might add, by our tax-paying, law-abiding citizens.
RUSH: I know. I made this point earlier in the program. Why do we even have embassies? You know, if the American embassy in Great Britain or France or wherever, if you are not a citizen you have to get a visa to come here. Why have diplomats? Why not just get rid of passports? Why not just get rid of them, folks? The guy has an excellent point, 'cause I made it earlier, that's why I know it's an excellent point. We can fight this on logic grounds every sentence, and we can smear 'em, we can cream 'em. But the big thing, the reason why they are so nervous is that this threatens nationwide voter fraud. That's what they're concerned about, the vote, pure and simple. And they're happy to agitate, they're happy to send Reverend Jackson and Al Sharpton -- grab Sharpton, taking it to the streets, he's already -- well, I don't know if he's rehearsing or if he's actually been there but this is what you can expect to hear when Reverend Sharpton and the boys hit the streets.
(playing of Sharpton spoof)
RUSH: There you have it, ladies and gentlemen, the Reverend Sharpton on the streets in Arizona.
RUSH: You remember, folks, what Obama's first organizing job in Chicago was? It was Project Vote, which was about getting new votes for Carol Moseley Braun, and is the same Project Vote got him elected a couple years later. Project Vote. It's a local version of Rock the Vote. It was an ACORN type thing, Project Vote. New votes, quote, unquote, new votes. So amnesty is simply the next Project Vote for Barack Obama.