RUSH: I'm getting a lot of e-mail from people very worried about something. (interruption) What? What did you say? What do you think people are worried about? The Obama immigration policy for the children. Here's the problem. I haven't had the TV on the past couple days, but I don't need to 'cause I have people out there watching and they e-mail me and tell me what happened, and they want to know what I think about it. Apparently, what's happening out there is a lot of people, quote, unquote, on our side are saying they are sympathetic to the issue. They're sympathetic to essentially these children being nationless and how can we say to a child, "Outta here, pal." Sympathetic to the policy.
Now, there are two reasons they're sympathetic to the policy. One is, it's the children. And two is that Marco Rubio has similar ideas. So if you rip into Obama here, by default you're ripping into Marco Rubio, who is a rising star in the Republican Party. The problem here is, again, I live in Realville. And that's my problem. You cannot incentivize illegal immigration of any kind -- grandmothers, grandchildren, pregnant mothers, you could tug every heartstring there is out there -- you can't do that until you've secured the border. That has to happen first. Everybody knows this, but nobody, at this stage, has the gumption to do anything about it. It comes down to a morality play, and that's where everybody gets tripped up here. But I don't think there's anything moral about this kind of pandering.
Now, we had the constitutional issue, which everybody understands. Obama doesn't legally have the ability to do this, but he did it, and because people are sympathetic to it, nobody's going to stop him from doing this. It's just the beginning. Next it will be grandmothers. "Oh, how could you deny Grandma Moses?" Then it's gonna be pregnant mothers and we're gonna have amnesty through the back door with the front door wide open, too, because everybody's sympathetic to the individuals involved. So now it's immoral to deport illegal aliens, children especially. When did that happen? As for Obama, I don't think he cares about the border. I know he doesn't care about the border. I don't think he cares that there is a border. I don't think he cares if there weren't a border. I don't think he cares.
All I know is that they are panicking in the White House in June, and they were panicking in the White House in May, and they were panicking in the White House in April, and they are panicking, and that's why all this stuff to shore up his base now is indicative of the fact that they are panicking and pandering at the same time. But you've got people on our side, and I got e-mails from people very, very worried about this, conceding the policy issue. They are of course opposed to the constitutional aspect. Of course they're opposed to Obama. But if you are going to be sympathetic, if you're gonna concede the policy issue, then the Constitution doesn't matter. And this is the barrel everybody is over now thanks to Obama.
If you're gonna sit there and say, "Well, ah, ah, ah, it's children! We gotta make sure that they're not nation-less and homeless."
What about the Constitution?
"Well, it's children!"
Okay, so the Constitution gets set aside over there, and we concede the policy issue. I may be alone in this, folks. In fact, I'm sure I am. I mean, it's not an end-all... (interruption) You think that's right? You think...? (interruption) Snerdley's saying I'm not alone, but I'm the only one who will say this. Ah, there will be some others who say it. There will be some others who'll say it. You wait.
There will be some others who say it, but I know what you mean. Our buddies in the media in DC ain't gonna say it. That's right. I think it's a sucker punch. I think this is designed to stifle opposition to the bigger stuff coming. That's exactly what it is. It's plain as day. Once you concede the policy issue because it's children -- and the independents love children. (They're the only ones who do.) So we have to make sure everything is for the children; then nobody's gonna ever say "no" to anything.
And, see, then you throw in that Rubio's massive comprehensive immigration reform features this. And Rubio's a rising star, no doubt a top-tier presidential candidate down the road. You can't come out against this because you're undercutting Rubio. So it's a smart move by the White House to do this. It's 800,000 people. And, by the way, that number is low. It's gonna be many, many more people than that. And the effect on the job market? That's the way to go at this on a political basis.
If they're gonna concede the policy and we have to go at this on an electoral basis, we say, "Okay, you got a lot of people out of work. You got a market that's now gonna be flooded with brand-new, amnesty-ized illegals who will work for less money than Americans will," and look at this. Two stories here. CNBC, Jeff Cox: "Job Openings Report Shows Market Is Really, Really Bad -- Job openings fell to a five-month low in April and showed their sharpest percentage decline in about seven-and-a-half years, according to a government report [today] that helped confirm a slowdown in the labor market," as if we needed confirmation.
"The Job Openings and Labor Turnover Survey, or JOLTS, indicated 3.4 million job openings at the end of April, an 8% decline from the previous month." Okay. There's that. And then there's this: "Young US Households 'Crushed' by [the Obama] Recession -- Young US households -- those aged 35-to-44 -- lost a stunning 59% of their wealth during the recession, a government report released yesterday revealed." And that age-group, that demo 35-44, is "the stiffest hit of any age group, said the report from the US Census Bureau.
"The age group -- typically struggling with mortgages, tuition bills and rising tax bills -- makes up the backbone of America’s middle class. The losses were mainly due to the drop in the value of their homes during the 2005 through 2010 period, the report said. The age group typically struggling with mortgages, tuition bills, rising tax bills, makes up the backbone of the American middle class. The losses were mainly due to the drop in the value of their homes during the 2005 through 2010 period."
That's right: 35-44, the kids are becoming of age, college time, tuition, student loans, mortgages, climbing the career ladder, getting to the point in time on that ladder where you're gonna make it or not. Your future's gonna be determined more than not by the time you're 44. And those households have been "crushed by the recession." And that's ideal for Obama. They have to go somewhere for food. They have to go somewhere for cell phones and so forth and so on.
So you couple those two stories with the influx of whatever numbers of millions (800,000 and up) of amnesty-ized illegals, and you've got even further pressure on the job market. See, I don't know how... This is my problem living in Realville. I hear this stuff, I absorb it as it's stated and as it's intended (these policies). And I ask: "How do you even manage an immigration policy like this that Obama has announced?"
I mean, do you realize that a federal agency that does not get any appropriated money has to administer all this stuff? I forget the name of it, but they get by with payments. These people aren't gonna have any money to pay them. These people are not gonna be able to afford the costs of going through this agency to get, quote, unquote, "their work permits" or whatever they're getting. So I don't know how you even manage an immigration policy like this, the amount of fraud involved in proving who is here legally and at what time they came to find out if they qualify or not.
And given the lax Homeland Security enforcement, 800,000 people, that's chump change. That's gonna balloon by the time all is said and done 'cause they're not gonna know enough to be able to decline any applicants. And, by the way, where will be the sympathy to decline them? We've already shown that there isn't any impetus to say no. I mean, we're reaching a point here where this can't be dealt with given the political demographics and the dynamics. But that's where it all is. And at the root of it is panic in the White House over Obama's flailing and declining reelection chances.
I think the regime wants this to be unmanageable.
They want this new policy involving the illegals to be unmanageable.
When it's unmanageable, what do you do?
Well, you define deviancy down.
When it's unmanageable, you throw up your hands and say, "Ah, we tried. We just couldn’t do it. Just come on in!" They want it to be unmanageable. The Democrats always hide behind children when they are attacking the Constitution or when they're attacking the rule of law. They're like hostage takers, in a way. But regardless, you don't advertise for illegal alien workers. Job openings could well be down. But regardless, it's gonna flood the market.
So we've got that to set the table a little bit. There's this stuff going; there's lots of stuff else happening as well but I gotta take a brief time-out here for an obscene profit break. We'll be back, we'll roll right on and be back before you know it.