RUSH: I have to correct, folks, I said something so egregiously wrong. You do not have to be alive to vote in Chicago. I was making a reference there to the murder rate in Chicago. I mean, they're calling Rahm Emanuel the murder mayor now. The murder rate is just off the charts, and of course the media is not asking why. You guys talk about gun control left and right, and you want new gun control laws, and none of the new laws, even the latest Senator to admit this is Dick Blumenthal, senator from Connecticut, and even he is saying that none of these background check laws, none of the new laws that they want to implement would have stopped what happened at the school in Newtown, Connecticut.
Stop and think about that. Nothing that they're doing, nothing that they want to pass, would have stopped that incident. So you have to ask, what's the point? Well, in Chicago, the murder rate, particularly among young Chicago teenagers is skyrocketing, it's out of control. It's becoming the murder capital the country. And there is a legitimate question that is not being asked of anybody in Chicago, very simple: Why aren't you enforcing the gun laws already on the books? You do not need new gun laws to deal with what's happening in Chicago. We have plenty of gun laws. All you have to do would be to enforce the ones you have.
Folks, this is a serious question. Let me tell you why this is really hideous. Because there is a theory. If Rahm Emanuel, the mayor of Chicago, big Democrat, former chief of staff for Obama and Clinton -- you know, Wayne LaPierre said this once of Clinton, too. He said that Clinton is comfortable with a certain level of violence because it promotes the idea we need new laws. Well, the same thing is being said about Rahm Emanuel, that there's not a lot being done to stop the murders in Chicago because they provide an excellent backdrop for the quest for more law. And so people are starting to say to the media, "Why don't you ask the mayor and the president and others, why are they not enforcing existing gun laws in Chicago? Why is there no effort being made to really reduce the murder rate in Chicago? Is it because it's too useful?"
Now, that may sound horribly cynical, but there are more and more people asking that question. Young people are killing young people in Chicago left and right, and there are no prosecutions, folks. Well, not none, but I mean so few prosecutions in Chicago that it has raised a lot of red flags from a lot of people. Why aren't you pursuing punishment under existing gun law? And one answer that people are concluding is, well, it provides an excellent backdrop to demand more gun law. And you could rephrase what Wayne LaPierre said about Clinton. Maybe the Democrats are comfortable with a certain level of violence in Chicago because of the crisis that it allows to be used.
Remember, it was Rahm Emanuel himself who said, "Never let a crisis go to waste." Well, you definitely have a crisis in Chicago. You got a murder crisis, and it is young people killing young people. And, furthermore, it's young black kids killing other black kids. And there is no effort, special or otherwise, to enforce current gun laws or to prosecute people. Why not? Why this push for new stuff that everybody admits would not have stopped what happened at the Sandy Hook elementary school? Of course the answers to all this are clear as a bell. The push for new gun law is not about guns. It's about bigger government. It's about taking over more and more control of people's lives, pure and simple. Well, I take it back. It is about guns, because ultimately the government would like to take from you as many of your guns as they could. We all know that, so, yes, it is about guns.
But this question is popping up. Are they actually sitting idle and using the horrors of the Chicago murders to provide to provide a photo, an optic that will help them get more gun laws? Every law necessary to prosecute people caught using a gun illegally in Chicago is already on the books. They've got plenty of laws that they could prosecute these people on. They somehow want to create the impression that there aren't enough laws to deal with this level of crime. Now, clearly, the law is not the problem with this level of crime in Chicago. I mean, no law ever stopped anything by virtue of its existence alone. We've got laws against murder. Still happens. We've got laws against robbing banks. Still happens. The law is a moral marker. It's a guardrail. It's how a society defines right and wrong, in many ways. But they don't enforce themselves. The regime wants you to think that the law isn't powerful enough.
Folks, we've been talking about the erosion of our culture. I mean, our culture is being perverted, and it's crumbling. The guardrails, the institutions that provided the glue -- marriage is one of them -- that kept society together, all those things are under assault, and many of them are vanishing. What is the biggest obstacle right now to welfare reform? It may not be the biggest, but it certainly is in the top three. You know what it is? Out-of-wedlock birth. Do you know how many out-of-wedlock births there are in this country? Seventy percent of black babies are born out-of-wedlock.
Now, I can guarantee you what's happening within certain sectors of the audience, is that people are shouting at me at their radio and calling me names about being old-fashioned fuddy-duddy or some sort of discrimination artist or what have you, or someone who holds up old-fashioned laws that are not relevant anymore. But stick with me on this for a second.
Fifty-three percent of Hispanic babies are born out-of-wedlock. Seventy percent of African-American babies are born out-of-wedlock. Seventy percent of babies born to poor white women are born out-of-wedlock. Half of the babies -- get this stat -- half of the babies born to mothers under 30 are born out-of-wedlock. Let me run through this again, 'cause I maintain that you cannot get rid of the welfare state with these birth statistics. Somebody has to take the place of the second parent, and the government has willingly, and, in fact, Democrat-led governments have eagerly done so. So 70% of African-American babies are born out-of-wedlock. Fifty-three percent of Hispanic babies born out-of-wedlock.
By the way, they tell us that Hispanics are natural conservative voters out there. They're just conservative Republicans-in-waiting. Poor white women who have babies, 70% out-of-wedlock. What does that mean? It means that the institution of marriage doesn't mean anything anymore to way, way, way too many people. It's been weakened profoundly. Do you know what the out-of-wedlock birth rate was the first 200 years of the company? Would you be interested in knowing what that number is? The out-of-wedlock birth rate was two to 3% in the first 200 years of the country.
Now, again, the numbers. Seventy percent of black babies are born without a father. Fifty-three percent of Hispanic babies born without a father. Seventy percent of poor white women's babies born without a father. You are not ever going to reverse the welfare state with statistics like that. Not possible. Chew on that.
RUSH: You know what people are saying out there to me now, don't you? They may not be saying it yet, wait 'til Media Matters gets their interpretation of the statistics I just offered. "How dare he talk about women's reproductive freedom that way. How dare he?" That will be the reaction to the out-of-wedlock birth numbers. That I, El Rushbo, was attempting to criticize women's reproductive decisions.
By the way, the overall illegitimacy -- ah, sorry. It used to be called illegitimacy. The overall out-of-wedlock birth rate in America is 40% now. And when you subgroup it as the numbers were that I offered, folks, there's no way you're gonna have serious welfare reform. Now, the question is, which came first? Did the existence of welfare help to create these statistics, and I'm one who believes that the answer is inarguably yes. But others, of course, "Oh, no, nothing could be further from the truth."