RUSH: Before we get to the actual immigration story from yesterday, here's a sound bite from last night on Fox News Channel, the Special Report with Bret Baier. He interviewed the US Chamber of Commerce president, Thomas J. Donohue, and this will tell you everything you need to know about what the Republican Party is doing and why when it comes to amnesty. Bret Baier said, "The Chamber, according to some bullet points I received, is going to be active this election cycle and specifically on the issue of immigration reform."
DONOHUE: We've got to do this immigration thing! Demographics are destiny. We need those workers. We need seasoned workers. We need the workers at the top end. We've made the deal in the Senate. How did we do it? Labor and management came together. Labor and business came together and supported the program. I think Speaker Boehner and his colleagues, they're moving forward in a positive way. They're taking a little different route, but they're passing and moving forward with small parts of this, and they're gonna put it together and we're gonna get a bill.
RUSH: The Chamber of Commerce (i.e., representing American business interests) wants the workers. "We got to do this immigration thing. Demographics are destiny! We need those workers. We need seasonal workers. We need the workers at the top end. We want those workers."
These are the money people. Chamber of Commerce members are often major donors to the Republican Party. They want immigration reform. They want amnesty.
Now, there's a problem.
The Republican leadership knows that their base doesn't want amnesty. So they're working on some things to get this done that would provide the workers but would not necessarily be amnesty. One of the things that is being talked about at the leadership level in the House is granting legal status to everybody that's here illegally without citizenship. We're not gonna make them citizens ,but we're gonna give them (essentially) green cards. We are going to legalize them for work.
This is the first step, by the way.
Now, the Republican strategy for all of their immigration reform proposals -- the entire plan, their strategery -- is to wait until the filing deadline has passed to protect moderate incumbents. They are scared to death of Tea Party primary challenges, so the strategery here is to hold off on anything until after the filing deadline. Don't announce anything. Don't make it official. I mean, some things are leaking out and it's becoming known what they want to do. But nothing official.
No legislation actually will be advanced until after the filing deadline, and this is being done to protect incumbents -- and to that you are incumbents, they can vote for immigration reform without fear of a challenge from the Tea Party or the Republican base. Now, this data is contained in an AP story, which starts this way. "His agenda tattered by last year's confrontations and missteps, President Obama begins 2014 clinging to the hope of winning a lasting legislative achievement: an overhaul of immigration laws.
"It will require a deft and careful use of his powers, combining a public campaign in the face of protests over his administration's record number of deportations with quiet, behind-the-scenes outreach to Congress, something seen by lawmakers and immigration advocates as a major White House weakness. In recent weeks, both Obama and House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), have sent signals that raised expectations among overhaul supporters that 2014 could still yield the first comprehensive change in immigration laws in nearly three decades.
"If successful, it would fulfill an Obama promise many Latinos say is long overdue. ... Boehner, for his part, in December hired Rebecca Tallent, a former top aide to Sen. John McCain (R-AZ), and most recently the director of a bipartisan think tank's immigration task force. Even opponents of a broad immigration overhaul saw Tallent's selection as a sign legislation had suddenly become more likely. Boehner also fed speculation he would ignore Tea Party pressure, bluntly brushing back their criticism of December's modest budget agreement. ... If successful, an immigration compromise could restore some luster to Obama's agenda..."
Now, there are more details to this, but unfortunately it's time for an obscene profit break. Sit tight. Back with more.
RUSH: It wasn't that long ago -- certainly within the last year and a half -- that I, in an almost facetious way, said, "You know what? If you want to grant 'em amnesty, do it. You just say they can't vote for 25 years." I said, "Let's see how many people support that," 'cause the point of amnesty is replacing upwardly mobile members of the Democrat permanent underclass. The Democrat Party needs a permanent underclass of dependent people voting for them for never-ending entitlement benefits.
As people in a normal American economy are upwardly mobile and escape the lower quintiles of income level and start doing better as they get older -- which used to happen before Obama, by the way -- then the Democrat Party underclass had to be replaced. As people were upwardly mobile for the economy, becoming more prosperous, they became less dependent on government, and the Democrats needed a replacement. Well, that's what amnesty is.
Amnesty. Talk "undocumented aliens," "undocumented immigrants." It's unregistered Democrats, is the way it's looked at -- and to a certain extent, some of the Republican Party think that, yeah, we can get some of those voters, too! If we let them know we like them, if we let them know we love them -- if we let the Hispanics know that we're not racist or sexist or whatever it is, that we don't want them thinking that of us -- we can get their votes.
So they are joining the Democrats 'cause the Chamber of Commerce wants these workers and it's heavy Republican donors. So both parties are making a move on this. Now, what's interesting is that the Republican Party plan that is being talked about behind closed doors would not grant citizenship. It would grant legal status and leave the question of citizenship out of the legislation. In other words, they can work but they cannot vote. That's part one.
Part two is, a House Republican retreat later this month could help Republican leaders devise a strategery. Some Republicans and Democrats say that John Boehner could wait until after the filing deadlines for 2014 primary elections before announcing any of this. That would protect some incumbents from Tea Party challenges or other conservative challenges in the primaries, and that would mean -- if they do that, if they wait 'til after the filing deadline -- nothing happens on this until April.
So the strategery here on the Republican side basically has two elements: Don't do anything until April 'til after the filing deadline so that the Tea Party is not ginned up and trying to primary some of these people that would otherwise vote for this. The second thing is, to tell us not to worry, that this isn't amnesty. "We're gonna make 'em legal but we're not gonna grant 'em citizenship. They're not gonna be able to vote. So you don't have any problem with this, folks.
"There's no amnesty. They're not gonna be able to vote. But we need the workers, and we need to reach out to the Hispanic community. We need show we don't hate 'em and demographics are demographics and yada yada," whatever they say. Now, anybody thinking straight about this has got to understand what is going to happen. Let's say this happens exactly as it's being drawn up. Let's say that all we get between now and April is a bunch of rumors and a bunch of leaks like this, but nothing really happens.
Then, after the filing deadline is over, the Republicans put forth their bill, and it contains everything that the story says it's gonna have. It will grant legal status, but they can't vote. No citizenship, but they're gonna be able to work -- and everybody does a sigh of relief and says, "Well, it's not the best, but we can live with it." Not that you would say that. I'm saying that inside the Beltway, they will think they're on to something here.
So let's say, just for the sake of discussion here, that all of this happens and that actually passes, and the Senate comes up with something similar, and what they pass is full legal status. No citizenship. They can't vote. How long (maybe, how many days) after the November election will it take for somebody like Chuck Schumer to find a microphone and camera and talk about how unfair this is? "What were we thinking?" he will say.
"We got hoodwinked by these Republicans who are still hell-bent on keeping these people out of this country! They really don't want 'em here. If they're not going to grant them citizenship, then they really don't want 'em here. They're gonna look at these illegals as three-fifths of a person, and we're back to the days of slavery." This is what Chuck Schumer will say. "This is unconscionable! How in the world can we do this? How can we welcome them to our country this way?
"How can we tell them, 'Go get a job and pay taxes but you're not a citizen'? What country would do this, what civilized country?" and the move will be on to grant citizenship two days after the election. It's part of the plan now, I think. Everybody knows this. They don't think you know it, though. They don't think you're gonna be able to figure this out. They think that the way to get this done without any primary challenges is to wait 'til April.
After April announce it, and as long as nobody can vote -- 'cause what that does is supposedly defeats the theory advanced by people like me that all that's at work here is getting more Democrat voters. They can say, "No, no! It never has been about that for either party. It's never been about voters. It's about humane treatment. It's about the future of America.
"It's about the American dream, and these people have been here anyway, and they've been here in a long time -- and they've got kids, and we're not gonna bust up families, and we've got to let 'em legally work because it's not right that they have to stay in the shadows and blah, blah, blah."
And, miraculously, after the election, somebody will say, "This is just unconscionable! This is not who we are as Americans! We are going to profit in their labor, and what kind of labor is it? It's the bottom-of-the-barrel labor. It's the kind of crap Americans won't do anymore, and we're gonna make them do it, and we're gonna call this a benefit? How inhumane. We're gonna make them work for dirt and we're gonna collect taxes but we're not gonna let 'em vote, what has happened to our country?" And the move will be on to grant them citizenship. What's anybody gonna do at that point?
Now, the interesting thing is, if I'm right about this, that the establishment leadership in Washington thinks that you're not gonna be able to figure all this out. I don't think you need me telling you any of this. When you hear that the current immigration reform plan will not grant citizenship and therefore will not allow them to vote, you are probably -- especially you in this audience -- are probably clever enough to know that that's not really what they had in mind. They're just saying that to appease the extremists in the Tea Party and the conservative base. But nothing's changed.
What both parties are really looking for here is voters. The Chamber of Commerce no doubt is looking for cheap labor. The business owners are looking for bodies. They are looking for people to do certain kinds of work for less than what Americans will. But the parties are looking for voters. So the areas of interest, the lines of interest will intersect, but only if they're allowed to vote. If they are not allowed to vote, then there's no benefit to the parties. In fact, if they're granted status but can't vote and they're not granted citizenship, there's gonna be hell to pay from the La Raza crowd, and we're gonna hear about exploitation. There's nothing in immigration reform for the political parties if we're not talking about new voters. Unless I'm missing something.
Now, how do the parties benefit by saying, "Okay, Hispanics, you're one half of the way there. Welcome." What's that get 'em? Well, I know the leadership thinks it would be off the table. We'll see. We'll see. I mean, this is what's effervescing out there, folks.
RUSH: To the phones. Steve, Santa Cruz, California, great to have you. You are up first, and hello.
CALLER: Hi, Rush.
CALLER: Oh, this thing with amnesty, it sounds like they're becoming Democrats and that deception is the rule now. They're no longer politicians, Rush. They're becoming criminals. I just can't keep... I haven't given 'em any money in probably five, six years. I don't support them. I don't. I think we need... We don't need a third party. We need a new second party. What do you think?
RUSH: Well, you're talking about you're upset at the Republicans here for being, as you say, criminals or engaging in deceit?
CALLER: Yes, and this deal about not wanting us to primary them and deceiving us --
RUSH: Well, now, wait just a second. Wait just a second. Let me just throw something else out here. This is an AP story. It is an AP story, and we know that the Associated Press is all about the advancement of the Democrat Party agenda. So what if what's in this story isn't true? What if there is no attempt to wait 'til after the filing deadline to move this forward, and what if the Republican idea is not to make them legal but not grant them the right to vote? What if the AP's just reporting that? If they're just reporting it and you're having the reaction you are, they're succeeding. They're turning you against the Republican Party. So my question is: Why do you believe it? Why do you believe the AP story?
CALLER: Because of what I've seen in the past. Evidence in the past, what they've done in the past, it just makes sense that they would do this. Just the fact that they want to go for amnesty, period.
RUSH: Okay, so you are using your intelligence guided by experience, and you're saying, "Look, we know they want amnesty. They've said it. We know they want to emulate the Democrats. So this story, I can believe it." That's basically what you're saying?
CALLER: Yes, and I think they're turning criminal. The art of deception, they're learning it just like the Democrats, and it's over. Once they've done that, it's over for the Republicans.
RUSH: Well, if this story is true... It is the AP. We have to hold some of this in reserve. It is the AP. We've gotta factor that. Again, intelligence guided by experience, and Steve here in Santa Cruz is right. We know the Republican Party. We heard Donohue at the Chamber. They want this, and I think all of the establishment is behaving this way. We're being governed against our will on so many issues.
We don't want Obamacare. We got it.
We don't want this kind of economy, but we've got it.
We don't want amnesty, but we're gonna get it.
We've heard certain Republican leaders say very mean things about the Tea Party. So it's not a stretch to believe this could be true. The problem... Not "the problem." The sad thing about it is that if it is deception, if it's true, it is designed to fool us and get everybody to go along. "Oh, okay, no voting and no citizenship? Well, okay, maybe," and then we know that's not gonna hold up. That would be the smart bet. Anyway, Steve, I appreciate the call. You must be one of five Republicans in Santa Cruz.
RUSH: Okay, we got confirmation. There's a Texas political news site called the Quorum Report, December 3rd. This AP story is from the last couple of days on immigration. The Quorum Report. "Sources: Boehner Tells Texas Business Interests That Immigration Reform Votes Will Be Held After the Filing Deadlines Have Passed." From the article: "[V]arious Texas business interests have told Quorum Report that Boehner has been telling them that he will start holding immigration votes not long after the filing deadline has passed."
That would make it after April. "This, of course, runs counter to conventional wisdom that says immigration votes in the House will have to wait until 2014." So I mention this only because I held out the possibility that the AP is the AP. They're devoted to advancing the Obama agenda. They could have been making it up or taking liberties with it. But here is a source, Quorum Report, a Texas political news site, back on December 3rd, which basically says the same thing.