Back Home Button
The Rush Limbaugh Show
Excellence in Broadcasting
RSS Icon


So It's the Statue of Immigration, Now? The Truth of Ellis Island and Richard Trumka's Warped View of the Problem


RUSH: The total number of people that came through Ellis Island seeking citizenship, seeking entrance into the United States, was 12 million people.  Ellis Island was in business for 62 years, 12 million people.  I don't know if that number surprises you.  It does me.  I thought it'd be much, much higher.  The reason I thought it would be much higher is because of all the things I've seen about Ellis Island, all the movies and all the talk about "we are a nation of immigrants." 

I've just been led to believe or maybe I did it to myself that it was very many more than 12 million people.  But I wanted to run some numbers on that.  So we had 62 years Ellis Island was in business, 12 million people came through.  That means 193,548 people, on average.  I mean, if it was the same number of people every year, that's how many people entered America through Ellis Island, on average, 193,548. 

Do any of you know, off the top of your heads, how many immigrants are permitted into the country per year under current immigration law?  Seven hundred thousand.  That is three times the number of people who were coming through Ellis Island, which is right there next to the Statue of Immigration.  And I think the current number is actually -- (interruption)  Yes, I can for the fun of it.  I can tweak 'em if I want.  The fact of the matter is that there are more than 700,000.  That's legal.  And even at the 700,000 legal number, that's three times the number of people that came through Ellis Island. And the current number has gotta be much higher than 700,000, but that's the safest number to use because it's what's legally permitted. 

But now we have, what, 12 million illegals in the country now if we are to believe that number.  Some think it is much, much higher.  Speaking of the people who are living in the shadows.  Before I leave this and get on to Benghazi, grab sound bites eight and nine, and ten.  Maybe just eight and nine.  Just for the fun of it, just to listen to how this whole thing ends up perverted, distorted, and corrupted.  Richard Trumka was in Washington yesterday during a panel discussion marking the one-year anniversary of the passage of the Senate immigration bill.  He runs the AFL-CIO.  He used to be with the United Mine Workers.  I think his dad was the mine workers union head honcho, and Trumka now is AFL-CIO. 

You would think off the top of your head that unions wouldn't want any illegal immigrants here because it lowers the job base, it lowers the wage scale.  Undocumented workers working in the shadows, and by admission they work much cheaper than Americans 'cause Americans are greedy and Americans are just too good for many kinds of work. So we need these illegal immigrants, low skilled, low education, low wage.  You would think the unions would oppose that, but they don't.  I'll tell you why in just a second.  Here's Trumka at a panel discussion marking the one-year anniversary of the passage of the Senate immigration bill.  First of a couple bites here.

TRUMKA:  Today marks a bittersweet moment in the fight for justice for immigrants.  It's obviously bitter because after 18 months of work, the Senate immigration bill languishes, deportations continue, and our immigration system remains broken.  House Republicans have failed to -- in their duty to serve the national interests and they've squandered a very historic opportunity to move our country forward.

RUSH:  Mr. Trumka, you know, you and your buds keep saying the immigration system is broken.  I thought we fixed it back in 1986.  I thought that's what the Simpson-Mazzoli Act was all about.  And that Senator Kennedy promised us if we just let this three million -- at the time that's what it was -- three million, just legalize them, make them citizens, give them amnesty and we'll close the borders and this is never, ever gonna happen again. 

Well, here we are nearly 30 years later, and it's four to five times the number of people that Simpson-Mazzoli was dealing with, but we were told that that was gonna fix it.  Now you want to do the same thing over again under the guise of fixing it.  What broke it?  Who broke the immigration system?  Who's responsible for breaking it?  It isn't broken.  It just isn't being enforced.  There's plenty of immigration law out there.  But not all of those laws are being enforced.  If they were, it wouldn't be broken. 

So when their clowns say that the immigration law, the immigration system is broken, it means they don't like some of these laws, and they want to get rid of some of them or pretend they're not there so that they can bring in these. Because I guarantee you this is about Democrat voter registration and it's about, strangely enough, raising the minimum wage.  Here's the way this works, and it takes time for all of this to play out.  Bring in these people that have no skills and they don't have any money and obviously not very much education. They're not qualified to do a whole lot, so they take certain kinds of jobs. 

After a while, Democrats start talking about how inhumane it is to pay 'em so little.  It's just not fair.  You can't support a family of four on 90 cents an hour, whatever it is, seven dollars, you can't.  Raise the minimum wage.  When the minimum wage gets raised is when the unions come and say, "Okay, we are far more qualified than those minimum wage jerks.  We are far better.  We deserve far more."  And they use that to up union contracts.  You would think that the influx of all kinds of low-skilled, low-wage people would harm the unions.  But remember, liberals are liberals first, and then they run unions, or then they make movies or then they teach school or then they go into journalism or then they do think tanks. But they are liberals first, and everything else they do comes second, because the ideology is the religion. 

They are not atheists.  They are not agnostic.  Their religion is simply their ideology and it trumps everything.  And if the current iteration of the ideology is the transformation of America, and if the way to do that is simply break it by importing people with no ability and no education and no money, then that's what we're gonna do.  Now, I don't know what's in it for -- well, I do know what's in it for them in the end.  But it's nothing that's good for the vast majority of the people of the country.  So here's Trumka.  Immigration is broken.  Who broke it?  Why didn't Simpson-Mazzoli fix it?  Why don't we just enforce the laws on the books and then it wouldn't be broken?  Trumka said this next.

TRUMKA:  See, the war that we've been fighting is, of course, a moral one.  The devastation of families.  The disruption of communities.  Emotionally, I gotta tell you, in my heart, it hurts.

RUSH:  Aw.

TRUMKA:  It hurts every time I see a family split up; every time I see a life disrupted; every time I see somebody's plans sort of erased. 

RUSH:  I don't believe that.

TRUMKA:  But the deportation crisis is not America as it's supposed to be, nor America as it can be.

RUSH:  I just don't believe that.  Now, it sounds good. It sounds like tugging heartstrings, "Oh, he cares, man, he really cares."  If all that were true, he's talking about immigrant families being devastated.  "It's not fair these kids arrive and they're separated."  You know what it's like?  The Menendez brothers kill their parents and then the trial out here, the jury acquits one of them because they feel so bad for him that he's not gonna have his mother as he grows up. Well, yeah, that's because he killed her.

"I know, but it's so sad that he's not gonna have his mother!" 

Well, he busted up his family. 

"I know.  I know.  But he's gonna live now in a broken family.  That's so un-American.  Punishment enough." 

Right.  So same thing here.  We're not busting up any families.  The people involved are leaving their families and then somehow this ends up our responsibility and our fault and something we have to do?  We're causing this?  Being who we are is causing this? Being a magnet for people who want to escape poverty or bondage or whatever, that's our fault and it's our responsibility to do something?  If this man really cared about the devastation of families, he would not be a Democrat, because the Democrat Party has destroyed more families in this country than you can count. 

They've destroyed the black family and they've done it with the welfare system.  They have simply made it unnecessary for fathers to become husbands and stay home and provide.  The government's taken that responsibility, and so single-parent families are all over this country because the government's right in there playing daddy, or mommy, whichever the case may be.  You don't have to look south of the border to find busted-up families.  All you gotta do is go to any American city you want where the Democrats have been running the show for years and years and years, and you'll find all of the devastated families you want.  You'll find disrupted communities.  You'll find communities where water's been turned off for tens of thousands of people so bad the United Nations is coming in to try to do something about it. 

"Every time I see a life disrupted, every time I see somebody's plans sort of erased, I just hurt in my heart." 

Well, I don't know how you can still be a Democrat, then.  Well, I know that's probably a tough thing to say because the Democrats have the reputation and image of caring about everybody and trying to help everybody and so forth. The circumstances that we all face in this country today didn't just happen.  I mean, this is the result of Democrat policy.  Last six years of Obama policy.  By the way, he's back on complaining about something else.  Oh, the highways.  Yes, just one crisis right after another.  Now it's the highways.  Six years, I thought the stimulus bill in 2009, his first year, I thought that was gonna fix the roads and bridges and schools. 

Now we're back to the highways are in a such a state of disrepair, why, kids can't get to school, people can't get to work.  Wait a minute.  I thought you didn't want people driving cars anyway.  I thought you wanted them in lawn mowers and golf carts.  It's just tough to keep up with these people.  Do I want to play this?  Oh, yeah.  Here's the next Trumka sound bite.  Here's what he thinks broke immigration.

TRUMKA:  In the 1990s our immigration system broke under the pressure of NAFTA.  And employers came to realize that workers without legal papers could help sleazy businesses --

RUSH:  Yes.

TRUMKA:  -- exploit all low-wage workers --

RUSH:  There you go.

TRUMKA:  -- everywhere.  Why?  Because employers grew to understand that --

RUSH:  Right.

TRUMKA:  -- immigrants without legal protections.

RUSH:  Right.

TRUMKA:  -- can't complain about working conditions.

RUSH:  Right.

TRUMKA:  And if you're a sleazy employer choosing between equally qualified workers, and one has citizenship and the right to stand up for him- or herself, and the other can be intimidated, who do you choose?

RUSH:  Note that for this argument to work, you must have a sleazy employer.  That is the given.  And who is to blame in that scenario?  The sleazy employer, not the person that broke the law coming here.  No, no.  That person is virtuous.  It's the sleazy employer that's the problem.  The sleazy employer is always going to choose the incapable, the weak, because the sleazy employer doesn't need anybody to do anything for him. 

No, no.  The sleazy employer doesn't care about his business running well.  The sleazy employer doesn't care if his products kill people.  The sleazy employer doesn't care if his service harms people.  All the sleazy employer wants to do is be mean to people.  So every employer who will not hire an illegal is sleazy.  And this is the worldview -- well, the left's view of the United States of America.  Sleazy employers, sleazy corporations, sleazy this, sleazy that, while they are clean and pure as the wind-driven snow.

It's against the law to hire undocumented workers, but that's not being enforced, either.  So if you're a sleazy employer choosing between equally qualified workers and one has citizenship and one doesn't -- what kind of convoluted choice is that?  That is rationale for granting citizenship to illegals?  We concoct that scenario to justify breaking the law?  Well, when the rule of law doesn't count for anything, you can say things like that, and you can get credit for compassion and thoughtfulness and all of that.  But you're also endorsing breaking the law in order to get what you want, and that's where they are.  


RUSH:  Get this other thing here from Trumka.  He says, "Now employers came to realize that workers without legal papers could help sleazy businesses exploit low-wage workers everywhere."  Why?  Well, because employers "grew to understand that immigrants without legal protection can't complain about working conditions. 

"If you're a sleazy employer choosing between equally qualified workers -- one has citizenship and the right to stand up for himself, and the other can be intimidated -- who do you choose?"  So Trumka has just said that the low-skill, low-wage, uneducated illegal arrival is just as qualified as his union worker. 

Now, where do you get that?  How in the world do you make that assumption?  Now we're elevating them to as qualified as Trumka's union members (sigh) and, of course, every union worker works for a sleazy boss, by definition.  Otherwise you wouldn't need the union.  (sigh)  Yeah.  



Rush 24/7 Audio/Video

Listen to the Latest Show Watch the Latest Show
Listen to the Latest Show Watch the Latest Show



Most Popular

EIB Features