The purpose of an ID is to identify people to make sure they are who they say they are, to make sure they have a right to drive a car, etcetera. Now, U.S. citizens have to have valid IDs. All we’re saying that terrorists should not be able to get them. (Laughing) I mean, if we have to have ’em. You ever try to get insurance without a valid driver’s license? You ever tried to get insurance without your car registration? I know many of you have run into people in accidents who don’t have any of that and you pay through the nose for it. People get away about it, but still the law is, U.S. citizens have to have valid IDs. (Laughing) We don’t think terrorists should be able to get ’em, and by definition, terrorists are not citizens! Terrorists ought not to be able to get valid IDs. How did this become so controversial? What in the world?
Drivers, illegal immigrants getting driver’s license. Driver’s license is an ID! It tells people who you are. It tells you who you are if you forget, and all of a sudden we are content with the idea that terrorists don’t have to have IDs? U.S. citizens do, but terrorists do not? They can get fraudulent IDs? They can have phony driver’s licenses, they can have 63 of them when they live in one state, and that’s okay? That’s not a concern when it comes to terrorism? and they seek these fraudulent IDs for one reason: to sneak into the country, to hide among our people and to strike at the heart of our cities. Is that not worthy of immediate attention? If the rest of this piece of legislation is worthy of immediate attention, why isn’t that fact that terrorists can get fraudulent IDs worthy of immediate attention? It teams to me that should be the top of the list, when you look at it this way.
This is not (sniveling liberal voice) “Driver’s licenses so people with a family can drive to the grocery story and get milk.” This is identifying people, and they’re getting fraudulent IDs in the form of driver’s licenses. They sneak into the country to get them with the intent of planning missions to blow us up! We have to be illegal ID’d. Why do they not have to be? Why does this not concern the Jersey girls? Why does this not concern the New York Times or the Baltimore Sun or the LA Times? I’ll tell you why, because a conservative wanted it, and they align themselves with any enemy of any conservative because they hate conservatives and they just have contempt for conservatives? Guys like Sensenbrenner to them are kooks!
Guys like me are kooks. You’re a kook! What is so hard to understand about having illegally in the country people not possessing legal IDs, fraudulent IDs? I’ll tell you what my view is, folks. My view is that liberals cause many of these problems in the first place. The fact of the matter is that this legislation being pushed by a bunch of liberals to cover up their own mistakes. They’re the ones that build the wall that said the FBI can’t talk to the CIA, that we’re going to go hunt these people down legally and use grand jury indictments — meaning intelligence people can’t have access to the data. They’re the ones that cause many of these problems in the first place, like preventing coordination from the CIA and the FBI, and now we rely on them to secure the nation now, on their words?
Not me. These people have demonstrated they don’t know how to do it and yet they’re the ones out there demanding this and demanding this and when they get it, saying, “It’s not good. It stinks.” Nothing’s changed here, folks, a liberal is a liberal is a liberal, and they cause problems like this. Real quick question: If terrorists don’t have to qualify for valid driver’s licenses, then why should we have to? And this legislation omitted that requirement for terrorists and illegals. Why should illegal aliens not have to qualify for a legal driver’s license, and why do I have to, or you, hmm?
*Note: Links to content outside RushLimbaugh.com usually become inactive over time.