Rush Limbaugh

For a better experience,
download and use our app!

The Rush Limbaugh Show Main Menu

Listen to it Button

RUSH: You know, forget everything that we’ve said about immigration today and all the details of this ’cause I actually want to apologize to you for wasting the first hour. Well, because I spent an hour on something that isn’t news and it’s gonna happen anyway. You know, I got sucked in, okay, there’s this big thing out there, this Hoeven-Corker amendment, border security this, border security that, and I got sucked into discussing it, and it doesn’t change anything. And the Democrats are not enforcing whatever laws are passed anyway that they don’t like.

There’s something more important here in all of this, and that is there’s a false premise that’s guiding all of this. I’ve talked about this before, too, but I really, really want to try to get down to the down and dirty, the nasty on this. The false premise is that, if the Republicans don’t do this, they are finished as a political party, when, in fact, they probably are finished if they do do this. The false premise has been constructed by the Democratic Party, and the false premise is amplified by the media.

The false premise is that Hispanics hate Republicans. All Hispanics do not hate Republicans. The vast majority of Hispanics do not hate Republicans. I think this premise has got everybody going in the wrong direction and for the wrong reasons. It’s a double negative whammy.

Now, we had Senator Cruz on this program yesterday, and I asked him about this, and he reminded me of something that we’ve mentioned a bunch of times on this program. If all of this is designed to make Republicans loved, if all of this is designed to finally get Hispanic votes, then why didn’t it work in 1986 through 1988? Again, in 1984, during a Reagan landslide of 49 states, Reagan the Republican got 37% of the Hispanic vote. In 1986, they did Simpson-Mazzoli — that’s amnesty. The next presidential election, 1988, George Bush 41 beat The Loser, Michael Dukakis. In ’86 the Republicans passed amnesty. In ’86 the Republicans made Hispanics love them. In ’86 the Republicans did what the Democrats said, Ted Kennedy said had to be done.

“You Republicans, if you’re gonna have any future, you’ve got to do this.” It’s the same arguments that were made then being made today. Two years after granting amnesty, the percentage of the Hispanic vote for Republicans dropped from 37 to 30%. So after amnesty in ’86, designed to make Republicans lovable and loved and supported by Hispanics, significantly fewer Hispanics voted for the Republican candidate in 1986. The reverse has to be considered here. This is a false premise, and it really ticks me off that it’s allowed to become such a prominent factor in a piece of legislation that is really important substantively, but all of it is nothing but political, and it’s a false premise and everybody in the Republican Party is getting sucked into this.

There’s also a desire, folks, in the Republican Party, I think, to anger some of its base and send them packing. I mean, there are a lot of things going on with Republicans supporting the bill. But the idea that we have to do this in order to ever win another election is as bogus a premise as there can be. It’s insultingly stupid. It is insultingly shallow. There’s no evidence to support it. There’s no evidence to suggest it is true. In fact, if you really wanted to use the evidence, what you could say is that passing this bill and granting amnesty will result in the Republicans getting fewer Hispanic votes, because that’s the history. That is undeniable.

Now, people might say, “Well, Rush, you can’t go back 30 years and start making comparisons.” Why not? That’s what you’re doing. Everybody else is saying we gotta do this or else. The Democrats have structured for themselves a no-lose proposition here. There is no way the Democrats lose no matter what happens here. And that only exists because the Republicans have either blindingly, naively, or willingly allowed it to happen.

Here’s how the Democrats don’t lose no matter what happens. If they get the bill, they win. If it loses, then they have their campaign issue, and they get to run around, and they are happier than pigs in slop when they’re telling everybody how rotten Republicans are. So they got the 2014 campaign coming up, and the 2016 campaign coming up to run around and tell everybody what racist pigs the Republicans are, how biased and prejudiced they are against people of color and Hispanics. Win-win.

Then they think that they’re gonna win in 2014 the House, 2016 they keep the White House, and then they get to write the bill all over again, and they really get to make it, I mean, full-fledged, hundred percent amnesty. If they win the House in ’14 and they keep the White House in 2016, they get to write whatever they want. In fact, they won’t even have to write it. They can just have their president declare it. There won’t be the Republican votes in either body to stop anything, or to override a veto, so they can’t lose here.

So how do the Republicans win? And I don’t think it’s that complicated. But it’s hard to do, apparently. And that’s stand on principle. And that’s learn to look at people in this country as Americans and not hyphenated members of groups. Be conservative. You’ve heard this spiel, folks. I’m not gonna waste your time with it again. This premise that we’re hated and despised, we’ve gotta do this, what Graham said, Senator Graham and all that, it’s a false premise. Everything that’s pushing this bill forward is a false premise. Just like the questions that the media asks. Most questions that are asked of Republicans, they ought to say, “Sorry, I don’t accept the premise of your question. Next question.” And not even answer ’em.

But I tell you, it’s frustrating. It’s frustrating to watch all this, and it’s frustrating to have people who you think — if you don’t agree with ’em, they can’t be this dumb or naive or whatever it is. Then, after we establish that we’re dealing with a false premise, then let’s add another statistic to this, and this, again, is fact, this is not opinion, it’s not projection. If Romney had even gotten 70% of the Hispanic vote in 2012, he woulda lost. He woulda still lost with 70% of the Hispanic vote. The numbers have been run. No Republican has ever gotten that many Hispanic votes. So what are we hoping to gain here? So what this tells me is that this is about something totally not being discussed. This is about something not on the table. This is about something that nobody wants to talk about, and that is money.

The people driving this, whoever they are — do not doubt me — think that there is a huge payday for them in the process when it’s over. The consultants who run political campaigns, the wealthier the candidate, the better. The more money the candidate has, whether he can win or not — you know why they really didn’t like Christine O’Donnell, and you know why they really didn’t like Sharron Angle? They’re not gonna make any money on ’em. Neither of them had any money to begin with. They didn’t think that too many people were gonna give them much money, so there isn’t any money in it for them.

You and I are sitting here thinking it’s all about ideas. You and I are sitting here thinking the objective is to beat liberals, to beat the Democrats. The objective is to make money for everybody. Now, nothing is wrong with that, of course. Don’t misunderstand. But when you lie about it and when you try to present yourself as an altruist or even somebody in it for the charity, in it for the goodness of your heart and the cause, spare me the violins.

So if you’re Republican consultant and you’ve got some really rich political wannabe — some guy who wants to be elected but doesn’t have a prayer — you’ll take him, and you’ll happily run his campaign, and you’ll happily spend his money to getting your percentage, your commission of it. Whether he loses or not doesn’t matter; you still get paid. If you are a corporatist and you have decided, because of the way this country is going, that the fastest way to profit is to be in business with the government?

If you’ve decided the fastest way to be in business and make a profit with the least friction, is to be a partner with the government in whatever they are doing and you’re doing (i.e., crony capitalism), then you are in this because you see higher profits or more money somehow if this law is passed. It’s cheap labor for certain people. No health care cost expenses for employees for others. If you follow the money on this, you’ll get to what’s really driving it.

All this talk about border security and eVerify and ratcheting up the e-Visa, the overstaying visas and building the fence and all that? We’ve already passed laws that mandate that, and they’re not enforcing them. How important is it, really? So there are other things driving this. The money explains in large part what is otherwise inexplicable, and that is, Republican support for this bill.

Folks, it doesn’t take a brain surgeon to realize that 11 million people who now can’t vote, who in a few short years will be able to vote — and 70 to 80% of them vote Democrat. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out that electorally, that’s it for the ideas represented by the Republican Party. It may not be the end of the party. You may have plenty Bob Michel guys in there who would love being leader of 120 Republicans in the House and maybe win the White House once every 20 years.

But it represents the end of the ideas that conservatism or what used to be the Republican Party. That’s just mathematics.

Pin It on Pinterest

Share This