Posted on 11/09/2012 3:03:55 PM PST by Kaslin
BEGIN TRANSCRIPT
RUSH: I will repeat the EIB amnesty program, as announced in the first hour of this program today. 'Cause I see where the trend is going. I see where we're headed. I see that amnesty's heading this way. It's gonna happen, folks. You know, losing elections has consequences. There will be amnesty in this country. When you hear the phrase "comprehensive immigration reform," that's what it means.
Amnesty for whoever is here. And it's gonna be blanket, and it's gonna be pretty quick. That's where we're headed. So I want to get in the game. I want to propose EIB amnesty. And I'll agree to it. Amnesty for every illegal citizen who is here. There's just one caveat. In exchange for having all of the laws that have been violated forgiven...
In exchange for blanket automatic citizenship without having to take the test, without having to learn the documents... (You're here. You've been here a number of years so you're a citizen. That's where we're headed.) One caveat: You can't vote for 25 years. And let's see how much support that idea gets. Let's see if amnesty is what really is desired. Let's see if it's citizenship that all of these compassionate Democrats really have in mind.
That's how they sell it. "Why, these people have been here for years. They're good, decent people, exactly the kind of people we need in this country. It's a country built on immigration." You've heard the stories. "We can't be exclusive like this. We need to be inclusive. If somebody wants to come to our country and improve their life, how can we say no? I'm not gonna shut my country out to somebody who wants to come here and improve their life.
"If they are living like slaves anywhere on this planet and my country can make them free, fine. I will not stand in the way." That's where we're headed. Fine. Okay. We're good people, and we're gonna grant amnesty, but you can't vote for 25 years. Let's see how much support that gets. I'm serious. Folks, I'm dead serious. I will support amnesty for any and all illegals if, as part of the deal, they can't vote for 25 years. What kind of support do you think that will get?
None.
None!
And when it gets no support, that ought to tell you something. Because the proposal is only illustrative. I make the proposal for a simple reason: To teach, to illustrate. And we know what the answer would be.
END TRANSCRIPT
I think he’s right, and it won’t “work” any more than the Reagan amnesty did. As long as our government-upwacked labor market prices citizen labor above a natural equilibrium, there will be a market for additional illegal workers.
My biggest problem with amnesty is that ten years from now we will have to do it again.
We will not stop illegals from coming across our borders, we all know that, and ten years from now these new people will want the same amnesty we give the ones here now.
Why not just let anyone in the country that comes? Makes more sense than wasting time patrolling a border that is more like a sieve.
Stop investing. Stop spending - as fully as you can.
Spend nothing on any libtard company’s goods.
Starve it.
Someone needs to replace the old white people they are going to euthanize.
Otherwise, white liberals have weak sperm and can’t keep up.
Are you serious? Can you name any country in the world that would permit this? It is not only the border. 40% of the illegals here are visa overstays. If we have the political will, we can secure the border.
Any legislation that legalizes the status of those who broke our laws by entering our country illegally and allows them to stay and work here is amnesty. We must not only prevent the Democrats and some moderate Republicans from hijacking the meaning of the word amnesty, but the public must be made aware about the true impact of an amnesty. The Heritage Foundation concluded that the cost of amnesty would be $2.6 trillion just for increased entitlement program costs. And the number of additional LEGAL immigrants who would join those who were the recipients of amnesty through chain migration, i.e., family reunification, would approach 70 million over a 20-year period, assuming there are only 12 million illegal aliens. We cannot assimilate such numbers. An amnesty would destroy the United States of America with the stroke of a pen.
That’s what happened after Reagan’s amnesty. A few people have suggested to me that Texas just build a fence along the border to other States; invade Mexico and get rid of the drug cartel and corruption there (might take 3 days max) and then with their natural resources and the survivor’s work ethic, things would work.
I think he’s right, and it won’t “work” any more than the Reagan amnesty did.
*****************************************************
It will work for it’s real purpose. Huge voter block for the Democrats that like government goodies. If the Pubbies fall for this, they won’t win another national electtion in my lifetime.
Good point.
We have 20 million+ Illegals, who are being "rewarded" for breaking the law, and put in the (D) voting column.
That's because when we find out the black vote FRAUD got The Messiah elected, TWICE, they need these criminal invaders on their voter roles.
Blame the businesses that depend on cheap labor for this, as they pour hundreds of millions in Campaign Donations to Democrat and Republican alike, to make sure their supply of cheap Mexican labor keeps flowing.
Couple that with the Drug Cartels who need the mules to cross the border to supply the black drug culture, and we have no border protection at all, and it's enough to make you puke.
Amnesty is just the next step. Open borders is the goal.
The courts in CA overthrew the will of the people and sane fiscal policy when they overturned prop 187. Of course the unions want more social workers paying dues that dole out the services. We can see how that’s turning out, esp. in the school system.
CA’s Anti-Immigrant Proposition 187 is Voided, Ending State’s Five-Year Battle with ACLU, Rights Groups
Share
Print
Email
Facebook
Twitter
Share
July 29, 1999
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
LOS ANGELES — A court-approved mediation today ended years of legal and political debate over Proposition 187, a controversial ballot measure that sought to limit services to illegal immigrants.
The agreement confirms that no child in the state of California will be deprived of an education or stripped of health care due to their place of birth. It also makes clear that the state cannot regulate immigration law, a function that the U.S. Constitution clearly assigns to the federal government.
Passed in November 1994, Proposition 187 sought, among other things, to require police, health care professionals and teachers to verify and report the immigration status of all individuals, including children.
Days after the measure passed, a federal district court judge held that it violated the United States Constitution and issued an injunction barring its implementation. Today’s agreement validates that ruling.
“The seal of the great state of California is now stamped on the death certificate of Proposition 187,” said Mark Rosenbaum, Legal Director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Southern California, a litigant in one of several challenges to the measure. “The court-approved stipulation marks not just the end of this case, but an end to nearly five years of racial divisiveness throughout California.”
California’s Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa, who participated in the mediation, agreed.
“Today’s settlement signals that it’s time to move beyond the divisiveness of Proposition 187,” he said. “The decision ensures that children can get an education, working families can get health care, and law enforcement can focus on fighting crime. We stand together today to say in one loud voice that Californians are tired of wedge issues and culture wars.”
In March 1998, U.S. District Judge Mariana Pfaelzer issued a final ruling in the ACLU’s challenge to Proposition 187, confirming the federal government’s exclusive authority over immigration and declaring the measure unconstitutional. The ACLU’s news release on that ruling is at /news/n031898a.html.
Folks, I’m dead serious. I will support amnesty for any and all illegals if, as part of the deal, they can’t vote for 25 years. What kind of support do you think that will get?
None.
= = = =
^5 Rush!
I heard this today and LOL.
Is it any wonder why CA is bankrupt? If we have an amnesty, the US will look like CA.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.