Thread: Rush Limbaugh “Devastating, humiliatingâ€

[quote]Rush Limbaugh weighs in: “Devastating, humiliatingâ€

I am positive that he wants Clinton to win... He became huge hit largely because of Bill Clinton in the White House. At the end of the day.. he is just a neo-con shill..

That's total BS, and you know it.

Rush Limbaugh was a nationally syndicated radio hit four years before anyone was even discussing Bill Clinton as a presidential candidate.

He's been the loudest, most consistent voice against illegal immigration on talk radio, short of Bob Grant, since talk radio took off. He has been railing against illegals since his first two books-which were ghostwritten by John Fund, of all people-were published.

People rail against Limbaugh because he doesn't attack radical Islam-especially of the domestic variety-and imply that it's because he's been intimidated by CAIR and other Islamo-fascist, terrorist organizations. That's a fair critique-and there are a lot of fair criticisms that can be made of Rush and his program-but yours isn't one of them.

Rush's brother, David, has penned some articles on illegal immigration.

(quote)

April 13, 2006

Immigration Madness

There is only one group of people with less credibility on the immigration issue than Washington politicians. It is the illegal immigrants protesting violations of their "rights" while parading the Mexican flag and disrespecting the one symbolizing the great nation from which they're demanding favors.

I'm not talking about all demonstrators in every city in which a march occurred. Some were reportedly peaceful and even patriotic. But the hostility of some protestors did more to galvanize apathetic Americans into demanding action on immigration than all the previous alarm-warnings from politicians and pundits combined.

Nothing awakens the sleeping giant like direct threats to her sovereignty and security. And it was hard not to feel violated by the outrageous spectacle of people making demands on the very system they have circumvented instead of demonstrating some humility, if not contrition.

On the other hand, it's not hard to understand their attitude, given our shameful negligence concerning the integrity of our border and the rule of law. We hardly have clean hands either, considering our enforcement laxity and our Faustian bargain to reap the fruit of the poisonous tree by exploiting the cheap labor illegals provide. We don't even have enough respect for our laws to call violators "illegals," insisting on the euphemism undocumented workers.

The immigration conundrum is President Bush's Achilles' heel in the War on Terror. His admirable determination to pursue the enemy unyieldingly no matter how negatively it impacts his approval ratings is matched only by his seeming impenetrable obliviousness to the problems immigration presents.

Most of us recognize these problems: national security, assimilation, rule of law, economic, and political. But we disagree on their relative importance. Nor do we have a consensus on how we should prioritize the proposed solutions to the problems -- assuming we can even agree on which of them need to be addressed.

Many people otherwise inclined to support the president's general policy in the war on terror are alternatively mystified and outraged by his apparent inconsistency in fighting the terrorists "everywhere we find them," while employing a Mr. Magoo approach to our open borders.

I agree with Bush's critics that his borders policy represents a gap in his overall security policy. But I think it also poses a different kind of national security threat ultimately greater than terrorists oozing across the border. Our refusal to encourage immigrants to assimilate constitutes a dire threat to the nation.

America is unique in the history of nations. The preservation of our republican form of government requires a modicum of commitment from the body politic to constitutional principles and a professed loyalty to the American ideal. This is why the naturalization process is so important.

Our reluctance to promote the immigrants' assimilation and adoption of our language works against their acquisition of a spirit of patriotism, which is essential for the cohesiveness and strength of our society. Why should we apologize for demanding national allegiance from those who choose to live among us? To do otherwise is to flirt with national suicide.

Our enslavement to political correctness and its rejection of the notion of national pride -- sometimes even national sovereignty -- prevents us from assimilating the millions of illegals already here. But they will eventually assimilate, provided their numbers quit multiplying at an unmanageable rate.

That's why we have no choice but to first do what is necessary to effectively seal our borders, whether that means building a wall or intensifying border security or both. We simply have to minimize the bleeding -- or should I say "transfusion" -- because that is the only way to prevent further erosion of our national integrity and identity. This is not to say that we shouldn't allow any more people in, but we must control the timing and numbers.

In the meantime, we must also address the legality issue (somewhere between felony and amnesty), otherwise we undermine the illegals' essential respect for the rule of law (and ours).

I'm far less sympathetic to the economic concerns, believing that whatever benefits we are reaping are offset by the drains on our entitlement programs. It is unfortunate that some view the immigration issue, like they do everything else, from a purely economic perspective. Economic growth and prosperity are wonderful, but they are not a panacea, and are an unacceptable tradeoff for the disintegration of our culture and the implosion of our constitutional system.

It is even more regrettable that some choose to tar all those who are serious about immigration as racists or nativists. It is a vicious and dishonest ploy mostly by those who are willing to subordinate almost everything good and decent to partisan politics. We have no unique ethnicity in this country. What makes us unique are the God-fearing, egalitarian principles embodied in the Constitution and sustained by the rule of law.

I pray this growing crisis will finally heighten our awareness and motivate us to take the necessary action to preserve the republic.

Posted by David Limbaugh at April 13, 2006 05:38 PM

(quote)

http://www.davidlimbaugh.com/mt/archive ... _immi.html

Matthew 5:44

Another commentary by David Limbaugh.

(quote)

May 21, 2007

The Immigration Debacle

The almost-stealth immigration bill light-speeding its way through Congress represents all that is wrong with politics and an elitist political class that is too far removed from its constituencies.

There is so much wrong with this bill procedurally, and substantively, that one can barely scratch the surface in a short column, but I'll recapitulate some of the most egregious concerns and share a few pet peeves.

First, we are bogged down in a semantic debate over whether the bill constitutes "amnesty." Open-borders apologists take umbrage at the term, saying the bill does not constitute amnesty because illegal immigrants will be punished, never mind how inconsequentially.

But I would argue that those insisting it is amnesty are, in a sense, understating their case. In certain respects it's worse than amnesty. Not only will criminal violators of the immigration laws receive a mere wrist-slap for their infractions; they will be rewarded for them.

Consider the treatment of those convicted of other crimes -- take stealing, for example. The convict not only faces criminal penalties; the law seeks to restore him and his victims to their status prior to the crime, to the extent that's practicable or possible. The bank robber is not allowed to retain the fruits of his crime. He must pay restitution, if applicable, in addition to whatever fines or jail time to which he is sentenced.

By contrast, millions of illegal immigrants under the bill would not be sent back home but would become legal permanent residents of this country. By being allowed to stay, they would be, in effect, keeping the fruits of their crime. More importantly, many of them would become recipients of federal government largesse via a smorgasbord of entitlements.

As reported in the Washington Times, the Heritage Foundation's Robert Rector calculates that during their lifetimes, they will likely receive "$2.5 trillion more in government services than they will pay in taxes." Among those benefits are Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, SSI, public housing, subsidized college education and Social Security Disability Insurance. So those persisting in challenging the amnesty characterization should be reminded that many illegals will be receiving an enormous economic windfall to accompany their anemic wrist-slapping.

Second, many of the bill's proponents have long resorted to ad-hominem assaults on the opponents, falsely portraying their valid, prudent, noble and patriotic opposition as racist, nativist and ultra-restrictionist.

But again, those who should have the burden of proof in this matter (the proponents) have turned the table on the opponents. How dare those who are promoting legislation that would flout the rule of law, reward criminal behavior, undermine our unique American culture, balkanize our society, dilute our sense of nationalism, make us more vulnerable to attack from our global terrorist enemies and coerce a massive redistribution of resources from lawful, taxpaying American citizens, call those who favor reasonable measures to preserve what is worth preserving about America -- which has nothing to do with race or ethnicity, by the way -- "racists"?

The misguided arrogance of those playing the race card to demonize open-borders opponents is staggering. Then again, inflaming the passions against your adversaries obviates addressing the issues factually.

I dare say that opponents of the bill would be opposed no matter the ethnicity or nationality of the windfall transferees. It's not about their ethnicity; it's not even primarily about them. It's about the rule of law, our national security, the American culture, the English language, national unity during time of war, the constitutional rights of American citizens and the fiscal concerns of American taxpayers and their descendants.

It's especially shameful that many of the bill's greatest supporters are motivated by crass political concerns rather than the best interests of the United States. If it were otherwise, would they be so adamant about fast-tracking this bill and drafting it in duplicitous terms? On that note, be aware that some experts who have briefly studied the bill's fine print have noted that the bill's so-called "triggers" -- the events that must occur as a sop to enforcement types before the wrist-brushings and windfalls kick in -- are virtually defined out of existence in many cases by exceptions that swallow the rule.

One silver lining in this unfortunate series of events is that such cavalier displays of power by the elite governing class serve to catalyze patriots in this nation and crystallize their thinking about what is still right with America and worth preserving despite the highhandedness and callousness of those who masquerade as representing their interests.

Just say "no" to this legislation.

Posted by David Limbaugh at May 21, 2007 07:16 PM

(quote)

http://www.davidlimbaugh.com/mt/archive ... he_19.html

Matthew 5:44