Marco Rubio was interviewed yesterday on the Rush Limbaugh show. Senator Rubio is a bright, articulate, perspicacious conservative. He is able to assert his position potently and with forthrightness.
Rush declared in the interview, “I’ve never agreed with Senator Schumer about anything.”
I would agree energetically with Rush, and I would add, if rubber-hips John McCain is for it . . . it’s probably a bad thing.
Like Mr. Limbaugh, I think there are points in Senator Rubio’s argument that are problematic.
First, Homeland Security is the primary Federal agency spearheading this. When George W. Bush initiated DHS after 911 my initial thought was “Why?” Why do we need to expand government? We already had the F.B.I. and the C.I.A..
But the Bushs are big government “moderates” (I am being very generous calling them moderates), not conservatives!
The Department of Homeland Security has not been, in my estimation, too successful at anything it was designed for. Under Obama and his appointee Napolitano it is a tool for the left.
In the interview Rubio bulleted a number of “triggers” that had to happen before other things happened, but my question is,
“How is this to be executed in real life; in real time, especially under this regime?”
I do not doubt Senator Rubio’s integrity, but perhaps he is being a bit naïve, I hope not, I hope Marco is reading the opposition correctly. Time will tell.
In a post-interview, post-broadcast piece, Rush came up with, what I believe, is a sagacious analysis of that instructive dialogue. You can read it below or click on the link.
Marco Rubio. I know a lot of people are hammering Senator Rubio, understandably so. People are hammering Senator Rubio because they think the bill wouldn’t go anywhere without a Republican in this Gang of Eight propelling it. There are some who say that this bill wouldn’t have a prayer if, for example, the front man were Senator Schumer — and therefore, Senator Schumer isn’t.
This is Rich Lowry’s theory today in Politico, that Senator Schumer has pulled a masterful maneuver here by securing a Republican to go get what he wants (i.e., in this immigration bill). I happen to like Senator Rubio very much. He’s a force of nature. He’s a force of energy. Folks, he is a genuine conservative and full-throatedly, full-heartedly, wholeheartedly believes in it. He really does. The bill itself, however? I’m never gonna understand it. I’m never gonna understand the thinking here.
He says that he’s not motivated politically, and that’s fine. But (chuckles) most of the Republican Party is motivated totally, only by politics. They’re buying hook, line, and sinker — from the Democrats and the media — “You guys better reach out to Hispanics or you’re never gonna win anything! You better make the Hispanics like you.” So they’re doing that. Well, okay. If you do that, if everything you do is “outreach” to Hispanics, how do you ever tell ’em no?
If the objective is to make Hispanics like you and you turn yourself into Santa Claus, then how do you turn yourself into Scrooge someday when you have to? You can’t. Also, the idea that the 11 million or whatever the number is will be quote/unquote legalized, but they won’t be able to vote for a while? We all know what Senator Schumer and the Democrats are going to do. Let’s say that this happens exactly as Senator Rubio spells it out.
Within two months, Senator Schumer and the Democrats are gonna run to the microphones and cameras and they’re gonna start tugging at people’s heartstrings by saying, “How in the world can we be so cruel as to not let them vote? We’ve just legalized them. We’ve just welcomed them to our country. We’ve just created a pathway to citizenship for them. They are paying taxes, and they’re working. It’s unconscionable that they can’t vote.” And — voila! — they’ll be able to vote.
Then, the fact that 70% of them vote Democrat becomes relevant. The fact that after the ’86 amnesty… There’s no doubt. There’s a correlation. We passed the ’86 amnesty, and the Republican Party lost California. Some of you are not old enough to recall it. The Republican Party used to own California. The Republican Party used to define it. Politically they used to own it, very close to it. The ’86 amnesty was the beginning of the end, and it’s gone now. It’s literally gone.
Republicans are simply outnumbered. It can be birth, it can be any number of things, but regardless. They lost, and there are legitimate fears that the same thing is gonna happen to the country, that Republicans/conservatives are gonna end up just be outnumbered. Regardless the birthrate, it’s mathematics. It’s not even ideology or politics. It’s just mathematics, and there are people scratching their heads and looking at the Republican leadership and asking, “Why in the world…?”
It goes to the thing I was asking him about. When Democrats propose something, why do we have to accept it and then offer alternatives? Why can’t we just say, no? Why can’t we just opposed it? What would have happened if we’d really tried to oppose Obamacare? I mean, we opposed their gun control efforts. The NRA does that, not the Republican Party. The NRA does that. But we get to the point that, after all the efforts they make, only 4% of the American people support Obama and Obama wants.
Only 4% support immigration the way Obama wants. I mean, the Republican Party is sitting on two gold mines here. They’re sitting on two great, tremendous opportunities. Ninety-five to 96% of the American people oppose “path to citizenship,” amnesty, or what have you. The Republican Party is sitting on a golden opportunity to define itself, to demark itself, to contrast itself with the Democrat Party — with 96% of the people already on their side before they do anything!
All they’ve gotta do is agree with what 96% of the people already think. Instead, the Republican leadership has bought into the idea — and, by the way, this is not an anti-Hispanic point of view at all. People that vote Democrat, I don’t care who they are, they vote Democrat. Why in the world do you think you’re gonna…? Chuck Schumer wants something. He wants it so bad he can taste it. So why should we? I don’t get it. I’ve never agreed with Chuck Schumer on anything. Why should I on this?
The Democrats are salivating over this, just like they’re salivating on gun control. The answer is, as I was told Tuesday night, “We’re never gonna win unless we reach out to Hispanics! We’re never gonna win another election if we don’t reach out to the Hispanics!” Well, they’re 7% of the electorate. “Yeah, but that’s gonna grow, Rush! That number’s gonna grow.” Well, but they’re only 7% now, so people just don’t understand. They look at the Republican leadership and do not understand.
“Sen. Jeff Sessions warns that passing the Senate immigration reform bill would have devastating effects on the US job market and fiscal outlook.” Senator Sessions, a Republican from Alabama, says that the immigration reform bill “opens up citizenship to recent arrivals and, remarkably, millions who overstayed their visas. It even opens up citizenship to those who have been deported from the country,” meaning they can qualify.
Because of that, because of the opening up of citizenship, “The bill would, thus, increase the unfunded liability of Obamacare by $2 trillion and of Medicare/Social Security by $2.5 trillion,” because all of these people will qualify as being covered by Obamacare. Senator Rubio said, “We would never keep somebody who could throw the baseball 99 miles an hour out of the country.” True. The New York Yankees would be the first team trying to get whoever that would be.
But that’s not who we’re talking about here. That kind of immigration we do need to increase.
Our immigration system is so whacked, those are the people who are limited. What is that, the H-1B visa or what it is? The visas for the equivalent of the guy that can throw a 99-mile-an-hour fastball or the high-tech geniuses, the high-tech grads, those are the people having trouble getting in. That’s where the relaxation needs to be taking place. But you can’t discount the role of Big Business. Big Business is seeing a huge pool of unskilled and therefore cheap labor in bad, questionable economic times.
So there are a number of different forces arrayed here, and the forces arrayed to oppose this on ideological grounds seem to be vastly outnumbered and overwhelmed. The fact that what happened to California could happen to the country doesn’t seem to matter to a lot of people. “Who cares if they’re Republicans or Democrats? I don’t care what they are. What’s the difference anyway? We just need these low-skill workers,” or whatever is the reason they support it.
“It’s outreach to Hispanics so they don’t hate us, so they don’t dislike us.” The Republican Party’s made up of a lot of people who think that way as well.