Skip to comments.Obama Amnesty Plan: Catch, Release, Vote
Posted on 06/15/2012 11:11:30 AM PDT by Kaslin
RUSH: I have a name for this new Obama immigration policy. In case you haven't heard, folks, very quickly: The regime today told the border agents: "If you catch young illegals, let 'em go and grant 'em work permits." No more deportation of illegal immigrants. They are to be given work permits and they can stay in the country. So what this is is "Catch, Release, Vote."
JOHNNY DONOVAN: And now, from sunny south Florida, it's Open Line Friday!
RUSH: That is exactly what this is: Catch, Release, Vote.
You know what surprises me about this? He's using up his political ammo pretty early here. Now, I know he's gonna go talk to La Raza or some Latino group next week, but I'm telling you what. If you had any doubt that people are paying attention, forget it. They obviously are. The president is in full panic mode. He's not keeping his powder dry until the fall. He's not. Why? Because people are paying attention, and we don't like what we are seeing or what we are getting from Obama.
First the churches, then women, then Bain Capital, then gays, and now this. They're just throwing everything up against the wall, hoping something's gonna stick out there. He's getting killed in the media over this speech yesterday. (We've got the audio sound bites.) I mean, he's being literally reamed over the speech. And I'll tell you what's coming next. Here we go. We just went through the brief overview. First, War on Churches. Second, create (as part of it) a phony Republican War on Women. And then go after Mitt Romney and Bain Capital. Then come out for gay marriage.
And now: Don't deport the young illegals; give 'em work permits.
What's that gonna do to the unemployment number? Are we gonna count 'em looking for work or not? If we don't, the number won't drop. If we do, the number will go up. What's it gonna do for those of you trying to get work to learn that 800,000 new illegals are in the job market who will work cheaper than you do? And what's next is home mortgages and student loans. Those are the next two things that are gonna fall. They'll throw it all up against the wall. You watch.
Audio sound bites. I warned everybody of this. Let's go back to July 30th, two years ago, almost. Two years ago on this program, this is what said I...
RUSH ARCHIVE: [T]he issue here is the dictatorial nature of this regime and Obama's willingness to do anything to advance his agenda. They've been caught. They are looking at ways to grant amnesty en masse without legislation if they can't get it done, and they've been caught, memo's been seen and now they say, "Oh, no, no, no! We would never do that. We would never." They're looking at it ... and if they could find a way to do it, if they can find a way to do it, who knows? With this bunch you just don't know. You have to assume, based on everything else we've seen 'em do, that they would do it.
RUSH: We were talking there about a Washington Times story that reported on a memo that said the regime was looking at ways to do what they did today: Grant amnesty to young illegals. And I warned everybody back on July 30th of 2010 that they would do it if they could figure out a way. And the way they figured out is, "Well, it's what Rubio wants to do!" They're just saying, "Hey, this is Marco Rubio's plan. It's bipartisan. It's the DREAM Act." Yeah, except the DREAM Act got defeated. So Congress doesn't matter.
This is what happens, folks, when you have statist, dictatorial types who are in full panic mode. Who needs Congress? I think even The Forehead once said that back when Clinton was president. Clinton did stuff like this now and then. Nothing this drastic, but he did. And The Forehead said, "This is really cool! Sign the paper, law of the land," or something like that. And I'm just telling you, it's Catch, Release, Vote. Use that, folks. That is the name of the program. And, as I say, they'll forgive student loans at some point if they have to in this campaign.
And they might even propose forgiving everybody's underwater mortgage. If they can do this and go against the will of Congress, they can pretty much do whatever they want to do. Drudge has a headline up in big, red letters. Let me check if it's still up. I don't have the Drudge page up right now. Yep. "Who Needs Congress? Obama to Grant Immunity to Young Illegals." He links to a piece from TheHill.com. That headline says, "Obama Makes Election-Year Change in Deportation Policy."
And that story begins by saying, "President Obama will sign an executive order Friday to significantly alter US immigration policy to reduce deportations of illegal immigrants who came to the country at a young age." According to the AP, "Obama's executive order could allow as many as 800,000 immigrants who came here illegally, not only to remain in the country without fear of being deported, but to work legally." So all those articles that we've been seeing about Obama being in trouble with the Hispanic vote must be showing up in the White House polls as well.
Now, this is pure desperation. But in addition to this being pure desperation, this is what he wants to do and has wanted to do all along anyway. The timing is what's desperate, not that he's doing it. And what he's counting on in every one of these proposals is the fact that his voters, basically life's takers... I'm just gonna say it. He thinks that his voters, the takers, outnumber the Catholics. And the people who don't like the whole notion of same-sex marriage. And who are opposed to ever-expanding entitlement programs. And now this.
He thinks that the black vote and the Hispanic vote and the feminist vote and all these other constituency groups are gonna add up to an electoral coalition over the rest of the country -- which I'll call, for the purposes of this discussion, "the producers." That's what he's counting on. We know that he's written off white working-class families. They've admitted that they've written that group off. They've written off the Catholics. I don't know. How much more brazen does this guy have to be. Does this help to put in context, "I hope he fails"?
Does this? You know, that was so needlessly controversial back on January 16th of 2009, when I said, "I hope he fails." The controversy attaching to that was so unnecessary. Bobby Jindal has an op-ed piece. I don't have it in front of me. It's in the stack. I don't know where it ran. But he was in Wisconsin. And Bobby Jindal starts out by saying, "I saw it. I was a witness at the scene of the crime." His observation, after being in Wisconsin for a while to help Scott Walker, was that the Democrat Party has been taken over by the radical left.
Now, you know that I love Bobby Jindal. And you know that I once suggested Bobby Jindal as a legitimate heir of Ronaldus Magnus. My contention is: We all should have known this back in 2007 when Pelosi and Hoyer and Barney Frank and the rest of the crowd took over Congress. It's been obvious that the Democrat Party has been taken over by the radical left for five years. And it was building before that. Now, I'm happy when anybody finally sees it and comes to the conclusion, but, folks...
And I not patting myself on the back. Please don't misunderstand me. I'm frustrated. All of this, everything Obama has done in 3-1/2 years was totally predictable. Based on his ideology. Based on who he is. Now, as I say, I'm happy people finally figured it out. But it would have been a lot better if people would have admitted it to themselves 3-1/2 years ago instead of waiting around trying to be bipartisan, trying to be open-minded, trying to be fair and all that. This has been serious from the get-go. This has been drastically serious from day one.
And now we see the manifestation of all this.
It's just... Well, as I say: I'm glad when people come to the obvious conclusion whenever they do. It's just frustrating. It's been out there for everybody to see that this is where we were headed. And this is where we have been headed and this is who the guy is. (interruption) Do I think it will work? Snerdley wants to know if I think it'll work. You mean help his reelection effort? I think they're throwing things up against the wall. I think they're in sheer, utter panic. I think they're spending all their political capital.
Obama the other day said (impression), "Nobody's paying attention. People don't pay attention 'til the conventions, until you get into the fall." Everybody's paying attention, and this move of his damn-well proves it. He wants everybody to know it. Folks, yeah, call me naive, and call me old-fashioned. I don't think it's gonna work. I don't think we're outnumbered yet. And a lot of people (my friends, even) disagree with me profoundly about that. It's the same coalitions they've always had. (interruption)
They've always had the Hispanics. They've always had the blacks. The reason he's doing that is 'cause he's losing 'em. It's panic time. (interruption) What do you mean? You think this is gonna add more? Not unless these people are allowed to vote, and don't discount it. Catch, Release, Vote. I know. It's my own term. But I told you, I'm surrounded by negativism, and I fight it. I can't tell you the number of people in my circle who think it's all over, and I don't. I don't.
It would be really great for ratings if I did think it was over. You know, people that sell subscriptions for things like Wall Street newsletters will tell you: A crisis story, the end of the world, will ramp up subscriptions. Keep that in mind next time you see some Wall Street analyst touting the end of the world. It's a technique. It's human nature. It works. By the same token, I can say, "Folks, I tell you, it's over. I don't know if we'll survive," and it might draw even more audience. But I don't think it. I think they're flailing. (chuckling)
And for some reason, last night I remembered David Brooks. David Brooks is one of the "smart people," one of the genuinely true smart people, one of the movers and shakers inside the Beltway. David Brooks. "I remember distinctly an image of... We were sitting on his couches, and I was looking at his pant leg and his perfectly creased pant," Brooks says, "and Im thinking, a) hes going to be president and b) hell be a very good president." That might be (chuckles) the best argument ever advanced to illustrate utter vapidness on, supposedly, our side.
That was a serious comment offered by the conservative columnist of the New York Times. That was a serious comment. It had weight. And it turns out that it may have been the best argument for supporting the guy! Forget the fact that he was a community organizer. Forget that he was a member of the socialist New Party. Forget that he was closer than close with a domestic terrorist or two; and that his pastor was a bigoted, racist, anti-American, anti-Semite. Forget all that. Those were certainly tempting reasons to turn the US executive branch over to a Marxist, right?
No, we couldn't do that.
His pants are perfectly creased! This is a man we can count on. David Brooks actually said it. I was thinking about it last night. Why wasn't that controversial or why wasn't that laughed out of the room? The crease in a young radical's pants. I looked up some more David Brooks after Obama's speech yesterday. I don't know why. I guess I just like reading what passes for "smart" inside the Beltway. And David Brooks in the New York Times on May 15th of this year wrote this: "Normally, presidents look weak during periods of economic stagnation, overwhelmed by events.
"But Obama has displayed a kind of ESPN masculinity: postfeminist in his values, but also thoroughly traditional in style -- hypercompetitive, restrained, not given to self-doubt, rarely self-indulgent. Administrations are undone by scandal and moments when they look pathetic, but this administration, guarded in all things, has rarely had those moments." I can't... This is what passes for smart? We're in the midst of utter incompetence combined with dastardly motives...
RUSH: Nancy Pelosi just more or less admitted that she likes this whole thing, and that it's not kosher. She just admitted that Obama is doing this to bypass Congress. She just tweeted, "Strongly support President's decision to stop deporting DREAM Act kids. Democratic-led House passed DREAM in 2010. GOP still obstructing." So because the Republicans who run the place are "obstructing" and didn't pass the DREAM Act, she's happy that Obama bypassed Congress. Shameless. They don't care. It's who they are. (interruption)
No, no, no, no. I am not gonna get sidetracked. When we come back from the break at the bottom of the hour, we're gonna go straight to Obama's speech, straight to the economy, straight to the panic in the media about it. Folks, I'm not -- I am never -- thrown off kilter, off course. Trickinology doesn't work on El Rushbo. And I'm telling you, they're in full panic mode. They're using up capital. This is the kind of stuff you wait 'til the fall to do.
I don't care that he's got a meeting with Hispanic leaders next week. Here, this Obama back in September 2011 at the White House. He had an open-questions roundtable. He got questions from people. "Why aren't you doing stuff for us? Why aren't you doing illegal immigration? Why aren't you making it legal? Why aren't you doing all this stuff?" Here's what he said...
OBAMA: This notion I can somehow just change the laws unilaterally is just not true. We -- we are doing everything we can administratively, but fact of the matter is there are laws on the books that I have to enforce. And I think there's been, uhhh, ehhh, great disservice done to the cause of getting the DREAM Act passed and getting comprehensive immigration passed by perpetrating the notion that somehow, by myself, I can go and do these things. It's just not true.
RUSH: Well, he did. What is he talking about? That's last year. He did. He said he just can't do this stuff by himself. He can't do amnesty by himself. He just can't.
Well, it's amazing what can happen in an election year!
He just did it.
Obama misses the point. THIS IS A REPRESENTATIVE GOVERNMENT AND HE HAS NO RIGHT TO CREATE OUR LAWS!
And, this differs from George W. Bush's immigration policy... How?
So, Rush, are we to watch for the “October surprise” in July?
Be very careful. This is not amnesty and does not confer citizenship. Presidential Executive Orders can very easily be cancelled or modified. Once you have registered Federal law enforcement has your name, address and other identifying features. Much easier to round you up for deportation when the EO is cancelled.
Did Hitler register Jews before the Holocaust? Do you really trust Obama?
Be very careful.
Jan Brewer has to spend millions, spend thousands of hours to make her State's laws stick, but...some foreigner who thinks he's King can do what he wants, no laws or Constitution bind him.
By what right does he claim the Presidency? A title defined only in law?
Oh that's right. That's a law he likes so...that one must be obeyed by the rest of us.
When, in order to buy their votes, he chafes, frets and complains that "there laws that I have to enforce," will they not see the same tyrannical tendency of the totalitarian leaders they chose to escape from?
Remember, the reason he, Pelosi, Reid and the other so-called "progressives" have been able to get away with this kind of violation of the Constitution is that they depend on the constitutional illiteracy of citizens whose history lessons were censored from their America's textbooks by their fellow "progressives" in the education bureaucracy.
Those who longed for American freedom, opportunity, prosperity and plenty while they pined away in other countries may not be so gullible. They may be smart enough to understand that America did not become the place of freedom and opportunity under Obama. Those from foreign lands have been fleeing to this place for over 200 years to escape the same kind of tyranny being imposed by Executive Order and behind the closed doors of Pelosi and Reid in the past 3+ years.
Hopefully, this in-your-face imposition of "my" power will expose the so-called "progressive" movement for what it is: an attempt at bypassing the Constitution's limits on elected officials and a blatant attack on the individual freedom of citizens.
Great post as usual
You said it
You said it
More to the point.
One "modification" that needs to be made, is for the _Resident's Republican successor to walk into the Oval Office immediately after taking the oath and sign an E.O. cancelling every E.O. signed by Barky since his inauguration -- especially including the first one he signed, sealing his records. Every. Last. One.
"Stroke of the pen, law of the land. Cool."
VERY good point. Probably the best I've read so far on this issue.
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.