TUCKER CARLSON: It will be interesting to see a White House graphic -- you saw the number of admitted -- demonstrable benefits to the United States of Syrian immigration. It's an unanswerable question, there isn't one actually. The U.S. has no moral obligation to let in Syrian refugees. And the problem, I think, the lesson of France is, not necessarily refugees, most of whom will be grateful to be here, but their children and grandchildren, is the lack of assimilation of large Muslim populations in the West. We've been doing this for 50 years in western Europe. It's a massive problem. Everyone in Europe knows it. No one here will admit it.
BRET BAIER (HOST): But not a problem here, though Tucker, right? Look at Michigan.
CARLSON: Because we haven't had massive Muslim immigration into this country. I'm totally pro-immigrant and I'm not anti-Muslim. So don't hang the bigot thing on me if you're watching at home. But this is a real question. And any western European will raise it to you in private. How do you assimilate people who don't buy in to your liberal values? And it's a massive problem when they don't. Again, ask anybody who lives in Sweden or Denmark or France. So why given the lack of obvious advantages to America, is the administration pressing forward? There are three reasons. One, so people in power can feel virtuous. Number two, because the president clearly has a commitment to changing the demographics dramatically of this country. And three, Muslim voters are one of the most reliable blocs in the Democratic coalition. It is the election, stupid. That is a part of this, and no one wants to say it out loud. But that is true.
[...]
CARLSON: Why hasn't anyone asked the obvious question, which is why is it our responsibility to settle these refugees? We did not start the war in Syria. This is a country with literally billions of people whose standard of living is lower than ours, who would love to move here, and who have compelling reasons to do so. When did it become -- the poem at the bottom of the Statue of Liberty notwithstanding -- our moral obligation to accept anyone who wants to come here? And I'd love to hear -- is that in the Constitution? I haven't read it. I'd love to hear the advocates of this program, of this immigration and resettlement program, answer that question very clearly. Where does our obligation come from? Is it Constitutional? Is it biblical? Is this a theocracy? Where did you come up with this?
