The Glenn Beck Program - Best of the Program | Guest: Pat Gray | 2/11/19

Episode Date: February 11, 2019

Best of the Program | 2/11   - Praising the President When Deserved? -h1 - Spartacus Speaks? -h1  - Fact Checking the Fact Checkers (w/ Pat Gray) -h1 - Picking Hitler Over Gandhi? -h2 - Democratic Presidential Hopefuls? -h2 - Cardi B on Taxes -h3       Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hey, welcome to the podcast. It's Monday. We've got a lot. We start with a take on the state of the union and what the president said about socialism, that socialism would not take root here in the United States. I wanted to pick that back up and start there because we've got a lot of socialists in today's world. We also had Pat in. He talked about what some of the fascistic freedom of speech things around the world, what's happening there. and who wrote the new Green Deal or the Green New Deal Alexandria Acosio's chief of staff we go on and look at him a little bit interesting guy very sexy we can say that very hot he has a very nice beard

he wears tight shirts all the things that you'd expect out of Alexandria There's also something else that maybe people should pay attention to and we covered that and polar bears being slammed by global warming yet again

and if we have have time we're going to squeeze in just a couple of comments with Cardi B all on today's podcast. You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. Home title fraud is a big problem and a big part of that, right? How do you protect your own, you buy a home and you have all this equity and then what? And then someone comes in and tries to take it all and steal it from you? Sounds great, doesn't it? There is one person that stands at the gate, literally protecting your home, the home of loved ones.

it's home tidal lock.com. Go to home tidalock.com. $100 search for free when you sign up. Stu has it. I have it. We have it. Not because they're an advertiser. We have it because we believe in this.

Hometitallock.com. Hometitleock.com. You remember towards the end of the speech? The president said one thing that I thought was stunning that a president had to say. And I was glad he said it. He took an unequivocal stand against socialism. And if you remember right, he said America will never be a socialist country and all the Republicans and I think there were a

couple of people in the Democratic Party that stood up for that. We will never be a socialist country. I want to point this out in a different way because most people in the press have ignored it. We have said, yes, finally somebody is saying it. But what is it? But what is it? it that he actually said when he said the United States will never be a socialist country the feeling in the room was palpable but what was it he actually said because we've heard him say it before just in different words in fact we've heard it said by every single member of Congress just in different words those words I will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. That's what he said. We'll never be a socialist

country. I will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Why that was so shocking, and I didn't think of it at the time, why that was so shocking is because it's been a long time since we've heard any politicians say those words outside of their oath that they quickly forget. I will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States. Now, the problem is Democratic Socialists, their agenda here in the U.S. is crazy. Do we have that audio we just played from Cory Booker on the New Deal? The New Green Deal. Listen to this. Our plans. Our plans. planet is in peril and we need to be bold. It's one of the reasons why I signed on to the resolution,

a co-sponsored the resolution for the Green New Deal. And there's a lot of people now that are blown back on the Green New Deal. They're like, oh, it's impractical, oh, it's too expensive, oh, it's all of this. If we used to govern our dreams that way, we would have never gone to the moon. God, that's impractical. You see that ball in the sky? That's impractical.

We are a nation that has done impossible things before. And my parents taught me reach for the, reach for the moon. Stop. This is the problem. You notice how they're framing this, that this is a moon shot, that this is something that we're going to do together. And it's, it's fantastic. The moonshot was something that we did together through private companies. We did it together.

Now there were public things like NASA as well. And we have debated that forever. In fact, we've just gotten out of that. And we now have things like SpaceX, which are showing us that they can do things much faster, much cheaper, and better than even NASA. But what we're talking about with the new Green Deal is something entirely different. See, our Constitution says there is a bill of rights. And these are the things that the people own. And the government must never do these things ever.

What the Green, the new deal, the new Green deal does is, in Akosio-Cortez's own words, takes the second Bill of Rights, which was attempted by FDR, and expands that. Well, we never passed the second Bill of Rights. Americans, they don't even know there was an attempt to do this. And what it was was to say there is a new Bill of Rights. Forget about all those other ones. Here's the Bill of Rights. The United States government believes that you have a right to a house.

You have a right to a job. You have a right to food. You have a right to medicine and medical care. Well, we've already passed the medical care. They're doing it in bits and pieces. Now this is a large sweep to be able to take over the entire economy. This is not constitutional. Now, that's why you see progressives.

They hate the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence. They hate it. They need it to be destroyed. That's why they try to convince people that it's a living document, that it's out of date written by dead old white men. the Constitution is a barrier you see it's a barrier to fascism to socialism to communism to all forms of statism

because the Constitution is written as you are the king you are the one who is in charge of your life and democratic socialist hate it and they think if the people democratically choose socialism then somehow it makes it fair and acceptable, but that's exactly what the Constitution prevents. No matter how the people

might vote, the Constitution makes the voting part irrelevant. Slavery, by the way, even if it's won by a popular vote is still slavery. Popular vote doesn't matter. Doesn't matter how you try to spin it. The people want slavery. Well, the people can't have slavery. The Constitution inherently limits the power of democracy to ensure that our natural God-given rights as individuals are never subverted by popular opinion. This is the antithesis of the socialist doctrine. Our founding documents identify and protect the rights and the freedom of the individual against the state. Socialism and socialist doctrine protects the rights and interest of the state and the collective over the rights of the individual. You know, very few people have the courage to speak out and face the criticism.

I don't know what it is about Donald Trump, but he seems to thrive on criticism. And in an era where standing for the rights of the individual and standing up for America first leads to rampant accusations of racism and misogyny and bigotry and greed, it kind of makes a guy who thrives on criticism, kind of the only guy who could possibly, weather this storm. By saying America will never be a socialist country, what Donald Trump said last week is we are going to continue to live under the U.S. Constitution.

What he said yesterday or last week, what he said on the on the platform with Nancy Pelosi grinning at him was something I haven't heard a politician say after they've taken the oath. I will protect and defend the Constitution of the United States of America. The best of the Glenn Beck program. The Green New Deal. Or the New Green Deal. Whatever, which one ever it is.

It'll be the Green New Deal. They're trying to keep New Deal together because that's innovative democratic policy. You see, there's this great idea of a New Deal that is so new and exciting to all these millennials who probably don't know that there was a new deal and then a new, new deal, which was rejected by the American people. This is the final play, I believe, to subvert the Constitution in the Bill of Rights. This is the play to reverse the Bill of Rights and change our system into, and there's no hyperbole here. Read it for yourself.

You change the system from a... a charter of negative liberties against the government to a charter of positive liberties, the things the government must do, and you have the Soviet Union Constitution, which, by the way, was changed like every 10 or 15 years. So one of the big things is they will, of course, get us off of fossil fuels completely within like a decade, which is pretty aggressive considering the amount that we use them now. I guess I don't, we still don't know an answer like, will we be able to use plastic cups? Will we will be?

Well, no, we won't be able to use. No, I guess not. Well, if we're not getting fossil fuels, we also won't be able to take medicine because a lot of medicine is coated in, you know, petrochemicals. And so, you know, to be able to take your medicine in that capsule, you need fossil fuels. So if we're not using fossil fuels, you won't be able to take any capsules. Minor things like that. Yeah, no big deal. 99% of cars would be taken off the road because they want all electric.

Every building, every structure in America would need to be retrofitted with all sorts of different eco materials, which by the time you finish the job would be completely outdated anyway. But they're talking about only tearing down or gutting every structure in America. Every structure in America. Now, this is what Cory Booker just said. You know, people say that's crazy. Yeah, it is crazy. You're getting rid of all cars within 10 years, all fossil fuels within 10 years.

You want to tear down or gut and rebuild every single structure in the United States of America in the next 10 years. There's a difference, too, between impossible and impossible on inspiring photos, right? Like there's those little hang in there posters that you can get that inspire you at work. You hang them on your wall. and it's like, you know, resilience. And then there's like a nice little quote about it. And there's somebody who's like climbing a mountain. Right.

Like that, yeah, you could say that's impossible. But that's not really the term, what really impossible means. You look at the moon. Look, it's a straight shot. There's almost no traffic. You can get there. It's hard. Right.

That's not impossible. Right. Impossible is getting rid and retrofitting every single structure in the country, plus taking 99% of cars off the road and replacing them with a whole new fuel system within 10 years. That's impossible. The fuel system that you don't have yet, by the way. Right.

Fuel system that we don't even know what it is. Also, you know, replacing it, I would assume that because they didn't ban coal, that we would be using coal. But coal is dirtier than the combustion engine today. Well, obviously, coal's not going to be a factor. In fact, not even nuclear power is going to be a factor, even though it has zero emissions. They want that gone, too. The funniest part about this is how they say they're going to pay. pay for it. Now, of course, that's the

Cory Booker, you know, he's indignant over something like a question like that. How we're going to pay for it? Well, we're going to pay for it. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said the same thing. Well, we're going to pay for it because we're a rich country and we can pay for it. In the document, they say they will pay for it the same way they paid for the New Deal, which in case you're

following along is $50 trillion dollars of debt. That's how they paid for the regular new deal. The old, timely new deal has caused us $50 trillion of debt. So that's they're going to pay for the Green New Deal, they actually cited as a positive example,

the New Deal, which is causing almost all of our debt problems. But go ahead. That's a good way to do it. No, it's just like you to, it's just like you to just say these things like that. I was quoting them, so I don't know if it was just like me.

It was more like just like them. No, you can't quote them and still not be a conspiracy theorist. Oh, okay. Didn't you learn that over the weekend? That you can still quote them and be called a conspiracy theorist. So what one of the guys was saying that was on her team was that this is not going to just cause debt.

They're going to be able to print this money. They're going to print this money, and they're going to print this money, and they're going to buy this stuff. But remember, it's too few goods being chased by too many dollars, right? Too many dollars chasing two, few goods. That's inflation. But they say, if we are tearing down all of America, those dollars are going to be chasing goods. We have to make those goods. So we're going to be fine.

There's not going to be hyperinflation because we can just print the money and make the goods. This is China's philosophy, right? This is how you come up with ghost cities where no one lives. Yes. You spend hundreds of billions of dollars. on cities with skyscrapers that remain empty because no one lives there or wants to live there. And it eventually fails. And it eventually fails. And they're seeing that now, they're already seeing the beginnings of that. And their people are feeling the beginnings of that.

And if you have a complete control over the government and complete control over every person in your country, you can get away with that for a little while. Now, just so we have the Green New Deal really covered, we just want to let you know that it also is banning all airplanes. Yes, that's true. We did forget about that. In 10 years. Now, isn't she revising that now?

She's saying we wouldn't necessarily... No, we'd phase them out. We'd phase them out. Because phase those things with the 40-year lifespan out over 10 years. Yeah, that's okay. We're just going to phase them out because we're going to find new technology. In the next 10 years, we'll probably, and I'm quoting, have solar technology for solar planes. Better get above those clouds pretty fast.

Yeah, yeah. I, that's a pretty super light and efficient batteries too. Yeah, really light and really efficient. But again, like, I always question this because they always say that conservatives are anti-science. That's a big claim. We're anti-science. We don't care about science. This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hi, it's Glenn. If you're a subscriber to the podcast, can you do his favor and rate us on iTunes? If you're not a subscriber, become one today and listen on your own time. You can subscribe on iTunes. Thanks. Pat Gray now joining us from Pat Gray Unleash, the podcast that you can hear anytime wherever you find your podcast, or you can also listen to him live prior to this broadcast on the Blaze Radio and Television Network. BlazTV.com slash back.

Okay, Pat Gray. I heard driving in a story today from Great Britain. Yeah. And you said it's coming here and it absolutely is coming here. The only reason why they're ahead and the only reason why it's not here is because for the time being, we have the First Amendment. Yeah, exactly. But that's quickly being done away with. As we see every day in the news, I mean, sure you've gotten freedom of speech but you can't have your job.

I mean, come on. That's crazy. And California just contemplated, and did they pass the law? I'm trying to think, where if you use the wrong pronoun in school, in public schools, you can be arrested. Is that a problem? And find, wait, if I use the wrong pronoun, I can be arrested? Well, in Great Britain, a 38-year-old mother was arrested in front of her children and locked up for seven hours and intensely interrogated after referring to a transgendered woman as a man online.

Wait, she didn't beat the person, she didn't shoot the person, she didn't torture the person. No. She referred to the person as a man online. Wow. And you arrest her for that? And that's different from a bullet how. Well, in that it didn't hurt or kill anyone. I mean, it hurt feelings, perhaps.

But it used to be sticks and stones would break your bones. Names would never hurt you. That's not the case anymore. Especially in Great Britain. But again, it is coming here. I mean, we see it every day. Three officers detained her and quizzed her at a station at the station for seven hours for dead naming. Now, that's...

Told you. Yeah, dead naming. Told you. It's not great. I love that expression. Yeah, dead naming. You can't dead name people. Now, what dead naming means is you cannot say anything about Caitlin Jenner.

You could say about Keelan Jenner. But you can't say Bruce Jenner. That's a dead name. That's a dead name. Once you mention of Bruce Jenner, you're dead naming Caitlin. And that name is dead. Despite the fact that that dead name was a gold medal winner in the Olympics. That would be like if Adolf Hitler would have, on the last day of the war, said, I'm a woman.

I'm Gertrude Hunzel's flight. And I want everybody to know, I'm Gertrude Hunzelflip. And you'd go, wait, you're Adolf Hitler. How dare you. You dead named him. Oh, her. Her, you dead named her. That is a different life that never happened.

Well, to the point where in documentaries about the Olympics, they now will say Caitlin Jenner, who at this time was named Bruce Jenner. And it's like, well, Caitlin Jenner would not have qualified for the event. If she was a woman, she would not be able to have been in the event that she supposedly won. You can talk about Bruce Jenner's accomplishments, but you are not to connect them to Caitlin Jenner. You can't do that. That's dead naming. You can't. So they're not the same person.

You can't have Caitlin Jenner show up for an appearance to celebrate the Olympic victory. They're not the same person. No, they're not the same person. I think that Caitlin Jenner would disagree with this. Wouldn't Caitlin Jenner be like, hey, wait a minute. Like, I did do all those things. I disagree with almost all of this crap. Caitlin Jenner, I mean, is one person who makes a lot of sense on a lot of this crap. And that's saying something.

But I don't think that Caitlin Jenner is the person that. wants to put anybody in jail because you're like, oh, it was Bruce Jenner. Weren't you Bruce Jenner at one time? Put him in jail. That is not Caitlin Jenner. I think Caitlin Jenner would say, yes, I was. But I'm not anymore. Yes.

And that's the way it should be. Right. Yes, because your eyes don't deceive you. The history books are not wrong. This all happened and we all know it. So you go to jail now in Great Britain. you go to jail if you call if you tweet somebody the wrong pronoun.

That's crazy. Oh my gosh. I mean, would you have ever as weird as the world has been, especially since 2009 when Obama took over, I could have never predicted something like this. This gender thing is so out of control and upside down.

It's all encompassing too. It is. It's all encompassing. It's the same with the new Green Deal. Yeah. The, the, there are the Green New Deal. This is all encompassing. This is to change the Constitution into a Constitution of positive liberties.

Which ruins it. It's not the Constitution. No, it's everywhere else. It's why the Canadians, I ask Gad SAD, who I think we're going to try to expedite his podcast and maybe put it out this week. Oh, really? We're going to try. Is that your way of telling us to do that? No, I wrote somebody.

Yes, but take it as that. I wrote to somebody on Friday and asked if we could expedite that. But he's remarkable. And I said to him, why is it, why is it that it's all the Canadians that are standing up? Where is academia here in America? And there are a few academics that are standing up. But Canada is on the war path. And he said, because we don't have the illusion of freedom of speech, you guys have the First Amendment.

and you think you'll always have it. We know we don't have it. And so if we don't fight for it, we're going to lose it. That's a really good point. Right. Really good point. Same in Britain. And what's scary is, you just think you're always going to have it. And unless you even know it, you won't have it.

And I'm telling you, this is the most radical Congress ever elected. Oh, no question. There was a tweet put out because of, of this whole Green New Deal and the back and forth with Akazio-Cortez. And how that was a lie and it was made up. Okay. And yet every 76 congressman have signed on to it. Including a bunch of them that are running for precedent.

Yeah. By the way. 76. 76 congressmen, senators, and presidential candidates have signed on to it. That's getting rid of cars. That's getting rid of airplanes. Within 10 years. That's, that's decimating every house.

trying to stop cow farts. Every house, all of it. So there was this big thing about the cow farts and whether or not it's a job for those who won't work. That's what we're arguing about. We're arguing about if the cow farts were in there or whether they were guaranteeing a job for people who were unwilling to work.

That's your problem, America? So anyway, the guy who put it out is her chief of staff. Do you know who the chief of staff is? Do you know how radical that guy is? I actually thought of Van Jones this weekend and thought, dude, I think you're probably on our side. I think you are starting to look like a conservative.

They've overturned windowed us to the point where Van Jones looks like a conservative. And I mean that sincerely. I think Van Jones is. probably not welcome anywhere near Ocasio Cortez and her people. I know he got lots of heat for working with Jared Kushner on the criminal justice reform stuff. I mean, the Democrats didn't like, yeah, how dare you work with them and cross that line? I mean, it is amazing. I mean, that's how far we've come that fast.

We're like, we were pointing out that Van Jones had all these past beliefs and he hadn't really shunned them yet when it comes to communism and socialism. Now, like, that's the mainstream position of the Democratic Party, and Van Jones is no longer welcome. Yeah. And that is phenomenal to me. Absolutely phenomenal. I heard you talking about the state of the union address last week where the president said we will never be a socialist country. Can you imagine a Democrat saying that? I can't think of a single Democrat who would declare that. You can't. Not with 76% of the 76 co-sponsors of the Green New Deal that can't. You can't. You can't. That is, that is fascism. Well, what? That's fascism. It's up when he said it.

I think of three of them stood up. I mean, think of, we've only had one Democratic president since the Democratic president was on the stage saying the era of big government is over. That's one Democratic president ago. You couldn't elect Bill Clinton in the Democrat Party now. Well, no, let alone JFK. For different reasons, too. Yes.

Yeah. Now they don't like him. And I guess that's, you know, by. partially because of his shenanigans when it comes to women, but also I think he doesn't fit ideologically anymore. No. He doesn't. When are the regular Democrats going to wake up?

And I don't think they will because the press is covering for all of this. Listen to this. Fact checkers sparred with Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez over their alleged bias, but it ended on a high note. Okay? It talks about beyond the fracas, the episode touched off a larger in public back and forth about fact-checking, how claims are chosen and the standards used in checking them. That's because of Ocasio-Cortez in a quid-twitter thread. Ask how fact-checkers do their work, their rules, and whether she's being treated fairly compared to other high-profile officials like White House press secretary, Sarah Huckabee Sanders. The fact-checkers answered, tweeted out their rules of engagement, and explained how she was. was not being held to a standard different than anyone. And from there, the Congresswoman pivoted away from conflict. She called fact-checking critically important and said it was important for everyone to know

the rules and thank the fact-checkers for their work. The Washington Post fact-checker responded, this is classy, and I appreciate it. As confrontations over fact-checking go, the outcome was as close to a win-win that can be had. Acosio Cortez's cordial exit let her reclaim some high ground. Even if her original tweet is

still there, the fact checkers got a high profile opportunity to explain how they do it and why. Oh, good. Oh, that's good. Oh, good. Are you kidding me? Did you read David Harsani, who used to work for the blaze? Yeah. Did you read his article on how biased these fact checkers are?

Oh, yeah. And the way they cherry pick their facts and and how they spin everything. It's just the fact checkers are not fact checkers. You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program. Well, we know now because it was, you know, because you can't hide on the internet. They went back and forth all weekend about, no, I didn't say cow farts. That wasn't something we put in there. No, no, no.

We didn't say that whether you're willing or not willing to work, you'd get money from the government. No, no, no. We didn't say anything about that. First, misdirection. Why argue about something of such nonsense when you're talking about a complete reversal of the Bill of Rights? And that's not my words. That's their words. This is addition, in addition, to Franklin Roosevelt's Second Bill of Rights. Well, we didn't have a second Bill of Rights. America rejected it. Why? Because it reverses us and makes us into a socialist or fascistic state. A state where you might own public production, but the state guides you. That's fascism.

The other is communism, where the state owns all of the means of production. And only for a while, because then it gives it to the people. Remember that. And it always happens that way. It gives it right to the people. this is the people's plant although none of the people actually have a say in how it's run well they do give it to people it's just usually the

people at the very top but that are in the government they're the ones that wind up getting it in the end okay so psychot I know I'm going to butcher his name and I apologize for it Chachrabarty is my favorite of the Chachra Barty family thank you he is

Akazio Cortez is chief of staff And I just want to show you how arrogant and comfortable they are. You remember when I was in last week, last Tuesday, I went to the State of the Union and I told you afterwards. What was stunning to me was the arrogance and how radical this class was. this is I'm telling you right now Van Jones looks like you know a puppet in one of Mr. Rogers' kingdom plays he is nothing

compared to this incoming class and we're going to show you some examples of that but I just want to show you you know you look to somebody and you say who are their heroes who are their heroes you know who do they spend time thinking about who are they who are they surrounding themselves with for instance behind me is a painting that I did this weekend of Abraham Lincoln and when I'm painting I'm

generally painting something that is uplifting something that somebody I admire etc etc that's the way people are You don't generally wear things or surround yourself with pictures of people you despise. Nowhere in the Democratic Party are there pictures of me and my family on their desk, unless they're just focused on destroying me. Nobody's like, you know what, I'm going to wear a Glenn Beck t-shirt. Ben Jones doesn't own one. So who does psychot?

Who is he willing to wear a t-shirt? And that face is on there. Now, we have seen people that wear Che Guevara. Che, of course, we know is a brutal killer, hated homosexuals, hated African Americans, brutal, brutal killer of artists and poets and writers and press. He was a psycho, although he's kind of acceptable. So as I'm looking at the, I'm looking at the website of a conversation. And I'm trying to figure out who wrote this Green Deal?

Well, the guy who put it out and who is marked as the author on the PDF is her chief of staff. So who is he? Well, he's a hot hunk. That's who he is. Oh, you should see him. He's a hot hunk. Well, looking at the hot hunk pictures that are going around, you know, where all of the women are saying, look at him.

He's a hot hunk. I noticed that he's wearing a t-shirt of somebody that I thought, who is that? Well, Stu, have you ever heard of, and again, I'm going to butcher the name, Nataji Subhoss, Chandra Bose, I think. Okay. That was just seemed like a lot of letters you mixed up.

Yeah, well. So, he was a guy that in 1928 he started the Indian National Congress, 1928, somewhere in that. And what was happening in the world in 1928, 29? Well, there was a big explosion kind of like there is now of nationalism, communism, extremism, fascism, and nationalism. So he was a nationalism. and he started the Indian National Congress in 1929. And he had everybody, there was 2,000 people in this,

and he had everybody march in these new uniforms that he had made. Does this sound familiar? Who else in 1920s was getting people together under a national socialist flag, making uniforms and having them march in these grand parades? We'll get back to him in a minute. Gandhi saw this in 1928 and said, this is an absolute circus. But Gandhi would later have to take a stand. In 1935, this guy was a full-fledged fascist and was calling for a dictator.

He wrote a book, and see if this sounds familiar to you, Stu. He wrote a book you might have heard of, or it might sound familiar. It was called Indian struggle. Struggle, like a comf, as it were. Yeah, like a mine conf. My struggle, this is Indian comp. Indian comp. Right, okay.

You know, and the struggle also jihad. Okay. So he writes the Indian struggle when Hitler is writing my struggle. They both are talking about fascism. In 1935, he decides he's going to bring this book to one of his heroes, Benito Mussolini. Now, the reason why he left India is because Gandhi and Nehru were against him. And they said, we have no place for you. There is no place for the kind of violence and the kind of system that, you.

you are asking for. Gandhi said that national socialism and communism, you can't blend these two things. You can't go either direction because they're both wrong. So he's chased out by Gandhi. Now, I want you just to understand, this guy has a choice between Gandhi and Mussolini and Hitler. he chooses Mussolini and Hitler, not Gandhi.

So he goes over to Mussolini, gives him a book, then he goes over in 1941. So there's no doubt who Hitler is in 1941. He goes over in 1941 to meet with Herr Hitler. And they meet. And he meets with, I think it was gerbils. and the Nazis give him his own stormtroopers. Isn't that great?

And his own little radio facility called Radio Free India. So he can spill his propaganda, his anti-Gandhi, anti-Nayru propaganda, pro-national socialist propaganda into India. He then goes over to the imperial state of Japan, and he sides with the Japanese, and the Japanese also give him stormtroopers, if you will. In 1943, he put together the provisional government of a free India. He declared himself head of state, prime minister, minister of war, and minister of foreign affairs.

He expected to continue this after the war was won by the Japanese and the Nazis. And he insisted on absolute loyalty to him and execution and torture. of those who disagreed with him. He in the same year, he talked about how India needed a ruthless dictator, not just to get rid of the English, but a ruthless dictator to rule for at least 20 years after liberation. He says, as long as there is a third party,

these dissensions will not end. They will continue to grow. They'll disappear only when an iron dictator, rules over India for 20 years. For a few years at least, after the end of British rule in India, there must be a dictatorship. No other constitution can flourish in this country, and it is so to India's good that she be ruled by a dictator to begin with.

He no longer liked just fascism. He was now a national socialist. He liked the Nazi leaders. How do you pick... how do you pick Hitler over Gandhi that's pretty hard to do it's pretty hard to do now when you get up in the morning and you have a choice of any t-shirt on the planet you could wear and you are Akazio cortez's chief of staff and you have a choice of t-shirts you could pick a Gandhi t-shirt. You could

pick a Lincoln T-shirt. You could pick a Nike t-shirt. You could pick a Colin Kaepernick t-shirt. But you instead pick the t-shirt depicting the face of the guy who selected Mussolini

and Adolf Hitler and worked with them. I think it's time we bring the chalkboard out because I think there's a whole new class of radicals that you need to be aware of and we need to do it again and we need to do it right so our democratic friends not the ones in Washington but the ones on the street will listen because they are surrounded

by people who believe any means possible that's just your writer of the green new deal this is the best of the glenbeck program we had some new contenders and really good looking contenders too for America that stepped into the race today. Stu is actually working on a, what he believes will be something that, and I agree, will be extraordinarily useful as you're going, as you're going forward in 2020 to be able to measure the Democratic nominees

and how the race is shaping up. You have over 20 factors that you're looking at, Stu? Yeah, so far 26 different categories. where he's like, you know, go from everything from polling to fundamentals to support within the party, alignment with the political policy positions of activist sort of voters. There's a lot of different factors that go into it. I think there's 26 so far. Probably will expand a little bit from there.

But I'm still in the middle of building it fully. Are you looking at the center of the country, Democrats, at all? Yeah, we're looking at that as well as the early states, which will be, when you're talking about this is about whether these candidates can win the primary who's kind of like a power rankings for the democratic candidate and who's going to be in the lead and can you when you get it done will you be able to look at which one is you know they might be winning the primary but not necessarily good against trump because yeah that's one of the most important factors right now i'm not building it as who is going to be the best matchup for trump from the democrats per se although

that's a factor in it. One of the things, the reasons I'm considering that sort of polling, which is basically based on general election polling, which still is out, is already being taken. Yeah. Is that is probably the number one thing Democrats want out of a candidate, which is to beat Trump. But they like if they came up with a person who believed lots of different things from them, but they believed would actually beat Trump, that person's much more likely to actually win. That's going to be different though, you know, with the, you know, with the Keith Ellisons of the world.

I mean, they really believe. I read an article this week. Something along the lines of, what was the headline? Can a moderate win against Trump? Can a moderate? Wait, wait, wait. You're always saying that the Republicans are running extremists when we run people who believe in the Constitution.

You're now questioning whether a moderate could win in the Democratic Party. I mean, Howard Schultz is not a moderate Democrat. He's a liberal Democrat, and he can't even fit in the party. No. He's running as an independent potentially because he doesn't think he has any chance, basically, to win as a Democratic candidate. I mean, think about that. That is a, that's quite a statement.

He's a lifelong Democrat. He's a guy who started Starbucks. And he's out. And he's out. He's out of the party. So think about how radical that change has been. But see, how do they expect to run a radical when 20% of the vote for Donald Trump came from people who voted at least once for Barack Obama? I mean, it's the best path for a win for Donald Trump.

If he is going to face someone like a, you know, Elizabeth Warren, someone who's so far left that it's impossible for a person in the middle of the country to say, I'm comfortable with that. Anybody who signed for the new Green Deal? Right, and they all have. As far as I know, I know Corey Booker was bragging about it.

You know, Kamala Harris is on it, Elizabeth Warren is on board. As far as I know, I don't know if any of the candidates have rejected. I don't think there's been one candidate yet that rejected it. Now, that might be the type of job that Joe Biden takes up if he gets a race. And he's the guy who says, all I want is super mega liberal, not socialist.

And that may be enough in this context to win. He's obviously doing very well in the polls, but a lot of that's name recognition. He hasn't even announced yet. But yeah, I mean, it's interesting to look at that. I did, so I had the very draft versions of this done. I haven't added Klobuchar yet. She just announced this weekend, Minnesota, a Minnesota senator.

And she's kind of being touted as the first. kind of moderate to get in the race. She is touted as a moderate. She's from a state that Trump almost won and from a region where Trump pulled off some unexpected victories. So that's one of the things there. She kind of placed herself off as a moderate.

I looked at her conservative review score. Now, a lot of Democrats have 0% conservative review scores. So I mean, you know, so she's a moderate. She has a 2%. Oh, wow. So a 2% conservative review score, pretty sexy, I think, for the moderates out there.

Yeah. But we can go through this if you want really quick. There's so far, I guess, one, two, three, four, five, six, seven, eight, nine. Nine, I think I have in there. Klobuchar would be ten. There's a couple of other minor candidates that we don't have in yet. But the way it works is it basically score from one to 100. It comes to, and there's a lot of different categories, but they're not all treated equally, right?

Like there's certain things that are really important, certain things that are not all that important. Like, what's the most important thing? I mean, certainly polling is up there as very important. the endorsements from the campaign. That hasn't really started yet, but that will become important. Name recognition, quite important. You know, things like the support from party elite

and social reach is pretty important. You know, you look at that, like, you look at someone like a, social reach is an interesting one, right? Like you have people like, you know, Elizabeth Warren and Corey Booker have huge social followings where someone like a, Kamala Harris has a much smaller social following.

She's getting lots of buzz from the media right now, but she doesn't necessarily have that way to easily and cheaply spread that message. That will grow if she starts to lead in the polls. These things all start to follow each other. And there's policy alignment stuff and all sorts of stuff like that. Is it a serious campaign?

Is there baggage? How many gaffs do they have? How do they have a propensity for gaffes? So there's a lot of different things to look at there. So the score basically comes out from zero to 100. It's basically impossible to get a zero or a 100. So I'll give you these in reverse order

as they stand right now. Andrew Yang. He's a... I thought he would be higher up on the list. Shockingly, no. He's got 17.8. Then you've got John Delaney, who's a former congressman, but it hasn't really made no big impact. He's at 18. Pete Buttigieg. Now, Pete

is the guy from... He's the mayor of South Bend, Indiana. Yeah, love Buttigieg. Yes, he's at 29. Yeah. on our guy. Tulsi Gabbard is next. She's at a 30 on our scale. She's a congresswoman from Hawaii.

Then you got Kirsten Gillibrand is at 38 on our scale. Julian Castro at 41. Interesting. There's a couple things that I found interesting as we get here towards the top. Because there's really only three or four big candidates that are in right now. And they are at the top. Elizabeth Warren is next at 41.4. I was shocked to see her, though, I mean, towards the bottom group.

I mean, 41 was Julian Castro. Again, he was the HUD Secretary and Mayor of San Antonio. That's his qualification. Why is her number come down on this? I mean, she just got so many problems. She's just riddled with problems. And that's it, right? She has real problems fundamentally as candidates.

She does well on things like social scores. She does okay in polling. There's certain things that she does pretty well, but a lot of those candidates, I mean, how does she deal with Donald Trump? We've talked about this before. She is. She'd be a, he'd walk all over her. She is the ideal candidate to run against Trump.

If they can make Elizabeth Warren the candidate, Trump will have the easiest time, I think, with her. Corey Booker actually finished second in this, and he's at 48.5 right now, which is considerably better than I think he's a terrible candidate. I mean, Corey Booker, you'll see him in speeches sometimes, and he can be kind of engaging. But he is a performer. When he gets in those moments, he tends to write things. he's not authentic. The authenticity level of Cory Booker is low when he gets in big moments. He handles big moments poorly.

Yeah, I am Spartacus. It's a great example of it, right? I mean, so inauthentic. So inauthentic. And again, just a, he's also the type of person. You saw it with a green clip that we played earlier, the Green New Deal clip, where he is a type of person that likes to defend those indefensible positions. He likes to jump into those situations.

So, you know, when everyone's saying the Green New Deal, it's ridiculous. like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez comes out with it, a bunch of people jump on board with it, and then everyone starts to see the details come out and say, oh my God, this is not a serious proposal. Right now momentum is going against the Green New Deal because it's patently absurd. Anyone who looks at it knows it's ridiculous.

Why? Just because he wanted to abolish air travel, car travel. All fossil fuels and car travel. And remake, knock down and rebuild, or just retrofit every single home in America and every single structure in America. These are not legitimate ideas.

I mean, this is Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's silliness. Some look at things and say why. Yeah, and that's what his defense was, right? His defense was, oh, that's a moonshot people said it was impossible. Well, they didn't say it was impossible. They said it was hard. This is impossible. And it's stupid.

It's not even a goal you'd want to do. At least the moon, we could at least look up there and say, wow, that's a pretty cool video. I don't know what you get out of the green deal except bankrupting people. So he was at 48.5, and then in first place, as it stands now, was Kamala Harris and her rating at 65.1. So as of this moment, based on my model here, Kamala Harris is considerably ahead of the field.

It does not necessarily mean anything at this point. Again, the top tier candidates, you don't have a Beto in yet, you don't have a Biden in yet, you don't have a lot of the people who were kind of talked about in that top tier. I mean, you saw Michelle Obama's appearance the other night. I mean, people keep talking about her as a potential candidate. we've talked about it before.

No way. She's not... I mean, she's not showing any signs of running at this point, but I think if you got to a point where they were desperate... I think if they got to the point to where everybody was like, that's Elizabeth Warren. She may pop in. She may pop in.

And if she pops in, she wins it, right? Like, she is barring something on first scene. She's been through these trials. She's been out and for people for a long time. Everybody always says Oprah. Mm-mm. Michelle Obama is better than Oprah. Yes.

because God really knows what Oprah. She has no idea what she's talking about in half of these things. Michelle Obama has lived in this world. She's been through the pressure of D.C. She knows it. She knows it. And you know her. You've seen her in the White House.

Again, as he's thinking of a democratic activist, they see her as the shining example of what we have set on fire with Donald Trump. They had this wonderful thing going. They had recovered from that evil Bush administration. Everything was going great. And then they set it on fire by electing Donald Trump. And it was Hillary Clinton's fault. You know, she's the one that blew it.

She didn't go far enough. She couldn't do it. They think Michelle Obama can. And if Michelle Obama walked into that primary, it would turn the whole thing upside down. She'd be at the top of this in seconds because, you know, she has that, she has the easiest path to that nomination if she wanted it. Now, she has not shown serious signs of wanting it. But, you know, there's a part of everybody that wants to be president in the United States.

And there's a part of her that was really more activist than him. I mean, she was really the activist, you know, muscle behind Barack Obama in their early years. She loves it. She's not a passive, you know, first lady. Like Melania Trump has literally no interest at all in, you know, higher office by any, you know, there's no, even rumors of it. Michelle always wanted it. You know, Barack got it first, but Michelle always wanted it, just like Hillary always wanted it. And so Michelle, I think if she could be convinced this was easy and she could.

coast to it, which she probably could, unless Biden ran. And Biden, I think that might be an issue there. But I think Michelle would, she would have a real, legitimate shot of a clean path. She could clear, she'd clear half these candidates out the day she announced. Half of them would drop out the day she announced. That's how, that's how much of a wave that would be in the Democratic Party right now.

And Hillary Clinton must hate her. Must hate her. The best of the Glenn Beck, I don't think people really understand how close we are to this socialist utopia being jammed down everybody's throats. We are just, you know, we are just a breath away, or to put it more frankly, a 2008 event away from us having socialism and a Green New Deal. And this is the problem with the binary choice thing, because they, just don't like Trump. So whatever Trump is for, they are against. They used to be

against late term in the last second abortion. Now they're not. Right. Like, they used to be against free trade. And now they're not. Because Trump's Trump has taken tariff positions that they used to love and now hate. The problem is if it comes down to a situation where we have an economic collapse

and it's a one-on-one situation, they don't like Trump. If Trump's the one arguing for capitalism, they're going to go the other way. And they also are going to go the other way because they'll promise jobs. Hey, if we have to if we have to build high speed rail and we have to do all this, they're going to just say this is the work projects.

We built dams like this. This is how every socialist utopia begins, right? It's the idea of we can, we understand you don't necessarily feel comfortable with these sorts of things, but we need them right now. It's common sense to do them right now. The economy's going down and we're in big trouble and we need us.

Well, you know, one thing I can't get past is how how blind people are on the left. May I play. Now I know this is really going to, you know, great lengths here, but may I play Cardi B from last week when she was

when she was talking about where is the tax dollars go? And you know, they're taking this money from celebrities? Listen. So you know, the government is taking 40% of my taxes. And Uncle Sam, I want to know what you're doing with my

tax money because you know what I'm saying? saying like when you donate like when you donate to a kid from a foreign country they give you updates of what they do in which of the nation i want to know what to do with my tax money because i'm from new york and the streets is always dirty we was voted the dirtiest city in america what is y'all doing there's still rats on the damn trains i know you're not spending it in no damn prison because y'all be giving two underwears one jumpsoo for like five months so what is what is y'all doing with my money? What is y'all doing with my

money? I want to know. I want receipts. I want everything. I want to know what is doing with my fucking money. Okay. All right. She is classy. Is that true? You only get two underwear's in prison. Is that true? And one jumpsuit every six months. One jumpsuit. Yeah. Could we play the other clip where she says

her poor lifestyle? You know what I hate? I hate when celebrities do something very extravagant by something very luxurious. There's people in the comments like, you could have donated that, oh, we're going backwards, you could have done this and that with your money. And it's like, who are you to tell people what to do with their hardworking ass money? First of all, do you know that artists, celebrities, the IRS, out of every check that you make, they automatically take 45% of this check. Are you serious, Cardi? Yeah, no, it's, stop it. It is, it's honestly, it's only happening to

celebrities and artists. Only celebrities and artists. Only celebrities and Only celebrities in artists. They have to pay these things called taxes. Clueless. Absolutely clueless. It's less entertaining from a lot of people, but that's a mainstream viewpoint. Would have no idea that people like Cardi B are paying 45% of taxes. She just happens to be thrust into this world because of her success.

Most people who listen to her music don't believe that's even happening with rich people. The Blaze Radio Network on demand.