The Glenn Beck Program - Overrated: Spelling and Grammar | Guest: Jeffy Fisher | 8/8/19

Episode Date: August 8, 2019

Hour 1Pat and Stu wonder if they’ll be able to trust the GOP and President Trump not to back down on “red flag laws." The Democrats haven’t learned a single thing over the past two years, and it could well cost them the 2020 election. The president said he would rather take firearms first and go through due process second, but he’ll probably change his stance shortly. Only a small number of people with a diagnosed mental illness are more likely to commit acts of violence. MSNBC and CNN are even more unhinged than usual, from an outlandish claim about today’s date and neo-Nazis to baiting the NRA into attending a pro-gun control spectacle. It's super easy for an organization to take credit for a boycott taking a host off the air (even if they're merely on vacation).Hour 2The convention of Democratic Socialists wasn’t cringeworthy for the socialism as much as for the over-sensitivity of those in attendance. Some Millennials make great employees, but some leave something significant to be desired. Pat and Stu have a good laugh (and maybe a cry) over a twenty-something employee who was incredibly offended by being told that there is no "p" in “hamster.” Even Democrats are urging the president not to support “red flag laws," though for nefarious reasons. A Harvard professor takes on Sen. Ted Cruz over tech giants manipulating voters during the 2016 campaign.Hour 3Why have the Democrats completely abandoned the (very electable) pro-life and pro-gun rights positions? Simple anti-gun measures like universal background checks poll well, and you don’t need to fight hard for them. Chris Cuomo’s CNN rant continued with him simply saying that it was dumb not to adopt his stance on gun control. The Democrats are running an entire campaign on a lot of the things that were included in the suspected El Paso killer’s manifesto. Some Republicans are going so far as to support a ban on “military-style weapons.” Jeff Fisher joins the program to chew the fat. Here’s your reminder that Colin Kaepernick is not out of the NFL because of his political stance; he’s unemployed because he’s a lousy quarterback. Artificial diamonds? Great. Artificial burgers? Almost great. Stu provides the latest update on the Democratic field. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment. This is the Glenn Beck program. With Pat and Stu for Glenn, who will return on Monday. Triple 8, 727, B-E-C-K. Wow, there was, I mean, so much insanity going on. I don't know if it starts with the CNN Town Hall last night or with Cory Booker or there's just so much where do you even where to even begin i i love how nothing that the republicans even though the republicans are bending over backward right now and and many of them caving in

to uh gun control mindset that's not enough nothing's enough nothing's ever enough this is why you don't cave in yeah because it won't be enough it will never be enough uh we're seeing this now Chuck Schumer, he's warning the GOP against settling for tepid red flag laws. So the red flag law thing, which is completely controversial to conservatives, is a massive move to the left. It is a constitutional violation. It is a, the type of thing that we took calls all day yesterday, all day yesterday from people who love Donald Trump and are like, don't cross this line. Please don't cross this line. This is really, really bad. I talked to David Harris, Jr. And David Harris, Jr.

It's a pretty MAGA guy. You know, big, big Trump supporter. He's not quite as pro-Trump as Donald Trump, but he is more pro-Trump than Donald Trump Jr. He's in between those two. Okay. Now, David's great. I love him. But he's like a big Trump guy. Yeah. And he said yesterday, same thing on his social feeds.

Don't. They said, like, you know, look, we love Donald Trump. He's done a great job. Don't cross this line. It's too big of a deal. you know, and I think this comes to the core of like Donald Trump, who's a guy who's, he's lived in, you know, in New York as a rich guy behind security. Like, he's in that environment. I was born in New York. I grew up partially in New York, partially in Connecticut.

You know, in that region, you just, it's just not part of your life. You don't think about guns all that often. And especially if you're Donald Trump living in the top of a tower, like, that's the last thing in the world you're concerned about. It's not part of your core. You don't see the Second Amendment. the same way probably. And, you know, so I don't know that he would understand what a big deal this would be to someone who really cares about the Second Amendment.

And we, man, we heard it like crazy yesterday. I mean, I think there was one caller yesterday who said, you know, I really like what he's, I understand at least he's trying to address mental health, which I think is, of course, true. But already the Democrats are saying, look, that's not enough. You can't, you can't just give us this. This is what's so frustrating about being a conservative. and having the only real representative for you being the Republican Party

because they are constantly folding on these things. They're terrible. And they just do stuff like, well, you know what? The Democrats want $700 billion for this project. We only want to give them $400 billion. And you're like, well, yeah, but what about the option of not doing it? And there's no one who represents that side of these issues. What about the option of spending less?

Yeah, that doesn't exist. That doesn't exist. It's impossible. It's impossible. Actually, I have a Republican congressman from Ohio, Michael Turner, who's actually talking about not just, not just the red flag laws, but also a limit on the, you know, the magazine limits. Yep. And a ban on assault weapons.

Yep. Assault limits. Assault. Yes, because they assault people. That one is really fascinating to me because obviously, you know, every weapon is an assault weapon. this is a breaking breaking news for you you can assault people

with any weapon and I don't mean just guns no you could have an assault knife there's a reason I can assault you with a knife yeah there's a reason why we own 10 times per capita

the amount of guns as Russia and they have much double the murder rate because people are able to kill other people with other things uh Pakistan same thing Pakistan has almost no gun violence problem

you want to move there let me get you on Zillow I could jam a spoon in your eye right now and that might be an assault right it's like I I mean Does anyone remember Paris? Right?

Right? Like, or was, I mean, Nice, I'm thinking of. When they went down, you know, in the middle of, you run over people with a street festival in your truck. Eighty-seven people? Yeah. It seems.

It was a lot. It was a lot. Does it seem, does any, are you know those people like, oh, man, at least I wasn't shot? No. No, that's not the way that works. You know, you can do these things. There was a big stabbing yesterday, right? Four people were killed in a stabbing yesterday.

Yeah. And again, that would be, that would, qualify on the mass shooting list if it happened to be done with a gun. But I guess because it's not with a gun and there's no political gain there. No one cares. Well, the people who got, you know, who are victims of these crimes still care. You know, the people who are in Chicago who do get shot in gun violence, but not the type of gun violence that moves the needle on your polls. Those people care.

Which is why, I strongly believe. after if they got some kind of ban on let's say rifles, let's say you ban assault rifles, then they'd have to go for handguns as well because the carnage will continue. The carnage like in Baltimore and Chicago is not going to be abated by banning rifles. You're going to have to, and they'll come after,

they'll come after handguns as well. It's just the beginning. You open up this door. They're going to keep walking through it. It's just, it would never end. And that's why we just can't give in. AAA 727 B-E-C-K. More coming up in one minute.

This is the Glenn Beck program. Imagine if I only gave you part of a news story. It'd be pretty hard to follow. Well, that's what it may be like relying on monitoring your credit and your bank statements to help protect your identity. You could miss a really important part of the story. Sure, your bank and credit card companies can help detect fraud, but it may not monitor all the other ways your identity can be stolen, like when somebody opens up a new account or applies for a loan in your name. That's why there's LifeLock. LifeLock uses proprietary technology to alert you to a wide range of identity threats.

And if there is a problem, a U.S.-based specialist will work to fix it. Now, nobody can prevent all identity theft or monitor all transactions at all businesses. But with LifeLock, they monitor more, and they can help you. you see the threats to your identity that you might otherwise miss on your own. Join now and get an extra 10% off by using the promo code back at 1-800 LifeLiflock or

head to LifeLock.com. Use the promo code back and save an extra 10% at LifeLock.com. It's Pat and Stu for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program. 8-727B-E-C-K. It's gotten so the media people in the media don't even

they hate Trump so much. They don't even even care if what they're saying about him is remotely accurate. Like Nicole Wallace, who was, who claimed that Trump has been talking about exterminating Latinos. Her guest is like, yeah. No. No. He has not been talking about that.

That is something that the president has never, never done. Well, a lot of times this stuff is like a game of telephone, right? Like maybe she happened to hear, she happened to tune into TV when Beto O'Rourke was saying that Donald Trump saying the same rhetoric as the Third Reich. Right. And maybe she heard that and thought, well, that's extermination. I guess I can now say this. Like they all just kind of pass it on just a little bit.

And then when she's called out on it, her only statement is she tweets, I misspoke about Trump calling for an extermination of Latinos. My mistake was unintentional and I'm sorry. Trump's constant assault on people of color and his use of the word invasion to describe the flow of immigrants is intention. and constant. So it's still his fault. It's still his fault, obviously. It's not her mistake.

Really, it's just that he's so awful. You know, I found really, I was thinking about this yesterday and it is remarkable where these people go. We've talked about this at the beginning of the administration, Pat. If the Democrats had, instead of launching a massive march and rally on literally the day after Donald Trump's inauguration saying how horrible of a president in person he was

when he hadn't even done anything. If they had approached this going to him and saying like, look, we want a bunch of stuff. We think you're the type of guy that can get a deal done and we're going to work with you and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.

Trump would have gone along with, I think, a lot of these things because he, you know, I don't think he, I think he is much more in this in the fight of this. And when they attack him, he's going to attack back.

I mean, we saw it with criminal justice reform. He's willing to work with the other side. He is. I mean, that's been his whole life. You know, he, so I don't think that's a crazy, a crazy thing. But the other thing, the lesson that, and I'm, by the way, I'm glad they didn't do that because God only knows what policies would have been passed. But the, the, they hate him too much to do it.

Right. Even if it was to their benefit, they just hate him too much to do it. Yeah. And I think that's true. And it's fascinating to see what's going on now, where they are now. calling every person who supports Donald Trump a racist. Go back to the 2016 election. Have they learned the lesson of the basket of deplorables from Hillary Clinton?

You know, Hillary came out and you go back and that became sort of a thing, right? Like the deplorable, oh, we're the deplorables. Go back and look at Hillary Clinton's statement. You can argue with certain parts of it. But generally speaking, it's true. and it's true about every candidate, right? Every single candidate has supporters who are awful. And Donald Trump is no exception to that.

Neither is Hillary Clinton, by the way. But every candidate has, you know, she said it as a basket of deplorables. There's some people who are supporters of a candidate who are doing it for really bad reasons, whether it's racism, whether it's sexism, whether it's socialism, whether it's extremism, whatever the thing is, everybody has that level of support in some way. And her point was not, she was not, that point was not about talking about how bad Donald Trump supporters are. If you go back and read the actual text of it, what she's saying is, yes, there are some supporters, she's talking to a Democratic audience and saying, yeah, you know, I know you guys were I was talking about the really bad people, the deplorables, but they also have a lot of people who can be won over to the cause. They're not, they don't, they don't like this stuff.

they don't like Donald Trump's evil rhetoric, blah, blah, blah, right? Like, I'm not saying I agree with her point. But generally speaking, what she's saying is there's a separation. There's good Trump supporters and bad Trump supporters. And we have to acknowledge there are good Trump supporters. So Hillary Clinton is making the exact opposite point in 2016 that the Democrats are making now. The Democrats are saying all of the Trump supporters are bad. They've actually gone the other way.

They haven't learned the lesson that calling half of his supporters deplorables was a bad idea. Their lesson is we should have called them all deplorable. plurables. Yeah. They've actually gone the other way completely. Yeah. And this is something that I think arguably lost them the election. And hopefully we'll do so again.

And I mean, this is how bad they are at this. Yeah. Right? Like they have not learned a single lesson from the last two years. And, you know, obviously because they're supporting socialism, this is a good thing for, I think, the Constitution and the American people in general. But it's just fascinating to watch a. party do this to itself.

Like Donald Trump has got a 42, 43% approval rating. This should not be an unwinnable election, but they're trying to make it into one. It really is. They're like, well, what if we raise the mountain even higher for us to climb? And we should be thankful for it. Yeah, that at least. Yeah, sure. More in 60 seconds.

Holy cow, we are in the thick a summer, which means things are really starting to heat up. Luckily, Blinds.com is here to help you with incredible sitewide savings. Tasha in Oklahoma said this about our new blind. She said, I love them. They're gorgeous. They're easy to install, easy to clean. We found the best deal for our windows and all of the options that we were looking for. We've told all of our family and friends about blinds.com, and we will definitely order again down the road from blinds.com. They're America's number one online choice for affordable, quality custom window coverings. Plus, every order gets free online design consultation, free shipping, and 100% satisfaction guaranteed. So stay cool this summer with blinds.com. Head there right now and you're going to get great sitewide savings. Plus, any Beck listener saves an extra $20 off top of that with the promo code B-E-C-K. That's blinds.com. Get an extra 20 bucks off with promo code Beck.

Blinds.com promo code Beck. Rules and restrictions do apply. Just to prove your point, Stu, about what they could be doing and maybe President Trump would even be on their side. remember this from last year where they were sitting around a giant conference table and the president was talking about taking guns early without due process. Listen to this. Yes, go ahead, Mike. Well, in the category, you spoke about this president.

Gun violence restraining orders. They're called California actually has a version of this. And I think you're meeting with governors earlier this week individually and as a group, we spoke about states taking steps, but the focus is to literally give families and give local law enforcement additional tools if an individual is reported to be a potential danger to themselves or others. Allow due process, so that no one's rights are trampled, but the ability to go to court, obtain an order, and then collect not only the firearms, but any weapons in the position of that individual. Or might take the firearms first and then go to court, because that's another system,

Because a lot of times by the time you go to court, it takes so long to go to court to get the due process procedures. I like taking the guns early. Like in this crazy man's case that just took place in Florida, he had a lot of fires. They saw everything. To go to court would have taken a long time. So you could do exactly what you're saying, but take the guns first, go through due process. No. No, maybe not.

No. I have a bad feeling about that option. Yeah. I mean, again, like, he likes taking him first and then worry about it later. It takes so long to adjudicate things. Let's not bother with that. That's amazing. Yeah, a little unconstitutional, fortunately.

It's an amazing clip. And I think, you know, if his supporters hear that they think that that's a bad idea, there's a good chance that he sees that. Yeah, I think he will. We saw this back in the day when he was talking, he was being sort of cornered on the abortion issue in an interview. And they were like, hey, Don, you know, what do you think? think happens to these women. Do they go to prison if they have an abortion? He's like, yeah, I think they have to. They have to. Yeah. Because he hadn't really thought about it.

Right. It wasn't one of those things that, you know, like this has not been his life, right? So a lot of these issues, the nuance of some of these issues, he is not necessarily fully digested, but he doesn't have to make on the spot decisions on a topic like this. Sometimes as a president, you do have to make those. Most of the time, you don't. You have time to deliberate. You have time to talk to your advisors. You have time to have a room of people who disagree, come in, fight it out in front of you, and pick one. I mean, I tweeted this yesterday. The both sides of the red flags law well represented, between an article by Dana Lash, or a column by Dana Lash and a column by David French. David French is on the side of, in this case,

the president saying, you know, red flag laws are a good idea. Dana Lash is on the side of saying, you know what, they just don't work out well, even though they're well-intentioned. And you kind of read, like there's really, I think, good reasoned arguments if you're conservative for both sides of this. I, you know, I definitely come down on team Dana on this particular issue. I mean, she, you know, I think has it right when it comes to the Constitution. And when you have these questions, especially about a constitutional issue, you need to side, you know, err on the side of liberty. You need to err on the side. Even some, when you know, I think with both both moves, you're going to have some negative output. But there's going to be no solving mass shootings from red flag laws.

I mean, there's no evidence of that whatsoever. No evidence of it. There's never, as far as I know, has never been one case where they believe it's actually stopped a mass shooting. There has been cases where they believe it stopped suicides, which, again, is there's a reason to like that, obviously. Yeah. But it doesn't mean it gets constitutional because it works. A lot of people forget that. It's like the thing with net neutrality.

People are like, well, these companies could just throttle my internet. and then I can't watch my Netflix shows. How am I going to watch Handmaid's Tale on Hulu? It's going to buffer. And I think people get confused. You know, there are some things that are human rights and some things that are just awesome. They're not the same. The Internet's awesome.

It is not a human right. It is not a right in this country. There's no constitutional right for you to not have to buffer Handmaid's Tale. That is not a constitutional right. And just because you might really like the show and really want the show to work fast, that doesn't mean you get to force companies with the things that they built

to treat you a different way. That's not, that is not America. That's not the way it's supposed to work. Yeah. The way it works is if somebody's buffering your handmade tail you switch servers. Yeah. You switch companies.

You go somewhere else. And by the way, that almost never happens. These companies with all the power in the world to buffer your handmade servers. decide instead to just give it to you really high quality 4K video because they want to keep getting your money. Yeah. That's the free market. Yeah. It works really well. And if it buffers enough, you're going to get pissed and you're going to stop paying them the money for it.

Yep. You'll go somewhere else. It's kind of, it's called capitalism. And it works pretty well, you know? Yeah. You hear all the time from the Democrat candidates that this is the richest, most powerful nation in the history of the world. They never talk about the fact that we got there through capitalism. And now you're trying to switch us to social. which doesn't work and wouldn't have gotten us there.

It doesn't make any sense. No. But we keep going down these rules keep popping up because we want to go down these roads of government control. We all feel better, apparently, when the government tells us it's going to, everything's going to be okay. And, you know, even with these mental health laws or mental health concerns and red flag laws, it's amazing. Like, for example, there's a story in New York Times talking about, you know, mental health and how big of a problem. problem, that is. They say scientists find that only a small fraction of people with persistent mental distress are more likely than average to commit violent acts. Patients with paranoid

schizophrenia, which is characterized by delusional thinking and often so-called command hallucinations, frightening voices, identifying threats were nonexist. People living in this kind of misery are far more likely to be the victims of violence than perpetrators, but they can act violently themselves, especially when using drugs or alcohol. The clearest recent case is Jared Loeffner, the college student who opened fire in an event in Tucson, Arizona, hosted by Gabrielle Giffords in 2011, killing six and wounding 13. Mr. Loeffner's online post demonstrated increasing drug use and paranoid fantasies. I thought that was caused by a pamphlet that had the word target and reload on it. Now we are finally coming to the point where we're saying, oh yeah, that was

complete insanity, making sure I understand this. Because at the time, you know, it was an ad that said, we're targeting these districts. We can't retreat. We need to reload. And that was the cause of it for many years. Now we finally learn, oh, by the way, it's the most clear example of mental health and recent memory. Now we're on that. Now that none of the people involved are in office anymore, it's okay to say, by the way, this guy was just insane.

And his big concern literally was grammar. You remember? He was like, he had some ideology. based on some new kind of grammar that he wanted to implement insane in every way. Yeah. Man, I'm really excited to welcome a brand new sponsor to the show, Tocovus. I know how ridiculous a great pair of boots can cost. Tocovus makes great boots and accessories.

They sell their boots directly to the customer, so their boots are half the price of anything that's even similar in quality. They're all handmade with a 200-step process. with only the best materials. Their entire line honors the timeless traditional boot styles. No silly stitching or sequins or loud colors or anything else. These are just great boots like my grandfather would have worn. With Tocovus, there's no need to break them in. They arrive already ready to be worn immediately comfortably. They're easy to order with tremendous customer service. Tocovus always has free shipping and free returns. Check out their boots and their

clothing and accessories right now to covis.com slash Beck. That's T-E-C-O-V-A-S dot com slash back. Pat and Stufer Glenn on the Glenn Beck program. You can check out my show, Pack Ray Unleashed immediately before this one, or on podcast at any time at your leisure. Triple-8-727B-E-C-K. Frank Figliuzzi on MSNBC had a powerful point. to make about Donald Trump with the raising and lowering of the flags.

I mean, this is some pretty brainiac stuff here. This is, well, you're saying from the Trump administration who is, there's such white supremacists. Yeah, that they've been. This is like 50 dimensional chess that they're playing here with their white supremacy. Listen to this. He'll clue us in. We have to understand the adversary and the threat we're dealing with.

Right. And if we don't understand how they think, we'll never understand how to counter them. Thank you, Frank. So it's the little things and language and messaging that matters. The president said that we will fly our flags at half-mast until August 8th. That's 8-8. Oh, my. Now, I'm not going to imply that he did this deliberately, but I am using it as an example of the ignorance of the adversary that's being demonstrated by the White House.

The numbers 8-8 are very significant in neo-Nazi and white supremacy movement. Why? Because the letter H is the eighth letter of the alphabet. And to them, the numbers 8-8 together stand for Heil Hitler. Oh, my gosh. So you're going to be raising the flag back up at dusk on 8-8. That is unreal. No one's thinking about this. No one's giving him the advice or he's rejecting the advice.

Yeah, no one is thinking about it. I'll give you that. I'll give him that. He's right about that. Other than him. That is unbelievable. It is really one of the strangest things. That's unbelievable.

Because there is a thing online. This is something that is relatively well known among people who cover white nationalism and white supremacy. There's two big things. The 8-8, which H.H. H. H. H. H. H. Hitler is a real thing that they do online sometimes. And there's also a thing called, was it 14 words? Do you know what I'm talking about? Can't think of it exactly. But it's something like that.

It's a phrase that says something about how white people are being targeted or blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. Some nonsensical. white supremacy thing. And so those are two things that they talk about a lot in these extremist groups. However, that does not mean

everything that occurs on August 8th has to do with that. Right? Like, I don't know, I don't know what's he supposed to do. Like,

he's supposed to hold it to August 9th so then white supremacists don't think he's signaling Heil Hitler to them? I mean, this is, this is bonkers. How do you,

how does this see, how do you bring this guy back on next time after that? That's a type of thing that's like, you just don't you don't come back on as an expert after that segment right right instead he'll be on tomorrow yeah you will yes same the same thing now if come on if people were doing that to Obama when he was in office they would have been laughed off of the air and they wouldn't come back

because you know they there'd be boycotts of the channel if you brought him back they they would have boycotted Fox News if you would have done that kind of stuff to Obama. Of course. But I guess it's perfectly fine. They did boycott it for much less. Right. And they're boycotting it right now. Much less. This is a funny thing that's going on with Tucker Carlson right now. Because there's a

thing that trended yesterday that said fire Tucker Carlson. Because he said that the white supremacy thing is a hoax. Right. And so if you look at Because there's nothing to it. How many white supremacists do you know? Oh, none. None. Obviously. Zero. I mean, look, there's a very small amount

of white supremacists in this country. It's a fringe element. Incredibly small enough. Just like we were told all the time with the Black Panthers. Oh, that's a fringe element. Why are you even talking about them? Don't even talk about it. In both cases, I do think it is important to fight that ideology

and show how stupid it is. And it is important for people in the FBI to make sure that they understand what the hell's going on because it doesn't take a lot. You don't need a thousand. Right? How many? You're talking about, what, 24 people at 9-11? Right? You don't need hundreds of thousands of people

to be damaging. And so it's good. that we fight these things, but like to act as if it's a massive problem, that is what he's trying to say. It's like it is not a widespread ideology. For example, and we talked about this, I think, a little bit earlier this week on this show. If you want to say there's 250 plus mass shootings in this country, you can try to say it because by some definitions and the definitions in my mind are completely ridiculous because it does not at all identify as what we think of when we think about of mass shooting. But if you want to use that number, you can. And you're going to say it's from the gun violence archive is the place that comes up with that number. And basically they say anytime there's been an incident where four people have been shot, whether anyone dies or not, whether it's, you know, police firing at people, whether it's a mistake. You know what I mean?

Like a gun goes off and hits somehow a couple times. Who knows? one person domestic violence, gang violence, anything, all qualifies. That's why we have some 250 mass shooting. Somebody kills their own family. Exactly. That'd be a mass shooting. Right.

So that is the reason they love that number is because it's so scary. Holy crap, there's been 250 of these. I'm not even hearing about them. That's how common they are. That's what they want the average person to react to. At the same time, they want to tell you the problem with mass shootings is white nationalism, white supremacy. Well, you can't have both of those things.

things. The problem with it is, if you look at the faces of the people that have committed the 251 mass shootings in this country, it's going to be hard to convince people that they're white supremacists because most of them aren't white. The overwhelming majority of them are not white. And that doesn't mean that anything like, oh, that race is bad or whatever. What it means is the overwhelming majority of our crime problem is an inner city gang violence problem. It's not white supremacy. So you have to abandon your racial anti-white supremacy point to get the 251 number. Or you have to abandon the 251 number

and go with a number that is a lot less impressive, which is six. And six would be the number of the real mass shootings that we think about in this country. Three of which were done by white people. So you can go down these roads if you'd like, but you're going to lose your little racial point. and then tell us about how above race you are. Please, please do that. And I think, like, that's the type of thing

that people don't realize, right? You know, you go on Facebook and you see people that you know, and they're people when you have conversations with them, they seem intelligent and is relatively well-informed and have absolutely no idea the facts of these situations. I have, Pat, I went on the air Monday and started talking about the issue, with this manifesto where he goes into a large portion of the manifesto of the two complaints he has.

One is white supremacy and immigration. One is environmentalism. Very clearly outlines both cases in this manifesto. I have yet to see one mainstream media source point out that he talked about environmentalism. All of these people are like, well, if you look at his manifest, it's white supremacy. Well, yeah, it was partially white supremacy. It was also so much plastic waste. and we are over-utilizing our resources.

And all of the- We need to eliminate people. Yeah, because they're using up too many resources. Over-population scare. Yeah. Periding that ideology that has been around in the environmentalist community forever. This guy sounded like Jay Inslee in this manifesto. Does that mean Jay Inslee is responsible?

Well, of course not. Yes. Oh, okay. But, I mean, the other side of that is you're doing exactly what the other side is doing. They're saying Trump is responsible because, and he's not even a white nationalist. They are environmentalists. They're not denying that. They're running on it.

They're running on the things he said in his manifesto. Trump isn't running on the things of white nationalism. Yes, he's saying there's a problem at the border and he's used the word invasion, which apparently is like, I mean, it's basically a DNA test proving he was the murderer to the media. Well, there's much more clear things that people are embracing on the left that were in that manifesto. and I don't think anybody knows it. Like, that's what's incredible. This audience knows it.

Maybe a couple of conservative sites have picked up on this since Monday, but very few. And the mainstream media won't even admit it occurred. That is a major problem, man. They are falling down on the job, and they're falling down on the job because all they care about. They don't care about who was shot. They just want to make this into a thing and they can take down Trump with it. That's it. It's incredible.

It's all it is. I mean, when you, when you turn on that town hall, Chris Cuomo conducted last night. Is that what you call it? I guess. I guess. Yeah. So bad. I mean, it's, it's embarrassing how bad that was.

First of all, he talked about inviting the NRA to the town hall. Here's what Chris Cuomo said about inviting the NRA. We also invited the national rights. Association, the NRA to be part of its conversation. They declined. They sent a totally disingenuous statement that they're open to honest discussion, but not this spectacle. That's what you call this, a spectacle? Yes. I guess they want to do their talking with propaganda ads and millions in lobbying. They came last time. Besides, let's be honest, the gun lobby is not going to be the answer. And that shouldn't be expected any more than we expected big tobacco to help us expose the ills of

smoking. The reality is people like you are the answer. And there can be no size. when it comes to wanting to be safer, better protected. They're just campy. Not anymore. God, he's horrible. By the way, first of all, they act, oh, the NRA, they're cowards. They came to the last thing that you did. Dana Lash was there. Dana Lash was there.

You praised the Broward Sheriff on stage for an entire hour. You had an audience there applauding. And it was a spectacle. It was a spectacle. And by the way, you also had CNN employees talking to Dana Lash off the air and saying, hey, I want to make sure you have security so you can get out of here. Why on earth would they send somebody again to your event? Why on earth would they do that?

You created a real security threat for the people who came to very respectfully argue and converse about a serious constitutional issue. You had people screaming obscenities at them the entire time and you created a security threat for them. Yeah. And you're like, oh, well, now they won't show up to our little party. I wonder why. We bashed their brains in last time, and it was completely unfair to them. Why don't they want to do that again? It's like, wow, what do you think?

They're no fun at all. We really wanted to do it again. Ben's due for Glenn on the Glenn Beck-Bek-K. Tucker Carlson, we kind of got started on this and I got sidetracked, but Tucker Carlson's being targeted with this fire Tucker Carlson thing because of his rant. And yesterday he announced he's going on. vacation. And of course, as is always the case, all of these boycott organizations take credit and say that, oh, well, he got suspended. See, it worked. And this is the great thing about being one of

these organizations is when you're in constant boycott mode of every host on a network, eventually one of them goes on vacation. And so you get to take credit for it. I can remember, and I'm sure you can remember this as well, Pat. When we were at Fox, and I think at CNN too, but I remember specifically at Fox, when we would go on vacation every time they took credit. They would take credit as if we were being suspended because of something that they did or some boycott, some advertiser they say pulled out that was never on the show or whatever. And we would have to go and dig out documentation, emails from months earlier where we set up our vacation schedules for the year and say, this was scheduled all this time ago.

And we had, the media was 100% willing to accept the reasoning of the boycott. organizations unless we could prove our own innocence with documentation. It was like we were being suspended unless you guys can come up with something that shows you you had a vacation. It was never like, well, how about them having to prove that we're being suspended? We just have to prove our own innocence. We're guilty until proven innocent. And still, many of these media organizations still ran with the idea that we were being

suspended despite the fact that we gave them emails from months earlier, saying when our vacation was. It was impossible. It really was impossible. I mean, the media is so horrible with this stuff because you know what? They can taste it. They want him, Tucker Carlson, in this case,

or Laura Ingram another day, or Glenn Beck, another day. They want them fired so badly so they can feel like they've accomplished something with their journalism degrees. Yeah. And they just dive into it. And it is something that they have to know

isn't real, It doesn't matter. It doesn't matter if they can come up with some justification to make people believe that in reality, he's being suspended. And I don't know. I don't know the Tucker Carlson situation. I just know with us that did not happen. It was not the case. They did not suspend us.

I mean, you're watching the showtime show about the era of us at Fox and the whole Fox founding. It was called the loudest voice. I don't know if they addressed that particular thing, but they did go into the Glenn targeting many times. Yeah. And they also go in, this is an ancillary point maybe, but they also go into what Fox did people from time to time. And they did a toss from time to time. They did. Well, I will say that is an additional point. Yes. And probably what I should bring up. Yes. Fox occasionally helped with that. You know what, you're right. I should, I shouldn't bring that up because in the media's defense, there were people at Fox continually leaking against us too. Which is strange. And people have a hard time believing there.

But now you see it and you can kind of understand why. Because they didn't want anybody getting bigger than the network. And anybody who started to get really big, they wanted to beat you down a little bit and let you know who was boss. Who was boss and who was in charge and who was really, you know, who was really in charge. And they showed you every once in a while. That's a fascinating. There's a little element of that there, too. Is the show good?

I've loved it. I think it's really compelling. Really? Yeah, really compelling. I mean, obviously, it's from a left-wing viewpoint, but it's well done. Absolutely. And some total and complete lies about Fox and then making up stories out of whole cloth. And it's just not true.

And then there's, you know, a few elements like we just discussed that are, in fact, quite true. It's interesting to watch. Interesting. We lived it. It was a roller coaster ride, man. Yeah. It was interesting. Yep.

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment. This is the Glembeck program. Point of personal privilege. He hers? Yes, go ahead. Thank you. Pat and Stu for Glenn on the Glebeck program. Now, apparently, you've got a story that's even more pathetic than the people we saw at the socialist convention?

I think it's at least on that level. Really? And it's really telling because, you know, look, it's a socialist convention. I don't, maybe you would expect it to be a little nuts like that. Honestly, I'm surprised. I didn't, I didn't expect it. I mean, I just expected socialism. I didn't expect the weenism that came out of it.

Right, because there is that level of, I need a cry space, a crying cave. I need a safe space. And I feel like we hear those stories from time to time. And usually that's college stuff. It's usually college stuff. and it's usually, I don't know, for some reason, I don't, I don't want to say I dismiss it because it is something real that's happening and it's so bizarre and extreme to me. On the other hand, though, it's so laughable.

And I think it's one of those things that even when you, like, if you tell a story like that, I have plenty of friends who vote Democrat. If I tell that story to them, they're going to laugh at it too. Yes. And they're going to be embarrassed by them. They're going to be embarrassed by them. Yeah. That is very, it's so crazy.

like, you know, it's not just a Democratic voter. It's not just a Democratic Socialist voter. It's not a Green Party voter. It's a socialist, like, you're in the Democratic Socialist Party. So I guess it's Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez level craziness. She's a card-carrying member, right? But it's not your average Democratic voter, right? Like, that is not who people, they don't operate like that.

I don't think so. I don't think so. Yeah, I hope we're not quite there yet. They're super liberal. They want higher taxes. They're wrong on all these issues. But they're not saying, hey, wait, guys don't make noise. you're, you know, what was it?

You're hurting my focus. And don't use non-gender pronouns. Really sensitive to sound and smell and sight and taste. Right. Stop all of my senses right now. And apparently everything else. Yes. So there's a story by a,

she told the story on Twitter and it's, I think one of the more fascinating insights into what our future looks like in America. and what if you happen to be a boss who is employing people from this generation and trying to figure out how the hell to do it? Tell me this story does not relate to you. We'll get into it in 60 seconds. This is the Glenn Beck program.

A good night's sleep is a must for any of us who have a crazy schedule. I toss and turn an awful lot. I have the right bed, but I thought I had the right pillow. Mike sent me my pillow, and it's, It's an amazing thing. You gotta get the right MyPillow for you. Mike is now offering his lowest price ever offered on TV or radio. You can get a two pack of MyPillow's premium pillows for just $69.98.

That's only $34.99 per pillow. And this offer is available only at MyPillow.com or calling 800-9663117. Use the promo code back. My Pillar made in the USA. it comes with a 60-day money-back guarantee and a 10-year warranty. Sleep like I did. 800-966-31-17 and use the promo code back to get Mike's offer. You'll get a two-pack of premium pillows for $69.99.

That's $349 per pillow. That's my pillow.com. Remember, promo code back. Pat and Stu for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program. All right. All right. You're ready for this? I'm ready for it. Yeah.

Here's the story. Here's hopefully a short synopsis of something that happened this week that I still don't understand. in office space near a client, a young woman was meeting with her boss. She was, by my estimation, in her late 20s. The boss, also a woman, was giving her feedback and reviewing edits she had made on something that this young woman wrote. They had been speaking in low tones, but their volume got louder toward the end of the conversation because the young woman was getting agitated about a particular edit. So she wrote some article, she's getting edits from her boss.

She doesn't like this one edit. this happens all the time in this world. The particular edit was correcting the spelling of hamster to hamster. Now, I'm going to give you to read the spelling. She spelled it, the employee, spelled it H-A-M-P-S-T-E-R. Now, that is not what the word is, obviously. It's Hamster, H-A-M-S-T-E-R. Yes.

Okay. So she spelled it Hamster, like a hamper where you throw your clothes? Yeah. Right? but hamster, meaning the animal, there's no P in there, okay? Pretty basic. So she spelled it wrong and somebody corrected her

and she's hacked off about it. She had used the phrase like spinning in a hamster wheel in the draft and it was like they were talking about it being like an op-ed or a speech or something. So spinning in a hamster wheel, H-A-M-P-S-T-E-R. So the boss is saying, hey, we got to change that to H-A-M-S-T-R.

The young woman kept saying, I don't know why you corrected this. this because I spell it with a P in it. And the boss said calmly, but that's not how the word is spelled. There is no P in a hamster. And the young woman replied, but you don't know that.

I learned to spell it with a P and that's how I spell it. The boss, remaining very calm and professional, let's go to dictionary.com and look it up together. Now again, All right.

As the writer points out, this is a woman in her late 20s, not a fifth grader. The young woman insists she doesn't need to look it up because it's fine to spell it with a P because that's how she wanted to spell it. Okay.

The boss says, let's look over the rest of this piece so I can explain the rest of my edits. They do, and I can see the young woman is fighting back tears. The boss is calm, cool, and handles this with professionalism and empathy. The boss says,

I know edits can be difficult to go over sometimes, especially when you're working on new kinds of things as you grow in your career. But it's a necessary process and makes us all better at what we do. Can't handle it better than that, right? You can't handle this craziness better than that. Yeah.

The boss gets up from the table and goes to her office and the young woman can barely hold it together. She moves to another table. Is there a crying room in this workspace? That's the problem. I hope there is. Apparently there was not.

Oh, no. Because she goes to another table in the common workspace area, drops all her stuff loudly on the tabletop and starts texting. A minute later, her phone rings. It was her mom. So she called her mom. She texted her mom. To call her because it was urgent.

And I'm sure her mother might have thought, you know, I don't know, she's in the ER or something. She then, in the conference. then in the common workspace puts her mom on speaker phone. Okay. She bursts into tears and wants her mom to call her boss

and Now I'm guessing if I don't know this story. I'm guessing mom will do that because this is obviously how she's been brought up. How else could she be this way? Right. Okay. Yeah. She bursts into tears wants her mom to call her boss and tell her not to be mean about telling her. her how to spell words like hamster.

Oh my gosh. The mother tells her that her boss is an idiot. This is again on speakerphone. And she doesn't have to listen to her. Wow. And she should go to the boss's boss to file a complaint about not allowing creativity in her writing. Why don't you just spell every word the way you want then? Why not?

How would anyone communicate with each other if you could just spell words however you want? the young woman kept saying quote unbelievable I thought what I wrote was perfect and she just made

all these changes and then had the nerve to tell me I was spelling words wrong when I know they are right because that is how I have always spelled them

now that is not the way you figure out whether something is right or not this is that world right where like every fact is morally

relative right like there's some relative thing. Well, I think it's right. So therefore it's right. I have my truth, right? It's that sort of rationale. Yep. She says, she then went on still on speakerphone to tell her mom that I'm very great and often... By the way, there's no embarrassment factor here. No, I know. Everybody's hearing this? You're in a common workspace on speakerphone. I always have those thoughts when you're like in an airport and someone's like in a fight on their speakerphone, like sitting on a bench around who, like what purpose is.

thinks that's the right thing to do. It's incredible. Like you go to the corner, if you have to have this conversation right now and you do it quietly and calmly, you don't put it on speakerphone and yell swears at the person, but yet that happens like every other time

I'm out of an airport. The woman then, the employee, then went on still on speakerphone to tell her mom, I'm very great, and office inappropriate detail about how hungover she was

and what she did with her friend and when some guys the night before. So she's saying how wonderful she is, but then also talking about how she's hung over at work on speakerphone in public. And then her mom laughed and laughed. The colleagues in and around the workplace kept looking at one another.

Some even put earbuds and headphones on. It appeared as though this was a regular thing with her. She ended the conversation asking her mom how she should bring this up with a boss's boss. I mean, this is a quote, I mean, I always spell hamster with a pee. She has no right to criticize me. She walked into the office kitchen for the rest of the call, so I don't know what happened next.

I always get five when I add up two plus two. It got no right to correct me on that. Isn't that incredible? Where does that end? There's no place that ends. Right. Except with total chaos in society. And we've talked about, how many times have we talked about the idea that you have to be able to have a foundation and truth?

We all have to be able to agree on some common principles for a kind of. to operate. Yes. And like the spelling of words should be really easy one of them. That's a no-brainer right there. Yeah. And like Glenn says all the time, the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, those should be a no-brainer. We should all agree on that.

Okay, that's our foundation. It's literally the foundation of this country. And then facts such as, I don't know, spelling and math should kind of be in concrete. They really should. You can't just spell it that way because you always have been. wrong spelling it that way and you're going to keep doing it. It is really incredible. And of course you're going to keep making it.

So what came of this? Do we know the outcome? She kind of goes into a, you know, look, I don't know. Maybe she has some learning disability and maybe, like, you know, she's trying to find some way. She's basically covering every basis in case she's being mean and doesn't realize she's being mean. Because in our society today, that's another thing that's happening. Yes.

Because a lot of times it happens, like if you say, oh, man, that guy's got a crappy haircut. He fell on his head when he was four years. years old, you bastard. It's like, all right, I didn't know that. Okay? And, you know, okay, I'm sorry. Like, all right. I guess it's not his fault, right? Like, but this

is this, you know, of course there is the outlying possibility that there's something. But again, like she's writing op-eds and, you know, you know, it doesn't seem like a normal arrangement, but she's allowing for the complete outlier of the possibility that she's missing something significant here.

She goes on to say, this is the writer of the story. I think I was perplexed by the insistence of wanting to spell something the way that she wanted to because she wanted to, ignoring the fact that there are rules and dictionaries and seeming offended that anyone would suggest the use of an outside resource as reference. She goes on and say, you know, obviously if there's something I don't know about, you know, she needs help or whatever, I hope she gets it. But it seemed more like someone who had never been told no, or that she is anything other than 100% perfect and amazing and can do nothing wrong.

and it's going to be exhausting for her and anyone in her orbit. I asked a colleague about it and he relayed a story about the time he gave an early 20-something feedback on a writing assignment. The young man quit the next day and had his parents call to tell him what a terrible boss he was for correcting work that didn't need correcting. I worry about how kids are being raised sometimes. I really do. That's how she wraps it up. How are they going to get along in the workplace? This is the problem.

You know, parents like that. have allowed that behavior the whole time. They haven't challenged them. They haven't corrected them. And everything they've done is right. So where do you go with that in the workplace? Yeah. And you see this.

Like there are funny examples of it. Like, I mean, this is an extreme example. I assume. I mean, I, I will say, we work around people in their 20s and they don't seem that way. Right. So it's certainly not widespread. However, I mean, it may be widespread,

but at least people who come work at the blaze aren't like that. I guess that's all. The only statement I can actually. actually make on that particular topic. People who are, you know, might be leaning conservative, maybe have a different profile. But it is a situation where, you know, it's the American Idol effect, right? They start that first episode and all these people come in that can't sing at all. And they've been told their whole life, how good they are. Yeah. And they have no idea that they can't function in this world that they think they can function in. Yeah. They think they're great

and Simon Cowell is just mean Simon Cowell is just telling you the truth and at some point you have to believe that people in this generation that have been raised this way bump their heads really hard into a wall called reality the scary part is not that though to me

the scary part is at some point that generation is now the boss we're only what 20 years away from that and when that generation is the boss and those people who think that way, if they're not, they don't have a change of thinking by then. They're running the country. What the hell happens then? It's over. It's over at that point. More in 60 seconds. Warning, if you're buried in debt you can't afford, do not let the credit

card companies make you think you have to pay it all back because you don't. What the credit card companies don't want you to know is that there's actually a way to get debt free without paying off your entire debt or going bankrupt. If you have 10,000, or more in credit card debt, you now have the right to let us settle that debt for a fraction of what you owe. For free information, call credit answers at 800-970-9159. If you're struggling to pay off your debt, do not let the credit card companies make you think you have to. Call credit answers now. For free information on how to get out of debt faster than you ever thought possible, without debt consolidation or bankruptcy. We offer a guarantee with no upfront fees,

so there's no risk. For free information, visit creditanswers.com or call 800-970-9159. That's 800-970-9159. Pat and Stu for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program. Wow. Well, you know, that's what's come of our participation trophy generation, isn't it? We gave them trophies for participating. We gave them game balls for participating. We change the grading system so they wouldn't be offended by getting low grades. We stop keeping score. Sometimes we stop grading people. You know, the whole society bent over backward so there wouldn't be any sort of embarrassment or offense to these kids. And now that's the result of at least that one girl in the workplace. I would love to, I mean, there has to be stories like this that people have seen. If you have one, I would love to hear it.

Triple-8-727 Beck, because these things that do happen. They do happen. And, you know, there is an entire industry that's basically, uh, write stories about millennials and how terrible they are and get lots of clicks. Like, that's a whole business. And a lot of it is BS, right? Like, I mean, you know, we deal with, uh, unfortunately millennials all the time. And, you know, they work here and there, there are much, many of them are okay. Uh, that's, As far as I will go. Many might be a stretch. Some are okay.

Some are okay. Yeah. Now, like, people don't realize this, but, you know, I was basically the first millennial. Oh, you, if, I don't know. Yeah. There are studies that identify my year of birth as, as at the very first year of being a millennial. So I have a sort of like, I'm like the, um, Obi-1 Canobi of all millennials. That's how they look up to me in that way.

Because I was born in like the second month of millennialism. So in addition to being a Canadian sports celebrity, you're also a millennial guru? Yes. Oh, nice. Yes, that's me. Uh-huh. But I, there is that sort of industry. Like, there was a story that came out the other day.

There's like, you know, 22% of millennials have no friends. And it's like, well, I saw that. Yeah. And like, you look at the story and it's like, well, 18% of the next generation has no friends, too. But it doesn't, that's not what they put in the headline. Because people like to do, millennial bashing is objectively fun. Like it's objectively a fun past- And it's almost a cottage industry right now.

It is. And it's a little bit faky, right? What was the article? There was a woman who was complaining about millennials going to Disney World by themselves with no kids. Like, because they like Disney World. I'd love to do that. Well, every- I would love that.

It's legitimately like why it was created. Yes, kids are part of it. But the whole point is escapism, right? Yep. And the article was like, these millennials are going there just to escape because they don't like real life. Well, that's what Disney World is. It's a different world called Disney World. That's a dumb article.

Come on. That did not need to be written. But viral like crazy, right? Tweeted everywhere. And of course, did I send it to multiple millennials that work here? Yes, I did. And with no commentary about how ridiculous it was, I just wanted them to think they were bad people.

Okay. That's a totally different situation. I don't know why. There is something interesting about it. But it is, there is, and I think it's worse as the generations go, right? Look, I know I sound like I'm a thousand years old when you say, like, well, my generation was good. And these other, these darn kids these days need to get off my law. And I got that.

I mean, I know it's what happens to you when you get old. You start saying things like that. And I'm completely comfortable with it. But there's a legitimate issue here in that the reason why things like socialism are popular among these generations is because they see it as mommy. Right? Their impression of it is, Mommy will take care of me.

All of these things that are problematic in my life can be handled by this giant government thing that can deal with it. So I don't have to deal with it. I don't have to have those problems and those tough decisions. I don't have to face something like, well, there's this person who doesn't make enough money

to afford the surgery that they need. How do we deal with that as a society? Well, what if we just let Bernie say? Sanders handle it. Then I don't have to make any tough decisions. I can just let Bernie Sanders and Bill Gates handle it. You know, Bernie Sanders can tax Bill Gates and then everything will be fine and then I never have to worry about a thing again. And it's understandable that they relate to that philosophy of government because that philosophy of government takes all personal responsibility away from them. Sure. And I do think it's not a minor problem. They've also been indoctrinated

to the fact that that is the way to take care of things. Yeah. Through massive governmental programs. And so, you know, so many millennials didn't have a chance because that's what they've been taught their whole life. And that's how they've been coddled their whole life to the point where they have a nervous breakdown when they find out a P is not in the word hamster. Are we sure about that? Not well. Because I don't believe dictionary.com. Wait, I've always spelled it. I don't know. Why should I change now? I've always spelled it that way. Reality's hard, man. It is hard. It really is. is. You know, sometimes the P just isn't there and you got to deal with it. It's a tough one. And how many times does this person written this word hamster? Why are they so sold on it? So, by the way, it's a patent stew for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program. Glenn returns on Monday. We were talking a little bit off the air here about the way the media and big tech can censor materials and speech and how big of a problem that is. And,

It's one of the issues that I think it makes a really clear point on why the red flag laws for guns are a real problem. Because if you think taking away your speech is easy, you put up past a law where taking away guns, a Second Amendment right, is easy. That's not a good road to go down. We've seen how this works, right? You know, people are not capable of making these decisions very well. And so it creates real problems. It's also fascinating that as they're talking about how tyrannical and oppressive Trump is, they're also talking about taking guns from people. So they should understand. Shouldn't they the risk involved here?

And it kind of tells you that they don't actually mean it. Right. Like for example, how long have they been asking for these red flag laws, the Democrats, a long time? And of course, Republicans are like, well, it's a second amendment issue. You can't really do it anyway. Plus, we're worried about the slippery slope and all of these different issues. We're not going to go ahead with that. And they said, we have to have them. This is vital. Why will they not do it? And then so these shootings happen. and Trump is like, all right, like, let's do it. Let's do it. We played the clip earlier.

I mean, he's signaled before that he's very much on board for this type of legislation. And typically, second amendment people around him have said, look, it's not a good idea. His supporters, I mean, if our audience is any indication, they are not at all for this. And, you know, it's not just our audience. It's big time pro-Trump audiences. I mean, I know there's a lot of Trump fans, certainly in this audience. But there is, even like online. line. We talked about David Harris Jr., who's a big Trump supporter, and he said the same thing to me,

that the overwhelming reaction from his people yesterday was like, look, no, just don't cross this line. Well, listen to this quote from Schumer. He's now warning the GOP about the red flag laws. This is what Schumer said yesterday. The notion that passing a tepid version of a red flag bill alone is even close to getting the job done in addressing rampant gun violence in the U.S. is wrong and would be an ineffective cop out. We Democrats are not going to settle for half measures so Republicans can feel better and try to push the issue of gun violence off to the side. You're never going to win with these people. And we know that these laws don't do anything to stop mass shootings. So why bother here? Right. Why bother? If you give them one inch, they will demand one mile and say if you give any less than one mile, you are Satan. So what's the point of dealing with someone like Chuck Schumer? And of course, Chuck Schumer, if what his goal was, was really to get a red flag law passed, would not treat it this way, right? He is saying, no, Republicans don't do it. He's telling them in advance, it's not going to work.

It's not going to help. We're still going to kill you for it. So why bother? Why bother going down this road unless you really believe it's the right thing to do? And there's a lot of questions about that. Same thing kind of goes with the speech issue. You have a red flag law where people can say, this person's problematic. we should take his guns away, then figure out whether he's guilty or innocent.

Same thing is happening online. Now, these are not government issues. These are private company issues. But these private company issues can move millions of votes. It is a very serious thing. And Ted Cruz did a little bit of work on this in a Senate committee hearing talking to Robert Epstein. We've had him on the show before. He's a Harvard professor.

He's a guy who supported Hillary Clinton. He is not a Trump supporter at all, but his case is, look, big tech is able to manipulate votes and they could change elections in the favor of different candidates with no paper trail. Listen to some of this exchange from earlier this week. And in 2020, you can bet that all of these companies are going to go all out. and the methods that they're using are invisible, they're subliminal. They're more powerful than most any effects I've ever seen in the behavioral sciences, and I've been in the behavioral sciences for almost 40 years. You know, our Democratic colleagues on this committee often talk about what they view

as the pernicious effect of big money and big corporate dollars. What you are testifying to is that a handful of Silicon Valley billionaires and giant corporations are able to spend millions of dollars, if not billions of dollars collectively, massively influencing the results of elections. And there's no accountability. You said, we don't know. We have no way of knowing if Google or Facebook or Twitter sends it to Democrats or Republicans or how they bias it because it's a black box with no transparency or accountability whatsoever.

Am I understanding you correctly? Senator, with respect, I must correct you. Please. If Mark Zuckerberg chooses to send out a go-vote reminder just to Democrats on Election Day, that doesn't cost him a dime. Fair enough. Do you happen to know who the Hillary Clinton campaign's number one financial supporter was in the year 2016? I think I do, but please remind me. The number one financial supporter of the Hillary Clinton campaign in the 2016 election was the parent company of Google, Alphabet, who was our first witness.

They were her number one financial donor, and your testimony is through their deceptive search methods, they moved 2.6 million votes in her direction. I would think anybody, whether or not you favor one or another, should be deeply dismayed about a handful of Silicon Valley billionaires having that much. power over our elections to silently and deceptively shift vote outcomes. Again, with respect, I must correct you. The 2.6 million is a rock bottom minimum. The range is between 2.6 and 10.4 million, depending on how aggressively they used the techniques that I've been studying now for six and a half years. Wow.

That's breathtaking. Yeah, it is. And this guy, again, is a Clinton supporter. He is not a conservative. Oh, the guy testifying was a Clinton supporter? A Clinton supporter. He voted for Hillary. And he said at the beginning, Cruz's first question was like, hey, so would you describe

yourself as a conservative Republican? And he just laughed. He goes, uh, no. He's no fan of Republicans as far as policy goes. Okay, none of this is a problem. No. But the Russian deal. The Russian deal was a big deal because they put ads on and they fake tweet.

They retweeted people a bunch of times with Russian bots. when you listen to this testimony and what he's told us on the show as well, I think Glenn did a podcast with this guy. I think he did. We've definitely had extended interviews with him, so it's worth going back and listening to, but he describes the

methods, Pat, and first of all, he says, if you take a 50-50 issue, let's say abortion, or whatever, some, that one's probably too core of an issue, but a big issue, but it's a 50-50 split. By reordering the search results, not by changing them, but just

by reordering them, his research shows you can turn it from a 50-50 issue to a 90-10 issue. Wow. 90-10. Because again, the amount of people who have principles on an issue who have really thought it all through and are, you know what, I am rock-soled in this belief, it's minimal in this country. So they can switch people like that. He said they did research where they monitored people's, you know, individual computers and what they are seeing. And I think a lot of people, and this is the way the Internet was at the beginning, have the impression that you type something in, oh, that's the number one search result.

So if I type it in, it's the number one search result. When you type it in, you see the same number one search result. Well, that's not true anymore. So, like, if I go, if I were to right now show you, you know, my homepage on Yahoo.com, what it would tell you is apparently all of America loves the Philadelphia Eagles because every other story is a Philadelphia Eagles story because that, That is the most likely story for me to click on when I happen to go to Yahoo.com, right? Or whatever site it is, it's all customized for me.

So there's no way to be able to monitor what they're doing with individual people. So Epstein's point is they can determine because of what you're doing on the internet and all the data that they have on you, whether you're going to be likely to vote for, let's say, Bernie Sanders or Donald Trump. and then they can, his extreme example is, they could put a get out and vote alert to just one side, just to the Bernie Sanders people, just the Elizabeth Warren people, and not send it to the Trump people.

And it is possible, he said, that in the last election, up to 10 million people were influenced. Yeah, that's what his research said, because he actually was monitoring computers and seeing that. Wow, that's amazing. It is really incredible. And I don't know.

I like it is it's like if you think of it with the Russian bot situation right what were they able to do well afterwards they were able to investigate they were able to look back at all the public Twitter posts all the ads that were placed and piece together a narrative of what Russia did actually legitimately really try to do and they were really trying to do this they went after websites they the whole Russian hoax thing has more to do with whether it affects Donald Trump not whether they actually tried to manipulate the election they did and so you look at that and they were able to trace that back, it was a difficult process, but they were able to do it. If Google did something similar, they wouldn't be able to because it only appeared on your computer.

Plus, Google was far more successful than the Russians were at manipulating people. Yeah, and obviously they're much better at this overall. They're the best. I mean, there's a reason why this is one of the most valuable companies in the world is because they do things really well, with the exception of place YouTube ads in the middle of sentences and videos, which I will never understand. Yeah. I know. This is a total side point,

but here's a company that is internationally known for their user experience. You go to, like, is Gmail better than every other email? Yeah. Is Google Maps better than every other map? Yeah.

Is Google Search better than every other search? Yeah. YouTube, it's this great service. Let's just stick the ads in the middle of sentences of the videos you're watching. It just stops, plays a 20-second ad,

and then it goes back to the second half of the actual sentence that you're watching. How is that possible that this is how the system works? It's definitely a way to make sure you see the ad. I guess, but all it does is piss you off against the advertiser.

You're saying there, it's like, I would never buy something from these people. How dare they? Now, it's not their false at all. My understanding is you can, if you want, place those ads in a place, like if you're the one uploading the video, you can place it and people just don't.

But still, like, how does Google, they automate everything. They're automating basically our elections at this point. They can't automate. where they put these freaking YouTube ads? Unbelievable. Shad Christ drives me nuts. AAA 727 B-E-C-K.

It's Pat and Stu for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program. You're listening to Glenn Beck. It's Pat and Stu for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program. You can check out my show. Pat Gray unleashed from 6 to 8 Central. It would be 7 to 9 Eastern right before this show or on podcast anytime. Glenn returns on Monday. We've been talking about many things.

Earlier, we had this story about the millennial who was so confident that hamster was spelled with a P and couldn't be bothered to change it, didn't want to even look it up, and then called her mommy because she was so offended that her boss was changing the spelling of the word hamster with a P. Let's go to Scott in Texas. Hey, Scott, you're on the Glenn Beck program with Pat and Stu. Hi. I'm calling as a former English teacher to share.

I think that that story Stu is telling them. Well, I think that that was one of my students. Really? There's the reason I say that. I assigned a research paper, typical, go do this research paper, five pages, MLA format, the whole bit. She turns in a paper that is a bunch of pictures with captions. Okay.

I'm like, no, this is not a research paper. any sources it's just a bunch of pictures with captions zero that's just an Instagram feed is what that is yeah mom comes in oh boy

and why did you fail my daughter well because it was a research paper but she was being creative but I'm an English teacher I'm supposed to be judging and helping them developed skills for writing. There's no writing here. It's just pictures with captions.

She did not fulfill the assignment. Right. This seems pretty basic. What was the mom's response? But she was being creative. Doesn't she get credit for that? No, man. Redo the paper, I'll consider it.

Did she redo it? Yeah. It was three pages. ages, it was okay. Right. But one of the things that, to go to Hamster, I'm an English teacher. I grew up going to Catholic schools, so it was drilled into me, grammar, spelling, all that stuff. When I'm having my annual visitation by the administration, principal comes in one day to

observe the class, and afterwards, in our feedback session, and he says, why are you wasting your time on grammar and spelling? Jeez. Wow. So those just don't matter anymore? No, the idea was that as long as a student can express themselves and get the ideas a cause, all that really matters. Wow.

We don't waste our time with grammar and spelling. It's amazing because that's really what's happening even with math now, too, where it's like, well, show your work and show that you kind of understood how you could get to the right answer. and that's enough. And that's what's important. I mean, we were a country that destroyed Dan Quail's life because he misspelled potato once. And now it's like,

God, if we could... And he spelled potato with an E, which was the way potato was spelled predominantly before. Right. Yes, it was... It really kind of can spell it either way. And I always was amazed by that clip if you go back and watch it.

No one else in the room has any problem with what's happened. Right. fine with it. And like for some reason, because the media decided they didn't like Dan Quayle and they wanted to call him an idiot. They used that to call him an idiot and ruin his life. And it literally destroyed his career. One word being misspelled once.

Now these guys around on freaking Twitter every day misspelling like, it can't even form sentences anymore. That's how it always spelled it. I'm going to keep doing it that way. Who are you to tell me? Wow. Triple-8-77 B-E-C-K. It's Pat and Stu for Glenn. The fusion of entertainment

and enlightenment. This is the Glenn Beck program. With Pat and Stu this week for Glenn, AAA, 727, B-E-C-K. You know, we never did play the Chris Cuomo babbling at the, at the, it was a town hall for gun control last night. And Chris has all the answers.

It's pretty amazing. Some of the things he had to say. I love it when he gets into that serious voice and it's like, okay, I'm going to tell you things that nobody's ever told you before. And then it's all the same. Blah, blah, blah. I'm being a tough guy by taking the position every other member of the media is currently taking.

Am I not brave? Because, yes, everybody's on my side. Guys, we just have to stand up to this NRA. I mean, sure, they can't even like keep their own operation going at the moment. Which is amazing, yeah. And it's sad and scary because they are very important. But, I mean, they're having real troubles internally just keeping the doors open. and with, you know, sort of infighting going on right now.

Mm-hmm. And again... But we're still supposed to be... They're still the boogeyman. Oh, yeah, they're the boogeyman. Not... Even though they were outspent in the last election by a large amount by anti-gun organizations. Like every town USA.

Every town, USA and many others, you know, that are supported by people like Michael Bloomberg, who just... By the way, a billionaire. Yeah. A billionaire. So it's a fascinating thing. Like, I... This comes up a lot where people are like, well, look, they just, they're folding to the NRA.

They're just folding to the NRA. Well, first of all, the NRA has no power in and of itself. The power comes from the members, and they represent millions and millions of individual people who care about the Second Amendment. So you're not folding to the NRA. If anything, you're folding to the people who are in the NRA, the actual members.

Which is, that's American citizens. American citizens and voters, right? Yes. But they're not, like the idea that a few million dollars that the NRA spends, which used to, by the way, go to a lot of Democrats. I mean, there was a time where they had, I think it was 60 or 60.

70 Democrats, they gave an A rating to. Now there's like two. Because... Are there two? I'm surprised there's two. If there's even two. I mean, I just read the stat. I want to say there was a couple of them, but I can't tell you their names off the top of my head.

But the bottom line is like, this is a situation where the Democrats have fled the gun rights position. They've abandoned it, just like they've abandoned the pro-life position. There used to be pro... I mean, like one of the most famous Supreme Court cases in history has the name Casey in it. And now you have... He's a very famous last name in Pennsylvania and Democrat politics. Now, I mean, you can't even find anybody.

They're kicking people out for being pro-life. Oh, yeah, you can't. No. I mean, so it's one of those things that's very strange because politically, forget the Second Amendment. Forget the fact that you should have, you know, the rights that you should have that come from God to protect yourself. Forget all those things for just a second. If you're just looking at politics, why wouldn't you ban assault weapons?

Who cares? Like you've got, most people don't have a quote unquote assault weapon, and I know that's not really a term, but like I'm using it for the ease of conversation here. Yeah. Why wouldn't you? There's five million of them out there, they say. You know, a lot of them, a lot of people own multiple assault weapons. It would be the easiest thing in the world to say, yeah, background check, sure. And yeah, assault weapons, sure.

And what else do you want? Oh, yeah, sure. Like, it looks like I did something and it'll help, you know, at the polls. These are things that are generally that poll pretty well. You know, not as much the assault weapon ban, but things like, you know, the background checks and stuff. Or even though they're kind of misleading, they poll very well. You could be the person out there saying, you know what? I did something.

I got that legislation passed. You could brag about how difficult it was. Like Kirsten Gillibrand when she said, when people told me that giving health care to 9-11 victims was impossible, I continue to fight for it. Oh, wow, impossible. Yeah, you remember when everybody was saying that to her? Oh, divisive issue, that one is. Whoa, no one wants to give health care to 9-11 victims. That was just way out there.

And how did we get that across the finish line with a Kirsten Gillibrand? You could do all that self-aggrandizing nonsense and say that you did something. The politics of it are easy. The point is that we actually have rights on a Constitution, and that's why you fight for them. You fight for them because it's the morally right thing to do. Not to mention the process makes it impossible for you to do the things you're trying to accomplish. There's a constitution you can't violate it. Shall not infringe is a big, it's a really restrictive wording.

Seems like it. They didn't leave it open for interpretation. I don't think it. It was certainly in that part. And yet here's all the, here's the compelling argument from Chris Cuomo last night. I want you to stop saying that this is going to be about the president. He's not going to solve this problem. You can argue the reasons why in different ways, but it doesn't matter.

He says he's open to making changes, but he is yet to act in a real way. And this really shouldn't be all about him. All major movements in this country start with you. Not them, not the politicians. True. Sure. When they run, they all have plans and ideas and promises, thoughts and prayers, sympathy for those who suffer. They just rarely act on it because it really is for you to lead with your voices and your votes.

And I believe there's reason for help. Okay. For one, we can't continue to be this stupid. It just defies common sense. What? We have a clear consensus among Americans of wanting better and more protection. This is amazing. This is just advocacy.

All right. This is running an anti-gun charity right here on television. This country rejects hate and the idea of white nationalists praying on a certain part of them. Because there's a lot of countries that openly embrace hate. There's a lot of places where hate is. The thing they love the most is hate. I mean, there are. There actually are.

I mean, if you go through the Middle East, you can find a lot of people who hate Jews. In polling, it's 70 and 80 and 90%. So there are those societies. It's the ones you're constantly defending, by the way. That's for sure. Those are the ones that when we are critical of the culture in those countries, you say we're hateful.

All right. He had more. See if we can get through this. Part of us is unacceptable. And I believe your revulsion will force lawmakers to treat people like them as the terrorists they are. Right. People point to the 94 assault weapons ban as a model. But is it really?

No. Barely found political consensus. It didn't do anything. 216 to 214. And to be honest, it really was easily run around by manufacturers. Oh, is that what happened? I would argue we've never really taken this on. And yet now they got the ban for a decade.

And they're saying it doesn't count. What good argument did you hear tonight? It's every socialist argument. Well, we had a socialist government, but it didn't count. That data really shouldn't be shared with relevant agencies. These fears of some mystery database, well, they'll know what you have. And then when you have to go against the government someday, you'll be unprepared. He'll equipped.

It's not even, it's not even journalism. It's not even moderation. He's not moderating this thing. All right. We got enough of him because it's pathetic. This is just a guy saying like, we are dumb if we don't take the government action that I want. right? Yes.

Because conservatives have a million different things that we think would help the situation. You just don't like any of them. Exactly. You don't like having extra security. You don't like having people getting rid of gun-free zones. You don't like those answers. So you say we're being dumb because we're not adopting your answers. Well, that's just advocacy.

We can have a debate about which one of those issues is better than the other. And that's what we've done. Sure, we can all say white nationalism sucks and we should fight against that. But of course, you're going to tell us it's a moment. much bigger problem than there's any right to believe that it is. You know, I mean, you have individual actors that have terrible ideologies, but I mean, you can't. These arguments, they're not even attempting to be. Oh, absolutely not.

Not even attempting. 3-8-727 B-E-C-K. More in 60 seconds. This is the Glenn Beck program. A good night's sleep is a must for any of us who have a crazy schedule. I toss and turn an awful lot. I have the right bed. but I thought I had the right pillow.

Mike sent me a MyPillow, and it's an amazing thing. You gotta get the right MyPillow for you. Mike is now offering his lowest price ever offered on TV or radio. You can get a two-pack of MyPillow's premium pillows for just $69.98. That's only $34.99 per pillow. And this offer is available only at MyPillow.com, or calling 800-966-3117, use the $1.9.00. the promo code back. My pillow made in the USA. It comes with a 60 day money back guarantee and a 10

year warranty. Sleep like I did. 800 9663117 and use the promo code back to get Mike's offer. You'll get a two pack of premium pillows for 6998. That's 3499 per pillow. That's my pillow.com. Remember promo code back. So I came in here on Monday after these shootings and was talking about the motivation behind them because everyone was saying it was white supremacy. It took the time to actually read, you know, the actual document from this murderer. And he does describe white supremacy. And he does use the word invasion, which is the entire link, basically, to Donald Trump.

We can blame Donald Trump because he used the word invasion and Donald Trump's used the word invasion. That's their big link. So I came in here and I said, well, the media, they're not telling you and they're not even linking to the document for you to find out yourself is there's entire section, it's basically equal parts in the document of white supremacy, anti-immigration sentiment on one hand. And on the other hand, anti-corporate and environmentalist rhetoric. And here we are now four days later. And I have still yet to see one example of the mainstream media even mentioning that it appears

in the document. I'm not saying they have to say it was the overwhelming motivation or even that it was on equal footing. You could even give me an argument if you want and say, well, you know what? I don't think he meant that one. I don't think he meant the environmentalist stuff. We only think he meant this stuff. You can say all of that. But the idea that they would continually blame Donald Trump without even mentioning it is remarkable.

I would love if you happen to see any mainstream media source that has mentioned this once, send it to me, tweet it to me. at World of Stew. Because it's very possible I missed one or two, but the overall narrative here has been very clear. It has been Donald Trump, use the word invasion, and that means that he's responsible. But take a step back for a second because I don't think it's even this,

it's much worse than the way I'm describing it. If you want to say Donald Trump is responsible for this shooting, which they are just saying as if it's fact, you have to complete multiple magic tricks to get to that. Right. You have to say that invasion, which is a colorful way of run-of-the-mill conservative border analysis, right? Like the point is that we're not doing anything and millions of people keep coming into the country when we're saying, please don't come into the country. So like, is that an invasion? You know, it's not the word that I would use.

But I mean, it is not, it's a bunch, it's millions of people breaking the law. it's something bad if you care about the law. If you care about rule of law, it's certainly something undesirable. And obviously for decades, the conservative analysis of the border, and about 15, any time before 10 or 15 years ago, the Democratic version and analysis of the border was the same, which was we can't just have people flooding over the border and screwing with our economy and committing crimes

and doing all these bad things. It was not a controversial issue. But to get to Donald Trump inspired this person, you have to say, okay, invasion, invasion, yes. But also that invasion is a real code word. And that code word is a code word for white supremacy and white nationalism when there's no evidence that Donald Trump supports

white supremacy or white nationalism. There's no evidence of it whatsoever. You can say he's racially insensitive at times. You can say he says things that are bad. You can say that he's not, not a uniting force in our country, blah, blah, blah. But there's no rational argument to say that he supports white nationalism because just at a very simple level, he hasn't overtly done it.

Like you could say he didn't quickly enough denounce the people in Charlottesville or he said there's good people on both sides. But he's never overtly said, I believe this is a white country and we should only have white people in it, right? There's no evidence of that whatsoever. None. Right. Mm-hmm.

However, in the environmentalist part of this, there is evidence that all of these candidates have said specifically the things he mentions in the manifesto. They are all running a campaign currently based on the things he cites in the document as his motivation for the killings. They all are saying we are a consumer society. They all are saying corporations are hurting our environment. They are all saying that we are at an apocalyptic tipping point with the environment. They are all saying so much plastic waste is in our oceans and ruining our environment. They are all saying we're overdoing it with our resources and over harvesting those resources.

They are actually overtly saying the exact same things with no qualifiers. It's not like with white nationalism where you have to say, well, invasion. What he means is he doesn't want any Hispanics in the country. what he means is that he must mean white nationalism. You don't need any leaps. He's basically quoting the debates that you're seeing on stage. And so if you are going to say with certainty that Donald Trump is responsible, you must say with even more certainty that the Democratic candidates are responsible for this attack.

Now, alternatively, you could have a morally defensible position and say that the killer is the one responsible for his killings. That you could also go that direction. But you can't just say that the one half of the manifesto with a bunch of magic tricks and gymnastics to try to mentally bend your way into finding that Donald Trump is responsible, you can't say that just that half is part of it when the Democrats are saying everything word for word from the other half of the document and say they have no responsibility and not even that, not even mentioned that it occurred in the document. This is the biggest. I have never in my life seen anything like this.

The media malpractice, which is completely intentional, I have never seen a worse example of it. In my entire life, I've been doing this for 20 years, and I've never seen anything like it. They are absolutely denying that half of this document exists. It's blowing my mind that they're at least not mentioning it and dismissing it. But they are not. And they are blaming Donald Trump with certainty when there's, if you want to go down that road,

there is more evidence. Again, more evidence that the Democrats are responsible for the El Paso shootings. More evidence. It's just that they're just not mentioning it. And you know what? And the mainstream media lets him get away with it. It's incredible. Yeah.

Health concerns are a sad part of life. I mean, it seems like there's always something that either. hurts or bothers us health-wise, right? Well, if that's you, you really need to see what CBD products can do for your health. CBD may offer many of the health benefits of marijuana, but without the high. So it's 100% legal and requires no prescription from cbdistillery.com. The health testimonials are impressive. Like this customer who wrote, I highly recommend CBD to everyone. It's done a complete turnaround for me. Another customer wrote, CBD made a big difference in my health. Look, if you haven't tried CBD for that health concern, you should. But where you get CBD products is crucial.

With independent lab tests and nearly a quarter million customers, you can trust CBdistillery.com. See what CBD can do for your health. Go to CBdistillery.com and enter relief for 20% off. Again, enter relief for 20% off at CBdistillery.com. CBdistillery.com. Pat and Stufer Glenn on the Glenn Beck program. And despite all you just said, Stu, this snowball continues to roll down the hill. And it's gathering momentum. And it's really picking up steam. And it's getting bigger and stronger every single day.

And it's actually rolling over the top of a lot of Republicans. Because Republicans are just giving up on this and they're caving into it. And so I'm pretty sure they're going to at least get their red flag laws passed. It really looks like there's going to be. a federal red flag law put into place. Which is, I think, a bad thing. I think there are good motivations to it and good arguments for it. I just don't think, A, it's constitutional or B, a good idea.

I don't either. I would add, too, that I think, honestly, there's a good, a good chance that they don't get the red flag laws for a very bizarre reason, which is they, the Democrats will oppose them. That is the only thing that will save us. They don't want to be able to say that they might push too hard and go too far. Right. They want to say, look, Republicans have these problems. They won't do anything. Yeah.

Because if they passed the red flag laws, the Republicans will be able to say, look, we passed, you know, this big legislation on red flag laws. They want to, they want the argument to be able to say they didn't do anything. So the way that they would accomplish that is to block the passage of the red flag laws on the basis of it's not going to go far enough. Yeah. And that may very well be the outcome of this, which is better than the outcome of them getting the red flag laws in my opinion. What they also might get is going a little bit further,

a red flag law and let's say a limit on magazines. I don't know how what kind of capacity is too much, but they're going to come up with some number, whether it's 10 or 8 or 5 or who knows what it is. But they, I mean, there are Republicans caving in on the on the magazine limit as well, which would not surprise me to see them do. No. And even some Republicans are going further. And they're bringing up like this guy in Ohio who has also said there should be a ban on rifles, as he calls military-style weapons. Yeah.

Because they're only created for one purpose. I don't know if you're aware of this. To kill people. Oh, really? Yeah. To kill people. That's what they do. That's what they do.

I've seen many women say, that they're very easy to shoot and as a defensive weapon, it's one of their preferred choices. Yeah. Yeah. Women, what they are 15s or AK-47s? Yeah,

they love them. It's true. I mean, because it's a very, it's very easily fired weapon. It's accurate. I mean, look,

the things that make a weapon deadly also make a weapon effective for in defense. Like, the Democrats say this all the time. They're like, yeah, what, these weapons,

they fire with such precision. You just want bullets flying all over the place. What the hell is your argument here? Like, I want my bullets to go to the left of wherever I'm shooting. Like, what? They're supposed to hit the thing that you're pointing it at. The point is how you use them, right? When you pull the trigger, do you want the bullet to be delayed?

Like 30 seconds? Or how is that supposed to work? It's like saying, all these knives, they're so sharp. Why aren't they dulling these knives? Well, I mean, the point is really like who's, if someone's stabbing, that's the issue, you want the knife to be sharp. So it can cut the food or wherever else you're using it for. Yes, we know people, it's the same thing.

It's like, oh, the steering wheel goes exactly where these people wanted to go when they're running people over. You wanted to go to the left of where people wanted to go? That's your argument? They're not good arguments. I'll say that. Not at all. Still, they might work.

It's Pat and Stu for Glenn and joined by Jeffie to chew the fat a little bit, which is also the same title as your podcast. It is. Which you can pick up at pretty much anywhere podcasts are available if I'm not mistaken. Correct. No, you are not mistaken. And all Home Depot locations. Oh, good. Okay. That makes it really handy.

You're getting some lumber. Yeah. You know, and a Jeffie podcast. Yes. Uh-huh. I was a fan of that. It's in the back left, like, by the toilet. Okay.

And the like industrial toilet. Yeah. That they have way back there. Exclusive Home Depot, not Lowe's. No, yeah. You can't go to Lowe's to get Jeffie's podcast, unfortunately. So this is a story that I have a couple, stories today. Before we get, I do want to talk a little bit about the polls because

they're exciting news breaking about the Democratic presidential candidate polling. But this is not for you, those two. Okay. This is people that would love bacon. And I know that you, you know, you might love the smell, but you can't eat it. It's only every other person on the planet other than me, basically. But there's a bacon intern job being posted. You get a thousand dollars for one day for just testing bacon. That's a pretty good deal. There's a burger chain in California that's saying, hey, post why you should be our intern on Instagram, and we'll pay you $1,000 for a day to test our bacon. Oh, that's incredible.

That's a good gig. A thousand bucks and you get to eat bacon? All day? Come on now. What a country this is. Come on now. So just, you know, post it at Farmer's Boy, Farmer's Boys food on their Instagram. Tell me that's available in China or the former Soviet Union.

No. Probably not. Probably not. Not even close. Almost nothing is available in the former Soviet Union as defined by the word form. But you couldn't get it even before it was forward. So that's the point. Or its current satellite nations.

Thank you, thank you. Yeah. Also, can we can I know it's getting close to football season and I'm pretty excited. Yes, preseason tonight. Oh, that's right. Eagles are on tonight. I'm excited. Can we make a common sense decision, point of personal privilege decision that we can

no longer hear from Colin Kaepernick? Oh, please. Please. Oh, I love that. Can we just do that? Point of personal privilege. I second it. It's all he has, though.

I mean, that is. He just posted on his Twitter account yesterday again. What? No. He started the Twitter feed with denied work for 889 days. Denied weeks, but he, oh, I can't take it. I can't take this guy. And then it just shows him working out in a gym and he says 5 a.m.

5 days a week for three years. Still ready. And then it shows him working out. Still ready. You weren't ready. You lost your starting job to Blaine Gabbert. Yeah. Which, by the way, hurts me even more than you know.

No, come on. The guy's been offered three jobs since he lost his job to Blaine Gabbardt. He turned them all down. I thought we were done, too, after the collusion case. Yeah. Right. He settled the collusion case with the NFL. Got $20 million out of them.

Some reports are even more than that. And I'm curious, are you denied work when you're making millions of dollars from Nike. Because I think a lot of people would say, especially people that you're going to whine about when you talk about income inequality, but those people would say, you know what, I think I wouldn't mind having that. I stand there, do nothing and make millions

of dollars job that he has with Nike. Yeah. And then if they post something, if they make a product that he doesn't like, they pull it. Yeah, he's like the Nike Ombudsman. Somehow he's got that gig, and that's a gig. Yes. He's making a lot of money doing it. And it's just being reported that Kong Kaepernick sends a message

to the NFL. Oh, shut. I just want to stop. And this is the thing that's most frustrating about all of this, is that people are now romanticizing him as if he was a good quarterback. He was not. He lost his job, not because he kneeled. He knelt after he lost his job.

He lost his job to Blaine Gabbert because of play, the levels of play being so terrible. Think of what I've just said. This is not something that is controversial. He was bad. He had a couple of good years before, and not even. I mean, they're not even good years when you look back at them. They're okay years.

He ran around a lot. He ran around a lot with a league's best defense. And because, you know, he has a lot of athletic ability, which is true. And that's what he's proving when he's working out. Not that he's a good quarterback, but that he can work out. He works out. And he ran around a few times. And he was, but he was a very mediocre passer.

The year he came back into the league after the second year, they almost won the Super Bowl. They brought it back and they said, you know what? we think Kaepernick is a star. And so they decided to start throwing it on every play. And you know what happened with that team? Jim Harbaugh is now in Michigan. That's what happened with that team. So it is completely revisionist history

to say that Colin Kaepernick belongs in the league for his level of play. He does not. He is not a good quarterback and does not belong in the league because of his ability. Yeah, but I mean, for three years now, he's still ready. Well, good.

He works out at 5 a.m. five days a week. Right. Well, you know what? If he cares about football so much, go playing one of the other leagues. He's not doing that. But he's been denied work to for 889 days. Because he sucks.

Could have been the backup in Seattle. He could have been the backup in, I believe, Denver. Could have been the backup in one other place. And was it Miami, maybe? Might have been. He's been offered jobs. I'll tell you this. I've been denied work in the NFL for 15,695 days.

No one's given me a gig Are you still ready? I am still ready. I work out every day by walking to my car, by shoveling food into my mouth. A lot of people think you're beyond your prime, but I think that's a... I mean...

Who? I don't want to name names because I don't want to offend to... Right. But every NFL team. Right. And again, when it comes down to this ridiculous idea that he's being banned because of his political speech,

it's so ridiculous. They love his political speech in the NFL. They promote it like crazy. The biggest sponsor is Nike and they promote it like crazy. But go over to Malcolm Jenkins is one of the starting safeties for the Philadelphia Eagles. He, now he made the mistake, I guess, of doing, having a little bit of credibility and that he never wore I hate the pigs, socks or anything like that. But he has been very much. Like Kaepernick did.

Right. Like Kaepernick did. But he's been very much on the side talking about violence, you know, when it comes to police officers. and points that I do not agree with at all. But he's a starting safety for the Eagles. You know why he keeps his employment because he's good. He's a good player. He makes plays defensively that other players can't make.

So he continues to hold on to his job. With Colin Kaepernick, he sucks so he doesn't have a job. It is black and white. Is it theoretically possible that Colin Kaepernick could currently hold a third-string quarterback job in the NFL without the activism? him maybe. I mean, Eric Reed also kneeled and he had his job for multiple years afterwards. And then as soon as he lost his job, he also started complaining about that's why he lost

his job. And he was part of the collusion deal. Of course. With Kaepernick and won that deal. And then he got re-signed. And then he got resigned. For another, I think, two or three-year deal. That's really bad.

You're really bad at colluding. Yes. They're terrible. When you give somebody money for it and then they get a job. Yeah. The heck is that. That's the point. That's wrong.

It's just wrong. When you're a really good player and you belong in the NFL, they're going to keep you in the NFL because they want to make lots of money. And you know what? They might even want to make lots of money so they can donate it all to Donald Trump because they're evil. Whatever your freaking view of the world is, you can still apply it to the fact that Colin Kaepernick sucks. That's just a fact.

I love the fact that they just, he's turned down jobs and continues to say that they won't give him a job. And he won a massive lawsuit for it. All kinds of money. Still has a true deal. And he also there's all kinds of reports where he doesn't want to take the third string, right? I mean, he will not be back up. And look, if you're an NFL

team, the only thing that I could say that the NFL team is NFL teams are thinking about is, do you want a third string quarterback that's going to take up all the news for your team? No, you don't. The third string quarterback is supposed to be over there. You know who learned that really well? Tim Tebow.

The same thing. Tim Tebow has a good record in the NFL. He's won a playoff game. Everything about Tim Tebow says you should keep him around because he can, you know what? He can make plays. He can do different things. Nobody wants that hassle. Nobody wants the hassle when he's talking about a second and third string quarterback.

There's a part of it that's true at that level. Like why bother bringing him to camp? Because the whole camp is going to be about Tim Tebow or about Colin Kaepernick. if you had enough ability. Tim, look, Tim Tebow is a great athlete and one of the best college football players in history. But is he a big-time NFL quarterback? The answer to that is probably no.

If he was, he'd be in the NFL. You know, he really would. And a lot of these teams don't want that hassle. The same thing, even though Tebow, I would argue, is really, there's no reason to not want that hassle, but he dominates the coverage. He makes you, you're constantly in front of the press answering questions about your third street quarterback.

And it's just a pain. It's not your focus. So he loses, does he lose a job? I mean, maybe he loses a job at the fringe of the NFL. But if you are a person who is good enough to be a starting quarterback, certainly, if he played like Patrick Mahomes, let's face it, he'd be a starter in the NFL. Or Ryan Fitzpatrick. If he played like a mediocre quarterback, he would be in the NFL.

Instead, he played like a bad quarterback. And he has the hassle. So why would you bother with that? I don't know how many days Tim Tebow has been denied work, but I do know that it's more than $8.503. It's more than that. A lot more. I just know that we also,

we talked a little bit about it on Pat Unleashed yesterday, that, you know, the planet Earth is dying. Oh, it is? It's going to be over like in. Well, either 10 or 12 years. We know that. I'm not true. It keeps, it could be five now.

I don't know. I don't know how long it's going to take. But we have found a potential. potentially habitable super earth. Yeah, this is good. Oh, cool. Because we're going to have to leave and go there pretty quick. We might work on a new name.

It's called GJ357D. Yeah, it's not exactly catchy. No, we'll need something else. We do have to come up with a new name. We also need, I don't know, light speed technology. Well, that's silly because it's six times larger than the Earth. Yeah. It orbits a dwarf sun.

Right. And it orbits, we'd be a lot older because it orbits every 55, almost 56 days. So we would be a lot older. But it is, Pat, you're right. we're going to have to find a different mode of transportation. I mean, it's right around the corner. Just 31 light years away. So at the speed of light, it'll take you 31 years to get there.

No problem. No problem. We could really use some warp speed technology, actually. Desperately. Yeah. Desperately. Maybe something at Area 51 has that technology. Maybe.

Maybe. I don't know. But I'm looking forward to it. And they're also saying that it's either, if it has a thick atmosphere, it could be too cold, like negative 60 or something. 70 degrees or if it doesn't it can be too hot you know be burning up with hundreds of degrees or it might have just the right amount of atmosphere or it might have just the right amount because it is in the goldilocks zone

where it's where it could be not too hot and not too cold I mean we found I found this fascinating that NASA's space telescope the Kepler has observed 300,000 stars more and found more than 4,000 exoplanet candidates since 2009 so we have a shot to get off the earth we have a shot most some of them are less than 31 light years away.

Oh, wow. I mean, so yeah. That's great. I mean, some of them are, you know, right there. Literally in our neighborhood. Right next door. Right next door. And this is sad news.

And I, I'm going to bring it to you anyway. Celebrities are being cheated into buying fake diamonds. And you might be. Don't say that. Oh, don't say that. I worry about celebrities. Have this problem, too, because you're buying diamonds that are fake. Well, they're not fake.

They're just lab grown here in the United States. This is pretty fascinating. because they're growing them and instead of mining them, but they're the exact same thing. So is that bad? Well, I guess not. I don't know. Right? I mean, they're lab grown using this chemical reaction is how they make them.

I know they tried to take a hit at Leonardo DiCaprio for giving misleading information about it because he's invested in this company that makes the diamonds. And you know, by the way, he also gave a misleading gem to a woman on a ship who then tossed it into the ocean because it was so fake. I didn't want to bring up that documentary.

Wow. Yeah, that documentary was powerful. Wow. But his words are, look, his words, he says that he's proud to invest in this company

and that these are to be cultivating real diamonds in America without the human and environmental toll of mining. That's, I mean, it's essentially the same thing of the impossible burger argument, right? Like, it's pretty much the same stuff chemically,

right? Like, it tastes the same. Which I want to talk about. But the diamond. Coming up here in just a second, we'll finish up. And just a minute or two here. You're listening to Glenn Beck.

Pat and Stu, for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program. Also, Jeffrey joins us. New Iowa poll out. Pat, would you like the results of this? I would love... I would love... Of the move things in Iowa, quite a bit. Have they?

Mm-hmm. Oh, everybody who had a really good performance like Corey Booker. Cory Booker was huge, right? Everyone told us. Skyrocketing. Oh, he is. He's moved quite a bit. In fact, he's moved by 67%.

Wow. He's gone from 3% to 1%. So he actually went down. I love that. Good. So these are all the people that showed up at more than 0%. Okay. John Hickenlooper, Tulsi Gabbard, John Delaney, Steve Bullock, and Corey Booker all at 1%.

Andrew Yang and Kirsten Jilla Brand at 2%. It's a nice poll for Jillabran. She doesn't normally hit 2. Um, here's an interesting one. And if you look at my candidate rankings that came out right before the debates, I had him in the middle of the pack where nobody had him. But Tom Steyer shows up at 3%. Wow.

And the reason, my, like my little model that I've built likes Tom Steyer's potential because of all the money and the idea that you could hire a lot of really good campaign people. And he has not shown it yet, but this is the first time he's showing up at it anywhere near 3%. So it does seem like he's doing something. Has he qualified for the next debate?

Not yet, but I think he is a good chance of getting there. Buttigieg is at 8. Wow. I'll give you Kamala Harris at 11 and Joe Biden at 28. Pretty much stable. Harris was actually up from 7 to 11. Biden from 27 to 28. Here's the two big things, though.

About two thirds of the, a little bit over half of the supporters for Sanders and Warren flipped. So Sanders went from 16 to 9%. Warren went from 7 to 19. Wow. So people are choosing between Warren and Sanders. Seven to 19? Yeah, Warren now second place behind Biden at 28 in Iowa.

That's good. They're going after the female communist. Wow. If you're going to pick a communist, she's the better one, probably. Yeah, probably. Although she is, I mean, how she could beat Donald Trump is beyond me. Lab grown to lose, said Donald Trump. You're listening to Glenn Beck.