Blog
LatestArticlesVideos
Radio
LivePodcastSerialsStations
TV
Podcasts
The Glenn Beck ProgramThe Glenn Beck PodcastThe Beck Story
Fine Art
Real Estate
More
AboutCharityBooksSponsorsShopContact
SEARCH
Live Radio

©2024 MERCURY RADIO ARTS.
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

TERMS OF USE | PRIVACY POLICY

Live

Glenn's Show Prep

David Barton talks "We are all Catholics" movement

February 16, 2012
Wilson

Writer

On radio this morning, David Barton called into the show to talk to Stu and Pat about the recent attacks on religious freedom being perpetuated by the Obama administration. Barton discussed Harry Reid's tactics to keep the Blunt Conscience Protection Amendment out of the latest legislation, as well as the effect that Beck fans have had in helping push back against the attacks on faith.

Read the rush transcript of the interview below:

PAT: 1‑888‑727‑BECK. Pat and Stu for Glenn who is doing something pretty big now and he'll have all the details for you Monday. In the meantime, we have David Barton on the line. David, welcome to the Glenn Beck Program.

BARTON: Hey, guys. Thanks for having me. Good to be with you.

PAT: You've been following pretty closely, I think, this whole development about the attack against faith and conscience and the Catholic church. What's ‑‑ what's the latest that you have about what's going on with this and how this supposed compromise is going down?

BARTON: Yeah. What happened is, of course, yesterday Glenn talked about it a good bit and I will tell you, it had a big impact, no question about it. I talked to senators in DC and their phones were lit up. Actually folks had trouble calling through the switchboard number because there was so much coming in.

PAT: Good.

BARTON: And so that's really good news. People responded. They made their voice heard and they did so in such a way that actually caused Senator Reid to take a different course of tactics. It looked like yesterday or the day before Senator Reid was going to allow the Blunt Conscience Protection Bill to come up and, you know, the things folks have got to understand on this thing is this is not about the Catholic church, it is not about contraception, it is not about abortion. This is conscience protection for everybody.

PAT: Right.

BARTON: And this has been going on with this administration for three and a half years. I can go through a litany of what they've been doing, but most recently it's the Catholic church. So, Blunt's got this bill. It was coming up yesterday. All these calls were coming there and then the White House and the press secretary jumps out and says, No way, Obama is not backing off this, he's sticking right with it, and they're getting inundated with calls. So, then here comes Reid and he says, Okay, I'm going to take this amendment off. You're not going to be able to vote.

And the way they do that in the Senate ‑‑ you really can't kill an amendment in the Senate. You have to let amendments go through. In the House you can kill amendments. You run it through the rules committee and no amendment is allowed to come to the floor of the House unless the rules committee approves it. In the Senate you can bring an amendment to the floor, you know, any time you want to if you can get through the procedure.

So, what ‑‑ and I hate to sound complicated, but here's what Reid did. He filled it up with what's called perfecting amendments. In other words, every slot that was left, he said, I've got an amendment and he just started loading it up with his own amendments so that there was no time left for any other amendment. He just filled it up with everything he can think of.

PAT: Wow.

BARTON: He's basically taken over all the time and what it means as a result is that they're going to have to have a cloture vote on all of his amendments that have come up. They'll probably do that Friday. So, unless ‑‑

PAT: So, it didn't happen yesterday, in other words?

BARTON: It did not happen. And if they can get 60 votes on Friday, then it's not going to happen, they've killed Blunt's Conscience Protection. I don't think they can get 60 votes. There's too many Republicans on this thing and some Democrats, as well, which probably means after Friday Reid's plan will go down. So, right now if things go as we think it will go, probably the week of February 27th Blunt's amendment will come back up on Conscience Protection.

So, it really worked yesterday. Lots of pressure put Reid in a tough spot and rather than backing off, he's bowed up his back and said, You're not going to tell me what to do and so he's taking over all the time on the floor from now through the end of the week, essentially.

STU: I will say, David, if he did say that, he said it a lot more boring than you sounded. He never sounds that excited. You can go to glennbeck.com, by the way, and get all the details on who to call and the numbers and everything else. You go there now and see We're All Catholics that Glenn's been talking about the last couple of days and it's huge.

By the way, I was looking through one of these polls that came out about this issue, David, and, you know, I thought this was a key ‑‑ a key thing that no one's really talked about which is, you know, Catholics have obviously, you think, would be the most ‑‑ most ‑‑ most offended and I think every faith has to be offended because this is such an overstep by the Federal Government, but when you look at ‑‑ the question was asked was the question brought up by the clergy at church. Now, there was a letter that was supposed to be read in every church or at least almost every church; is that right?

BARTON: Well, in Catholic churches, Catholic churches came out with a letter to be read and you probably know the military side because Catholic military chaplains would read it, as well, and the Obama administration Department of Defense folks stepped in and said, wait a minute, we've got to edit that letter before you read it and they actually marked out parts of the pastoral letter for military chaplains to read which is another conscience violation.

STU: Yeah, but this is supposed to go ‑‑

BARTON: The government doesn't get to mark out what you say. There was a letter to be read and that's what ‑‑ that's what all Catholics were to read to their congregations on that Sunday.

STU: It was supposed to go to all congregations, but listen to this stat from the polls. Was it brought up by clergy at church? Among Catholics that attend church weekly, only 32% say "yes."

PAT: Wow.

STU: And that is a major problem. No wonder there's not this revolt. No wonder the Obama administration beliefs they can get away with it. If only 32% of people are hearing about this that are going to church every week in the Catholic church, they're just depending on people not knowing about the issue.

BARTON: And that's where, you know, what Glenn's got going, we're all Catholics now is ‑‑ well, that's just that population. There's a bunch of us, millions that know about it now that aren't necessarily in the Catholic church and we're making our voice heard. So, if they counted on it being a Catholic only issue and being silenced because only 32% heard, that didn't work out. Now millions and millions know about it and this thing really has taken off. There's been a whole coalition of groups and folks that have made this a huge issue as Glenn has and so if that's what the administration counted on, it backfired.

PAT: So, David, what do we do? Do we continue to call senators?

BARTON: Well, this is ‑‑ I've got to be careful how I say this, but this is one of the problems with conservatives. We tend to get riled up and get inspired to do something and we don't tend to stay in there very long.

PAT: Right. Yeah.

BARTON: And so, you know, he all got riled up yesterday. We shut the switchboards down. We let the senators know what we think and they're counting on us not really staying on this thing until the 27th of February or whenever they bring this up. So, they try to outlast us, they try to wear us down, and then we'll all get discouraged and say it doesn't matter because they all do the same thing and so what we've got to do is we've got to keep the pressure on and the heat on and we've got to call the senators and say, I'm outraged that you wouldn't let your leader get away with killing all the amendments. What happened to free speech and ‑‑ you know, whatever it takes for us to express. We cannot go away on this thing until we win this and, you know, the House will come up later in the year, but the Senate is up right now. We didn't think the Senate would be up until much later in the year, but this is a ‑‑ I really think that when they started this, they hoped to do it real quick, before pressure got put on. They got so much pressure yesterday that they said, whoops, let's back off. So, we're really driving them right now, but we just can't let them outlast us or outwait us. We've got to keep the pressure on.

PAT: So, we need longer attention spans this time?

BARTON: Exactly right. We don't need to microwave mentality on this thing. We're here to say.

PAT: Yeah. Keep the pressure on. All right. And you can go to glennbeck.com and find out how to get a hold of your senator and by the way, you have two of them. If you don't know them, that's probably a problem at this point. Probably a problem, but ‑‑

STU: Would you say?

PAT: Yeah. Not that hard to find out. David, thanks a lot. Appreciate all you do.

BARTON: Thanks, guys. Thanks for all you're doing.

PAT: All right. David Barton. You know, it's nice that it had an impact yesterday, but like David said, we've got to keep it up.

STU: Yeah.

PAT: We have to keep going.

STU: It's all about diligence.

POLL: What topics do YOU want Trump and Harris to debate?

Montinique Monroe / Stringer, Win McNamee / Staff | Getty Images

Does Kamala Harris stand a chance against Donald Trump in a debate?

Next week, during the second presidential debate, we will find out. The debate is scheduled for September 10th and will be hosted by ABC anchors David Muir and Linsey Davis. This will be the second presidential debate, but the first for VP Kamala Harris, and will feature the same rules as the first debate. The rules are: no notes, no chairs, no live audience, and the debater's microphone will only be turned on when it is his or her turn to speak.

This will be the first time Trump and Harris clash face-to-face, and the outcome could have a massive effect on the outcome of the election. Trump has been preparing by ramping up his campaign schedule. He plans to hold multiple rallies and speak at several events across the next several days. He wants to be prepared to face any question that might come his way, and meeting and interacting with both voters and the press seems to be Trump's preferred preparation approach.

With the multitude of issues plaguing our nation, there are a lot of potential topics that could be brought up. From the economy to the ongoing "lawfare" being waged against the former president, what topics do YOU want Harris and Trump to debate?

The economy (and why the Biden-Harris administration hasn't fixed it yet)

The Southern Border crisis (and Kamala's performance as border czar)

Climate change (and how Trump pulled out of the Paris Agreement)

The "lawfare" being waged against Trump (and what Trump would do if he were thrown in prison) 

Voting and election security (and how to deal with the possibility that illegal immigrants are voting)

3 ways the Constitution foils progressive authoritarianism

ANDREW CABALLERO-REYNOLDS / Contributor, Kevin Dietsch / Staff, Pool / Pool | Getty Images

This is why it is important to understand our history.

Over the weekend, the New York Times published a controversial article claiming the Constitution is a danger to the country and a threat to democracy. To those who have taken a high school American government class or have followed Glenn for a while, this claim might seem incongruent with reality. That's because Jennifer Szalai, the author the piece, isn't thinking of the Constitution as it was intended to be—a restraint on government to protect individual rights—but instead as a roadblock that is hindering the installation of a progressive oligarchy.

Glenn recently covered this unbelievable article during his show and revealed the telling critiques Szalai made of our founding document. She called it an "anti-democratic" document and argued it is flawed because Donald Trump used it to become president (sort of like how every other president achieved their office). From here, Szalai went off the deep end and made some suggestions to "fix" the Constitution, including breaking California and other blue states away from the union to create a coastal progressive utopia.

Here are three of the "flaws" Szalai pointed out in the Constitution that interfere with the Left's authoritarian dreams:

1. The Electoral College

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

The New York Times article brought up the fact that in 2016 President Trump lost the popular vote but won the Electoral College, and thus won the election. This, as Szalai pointed out, is not democratic. Strictly speaking, she is right. But as Glenn has pointed out time and time again, America is not a democracy! The Founding Fathers did not want the president to be decided by a simple majority of 51 percent of the population. The Electoral College is designed to provide minority groups with a voice, giving them a say in the presidential election. Without the Electoral College, a simple majority would dominate elections and America would fall under the tyranny of the masses.

2. The Supreme Court

OLIVIER DOULIERY / Contributor | Getty Images

President Biden and other progressives have thrown around the idea of reforming the Supreme Court simply because it has made a few rulings they disagree with. Glenn points out that when a country decides to start monkeying around with their high courts, it is usually a sign they are becoming a banana republic. Szalai complained that Trump was allowed to appoint three justices. Two of them were confirmed by senators representing just 44 percent of the population, and they overturned Roe v. Wade. All of this is Constitutional by Szalai's admission, and because she disagreed with it, she argued the whole document should be scrapped.

3. Republicanism

Chip Somodevilla / Staff | Getty Images

To clarify, were not talking about the Republican Party Republicanism, but instead the form of government made up of a collection of elected representatives who govern on the behalf of their constituents. This seems to be a repeat sticking point for liberals, who insist conservatives and Donald Trump are out to destroy "democracy" (a system of government that never existed in America). This mix-up explains Szalai's nonsensical interpretation of how the Constitution functions. She criticized the Constitution as "anti-democratic" and a threat to American democracy. If the Constitution is the nation's framework, and if it is "anti-democratic" then how is it a threat to American democracy? This paradox is easily avoided with the understanding that America isn't a democracy, and it never has been.

Kamala Harris' first interview as nominee: Three SHOCKING policy flips

Anadolu / Contributor | Getty Images

On Thursday, Kamala Harris gave her first interview since Joe Biden stepped down from the race, and it quickly becameclear why she waited so long.

Harris struggled to keep her story straight as CNN's Dana Bash questioned her about recent comments she had made that contradicted her previous policy statements. She kept on repeating that her "values haven't changed," but it is difficult to see how that can be true alongside her radical shift in policy. Either her values have changed or she is lying about her change in policy to win votes. You decide which seems more likely.

During the interview, Harris doubled down on her policy flip on fracking, the border, and even her use of the race card. Here are her top three flip-flops from the interview:

Fracking

Citizens of the Planet / Contributor | Getty Images

In 2019, during the 2020 presidential election, Harris pledged her full support behind a federal ban on fracking during a town hall event. But, during the DNC and again in this recent interview, Harris insisted that she is now opposed to the idea. The idea of banning fracking has been floated for a while now due to environmental concerns surrounding the controversial oil drilling method. Bans on fracking are opposed by many conservatives as it would greatly limit the production of oil in America, thus driving up gas prices across the nation. It seems Harris took this stance to win over moderates and to keep gas prices down, but who knows how she will behave once in office?

Border

PATRICK T. FALLON / Contributor | Getty Images

In her 2020 presidential bid, Harris was all for decriminalizing the border, but now she is singing a different tune. Harris claimed she is determined to secure the border—as if like she had always been a stalwart defender of the southern states. Despite this policy reversal, Harris claimed her values have not changed, which is hard to reconcile. The interviewer even offered Kamala a graceful out by suggesting she had learned more about the situation during her VP tenure, but Kamala insisted she had not changed.

Race

Tasos Katopodis / Stringer | Getty Images

When asked to respond to Trump's comments regarding the sudden emergence of Kamala's black ancestry Kamala simply answered "Same old tired playbook, next question" instead of jumping on the opportunity to play the race card as one might expect. While skipping the critical race theory lecture was refreshing, it came as a shock coming from the candidate representing the "everything is racist" party. Was this just a way to deflect the question back on Trump, or have the Democrats decided the race card isn't working anymore?

The REAL questions that CNN should ask Kamala tonight

KAMIL KRZACZYNSKI / Contributor | Getty Images

The Democrats don't want the American people to know who they are voting for. It has been well over a month since Biden dropped out of the presidential race and Kamala was hastily installed in his place. During that time, Kamala has not given a single interview.

The Democrats' intention is clear: they have spent the last month gaslighting the American left into believing that Kamala is their new "super-candidate." Now that they've taken the bait, they can allow Kamala to take a softball interview to combat accusations from the Right.

Kamala's first interview will be hosted by Dana Bash on CNN and is scheduled for 9:00 p.m. ET tonight. Kamala will be joined by her running mate, Tim Walz, for an unusual interview. Between the tag-team approach and the more-than-sympathetic interviewer, it's almost certain that this will not be a particularly substantial interview full of easy, soft-ball, questions.

The American people deserve to know who is on the ballot, and that means that they should be able to see how their candidates stand up against tough questions. Here are five questions that CNN should ask Kamala tonight:

Will she build a border wall?

SOPA Images / Contributor | Getty Images

After years of bashing Trump for his proposed border wall, Kamala has suddenly changed her mind. During the DNC, Kamala pledged to support a bill that included money for a border wall and other border security measures. This change seems like a knee-jerk response to recent criticisms made about her abysmal performance as the "border czar." The question is: how genuine is it?

What is her stance on the Israel-Hamas war?

BASHAR TALEB / Contributor | Getty Images

Kamala has been mushy on the issue of the Israel-Hamas war so far. She said that she would support Israel while simultaneously expressing sympathy for the Palestinians in Gaza. With mounting pro-Hamas support within the American left, just how far is Kamala willing to go?

How does she explain defending Biden against allegations that he was too old for office now that those allegations have proven true?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

For the last four years, Kamala and the entire mainstream media have vehemently defended President Biden's mental fitness, despite countless incidents that indicated otherwise. After Biden's senile performance at the June presidential debate, the truth couldn't be hidden any longer, and Kamala was quickly swapped into his place. Now that the cat's out of the bag, how does Kamala justify her lies to protect the incompetent president?

How does she plan on fixing the economy, and why hasn't she already done it?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

Kamala has claimed that she could lower consumer prices starting on the first day of her administration, accompanied by other promises to fix the economy. So why the wait? If she knows how to fix the economy that is causing so many Americans to suffer, can't she do something right now as the Vice President? Why has the economy only gotten worse within her three-year tenure in the White House?

Why does she keep flipping on her policies? Where does it stop?

Andrew Harnik / Staff | Getty Images

As mentioned above, Kamala has already changed her stance on a border wall, but it doesn't end there. During her 2019 presidential campaign, Kamala vowed to end fracking, a controversial method of drilling for oil, in the name of climate change. But now it seems her position has softened, with no mention of a fracking ban. Why does she keep changing her stance on these major policies? What other policies has she changed without any indication? Why has she so far failed to produce a clear campaign platform?