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

Politicians need to stop treating Washington like 'Game of Thrones'

April 08, 2015
Wilson

Writer

Bush. Clinton. Bush. Clinton? Bush? The presidency has pretty much become a crown to be passed and forth between these two political families. Political dynasties have been created, and the establishment is fresh out of new ideas. Thankfully, there are still candidates who stand for something. People like Ted Cruz and Rand Paul, who have already announced their candidacies. Heck, even Elizabeth Warren stands for something - even if it's scary, scary big government. It's time to stop looking for an establishment candidate to keep doing the same old thing in D.C. and start looking to the candidates who stand for something real.

The second Republican now to throw their hat into the ring for 2016 is not really a Republican. One that I can support, it’s Sen. Rand Paul from Kentucky.

He announced at the Galt House in Louisville. In a not-so-subtle hint at what the campaign is going to be all about, he laid down the gauntlet. The man understands liberty. Set on the backdrop of a government bent on squeezing every last drop of liberty out of you, the American people, Sen. Paul hammered away at the excessive government and presented the path to real freedom in a clear and I think accessible way.

This is a very different politician, one that I think will speak to the young people in America. The rise of this type of candidate is long overdue. We’ve lived the Game of Thrones long enough. Honestly, if the establishment had their way, it will be a Jeb Bush versus Hillary Clinton election. I’ve talked to so many people who have said—in fact, I talked to a congressman today who said I will for the first time in my life skip the voting booth if that is the choice.

If you’re under 40, this choice would basically mean you don’t know what life without a Bush or a Clinton in office is today, and if either Jeb or Hillary actually win in 2016 and complete two terms, the US would have had a Bush or a Clinton in the White House for 36 of the previous 44 years, and that’s not counting Hillary Clinton as Secretary of State.

Think of that. You’ll be 44. You’ll have no memory of a Bush or Clinton not being in the White House. That is a track record that Robert Mugabe would be jealous of, and it would continue for many more years to come because there is always the ever-so-yummy possibility of Chelsea running for office or one of the other Bushes. After all, Jeb’s son, George P. Bush, is one that everybody in the establishment is so excited about. He just won an election for land commissioner in Texas.

Without fail, the establishment plays the electability card against the Game of Thrones. They tell you your guy can’t win. They tell you ignore your values and vote for their guy because if you vote for their guy, whether it’s Jeb Bush or Hillary Clinton, it’s the only way you’re going to win. You can’t afford to have that other candidate in office, you know?

Both the Republicans and the Democrats fall for it every single time. How’s that working out for us? How is it having a progressive light Republican? But Glenn, we have to appeal to more people. Ted Cruz, Rand Paul, they’re too extreme. Really?

Is it just me that has noticed the Democrats have elected the most liberal senator in the history of Congress? Why is it we have to compromise on what we believe? A real question, if not now, when? And why not now? Why not now?

We have the winning message—freedom, liberty, charting your own course, keeping what you earn, unleashing the American dream, attacking the government waste and the Game of Thrones political machine that has been created. This is what Rand Paul was talking about today. Stand on those, and I’m telling you right now you’ll be standing in victory.

The establishment, the media, they want you to believe people like Sen. Paul cannot win. We saw the reaction when Ted Cruz announced. Look at the reaction today with Rand Paul. First headline, “Why Rand Paul Probably Can’t Win Republican Nomination.” “Can Libertarian-Leaning Rand Paul Really Win the GOP Nomination?” “Rand Paul is Losing His Father’s Base.” Really?

I don’t know if he can win or not. I really don’t know, but are we not going to try to elect somebody who believes in the Constitution and liberty and is not part of the establishment? It is hard to imagine the message of the Tea Party, the message of freedom, not resonating with people of all ages if you have the right banner carrier. I don’t know who the right banner carrier is. I have my personal preferences, but I’ll take any of these liberty candidates, any of them.

He has challenged every aspect of entrenched Washington politics. Watch a little bit from the speech today.

VIDEO

Sen. Paul: Congress will never balance the budget unless you force them to do so. Congress has an abysmal record with balancing anything. Our only recourse is to force Congress to balance the budget with a constitutional amendment. I ran for office because we have too many career politicians. I believe it now more than ever. We limit the president to two terms. It’s about time we limit the terms of Congress.

You know, it’s amazing. What’s really amazing to me, as I am watching this on our monitor down here, I have all of the other networks on monitors that I can view in case there’s breaking news or anything. As I’m hearing Rand Paul talk about this, what is the lead story on FOX News this hour? The lead story with FOX News this hour was John McCain is going to run again for Senate in 2016.

Which one is the message that America needs? Yes, America was never meant to have career politicians. Rand Paul is a doctor. He spoke about it, and I love this. I stand with him. I absolutely believe this is one way to attack the entrenched politicians, stopping the leeches who suck the life out of every newbie that enters office in DC.

He also proposed a read-the-bill law. How this hasn’t passed already is beyond me. Every day Congress has to read, should read, supposed to read, but never does, the 1,000-page bills they propose. To revive the economy and struggling sectors like manufacturing, he said today he would dramatically lower the tax on American companies that keep profits here and not overseas. And here’s why I believe we have an opportunity to crush the failed progressive ideas. Look how he attacked education.

VIDEO

Sen. Paul: Those of us who have enjoyed the American dream must break down the wall that separates us from the other America. I want all our children to have the same opportunities that I had. We need to stop limiting kids in poor neighborhoods to failing public schools and offer them school choice. It won’t happen though unless we realize that we can’t borrow our way to prosperity. Currently, some $3 trillion comes into the US Treasury. Couldn’t the country just survive on $3 trillion? I propose we do something extraordinary—let’s just spend what comes in.

That is the way to frame both of those issues. In truth, poor kids are stuck in the worst failing schools. I lived in New York City. Democrats in New York City are clamoring for someone to give them choice. How about we give them an escape hatch? And what a great simple message, what do you say we just spend what we have and not a dime more? It’s pretty impossible to argue with that. Believe me, the Jeb Bushes of the world will.

He tackled the unconstitutional spying program.

VIDEO

Sen. Paul: Warrantless searches of America’s phones and computer records are un-American and a threat to our civil liberties. I say that your phone records are yours. I say the phone records of law-abiding citizens are none of their damn business. Is this where we light up the phones?

The president created this vast dragnet by Executive Order, and as president, on day one, I will immediately end this unconstitutional surveillance.

I will tell you that you know I’m a fan of Ted Cruz, but this is a speech that made me get up off the couch. I was cheering for this speech. I think this is one of the better speeches I’ve heard any politician give in a very long time.

Even what people say is Rand Paul’s weakest area, foreign policy, he took it straight on and tackled it. Watch.

VIDEO

Sen. Paul: The enemy is radical Islam. You can’t get around it. And not only will I name the enemy, I will do whatever it takes to defend America from these haters of mankind. We must realize though that we do not project strength by borrowing money from China to send it to Pakistan. Let’s quit building bridges in foreign countries and use that money to build some bridges here at home.

It angers me to see mobs burning our flag and chanting “death to America” in countries that receive millions of dollars in our foreign aid. I say it must end. I say not one penny more to these haters of America.

How do you argue with that? I don’t know. What is the left going to do with what is essentially an antiwar candidate? They’re going to say that he’s an isolationist, etc., etc. I’ve got questions on how he would fight ISIS and how he would fight the war, but I agree with all that. I don’t think he’s an isolationist. I hope he’s not.

I said it was a really good day when Ted Cruz announced he was running for president, and I say again today is a really good day as well. I have questions for Sen. Rand Paul just like I do for Ted Cruz, Scott Walker, and Marco Rubio. Here is who I don’t have any questions for: Jeb Bush. I know exactly who he is. I know who the establishment is, where they have taken us, and where they would continue to take us. No, thank you.

What do you say we don’t eat the liberty-minded politicians, we stand by and behind those for the Constitution, and we eat the progressive establishment candidates instead? Enough of Lindsey Graham. Enough of the Bushes. Enough is enough. I for one am looking forward to this Game of Thrones and replacing the establishment GOP.

And one other thing, I had a meeting today with all of the writers on TheBlaze to start outlaying our strategy for what our election coverage is going to be here at TheBlaze. I said we have to be the people that ask, “Why not? Why not?” I don’t really care if we’re not on the plane with Jeb Bush. I don’t really care. If he’s the establishment, if he’s the guy, go get your new someplace else because we’re going to be talking about something else, because I know exactly what will happen if that guy is elected. I’m not interested.

I do want to be on the plane with Ted Cruz. I do want to be on the plane with Rand Paul. I do want to be on the plane with Marco Rubio. I do want to be on the plane with Scott Walker, although I will tell you something is not right with Scott Walker. This again is just me, but something is not right with Scott Walker.

Either he is avoiding me, he’s avoiding this audience because he doesn’t want to be seen with you, or his staff is out-of-control incompetent. We have been trying to get an interview with him for what, almost two months. For some reason, we can’t get a single interview with him. That is highly unusual for somebody who is offering 15 minutes or an hour of time for a media empire that has a footprint of 50 million people.

Something is not right with Scott Walker. I don’t know what it is. We’ll follow the story. In the meantime, let’s all stand together with those who will stand by the Constitution. Let’s stand arm in arm. I’ll take anybody who will defend the Constitution over yet another Bush or Chris Christie in office.

Featured image courtesy of the AP

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?