How to Utterly Obliterate the DC Monopoly With Article V

May 26, 2017

WRITER

Former Senator Tom Coburn (R-OK) joined The Glenn Beck Program on Friday to discuss his new book Smashing the DC Monopoly. Although the Constitution established a framework for limited federal power and expansive personal freedoms, self-interested politicians and activist court rulings have seriously imbalanced the system. Coburn's book argues for an Article V amendments convention as the best solution to limit the power and scope of the federal government.

"The big problem in our country is chaos," Glenn said Friday on radio before introducing former Senator Coburn. "The reason why so much of this is happening is because we have violated the Bill of Rights, we have so weakened our Constitution [that] the balance of power is broken."

The Constitution's Framers anticipated a time when self-interested officials would be unwilling or unable to act in the people's long-term interest. So they included the safety feature of Article V that allows the people to propose amendments to the Constitution through the actions of their state legislatures.

Coburn writes in Smashing the DC Monopoly a statement made by patriot William Barton about Article V:

This clause ought to be written in letters of gold. We ought to observe the excellencies of the Constitution. There's a fair opportunity for amendments provided by the states, but this clause should be written in letters of gold.

"Glenn, I think our country's unsettled, and people know something's wrong," Sen. Coburn said.

Smashing the DC Monopoly hits bookstores everywhere May 30, 2017.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Senator Coburn has written a book smashing the DC monopoly. The title tells you everything you need to know. Using Article V to stop freedom and to stop a run away government. Welcome to Dr. Tom coal better than, a former U.S. senator. Hi, Tom.

TOM: Hey, Glenn.

GLENN: I found your book fascinating, and let me take you to a couple of places. I'm going to start at the beginning of the book. I'm going to take you to William Barton. Tell the story of William Barton.

TOM: Actually, there were three people involved in this. One was colonel George Mason who actually raised the first issue associated with ever knowing was there ever a country that voluntarily gave power back to its citizens. And what do they did or did not. So that started the conversation with Barton and bringing forth Article V, the subsection that we talk about. There's a lot of stories about Barton in the history. But his leadership in terms of this issue and restoring our freedom.

GLENN: Well, he said, you wrote in the book, he said, "This clause ought to be written in letters of gold. We ought to observe the excellencies of the constitution. There's a fair opportunity for amendments provided by the states. But this clause should be written in letters of gold."

TOM: Well, that's right and the reason that clause is there is because right now where we found ourselves, that's the only solution that's big enough for the problem in front of us.

GLENN: So would you agree with me that the chaos that we are feeling right now -- because I think we're having a crisis of chaos. I think that the only time that people reach out for somebody who will make it stop, you know, more of an authoritarian progressive kind of player, is when they are afraid, and I don't think they're afraid of ISIS or war as much as they're afraid of the loss of the western way of life. And I think --

TOM: Glenn, I think our country's unsettled. And people know something's wrong.

GLENN: And would you agree that something's wrong, the problem comes from the fact that we haven't adhered to the constitution, so we're rutterless.

TOM: Not only have we not adhered to it, we've had Supreme Court to change its meaning to where we no longer have the structure that would allow us to maintain the freedom and the opportunity to fix ourselves, to set ourselves right. You know, what we're seeing today is people talking about the problems we have. A recent poll I think said 84 percent of Americans don't trust the Federal Government. Rightly so. Why would you? There's a million dollars of debt per family out there; right?

So how do they pay that off? For the millennials, there's 1.7 million unfunded liability, not counting the debt.

GLENN: I don't think that's a bad number that 84 percent of people distrust the government. I think you go back to George Washington's time, I'll bet you that number was in the 90s if they had taken polls. George Washington said you shouldn't trust government. Treat it as fire.

TOM: But they're also saying is we don't think it works anymore. As a matter of fact, the millennials don't know how it's supposed to work because the education has been so disruptive innocent teaching them, undermining the principles of our country that we're built upon.

So I don't worry that people don't trust the Federal Government. I worry the fact what that will lead to is no confidence in anything that comes out of there.

GLENN: Well, you have a problem now where 49 percent of conservative millennials, conservative millennials, 49 percent believe in freedom of speech but that the government should determine what that speech should be.

TOM: Yeah, and that's scary because we've had our hole in education establishment stolen in terms of freedom and the principles that built this country. And the Judeo principle Christians that allowed us to do that in the first place. So that's all been stolen. And so we've had mind-bending. Not that there are not a lot of young, great people out there. But they've been taught -- you know, it's not just for you to listen to a difference of opinion. Well, the only way you really grow intellectually is to listen to a difference of opinion and actually think about it. And now we have this whole generation that doesn't think you want to -- they want to go my hair's on fire, qua listen to you, even though you have sound reasoning and good logic in your discussions. That's a symptom, though, Glenn, of the problem. The problem is we've abandoned limited government. We've undermined personal responsibility, and we're suffering the consequences of it.

GLENN: You're writing the book about Samuel Jones, why Article V solution. Why it exists. Can you tell us a little bit about that story?

TOM: Well, Article V solution exists because it was forced to exist. As a matter of fact, it was the only thing in the constitutional convention that never had heavy faith. Now, most people don't realize if you look at Madison's notes, he did copious notes on the whole convention. And the only aspect of that convention that didn't have vigorous debate, vigorous hard, fighting debate before they came to agreement was Article V. And the very aspect that they would come around to allowing a restoration of principles. Actually, the history is that our founders knew that republics wouldn't live long. They knew.

So they came around to the idea that we have to put a way for us that at least put a salvage echo in there.

GLENN: Tom, I sure appreciate your taking on this topic and explaining it to the American people. "Smashing the DC Monopoly: Using Article V to Restore Freedom and Stop Runaway Government". It's available in bookstores everywhere. It has -- it has tremendous history, including a story about Jefferson Davis. After the war, Jefferson Davis said we should have just used Article V. It led to too much bloodshed. If we used Article V, we wouldn't have had the civil war.

TOM: They almost did, Glenn. They almost did.

GLENN: Yeah. Smashing the DC monopoly and if you can, get involved in the Article V movement in your state. It is -- it just passed in Texas, and it's starting to gain momentum, and it's critical. They'll never give themselves a limit on their power in congress. Never. You need to do it, and it needs to happen through convention of states to change the constitution and put a few things in there like -- I don't know you spend the money that you have. Not our children's money. Article V convention. And the name of the book, again, is smashing the DC monopoly by Tom coal better than. Tom, thank you very much. Appreciate it.

TOM: God bless.

GLENN: God bless.

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) recently delivered a lecture that should alarm every American. During a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, he argued that believing rights come from a Creator rather than government is the same belief held by Iran’s theocratic regime.

Kaine claimed that the principles underpinning Iran’s dictatorship — the same regime that persecutes Sunnis, Jews, Christians, and other minorities — are also the principles enshrined in our Declaration of Independence.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

That claim exposes either a profound misunderstanding or a reckless indifference to America’s founding. Rights do not come from government. They never did. They come from the Creator, as the Declaration of Independence proclaims without qualification. Jefferson didn’t hedge. Rights are unalienable — built into every human being.

This foundation stands worlds apart from Iran. Its leaders invoke God but grant rights only through clerical interpretation. Freedom of speech, property, religion, and even life itself depend on obedience to the ruling clerics. Step outside their dictates, and those so-called rights vanish.

This is not a trivial difference. It is the essence of liberty versus tyranny. In America, rights belong to the individual. The government’s role is to secure them, not define them. In Iran, rights serve the state. They empower rulers, not the people.

From Muhammad to Marx

The same confusion applies to Marxist regimes. The Soviet Union’s constitutions promised citizens rights — work, health care, education, freedom of speech — but always with fine print. If you spoke out against the party, those rights evaporated. If you practiced religion openly, you were charged with treason. Property and voting were allowed as long as they were filtered and controlled by the state — and could be revoked at any moment. Rights were conditional, granted through obedience.

Kaine seems to be advocating a similar approach — whether consciously or not. By claiming that natural rights are somehow comparable to sharia law, he ignores the critical distinction between inherent rights and conditional privileges. He dismisses the very principle that made America a beacon of freedom.

Jefferson and the founders understood this clearly. “We are endowed by our Creator with certain unalienable rights,” they wrote. No government, no cleric, no king can revoke them. They exist by virtue of humanity itself. The government exists to protect them, not ration them.

This is not a theological quibble. It is the entire basis of our government. Confuse the source of rights, and tyranny hides behind piety or ideology. The people are disempowered. Clerics, bureaucrats, or politicians become arbiters of what rights citizens may enjoy.

John Greim / Contributor | Getty Images

Gifts from God, not the state

Kaine’s statement reflects either a profound ignorance of this principle or an ideological bias that favors state power over individual liberty. Either way, Americans must recognize the danger. Understanding the origin of rights is not academic — it is the difference between freedom and submission, between the American experiment and theocratic or totalitarian rule.

Rights are not gifts from the state. They are gifts from God, secured by reason, protected by law, and defended by the people. Every American must understand this. Because when rights come from government instead of the Creator, freedom disappears.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

A recent poll conducted by Justin Haskins, a long-time friend of the show, has uncovered alarming trends among young Americans aged 18-39, revealing a generation grappling with deep frustrations over economic hardships, housing affordability, and a perceived rigged system that favors the wealthy, corporations, and older generations. While nearly half of these likely voters approve of President Trump, seeing him as an anti-establishment figure, over 70% support nationalizing major industries, such as healthcare, energy, and big tech, to promote "equity." Shockingly, 53% want a democratic socialist to win the 2028 presidential election, including a third of Trump voters and conservatives in this age group. Many cite skyrocketing housing costs, unfair taxation on the middle class, and a sense of being "stuck" or in crisis as driving forces, with 62% believing the economy is tilted against them and 55% backing laws to confiscate "excess wealth" like second homes or luxury items to help first-time buyers.

This blend of Trump support and socialist leanings suggests a volatile mix: admiration for disruptors who challenge the status quo, coupled with a desire for radical redistribution to address personal struggles. Yet, it raises profound questions about the roots of this discontent—Is it a failure of education on history's lessons about socialism's failures? Media indoctrination? Or genuine systemic barriers? And what does it portend for the nation’s trajectory—greater division, a shift toward authoritarian policies, or an opportunity for renewal through timeless values like hard work and individual responsibility?

Glenn wants to know what YOU think: Where do Gen Z's socialist sympathies come from? What does it mean for the future of America? Make your voice heard in the poll below:

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?

Americans expose Supreme Court’s flag ruling as a failed relic

Anna Moneymaker / Staff | Getty Images

In a nation where the Stars and Stripes symbolize the blood-soaked sacrifices of our heroes, President Trump's executive order to crack down on flag desecration amid violent protests has ignited fierce debate. But in a recent poll, Glenn asked the tough question: Can Trump protect the Flag without TRAMPLING free speech? Glenn asked, and you answered—thousands weighed in on this pressing clash between free speech and sacred symbols.

The results paint a picture of resounding distrust toward institutional leniency. A staggering 85% of respondents support banning the burning of American flags when it incites violence or disturbs the peace, a bold rejection of the chaos we've seen from George Floyd riots to pro-Palestinian torchings. Meanwhile, 90% insist that protections for burning other flags—like Pride or foreign banners—should not be treated the same as Old Glory under the First Amendment, exposing the hypocrisy in equating our nation's emblem with fleeting symbols. And 82% believe the Supreme Court's Texas v. Johnson ruling, shielding flag burning as "symbolic speech," should not stand without revision—can the official story survive such resounding doubt from everyday Americans weary of government inaction?

Your verdict sends a thunderous message: In this divided era, the flag demands defense against those who exploit freedoms to sow disorder, without trampling the liberties it represents. It's a catastrophic failure of the establishment to ignore this groundswell.

Want to make your voice heard? Check out more polls HERE.

Labor Day EXPOSED: The Marxist roots you weren’t told about

JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

During your time off this holiday, remember the man who started it: Peter J. McGuire, a racist Marxist who co-founded America’s first socialist party.

Labor Day didn’t begin as a noble tribute to American workers. It began as a negotiation with ideological terrorists.

In the late 1800s, factory and mine conditions were brutal. Workers endured 12-to-15-hour days, often seven days a week, in filthy, dangerous environments. Wages were low, injuries went uncompensated, and benefits didn’t exist. Out of desperation, Americans turned to labor unions. Basic protections had to be fought for because none were guaranteed.

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

That era marked a seismic shift — much like today. The Industrial Revolution, like our current digital and political upheaval, left millions behind. And wherever people get left behind, Marxists see an opening.

A revolutionary wedge

This was Marxism’s moment.

Economic suffering created fertile ground for revolutionary agitation. Marxists, socialists, and anarchists stepped in to stoke class resentment. Their goal was to turn the downtrodden into a revolutionary class, tear down the existing system, and redistribute wealth by force.

Among the most influential agitators was Peter J. McGuire, a devout Irish Marxist from New York. In 1874, he co-founded the Social Democratic Workingmens Party of North America, the first Marxist political party in the United States. He was also a vice president of the American Federation of Labor, which would become the most powerful union in America.

McGuire’s mission wasn’t hidden. He wanted to transform the U.S. into a socialist nation through labor unions.

That mission soon found a useful symbol.

In the 1880s, labor leaders in Toronto invited McGuire to attend their annual labor festival. Inspired, he returned to New York and launched a similar parade on Sept. 5 — chosen because it fell halfway between Independence Day and Thanksgiving.

The first parade drew over 30,000 marchers who skipped work to hear speeches about eight-hour workdays and the alleged promise of Marxism. The parade caught on across the country.

Negotiating with radicals

By 1894, Labor Day had been adopted by 30 states. But the federal government had yet to make it a national holiday. A major strike changed everything.

In Pullman, Illinois, home of the Pullman railroad car company, tensions exploded. The economy tanked. George Pullman laid off hundreds of workers and slashed wages for those who remained — yet refused to lower the rent on company-owned homes.

That injustice opened the door for Marxist agitators to mobilize.

Sympathetic railroad workers joined the strike. Riots broke out. Hundreds of railcars were torched. Mail service was disrupted. The nation’s rail system ground to a halt.

President Grover Cleveland — under pressure in a midterm election year — panicked. He sent 12,000 federal troops to Chicago. Two strikers were killed in the resulting clashes.

With the crisis spiraling and Democrats desperate to avoid political fallout, Cleveland struck a deal. Within six days of breaking the strike, Congress rushed through legislation making Labor Day a federal holiday.

It was the first of many concessions Democrats would make to organized labor in exchange for political power.

What we really celebrated

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

Kean Collection / Staff | Getty Images

What we celebrated was a Canadian idea, brought to America by the founder of the American Socialist Party, endorsed by racially exclusionary unions, and made law by a president and Congress eager to save face.

It was the first of many bones thrown by the Democratic Party to union power brokers. And it marked the beginning of a long, costly compromise with ideologues who wanted to dismantle the American way of life — from the inside out.

This article originally appeared on TheBlaze.com.

Glenn's Show Prep

How to Utterly Obliterate the DC Monopoly With Article V

The dangerous lie: Rights as government privileges, not God-given

When politicians claim that rights flow from the state, they pave the way for tyranny.

In America, rights belong to the individual. In Iran, rights serve the state.

From Muhammad to Marx

Gifts from God, not the state

POLL: Is Gen Z’s anger over housing driving them toward socialism?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism comes from perceived economic frustrations like unaffordable housing and a rigged system favoring the wealthy and corporations?

Do you believe the Gen Z support for socialism, including many Trump supporters, is due to a lack of education about the historical failures of socialist systems?

Do you think that these poll results indicate a growing generational divide that could lead to more political instability and authoritarian tendencies in America's future?

Do you think that this poll implies that America's long-term stability relies on older generations teaching Gen Z and younger to prioritize self-reliance, free-market ideals, and personal accountability?

Do you think the Gen Z support for Trump is an opportunity for conservatives to win them over with anti-establishment reforms that preserve liberty?

Americans expose Supreme Court’s flag ruling as a failed relic

Labor Day EXPOSED: The Marxist roots you weren’t told about

During your time off this holiday, remember the man who started it: Peter J. McGuire, a racist Marxist who co-founded America’s first socialist party.

Labor Day wasn’t born out of gratitude. It was a political payoff to Marxist radicals who set trains ablaze and threatened national stability.

A revolutionary wedge

Negotiating with radicals

What we really celebrated