RADIOOctober 04, 2023

The ONE question Mark Levin wants YOU to ask after House ousted McCarthy as Speaker

The House of Representatives has ousted Rep. Kevin McCarthy as speaker. But was this move — supported by only 8 Republicans and every Democrat — a smart one? BlazeTV host Mark Levin holds nothing back as he joins Glenn to give his thoughts: "This is one of the dumbest ass wars I have ever seen." Levin explains his biggest disagreement with Rep. Matt Gaetz, who spearheaded the ousting: "If you're gonna blow up the House, blow it up for the right reason." And he urges Republicans who are happy about the ousting to remember one thing moving forward (which also happens to be the title of his newest book): "The Democrat Party HATES America."

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: My friend Mark Levin. How are you, sir?

MARK: I'm great. Thank you.

GLENN: What is your take on what happened yesterday in the House?

MARK: Well, I've been very outspoken about this, and a lot of people want to get behind Matt Gaetz. I'm not one of them.

So I guess I'm a neocon RINO sellout.

GLENN: Don't you hate this? Don't you hate this?

MARK: I will put it on my business card. Look, you and I spent decades fighting these wars. This is one of the dumbest ass wars I've ever seen. Why? You've got guys who claim to be conservative. One of them Nancy Mace, votes against McCarthy because he wouldn't put an abortion bill on the floor. He wouldn't put a gun control bill on the floor.

She's a complete head case. You have another guy, Andy Biggs, president of the state Senate in Arizona, who blocked Convention of States. He runs for Congress, he wins. He wants to replace us. And then Arizona becomes one of 20 states passing a resolution for Convention of States. That's where my head is. Convention of States. Then you have another guy. This guy from Tennessee. That nobody ever heard of before. Why is he mad?

Because he said, McCarthy criticized the coalition when he spoke of something. I'm like, I'm not a special pleader for McCarthy. And I'm not a special pleader for Gaetz. I call them as I see them.

And so he says what he says. You know why he voted for McCarthy?

Because he chaired a subcommittee. And he said, he worked really hard on this UFO issue. And he wanted to chair this committee on the UFOs. And Comber told him, he's not going to lie to him.

And he got very angry.

That's why he votes against McCarthy. Then we have Gaetz, who goes to the floor of the House. And I'm listening them very, very carefully. This is very important.

And he says, we didn't have regular order. He promised us 12 bills.

I had Thomas Massie on the show, who is a long-time Libertarian conservative. He's the best of the best.

GLENN: I love him.

MARK: He said, that's not what happened. You have to get these bills out of committee.

The Democrats were laddering up these things.

It was the conservatives who killed them in committee.

We couldn't get these bills to the floor. It has nothing to do with violating a promise or anything else.

And he said my show, you can't have it both ways. Regular order. Or whatever comes out of the committee, goes to the floor. And at the same time, we need to cut the budget.

He said, the Democrats were playing us.

And others. Voted against the committee, so it couldn't get to the floor.

So listening to him, and I said, well, then, what's this?

12 bill stuff that Gaetz -- he says, Gaetz knows this.

I said, okay. Then I listed myself. Gaetz say, we have a 33 trillion-dollar debt.

And I said, on the air, I don't remember Gaetz speaking up against all this COVID spending.

Massey, he never did. Not once.

I said, well, that was $3 trillion, right there. They wanted to spend $6 trillion.

Almost none of it went to, quote, unquote, COVID. Or the pandemic.

I'm telling you, that if you're going to blow up the House. Blow it up for the right reasons.

I worked for the administration. We shut the government down eight times. Exactly why we shut it down.

He wanted an MX missile system. He wouldn't give them to them. He wanted weapons in Europe. To defeat the Soviets. Which is what happened.

And he shouted at it, until he got it.

Very specific. This is -- we have a 33 trillion-dollar debt to debt. Let's burn down Washington.

Okay. Great. So what are they going to do in you?

GLENN: That was my question.

MARK: The budget now. They can't control it.

GLENN: I would love to -- you know, I'm not a fan of McCarthy. However, what is your plan now? You don't run away from something. You run towards something.

They weren't running toward anything. Who were they running to? Who was going to take it?

MARK: They ran towards the squad and Hakeem Jeffries. Behind the scenes, they were working with them, while complaining that McCarthy is working with -- I don't want any of them working with them, for anything.

Fifteen percent of the Democrats in the House are Marxists. They're outspoken, quote, unquote, democratic socialists.

Why the hell are you working with these progressive caucuses. And going to whatever, Jamala, whatever. Trying to coordinate with her. Why are you going to AOC, like you have a real love lust for the woman?

It's constant. And then you're raising money on it? And that's right -- sending -- putting together lists to run for governor.

Well, at least I'm not paid for by the special -- hey, bro.

You know the 20-point Republican preference.

You are referencing the Republican panhandle of Florida. And those are wonderful patriots.

They're never going to vote for Democrats. Then you have this guy from Montana, who ran for the Senate, and lost last time. And wants to run again.

And he says, he prayed for a very small Republican majority in the House. So he and the others would have -- wow, that's unconstitutional. So he runs the House of Representatives with the Democrats?

Let me tell you something. He made sure he won his election. But he didn't want enough people to come in, or we had a big majority.

You know, there's a lot of patriotic people, that lost in that midterm election. That many of us voted for.

Like here in northern Virginia.

He lost by 1 percent. In a purple, or actually more blue district.

Loughton County, Virginia, for God's sake. Am I glad he lost?

So Rosendale has more power?

This guy is from Montana. He has nothing to do with me.

And so you've got -- there's so many weird things going on.

And people need to scratch their heads and ask this.

Is Chip Roy a RINO? Is Byron Donalds a RINO? Is Jim Jordan? Is every other member of the Freedom Caucus, who voted against these guys, are they RINOs too?

No. There's a difference between anarchy and constitutional conservatism. Read your Constitution, folks.

There's no anarchy in there. There's no mobocracy. They oppose the mobocracy.

They oppose the central government. You know this.

They set up a complex government system.

Our only hope is the House of Representatives. With a tiny majority.

That Senate Republicans have sold us out.

Here's the bottom line. That man is still as they proposed. It was negotiated by Chip Roy and Byron Donalds.

With Ted Cruz and other conservative Republicans in the Senate.

The plan was that this would pass.
The greatest cut in a short-term CR, probably in American history. Certainly in our lifetime.

30 percent protecting the Defense Department. The Border Patrol. And veterans.

That was it. So that would affect the FBI. It would affect the Department of Justice.

It would affect all this stuff.

And it was negotiated by the conservatives. Got it to the Senate.

So we have some leverage over Mitch McConnell.

Who is a real SOB. That guy.

Every time. Five of them chosen. They said, in. Shut the government down. They said, shut it down.

This is better. We won't know what we will get if we shut it down.

Do this. We have the support. We have negotiated with the RINOs and everything else.

Let's do it. And they kill it.

That's why I've had it with these people. And people shouldn't just follow them.

They're doing nothing. Zero.

And I'll tell you one other thing. I would not negotiate with Hakeem Jeffries, and these democratic Marxists in the squad, and all the rest of them.

If you put a gun to my head. These people are destroying my country, at every turn.

They are the enemy.

Not adversaries. They are the enemy. And you're cutting deals with them.

And then you're sending, you're the true believer. You're cutting deals with the democratic majority?

And now we're going to have a bigger, bloated budget?

The border will remain open, because part of that bill they opposed, had the strictest restrictions on the border, ever cashed by the House of Representatives.

I read it, it's unbelievable. Would it pass the Senate?

Well, I don't control the Senate.

Well, it would give us something to negotiate with.

Look at the house. Look at what they passed, Mr. McConnell. We have to do something about this. Now they have nothing.

Zero.

And so I would ask people who are defending and promoting these people.

Do you know who they are?

How do you know the guy from Tennessee?

How many of you know a guy from Montana?

How many of you really know about Nancy when is a complete head case, out of South Carolina?

So this is my problem. That we have had good momentum going in.

Forget about personalities.

McCarthy. I don't care. We had good momentum going in.

And now we're stuck.

Everything -- everything is frozen.

Everything.

GLENN: And --

MARK: And we're packing the most conservative body we have. It's not conservative enough. The presidency is gone. The Senate is gone. The courts are gone. We have a five-vote majority in the House. We're doing more with that five-vote majority than anybody.

And we just crippled it. That's my take, Glenn.

GLENN: You know, the one thing I love about having a talk show host on.

Is I asked a question about 11 minutes ago.

And it was a great answer. I know. I didn't want to.

It was a great answer.

All right. I want to talk to you about -- all right. I don't think there's anything more plain.

The Democratic Party hates America.

So before we get to the book. How much time do you have, first of all, can I keep you until about a quarter until?

MARK: Actually, yes. I have a lifetime, my brother. How are you?

GLENN: I mean, this is the opposite end of the clock for you too. I mean, you're getting up, and you're this fired up. I love it.

So, Mark, first, let me ask you, do you see a plan? Is there a plan? Is there something that we're hoping for at this point?

MARK: No. I would love to see one. I mean, when the case is asked, who would he accept? He starts with naming liberal members of the House.

I thought, holy crap.

I don't know what the plan is. I don't even know who would want to be speaker at this point.

Forget about McCarthy and so forth.

Thinking, okay.

And the way that works is, from the propaganda point of view. These guys will claim victory, no matter what happens.

So, in other words, let's say they actually -- let's say a Jim Jordan. Who I love.

GLENN: Yes. And they will say, you wouldn't have Jim Jordan.

They have it all planned out.

And the fact of the matter is, one of the biggest supporters of the previous speaker was Jim Jordan.

And he even gave a speech on the floor.
Why? He said, because he let us do what we needed to do.

He never interfered.

He said, whatever you need, I'll take care of it. So forth. So on.

The Rules Committee. There were more conservatives on the Rules Committee in the history of the House of Representatives. Then they had Tom Massey on there, Byron Donalds on there, and another conservative.

Chip Roy, who had the power to block anything, and to promote anything.

And so he said, he's been in the House for a while now.

He said, he came in at the same time, McCarthy did.

And he said, it's never been more open.

And he said, it's on open. That everybody in agreement, was thinking about running against him.

So that's how you get the Nancy Maces in there, and these other people in there.

And that's why, and then Chip Roy -- sometimes we have to accept victory. Well, we have a 30 percent cut, in the ordered security bill, which is the strongest kind of -- that the House has ever passed.

This is -- this is a 30-day bill.

Why the hell wouldn't we just pass it?

I said, it beats me.

That's why I'm not a politician. I couldn't figure you guys out, to be perfectly honest with you.

So --

GLENN: You know, you said, Mark, that the democratic party.

I think you said, 60 percent are named Marxists. They are fine with being democratic Marxists or socialists.

MARK: That's correct.

GLENN: How did this happen?

MARK: Well, here's the truth: The fact is, that's the point of the book. You're very good. It's a very good segue there.

GLENN: Thank you.

MARK: I just wanted to say, everything I know I learned from Glenn.

GLENN: Yeah, right.

MARK: You are. You are top shelf, baby.

Look, here's the bottom line with this book. The book explains that the Democrat Party has never accepted America's founding. It has never accepted its principles.

We wouldn't have had a civil war, if it wasn't for the Democratic Party. The vast majority of Americans, I don't even know if owned slaves. Ever met slaves.

Even in the South, a tiny percentage, tiny. Think about -- don't get me wrong. But not the vast majority of the people in the south. There were two quarters that owned slaves. Slavery was an abomination.

And who perpetuated it? The Democratic Party. Who was prepared to destroy the country to defend it?

The Democrat Party. The party who considers it.

Look, we don't have enough time.

The book is 400 pages.

I will tell you this, I decided to take all their icons. FDR.

GLENN: Good for you.

MARK: The Kennedy family. Lyndon Johnson.

People wouldn't have learned things about these people, they couldn't have possibly known. Because the Democratic Party writes our history -- or I should say, rewrites our history.

So all the things, the Democrat Party today condenses. And we condense.

Back in our history, it's their history.

I mean, they did this to the country.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Max Lucado & Glenn Beck: Finding unity in faith

Glenn Beck sits down with beloved pastor and author Max Lucado for a deep conversation about faith, humility, and finding unity in a divided world. Together, they reflect on the importance of principles over politics, why humility opens the door to true dialogue, and how centering life on God brings clarity and peace. Lucado shares stories of faith, the dangers of a “prosperity gospel,” and the powerful reminder that life is not about making a big deal of ourselves, but about making a big deal of God. This uplifting conversation will inspire you to re-center your life, strengthen your faith, and see how humility and love can transform even the most divided times.

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Max Lucado HERE

Bill O'Reilly predicts THIS will be Charlie Kirk's legacy

Bill O’Reilly joins Glenn Beck with a powerful prediction about Charlie Kirk’s legacy. Evil tried to destroy his movement, Bill says, but – as his new book, “Confronting Evil,” lays out – evil will just end up destroying itself once more…

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Mr. Bill O'Reilly, welcome to the program, how are you, sir?

BILL: Good, Beck, thanks for having me back. I appreciate it. How have you been?

GLENN: Last week was really tough. I know it was tough for you and everybody else.

But, you know -- I haven't -- I haven't seen anything.

BILL: Family okay? All of that?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. Family is okay. Family is okay.

BILL: Good question good. That's the most important thing.

GLENN: It is.

So, Bill, what do you make of this whole Charlie Kirk thing. What happened, and where are we headed?

BILL: So my analysis is different for everybody else, and those that know me for so long. About a year ago, I was looking for a topic -- it was a contract to do another book. And I said, you know what's happening in America, and around the world. Was a rise in evil. It takes a year to research and write these books.

And not since the 1930s, had I seen that happen, to this extent. And in the 1930s, of course, you would have Tojo and Hitler and Mussolini and Franco and all these guys. And it led to 100 million dead in World War II. The same thing, not to the extent.

But the same thing was --
GLENN: Yet.
BILL: -- bubbling in the world, and in the United States.

I decided to write a book. The book comes out last Tuesday. And on Wednesday, Putin lobs missiles into Poland.

Ultra dangerous.

And a few hours later, Charlie Kirk is assassinated.

And one of the interviewers said to me last week, your -- your book is haunting. Is haunting.

And I think that's extremely accurate. Because that's what evil does.

And in the United States, we have so many distractions. The social media.

People create around their own lives.

Sports. Whatever it may be. That we look away.

Now, Charlie Kirk was an interesting fellow. Because at a very young age, he was mature enough to understand that he wanted to take a stand in favor of traditional America and Judeo Christian philosophy.

He decided that he wanted to do that.

You know, and when I was 31 or whatever, I was lucky I wasn't in the penitentiary. And I believe you were in the penitentiary.
(laughter)
So he was light years ahead of us.

GLENN: Yes, he was.

BILL: And he put it into motion. All right? Now, most good people, even if you disagree with what Mr. Kirk says on occasion, you admire that. That's the spirit of America. That you have a belief system, that you go out and try to promote that belief system, for the greater good of the country. That's what it is.

That's what Charlie Kirk did.

And he lost his life.

By doing it!

So when you essentially break all of this down. You take the emotion away, all right?

Which I have to do, in my job. You see it as another victory for evil.

But it really isn't.

And this is the ongoing story.

This is the most important story. So when you read my book, Confronting Evil, you'll see that all of these heinous individuals, Putin's on the cover. Mao. Hitler.

Ayatollah Khomeini. And then there are 14 others inside the book. They all destroy themselves.

Evil always destroys itself. But it takes so many people with it. So this shooter destroyed his own family.

And -- and Donald Trump, I talked to him about it last week in Yankee stadium. And Trump is a much different guy than most people think.

GLENN: He is.

JASON: He destroyed his own mother and father and his two brothers.

That's what he did. In addition to the Kirk family!

So evil spreads. Now, if Americans pay attention and come to the conclusion that I just stated, it will be much more difficult for evil to operate openly.

And that's what I think is going to happen.

There's going to be a ferocious backlash against the progressive left in particular.

To stop it, and I believe that is what Mr. Kirk's legacy is going to be.

GLENN: I -- I agree with you on all of these fronts.

I wonder though, you know, it took three, or if you count JFK, four assassinations in the '60s, to confront the evil if you will.

Before people really woke up and said, enough is enough!

And then you have the big Jesus revolution after that.

Is -- I hate to say this. But is -- as far gone as we are, is one assassination enough to wake people up?

JOHN: Some people. Some people will never wake up.

They just don't want to live in the real world, Beck. And it's never been easier to do that with the social media and the phones and the computers.

And you're never going to get them back.

But you don't need them. So let's just be very realistic here on the Glenn Beck show.

Let's run it down.

The corporate media is finished.

In America. It's over.

And you will see that play out the next five years.

Because the corporate media invested so much of its credibility into hating Donald Trump.

And the hate is the key word.

You will find this interesting, Beck. For the first time in ten years, I've been invited to do a major thing on CBS, today.

I will do it GE today. With major Garrett.

GLENN: Wow.

BILL: Now, that only happened because Skydance bought CBS. And Skydance understands the brand CBS is over, and they will have to rehabilitate the whole thing. NBC has not come to that conclusion yet, but it will have to.

And ABC just does the weather. I mean, that's all they care about. Is it snowing in Montana? Okay? The cables are all finished. Even Fox.

Once Trump leaves the stage, there's nowhere for FNC to go. Because they've invested so much in Trump, Trump, Trump, Trump.

So the fact of the matter is, the corporate media is over in America. That takes a huge cudgel out of the hands of the progressive movement.

Because the progressive movement was dependent on the corporate media to advance its cause. That's going to end, Beck.

GLENN: Well, I would hope that you're right.

Let me ask you about --

BILL: When am I wrong?

When am I wrong?

You've known me for 55 years. When have I been wrong?

GLENN: Okay. All right. All right. We're not here to argue things like that.

So tell me about Skydance. Because isn't Skydance Chinese?

BILL: No! It's Ellison. Larry Ellison, the second richest guy in the world. He owns Lanai and Hawaii, the big tech guy and his son is running it.

GLENN: Yeah, okay.

I though Skydance. I thought that was -- you know them.

BILL: Yeah.

And they -- they're not ideological, but they were as appalled as most of us who pay attention at the deterioration of the network presentations.

So --

GLENN: You think that they could.

BILL: 60 Minutes used to be the gold standard.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

BILL: And it just -- it -- you know, you know, I don't know if you watch it anymore.

GLENN: I don't either.

So do you think they can actually turn CBS around, or is it just over?

BILL: I don't know. It's very hard to predict, because so many people now bail. I've got a daughter 26, and a son, 22.

They never, ever watched network television.

And you've got -- it's true. Right?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah.

They don't watch --

BILL: They're not going to watch The Voice. The dancing with this. The juggling with that. You know, I think they could do a much better job in their news presentations.

GLENN: Yeah. Right.

BILL: Because what they did, is banish people like Glenn Beck and Bill O'Reilly.

Same voices, with huge followings.

Huge!

All right?

We couldn't get on there.

That's why Colbert got fired. Because Colbert wouldn't -- refused to put on any non-progressive voice, when they were talking about the country.

GLENN: I know.

BILL: Well, it's not -- I'm censoring it.

GLENN: Yeah, but it's not that he was fired because he wouldn't do that. He was fired because that led to horrible ratings. Horrible ratings.

BILL: Yes, it was his defiance.

GLENN: Yes.

BILL: Fallon has terrible ratings and so does Kimmel. But Colbert was in your face, F you, to the people who were signing his paycheck.

GLENN: Yes. Yes.

BILL: Look, evil can only exist if the mechanisms of power are behind it.

And that's when you read the front -- I take them one by one. And Putin is the most important chapter by far.

GLENN: Why?

BILL: Because Putin would use nuclear weapon.

He wouldn't. He's a psychopath.

And I'm -- on Thursday night, I got a call from the president's people saying, would I meet the president at Yankee stadium for the 9/11 game?

And I said, when a president calls and asks you to meet them, sure.

GLENN: I'll be there. What time?

BILL: It will take me three days to get into Yankee stadium, on Long Island. But I'll start now.

GLENN: Especially because the president is coming. But go ahead.

BILL: Anyway, that was a very, I think that Mr. Trump values my opinion. And it was -- we did talk about Putin.

And the change in Putin. And I had warned him, that Putin had changed from the first administration, where Trump controlled Putin to some extent.

Now he's out of control. Because that's what always happens.

GLENN: Yeah.

BILL: It happened with Hitler. It happened with Mao. It happened with the ayatollah. It happened with Stalin. Right now. They get worse and worse and worse and worse. And then they blow up.

And that's where Putin is! But he couldn't do any of that, without the assent of the Russian people. They are allowing him to do this, to kill women and children. A million Russian casualties for what! For what! Okay?

So that's why this book is just in the stratosphere. And I was thinking object, oh. Because people want to understand evil, finally. Finally.

They're taking a hard look at it, and the Charlie Kirk assassination was an impetus to do that.

GLENN: Yeah. And I think it's also an impetus to look at the good side.

I mean, I think Charlie was just not a neutral -- a neutral character. He was a force for good. And for God.

And I think that -- that combination is almost the Martin Luther King combination. Where you have a guy who is speaking up for civil rights.

But then also, speaking up for God. And speaking truth, Scripturally.

And I think that combination still, strangely, I wouldn't have predicted it. But strangely still works here in America, and I think it's changed everything.

Bill, it's always food to talk to you. Thank you so much for being on. I appreciate it.

It's Bill O'Reilly. The name of the book, you don't want to miss. Is confronting evil. And he takes all of these really, really bad guys on. One by one. And shows you, what happens if you don't do something about it. Confronting evil. Bill O'Reilly.

And you can find it at BillO'Reilly.com.

The difference between debate and celebrating death

There’s a big difference between firing someone, like a teacher, for believing children shouldn’t undergo trans surgery and firing a teacher who celebrated the murder of Charlie Kirk. Glenn Beck explains why the latter is NOT “cancel culture.”

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: I got an email from somebody that says, Glenn, in the wake of Charlie's assassination, dozens of teachers, professors and professionals are being suspended or fired for mocking, or even celebrating Charlie Kirk's death.

Critics say conservatives are now being hypocritical because you oppose cancel culture. But is this the same as rose an losing her job over a crude joke. Or is it celebrating murder, and that's something more serious?

For many, this isn't about cancellation it's about trust. If a teacher is entrusted with children or a doctor entrusted with patients, publicly celebrates political violence, have they not yet disqualified themselves from those roles? Words matter. But cheering a death is an action. Is there any consequence for this? Yes. There is.

So let's have that conversation here for a second.

Is every -- is every speech controversy the same?

The answer to that is clearly no.

I mean, we've seen teachers and pastors and doctors and ordinary citizens lose their job now, just for saying they don't believe children under 18 should undergo transgender surgeries. Okay? Lost their job. Chased out.

That opinion, whether you agree or disagree is a moral and medical judgment.

And it is a matter of policy debate. It is speech in the public square.

I have a right to say, you're mutilating children. Okay. You have a right to say, no. We're not. This is the best practices. And then we can get into the silences of it. And we don't shout down the other side.

Okay? Now, on the other hand, you have Charlie Kirk's assassination. And we've seen teachers and professors go online and be celebrate.

Not criticize. Not argue policy. But celebrate that someone was murdered.

Some have gone so far and said, it's not a tragedy. It's a victory. Somebody else, another professor said, you reap what you sow.

Well, let me ask you: Are these two categories of free speech the same?

No! They're not.

Here's the difference. To say, I believe children should not be allowed to have gender surgeries, before 18. That is an attempt, right or wrong. It doesn't matter which side you are.

That is an attempt to protect life. Protect children. And guide society.

It's entering the debate about the role of medicine. The right of parents. And the boundaries of childhood. That's what that is about. To say Charlie Kirk's assassination is a good thing, that's not a debate. That's not even an idea. That's rejoicing in violence. It's glorifying death.

There's no place in a civil society for that kind of stuff. There's not. And it's a difference that actually matters.

You know, our Founders fought for free speech because they believed as Jefferson said, that air can be tolerated where truth is left free to combat it.

So I have no problem with people disagreeing with me, at all. I don't think you do either. I hope you don't. Otherwise, you should go back to read the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. Error can be tolerated where truth is left to be free to combat it.

But when speech shifts from debating ideas to celebrating death, doesn't that cease to be the pursuit of truth and instead, just become a glorification of evil?

I know where I stand on that one. Where do you stand?

I mean, if you go back and you look at history, in colonial matter -- in colonial America, if you were to go against the parliament and against the king, those words were dangerous. They were called treason. But they were whys. They were arguments about liberty and taxation and the rights of man.

And the Founders risked their lives against the dictator to say those things.

Now, compare that to France in 1793.

You Thomas Paine, one of or -- one of our founder kind of. On the edges of our founders.

He thought that what was happening in France is exactly like the American Revolution.

Washington -- no. It wasn't.

There the crowds. They didn't gather to argue. Okay? They argued to cheer the guillotine they didn't want the battle of ideas.

They wanted blood. They wanted heads to roll.

And roll they did. You know, until the people who were screaming for the heads to roll, shouted for blood, found that their own heads were rolling.

Then they turned around on that one pretty quickly.

Think of Rome.

Cicero begged his countrymen to preserve the republic through reason, law, and debate. Then what happened?

The mob started cheering assassinations.

They rejoiced that enemies were slaughtered.

They were being fed to the lions.

And the republic fell into empire.

And liberty was lost!

Okay. So now let me bring this back to Charlie Kirk here for a second.

If there's a professor that says, I don't believe children should have surgeries before adulthood, is that cancel culture, when they're fired?

Yes! Yes, it is.

Because that is speech this pursuit of truth.

However imperfect, it is speech meant to protect children, not to harm them. You also cannot be fired for saying, I disagree with that.

If you are telling, I disagree with that. And I will do anything to shut you down including assassination! Well, then, that's a different story.

What I teacher says, I'm glad Charlie Kirk is dead, is that cancel culture, if they're fired?

Or is that just society saying, you know, I don't think I can trust my kid to -- to that guy.

Or that woman.

I know, that's not an enlightening mind.

Somebody who delights in political murder.

I don't want them around my children! Scripture weighs in here too.

Out of the abundance of the heart, the mouth speaketh. Matthew.

What does it reveal about the heart of a teacher who celebrates assassination?

To me, you go back to Scripture. Whoa unto them that call good evil -- evil good and good evil.

A society that will shrug on speech like this, say society that has lost its moral compass.

And I believe we still have a moral compass.

Now, our free speech law doesn't protect both. Absolutely. Under law. Absolutely.

Neither one of them should go to jail.

Neither should be silenced by the state.

But does trust survive both?

Can a parent trust their child to a teacher who is celebrating death?

I think no. I don't think a teacher can be trusted if they think that the children that it's right for children to see strippers in first grade!

I'm sorry. It's beyond reason. You should not be around my children!

But you shouldn't go to jail for that. Don't we, as a society have a right to demand virtue, in positions of authority?

Yes.

But the political class and honestly, the educational class, does everything they can to say, that doesn't matter.

But it does. And we're seeing it now. The line between cancel and culture, the -- the cancellation of people, and the accountability of people in our culture, it's not easy.

Except here. I think it is easy.

Cancel culture is about challenging the orthodoxy. Opinions about faith, morality, biology.
Accountability comes when speech reveals somebody's heart.

Accountability comes when you're like, you are a monster! You are celebrating violence. You're mocking life itself. One is an argument. The other is an abandonment of humanity. The Constitution, so you understand, protects both.

But we as a culture can decide, what kind of voices would shape our children? Heal our sick. Lead our communities?

I'm sorry, if you're in a position of trust, I think it's absolutely right for the culture to say, no!

No. You should not -- because this is not policy debate. This is celebrating death.

You know, our Founders gave us liberty.

And, you know, the big thing was, can you keep it?

Well, how do you keep it? Virtue. Virtue.

Liberty without virtue is suicide!

So if anybody is making this case to you, that this is cancel culture. I just want you to ask them this question.

Which do you want to defend?

Cancel culture that silences debate. Or a culture that still knows the difference between debating ideas and celebrating death.

Which one?

Shocking train video: Passengers wait while woman bleeds out

Surveillance footage of the murder of Ukrainian refugee Iryna Zarutska in Charlotte, NC, reveals that the other passengers on the train took a long time to help her. Glenn, Stu, and Jason debate whether they were right or wrong to do so.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: You know, I'm -- I'm torn on how I feel about the people on the train.

Because my first instinct is, they did nothing! They did nothing! Then my -- well, sit down and, you know -- you know, you're going to be judged. So be careful on judging others.

What would I have done? What would I want my wife to do in that situation?

STU: Yeah. Are those two different questions, by the way.

GLENN: Yeah, they are.

STU: I think they go far apart from each other. What would I want myself to do. I mean, it's tough to put yourself in a situation. It's very easy to watch a video on the internet and talk about your heroism. Everybody can do that very easily on Twitter. And everybody is.

You know, when you're in a vehicle that doesn't have an exit with a guy who just murdered somebody in front of you, and has a dripping blood off of a knife that's standing 10 feet away from you, 15 feet away from you.

There's probably a different standard there, that we should all kind of consider. And maybe give a little grace to what I saw at least was a woman, sitting across the -- the -- the aisle.

I think there is a difference there. But when you talk about that question. Those two questions are definitive.

You know, I know what I would want myself to do. I would hope I would act in a way that didn't completely embarrass myself afterward.

But I also think, when I'm thinking of my wife. My advice to my wife would not be to jump into the middle of that situation at all costs. She might do that anyway. She actually is a heck of a lot stronger than I am.

But she might do it anyway.

GLENN: How pathetic, but how true.

STU: Yes. But that would not be my advice to her.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: Now, maybe once the guy has certainly -- is out of the area. And you don't think the moment you step into that situation. He will turn around and kill you too. Then, of course, obviously. Anything you can do to step in.

Not that there was much anyone on the train could do.

I mean, I don't think there was an outcome change, no matter what anyone on that train did.

Unfortunately.

But would I want her to step in?

Of course. If she felt she was safe, yes.

Think about, you said, your wife. Think about your daughter. Your daughter is on that train, just watching someone else getting murdered like that. Would you advise your daughter to jump into a situation like that?

That girl sitting across the aisle was somebody's daughter. I don't know, man.

JASON: I would. You know, as a dad, would I advise.

Hmm. No.

As a human being, would I hope that my daughter or my wife or that I would get up and at least comfort that woman while she's dying on the floor of a train?

Yeah.

I would hope that my daughter, my son, that I would -- and, you know, I have more confidence in my son or daughter or my wife doing something courageous more than I would.

But, you know, I think I have a more realistic picture of myself than anybody else.

And I'm not sure that -- I'm not sure what I would do in that situation. I know what I would hope I would do. But I also know what I fear I would do. But I would have hoped that I would have gotten up and at least tried to help her. You know, help her up off the floor. At least be there with her, as she's seeing her life, you know, spill out in under a minute.

And that's it other thing we have to keep in mind. This all happened so rapidly.

A minute is -- will seem like a very long period of time in that situation. But it's a very short period of time in real life.

STU: Yeah. You watch the video, Glenn. You know, I don't need the video to -- to change my -- my position on this.

But at his seem like there was a -- someone who did get there, eventually, to help, right? I saw someone seemingly trying to put pressure on her neck.

GLENN: Yeah. And tried to give her CPR.

STU: You know, no hope at that point. How long of a time period would you say that was?

Do you know off the top of your head?

GLENN: I don't know. I don't know. I know that we watched the video that I saw. I haven't seen past 30 seconds after she --

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: -- is down. And, you know, for 30 seconds nothing is happening. You know, that is -- that is not a very long period of time.

STU: Right.

GLENN: In reality.

STU: And especially, I saw the pace he was walking. He certainly can't be -- you know, he may have left the actual train car by 30 seconds to a minute. But he wasn't that far away. Like he was still in visual.

He could still turn around and look and see what's going on at that point. So certainly still a threat is my point. He has not, like, left the area. This is not that type of situation.

You know, I -- look, as you point out, I think if I could be super duper sexist for a moment here, sort of my dividing line might just be men and women.

You know, I don't know if it's that a -- you're not supposed to say that, I suppose these days. But, like, there is a difference there. If I'm a man, you know, I would be -- I would want my son to jump in on that, I suppose. I don't know if he could do anything about it. But you would expect at least a grown man to be able to go in there and do something about it. A woman, you know, I don't know.

Maybe I'm -- I hope --

GLENN: Here's the thing I -- here's the thing that I -- that causes me to say, no. You should have jumped in.

And that is, you know, you've already killed one person on the train. So you've proven that you're a killer. And anybody who would have screamed and got up and was with her, she's dying. She's dying. Get him. Get him.

Then the whole train is responsible for stopping that guy. You know. And if you don't stop him, after he's killed one person, if you're not all as members of that train, if you're not stopping him, you know, the person at the side of that girl would be the least likely to be killed. It would be the ones that are standing you up and trying to stop him from getting back to your daughter or your wife or you.

JASON: There was a -- speaking of men and women and their roles in this. There was a video circling social media yesterday. In Sweden. There was a group of officials up on a stage. And one of the main. I think it was health official woman collapses on stage. Completely passes out.

All the men kind of look away. Or I don't know if they're looking away. Or pretending that they didn't know what was going on. There was another woman standing directly behind the woman passed out.

Immediately springs into action. Jumps on top. Grabs her pant leg. Grabs her shoulder. Spins her over and starts providing care.

What did she have that the other guys did not? Or women?

She was a sheepdog. There is a -- this is my issue. And I completely agree with Stu. I completely agree with you. There's some people that do not respond this way. My issue is the proportion of sheepdogs versus people that don't really know how to act. That is diminishing in western society. And American society.

We see it all the time in these critical actions. I mean, circumstances.

There are men and women, and it's actually a meme. That fantasize about hoards of people coming to attack their home and family. And they sit there and say, I've got it. You guys go. I'm staying behind, while I smoke my cigarette and wait for the hoards to come, because I will sacrifice myself. There are men and women that fantasize of block my highway. Go ahead. Block my highway. I'm going to do something about it. They fantasize about someone holding up -- not a liquor store. A convenience store or something. Because they will step in and do something. My issue now is that proportion of sheepdogs in society is disappearing. Just on statistical fact, there should be one within that train car, and there were none.

STU: Yeah. I mean --

JASON: They did not respond.

STU: We see what happens when they do, with Daniel Penny. Our society tries to vilify them and crush their existence. Now, there weren't that many people on that train. Right?

At least on that car. At least it's limited. I only saw three or four people there, there may have been more. I agree with you, though. Like, you see what happens when we actually do have a really recent example of someone doing exactly what Jason wants and what I would want a guy to do. Especially a marine to step up and stop this from happening. And the man was dragged by our legal system to a position where he nearly had to spend the rest of his life in prison.

I mean, I -- it's insanity. Thankfully, they came to their senses on that one.

GLENN: Well, the difference between that one and this one though is that the guy was threatening. This one, he killed somebody.

STU: Yeah. Right. Well, but -- I think -- but it's the opposite way. The debate with Penny, was should he have recognize that had this person might have just been crazy and not done anything?

Maybe. He hadn't actually acted yet. He was just saying things.

GLENN: Yeah. Well --

STU: He didn't wind up stabbing someone. This is a situation where these people have already seen what this man will do to you, even when you don't do anything to try to stop him. So if this woman, who is, again, looks to be an average American woman.

Across the aisle. Steps in and tries to do something. This guy could easily turn around and just make another pile of dead bodies next to the one that already exists.

And, you know, whether that is an optimal solution for our society, I don't know that that's helpful.

In that situation.