Best of the Program | 7/11/22

Bundle and safe with Expedia.

You were made to follow your favorite band and from the front row, we were made to quietly save you more.

Expedia, made to travel.

Savings vary and subject to availability, flight inclusive packages are at all protected.

Stu.

What a delight to be back.

You haven't.

You and Pat haven't solved one damn problem.

The world is even worse than it was two weeks ago.

What are you doing?

Well, you can say that of any two-week period lately, Glenn.

So we did nothing.

Yeah, I'm surprised we're still broadcasting at this point.

And not because you two are on, just because it's decaying that rapidly.

Right.

We went over a lot of things today:

abortion, the Supreme Court.

But I also started in an unusual place, Sri Lanka.

It is the place where you can learn the future of America.

I explain in today's today's podcast.

You're listening to the best of the Blenbeck program.

All right, let me give you a couple of stories here.

Germany is now moving to reactivate the coal plants because they're afraid Russia is going to cut off the gas.

Swiss,

the Swiss are now preparing for gas shortages and are looking at rationing their fuel.

The world is learning a lesson.

Now,

let me take you to Sri Lanka because this is the lesson that we should all learn today.

You might not be familiar with the island nation of Sri Lanka other than its name,

but it is the foreshadowing, dark foreshadowing of things to come in this great reset-bound world.

22 million people inhabit Sri Lanka.

22 million people are now struggling to survive.

They're now facing the worst economic crisis they have ever encountered since declaring independence in 1948.

The government is now all but bankrupt.

They're in default on foreign debt.

They can't afford critical imports to sustain their people.

Medicine has now become too expensive or scarce to get a hold of.

Fuel prices on this little island are out of control.

It began to spiral out of control as long lines formed at gas stations.

Then violent brawls would sometimes break out between people and the military and the police holding them back.

Food prices skyrocketed.

Food prices became unsustainable when gas went through the roof.

Now Sri Lanka is on the brink of chaos.

Videos have emerged of starving and desperate people attacking others out in the street.

Everything culminated this weekend as thousands of angry rioters storm the presidential palace and force the resignation of their leader.

Sri Lanka.

I mean,

I don't know anything about Sri Lanka.

Why would I care about Sri Lanka?

Here's what happened to Sri Lanka.

There was an IMF bailout package, and it was really Sri Lanka's final option for recovery.

But a few days ago, the IMF walked away from the deal.

Now, if you know about Sri Lanka or you happen to have relatives in Sri Lanka,

you're wondering what I'm wondering: why

they did everything they were supposed to do.

They played by the rules as ordered.

So, why is the global financial system now abandoning Sri Lanka?

A few short years ago,

to the global economic elite,

Sri Lanka was the jewel of Asia.

The World Economic Forum showered them with praise.

In one of their puff pieces highlighting Sri Lanka's leadership of the rest of the world, the article was titled, This is How We Will Make Sri Lanka Rich by 2025.

That was four years ago, and now they're bankrupt.

So what happened?

Well, the usual crap that we hear from the overlords in Davos,

and it was all described in that WEF article, Sri Lanka was to concentrate on a social economy, spending millions in the transformation to a new kind of capitalism.

They would double down on green energy.

Any of this sound familiar?

How about this?

Sri Lanka cut taxes, but also didn't cut spending.

In fact, in order to fuel the great reset of their economy, they began printing cash at unprecedented levels

because they had a green economy, they just had to serve.

And because everything went green and they needed it right now, they upended their farming and agricultural production.

Any of this sound familiar to anyone?

Everything had to be organic and everything had to be grown with new rules.

Now, the the World Economic Forum said it was going swimmingly.

They said, quote, the plan is delivering impressive results.

The current government has created 460,000 jobs.

So you know the government doesn't create jobs.

Current government created 460,000 jobs, helped more than 260,000 families secure a home.

Strong progress is being made.

The government is also invested to generate green energy and provide water resources for agro-production.

You see, look at all of the things when you just decide to build back better.

Look at all the wonderful things that come.

Well, that's when it first started.

Four years into it, we need to update the scorecard.

This is what followed that initial push.

Bankruptcy, inflation, default, shortages of food, shortages of commodities, shortages of fuel, violence in the streets, and in the end, the organizations that supported them and pushed them in that direction, the organizations like the IMF and the World Economic Forum, just walked away.

WEF just ran an article reporting on how Sri Lankan public workers are now being given extra days off.

Well, that's fantastic.

Do you know why they were given extra days off?

Quote, so they can grow their own food, end quote.

Now, does anybody in Davos,

anybody like George Soros?

Yes, I know some people have to be hurt.

They'll be hurt.

Yes, they'll lose their business or whatever, but it's a great experiment and lots of fun for me.

You remember him saying that?

They don't feel guilty.

The IMF doesn't feel guilty.

To them, entire countries are mere casualties of war in their grand experiment.

It's the same thing with socialism and communism and progressivism.

One by one, the experiment fails.

Nations fall.

Thousands, sometimes millions die or starve to death.

And they never say, well, crap, geez, that was our fault.

They say it wasn't done right.

Well, they didn't check all of the boxes.

Whatever the excuse is, it's never their fault.

They observe the ashes from afar, and then they double down and try it again.

Remember what they did to Sri Lanka the next time you hear Klaus Schwab say now is time for great reset.

Whenever you hear him say that, whenever you hear about Build Back Better, whenever you hear about our agricultural industry needing to go green, whenever you hear about how Russia is causing the gas prices, I want you to think Sri Lanka.

Remember, Biden and Joe Kerry, John Kerry say we just have a few short years to get this done in America.

Yeah.

Don't worry, you'll own nothing, and you'll be happy.

So far, they got the first part in Sri Lanka right.

They own nothing.

Now, if they could just just get the happiness part, they would be set.

Have you noticed also in the Netherlands?

What's happening up in the Netherlands?

Have you seen?

The Netherlands are being forced to go green as well.

The Netherlands, of course, you know, are part of this great reset.

And there's Dutch farmers.

These Dutch farmers,

they don't like this green new deal.

They oppose these pollution cuts.

My goodness.

They just won't play along.

Well,

they'll get it eventually.

So now the farmers

in the Netherlands.

The Dutch farmers.

Have you ever heard of anyone in the Netherlands ever getting upset at anything?

They're now taking their tractors in

and they're they're

they're bringing their tractors in and they're blocking trucks.

They're burning hay on the streets

They've taken uh

they've taken uh

crap from animals

and uh poured it on the steps of the Capitol.

This is because

they can't use the fertilizer that they've been using.

That

nitrogen oxide and ammonia.

Oh, man.

We can't use that because that's not natural, you know.

That's ammonia.

Nitrogen?

No, it's not natural.

We can't do that.

They say it's going to close down their farms.

It will shut down their farming ability.

It will cause mass starvation, they say.

So we could either listen to the experts or we could listen to the people who actually grow the food and have been growing our food forever.

You're right, we should probably listen to the experts.

This is happening.

Look for civil unrest.

Look for inflation unrest.

You will see this happening all over the world.

This goes to something I told you in 2009 would happen.

They're all going to blame the United States.

In the end,

they will blame the United States, and half of our own damn people will blame the United States as well.

Let's put this blame right squarely where it belongs on the shoulders of the elites that are running all of our countries because this is happening all over the world.

They think they know better.

They don't.

Just stand in that truth for a while.

I have much more confidence in you solving things, even though Stu and Pat didn't solve a darn thing while I was gone.

I gave you two weeks.

Not one problem has been solved.

I thought you said screw up a bunch of stuff like Sri Lanka.

And

I thought we were following your guidance.

Okay, yeah, no, uh-uh.

I have more confidence in the American people than I do in any expert.

I think if we would just leave this to our cities and our local governments, we would be fine.

We would be fine.

You know, government, you just do the things.

You know, there's only a handful of things.

You just do those things for a while.

And we're going to watch.

Make sure you, you know, you actually secure our borders.

You actually are.

Have you heard the latest?

We're about to lose about, I think, is it a quarter of our National Guard because they won't get the vaccine.

Why is anybody even talking about the vaccine still?

So we're going to lose a lot of our National Guard because of the vaccine.

22%

of the police force in San Diego gone.

Why?

They wouldn't get the vaccine.

So they just let go 22%

of the police force.

What could possibly go wrong?

I mean,

I mean,

we don't need police.

We're going to reimagine the police and then we're going to do something about it.

And when we do it, it's going to be great.

Trust us.

Back in just a second with more.

Our sponsor this half hour is the Tuttle Twins.

Our freedoms are under attack, and true history is disappearing.

The socialists are rewriting it, and they've been winning for a long time.

I'm going to show you

the pattern of totalitarian takeovers.

I'm going to do that in hour number three today.

I want you to make sure you're listening

because

one of the things, one of the first things they do after they sow discontent is they take over the schools.

And gee, that doesn't, I mean, does that sound familiar at all?

Take over the schools.

They rewrite history.

They rewrite the morals.

They rewrite absolutely everything.

Well, that's happening.

And if we don't teach true American history, we're screwed.

Break the cycle.

Help your kids learn real history.

There is a solution.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

The poll was done by Rasmussen to see how Americans, how they feel about the Supreme Court.

Yeah, so here's what we have.

Majority of Democrat likely voters, not just registered Democrats, but likely voters, believe the Supreme Court is fundamentally racist, 56%,

and fundamentally sexist, 67%.

That's not good.

That's not good.

Further, 53% of Democrat likely voters want to abolish the current Supreme Court and establish a new Democratically elected Supreme Court with justices chosen by the American people directly.

Can you even

imagine

what a nightmare scenario that is?

39% of Democrats would strongly or somewhat favor a constitutional amendment that would give the United Nations the authority to reverse U.S.

Supreme Court decisions that UN members believe violate human rights.

I mean,

who are the Democrats?

Who are they?

Really?

I mean, I've met this many dumb people, but that would mean that all of the dumb people in America are Democrat, and I don't believe that.

But I'm beginning to.

I mean,

53%,

56%

say it's fundamentally unracist.

67 of Democrats say fundamentally sexist.

But 53%

of those who are likely to vote say they want to abolish the Supreme Court and hold elections for the...

I mean, why don't we just

do America's Got Talent?

America's Got Judges.

I mean, look, that idea worked really well with the Senate.

Look how great our Senate is doing now.

Now that

we elect them directly, it's really improved that process quite a bit.

You know, I mean, you you can kind of like understand, okay, the fundamentally racist thing, well, I mean, the Democrats think literally everything is racist.

So, okay, maybe fundamentally sexist.

I mean, you know, maybe they just went through the Roe versus Wade thing.

A lot of the Democrats are angry about that.

I can cut you some slack on that.

Yeah, but

like, no one's even proposing that the UN takes over vetoing our Supreme Court decisions, and still a giant chunk of Democrats believe that that's the way we should go.

That is remarkable.

So 39% of Democrats would strongly favor a constitutional amendment that would give the United Nations the authority to reverse U.S.

Supreme Court decisions that U.N.

members believe violate.

That's 39%.

Here's the crazy part.

48%.

of all voters aged 18 to 39

favored giving the United Nations the power to overturn the U.S.

Supreme Court cases.

So you're, you, wait, you want to give up our sovereignty to that group of people?

Can you tell me what that group of people have done?

One good thing, honestly, one good thing.

Audrey Hepburn was

an ambassador for them, and I loved her.

She was great.

That's it.

That's as far as I can go.

It's okay.

It really is amazing.

Why would you want to do that?

Of all things, you know, I guess at this point, they just want to overturn everything because they see the Constitution being upheld.

And that's the problem here is that, you know, again, the Supreme Court did not take away a right.

They said the right didn't exist the whole time, which is true.

And they took the power away from themselves.

The Supreme Court initially created this right out of thin air, which is their argument, by the way.

Not my argument.

Their argument is they acknowledge it wasn't around during the time of the 14th Amendment because almost everybody had banned abortion at the time of the 14th Amendment.

So they can't argue it was the initial intent.

They just said later on, they believe that with updating standards, it's a living document.

And now that power of the 14th Amendment includes abortion.

They, the Supreme Court, a bunch of men, men, created the right.

And then a later Supreme Court said, yeah, you can't just create rights like that.

That's not what you do.

So they took the power out of their own hands.

And people are still incredibly angry at them.

It really is utterly angry.

I don't think people understand the second part of that.

They took it out of their hands because they said, it's not a right in the Constitution.

It's not like they said, nope, nope, that's not a right.

They said, that's not a right that the federal government has purview over.

The federal government has certain things that they have, all the Bill of Rights, all those.

That's what the federal government cannot do.

Okay?

They can't violate any of those.

Well, they're violating all of those right now.

Nobody seems to care.

But it's what the government cannot do.

Any other right not listed there goes to the people and to the state.

So you might have the right.

I haven't heard a good case on it.

You might have the right to abortion, but that's for the people

and the state to decide, not the federal government.

Aaron Ross Powell, and some state constitutions allow for that right.

I mean, again, I think that's

morally reprehensible, but that is in several state constitutions, and you can get those abortions there for the time being at least.

But the whole point of this, and this is in several of these, it was also in the

EPA case and several others of this session.

It was a theme.

We are not the ones that are supposed to make these decisions.

If you guys want to do these things, pass laws.

Start passing laws if you want these things to be done.

Go within the constitutional bounds of your power and pass laws.

Stop acting like we're going to do all this stuff for you.

That's not our job.

That's them saying, hey, we aren't going to take the power.

We are actually going to cede the power, which for some reason the left wants us to have.

We're going to cede it back to the legislators where it belongs.

That is what they've been doing over and over again.

That's how this is supposed to work.

So, what is

crazy?

Let me do one more thing here.

On abortion, if you look at the numbers, more than one in three, 37%, said their state should allow abortion only in cases of rape and incest.

37%.

Another, 12%, favored allowing abortion only in the first six weeks of pregnancy.

And that's when you can detect a baby's heartbeat.

You said how much

those two.

Yeah, it was 16%, you said?

12.

12.

So we're up at half, basically.

So, yeah, we're at at 49% of the country that would say

six weeks, that's it.

Six weeks or less.

Half of the country.

Yeah.

Okay.

Another 23% would support a ban at 15%,

meaning 72% of

the country agrees with what Mississippi brought in front of the Supreme Court because they said they wanted a 15-week ban on abortions.

Women are more pro-life than men, and I think that's absolutely, absolutely explainable.

It's a woman's body.

You don't have a right to say anything.

I completely disagree with that, but how many guys are, A,

keep the options open?

Yeah.

And B,

and B, been just bullied into not having an opinion?

I think that's true.

I think the, you know, look, think of this stereotypical situation that you'd think of in these cases.

Guy goes out, hooks up with a girl, he finds at a bar, they go back to the house, they do their thing,

she's pregnant, and he's the one that's like, oh, I don't even want to talk to her again, let alone raise a child with her.

So please, yeah, abortion.

It's great.

Women's rights.

Yeah, please.

Oh, my gosh, women's right to choose.

It's so important to me.

What a fundamental right this is.

They just want to get out of what they've done.

right they want to avoid the responsibility so stereotypically you'd assume that the guys would be the one ones pushing for this.

By the way, I might remind you, it was seven guys who brought the right to you.

So, you know, for all the thoughts that men shouldn't have an opinion here, the only person involved in a major abortion case that actually decided it, that was a woman, really was

Amy Coney Barrett.

I mean, I guess in Casey, you could make the argument, but still, I mean, Amy Coney Barrett's the one who was involved here.

She's a woman.

There were no women involved in the Roe versus Wade decision at the Supreme Court level.

Here's the most telling part of the

poll.

Majority, 55% said they opposed overturning Roe versus Wade,

even though 72% would support a law that Roe would have struck down.

What's more, 25%,

only 25%,

agreed that the Supreme Court, as opposed to state or federal lawmakers, should set the standards on abortion.

So

amazing.

Wait,

72%

support the law that it just overturned, or that it just made possible by overturning it.

And only 25% say the decision should be in the hands of the Supreme Court, which is what the Supreme Court said.

Yeah, so basically what that tells you is that people just don't know what Roe versus Wade means.

They think Roe versus Wade means if you overturn it, abortion goes away completely.

They, of course, will learn very soon that that's not the case because 72% support the Mississippi law and 25%

like want the Supreme Court to make these rules.

Well, that's what Roe versus Wade was.

So you can't support Roe versus Wade and oppose the Supreme Court coming up with the rules.

Their whole argument in Roe v.

Wade was, you guys are really kind of at odds here.

Why don't we come in and say, we'll just make up a standard and that will solve the problem.

And then Casey came along and they said, hey, that Roe versus Wade thing sure didn't solve the problem.

We're going to give you a new standard, a new idea.

Now it's going to be viability and that'll solve it for you guys.

And it didn't solve it at all.

And then this Supreme Court said, hey, maybe we shouldn't be giving you the standards.

Maybe you guys should solve this on your own through the normal process instead of us trying to come up with some universal solution for everybody.

And that's what everyone seems to want in the poll, but they have absolutely no idea what Roe versus Wade is, other than people who oppose it are evil.

Yeah, and the people who

are for it apparently love children and women, even though now

New York has gone crazy, absolutely crazy.

Not only their gun, their new gun

concealed carry permit,

What do you call it?

I don't even know.

Bureaucracy.

It's worse than it was.

It's worse than it was now.

And there's no way this stands up in court.

No way this stands up in court.

And New York also said that they need to crack down on the pregnancy centers that are offering life

because they say they are offering disinformation

by saying that it's a baby already inside of you.

And the other disinformation is you're already a mother.

You're carrying your child right now.

So you already are a mother.

Those are the two pieces of misinformation or disinformation they say that they have to crack down on.

So they are now cracking down.

It doesn't matter.

New York, you can have all the abortions you want.

Celebrate all the abortions.

We'll send you cakes.

Just all the abortions you want.

That's not good enough.

They have to stop those 20%

that go to these pregnancy centers and have their minds changed.

Interesting times we live in.

You will be forced to participate.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

So I was reading something

while I was away from the Epic Times, and it's the five stages of totalitarianism.

And have you noticed both sides are worried about totalitarianism?

The Antifa is saying, you know, it's the religious totalitarian, you know, and Donald Trump the totalitarian.

And that's exactly what the other side is afraid of.

Now,

I'm not going to argue which side.

I just want to give you the five stages of totalitarianism and see if any of these connect with you and see if any of these things

have happened yet.

The first thing is discontent and rumblings.

You can't start a totalitarian government

until you're standing on the ash heap of the government and of the society that was.

If you want a new regime, you have to generate dissatisfaction with the status quo.

You have to get people to despise the old order.

You have to get people to believe that they can't do anything because of the old order

and then present this new thing as

a solution to all of those problems.

Now, has that happened?

Is there someone preaching a new world order?

Is there someone preaching new ideas?

Capitalism has failed.

Our families are failing us.

Is there anybody that is suggesting that everything is failing us

and seems to want to even see it burn to the ground?

That's the first step.

The Bolshevik Revolution in Russia in 1917,

it established a totalitarian regime, and

it was very, very bloody, much more bloody than the revolution in France, which ended in, you know, guillotines.

This

was, you know,

the reign of terror in Russia was beyond anything that you could imagine.

The people were disenfranchised.

They no longer believed in the czar.

They had been defeated in war.

They were hungry.

The transportation in the city started to break down.

And

once your transportation breaks down, that causes food and fuel shortages and that causes riots.

Then Adolf Hitler, he did the same thing.

It was bubbling with discontent.

They had the Treaty of Versailles.

They had just left a humiliation on the battlefield.

The Treaty of Versailles was

humiliating to them.

And then they, because of the treaty,

they had horrible economics.

They went into hyper-inflation.

And then

Germany starts to default on

its payments.

And now you start to have occupied territories of Germany, etc., etc.

Made the people poor, hungry, and angry.

Russia, poor, hungry, angry.

France, poor, hungry, angry.

None of them believed in the old system.

So there's your first step.

Are we poor, hungry, and angry?

Well, I would suggest that we are angry.

We have our share of anger.

Are we poor?

What time is it?

We're on our way to poverty.

Are we hungry?

We don't think hunger could really happen here in America because we're the breadbasket of the world, except we're not the breadbasket of the world anymore.

The second thing, the false savior and the first revolution.

So once people identify the discontent and appeal to that, the totalitarian presents himself as a savior.

In stage two, the revolutionary totalitarian enacts a dramatic change to solve the problems and

discontent of stage one.

To find a solution to its debt crisis, the French government called the Estates General Assembly to advise the king on what to do.

Third Estate quickly claimed full governmental authority as a national assembly.

The National Assembly wanted to draw up a new constitution that would change the nature of the government to deal with all of the injustices.

Does this sound familiar?

After the storming of the Bastille, peasants in rural areas revolted against their lords.

The National Assembly then declared feudalism abolished and introduced the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen.

And then

you had the execution of King Louis.

No one could stop the ferociousness, if you will,

of the bloodbath.

Russia, the Bolsheviks, took advantage of the food riots that began in early 1917.

When the military began siding with the rioting workers rather than, you know, restoring law and order, Nicholas, the Tsar, resigned and then was shot.

Then the Soviets quickly took control of Russia, and their slogan was peace, land, and bread.

And many angry people looked at them as saviors.

Same thing with Nazism.

The third stage: censorship, persecution,

propaganda, and ending of opposition.

So now you have the savior on board.

You have a plan.

They're changing absolutely everything.

They want to change the way you talk to one another, your traditions,

even your language.

They have presented a plan to change everything.

But stage three

happens after stage two has passed.

The old order has been fundamentally changed.

So we're there right now.

We are still, I think, having to change some things, but think about it.

Our banking system is no longer the banking system we had.

Our businesses are not the businesses we had.

Our way of communicating with each other, not the way we've always communicated.

Even the understanding of freedom of speech, our press is fundamentally different.

All of it.

So the old order has been fundamentally changed, and now the various forces begin to react.

The rising totalitarian government faces many enemies, often dubbed counter-revolutionaries or extremists.

In its infancy, in infancy, the new order must struggle to gain more power and maintain that which has been acquired.

For this reason, it sets about combating its enemies through censorship and persecution.

Does any of this make sense?

Does any of this ring like you've seen this movie?

As soon as they gained sway over their countries, the first move of totalitarians like Hitler and Vladimir Lenin was to censor the opposition and put out propaganda.

Each of the totalitarian leaders also gained control of education and had a secret police force to monitor or even kill anyone designated as an enemy.

Another strategy was to establish youth organizations to indoctrinate citizens in the state's propaganda from an early age and tear their loyalties away from family or religion.

Religion was almost universally persecuted once these regimes came to power.

Huh.

I'm not saying we're in stage three,

but stage three sounds familiar.