Best of The Program | Guests: Gov. Greg Abbott & Sen. Mike Lee | 6/2/21

Hey, great podcast.

Today, we have the governor from the great state of Texas who is, I think, has had enough.

We also will tell you about something that is happening in the Senate that you need to be aware of.

In really important, the dismantling of the American system.

It is absolutely happening.

This and so much more on today's podcast.

Next.

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

There was a massive Democratic walkout in the Texas State House of Representatives, and

it has

shown the great anxiety by the Democrats.

The Republicans are not sitting down and taking the massive changes in our voting system sitting down.

Thank God they're standing up.

We changed almost everything because of COVID, and it has made it really, really easy for anyone that wants to to cheat.

Governor Abbott joins us now from the great state of Texas to talk about the walkout of the Democrats.

Hello, Governor Abbott.

How are you, sir?

Gwynne, I'm doing great.

How are you doing?

Very Congratulations, first of all, on your

endorsement of Donald Trump for

governor of Texas.

Well, thank you very much.

He called me yesterday to tell me about it and to visit with me.

He is in great spirits, and he's fired up, ready to go.

And, you know, one thing that he and I have worked on together when he was president, but he's very excited about, and that is everything that we are doing to secure the border.

I've got so much good news in the coming weeks to talk about what we're doing to better secure the border.

But also, he's fired up and appreciates the effort that we're putting in to make sure that we achieve election integrity in the great state of Texas.

All right, so let's talk about that.

And I do want to touch on the border because I'd love to hear some good news.

Border Patrol agents say they see a 3,000% increase in convicted sex offender arrests just in the Del Rio sector.

So I'd like to just touch on that, but let's go to what's happening with

the Texas statehouse with the Democrats walking out.

Well, listen,

if you go to any job, as some of your listeners are going to jobs as we speak right now, if they walked out on their job, that would be unacceptable.

And it's unacceptable in the state capitol also for people to walk out on the job.

They can stay in debate.

They can vote against bills.

They can do whatever they want to do.

But it's wrong just to leave your job.

And that's why they will be coming back to finish up the job that they walked off of.

And that's why I'll be adding a special session

in the coming days.

I'll make an announcement about when that special session will be.

And included on that special session agenda is going to be the law that they abandon, and that is to vote to ensure that we do have election integrity in Texas that will stop cheating and illegal voting in this state.

We'll make it easy to vote, but hard to cheat.

So, what is this law?

Because they're saying this is just draconian.

This is going to take away the rights of anybody who wants to vote other than for a Republican.

What does the law actually do?

This is hilarious because of the contrast of what picture is being painted by the Democrats and the mainstream media.

And that is what the law actually does, it increases, not decreases, the hours that people have to vote in the state of Texas based upon in comparison to state law.

What happened in the last election is Harris County alone, they decided they were going to create vote law in the state of Texas, which they have zero authority to do.

And they added 24-hour voting, which has never been authorized in state law.

It's never happened in the state of Texas.

And so, yes, we are going to limit.

24-hour voting.

And let me tell you why.

And that's because one component of Texas election law is to have poll watchers out there watching what's going on in the polls.

And we may not be able to have people at 2 a.m.

or 3 a.m.

out there watching the polls, and that could lead to lack of integrity in the election process.

But if you compare it to pre-existing state law, where you're adding hours, but get this, Glenn, and that is, you know, they talk about the Texas law having voter suppression because of the limited hours, all that kind of stuff.

Well, let's compare Texas law to the law of the great state of of Delaware, where Joe Biden voted in the election, last election, and voted in every election in the past.

And we have far more hours of voting in the state of Texas than they have in the state of Delaware.

So if people want to talk about hours of voting leading to voter suppression, people should be going after Delaware for voter suppression, not the great state of Texas.

Well, but you are against the souls for the polls, which I thought originally was, you know, the campaign to get dead people to vote for the Democrats.

But

that is something where you can leave church and immediately go to vote.

But apparently, the Democrats don't want that hour break in between.

I don't know why,

but

why are we saying, no, you have to wait until 1 o'clock on a Sunday?

A couple of things about that.

First is that pre-existing state law required a minimum number of hours to vote on that one Sunday during early voting.

And what SB 7 did, the new proposed election law in the state of Texas, it added an additional minimum requirement of hours on Sunday to go vote.

Then yesterday I heard something interesting I had not heard before, and that is there was a clerical error in what's called the legislative council that drafted up the bill

where

it was Travis Clarke, as his name is the state representative, saying that the error was it was supposed to be beginning at 11 o'clock, not beginning at 1 o'clock.

I don't know those details.

It's something that we're going to be looking into to find out the truth.

But bottom line is when the sun sets and all this, the souls of the polls, that's not going to be interrupted or whatsoever the case may be.

But the important thing for people to walk away from and know, and that is Texas actually added an additional minimum requirement for the number of hours for people to be able to vote on Sundays.

And and everyone gets that fact wrong.

So they walked out because they're hoping that people are going to rise up and stand with them.

I don't see that happening.

Is there any consequence for them walking out other than having to come back to work?

Right now there is because, as you may have noticed, I vetoed the legislative budget.

So the legislature, I haven't vetoed it yet because it hasn't reached my desk, but I told the public I was going to veto what's called Article 10 of the Texas budget, and that funds the legislature.

And so they need to get back to work.

And they will have the chance to vote to reinstate their budget.

But people don't get paid for walking off the job.

They get paid for showing up for their job.

Okay, one, well, that's changing in America now as well, but I'm glad that we're not changing here in Texas.

Border Patrol says 3,000% increase in convicted sex offender arrest in just the Del Rio sector.

We are pushing through, at this rate, about 2 million

people through our border.

What is being done?

Because you're not hearing anything from the media or from the Biden administration.

You know,

Harris, Vice President Harris is in charge of it.

Have you heard from her?

So

during

the entire episode, I'm during the entire presidency of the Biden administration, haven't heard from the President, haven't heard from the Vice President.

The only interaction, which is extremely minimal, involves Secretary Mayorkas.

But they have completely abandoned post as it concerns the Texas border.

So Texas is stepping up.

Let me tell you what we have done and what we are about to do.

What I did beginning in March is I deployed 1,000 Texas Department of Public Safety officers to the border.

I deployed the National Guard to the border, and they've made well over 1,000 arrests of some of these criminals that you're talking about.

They've apprehended more than 33,000 illegal immigrants coming across the border.

But because of what you're saying, because of the way that the Biden administration has abandoned the border, we are now elevating our game.

What I did yesterday is

in response to more than a dozen counties along the border, including the county in which Del Rio was in, which is Valberti County, I granted their request for a disaster declaration.

Typically, you see a disaster declaration by a governor responding to something like a hurricane or a flood or something like that.

This is the first time that I'm aware of where it was declared for a public safety disaster, a public safety disaster where you have the farmers and ranchers being overrun, their fences torn down, their cattle let out, or their vehicles or the homes invaded, whatever the case may be.

It's a total disaster as declared by these local counties that I agree to support.

And so what this will do, it will add additional Texas resources, but Glenn is going to also add some new strategies that we are coming up with that I'll be talking with these local officials about next week, and that is this.

And that is

we are going to step up and we're going to begin arresting everybody coming across the border and charging them with criminal trespass and putting them in jail.

They're coming here thinking they're going to get the Biden-free ride and get to go wherever they want to go, not in the state of Texas.

We're going to start arresting them right and left and putting them behind bars, telling them they came into the wrong state.

Let me explain one last thing about this, Glenn, because a lot of people are unclear about what I'm about to tell you.

Because some people say, well, why don't you just stop them from coming across the border or immediately send them back?

You may recall Jan Brewer, who was the former governor of Arizona.

And when she was governor of Arizona, they passed a law that did say they had the authority to immediately stop people from coming across the border, that they did have the authority to send them back across the border.

That went all the way to the United States Supreme Court.

And in a case, the name of which was Arizona versus the United States, the United States Supreme Court said that anything about

stopping people from coming across the border, anything about sending people back across the border,

that authority was given solely to the federal government.

So with regard to stopping people from coming across the border, that's the federal government's job.

However, once they step foot in our state, we can arrest them for any crime that we can charge them with.

And when I declare a disaster like I have, what that automatically does, it increases a notch the criminal violation.

So, let's say that

before yesterday, the criminal violation for trespass was either a Class C or Class B misdemeanor.

It's going to be going up to a Class B or Class A misdemeanor, misdemeanor, and the jail time will be longer.

The consequences will be more severe.

You're going to see cages again.

You're going to hear all of that.

Are you prepared for the media onslaught of just Texas is a monster?

We're prepared to see a reduction in the number of people coming across the border because Texas is enforcing the law, period.

Good for you, Governor.

Thank you so much.

Governor Greg Abbott from the great state of Texas.

You're listening to the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Senator Mike Lee, there's about three in the Senate now that I trust and I think are fighting the good fight for the Constitution

and not for politics.

Mike Lee is the chief among them.

Hello, Mike.

How are you?

I'm doing great.

Good to be with you, Glenn.

Good.

So tell me about the Endless Frontier Act, because it sure sounds great, Mike.

To me, it sounds dreadful and horrific in every single respect.

Look,

first of all, consider the name Endless Frontier.

The two are sort of oxymoronic.

They don't go together at all.

They've also rebranded this thing recently as the U.S.

Innovation and Competition Act.

If you've got to brand it as that, it's not going to do what it says.

It creates a new directorate,

a new technology directorate within the National Science Foundation, and ends up throwing around about $200 billion, much of this going directly to the National Science Foundation.

People who have been known over time to spend millions of dollars studying such cutting-edge questions like how long does it take a pan of air to go to the bathroom

and

in this they try to basically out-compete China at China's own game we're going to beat China by developing much more of a command and control authoritarian approach toward technology development and entrepreneurial spirit that this is the China way of doing things this is how we lose we cannot and will not ever beat China at China's own game we have to beat China by playing our game better.

And our game involves free markets.

It involves civil society.

And it involves recognizing the proper role of government and leaving government outside of everything else.

So this is, you remember the,

if you will, the State of the Union speech that Joe Biden gave?

Beforehand, he talked to reporters and he said, you know, There's a great debate, and I know which side I'm on, but there's a great debate right now on whether a democracy,

something as great as ours,

can actually compete against Russia and China because they can move so much faster.

Basically, he was arguing for fascism or communism.

And this is the fruition of that.

This is the fruit of that question.

He didn't believe in the United States system.

He does believe in command and control.

And this

is to what?

I mean,

we all get together.

When I say we, the government minds get together and say, hey, we should develop

this technology, and then suddenly we do it.

Yeah.

Look, if this were happening in another country, this sort of approach to developing technology and economics and their ability to compete, if it were occurring in another country, country, we'd have words for those.

And I think you used a form of the word fascism a minute ago.

It's sort of the word we use when we see industry and government combining and saying we're going to make everything more efficient by developing a command and control economy.

And this, keep in mind, Blen, is a country with the worst

human rights record imaginable.

And yet we're going to try to be like them.

Look, my view is that we ought to decrease regulation and not invest in regulatory bodies.

Instead of chilling innovation and competition, we ought to decentralize power and champion trust in the private sector.

And we ought to simplify and cut taxes, not offshore our jobs.

We ought to use our critical minerals and not let them languish.

We need to partner with our allies and not restrict fair trade.

We need to harvest timber and not organs.

We need to value families and not diminish them.

And we ought to be encouraging entrepreneurship and not crony capitalism.

We ought to strengthen our markets, not government.

This does the opposite of all those things, and we've got to defeat this.

So, this is really the great reset.

I mean, this is part of that whole thing that's coming

out of

the,

what is it, the Economic Council, the, the, Stu, help me out here, the Economic Forum

out of Europe.

This is the idea.

It is fascism, and it's a public-private partnership.

And the government picks the winners and the losers.

And

you can get all kinds of help from the United States government if you're playing ball and you are creating the things they want people to create.

It is the definition of fascism.

That sort of of system, by the way, works out really well if you are wealthy and well-connected.

It works out not at all if you don't have friends in government and you're not already wealthy.

But this increases restrictions on entry.

This makes it impossible for the lean, mean, innovating machine who comes along with just a good idea.

It makes it very, very difficult.

And it does so in the guise of economic development, which is really, really sad.

This is going to be something that forever will tarnish, harm, and impair upward economic mobility, which has been one of the hallmark characteristics of our economic system.

So, are there enough people in the Senate to call that will stand against this?

There are a growing number of senators who don't want to support this.

As of a week ago,

this bill was looking very likely to pass.

We were

afraid we had good reason to believe that it was going to pass by last Thursday.

A small handful of us decided to stay up all night and keep the Senate in session and keep debating on this to delay a vote.

We were able to delay the vote until this coming Monday.

But it's going to be a close vote.

It's not clear whether it will pass yet.

We can stop it.

Who are the senators that should be targeted with kind phone calls saying, hey, please, I know you're on the fence,

do not support this bill?

You know,

it is

a safe way of putting it is communicate that to all senators.

Whether you have a reason to believe that your senator might have cast procedural votes in favor of this thing beforehand or not, just to assume that they might otherwise be tempted to support it and you'll be safer because most members of the U.S.

Senate have, at one point or another, expressed a degree of support for this.

Some of them are learning more about it.

So if everybody just communicates, we don't like this,

we're going to be in a much better position.

You know,

I know they reduced the number.

They went from like $200 billion to $20 billion.

You can't even open this door.

You can't open the door.

Am I wrong?

Well, you're wrong that this is a toned-down version of this.

I mean, this thing's gotten bigger.

It's gotten more expensive, not less so.

But you are absolutely right.

That the minute you start to say we're going to start to be like China a little, that that means we're somehow going to become more efficient or that we're somehow going to become a system that's more friendly to the small-time entrepreneur who doesn't have big connections in government and isn't already wealthy.

You can't open that door because the minute you open it, you're going down a path that's bad.

See, Glenn, this all focuses on a misapprehension about what government is.

Government doesn't have eyes to see you.

It doesn't have a heart to love you.

It doesn't have arms to embrace you.

Government is only one thing, and that's force.

Force and the ability to collect taxes through force.

Once we remember that feature, then we start to utilize government for that which only government can do to protect us, to protect life, liberty, and property.

And occasionally it can help us out with some public good type arrangements like roads.

But other than that, we need to keep government out because government doesn't do command and control economy well.

It's not a possibility.

This seems to presuppose that some of that is good, and it's not.

Let me change the subject here.

We had a hack into now one of our four meat processors.

It was

JB, what is it, JB,

I don't know, one of the big meat companies.

It's a quarter.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

It's a quarter of our meat.

production gone.

Now they're getting back online after the cyber attack, which would imply to me that they've paid some sort of ransom.

If they can't, if the United States government can't

keep the cyber criminals away from JBS or from

the colonial pipeline, what good are they?

This is the thing they should be concentrating on.

This is their priority, according to the Constitution, is to keep us safe.

What should be done?

Because

the responses that I have heard about getting rid of

cryptocurrency and everything else is just a nightmare.

Yeah, look,

I'm going to state a somewhat controversial opinion here,

which is

we've got far too much consolidation anyway in the meat packing and processing industry.

Oh, thank God.

Yes.

The fact that that many people,

that few people control

like a fourth or a fifth of our meat packing and meat processing industry in America is wrong.

And in fact, it ties in

somewhat indirectly, but closely nonetheless, to our previous conversation, which is

when you force a federal regulatory system on the entire nation, even over things that shouldn't require that.

In other words, there's no reason why the meat inspectors that inspect the meat in Utah or Idaho have to be the same ones that inspect it in Texas or in New York, shouldn't all have to go through a federal regulatory process.

If we didn't have that and we allowed states and localities to do their own thing, there wouldn't be such a massive drive for consolidation.

If there weren't such a massive drive for consolidation, you wouldn't have as few few points of vulnerability because you wouldn't have this kind of massive scale

accumulation of market control.

This is independently concerning.

And I understand the cyber

attack aspects of it are also very concerning.

And those have got to be dealt with.

But the free market itself has incentive to protect itself from that.

I don't necessarily want the government taking control of all companies' cybersecurity needs either, because it will do a bad job at that.

But at a bare minimum, Glenn, the federal government can stop creating a regulatory environment in which we end up with only a tiny percentage

of a tiny number of meat processors and packers that control everything.

Yeah, well, I don't know if you've been following, but there's something really wrong in the meat industry with the processors.

The cattlemen are being screwed.

Meanwhile, the head of JBS says that, you know, meat's going to become very, very expensive, and that's why you're going to have to go to vegetable

meat.

Well, they're one of the makers of vegetable beef.

And

I just think there is collusion and all kinds of incentive, and there's only four of them.

One is Chinese-owned.

This is crazy.

And they are making profit like crazy while the farmers are being put out of business.

They can't make money raising beef anymore.

And I just don't think it's a coincidence.

It's not.

It's not.

When the federal government steps in, when it demands that everything be regulated by the government, and that that government doing the regulating always has to be federal, it always creates market distortions.

Those market distortions lead to a sensitive accumulation of power in the hands of the few, and that in turn leads us to a very vulnerable position.

Will you back a bill to

investigate these meat packing companies?

Absolutely.

No Grassley is signed on to one.

Yeah.

And do you trust the DOJ to be able to actually do that honestly?

I trust the DOJ to be able to do its work in a way that is either honest or that if it's not honest, it'll be discernible to a handful of us who will watch that closely.

Mike, I'm grateful that you're in the Senate.

I know because I know you how many times you've thought, I can't do this anymore.

But I am grateful that you stand every single day and

you take every whip

and you dismiss it.

And I'm grateful for that.

Thank you.

Thank you, Glenn.

God bless.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

So,

Stu,

let me bring you in to tell the story of poor little Kimmy Schmidt.

And I know you're as torn, you have to be, as torn on this story as I am.

Yeah, partially.

So, the story is,

her name is Ellie Kemper.

She's an actress.

She was on the office.

You remember her as Erin on the office.

I don't know.

She's, to me, like, it's the type of person that you just look at and are happy happy because you look at like just seeing her face makes me happy.

I don't know what it is.

Maybe it's just because I'm a big office fan.

Right.

But apparently the internet has no such

attachments.

No, there's nobody happy on the internet.

No, no.

Everybody's miserable.

And like, we're like, gosh, I can't understand why we can't solve these problems.

Every time you go onto social media, everyone's awful.

I wonder what the cause could be.

It's a whole nother rant.

But so Ellie Kemper, an actress, she

is in trouble now, Twitter trouble.

She's about to be canceled in the midst of being canceled by not just Twitter, of course, but multiple large media organizations who have now decided to jump on this bandwagon.

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.

Wait, she's in Twitter jail.

Has she done anything on Twitter?

No, nothing.

Has she sent anything on Twitter?

People are tweeting about her.

They have tweeted that she is the KKK princess.

She's the KKK princess.

Yeah.

Wow.

Yes.

And you get the types of headlines from, and you know this is a very reliable source, the Daily Beast.

Yes, the offices, Ellie Kemper, was beauty queen of a racist ball.

That's how it's being summarized.

So

the backstory is she

was

crowned the queen of love and beauty at

what

sort of sort of was referred to as the Veiled Prophet Fair.

Now, the Veiled Prophet Fair is something in St.

Louis where

it was created back in the 1870s, I believe.

Now, little known fact about American history, everything created in the 1870s was racist.

All things in the 1870s were racist.

At least, certainly.

Well, especially in the South.

Right, certainly.

In the South, most likely.

Certainly as it applies to today's society.

Even the people we look at as civil rights heroes of the 1870s said things you would not feel comfortable saying today.

Yeah.

Yes, right.

Now,

it does appear, by all accounts, that the early days of this particular fair were, it was created by very rich, white, powerful people, and many of them were racists.

There's some of the imagery of that time, again, in the 1870s,

that was,

I would say, looks, it's themed, seemingly themed towards the KKK.

Okay.

So, okay, all right.

I don't think anyone is going back and saying, like, you know what, was a great,

a great founding was the founding of this particular event.

I mean, it was looked, it's been looked at for a very long time as having a problematic history.

Now, over time, as we moved into, you know, the 20th century, it became to be a problem.

People started complaining about those sorts of themes.

And over, you know, eventually, black people became members of the organization.

You know, later on, you know, the 70s,

you know, this is 20 years before Ellie Kemper was named the

queen of love and beauty at this particular car.

Right.

Yeah.

In fact, the name was changed.

Like, all of this is ancient history.

They changed the name to Fair St.

Louis.

And

Ellie Kemper in 1999 became the 105th girl,

she was 19 years old, to be given the title of, you know, to win this little fair.

Now,

what started this controversy?

I watched her all these years and I didn't know she was a hidden clan member.

Yeah, you'll, yeah.

I had no idea.

You'll notice she was not alive in 1877, not alive in 1977.

So she says.

So she says.

Have you seen her birth certificate?

No, I haven't.

In fact, she may have been born.

Who knows?

Maybe in Kenya.

We don't know.

We're going to find that out later.

So,

what started this recent controversy, Glenn, is, you know, some idiot on Twitter, of course, tweeting that she was the KKK princess and referring to a 2014 Atlantic article.

An article in the Atlantic had excerpts from a book about this particular fair saying it was problematic,

you know, went through sort of a history of it.

Did not reference Ellie Kemper.

The story was not about Ellie Kemper, but basically said, like, this fair is not a good idea because it has a racist history.

Then someone digs up, hey, Ellie Kemper was the winner of this award at this fair, And now Ellie Kemper equals racism, I guess, is how this thing works.

Now,

all of the problems with this analogy were

she was 19 at the time.

The fair was not even the same fair.

It was named something else.

She was not around in the 1870s.

It was not a KKK fair at the time.

There were black members who for some reason wanted to join this racist organization many years later,

nothing points to the idea at all that she had any racist feelings, intent, and nothing like that at all is even

being

assumed.

What white America, the racist white America, says every time you point out their hidden systemic racism, Stu.

Right.

Now,

even the people cited in the article have come out and said,

No, Ellie Kemper is not a racist.

There's no reason to believe she's a racist.

The people who said the fair was racist are saying, like, you don't understand, this developed into a St.

Louis tradition and it really had nothing to do.

Its roots were bad, but it was not like that at this point.

Also, most of the girls who participate in this particular event are not excited about it.

They're doing it for their dads.

Their dads have been, you know, maybe part of this organization for a while.

They're going along with

these are the people who are saying the organization was racist at one time are saying this about her.

So

I think on its surface plays as a very typical, ridiculous cancel culture example, right?

There's no reason to believe Ellie Kemper is a racist.

She has never shown any signs of racism.

It is a completely nonsensical story based on some idiot tweeting something they knew nothing about.

And then the experts have come out and

No, she's not racist.

This is not what to assume from this piece.

And just because this happened, what, 20-some years ago,

you think that just washes away all of the racism that she clearly either knew or didn't know

and either was or wasn't at the time.

You just think it just washes all of that guilt away.

First of all, there's no guilt.

She should not feel guilty about this.

But the

secondary part, and of course, I should say, she should not feel guilt about this.

I will not be surprised at all if she is apologizing, though, by the end of the day.

We should be clear about that.

Of course she will be.

This is, of course, the way she's going to handle it.

Now, part of the reason I know she's going to handle it that way, or I believe she will, is because she's a big liberal.

I mean, she's no conservative.

She's a big liberal.

you know, been all over talking about, you know, she's not like, I wouldn't say an incredibly politically active person, but has been every

example you could find of her being political has been to the left.

Her parents were wealthy people from St.

Louis and have some, you know, loose ties, supposedly to some Republican policies, but she's not at all that way and has donated to like Black Lives Matter.

So that introduces you to the second layer of the story.

And I think...

Part of it, which is interesting to our audience and how we react to it, because I think we would all agree on the surface, Ellie Kemper is completely innocent here, and this is a blatantly terrible example of cancel culture.

On the other hand, there is certainly a part of me

that sees someone who donates to Black Lives Matter, an organization that is actively creating this world that does these things to people all the time.

cancels them for nothing all the time.

Right.

When you are right on that side of the argument and you create and manifest this society in this way and cheer it on over and over and over again, are we really supposed to feel bad for you?

And I, right, are we supposed to, are we supposed to get up and

help you?

And then, but there's a bigger part of me, Stu, that just says, isn't it time to have some ice cream?

Right.

It's like,

you know, Pat says this every once in a while, Pat Gray from Pat Gray Unleashed.

He says, I just love it when liberals eat their own.

And like,

you know,

I go back and forth on this because I can feel,

you know,

there's that sort of,

I don't know, instinct, animal instinct inside of you to say, screw her.

Yeah, she, she helped build this and screw her.

She's going to have to, she made this bed.

She's going to have to lie in it.

On the other hand, I think the right thing to do,

the right thing to do is to say that she's not a racist because you know what?

She's not.

And there's no reason to believe that she is.

This thing is bigger, though, than this left-right thing that we talk about all the time, Glenn.

And that, like, you know, look, they go after the left on this stuff, too, constantly.

Right.

What comes to mind is the old saying:

liberals can't live with them.

Seriously, isn't it about time to get some ice cream?

Seriously, I mean,

is that the official Glenn Beck position?

No, my official position is we should support her because this is crazy.

Because

we make no ground.

We make no friends.

And I'm not saying we're going to make friends, but we make no friends by just throwing her under the bus.

We are not taking the higher ground, so they just continue to think that we're monsters.

And that's fine.

You don't do it for that reason.

You do it because if I don't stand for the person

who I really abhor their positions, if I don't stand for them, nobody's going to stand for me.

Nobody will stand for me.

Yeah.

And morally, I don't want to be a part of that culture.

Morally, I think it's unquestionable what the right thing to do is, right?

But if you take the morals out of it for a second, because you know, this is America in 2021,

that is a problem.

Listen to what you just said.

Morally, it's clear, clear.

But let's take the morals out for a second.

I will say a lot of times, I only say that because I don't think that always wins the argument anymore.

There was a time, I think, where you could just say, like, this is blatantly the right thing to do.

And whatever the consequences are, screw it.

You do it anyway.

I don't think that's where America is these days.

So let me make a pragmatic argument for it as well.

When we come out and we...

The left comes up with a ridiculous standard.

Like, let's just cancel everyone for saying something that isn't racist because we can come up with some bizarre justification that it is.

And we think that's a bad standard, and we complain about the standard, and it keeps getting applied to us.

Then it gets applied to the other side, and we say, okay, well, you guys made the rules, therefore we're going to apply them to you.

What we're admitting there is we're allowing them to make the rules.

We are codifying their terrible standard by enforcing it on both sides instead of fighting the standard.

And I think the standard is what needs to go down here, not Ellie Kemper.

No one cares.

I mean, look, I like Ellie Kemper.

I'm a fan of her.

But like, there's no huge political win in losing Ellie Kemper from the left.

She's just an actress.

I, you know, I am much more interested in convincing people who are winnable that this cancel culture standard is ridiculous.

And sometimes examples from the left help win those people in the middle over easier than just defending your own side.

I think taking that stand is an important thing to do.