Best of the Program | 11/6/19

Hey, welcome to the podcast.

Stu is back from his wonderful vacation here at Disney.

He is completely flat broke and now in debt.

So he's going to be here for a while.

Congratulations on that.

We do, we have a lot of great stories.

ABC now caught on tape and ABC anchor saying, we have this story, we have everything on it

on Epstein, and the network wouldn't let it run.

The network says, oh, well, no, that's because we didn't have it buttoned up.

up i'll let you decide as we talk about this but that's now abc and nbc

both of them editing about jeffrey epstein but i'm sure we can trust them on brett kavanaugh oh sure

uh also uh the whistleblower um

nobody wants to say his name we do and we tell you why it's so important and we learn how to pronounce it We do.

I think we do.

Big discovery in today's program.

And population control.

Being green, stopping eating meat, not enough.

Now we have to reduce the population.

This sounds like fun.

All on today's podcast.

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

We say welcome back to

Stu, who had a vacation with his family in Disney, California, you see the new Star Wars thing?

I did, yeah.

Good.

It's really cool.

Like, at points, you're standing in the middle of this area, and you feel like you're just in the movie because it's all-encompassing.

Like, everywhere you look, it just looks like Star Wars.

So, that was pretty cool.

And I, you know, I've mortgaged my home, sold it,

sold a couple of the children.

You kind of had a fire sale on that.

I was a little surprised.

Yeah.

Kids wanted to eat while they were at Disney, too.

Yes.

They wanted a big elephant ear.

So those things are expensive.

Every time you hear about economic problems, you don't see them at Disneyland.

People don't mind spending $54.95 on a corndog.

Oh, no, that's funny.

They do.

No, no, no.

They do.

I don't think they do.

I think it's a point where it's just like the American people.

You get to a point where you just have to eliminate the idea that finances exist.

And if you do that, things seem great, right?

Like there's a fancied mouse walking around, and there's this goofy guy, and he seems pretty funny.

And there's Pluto, it's a dog, and he's cool.

And I have no more money.

And that is this, right?

This is what happens with the American people, right?

Like you go out and you vote.

We were talking about this with Texas.

Texas.

This is not California.

This is not New York.

Texas had 10 ballot propositions

you could vote on last night.

Texas.

No, they were good.

They were good people.

Oh, they were good.

And you you look at it and you're just like, well, is there any way

to stop a ballot proposition from passing if you say you're spending money on something?

Especially if it's something that sounds moderately positive.

Like

additional Texas Water Development Board bonds.

Should we be doing that in Texas?

Of course.

64 to 36 gets approved.

Hang on just a second.

The constitutional amendment, constitutional amendments.

These are all constitutional amendments.

Providing for the issuance of additional general obligation bonds by the

Texas Water Development Board of an amount not to exceed $200 million to provide financial assistance for the development of certain projects in economically distressed areas.

This is sort of on the back of Harvey, Hurricane Harvey.

This would permit the Water Development Board to use bonds for projects in areas of the state with greater financial need.

That's great.

Of course, we got to approve

that.

We've got to do that.

64 to 36.

Yeah.

Temporary property tax exemption for disaster areas.

Again, all right.

Yeah, well, you know, this has been damaged by a disaster,

and there's been an official disaster declaration.

Let those people get back on their feet.

Let's just cut the taxes.

There's a little more spending, a little less revenue in the first couple here.

How about prohibiting state income tax on residents?

Now, of course.

You don't even have to read it.

No.

Well, you don't.

You want to prohibit.

So the answer is actually yes.

This was a big confusing thing that was coming down to

the line of the vote.

But

if you want to prohibit the state income tax, you want to vote yes.

Right.

So it's a little confusing, but

the constitutional amendment prohibiting the imposition of an individual income tax, including a tax on an individual sheriff partnership or unincorporated association income, the answer is, yeah, I don't want any income tax in the state of Texas.

We don't have state income tax now, and this is a constitutional amendment saying we'll never have it unless you amend the constitution.

So it's not that hard.

Apparently not that hard.

I don't know why

it's not 70%.

This should be two-thirds of the state to amend a constitution.

Right.

That's just 50% here in Texas.

So that one passed 77 to 23.

How about sporting goods sales tax to fund parks, wildlife, and historical agencies?

Of course.

Well, those are good things.

So therefore, the answer is yes.

We're hunters, and we want to make sure that we take care of our state parks and our wildlife.

Are you anti-park?

Yeah.

Is that a position you're taking?

You're anti-park?

No.

Well, 13% of the evil people here in Texas did take that position.

13%.

13%.

87 to 13,

which was the final vote on that one.

How about increasing bonds for cancer prevention and research institute?

Now, look.

Do you want cancer?

Do we want cancer?

Of course we don't want cancer.

Nobody likes cancer.

Cancer, bad, in all circumstances.

But here's the thing: 64 to 36 for more money for it.

So now we've, if you've noticed the pattern here, and this is the California problem.

Same problem in California, same problem in Texas, the same problem with everywhere that has these constitutional amendments where the average person can go vote on them instead of a representative democracy, representative republic, like we were given initially.

You can vote for no taxes and all the spending.

What?

That's like

it's like going to Disneyland.

Yeah.

As long as you don't care about all the, but you can get all the pictures you want with Minnie Mouse.

She's just going to charge you $54.95 every time the flash just looks at it.

Don't worry about it.

Yeah.

Don't worry about late count.

Someone else will pay it down the road.

Right.

How about

increasing distributions to the state school fund?

Wait, kids?

It's got school.

It's got school in it.

Of course, we need that money.

Right.

73 to 27.

How about a creation of a flood infrastructure fund?

Oh, we need one of those.

Of course.

That sounds good, right?

You want flood if there's going to be a flood.

You need

infrastructure to go against it.

So that passes 76 to 24.

Another property tax exemption for the money.

Hang on just a second.

That is actually the one that I look at and go, that one probably should.

Constitutional amendment providing for the creation of flood infrastructure fund to assist in the financing of drainage, flood mitigation, and flood control projects.

A lot of this stuff came on the back of Hurricane Harvey, which hit Houston so badly and all over Texas.

If people in New Orleans would have done this, it wouldn't have been so bad.

But they never did it.

Right.

And here, but here's the issue.

There's not anything on this list that you'd look at and say, oh, well,

we don't need to fund cancer research.

There's nothing on here where you say it's a bad idea.

Of course, you want all those things.

But that's the problem.

When the government offers all those things, the people take all those things.

And the same thing goes for the taxes.

Of course, people don't want to pay extra taxes for all these things.

Yes, they see tax exemption in one of these things.

They're going to vote for it most of the time.

It's almost impossible to find something with the word school or cancer or health or floods or disaster in it that will not pass in one of these situations, which is why our founders kind of said, you know, what isn't a good idea is having all of our

expenditures being designated and doled out through votes

through democracy.

This was the plan from the progressives.

You didn't do this before.

You had a representative democracy or republic.

Yeah, you have an election, you hire someone who's supposed to be good at what you're asking them to do, and then they go in there and they figure this stuff out, and then you vote them in or out of office.

Right, but you couldn't get them to do the things that progressives wanted.

So they started in California and they went directly with these kinds of things for a direct vote because we all love democracy.

Well, democracy gets you California.

Democracy is getting us this.

So you look through all of these.

Yes on all of the spending and any of the taxes are no, including property tax exemption for precious metals in depositories.

Now, we just built in Texas a massive depository for gold.

We got all of our gold back from the Federal Reserve.

So, all of that gold that Texas held gold that went now into some underground vault that has been built.

So, Texas has all gold, it has all of its gold.

Now, listen to this.

It's a constitutional amendment.

Tell me why people voted yes or no for this.

The constitutional amendment authorizing the legislature to exempt from ad valorum taxation precious metals held in a precious metal depository located in this state.

I would guess that

less than 1%

knew what ad valorum meant.

Right, even though even though what it means.

Yeah,

it could be like a property tax

excise tax.

Well, I don't really like ads.

I think they should be commercial

Commercial free gold.

From ad valorum taxation.

Right.

Basically,

it's a property tax.

You know, a million people voted on this.

Did 10,000 know what ad valorum meant?

No.

No.

No, right?

No, which is why it was close.

It was

yes, 54.

No, 46, because people were like, ad valorum, that sounds fancy.

I don't know.

That's a trick.

Yeah.

I don't like those.

Who's writing this thing?

Someone's speaking a different language.

Therefore, I'll vote no.

They're tricking us.

Well, I think, honestly, the only thing there that saves that one and makes it close is it sounds like precious metals.

It sounds like rich people.

So people are willing to vote against it.

But the bigger issue here, I think, is.

Something we've all vilified as it's terrible.

We should all be pragmatic.

We should all be, we should all just, I just want to, I just care about what's right.

I'm not ideological.

I don't have an ideology.

These ideological, the ideological people are the problem.

No, an ideology is simply a group of beliefs and policies that, and this is important, work together.

So if you believe in lower taxes, what you're saying is I want a smaller government that does less.

If you believe in

all excessive spending, then you need to believe in higher taxes to pay for it.

What we get are people who don't want to pay any of the taxes, but do want to pay for all the free stuff.

Which side is Ad Valorum on?

I don't know.

That's the one I'm against.

Okay.

That's the one I'm against.

Okay, yeah, he's

may I just point out one more thing?

Yes.

I'd like to see the Constitution of Texas because it's a really crappy constitution, and I don't like to take on Texans on their constitution.

But Proposition 10

is a constitutional amendment

to allow the transfer of law enforcement dogs to qualified caretakers in certain circumstances.

It's a long constitution.

When your constitution is covering dog handlers,

I don't know if it's a constitution anymore.

It's more just a rule book, you know, that we...

A list of stuff I want.

Yeah,

it's almost like Santa's list.

What, you don't like police dogs?

You want them to just be destroyed?

Is that what you want?

I want all those gold-holding police dogs that have cancer to die in a flood.

That's wow.

You would have voted knowing a lot of this stuff.

Yes, I would have.

And they should all be paying higher taxes, income taxes.

The best of the Glenbeck program.

Hey, it's Glenn, and you're listening to the Glenbeck program.

If you like what you're hearing on this show, make sure you check out Pat Gray Unleashed.

It's available wherever you download your favorite podcasts.

It looks like Matt Bevan, who was our guest yesterday, Matt Bevan lost in the gubernatorial race.

He has not conceded yet, though, has he?

No,

at least as of this morning, he has not.

It was, I mean, it's a very close race.

It was a few thousand votes.

And it looks like he wants to see a recount, which is, I think, within his right.

You know, usually something, an election with several thousand votes does not normally get overturned, but it's within that range where why not look at it again?

It's an important decision.

Kentucky, I think, is going to regret

this election in the future,

but

it's not an easy terrain for Republicans.

This is what happens when you...

You hire somebody and they put you on an austerity diet.

Yeah, it's exactly the thing we were just pointing out.

If you do the thing that I'm advocating, you lose elections.

This is what happens.

If you go out and you say, you know what?

Actually, people, we can't give you all the free,

all the free funds and all the free school spending and all the free things.

You know what?

You can't really have all of that.

You can only have a little bit of it.

When you say that to people, they say, oh, okay, well, get out of here.

There's the door.

You see it?

You can have all that.

You can have the whole door.

Walk through it.

It's really cool.

The district I live in, the school district I live in, they wanted even more money.

And I'm like, what do you want?

Do you want a helipad for the kids?

What do you want?

I mean, it is insane.

It's insane how you can just say kids and school and pass anything.

Pass anything.

Anything.

I've never seen one fail that puts that in there.

I've never in my life seen it.

Now, I'm sure it's happened.

No, it's but I've never seen it in the place I've lived.

We should be starving these schools to death for money only because they're not working.

They're not working.

Our school systems and our educational standards are the lowest they've ever been.

Our test returns, lowest they've ever been.

People don't even know our history.

We should be starving these schools to death.

And look,

so much more of this should be private.

In a country like the United States, it should be much more private.

Like, even if you have a system of public schools, it should be a fallback option for places that need it.

Not the only option and the main thing people go to.

I mean, we should be looking at this as we should, all these things like school vouchers used to be important policies that Republicans pushed for and were very popular, by the way.

But, you know, those things have been abandoned.

Just because of the teachers' unions.

Yeah.

I think the teachers' unions.

That was one of those things that Bevin was one of the reasons why

he lost, just because he went after teachers' unions.

Yeah, and it was all about the kids in school.

Yeah.

Everybody, oh, we got to take care of the kids, got to take care of education.

You don't think Matt Bevin wants to take care of kids in education?

Of Of course, it's a failing system.

And you are, and let me tell you something.

If a teacher likes being told exactly what to do in every situation, in every classroom,

they're not meant to be a teacher.

They're really not.

I want the teachers who think out of the box.

I want teachers to have their own control.

I want teachers to be able to

come and find a different way to teach.

But all of these teachers are told you have to teach exactly this and exactly this way.

Have we not learned anything from every Robin Williams movie?

I mean, this is essentially his entire career was built on he was a doctor with a red nose.

I'm doing surgery differently.

I close my eyes and I do it with a heart in one hand.

And the guy was like, it sounds like a terrible idea, but he did it differently.

And then there was, you know, he was always in front of a class.

A dead poet society wasn't on him, too.

Hey,

I'm doing everything differently.

All the rules, you throw them out the window, and I'm going to be funny for about 12 seconds in this movie, even though you're expecting it to be a comedy.

That's real, right?

I mean, there is an yes, some structure is good, of course.

But, you know, these are people who are trying to create.

Good teachers can engage a kid's mind because they're creative.

They're giving them a different way of thinking of things.

They're excited about it.

Every kid is different.

And if you don't capture their imagination, especially in today's world, you got nothing.

Yeah.

You got nothing.

They're going to be on TikTok in five seconds, you know, watching some stupid video of a person running into a wall.

And that's going to win most of the time

unless you really engage teachers.

And how people don't think that our local systems should be empowered to work this all out.

I mean, what is it?

Schools get 3% of their money from the federal government, something like that, and it's like 80% of the paperwork for federal government.

I mean, it's insane.

One of the best principals around,

I read this story about a principal who spends all of her day just filling out all the paperwork saying to the federal government, yeah, we're doing all that, even though they're not doing any of it.

I mean,

the federal government is making people lie to be able to have a better school.

It's just insane.

It's insane.

It doesn't work.

Why do we keep voting for more?

We keep giving them more money and the scores keep getting worse and worse and worse.

What are we doing?

I wouldn't want that to happen to us, you know, as radio hosts.

I wouldn't, I want to be the guy who could break the rules.

Like, you know, good morning, Vietnam, something like that, where you're just the one DJ that's breaking the rules of the military because this is the only role I ever do and no one ever noticed it.

And now I'm dead and people are just starting to pick it up.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Hey, it's Glenn.

And if you like what you hear on the program, you should check out Pat Gray Unleashed.

His podcast is available wherever you download your favorite podcast.

Hi, it's Glenn.

If you're a subscriber to the podcast, can you do us a favor and rate us on iTunes?

If you're not a subscriber, become one today and listen on your own time.

You can subscribe on iTunes.

Thanks.

Charimella.

Charimella.

I'm getting this in now.

Eric Charamella.

Yeah.

Charamella.

It is like a

Charamella in the morning.

Eric Charamella at night.

That doesn't quite work.

I'm writing, I'm working on a song.

called Eric Charamella.

Or Caramella.

Or Caramel Malo.

I don't, I don't, I'm not, maybe that's why they don't want the name out because

you don't confuse it with a candy bar.

They don't know how to pronounce it.

I'm not really sure.

Could it be the media is just holding this back because they don't want to pronounce it wrong?

It could be.

It could be that.

Could be.

Doubtful, but could be.

In about three years, we're going to get a great video of like an ABC news anchor saying how they had this whole Eric Charomella story down and they wouldn't let us go with it.

Wouldn't let us go with it.

Wouldn't let us go with it.

I had every aspect of this lockdown.

Now, here's the game that's being played on Capitol Hill.

Now, listen to Rand Paul.

Here's Rand Paul yesterday being stopped by a reporter.

Asking, what are you doing?

You can't release his name.

Here it is.

The whistleblower laws, though, they protect a whistleblower.

You know it's illegal to out a whistleblower.

You see, you got that wrong, too.

I mean,

you should work on the facts.

Here's the thing is, the whistleblower statute protects the whistleblower from having his name revealed by the Inspector General.

Even the New York Times admits that no one else is under any legal obligation.

The other point, and you need to be very careful if you really are interested in the news, is that the whistleblower actually is a material witness.

completely separate from being the whistleblower because he worked for Joe Biden.

He worked for Joe Biden at the same time Hunter Biden was receiving $50,000 a month.

So the investigation into the corruption of Hunter Biden involves this whistleblower because he was there at the time.

Did he bring up the conflict of interest?

Was there discussion of this?

What was his involvement with the relationship between Joe Biden and the prosecutor?

There's a lot of questions that the whistleblower needs to answer.

Yeah, there's a lot.

And it kind of falls apart once you know who Eric Caramella is.

Once you know who Eric Caramella is and you see all the connections, then you're like, oh, we should say the name Eric Caramella.

Now, I don't know.

Charamella.

Or Charamella, whichever it may be.

I'm not sure.

I'll take it from him.

That's the one thing I'll take from him.

I'd like to know.

Would you believe him if he told you how to pronounce his name?

I don't know.

I would need a second source.

I would need a second source.

You can't ban words and names by law coming out of a regular citizen's mouth.

That's not the way

the country operates.

Listen to me.

Listen to me.

We don't know.

Even Chuck Schumer, play the Chuck Schumer conference yesterday.

He said he doesn't even know the name of the whistleblower.

The calls to make public the whistleblower's identity are despicable.

Despicable.

The whole purpose of the whistleblower law was to protect people when they had the courage to come forward.

This whistleblower is obviously coming forward because he was so concerned about where President Trump was leading America.

And every single Republican senator, including the Republican leader, ought to denounce this.

This has nothing to do with answering questions about the status of impeachment or the status of the trial.

This has to do with what America is all about and a law that was passed in a bipartisan way.

Whistleblowers should be protected, period.

Period.

And no one knows who he is, or if you do, you should let me know.

But nobody knows who he is.

Nobody knows who he is.

Everyone.

Everyone knows who he is.

This is the biggest lie.

Everyone knows who the whistleblower is.

And the reason he's being protected is because you ask him any question.

You just look at his job history, and it confirms everything on our blackboard.

Confirms it all.

Confirms it all.

This guy should watch out because it's not going to be a Donald Trump supporter that would ever do anything.

This guy could be Jeffrey Epstein in a heartbeat by all of the people in the DNC

because this guy is is a danger to what they are actually hiding.

Now, let me give you an update.

First of all,

let me just say this.

One of the problems with the whistleblower is seven months ago in April, Senator Chuck Grassley wrote a letter to Attorney General Bill Barr asking about a text message conversation between two FBI agents, Strzok and Page.

Do you remember them?

And that was made into, this is just a relationship thing.

This is just a guy cheating on his wife.

That's all this is.

Well, is it?

Because Chuck Grassley wrote and said, can you find out what this is all about?

He wrote, quote, talking with Bill,

do we want Joe to go with Evenina instead of Charlie for a variety of reasons?

Grassley notes in the footnotes that all aliases are known with the exception of Charlie.

Who's Charlie?

The conversation goes on with Page's response: quote: Hmm, I'm not sure.

Would it be unusual to have him show up again?

Maybe another agent from the team.

Now, why aren't they worried about the optics of a Charlie showing up to a meeting with Trump's transition team?

Why are they hiding Charlie?

Who is Charlie?

Or is he the CI guy?

Hmm.

Because if he could assess if there were any new questions or different demeanor, if Kate's husband is there, he can see if there are people we can develop for potential relationships.

End quote.

They're using what we now think may be the whistleblower to go in and recruit more people to turn against the president of the United States.

This is a coup.

Now, that's not all the whistleblower was doing.

The whistleblower is also,

his presence,

his presence takes apart the lies of the Democrats saying that they had nothing to do at the embassy, that they had absolutely nothing to do.

They were not doing anything at the U.S.

embassy, the Ukrainian embassy in the U.S.

They were not pumping the Ukrainians for information.

And Chalupa, she's just this sweet little mom that's a housewife and there's no connection there.

Well, we know that's not true, but we also know because we have her and the whistleblower together

working

the investigators in Ukraine, telling them you need to find stuff on Trump.

Go back and find stuff on Trump.

We now have them.

Is that the whistleblower?

Because the whistleblower's name that's being bantied about is the same name as the guy who is helping

her.

Now,

in another update,

a U.S.

Representative for Burisma Holdings sought a meeting with the Under Secretary of State, Catherine Novelli, to discuss ending the corruption allegations against the Ukrainian firm where Hunter Biden worked as a board member.

These memos have been obtained under a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit.

What is it the Democrats are hiding?

Well, because of a Freedom of Information Act lawsuit, which, by the way, is not like some mysterious whistleblower, these are facts on paper.

Three weeks before Burisma's overture to the state, Ukrainian authorities raided the home of an oligarch who owned the gas firm,

which employed Hunter Biden.

A signal, the long-running corruption probe, was escalating in the middle of a U.S.

presidential election.

So three weeks

they raided Burisma, Hunter Biden's name, in fact, was specifically invoked by the Burisma representative as a reason the State Department should help.

According to a series of email exchanges among U.S.

officials trying to arrange the meeting, the subject line for the email exchanges just read simply Burisma.

Quoting, per our conversation, Karen Tradmont

Tramont,

whatever, Karen of Blue Star Strategies requested a meeting to discuss with the U.S.

representative, State Department Representative Novelli,

alleging burisma of corruption.

Email between the state officials read,

she noted that two high-profile U.S.

citizens are affiliated with the company, including Hunter Biden as a board member.

They would like to talk to Novelli about getting a better better understanding of how the U.S.

came to the determination that the company is corrupt.

According to Tramamanto, there is no evidence of corruption.

There's been no hearing or process, and evidence to the contrary has not been considered.

Novelli was the most senior official overseeing the international energy issues for the state.

The other woman was a lawyer working for Blue Star Strategies.

It's a Washington firm hired by Burisma.

Another Blue Star official, Sally Painter, both alumni of the Bill Clinton administration, worked with New York-based criminal defense attorney to settle the Ukraine cases in late 2016 and early 2017.

Burisma holdings records obtained by Ukrainian prosecutors state the gas firm made a $60,000 payment to Blue Star November 2015.

She was scheduled to meet with Novelli on March 1st.

State Department officials were scrambling to get answers ahead of that

meeting from the U.S.

Embassy in Kyiv.

So what happened?

What happened?

The vice president,

the State Department, knew that Hunter Biden was going to be investigated.

Burisma came to the State Department and said, you've got to help stop this investigation because Hunter Biden and a couple of other people are involved in this.

So the State Department scrambled to do what they could to figure this out and to stop the investigation, which Democrats say never happened.

They said there was no investigation.

We now have the State Department emails showing that three weeks before he goes, there is an investigation.

They are talking about it.

They know exactly what's going on.

We also showed you in the last special the documents that that prove

that the

general prosecutor in Ukraine, kind of like our attorney general, he went to court and filed the case four weeks

before Joe Biden came in.

So he filed an active case four weeks before.

What does the whistleblower know about any of this?

Because he's with the State Department

what does the State Department know and what are they really hiding one week from tonight we'll show you you're not gonna like it but we'll show you

and quite honestly

I think this thing it could end like a Jason Bourne movie because This is corruption at the highest levels and corruption that is not going to sit well with Democrats, Republicans, Independents.

They are not going to like this.

We expose it next Wednesday.

Make sure you're a member of Blaze TV.

Go to Blazetv.com, use the promo code GLEN, and you're going to save 10% right now.

Don't miss it.

Next Wednesday.

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Like listening to this podcast?

If you're not a subscriber, become one now on iTunes.

And while you're there, do us a favor and rate the show.

Well, I don't know if you know this, Stu, but

Donald Trump notified the United Nations this last Monday, we're formally withdrawing from the Paris Agreement.

It seems so much easier to get into these agreements than to get out of them.

It's almost like Brexit.

It's a Brexit.

I was the same.

It's almost like Brexit.

In about a year, we'll have a referendum on whether we should actually get out

of the Paris Accords.

Now,

it's a one-year process to exit.

It will happen.

It's like a one-year process.

He announced this like two years ago.

Yeah, I know.

I know.

So it's not a one-year process.

You had to have the two years in between, just a cooling off period, just to make sure.

You're not going to go into buy a gun when you're angry.

You need a two-year cooling off period.

And so he's cooled off now for two years, and he's like, yep, I still want want out of the Paris Accords.

So now it's a one-year deal, and it actually will expire, I think, right around

or on

Election Day.

Better get it started.

Not a good day to college.

Got to get that start.

Now,

because Donald Trump just doesn't care about people, the planet, his children, air, water,

any of it.

Hates water.

He hates it.

He hates it.

Hates both hydrogen and oxygen.

Oh, you put the two together.

And it's the opposite of the Reese's peanut butter cup.

He's like, you put hydrogen in my oxygen, you bastards.

So he hates it.

Anyway, more than 11,000 experts now.

These are experts, Du.

Experts.

They're scientists.

Now, nowhere in the story does it say they're scientists of what?

You know,

I don't know.

Maybe it's,

you know, the science of mechanics or, you know, science of race cars.

I don't know.

But they're scientists and they're experts.

And they are calling for a critical addition to the main strategy of dumping fossil fuels for renewable energy.

These 11,000 now declare.

from the the 11,000 scientists from around the world, I'm quoting, clearly and unequivocally, state that the planet Earth is facing a climate emergency.

And to secure a sustainable future, we must challenge the way we live.

Economic and population growth are among the most important drivers of increases in CO2 emissions.

So we got to stop this economic growth.

Don't you just hate that civilization stuff?

Oh, I do.

It's so irritating.

It's almost as irritating as water.

I know.

Because when we weren't as sophisticated and we weren't as far along as we are now, our air was so much cleaner.

Like 100 years ago.

Oh, yeah.

Oh, my gosh.

It was so much cleaner.

You know what?

And then they paved paradise and they put up a parking lot.

Not a parking lot.

In paradise?

Yeah, in paradise.

Holy.

You know, the paradise of that shopping center down the street.

Not the shopping center.

Oh, my gosh.

Yeah.

That used to be paradise, guys.

And now it's a parking lot where

vehicles can carry human beings at 100 miles an hour to hospitals and shopping centers where they can buy things that help them live longer and live happier.

What a terrible thing.

I want more flowers in that lot.

Yeah, because those are doing a hell of a lot of good.

We don't.

Let me tell you something, hate monger.

Okay.

We need

transformations regarding economic and population policies because the population is still increasing by roughly 80 million people per year.

That's more than 200,000 per day.

Imagine hearing that

making

a radical.

Hey, there are more people around.

Isn't that terrible?

I'm trying to tell you what's the science.

Are you an expert?

Obviously not.

Are you a scientist?

Obviously not.

No, I'm a doctor, okay, which makes me an expert.

I'm a doc.

I have my doctorate.

I can't tell you the studies that I had to go through.

The years of studies and tests and

those big long papers that you have to write.

I was like crazy for years.

It could be funny when you call them that.

But I mean, I will say this in your defense.

Yeah.

We are talking about the population of humans, and your doctorate is in humanities.

So, I mean, this is you're pretty much, this is your expertise.

This is Glenn Central.

So, shut up.

All right.

The world population must be stabilized and ideally gradually reduced.

Now, this is within a framework that ensures social integrity.

So now what they're talking, we're not talking about just getting rid of cows.

Soil and green.

It's people.

We're now talking about people.

And it's kind of a passive population control.

You know, they say we just need to educate people better because once they're educated, they stop birthing birthing them babies.

And

so they just want more education

and they want

a greater equality of the sexes.

Oh, yes.

That's a big.

I mean, that's a

great goal, but has nothing to do with

it.

It kind of does.

When you do have more equality for the sexes,

women tend to be able to say, get off me.

That much equality, I think, we're all for.

Yes.

No, and it's true that

over and over and over and over and over again, in only every single example of a country becoming an advanced economy and developing

into the, you know, a level that we would call a developed country today.

All of those cases, birth rates drop.

Yeah, well, this one we can't.

We have to have birth rates drop and

slow down economic progress we can't have developing countries why

because developing countries put up too much co2 yeah see this is a problem here i'm gonna go with uh that's a terrible idea and i'm also gonna say it's also completely uh unfair and um

you go to a country who uh you know we would used to consider third world countries right yeah stop giving them televisions they don't have any idea what they're saying right like that's the thing we're like oh well they don't need the stuff we have.

We're kind of special.

Let's let them, they can, don't they have huts or something?

Let them have the huts and not put any more CO2 out there, and we'll do our thing.

And we'll do all the expensive solar power.

Do you disagree with the Star Trek Prime Directive?

Hello.

First, it would do no harm, right?

No,

you're not supposed to, the Prime Directive, you're not supposed to help other civilizations.

You can't get in the way, right?

You can't get in the way.

You can't help them.

You can't expose them to things.

You're like a documentary filmmaker.

You're just there filming the tribe.

That's exactly right.

And you're not allowed to be seen.

It's the prime directive.

It is.

It is the prime directive.

We violated the Star Trek Prime Directive all over the world.

Well, I felt we violated it the first time when we took all the trees and put them in a tree museum, and then we charged the people a dollar and a half to see them.

I thought that was the first violation, but no.

You know, I never made it to that part of

as soon as you hear them go, ooh,

by pressing the button.

I don't want to find out if it's counting crows or the

Joni.

Oh, they're doing something to that parking.

They made it into a parking lot.

God, pave it.

Pave over them.

That's what I want to do.

Pave over the band as they're playing the song.

You know what?

I like parking lots.

In fact, I like them just playing without any cars.

Just

chew up some glass so anybody that pulls their car in there, because then they'll have to build another parking lot across the street.

That's how much I care about your stupid song.

Anyway,

in a completely unrelated story,

completely unrelated.

The National Health Service Trust has announced in Great Britain that they are launching a red card to racism campaign.

Oh, no.

Yes.

They don't like racism.

Well, that sounds good.

I don't like racism either.

Yes.

So I guess I support this.

I'm going to vote yes on this one.

Following a national trend, staff have reported that incidents of racism on wards have increased over the past year.

So the hospital will be enforcing its zero-tolerance policy against any kind of abusive behavior.

That means any patient abusing staff will be challenged and warned, leading to a sports-style disciplinary yellow card.

And then if they do it again, they get the final red card, which means treatment will be withdrawn.

So we you can go to a hospital and they won't treat you if they think you're too racist?

Yes.

That's

sexist or racist.

Now, I want you to know that the hospital has just removed the British flag from the, I want to get this right, what they call these.

I had never heard of these, but boy, they're so

good here.

Hang on just a second.

It was

their knife vests.

The security, they don't have bulletproof vests because there are no bullets.

Okay, so people people don't want to hurt other people unless they have bullets.

So the security has knife vests

to stop people from shivving them.

And one of the patients saw the flag, the British flag, on one of the knife vests.

And they've now removed those vests.

I mean, not the whole vest, just the flag off that vest because it has been deemed offensive.

So those flags from those vests are not going to get any medical care.

I mean, when you put those two together,

they are going to decide when you're too racist or sexist to give you medical treatment.

But, by the way, the flag of our own country is offensive.

Okay, so here it is.

If you use racist or sexist language,

gestures, or any behavior.

What about can you use the term toots?

I don't think so.

Okay.

I don't think so.

Tutten?

No.

Okay.

Sweetheart?

No.

Okay.

If you're making excessive noise, like, help, help, I'm on fire.

That might, they may stop trying to put you out, you know, because you're on fire.

If you have abused alcohol or drugs.

Now, that seems like a reason you go to the hospital.

Not here.

This is the reason you don't get treatment.

You don't get treatment.

Threatening or offensive language.

Malicious allegations.

like hey, they won't put me out because I'm making too much noise.

That's malicious.

Yeah.

And intentional damage to trust property.

To what?

Trust property.

Okay, so if you damaged the property.

The hospital, yes.

I'm

this is, I mean, look, this is a terrible idea.

And this is just, you know, one of many, many steps they have

to withhold.

treatment slash ration treatment.

When they don't have enough money to pay for this crap anymore, they can all say that we are saying too many swears and then not do our surgery.

Right.

Now, there are some people in the hospital that don't like this, but they've been calling on all of the staff to join its black, Asian, and minority ethnic network

to join them

and support

because they want to stamp out racism and sexism.

And that's what you get when you have a government-run health care system, and then you inject political ideas into health care.

Then you'll be able to just treat the people who have a reason to live.

You know, the people who are adding to our society.

Why treat those people who detract, who make it difficult for people?

I mean, I'd like to say go get your health care someplace else, but there is no other place you can get your health care because it's all been nationalized.

Oh, how many black alley doctors will there be?

This is the best of the Glenn Beck program.

Can you be quiet?

Because there is something very important that I want.

Jane Fonda is fighting climate change.

Do we have that audio, please?

Oh, my gosh.

Here she goes.

So, you see this coat?

I needed something red, and so I went out and found this coat and said, This is the last article of clothing that I'm going to ever buy.

That's it.

To say that I will ever buy in my life may not be much of a concept.

We're going to live to a hundred days.

And that has also made me think a lot about consumerism.

And I grew up when consumerism

didn't have such a stranglehold over us.

So when I talk to people about we don't really need to keep shopping, we shouldn't look at shopping over our identity.

We just don't need more stuff.

Then I have to walk and talk to people.

Would you look up how old Jay Fon is?

This is beautiful.

This is beautiful.

And listen to the crowd.

Listen to the crowd.

They go wild.

There she is.

And she said, look, I bought this red coat because I needed something red.

You prioritize that over the earth.

I mean, obviously.

Yeah, I needed something red.

But she said, this is the last one that she's going to buy.

She's not, I'm not going to buy any more clothes.

Now, here is this brave woman who has been in Hollywood and an icon forever, who probably,

I mean,

God bless her if she has less than a 2,000 square foot closet.

And here she is at 81 saying, I'm not going to buy any new clothes.

Now, what happens on her birthday at 82?

If you buy clothes for her, maybe.

I don't know.

Maybe she'd reject them.

But she's not going to do it.

She says it's the last one.

Now, she won't guarantee this will be the last one until the rest of her life.

She needs something another color at some point.

Yeah.

She clarified.

It's not necessarily the last one the rest of my life.

Then what does it mean when you say this is the last article of clothing I'm ever going to buy?

This week, today?

Were you saying this is the last thing you were going to buy today?

I don't know what that means, but it's stunning that she didn't have more red, considering her viewpoints.

They seem like she was wrapping herself in a red flag.

Red would be a very popular color for her, I would imagine.

And can't you make the case a pretty strong one, I would say,

that one of the let's just say everything they say about global warming is true.

We're all going to die, emissions, that's the end of the end-all, be-all of the world, right?

You can make a pretty strong case that Jane Fonda is singularly more responsible for this problem than any citizen in the United States because she was the one who starred in the China syndrome, which made everyone scared of nuclear power,

which is an emission-free form of electricity.

And the China syndrome is the safest electricity.

ever produced.

Out of anything ever produced.

Yes.

And she

starred in the movie that freaked people out, so we stopped building nuclear power plants that could have actually done something about the emission problem.

Instead, she continues to fight against nuclear power, and she continues to complain in her nice red skin.

We want to be more like France.

Okay?

We just want to be more like France.

I don't think you want to just say that.

Well, I know exactly what I'm saying.

I'm sure they're not using nuclear energy.

About 80% of their electricity is generated by nuclear power.

So

they're actually doing something about emissions from electricity with nuclear power.

Yeah, but their hats aren't as big as ours.

Like, they have those little berets.

That's true.

So they have different hats.

And like our trucker hats has plastic in the back of those trucker hats.

Those things are never going to decompose.

French don't have that.

So let them have their power plants.

It's us with our stupid trucker hats that's destroying the world.

The Blaze Radio Network.

on Demand