Best of the Program | 8/30/19

Welcome to the podcast.

Have a good Labor Day weekend.

But before you do that, listen to this.

We have some interesting stuff from people who are calling in and trying to tell us what their view of the world is.

It's one thing I know Glenn is prioritizing this year is trying to make sure that

we hear your voice a little bit more often.

And we're going to be going into that with a bunch of callers today.

Also, we'll talk about Dave Chappelle, his new comedy special, which is really...

creating quite a stir for saying really obvious things, which is kind of a funny, funny thing in our society these days.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez wants you to know and teach you what capitalism is, because

if she's nothing else, she's an instructor.

We also have some stuff on Mike Lee today, Tom Steyer,

and of course, we have a little bit about

Joe Biden, who can't seem to get any of the stories straight that he's telling on the campaign trail.

All of that on today's pod.

You're listening to

the best of the Blenbeck program.

Here is the latest from CNN on Biden.

He made a, well, what would you call this?

Made up a story,

you know, did a story, but got all of the facts wrong.

I mean, again, from Joe on the Joe Biden curve, this is one of the most accurate things he's ever said in his entire life.

Right.

No,

take off the Joe Biden curve.

Well, because he actually did, the story's about a soldier.

He went to pin a medal on him, and

the soldier apparently said, you know, I don't want this.

Don't even give me the medal because the, you know, his

fighting, his, you know, brother-in-arms had already died, and he didn't feel good about taking it.

And it's kind of an uplifting story about the character of our military.

So, all that happened.

Like, he did actually do it.

He did it when he was a senator, though, not the vice president.

And this is something that has been repeated over and over again.

The Parkland thing was another example of this where he was not vice president when he said he was vice president, meeting with the Parkland kids.

Of course, the shooting happened afterwards.

If he met with the Parkland kids about the shooting when he was vice president, what did he know and when did he know it?

Is what I want to ask.

So

he's one of these guys that he was plotting.

I met with the Parkland kids and plotted this whole thing.

He is one of those guys that I just, you know,

his brain is not,

the wires aren't connecting.

And I think everybody sees this.

Are you saying that I put an abnormal brain

into

a 5'10 vice president?

Is that what you're saying?

I don't.

Sorry, quoting Mel Brooks.

Listen to this.

This is Washington Post.

One big question facing candidates and voters.

Now, this is about Joe Biden from Brian Stelter.

One big question facing candidates and voters is whether President Trump's routine falsehoods have changed the standards

by which other presidential aspirants should be judged.

Okay.

Okay.

Wait, wait.

Wait.

I thought this was about Joe Biden.

The Washington Post,

the revelations about Joe Biden's completely botching, botching a war story.

Last Friday in the campaign trail in New Hampshire, the Democratic

Forerunner told a moving but false story about a Navy captain who, despite his bravery, felt like a failure.

The problem is, except, this is quoting the Post, except almost every detail in the story seems to be incorrect.

More than a dozen, they spoke to more than a dozen U.S.

troops, their commanders, and Biden campaign officials to figure out what actually happened.

They concluded that, quote, Biden jumbled elements of at least three actual events in the story of bravery, compassion, and regret that never happened.

The bottom line is, in the space of three minutes, Biden got the time period, the location, the heroic act, the type of medal, the military branch, and the rank of the recipient wrong, as well as his own role in the ceremony.

So bizarre.

I mean, because

like none of those, and this is what's weird about Biden.

None of those things make the story better.

The story isn't better because he's vice president.

The story isn't better because he's in a different location.

The story isn't better because it's one type of a medal over another type of a medal.

He just doesn't seem to remember anything.

And again, it seems to come back to that same thing where there's just like a

mental

mental brain function that occurs in your average person is occurring in a different way in Joe Biden's head.

And I think it's been like that for a while.

It just seems to be getting much, much worse.

And the important thing here, as far as Democrat voters go, has nothing to do with whether he ever tells another thing that's true in his entire life, whether he ever tells another story that's true.

The issue with Democratic voters here is for them to figure out whether he is so far gone, he's not going to be able to win this election.

The second the Democrats believe these issues lead to him losing to Donald Trump is when he's no longer the frontrunner.

He's Hillary Clinton.

Yeah, I mean.

The minute they realize he can't, he's Hillary Clinton.

They will treat him like Hillary Clinton.

Now,

Devon Cole from CNN notes Biden made other several misstatements not lies misstatements at the same New Hampshire event last Friday including one about how many visits he made to Afghanistan and Iraq but two wrongs don't make a right now listen to this how do you feel now this is about Biden How do you feel about how this may relate to how you feel about Donald Trump?

Lots of progressives are all up in my Twitter mentions saying this Biden story doesn't matter because Trump is a pathological liar.

And lots of conservatives are promoting the Biden story for obvious reasons.

Yeah, here's the obvious reason.

I think he is mentally not fit anymore.

He's not the same guy that he was four years ago.

He is stumbling over his own words.

He looks like he's beginning to go senile.

And that's not conservatives saying that.

That's also a lot of liberals saying that.

But he goes on, but the bar should stay high even if Trump constantly finds way to go lower and lower.

Then he writes, here's the counter argument.

Now, let me ask you this.

Have you heard them have a counter argument?

for Donald Trump getting things wrong ever.

There's never been an excuse where they're like, look, what he probably meant here was this.

They actually jump on it the complete opposite way.

They look for anything he says that's the slightest bit off and then act as if he's making a major policy statement.

You know, this goes back to things like...

Even going back to the very classic example from 2015, where he came down the escalator and said, you know, look, we've got rapists coming across the border.

Everybody who listened to that speech could easily tell that what he is talking about is: are there some?

Yeah.

I mean, the answer to that is yes.

There have been a lot of criminals that have come across the border.

Everybody on earth knows that.

He wasn't saying everybody in Mexico is a rapist, right?

He's saying that, look, we have a problem with crime coming across the border.

And most people were able to decipher that if they were being honest.

But if you go the other way and you just act as if the exact thing he says is a major policy statement, it gets you a lot of clicks.

You get a lot of outrage clicks.

And that is what the media has decided to do with this president.

It's unbelievable.

It's unbelievable.

They will talk down the economy, and they are capable of doing it.

They will never give the president the benefit of the doubt.

Now, look,

if you want to understand this president, you watch what he does,

not what he says.

They've known this since the 1970s with Donald Trump.

Donald Trump is P.T.

Barnum.

Donald Trump knows how to manipulate the press to be able to get coverage.

Now, he should change that, but he's been doing it his whole life.

So you're asking to teach an old dog new tricks.

He doesn't feel comfortable when people aren't talking about him.

That's the way he's lived his entire life.

And we've all known that he's hype.

We've all known this.

We all knew when we voted for him, or

when people voted for him, that

that's baked in.

There's not a single person that I know that really, when it comes down to it at the dead of night, doesn't know that Donald Trump just kind of is loose with the facts, to put it kindly.

It's not why they voted for him.

They voted for him because he said, I will be your president.

And there are so many people in this country that feel like they've just been walked on constantly.

They feel as though,

you know, I'm called a racist no matter what I do.

And I'm not a racist.

And I've been called a racist for the last 15 years at least by this media.

They're not going to give me a counter-argument on what I really said.

They're not going to give me the benefit of the doubt ever.

They're not going to, they're not going to, when I say something, they're not going to make it about Barack Obama.

You know, I heard a story today from NPR.

They were talking about these people who are in the streets saying,

stop the coup, stop the coup.

Well, I know where stop the coup is coming from.

This is the Boris Johnson story where he has suspended parliament.

Well, that's not unusual.

It's just two weeks longer than usual.

It usually lasts about three weeks.

It happens every year.

Longer ones happen

many times once the prime minister takes over, a new prime minister.

He's asking for two more weeks than three.

The queen approves.

Now they are in the streets and they're saying this is a coup.

Now, NPR reported this story as

Londoners, people gathered in the streets.

They're very upset at Boris Johnson and what they claim is a coup.

And then they played this whole thing and they talked to one of the people.

They never said these are Labour Party members.

They never said these are the socialist radicals.

They never said any of that.

Where if we were on the street, we would immediately be branded as extreme right wing or a small group of people who are very anti-government are protesting in the streets.

That's the kind of coverage we get.

And that's why people elected Donald Trump.

And the more the press continues to harp on him, unfairly in many cases, fairly in others.

They harp on him and never give him the benefit of the doubt and continue to call anyone who supports him a racist, a homophobe.

I don't know how this guy's a homophobe.

He's the first guy to run on gay rights.

Nobody else, Barack Obama, nobody else did that.

He ran.

He had a gay

speaker

in a prominent position at the GOP GOP convention.

How is this guy anti-gay again?

I can't figure it out.

I can't do the math.

Yeah,

I think one of the issues here is that to understand Donald Trump, you have to know that he sees the entire world and everything he does every day as a negotiation.

So he's constantly in the middle of a negotiation.

And you could look at it and you could say,

we should listen to every word he says and freak out about it.

Or you can look at his actions.

For example,

with North Korea, he has said both, we are going to bomb the hell out of you and Fire and Fury is coming, and also Kim Jong-un is a good guy, and

we're going to negotiate and talk, and I think we're going to get to a wonderful solution.

Well, which one of those is true?

I mean, probably, certainly not the Fire and Fury thing.

Donald Trump has a long history of wanting to avoid conflict internationally.

And as you've seen in the past few months, when they're firing missile after missile after missile, and he's just like, well, look, they're not violating the agreement.

Everything's fine.

He obviously feels that he would rather avoid conflict and he's trying to negotiate.

With China, there's another situation, right?

He said over and over again, we're going to have a big trade war.

And he's also said, you know what, we should go to zero tariffs.

Well, which one of those do you believe?

You could freak out every time if you're a protectionist and you're like, oh, he's going to go to zero tariffs.

Donald Trump's a bad guy.

Why is he abandoning his principles on protectionism?

Well, he's not.

Look at his actions.

His actions are he's,

you know, it's not a negotiation.

He likes tariffs.

He's he's hiked them over and over and over again.

Russia is another example, right?

Over and over again, people have said, well, he's way too kind to Russia.

He said all these nice things about Russia.

What has his administration done with Russia?

They've been way more harsh on Russia than Barack Obama was.

Over and over and over again, they've sanctioned them, and they've done much more pushing back against Russia than Barack Obama ever contemplated.

So when you look at those things as a whole, you realize that when Trump is speaking publicly, he's typically looking to massage a situation into an area where he wants it.

Right.

And a lot of that has to

win.

He wants to win.

And if he believes that winning

is the trade war, he'll say what he believes at that time

that will give him an advantage in that negotiation.

And if you see how he negotiates for real estate deals, he plays hardball.

And then it's over.

And then he's like, that's my best friend.

He is just negotiating.

and no one can see that.

No, no, everyone can see that.

No one will give him the

respect to be able to say, the guy is one hell of a negotiator because he scares the hell out of the other side.

And you never know

he might do that.

I don't know.

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.

Okay, could we play the AOC audio that people are confused about capitalism?

People talk about, oh my gosh, like socialism, this, socialism, that.

Let's talk about capitalism.

Okay, let's, what is capitalism?

I think that capitalism and the idea of capitalism gets confused by a lot of people.

I think capitalism, a lot of people think about capitalism and they're like, oh capitalism, that means businesses, right?

That means a free market, right?

That means

that means competing

for

having different products compete on the market, right?

That's what capitalism is, right?

That's not what capitalism is.

You can have free market economies with many, with mixed economies,

economies exist.

You can have free market economies with democratic socialist businesses.

What on earth is a democratic socialist business?

And a perfect example of that is worker cooperatives.

So, worker cooperatives are,

you know, if you ever go to

Vermont or if you go to upstate New York, there'll be grocery stores that are employee-owned or they are cooperative, which means that

people own the shares and workers own the shares in the company.

So, a more democratically quote-unquote socialist business would have workers on the board of the corporation

instead of.

Stop talking, or I'm going to be completely hammered because I can't take this without outside.

So, it's really about democracy in the economy.

I don't believe in government.

It does not mean government owns everything.

Socialism does not mean government owns everything.

It does.

Exactly.

I mean that.

Now, I think

she's got a cute little

idea.

Because

if you look at cooperatives, because they do these a lot, like they'll have a

team-built

store like Deli or something.

And I

hear about them all the time.

Because I'm reading about how they always go out of business.

And you're like, why do they go out of business?

Because it doesn't, it, it doesn't, uh, it doesn't work.

Uh, that, that, uh, that's why.

No, it's true.

I'm sure, I, I'm positive that, uh,

some of them do work.

I just don't know where they work.

The same thing with socialism.

Now, she says, in there, you know,

you can have all kinds.

You could have all kinds of

there's a lot of varieties of socialism.

uh and and and i looked it up in in webster's dictionary and it's true there are three kinds of socialism and and and i think

she does uh she's right when she says people people people get confused

uh and so i did my homework

And it makes

a lot of sense to me when you go to Webster's and you look up

socialism.

There's three definitions.

One,

any various economic and

political theory advocating collective or government ownership and

people running the means of production and distribution of goods.

So that's the really

hardcore

socialist

kind of thing.

That's where, hey, that's not Sweden, I'll tell you that.

So maybe

we can maybe we can find Sweden under number two.

It's a system of society or group living in which there is

in which there is no private property.

So that's not sweet.

Okay, two has a B

and is to be definition

to be to be or not

a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state.

Okay, so

I don't really know the difference between one and two because

they both suck.

It must be number three.

Definition of socialism

by Marion Webster, who

I think I dated Marion at one point.

A stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between

capitalism and

communism

and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and

pay according to work done.

I don't even know what the hell that means, but it's got a spooky word of communism in it.

So it's probably it's probably it's probably it's probably uh I think AOC is confused,

very confused.

This is absolutely outrageous how they are trying to redefine absolutely everything, and she's a dope.

She's an absolute, if I were BU, Boston University, where she went and she got her

degree in economics and world politics,

I would be so humiliated.

I would be watching her.

If I was the president of BU, I'd be like,

did she steal her diploma?

And did she actually ever go here?

Because if this is the kind of crap we're turning out,

we should all go to prison because she's not very smart.

Maybe we have more co-op liquor stores.

That's the way we solve the AOC issue.

I love that idea.

There's not enough booze for Americans if her kind are running the country.

There's just not enough booze.

I love her really innovative point: you know, there are things called mixed economies, and those exist.

They do exist, you know, in every country that's ever existed.

Yes, they've all had mixed economies.

Like, yes, it's true that like we're well, no, there's there's pure communism.

I mean, even

that, they kind of turn into

you know, there's a lot of oligarchs in

communism.

And there's also black markets that pop up like crazy.

There's no way to have a pure example of these systems.

These are theoretical systems.

It's interesting, though, that she applies the purity only to capitalism, right?

Like she's trying to make this case in which she can be socialist but not mean the definition out of the dictionary that you just talked about.

But on the other hand, capitalism, well, that's not what you're thinking about when you're talking about the free market.

Well, that's a massive element of what capitalism is.

And the thing that's missing out of capitalism are the policies that you're pushing for.

The things like, you know, Medicare for all and the Green New Deal and

various other programs dating back, you know, half a century.

But what I love is

she says, you know, what we're talking about here is, you know, a mixed economy.

Socialism does not mean that the government runs everything.

I just gave you the three definitions of socialism in the dictionary, and all of them include ownership of the, you know, of the production lines.

your own green deal job says it's a fundamental transformation of this economy and it talks about the industries that will have to be taken over by the government how is that not the textbook definition of socialism

yeah she's trying she's trying to have

the one with the gulags and stuff she's trying to have this little middle ground which is like well what do you like that's socialism What don't you like?

That's capitalism.

That is the extent of her knowledge on this topic.

And again, I think BU, when they gave her the diploma, had already gone to the co-op liquor store a few too many times because it does not seem to be that she understands any of these issues.

All right.

I've sobered up a little bit, and I want to take you to another story.

This is from Real Clear Politics.

On his August 20th Fox News show, Tucker Carlson detailed how Senate Antitrust Subcommittee chairperson Mike Lee transformed one of Google's harshest critics into one of his most loyal defenders faster than you can say monopoly.

From 2011 to 2015, Lee pressed the Federal Trade Commission to pursue antitrust violations against Google for its internet search dominance, grilled its CEO Eric Schmidt for the company's abuses, and supported the European Union's investigation into the search engine giant.

After the FTC slapped Google on the wrist, he said he would investigate the Obama White House's improper interference with the investigation.

But now, according to Tucker Carlson, he has done a complete 180.

As a possible explanation for the flip-flop, Carlson pointed to investigation or to investments in YouTube, I'm sorry, in Utah by Google and Facebook, along with Google's fundraising for Lee.

The two-term senator declined an invitation to discuss the issues on the show.

Okay.

Now, let me give you

this from Mike Lee.

Mike is a friend of mine.

Mike and I have spent lots of time recently talking about Google, talking about how do you

use the law without bastardizing the law, without creating a situation which

at least as a constitutional conservative, I don't want, I don't want the government to overstep its bounds.

Once we do this,

it's just going to happen over and over again.

And Mike doesn't want to overstep the bounds, yada, yada.

So I've been talking to him.

one-on-one recently about Google.

I am constantly talking to him about: look at what Google's doing here.

Look at what Google's doing there.

I have set up conversations with him and others, or at least offered those conversations, whether they happen or not, I don't know.

So he's passionate about it, and I know it.

He knows what's going on.

So I immediately, yesterday, when I saw that story, I immediately called Mike and said, dude,

what is this about?

He sent this to me.

Let me just read it to you.

The Tom Steyer-funded left-wing attack group Crew, which has sued President Trump more than 175 times, recently spun off a new

attack

entity devoted to attacking conservatives over technology issues.

This new entity from Tom Steyer attacked Senator Mike Lee for allegedly changing his position on antitrust laws due to lengthy, multifaceted campaign by Google and other big technology companies.

Now,

let's just dissect this as we go along.

You notice anything about that, Stu?

Anything important

stand out to you?

Well, usually there's not a lot of conservative attacks that are

foundationally based on a Tom Steyer attack group.

Thank you.

Thank you.

So let's start there.

I'm going to take a one-minute break and then just give us a little look at Tom Steyer's more than just a candidate who spent millions and millions of dollars to become president and just has been excluded from the debate.

He's more than just a two-time loser.

He's a very powerful guy.

And Stu will explain who Tom Steyer is coming up in just just a second.

And then I'll tell you what Mike Lee was really saying and really doing.

You're listening to 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.

Well, welcome to Labor Day.

Labor Day weekend.

You know, as a kid growing up, Labor Day weekend just meant the end of summer.

And white pants.

Couldn't wear white pants anymore or white shoes.

Which I don't even think is a fashion.

There are no fashion rules anymore, I don't think.

Anyway, Labor Day, that's what it always meant to me that on the Labor Day weekend, you would watch the Jerry Lewis telethon, and the next day you were going to school.

Oof.

It was the end of

your childhood summer times.

But you know,

it actually was started by the Marxists,

the socialists,

to extol the power of the unions.

Workers of the world unite on Labor Day.

But I don't think anybody thinks of it that way.

I guess some do.

But almost every holiday, this is going to blow your mind.

Almost every holiday

that

has come after probably 1880, 1890 maybe,

has really been a socialist kind of thing.

And then they perverted the other holidays.

Do you know that we didn't, when during the founding, Stu.

During the founding, you know we didn't celebrate Christmas, right?

We celebrated Christmas, but you did, it was not a holiday.

Did you know that?

I don't know that I knew that.

Maybe I did at one point, but it didn't off the top of my head ring a bell.

Yeah.

I mean, we didn't have

national holidays, it wasn't really like a big thing at that point, was it?

No, but Christmas was always a holiday.

Christmas, I mean, these were Christians.

But do you know why we didn't have Christmas?

We didn't have Grinch.

We didn't have,

yeah, right.

Yes.

Have you seen that documentary?

Yes, it's really powerful.

Right.

With George Washington as a who.

We didn't have Christmas, not because it wasn't the federal government's position, but because it was considered garish

to, on the day that Christ was born, that you would take a day off

and not work.

Yeah, what did you do for it?

You didn't do anything.

Right.

Right.

Nor can you do anything for it.

Right.

That should be Labor Day.

But anyway, so

we didn't

do it because we thought it would be too commercialized.

It was a very private thing.

People worked and then they went home and they had their Christmas meal.

Do you know now when we did make Christmas a holiday?

I did not know I had a quiz today, but no, I don't know off the top of my head.

Take a guess.

When did Christmas become something we celebrated by by taking the day off?

Last Thursday.

I don't know.

Shut up.

1870.

That's my next guess.

1870 or last Thursday.

That's crazy, though?

Yeah, I mean, it seems

recent for something like that.

Right.

So we had in 1870, we adopted New Year's Day as a day off.

The 4th of July, Independence Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas.

Even though we already celebrated all of those, we didn't have the day off.

And that was at the beginning.

And isn't it interesting?

In 1858, Marx writes his manifesto.

In 1870, Paris, the communist riots are going on, and we're beginning to be influenced by Marxism and socialists.

1880 is when we really start to go hard left

because our people like Woodrow Wilson are coming back home from school in Germany, and so they're picking up all of this crap.

So listen to this.

In 1880, we get Washington's birthday.

In 1894, when just before Roosevelt starts the Progressive Party, we get Labor Day.

Then we get Armistice Day in 1936.

That's to

recognize

the end of the war.

In

1968, that's changed to Veterans Day.

During the

Roosevelt time, we changed Thanksgiving, which was meant to be really, really sacred.

And we celebrated from George Washington, we celebrated Thanksgiving Day, just no day off on it, no holiday.

And we celebrated it.

And we had it on the last Thursday of

November.

But during the Depression, we bastardized it.

We took this really sacred holiday and Roosevelt moved it to the third Thursday so you could have a Black Friday.

and have shopping season last longer.

I mean, you want to talk about your gods.

Columbus Day is 1968.

MLK was 1983.

It blows my mind that

it wasn't until 1870

that it was a day off for things like Christmas.

How much we have changed as a nation.

Now, you could have taken it off.

You could have given it to your staff if you wanted to.

Everybody was free to do whatever they wanted.

We didn't even have a standard flag.

You could make a flag and you could put the stars any way you want.

You could do anything you want with the flag up until Woodrow Wilson.

We didn't have a national anthem until FDR.

That's crazy how we have now become so nationalized where we were the exact opposite 100 years ago.

All right, I want to talk to you a little bit about the Dave Chappelle special on Netflix.

Everyone tells me, they're like, Glenn, it is the funniest thing ever.

It is so brilliant.

It's blah, blah, blah.

It is brave.

It is funny.

It's foul in case you, you know, are

offended by language.

It is very foul.

But I don't think it's.

I think we are forgetting that this is the way comedy was 15 years ago.

You could make all of those jokes 15 years ago.

Now, him making those jokes that were perfectly fine before

is now suddenly cutting edge.

And it, to me, says a lot.

It says that the left has overplayed its hand, that even people like Dave Chappelle and what was the other one that came out recently?

You mentioned Joe Rogan?

Is that who you're?

Yeah, Joe Rogan.

Did you see that one?

I have not seen the Rogan special yet.

No.

Oh, my gosh.

Is that funny?

Really?

The Joe Rogan special is really, really funny in exactly the same way, where he's just saying whatever he wants to say, and he's just done with the, you know, the shunning society.

I don't know how these two guys make it, but they are leading the way back to sanity.

As comedy always should.

It should just take on truth and show us ourselves in a

parabolic mirror.

Sort of surprising, though.

Because for a long time, comedy pushed the boundaries of criticizing traditions and

religion and

people who were too stodgy and such.

And

that has been kind of the pattern.

But don't you think that that's what they're doing now?

Well, that's what I was going to say.

You hear them talk about it.

It's new

Puritanism.

It is like this idea that you have to line up.

I mean, Louis C.K., who has been shunned from our society at this point, and there's a very funny part.

He's coming back.

It's a very funny part of the Chappelle

about the Louis C.K.

thing.

But he did a bit just recently basically saying exactly that.

That

people,

when you talk about which pronouns you're allowed to be

called,

and people get offended if they're called the incorrect pronoun, is that almost not identical to the way that we have to refer to a royalty?

You know, you'd have to refer to a kings and queens and prince and princess and all of that.

And you're briefed before you meet them to make sure that you have

the right pronouns.

Right.

I mean, that is a thing

it's because it's from the left.

Most comedians have avoided criticizing it.

But there's been a few brave ones, and

most of them are on the left.

I mean, I think Dave Chappelle is certainly no right-wing figure, neither is Louis C.K.

We've seen stuff like this from people like even like Patton Oswalt, who's an incredibly left-wing guy, who's just who came out and said, Look, you know, we're trying to help.

I'm a progressive guy, but can you not yell at me every time I get a pronoun wrong that you changed two days ago?

I mean, these are these are insane new standards that are being put on

us.

And comedians are really the ones that that lead the culture as far as pointing out how ridiculously absurd they are.

And you got to cheer it on.

I mean, this is why I get annoyed when conservatives, and this does happen, criticize some comedian for making a joke that's inappropriate or whatever.

Like, this is the ultimate bastion of free speech.

This is where it needs to exist more than any other place is comedy.

You have to be able to exaggerate and say ridiculous things and not have them be taken like policy statements.

It's comedy.

You have to be able to do those things, and it's beneficial for our society in the long run that you have people that can do that and not be fired or canceled every time they come out with the wrong joke.

But they abandoned their post for the entire Obama administration.

Totally.

They were becoming organs of the left.

That's all it was.

There was no comedy.

They were going for claptor.

This,

if you watch Chappelle's comedy, people will clap when he says something and he'll say, oh, shut up.

I mean,

he is not going for claptor.

In fact, he hates it.

Don't, I mean, when he said, you know, it's impossible to be a celebrity now.

It's impossible to do our job because everything, you know, anything you say,

if somebody, if I've said something 15 years ago, you know, everybody wants you to shut down.

And people start to clap, like, yeah, that's right.

And he's like, shut up.

You know who I'm talking about?

You.

I'm talking about you.

Because no one sees this in themselves, right?

No one sees the annoying person who's trying to get everybody fired in themselves.

But I mean, that's why I tried so hard to avoid it.

And I know we've done that many times as well.

I mean, you look at, I mean, Sarah Silverman's a great example of this.

Sarah Silverman, who came out and was through the entire administration, she's a complete leftist.

She's constantly criticizing everybody else.

And then here she is.

She did a bit back in, gosh, it was 2006 or 2007 where she used blackface to make a point.

By the way, a point about woke racism.

She was basically acting like an idiot and not understanding racism to point out the evils of racism, right?

That's the point of the bit.

Then in 2014, she comes out and now is so woke that she's critical of herself, saying, Wow, even though I was making the right point, I shouldn't have done that.

It was insensitive.

And in 2019, five years years later, she's losing gigs because people are going, are pulling screenshots of her in blackface as if she was doing something that was racist.

And it's like, well, this is the society you've built.

Do you not understand that?

You've put all of these rules up and applied them only to conservatives.

And now conservatives at some level are trying to apply it to you.

And the culture in general has now decided, well, now that's the rule.

When we decide 15 years afterwards that something is completely wrong, we can retroactively get get justice by ruining your life today.

And that cannot possibly be a sensible standard for a civilization to hold.

When he was doing the Chappelle show, he was called into HR and they said, Dave, you can't say the F word, you know, is regard in regard to

homosexuals.

And he said,

you can't use that.

And he said, oh, okay,

I don't care.

So he decided not to use it.

And he said, later, I thought, wait a minute, how come I can't use that word, but I can use the N-word and everybody's fine?

He went back and she said,

well, because Dave,

you know, you're not homosexual.

And he's like, well, I'm not an N-word either.

So wait a minute.

You're implying that I am an N-word and that's why I can use that?

That's not who I am.

You would not want to get into the HR conversation with Dave Chappelle.

That would not go well for you.

That's such a good point.

Such a good point.

We've all been saying it.

You know, wait a minute.

This is a slam.

It's either a slam or it's not.

Well, they can say it because that's who they are.

You're calling them that?

You, as a white man, is calling them saying, yeah, they can say it because that's who they are.

Oh my gosh.

The Blaze Radio Network.

On demand.