No Way He Wins? | 11/20/18

The Blaze Radio Network.

On demand.

To get the goodness of vegetables, you don't have to eat your peas.

You don't have to eat your greens.

You don't have to eat kale.

What you need to do is get Brick House Nutrition's field of greens because, you know, everyone likes to call themselves a superfood, which is just like, to me, it's just basically a scam term.

I don't know.

It doesn't seem to mean anything to anyone.

But how about just food?

A lot of these things are just extracts and weird supplements and things that, you know, there's some odd collection of ingredients.

Not Field of Greens.

Field of Greens is just food.

It's just real food.

You get to eat your vegetables without having to eat your vegetables.

For a limited time offer, visit brickhouseglen.com.

Use the promo code Glenn.

Get 15% off your first order.

It's brickhouseglen.com.

15% off if you use the promo code Glenn.

Do that now.

It's brickhouseglen.com.

Glenn back.

With Pat Gray and Stubergere,

888-727-BECK.

Pretty good Monday night football game last night.

Yes.

In fact, it's all I want to talk about today.

I know that might not be the most popular choice, but that's exactly what I want to talk about today is the National Football League.

That game last night was one of the, it was honestly one of the best sporting events I've ever watched in my entire life.

Now, of course, it comes into a distant second,

at least to last year's Super Bowl, which was the greatest sporting event of all time.

But that game last night, Pat, and I don't think you stayed up for it, right?

You have to get up so early for Pat Gray Unleashed.

I recorded it.

You did.

It's worth watching.

It's actually that fun.

And it was an incredible game last night.

And I'm watching it, I mean, because it was 54-51 as a final.

I was listening to a little of Pat Gray Unleashed earlier, and you made the point, which is a sensible one, of where was there any defense on the field at all?

And that's what I think was incredible about that game is that there was

a lot of defense.

I mean, there were three defensive touchdowns, three in the game.

You know, two of them by one guy, Samson Ibacom.

He was incredible.

Aaron Donald

played one of the best games, most dominant games by an interior defensive lineman I've ever seen.

That's hard to believe.

I've ever watched.

I mean, he was.

He was

dominating the entire game.

And again, it was 54-51.

Now, again, 21 of the points were on defense.

So, I mean, you could see there was a decent amount of turnovers.

I mean, it was just back and forth and crazy.

And as I'm watching this game,

it is just one of those things, fully, if you like sports, right?

There's a certain line of people.

And Glenn always falls on

the other side of this line.

He's transitioning.

when it comes to sports.

And he is on the other side of that line, and he doesn't care about it.

So if you don't care about sports, you don't care about sports.

But as this game is ending, I'm thinking to myself: there are some people who don't care about sports.

There are some people like Mr.

Pat Gray, who's responsible and decided not to go, just actually to go to bed, but still recorded it, right?

Yes.

And all that.

There's some people who watch the game.

All those people I fully understand.

But allow me to make a pitch here.

Allow me to revisit with new information the group of people who love the NFL, who love watching football, but who didn't watch because they were boycotting the league.

Polls show this is not a huge number, but in this audience, it's probably a significant representation

in this audience, and you're not doing it because, as we know, Colin Kaepernick was kneeling and all the controversy that's gone over that over the last couple of years.

And I understand why you would do that.

I understand

why you would think the national anthem and our country is more important than sports.

It's a sensible decision and I understand it.

However,

Colin Kaepernick isn't in the league.

The man is not employed by the National Football League.

He is not in the league and has not been in the league for multiple years.

He, yes, he took a knee and yes, he has no idea what he's talking about when it comes to the statistics of policing.

Does he

any of the words that come out of his mouth?

The answer to that is no.

He doesn't.

He does not understand it at all.

But you can't let Colin Kaepernick's sock choices determine what you do with your life.

I felt, I thought to myself, like, this is...

This is one of the most enjoyable sporting events I've ever watched in my life, and people are avoiding it because of what Colin Kaepernick put on his feet.

Who cares what Colin Kaepernick does?

He deserves no power over anyone in this audience.

He should not be making one decision for any individual person in this audience.

We're conservatives.

We're individualists.

We're people who think for ourselves.

And to let Colin Kaepernick make a choice for you makes no sense to me at all.

Remember, this is a league that not only does not employ Colin Kaepernick, but employs what?

Two players who are kneeling?

And I think one cheerleader who's kneeling?

Two players and one cheerleader.

There's a thousand players in this league.

There's two players who are kneeling.

Why would you boycott something over that?

And we don't even hear about them.

We don't even hear about them anymore.

I understand that these culture sort of wars go on and you feel like, you know, with social, I mean, you know, Glenn's book really keeps popping into my head as I watch this stuff go on.

Addicted to outrage available now.

But I mean, you're going to see this at Thanksgiving.

There's Thanksgiving table too, and people are going to be so angry about all these little issues related to politics, and people take their sides.

And I understand all that.

And sometimes it's important to make your stand.

And, you know, these issues, these cultural issues can be important.

We talk about them every day.

But the idea that two out of a thousand players are kneeling that would keep you away of such an enjoyable three-plus hours last night is just

criminal.

Colin Kaepernick should not be controlling our lives and our decisions.

And

there's something about this where I don't know, we just get on these lines, and it's partially because of politics and partially because, you know, Colin Kaepernick's points are really terrible.

Like, he's vilifying American heroes.

He

is doing things that

push back against the cultural fabric of this country.

You know, I'm a patriotic guy.

I know most of the audience is as well.

Pat's got a flag on his shirt right now.

I'm not kneeling.

I'm not kneeling in front of it.

I've got no interest in kneeling in front of the flag.

And I got no, and you know, we've gone over the stats a million times.

Colin Kaepernick and the people who agree with Colin Kaepernick that are in the NFL are wrong on most of these issues.

That's not to say there's never an incident of

unwarranted violence towards African Americans by police officers.

But we know, we've looked at these stats a million times.

There is almost nothing to support the opinion of Colin Kaepernick.

But that's even more of a reason to not let it

determine your choices.

It's even more of a reason to not let Colin Kaepernick make these choices for you.

He makes bad choices.

He's made choices that have cost him millions of dollars, arguably.

Most of those choices were throwing it to defensive players instead of offensive players, but that's a whole other situation.

And I just can't,

I just was watching this last night and I think our audience, most of them will do what they want to do.

Most of them will say, hey, you know, look, I'm not going to let this guy, you know, decide my life for you.

I think football sucks.

I'm not going to watch it.

If football's great, I'm going to watch it.

But I don't understand this.

You know, every place you go into has people who feel like Colin Kaepernick.

Every grocery store trip you go into, you're buying food that was stocked by people who agree with Colin Kaepernick.

Every restaurant you go into has a server or a cook or someone else who works there who agrees with Colin Kaepernick.

And they're probably posting publicly about it on their social media accounts.

Every single time, I guarantee the radio station you're listening to with all the conservative hosts has an engineer or an IT guy or somebody somebody else that agrees with Colin Kaepernick.

These, this is our world.

You deal with people who are wrong all the time.

And yet, the one thing that everybody seems to want to boycott is the National Football League.

The one thing I know, at least in my life, is the highest level of entertainment.

I know, I love it so much, and I know that's not everybody.

It's easy to avoid entertainment you don't like.

But if you love it,

there's just no reason to let Colin Kaepernick or any of the other morons making points associated with him control your decisions.

It's just not sensible.

And

I think

in the heat of the moment when there's, you know, Trump's tweeting about it and Pence is going to the games and leaving games and it's a big issue and MSNBC is talking about it all the time, I can understand

getting in the middle of that and taking a side on it.

Because I, of the two arguments, I completely side with Donald Trump on the idea that it's a terrible protest.

They should have the right to protest, but I think it's a bad, it's a bad series of points.

But

that's past now.

The fury is past.

The intense back and forth has passed.

Isn't it another moment to, isn't it a time in this really complicated world where everybody hates everybody for everything?

To just step back and say, look, if a football game is something I want to watch, I'm going to freaking watch it.

You know, it's the same thing with movies.

You know, I'm very excited, as you know, Pat, to go see Creed 2 tonight.

And Sylvester Stallone is

Republican-ish, right?

I don't know if he's officially out that way.

I mean, he has a good relationship, seemingly, with Donald Trump.

He worked with him on a pardon

a few months ago for a former boxer.

But, you know, Sylvester Stallone, obviously, the Rocky guy, but guaranteed, half or more of that cast probably, if they had a choice, would side with Colin Kaepernick, right?

Like every Hollywood movie you go to, every television show you watch.

I mean, every time you watch a Fox News program, you're watching a show that

probably has camera guys and

people working behind the scenes in every capacity that agree with Colin Kaepernick.

But we don't boycott Fox News.

You know, Shepard Smith's on the air, and we don't boycott Fox News.

Right?

Like,

we have to understand, I think, that so often people in Washington and in the media find little issues like this.

And that is what this is, by the way.

Colin Kaepernick, a man who has, I wouldn't trust to order the catering at Thanksgiving dinner.

I wouldn't trust him with any decision in my life.

I don't trust him.

I've seen the analysis he has made on two major situations.

One, how bad cops are.

I know he's wrong there.

And two, who he's supposed to throw to, and it's constantly the other team.

So I know he does not make good decisions.

It's the reason he's not in the league.

Much more the decision-making on the field than the other way around.

But it's like, you know, to see that and to, I just feel like Washington and the media and all these sites, all the social media

accounts are constantly trying to use us

to get us to click on things, to push us into these passionate

decisions that we're going to make and lock ourselves into choices that we ourselves don't even enjoy.

We're taking things that we like out of our lives because of other people's choices.

And I just, you know, it's Thanksgiving week.

One of the most important parts of Thanksgiving, I think number one is obviously football.

Number two, I think it's family or something.

No, it's two's food and three's family.

And four is like talking to people.

And I think five is that great nap that you have after you have dinner and you fall asleep on the couch and your guts half hanging out over your belt and

you look like Jeffy, basically.

At least you feel like Jeffy.

Those are the important moments of Thanksgiving.

And I just, this week, I think it's time to reconsider that if you went that way.

You made your point.

I mean, if you wanted to make your point, you made your point.

I mean, the National Football League seems to be thriving.

I don't know that it had a huge impact on them, but, you know, it's not, that doesn't matter.

If you believe it, then do it.

I, you know, if you really believe that this is an important thing to do, you know, more power to you.

I just feel like so many people get locked, you know, get caught up in this without even thinking through the idea that what they're doing is giving power over their lives to some dope who's kneeling on a field.

And it just doesn't make any sense to me.

And the protest is essentially,

for all intents and purposes, over.

It's over.

It's over.

I mean, nobody talks about it.

Nobody even makes note of it.

I don't even know who the two players are that you mentioned.

I'm making the number up.

I don't even know if there are two.

I mean, I know Eric Reed is still in the league, and he was one of the guys who was.

He said he was going to keep doing it.

He said, I don't know if he's still doing it.

Yeah, I don't even know.

I don't know.

I mean, think about this, how ridiculous.

The only thing I've seen is the cheerleader.

The cheerleader was recent.

One, I think, a Buccaneers cheerleader.

Who cares?

I mean, I don't care what the cheerleader does.

But, like, that's

a great point, though.

You know, I don't care what the cheerleader does either, right?

But like, shouldn't we think of the players the same way?

Why do we favor what the players think about a political issue over the cheerleaders?

The cheerleaders have more time to be thinking about it.

They probably are more informed than most of the players.

There's no reason, you know, guaranteed, like, you go to that game, if every single player stops kneeling and every cheerleader stops kneeling, there's going to be thousands of concession workers and thousands of people working at the networks that carry the games and thousands of people who work for the websites that you visit to go that that would go and talk about the games.

Every franchise has got people in their offices who do this.

This is an issue.

We live in a society where people get to make their own minds up, and sometimes they make really terrible decisions, and they're wrong.

And I, you know, I can't, you know, Glenn's got into this world before, and we always talk about this.

We used to have this argument with Glenn all the time whenever he would decide, I don't know, maybe I'm going to boycott X, Y, or Z.

It was usually sports, and we always made fun of him because you don't like sports, Glenn.

That doesn't count as a boycott.

You can't boycott the NFL.

Right.

Because you weren't watching it in the first place.

Exactly.

You know, I'm boycotting ballet.

Right.

Then yeah, okay, that's powerful.

You're taking a tough one.

That's like Lynch when you give up.

I'm giving up crack cocaine.

Well, I don't do crack cocaine, I do regular cocaine, so I wouldn't need that.

Wouldn't even be a anyway.

But like with Glenn, it was always, we always come back to him and say, well, what about entertainment?

You go to 16 movies a week and give him those up.

He'll usually get very mad at us when we made that point.

Yes.

But, you know, it's true.

I mean, it's like you can find this everywhere.

There's, there's no way to be consistent in your life on these, on these stances because

every single thing you do has people,

there are conservatives, we know this, in every aspect of society, right?

I mean, even in, with the exception of maybe academics, you can basically find them everywhere, even in Hollywood, right?

And so many of them are in hiding, but still, they're out there.

The same thing happens with people who are completely wrong about police officers.

They're there.

They're everywhere.

And you're just never going to be able to be consistent on this issue.

So why pick one that's going to cost you enjoyment out of your life that you'll never get back?

I just don't get it.

And, you know, I don't know.

Maybe I'm alone on this one, but it doesn't.

I like your point here, Pat, too.

It's basically over.

It is.

It's over anyway.

So even if you thought

when Kaepernick was in the league, at least there was an argument.

The guy's not even in the league, isn't it?

I don't think for years.

He's never going to be again.

Nor should he be.

Nobody cares anymore.

And he had his chance.

I mean, he had several teams offer him.

But I think

it was too big a point he wanted to make.

And so he continued to make the point.

All right.

Well, you made your point.

And you lost out on probably, who knows, over

three years now, it's probably...

$30 million you lost out on?

Well, good for you.

That must be great.

That's a great, I mean, that's a pretty powerful point.

There you go.

He got his Nike commercial out of it.

Yeah, he did.

You see that.

He got that.

All right.

Triple eight, 727, BECK.

More patent stew for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program.

Here's patent stew for Glenn.

Triple 8, 727, BECK.

You getting pumped up for the Tom Steyer presidential?

Oh, my gosh, I can't even.

I'm so pumped about Tom Steyer.

He wasn't even on any of the poll calls.

Democrat billionaire.

He's basically, I think what he's trying to do is get out ahead of Bloomberg because this is a guy, you've seen his face before if you've watched cable news probably.

He's leading the way for impeachment.

Yeah, he's been the guy.

He's spent

$100 million of

try to push people into getting familiar with the Donald Trump impeachment that he's trying to push for.

And so this is going to be where he runs if he does.

And he's taking steps.

There's not one chance, not a chance, that he wins the Democrat nomination.

I know lovers say things like this.

And if he did,

I'll eat my underwear if he wins the Democrat nomination.

This is one where I can go out on a limb.

I just swore this off and said I'd never do this.

No, you got to do it again.

But Tom Steyer, I got to do this.

Not for Tom Steyer.

So let's go back to the underwear review for Pat.

The first it was Elizabeth Warren.

Yeah.

Elizabeth Warren will do it.

If she wins the Democrat nomination,

I'd eat my underwear.

Didn't happen.

Didn't happen.

She didn't run.

And then the next one, I believe, was a little closer.

It was a little closer.

I was a little nervous election day.

The fact is

with Betto O'Rourke.

Right.

Because a year ago, over a year ago, I said, yeah, come on.

No, there's no way that Beto O'Rourke beats

Ted Cruz.

And he came dang close.

Two and a half points, basically.

So, yeah, that was a close one.

So I didn't have to eat my underwear, though.

I feel confident.

And now I feel confident if Tom Steyer wins the Democrat nomination, I will eat my underwear.

He is a big-time climate activist, and he's announcing

several town halls to go over his platforms of the five rights of pre-K education through college for free, clean air and water, an equal vote, a living wage, and the right to health.

Which I'd love to see how he solves that one.

We got to flesh this out a little bit, maybe coming up.

Triple 8727 Beck.

It's Pat and Stu for Glenn.

You can also check out my show, Weekday Warnings between 6 and 8 Central Time, so 7 and 9 Eastern,

and on Pat Gray Unleashed and the Blaze Radio TV Network.

And, you know, anytime on podcast, if you can't get up that early.

We spoke about football a little bit earlier.

I think we have a clip from More on Trivia.

Maybe we could play that today.

Oh, yeah.

From this past More on Trivia.

Because tomorrow you have a special edition of More on Trivia for Thanksgiving, right?

Right.

Yep.

Yep.

That's always a fun one.

we're 9-2 on the season.

Which is one of the best years.

9-2.

Yeah.

That's one of the best years in the history of More on Trivia.

I mean, and some of these weeks I'm thinking, ah, it's not going to be right this week.

And then it is.

I don't, it's so weird.

It's a really good predictor of who's going to win the game.

I mean, I don't know of a better predictor.

I certainly wish, I honestly wish I just

moved to Vegas and just started betting Moron Trivia years ago.

You would have made some money.

Yeah.

You definitely would have made some money.

We do have a clip, but can we want to to look over this now?

Yeah, we might as well.

Do you know what the setup is to this?

We're asking questions of

store clerks.

Wow.

Yeah.

Really?

Yeah.

What made you do that other than the entire rule of the game?

It's a rule of the game.

Okay.

Yeah.

Pretty much just that.

Okay.

So here's the clip from this.

This is from

last Friday.

This is last Friday.

Pack Ray Only.

Karen High.

Hi.

Name one country in the Middle East.

Pakistan.

Oh.

What did she say?

Pakistan.

Idaho would have been a really good answer.

Oh, that's true.

There's a new movie coming out soon about the life of Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

What is Ruth Bader Ginsburg best known for?

A rider.

Oh, a writer.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

A writer.

No, she is the woman who invented women.

She invented women.

Really?

Yeah.

The abbreviation GDP is short for what?

Three words.

Whoa.

Easy.

I have no idea.

I didn't mean that.

Oh, yeah.

Yeah, I didn't mean it.

It's crazy.

He's getting over here.

It's get down and party.

Really?

Yeah.

GDP is get down and party.

Get down and party.

A lot of people don't know that.

A lot of people don't know that Pakistan's not in the Middle East either.

But Commissioner Jeffy gave her that answer.

Why do you still have him in that role?

No, I don't know.

We got to fire him as Commissioner because he's terrible.

And then every time there's a flag on the field and we go to the flag on the field and somebody makes a really good point, it's like, okay, well,

thanks for your concern.

Bye.

I mean, he doesn't even consider any flag on the field, no matter how legitimate.

He doesn't care.

No.

He just doesn't care.

He's already made his ruling.

He's already made his mind up, and that's it.

Well, he's a bad person.

He is, which is a terrible person.

The foundation of this problem is that he's not a good guy.

Right.

But if you want to hear more from the good guy, he's got a podcast.

What's it called?

Chewing the fat with Jeff Fisher.

I guess listen to it or something.

It's available on our channel, and I don't know.

And he'll join us again tomorrow for

more on trivia as well.

Is he coming in today, by the way, for a segment?

Is he just not

going to show up?

Well, that's understandable.

I mean, Jeffy, you have to understand, really prepares for Thanksgiving.

Because he basically, if you think of your Thanksgiving meal, that's four or five times a day for Jeffy.

So for him to expand to an actual Thanksgiving meal for him, he needs to prepare days in advance and eat, you know, 10, 12 times a day large meals.

So it's something about expanding his stomach, he says.

It has to get even more expanded than normal.

And so that starts like, I think, six weeks out from Thanksgiving.

By the way, the more on trivia contestants, good cross-section of who Tom Steyer is going to be going for if he's running for president, which it does appear he is.

He tried to impeach the president the last couple of years.

And he spent $100 million to try to do it.

So this is his.

It wasn't about impeaching the president.

We should be clear.

Yes, he wants the president impeached, but this is about his face getting in front of the American people, particularly hardcore leftists, to show that he's putting his money where his mouth is.

And by the way, this is who I am, because you have no idea who I am.

We did a, remember we were doing these serials for a while, Pat?

Yeah, and you put together

a great one on Tom Steyer.

And we got to bust that back out, I think, because a lot of those we're making into television episodes that are going to be airing in the next year,

which is pretty cool.

And the Tom Steyer one had a lot of information I didn't know about the guy.

He's one of these up-and-coming, kind of the new, some people would compare him to like a George Soros type, where he's dumping a bunch of his billions of dollars into stuff like climate activism and impeaching the president and things like that.

And I love the fact that he's such a climate activist because he made most of his money

in fossil fuels, oil,

of course.

Of course.

I mean, of rights.

That happens every time.

Virtually every time.

George Soros made a lot of money in capitalist markets.

Yet what is he doing around the world?

Trying to shut down capitalism in so many ways.

It's not a huge surprise, I guess.

But he is now starting a six-figure web buy on Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, and Instagram.

Full page ad in USA Today.

He is outlining his political platform.

He's revamping TomSteyer.com.

Oh.

And he's announced five town halls.

How often do you go to to TomStyre.com?

Like three, four times a day?

I'm there right now.

You are?

I'm soaking in it.

Okay.

Prelee, your skin looks really soft.

Thank you.

It's Tomstyer.com.

Yeah.

Okay.

Yeah.

It's doing it for me.

The first of the five town halls will be happening in South Carolina, which you may notice is an early primary state.

The first town hall

is in Charleston.

It's your third or fourth, right?

Iowa.

Well,

Nevada sometimes squeaks in there too, but it's usually thought of as Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina as the first big three.

I know California has tried to push itself in there as well.

He's going to California as well.

He is going to be talking about each of the five rights that you have.

Now, there is something called the Bill of Rights that was

10.

Yeah, we're 10.

Let's cut it to five.

So we only have five now.

Now with 50% less rights.

That's a great campaign slogan for Steyer.

Now with 50% less rights.

I like that.

Here is his five-right platform.

The right to an equal vote is number one.

We already have that, Tom.

Thank you.

Yes, that's already guaranteed to us.

And this is him basically saying, I'm going to side with the loser in the governor race in Georgia.

This is his signaling.

And that is just

so bogus.

You shouldn't have to bring your ID to the polls.

And we should talk about that a little bit in that

yesterday mentioned Mia Love, who was leading in her race.

By 419 votes.

Now she's trailing by 1,800, I think it is.

Is she really?

Yeah, and the reason it looks like the reasoning for this is

same-day registrations.

That's what all these late votes are.

People who register to vote the day of the election for the first time

and then voted.

And so what they vote, my understanding of it, and there's been some really good, really good reporting on this.

One guy in particular from the Salt Lake Tribune was all over this and kind of gave the signal that this might turn around and go to the Democrat in this race.

But my understanding of it is you can register the same day, and then when you cast a vote, you're casting essentially a provisional ballot.

So there were tens of thousands of provisional ballots cast in.

Why is it provisional when you register day of?

I think because they want to check and make sure you actually are able to register.

You are a citizen, you are in good standing, you have the right to vote, whatever the

time.

It takes a couple days for them to figure that out.

That's why this has taken taken such a long time.

It's something that you can register the day of.

Yeah, why would you do that?

And again,

I made this point before, and I think like most people think it in America would think this sounds terrible.

But like, it's not a terrible idea to have some level of awareness of what's going on in the world to cast a vote.

Now, you have a right to do it if you know nothing.

You have a right to do it, you can do it.

You just shouldn't.

But encouraging people

who know nothing about what's going on to vote is not a rocking the vote is a democratic tactic to win elections.

It's not a sensible choice.

Getting people who have never read a news article other than about a Kardashian to go to the polls and cast a vote is not necessarily the right call.

No, it's going to kill us.

If we continue to encourage that, and they're going to.

Because it benefits Democrats almost every time.

Every time.

And

they're targeting, as we've called them over the years, low-information voters.

And it's okay, by the way, for you to be a low-information voter if you want to live your life and have no engagement with the political system.

Obviously, our founders warned against that as a trend.

But as an individual, you absolutely have that right to not vote, to not care.

It is why our founders

ensured that you had skin in the game in order to vote.

That's why you had to be a property owner.

That was the original way they did it.

Because you had skin in the game.

That way, people aren't voting themselves your property.

They understand what it takes to get property, and keep property, and pay for property, and so they've got that knowledge, and they're looking into the issues, and they're understanding how things work.

It just ensures kind of that you've you've got some knowledge going on.

It indicates a level of engagement.

Yeah.

Now, this is different from like, let's say, a poll tax, which is completely wrong.

Yes, of course.

And, you know, that is like saying, oh, well, only people who have the money to vote should vote.

And that's not a good idea

at all.

However,

that was a voter suppression

issue.

It was.

Having ID is not a voter suppression issue.

It's ridiculous.

Again, like over 80% of African Americans support it.

It's into Hispanics.

And it's in the upper 70s or low 80s for Hispanics, too.

It's seriously, and I mean this sincerely, one of the most popular proposals

in our public debate, in our public discourse.

Nobody thinks it's wrong to have somebody prove who they are when they go to vote.

Nobody thinks that.

Why?

Because they have ID as well.

It is racist to think they don't.

Of course it is.

Of course it is.

So

beyond all of this,

the issue in Salt Lake City and with Mia Love and her election,

a lot of last-minute same-day registrations.

If you're not engaged enough

to do it ahead of time.

A normal deadline.

I mean, like, look, there could be ridiculous ones.

You register a year in advance.

That's probably not right.

Does anybody have that?

I don't think so.

I don't think so.

But there are some that are a few months

or a few weeks.

Again, there should be enough time that you have these registrations and who is able to vote done before the election.

Here is

why these votes are trickling in is because they're figuring it out afterwards, which is not, it does not, it does not.

You should know election night who won.

Yeah.

Period.

It opens up to a lot of problems here.

It does.

And it can be abused at some point.

But one of the big reasons why Mia Love did not win, it looks like, at least in this case, is because of they had the ballot initiative on marijuana.

And so the people were not registering last minute to vote for or against Mia Love.

It was about they wanted to vote and say medical marijuana should be legalized, which it was

in Utah.

It was.

But that was apparently the motivator.

And all those people

voted for the Democrat.

Yeah, they're potheads.

Of course, they're going for the Democrat.

Yeah.

So again, that is like a, you know, we have a right to vote.

It is equal.

The other reason she lost

was summed up by our president.

On the other hand, you had some that decided to, let's stay away.

Let's stay away.

They did very poorly.

Didn't ask him to campaign for him.

I'm not sure that I should be happy or sad, but I feel just fine about it.

So he's happy.

Okay.

Carlos Cabela.

Cabela.

Mike Kaufman.

Mike Kaufman.

And too bad, Mike.

Too bad.

Mia Love.

Mia Love.

I saw Mia Love.

She'd call me all the time to help her with a hostage situation.

Being held hostage.

In Venezuela.

In Venezuela.

Right.

But Mia Love gave me no love.

So that's why she lost.

You didn't give.

President Trump any love.

So there you go.

That's sad.

Yeah, it is.

It looked like she was was going to come back and win, and now she's lost.

Now she's lost.

I don't know.

Let me give you the last four real quick, and then we'll go.

It's clean air and water.

I mean, come on.

This is the five rights.

To learn with pre-K education through college, which is obviously a free college thing.

It's not just learning.

All those things already exist.

A living wage.

So you're talking 15 bucks an hour, probably more.

And the right to health, which that one we need to get into more.

Because I don't know how you guarantee health.

How the government guarantees health, I don't know.

But maybe Tom is going to be able to do that.

If he can do that, though, that's I mean, that's a point in his favor.

I will say he'll probably win.

Yeah.

If he can actually guarantee health, I think a lot of people would vote for the guy.

I think so.

So there you go.

All right, triple eight, seven, two, seven BECK.

It's Bat and Stu for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program.

Glenn Beck.

All right, Tom Styre has eliminated at least five of the really annoying rights that all Americans have because we have a Bill of Rights that's, you know, 10 original, 27 now.

Well, he's narrowed it down to five rights in his platform.

And one that we really find interesting is the right to health.

I'm not sure how he's going to pull that off.

Have you seen any details on that yet?

Can he guarantee that we don't get cancer?

Yes.

You know, I don't know if you know this.

There was another candidate who ran a long time ago on

healing the sick.

His name was Jesus.

One big, huge candidate.

Still popular today.

Yes.

Did really well, in fact,

huge percentages of the vote.

And what he did is he would have people come in with like leprosy and stuff, and he would heal them and give them a healthy health.

If they had the right to health,

they had the right to health.

That was his first, the first leg of his platform.

So, Steyer's going to do that.

Basically, what he's going to do is.

Wow, that hasn't been pulled off much since that particular candidate of which you speak.

Yeah, it's so crazy because it works so well for him.

You know, he's had a really good legacy.

Steyer's picking that up.

What he's going to do is, like, if you have strep throat, your kid has strep throat, maybe, you bring him in.

Tom will touch

his neck And it's over.

And it's all gone.

He'll be gone.

It's his right to health proposal.

That's great.

And I think it's going to work out well because the government does a really good job when they take on things like this.

Oh, they're so good at it.

They're just really good at it.

If we just let them run everything,

things would go so smoothly, wouldn't they?

It would be so easy.

What a word.

Turn it over.

Do you want to do things like earn money?

No.

Give that to the government.

Let them pay you for just being alive.

And then you can go and you can do music and art and paint on your own.

Like Nancy Pelosi let us know.

This is the future.

We need to embrace it.

Well, let's tell you about Relief Factor.

Relief Factor has been helping Glenn for quite a long time alleviate some pretty severe pain he's had and issues he's had with that.

There's a thing he does, like there's a little video.

Have you ever seen this, Pat?

Where there's like Glenn standing on like a farm and he's by a fence.

And he's like, look, I just do a lot of hard work outdoors and

get a lot of pain from it.

And you're just like, wait, you don't?

No, you really don't.

I think Glenn loves the idea of hard work outdoors yeah he does he doesn't want to i don't think he does want to actually do it right uh but it's helped him when he actually has attempted the work it's he's not in a lot of pain anymore which is a big deal this is 100 drug-free it's created by doctors it's got four key ingredients that help you your bodies fight against inflammation which is where the pain is coming from they've got a three three-week quick start for 1995 this is an easy way to give it a shot see if it works for you 70 of people it does work for them they're ordering more why not see if this is going to help you for for 20 bucks to find out if you can get rid of this issue that you're having with pain that's that's the easiest bargain you're ever going to find if you go to drug-free and natural way to ease your pain go to relief factor.com it's relief factor.com

with patents due today uh for glenn uh got an early start on thanksgiving triple eight nine hundred thirty three ninety three

surprised about that too like you know i the the the holiday that's celebrated by the giant meal that he would want to leave early for it right yeah i guess it starts he said

I was surprised to hear him endorse the 11-day Thanksgiving feast.

But he did.

But he did.

Yeah.

He wanted to make sure he was home the whole day because if he had to separate three hours from the dinner table, I mean, what could happen?

He could die of starvation.

Easily.

Easily.

Quite easily.

So, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez,

man, is she.

setting the world on fire with her brilliance.

I mean,

every time she opens her mouth, you think, wow, that is a bright young woman, isn't she?

Here she is reminding us about the three branches of government.

This is,

pay careful attention.

You might want to gather the kids around if they haven't had a civics lesson for a while and just remind them.

Here's Alexandria.

What I mean is that should we, and if we work our butts off to make sure that we take back all three chambers of Congress, rather all three chambers of government,

the presidency, the senate, and the House in 2020,

we can't start working in 2020.

All three chambers of the government, the presidency, the House, and the Senate.

Just like our founders designed.

Yeah.

It's funny because she actually corrects herself.

She realizes she's wrong and then corrects herself to something else that is also wrong.

To something even more wrong, really.

Because if you're just talking about the three branches of Congress, I mean, there aren't three branches of Congress.

No.

The three things we vote for is kind of what she was going for.

I guess.

Yeah, right?

Like, I mean, you know, House, Senate, and presidency are the three big elections.

I mean, you'd put governor in that probably level as well for most people.

But, you know, most people aren't necessarily focusing on local judicial elections.

Like, these are the big things you're fighting for.

You kind of get what she's going for.

But again, all this stuff seems so unfamiliar to her, which is

really what's interesting to her.

I think it is unfamiliar to her.

But, I mean, it's happened before with Democrats.

So I would urge my Republican colleagues, no matter how strongly they feel, you know, we we have three branches of government.

We have a house, we have a senate, we have a president, and all three I mean, the same thing.

We have a house, we have a senate, we have a president, the three branches of government.

Somebody should learn them some things.

Yeah.

Like, we're not a democracy, for one, and then tell them what the three branches of government actually are.

That would be helpful to them.

Yeah.

Very true.

It would be nice.

I think it does reveal a lot about how progressives think about the world, right?

They think about there are three things that matter, the things that give us power.

So we got to work on those.

I think that's what it is.

And that's why it's the most important to them because it's the way that they are able to take more control over everybody's daily lives.

So I'm not surprised it's a focus.

Again,

Acasio-Cortez is really an interesting phenomenon to me because she is

not just because like I because I think it's it's true that she doesn't seem to be all that well informed about basic issues in other words that relate to government.

She's butt stupid.

Some people would.

Is that what you're trying to say?

I don't, not exactly.

Oh, okay.

Again, I think, you know, she's a 28-year-old socialist, right?

So, like, is it surprising that she's not going to be particularly well in tune with what's going on in the world?

I mean, no, it's not exactly a shock to me, at least.

But I am surprised at the odd level of like this halo of protection around her in that she can't be criticized.

And she's very, every time someone says a word of criticism about her, she accuses them of being

obsessed with her, like stalking her essentially on the internet.

Oh, Fox News is just obsessing over every video I put out.

It's like, I don't, I don't know anyone who's obsessing over her,

at least on the right.

I mean, I think people are critical of her, and she's sort of the face of democratic socialism, which is something I think worth some certain level of obsession, you know, to avoid what they want, I think, is

it certainly deserves our attention.

And she's sort of the public face of it, fairly or unfairly.

I mean, Bernie Sanders is much more, like, Bernie Sanders is much more an ideological democratic socialist in that he's very aware of what's going on.

But again, he looks like Bernie Sanders.

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is a much better face for things.

Yeah, she doesn't look like Bernie Sanders.

She doesn't look like Bernie Sanders.

I'd never mistake her for Bernie Sanders.

No.

And now she's making soup.

on the internet and everyone's praising her over that.

Like the best thing that happened on the internet is this Alexandria Casio-Cortez making soup.

She's made soup on Instagram.

It's like, okay,

who's obsessed here?

It's not me.

I'm not obsessed with her soup videos.

Not at all.

I'm obsessed with stopping her policies.

I really don't want us to have an 80% tax rate.

So yes,

I really want what she wants to happen with our federal government to not occur.

But

a personal obsession, I don't know anyone who has a personal obsession with her.

But I think she gets Democratic protection because they're afraid of her constituency.

I think they're afraid that if she gets angry at the Democrat leadership, she will sick the millennial generation on them or something.

Maybe she sways her people who follow her every move.

Those are the ones who are obsessed with her, like the millennials, because she's so active and she's so pretty and she's a socialist and she wants to give me free college and I want free college.

You know, all of those things.

And so I think that's how she escapes the ire of, say, Nancy Pelosi, even though she participated in that protest at her office, which could not have made her happy.

No, probably not.

Now, I know

the millennial thing would explain, I guess, why, you know, Maxine Waters doesn't get this level of protection from the media.

Maxine Waters is just as socialist as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is,

if not more.

I mean, I think at least Maxine Waters has a little bit more of an understanding of what she's actually pushing for.

Very,

again, we're talking very small degrees here.

But she, I think, is, she's been around a long time.

She's fought for these things for a long time.

And she doesn't get that level of protection.

When she says something dumb, people say it's dumb, generally speaking.

When Ocasio-Cortez says something dumb, people are like, oh, but that's my daughter, and she's just out of college, and it's okay.

Of course, she doesn't know yet.

It's a weird thing to say that she's not.

She shouldn't be in office.

That's someone who should win on the election.

again people get the right to have the right to vote for whoever the heck they want but it is a strange thing she she does not seem to have the basic understanding of the things she's speaking of which is an issue yes it's it's kind of an issue and it's it's gotten her into a little bit of trouble the thing she said about israel you know being the occupier um now that's consistent with her it is consistent with her beliefs

system and but you better know the details of it if you're going to try to back it up yes which she doesn't seem to to do.

And I don't think she has any idea.

We have this clip of her, too, talking about

the opposition to Nancy Pelosi.

This is an interesting one.

These dynamics are very interesting to watch, these little internal squabbles.

You know, we talked about football last hour where

Colin Kaepernick, Eric Reed is another player who's kneeling.

And Malcolm Jenkins, who's an Eagles player, was not kneeling, but

friendly to the line of thinking of the protests.

And they actually got in the game, because he's on Carolina now, they got in a game,

a fight in the game, like almost like a fist fight before the game, of both of them, or at least Eric Reid accusing Malcolm Jenkins of selling out because he wasn't kneeling enough.

He made a deal or something with the NFL that if they

think they donated some money to his cause, and so he stopped kneeling, right?

Isn't that?

I don't think he ever was.

He wasn't, he put it, he was one of the, he put his fist up or something in the air.

But like he decided, instead of the Colin Kaepernick way of just bitching about it and acting like you're super impressed.

He actually got something done.

He got something done.

He got a bunch of money

and he's putting it towards the cause he believes in.

Again, I don't agree with his analysis of the situation, but at least he's trying to do something about it.

But again, those squabbles are always fascinating to me.

Listen to this.

This is Casio-Cortez about the Democratic group opposing Pelosi.

Listen.

If we are not on the same page about changing the systems and the values and how we're going to adapt as a party for the future, then what is the point of just changing our party leadership just for the sake of it?

What I'm hearing from you is that you don't feel like there's an ideological or substantive sort of agenda-driven core of this objection.

No, I mean, if anything, I think that what it does is that it creates a window where we could potentially get more conservative leadership.

And when you actually look at the signatories, it is not necessarily reflective of the diversity of the party.

We, you

We have about 16 signatories.

14 of them are male.

There are very few people of color in the caucus.

There's very few ideological diversity.

It's not like there are progressives that are signing on.

It's not like you have a broad-based coalition.

So

I find it,

you know,

I'm not totally bought into the concept.

That's interesting.

We've hit a little intersection here with socialist street and racist street.

They've come to a little intersection, and someone's got to put the brakes on.

Because it's okay that they can have socialist policies, but if they're not the right color,

then they don't matter.

Their obsession with what color people are and what sex they are and what sex they are is,

I think, the real racism here.

That's all they focus on.

That's all they care about.

They are so obsessed with race and gender

that

I mean, it's pretty clear that they're the ones who are always focused and concerned and worried about it.

The rest of us don't really care.

I don't care what color you are.

What are your policies?

What's your ideology?

Are you trying to take more money out of my pocketbook?

Are you trying to steal from me?

That's what I want to know about.

I want to know why you're carrying a pocketbook.

I mean, as a man, typically it wouldn't be the choice.

But again,

are you showing your diversity?

Pretty much, yes.

Okay.

It's interesting.

And my gender fluidity.

And it's great.

You can let us know next break which one you are or which one is.

Right now, I'm not sure.

Right now I'm questioning.

Okay, good.

Yeah.

It's interesting to see that happen because, first of all, there's a handy-dandy guide to whether what you're saying is racist, handy dandy guide for Democrats.

And it works really well.

If what you're saying, just reverse the color on what you're saying and then say it out loud and tell me if you feel

if it feels racist.

Like here you're saying,

well, there's not, there's too many, if you're saying too many men

or if you're saying there's too many white people, which is basically her point there.

Yeah.

Reverse that and say, there's too many women in the caucus and there's too many black people in the caucus.

Does that feel racist to you?

If it does, what you just said is racist.

It's a really easy guide.

It's a really good rule of thumb.

Yeah.

I love it.

It works every single time, too.

And I think people would appreciate it.

Because if people would think about it that way, these statements are all racist.

All of them.

When you go into this, if what a determining factor as to what you vote for, who you support is race, then you are making a race-based decision, a decision based on skin color.

Do you remember which side of the argument Martin Luther King came down on between skin color and content of character.

He was a content of character guy.

Content of character guy.

He wanted it to be content of character, not skin color.

They've completely

disowned that.

Completely disowned it.

And they've come to a point where the end of this solution is to get more, let's say, black people or Hispanic people or whoever.

That's supposed to be, if you see that there's too many people, for example,

in

a particular organization, that could be an indication of racism, right?

Like

a, if it's all white people in an organization, that could theoretically be a basis of skepticism to see if they are racist.

It can make you questioning, as you just said, Pat.

It can make you question whether they are racist.

However, if I were to look at the National Football League right now and see that 80% of players are African-American, despite only 14% of the population being African-American, now, I guess I could theoretically say there's an indication of racism.

They're only hiring black people.

They're hiring them at a massive rate.

However, then I would maybe determine, well, maybe those individuals are better than the other individuals who happen to be white, right?

What they have now done in Congress and people like Ocasio-Cortez have made the mix the end game.

Not to have fair treatment, but just have, do I have the right amount of people from every group?

And that when we do, the problem will be solved.

And that is not, it's an asinine way to think about it.

The point is you're supposed to get the best people regardless of skin color.

If they all happen to be, if it happens to to be that 80% of the people in a particular organization do the best job and they happen to be African-American, good.

That's not the Democrats.

Us Whitey should try harder.

That's what that says.

Yeah.

Triple 8-727-B-E-C-K.

We're just talking about the obsession with race, especially by Democrats like Alexandria Casio-Cortez.

Michelle Obama was just at a recent function, and her obsession with race was amazing and using the Stuberge test where you flip what she said to be the opposite you know where you change the color change the color yeah imagine that in your mind as you hear her speak if we're trying to get anything done and we look around and we all look alike we're all sitting around the same table and we feel really comfortable with ourselves

We should question that at any table that we're at.

And we should be working actively to mix mix it up so that we're getting a real broad range of perspectives on every issue.

But I, you know, shoot, I would see that in Congress.

So again, contrary to what Martin Luther King said, don't judge people that are sitting at your table by the content of their character.

Judge them by their skin color.

Do you have enough of the right colors of skin?

As if

skin color would indicate the way you think.

Yeah.

As if the skin color has anything to do with the way you'd analyze a situation.

Now, look,

the way we grow up has an effect on that.

However, it's not skin color.

Right.

Like percentage-wise, you might find trends in that data, but that's not what determines it at all.

Yeah.

And she had more to say about it.

One of the most interesting points, I told you about this, usually at the State of the Union address,

where you sit in the balcony and watch the State of the Union

like you do.

Yeah, like you do.

You know, you see it on TV.

I'm in the room.

You know, but when you're in the room, what you can see is this real dichotomy.

That on one side of the room, it's also, it's a feeling of color almost.

On one side of the room, it's literally gray and white.

Literally, that's the color.

Okay, listen to how disgusted she is.

It's literally gray and white.

Like, there's a lot of white people.

It's just despicable.

It's disgusting.

Like white people in gray hair.

Is that what she's saying?

I guess.

palette yeah on one side of the room on the other side which by the way isn't accurate by the room there's yellows and blues and whites and greens

physically there's a difference in color in the tone wow because one side all men

wow all white all white on the other side

some women some people of color and again if you were to say look at the democrat side there's so many blacks and Hispanics and women.

And women.

And on the other side.

Would that not be considered wildly racist?

Because that's racist stuff.

One side, it's all gray and white.

One side, it's all brown and black.

Imagine someone saying that?

I can't.

Again, it's racist because the other thing is also racist.

That's why it feels racist to you to say that.

Because it is.

Because it is racist.

It's exactly certainly by the definitions of today.

To sit here and be largely.

I mean, again, she's advocating for it to end.

So think about this.

Oh, over there, there's all black and brown people.

That's got to stop.

And, you know, over here on this side, it's all women and people of color.

That's got to stop.

That makes you a racist if you say something like that.

And similarly, if you just change a couple of words, like white to black or men to woman, both sides of them are racist.

Both of them.

Yeah.

And I know

like people,

everyone on the left views these things through that prism of oppression and who's the oppressed class.

And we're supposed to judge, I guess, an oppressed class in their eyes in a different way.

They get different breaks.

They are not supposed to be criticized.

I think that's Ocasio-Cortez.

She's a young

female who is doing, you know, who is in that world where she's not allowed to

be a victim of more oppression because she's already a member of this oppressed class, or multiple oppressed classes.

You know, someone, there's like a writer on some conservative site who posted a picture of her and said, I don't know, she looks like she's got pretty nice clothes on.

I don't think

she's doing that badly.

I mean, it's pretty nice for a socialist.

This guy just got lit up.

And again, like, you could say, well, it wasn't a great comment, but like, they treated him like he, like, endorsed the Holocaust.

It's like he made a quick comment about the way somebody was dressed.

That's insanity.

It really isn't.

She's had that weird halo of protection around her at this point.

I don't know how long that lasts, but for the moment, it's here.

With Pat and Stew today.

By the way, on Pat Gray Unleashed, tomorrow morning, second hour of the show, we'll be doing a special Wednesday edition of Moron Trivia.

Thanksgiving football.

Show.

Should be fun.

We have the Lions and Cowboys are always playing.

And then

there's now a third game, which is kind of cool too.

I just love that.

It's all dead.

I just love it.

You got the morning, you got the afternoon, and you have the evening

and that way you never have to talk to a relative that's pretty that's interesting which is a huge plus huge uh so we were talking about issues of gender and gender equality and how important that is to people there's a kind of an amazing moment has occurred here uh with the women's march now you uh may know the women's march as a

really kind of terrible uh organization um not because women are terrible but because, first of all,

I think they started off on the wrong foot because their first protest was literally the day of or the day after the inauguration of the president of the United States.

So they didn't even give him a chance to be bad, right?

Like they didn't give him a chance to be president and do something bad against women that they could fight against.

They just did it the day after he entered the office.

They were like, we protest his choice on the drapes.

It was like, there's nothing to protest yet.

Obviously, like, they didn't like Donald Trump generally, but like that is what the election is, right?

You make your case there.

And then once the president becomes the president, just like we did with Barack Obama, by the way, you give him a chance to do what he does.

And when he starts doing things like the bailouts and when he starts saying in stimulus package and cash for clunkers, he confirms what you previously believed about him.

And then you can say, okay, now we're protesting.

You know, the Tea Party didn't start the day after, at least to me, at least on this show, it didn't.

The day after he was elected, it was until he started doing things that didn't work out.

It was 2010, that election, right?

Not 2000, you know.

It wasn't hardcore.

And, you know, I think the first protest I remember about him was in April of 2009, which I think at the time Glenn even said, it's too early.

He hasn't done enough yet on these issues, like taxes.

It wasn't until a little later that we really, okay, this is really happening.

He's really going for these things.

And then you got to be out there.

So that I thought was mistake number one for the women's march movement.

And then mistake number two was associating itself with really awful people like Linda Sarsour, who is

outwardly an anti-Semite and has all sorts of issues that she's associated with.

She's associated herself with Louis Farrakhan and will not distance herself.

Same thing with Tamika Mallory.

These are high-level people.

So this has just come out from Teresa Schook.

She is one of the founders of the Women's March.

This is a remarkable statement.

As founder of the Women's March, my original vision and intent was to show the capacity of human beings to stand in solidarity and love against the hateful rhetoric that had become part of the political landscape in the U.S.

and around the world.

I wanted us to prove that the majority of us are decent people who want a world that is fair,

just, and inclusive of women and all people.

And all was capitalized there.

So you know she meant it?

Like

if she just said all A-L-L with all lowercase, like, that's like just a passing statement.

But she capitalized the A.

And that means all people, not just men and women, all the genders,

anyone who's identifying as a person today.

And that just makes it so powerful.

It does.

With the caps or an exclamation point.

It's just, it's a little scary, though.

Yeah.

Because you know they really are intense about it then.

Sure are.

We proved

they proved that, they say, on January 21st, 2017.

Now she writes, Bob Bland, who I don't know, Tamika Mallory, Linda Sarsour, and Carmen Perez of Women's March Inc.

Women's March Inc.

I love how they turned it into an incorporation,

a incorporation, have steered the movement away from its true course.

I have waited, hoping they would write the ship, but they have not.

In opposition to our unity principles, both capitalized, by the way, which makes you know it's important.

They have allowed anti-Semitism, anti-LBGTQ, IA sentiment.

Wow, they're missing a Q, one Q.

And

a question mark, right?

Yes.

Or is that the other Q?

Yeah, that's the other Q.

But they're also missing the two for two-spirit.

For two spirits, that's so discriminatory.

Because you haven't included the two spirit people.

And I think we came to the conclusion a previous time doing this show together that we really liked Quilt Bag.

Yes.

And Quilt Bag 2, Electric Boogaloo, would cover all of that, including the two.

So I do think that you do throw in the Electric Boogaloo.

I do think.

Well, there's going to be a lot of new stuff.

I've got to assume most of it's covered by Electric Boogaloo.

So if you do Quilt Bag 2, Electric Boogaloo,

then you know you're tolerant.

Yeah.

All right.

Okay.

But in opposition to our unity principles, they have allowed anti-Semitism, anti-Quilt Bag 2 electric boogaloo sentiment, and hateful racist rhetoric to become part of the platform by their refusal to separate themselves from groups that espouse these racist, hateful beliefs.

I call for the current co-chairs to step down and to let others lead who can restore faith in the movement and its original intent.

I stand in solidarity, and this is capitalized, so you know it's important, solidarity, with all the sister march organizations to bring back the movement to its authentic purpose.

As Women's March founder, I am stepping up to bring focus back to the unity principles, and that's capitalized, so you know it's important.

And I am stepping up to bring back focus to,

and with all the support of those who march and have continued to march, I pledge to support grassroots decentralized leadership, promoting decentralized leadership is an interesting thing coming from this group.

Why wouldn't you want it centralized?

I don't understand.

Central control is so great.

Promoting a safe, worldwide community devoid of hate, speech, bigotry, and racism.

This is something that we have on the right criticized the women's march about, saying, hey,

if you want to be taken seriously in this movement, you got to distance yourself from people like Louis Farrakhan and the people who are working with them, like Linda Sarsour, like Tamika Mallory.

And we're getting our wish here.

She is, I mean, the founder of the Women's March is saying, this isn't right.

We're going in the wrong direction.

You even saw Alyssa Milano.

who after she resisted that for a long time.

She did resist it for a long time, and then she also denounced them and what they were doing.

So there is some movement here.

I think they've finally been guilted into saying, you know, maybe your advocacy of the position that Jews are bad isn't all that wonderful.

And it's nice that they've discovered that.

When it comes to the connection between

gender and race and all these things that are so important, you hear this all the time from Democratic politicians, largely, and also in the media.

It's a constant focus.

This is how women will vote.

This is how African Americans will vote.

You have to make sure you have this number of people on

each group so we can show it's diverse.

That is so common.

I even get the sense, I think, that

that's reality.

That's how people are.

There's a split between conservatives and liberals in which liberals, you know, the left sees this as

vitally important, diversity for diversity's sake, skin color for skin color's sake.

And conservatives see it as like, what about the merit of the person?

Like that's been a, I feel like a debate.

It's not really the battle lines, though.

This is fascinating.

This is a poll, and this is in the Huffington Post.

They wrote about this.

Would you say that you share a lot of common interests and concerns with other

people of your gender?

Or would you say it's not really irrelevant?

Now, in my mind, Democrats are going to say it's 80% really relevant.

And Republicans are going to say 80% not relevant.

And in the middle, like, you know, maybe it splits out a little bit differently than that.

Maybe you know, somewhere in the middle among independents.

It's, that is not, this is not the case.

In fact, it's really only true with female Democrats.

And it's still not to the scale that we're talking about.

Listen to this.

Female Democrats, do you believe you have a lot of common interests and concerns based on gender?

Female Democrats say yes, 50%, no, 34%.

Now, even that to me is not nearly as high as I imagined it in my head.

Based on the debates we see in politics and the media,

I would have said it would be much more dramatic than that.

Female independents, 29% say, yeah, I have a lot of I'm a woman, I have

a lot in common with other women.

Only 29%, 45% say no.

Among Republicans, only 27% of females say yes.

They have interests with the same

common interests with other women.

63% say no.

So you kind of get

the general general split there, but not nearly as dramatic as you'd expect.

What's even more interesting, I think, is

males, and of course, obviously, as a sexist, you'd expect that out of me.

Male Republicans, only 24% say they have something in common with other men.

In other words, you're thinking of yourself as part of a group, and we're all in this together, and we all have the same concerns because

instead, you think of people as individuals.

Only 24% say yes, 61% say no.

Among male independents, it's actually lower.

21%

say they have something in common with their gender.

50% say no.

So 24% of male Republicans say yes.

Male independents, it's only 21%.

But maybe the most shocking thing of all, the lowest support out of all these groups, male Democrats.

Male Democrats say.

Now, maybe that's because they're saying, well, well, it's because women are the important ones and not us or whatever.

Only 21% say they have a lot in common when it comes to basing things on gender.

That's kind of a fascinating thing.

When you look at some of the other findings, 52% of all Americans who identify with a political party, including half of Democrats and 55% of Republicans, say they share a lot in common with their party.

Now, that's one you should share a lot in common with, right?

Because this is an ideologically based organization in theory, right?

Like, you should have the same concerns as other Democrats.

Why would you be a German?

That's a gender question, though.

Would you say you have a lot in common with the Republican Party right now?

I'd probably say no.

No, I'm not, I'm not a Republican or an Independent, so I wouldn't necessarily, and neither are you, right?

I mean, you're not a Republican, registered Republican.

Although I certainly typically vote for more Republicans than Democrats, I vote with a lot of Libertarians as well.

But again, if you're in a party, and I don't take that stance largely because I don't believe in the way the party system works, I don't like it.

So

I don't join a party.

But if I'm going to join a party, what reason would you join a party other than the ideas and concerns being similar?

Like that number should be 100%.

Now, maybe there's people in there you could say, well, I disagree with what we're doing and I'm fighting against it.

However, if that's true, like there's also an argument to just find a new party, right?

Like go to a party that's like the party is just supposed to identify your values and try to push them over the line in elections.

It's not supposed to be a group you are

aligned with your entire life.

We saw this a lot with people who were Democrats in the 50s,

and they really love,

they were

50s Democrats, and they remained Democrats through the 80s when the Republicans were much closer to their views than the Democrats of the 80s were.

But they remained Democrats because they were loyal to that party and it was part of their identity, right?

They saw it as part of their core, which is not what a party is supposed to do for you.

It's not.

I mean, they change all the time.

We see them change on positions all the time.

If you're changing with them, that's fine as long as you're leading that, not them.

They shouldn't be leading you to a new position.

Black Americans were split 38, 34 as to whether or not they had much in common with others who share their race or ethnicity.

Would you believe that?

Looking at the way we are told that African Americans vote in lockstep, they never disagree with each other.

All they do is care about racism.

The way the media paints the African American in this country is a crime.

They paint them as mindless people who just will always vote with Democrats and they don't think for themselves and they can't get ID.

And it's like, who are these?

I I don't know any African Americans like that.

African Americans I know think for themselves, just like every other race and every other group.

You know, like, it's insulting.

And somehow the media gets away with that.

And bleeding and acting otherwise is racist.

They're not.

Groups are, it's a terrible way to identify people.

You know, you are an individual.

And I know as conservatives, we understand that.

The media just likes to lump everybody in groups so they can talk generally about them.

And that's a terrible idea.

It's actually the core of what racism was, right?

Yeah.

When you think of people as groups instead of individuals, this is when you get improved, when you have lots of problems.

It's how anti-Semitism exists.

Those Jews do X, Y, and Z.

There may be a person who is Jewish who does things that you don't like, and that's okay.

The media should learn that about George Soros, who's, I mean, you know, really more of an atheist at this point.

But still, the point is that, like, you can criticize someone as they do with Jared Kushner, with Ivanka Trump, with Sheldon Adelson.

They're fine finding criticism there.

It doesn't make them anti-Semitic, of course not.

But when a conservative says something bad about Chuck Schumer, well, then it's just because we're anti-Semites.

George Soros, oh, you're just an anti-Semites.

It's Jewish money

you're criticizing.

It has nothing to do with it.

He is making decisions that we don't like politically.

And that should be okay.

30% of Americans younger than 30

say they have a lot in common with others their age.

A third of those age 45 to 64

say that they agree with that.

So not a huge amount there.

But again, that's an interesting point.

And then when it comes to

income, people making less than 50 grand a year

say they have, about a third of them say they have a lot in common with people in their income group.

And it's lower when you get more wealthy.

59% of

Americans who describe themselves as born-again or evangelical Christians say that they share many interests and concerns with other faith, others of faith.

That one should be higher.

59% is the highest number on this poll, but again, if you're in a faith,

you should really consider yourself aligned with others as far as concerns go.

Because, I mean, that's kind of the whole base.

Ideological groups, you should find a lot of similar interests and concerns.

Skin color, you shouldn't.

Yeah.

888-933

888-727 B-E-C-K.

It's Pat and Stew for Glenn.

What Patton Stew today?

Hey, we're going to tell you coming up here in a few minutes about the new nickname President Trump has for Joe Biden.

It is, it's perfect.

It is a perfect nickname.

Also, Ivanka Trump is in trouble because

she's got a private email server that she's been sending out government business on.

And so now the Democrats are getting together and chanting, Lock Her Up.

Isn't that adorable?

That's cute because the Republicans chanted lock her up when it was Hillary doing it.

And she was Secretary of State.

So

they're just.

It's also sexist, if I remember right, from the media's perspective.

When they said lock her up, it was sexist.

And now

it's wonderful.

No, it's wonderful now.

Okay.

Yeah, now it's wonderful.

I understand.

All right.

That and more coming up on the Glenback program.

Pat Stu.

Our sponsor this half hour is Home Title Lock.

Home Title Lock is.

They actually showed us how they go and

how the criminals can do home title fraud.

It literally takes them like 15 or 20 minutes

to take your title.

Yeah, and they can take it and borrow hundreds of thousands of dollars.

I've decided

to stop doing radio and just go into business.

It was so easy to do.

I got to believe that I can probably get away with it.

I know all the, you know, just go and you just start taking people's homes, borrowing against their equity, and then spending the money on yourself.

Yeah.

That's what criminals are doing.

And they can find your home as well, especially if you don't protect yourself.

I want to stop it.

Yeah.

Go into hometitalock.com.

Yeah, hometitalock.com.

It's pennies a day.

They put a virtual barrier around your title and mortgage.

And

as soon as they find tampering, they're going to shut it down for you.

Find out if you're already a victim.

Get the $100 search free with sign up at hometitalock.com.

It's home titlelock.com.

Glenn back.

With Patton Stew.

Today, we're going to talk about Ivanka here.

But first of all, I just want everybody to understand that day after tomorrow, it's going to be Thanksgiving, the Macy's Day Parade and all that.

It could be the coldest ever in New York City.

Really?

Which, of course, means global warming has kicked into gear again.

Global warming.

Is this weather weirding against this?

Weather weirding.

Because it's colder than usual, which means global warming.

And when it's warmer than usual, that, of course, also means global warming.

If there's extra snow, obviously global warming.

And if there's no snow, that's global warming.

So just know that when you're, if you go to the parade, uh, Thursday and the balloons aren't able to fly because it's so freezing cold and windy and you're standing there shivering watching marching bands go by.

It's global warming that's responsible for that.

Now, this is happening despite Kyoto Energy Park.

Yes.

And

it's really happening because Trump pulled us out of the Paris Accord.

Otherwise, we'd have this problem fixed.

Yeah, it would be fixed by now.

I would assume, though, I thought Kyoto Energy Park was going to be enough because Australia did this.

It was a shining example of renewable energy generation.

And it received fast-track state government approval a decade ago.

Now, look, they just didn't really go all out on it.

They only gave it $200 million.

Now, what are you going to do with $200 million?

How much would have been going all out?

I feel like $600 trillion.

Okay.

Yeah, I think you're right.

That would be all out.

I'd prefer a quadrillion.

Yeah.

Yeah.

But a $600 trillion investment, I mean, is that not enough for our future?

Is that too much for your kid's life?

Here's the thing.

here's the question you need to ask: Can you afford not to do it?

That's the question.

That's a great question.

Thank you.

So, it was initially intended to construct, it was going to construct a park in stages starting with on-site facilities, followed by wind, solar, and mini-hydro infrastructure to show everybody, you know, Australia is green.

Like, we've got this whole thing wrapped up.

Project had experienced numerous delays, blamed on unfavorable government policies and investor uncertainty.

Residents were advised in 2016 that work was due to start that year.

Now, remember, this was 2008.

The funding was approved.

They decided to put it into

effect.

Okay.

And now a cloud, however, is hanging over the $200 million project

after the company behind it went into administration.

So shockingly, the company behind it is now going bankrupt.

Apparently, this is not going to solve the climate catastrophe.

Oh, darn it.

I had high hopes for it.

I really did.

It did.

I mean, that's sad.

Between the Energy Park and the Paris Accord, which, by the way, if you ever look at the details of the Paris Accord,

is absolutely fascinating.

None of the things they say about it are actually true.

It's like a promise.

They're like, oh, well, we're going to reverse this 0.7 degree temperature rise.

We're going to limit the amount of emissions in the atmosphere.

That's not what the Paris Agreement actually does.

What the Paris Agreement does is it has an agreement, a non-binding agreement, to do one, I believe it's one one-thousandth of what that goal is.

So it's not the whole goal.

They've agreed in a non-binding fashion to go one one-thousandth of the way to the goal they talk about every time they talk about the Paris Accord.

And you've heard Al Gore himself talk about the Paris Accord, right?

When he said.

If all 195 nations on 194 met their targets, it still wouldn't solve the problem.

That is correct.

That is correct.

However,

it sends a very powerful signal.

That's right.

Okay, so

it would have sent a very powerful signal that we want to correct it.

We're not correcting it, but this sends the signal that we want to.

Okay, well, that's that really worth screwing up our economies and spending trillions of dollars?

By their own admission, the Paris Accord does virtually nothing.

It really does.

Virtually nothing.

Nothing.

And that is what all of this is about.

It's all about signaling your virtue, right?

It's about saying, you know, it's about throwing up a couple of, you know, it's about driving a Prius so everyone sees you in your Prius.

Yes.

You know, you go back and look at the polling on the people who drive and buy Priuses.

First of all, they make over $100,000 a year.

They're some of the wealthiest people around.

So when it comes to subsidizing those purchases, this would not be what you're talking about when you talk about the wonderful progressive goal of helping the poor.

You're helping rich people buy cars.

So you help rich people buy cars to make yourself feel good.

And then when you poll the people who bought the Prius, what they say is the most important reason, the reason why they bought it, is to tell so that people know

because it says something about them.

Signaling.

Right, right.

The most important thing is because it says something about them.

Yeah, it says they care, and that's the important thing.

It is they care.

Doing something about the problem, if you think it's a problem, certainly is not the most important thing.

No, uh-uh.

Well, it's always

their battle cry.

Well, we've got to do something.

They don't care about the right thing, doing the right thing.

No, we just do something.

Something.

And right now, one of the things they're doing is trying to pin Ivanka Trump with the same problem that Hillary had when

President Trump had everybody chanting, lock her up.

They're going to be able to

drum her out of the picture in the White House?

Right.

Because, I mean, we have to go back and revisit the lock her up thing.

This was seen as a sign of sexism by Republicans who wanted to lock up Hillary Clinton with no evidence, no trial.

Showed that they don't care about due process, showed that they just wanted to.

Now, of course, what we all know is it was a

you know a little bit over-the-top uh

chant about saying we don't want her to be president of the united states right it was like it was a dumb part of a political election like locking her up like obviously let's all be clear about this obviously donald trump does not think that she should be locked up because if he did he would do something about it he's president of the united states he controls these levers he's done nothing in two years about it he does not he did he does not think she should be locked up he could say all he wants he wants her to be locked up but he was doing that as it's basically a campaign tactic.

He has the ability to do something about this and hasn't done anything about it.

Now, who knows?

Maybe he will in the future if he thinks it's a positive thing.

But he said right after the election, look, I think we've done enough to her.

I think the family's gone through enough.

Yeah.

Now, that's not how the law works.

I don't know if anyone knows this.

When you commit a crime,

we're not supposed to say, well, look,

they've been through enough.

Look, his daughter.

He's got a lot of negative publicity.

Don't leave him alone.

Stodder lost the problem queen thing, first of all.

She didn't make the cross-country team.

And just because her dad robbed a bank, we can't do that to her as well.

Come on.

He doesn't need to go to prison for that.

That's not how that works, right?

If you commit a crime, you should be investigated for it.

And the idea that we're somehow embracing this idea that because she's a powerful political figure who's going to, is probably close to, if not a billionaire, who has lost a political election.

So she gets out of whatever crime she committed.

Like, that's not a sensible way of dealing with this.

And I think the reality of it is, is when they look at it, like, you know, could you go after her if you really wanted to?

Yeah, you probably could.

I mean, she did seemingly do things that were in violation of rules and probably

illegal in some way, but it would be difficult to prove.

It would be a very large undertaking.

It would cost a fortune.

It would be a massive thing that tore apart the country even more than it already is.

And for that reason, it's just not worth the hassle, I think.

It's probably not, she's not going to jail for 50 years over it, you know, over the email thing.

And who knows?

Maybe she would have if we saw all of her emails, right?

But we didn't.

So that's a whole, that's the whole reason why that crime exists in the first place.

The Ivanka thing is a totally different story.

And what the media is doing, and it's fascinating coming from the media, in that every single time you say, well, Barack Obama, you're saying you're complaining about Donald Trump separating kids on the border.

Well, look at these pictures from the Barack Obama administration.

And they'll say, oh, what about is?

Is this more what aboutism?

What's going on right now?

What's important now?

So, this is just blatant what about ism.

You complained about Hillary Clinton in her emails during the campaign, and now

has sent emails from a private email address

about work issues.

And now you don't care.

This is the same story, and we should all care about it the same way.

Stunningly, some actual sense, I guess, is coming from MSNBC on this issue, who's separating the issue a little bit.

Here's the segment from their coverage this morning.

Listen.

Trump's use of private email appears to cover about seven months from February 2017 until last fall.

Hillary Clinton used it for all four years that she served as Secretary of State.

According to people familiar with an internal review that began last year, Trump's attorney found less than 1,000 emails that discussed her official schedule and fewer than 100 that discussed government business with other administration officials.

By comparison, Clinton's attorneys determined that about 30,000 of Clinton's emails addressed official business

and had to be turned over to the State Department.

According to the FBI, another 31,000 emails were deleted after Clinton determined that they were personal.

How many for Von?

Trump's attorney says none of her emails were deleted.

Trump's attorney also insists none of her emails contained classified information.

And so far, none have been uncovered.

But we don't know.

We haven't seen the rest.

On the other hand, the State Department determined more than 2,000 of Clinton's emails included classified information.

And in some cases,

so it's the same thing, right?

Right.

Sure.

In Hillary's case, it's like maybe 61,000

emails that had to do with sensitive government information to maybe less than 100 of Ivankas.

And you know that they, I mean, the Secretary of State is probably privy to some pretty serious information that she could be sharing on these emails.

I'd also note the first daughter is not held to the standard of the Secretary of State.

Yes.

Now, she is an advisor to the President, so she has some role formally in the government, I guess.

But,

you know, and she has to follow these rules just like everybody else.

But again, 100 emails versus 30,000.

Deleted emails, it was zero versus 30,000.

It was four years rather than a few months.

I mean, all of these, like,

I will, the one thing I will say about it from the negative perspective on Ivanka and others who have been in the administration who have done this is because it was such a big deal during the election.

All of this, you should know better.

You should know better.

Yeah.

You shouldn't, you gotta, I mean, you just know this is gonna be a problem because of what a big big problem it was for Hillary during the election.

And you should probably make sure you're just on government email all the time unless it's private business.

That is

a lot of these wind up being, though,

you know, tied together.

And Hillary tried to make this point with some of the things that she did.

Some of them were absolutely not this way.

But like, if you're sending a, if we're saying, you know, if tonight I'm going to Creed II, very excited to go see Creed too.

And if I'm in the government and I'm like, well, I got to find a time.

I'm going to see Creed II.

What time do I need to go?

What does my schedule look like?

And they send back my schedule.

Technically, that's government business, right?

But I mean, I don't know.

Can that be on a private email server?

Sure, right?

Like in theory.

The other point I would bring up, though, is that one.

There's a difference between a private email account and a private email server.

If you are doing a private email account, you open up a Gmail, you open a Yahoo account, whatever you have,

hotmail.com.

A lot of people, H-O-T-M-A-L-E.com.

A lot of people on that.

If you're on hotmail.com,

your stuff is all stored by

Google or whatever else.

And if it needs to be seen, there's an availability to get it.

You can't delete all your emails out of your Gmail account.

At least there's ways that Google can get them if, like, let's say they're subpoenaed, right?

Google will work within those legal restrictions.

If you have a private email server, there's a reason you do that.

The reason you do that is to pull all of that outside of the, Google's free, right?

Like

if you want to go and send emails about cooking recipes, you can do that over Google pretty safely.

When you do a private email server,

you are launching intent.

Hillary Clinton knew she was going to run for president again, did not want all of her emails to be public.

So she didn't send them on the government accounts.

And then when she set up her private server, she deleted 30,000 of them, knowing that no one could recover them.

You couldn't, you most likely would not get away with that if you were.

And they might have all been sensitive.

We don't know.

We don't know because we haven't seen them.

We don't get the chance to read them.

Let's just say, Pat, you were going to send an email that was sensitive in nature, that you knew if it came out would affect your future presidential campaign.

Yeah.

And you had a choice whether to send it through A, a government account, B, a public, popular Gmail type account, or C, your own private server that exists in your home that you could light on fire that nobody could see.

That nobody can see and no one has access to.

Which one would you choose?

That is a hard one.

And then when I phone a friend, you can.

But let me give you one more piece of information because it's going to be hard for the friend.

If you had a situation in which you knew

there might be one of these

political controversies coming up and you were going to choose which ones to delete, would you say delete 29,500 emails that were just about cooking and 500 of the most sensitive, terrible things you don't want in public.

Or would you just, was it just recipes?

If you had that opportunity to get rid of all those private emails about your grandkids and you could just throw in a couple of more slipped in there that happen to be the things that make me look bad, which one would you choose?

Wow.

Do you want to phone a friend?

Let me give you the name, Hillary Clinton.

Phone her.

Because she should know by now, right?

She should know better.

Everybody should, though.

You should.

And so, yeah, just the appearance of it is unfortunate.

It's a political mistake.

Unfortunately, we said, like, Scott Pruitt was guilty of this occasionally, the guy who was in EPA

initially in the Trump administration, did a lot of really good things at the EPA.

But he was, once he got into this realm of like he was being talked about as this corrupt guy who was doing all these things that he shouldn't be doing, after that, you can't order the $1,000 pens.

Yeah.

Like, you shouldn't be ordering them anyway.

Is it a huge controversy, $1,000 in the government?

I mean, come on.

They order that in catering five times a day.

However, when you know that you're already under that microscope scope, be careful with that stuff.

And I think the Trump administration should learn that lesson.

They should know that.

They shouldn't

do any of this material to

the media.

But again, I give MSNBC some credit there.

They actually characterized that pretty accurately.

They kind of did.

Yeah.

Triple 8, 727, B-E-C-K.

With Pat and Stu, by the way, check out my show, Pat Gray Unleashed, immediately preceding this one, every weekday, 6-t8 Central.

It's actually 7-9 Eastern.

And tomorrow, it's a special edition of More on Trivia as we get into the Thanksgiving holiday.

Triple 8, 727 BECK.

I

love this decision from the Trump 2020 campaign team.

They have apparently come up with

some nicknames.

They're trying to give nicknames to all the Democrats who will potentially run against him for president.

And so

one of the people that they've been working on is Joe Biden because Joe Biden is,

as you mentioned yesterday, Stu, what, like 20 points ahead of the second-place contender?

Yeah, a poll that was taken in October has

Joe Biden at 33% among Democrats.

And I believe it was

Elizabeth Warner Kamala Harris was second place.

One of the two.

13%.

That's amazing.

Big, big lead.

And then Sanders was behind that, I think, at like 12 or 11.

I don't think Hillary was in that.

So if Hillary jumped in, it might change things.

But anyway, right now it looks like Joe Biden is

the main

candidate in the Democrat Party that everybody thinks would have a chance to unseat President Trump.

So

Trump is really good at these nicknames, and it kind of sticks when he starts calling people Crooked Hillary, Lying Ted.

All of those things pretty much worked.

The name they have tentatively decided upon for Joe Biden if he runs is Creepy Joe,

which is pretty good.

He is very creepy.

We've talked about his creepiness before, where he's got this propensity for touching women seemingly inappropriately that he doesn't know, that he's kind of hangs on them and

hovers around them and paws at them.

Yeah, another thing he seems to like to do, and this is something you'll notice if you look at a bunch of pictures of Joe in these situations, is he likes to sniff the back of women's ears.

Yeah, you'll notice it.

Look at the pictures.

Icky, and again, creepy.

It's creepy Joe.

It's a good name.

It's going to stick if he uses it and if Joe runs.

So just know that, Joe.

When you get in, you're going to become known as not middle-class Joe that everybody calls you.

Usually.

In the press, well, because you told them to, but it'll be a creepy Joe from now on.

Look what the cat dragged in.

That was a big cat.

That was a cat the size of an elephant that dragged in Jeff Fisher.

Yeah, it was just an elephant.

It was an elephant.

It was an elephant.

Dragged Jeffy in.

And in fact, it was a pack of elephants that dragged him in because just one wasn't enough.

Really?

It's good to see you too, Pat.

Really good to see you.

See you tomorrow morning on Maravia, too.

Can't wait.

Yeah, it'll be fun, won't it?

It will be.

I know you're looking forward to it.

I love it.

And actually, we've had a great season.

You can hear Jeffy every day on his podcast.

Chewing the Fat, available wherever free podcasts are sold.

When does that download, for instance?

When could I get the new one?

The new one would be at 4 p.m.

Central, 5 p.m.

Eastern, Monday through Friday.

All right.

Amazing.

Okay.

Now, wonderful.

I heard you talk a little bit about Thanksgiving and people preparing for Thanksgiving, but really, you know, that people that think that you have to starve

before Thanksgiving.

No, that's the wrong way to go.

That's the wrong way.

No, you got to eat more

to kind of stretch out your stomach.

You have to continue on.

You can't starve yourself.

Otherwise, you're no good on Thanksgiving.

You know how to power through these things.

You've taught us a lot about overeating.

And I appreciate it.

I've taught, I mean, I just want people to feel free to

do what they want.

Yeah, sure.

That's exactly it.

We appreciate your expertise.

Thank you.

Thank you.

There's a

couple of stories, a couple of big-time females that are in a little bit of trouble.

And I feel sad.

I feel sad for this particular person, Taylor Swift.

She took a big heat for getting involved in the Tennessee Senate race, and people were all wound up.

By the way, her candidate lost badly.

It was not good.

But she, and this is how bad it hurt her, she now is number two on the highest paid women in music list.

So

man, I heard her a lot.

Is there any evidence that the two are tied together, or are you just making that up?

I'm just making it up.

Okay.

I kind of thought so.

Making it up.

Number one, what you do, right?

Like, you just make things up.

Who's number one now?

Katy Perry.

Oh, Clinton supporter.

So, yeah.

Katie Perry.

The one who heard them both.

The one who actually sang the Hillary Clinton campaign theme number one.

She's number one.

She apparently was not punished for endorsing Hillary Clinton, but Taylor Swift was.

Correct.

But Taylor will probably take number one again because I know she just signed a new record deal, too, for another $100 million.

She is pretty unstoppable.

I will say one of the craziest things that no one pointed out about that whole Taylor Swift endorsement, which, by the way, I mean, she really did.

Blackburn won pretty easily in that race.

It was supposed to be close.

But

the craziest part about that is she waited till literally the day after her tour ended to do it.

Right.

Like, she didn't come on.

She was on stage the previous night in Dallas, Texas.

She could have announced her big political views then,

but apparently didn't want to do that in front of a big live stage.

Another person in trouble, Stormy Daniels, and I know you'll be sad about this.

Oh, no.

Stormy, you know,

she's been in the news quite a bit.

She attacked President Donald Trump.

And, you know, now she says that because of that, her pornography career is completely ruined.

It's ruined.

I disagree.

I thought it was over already.

Oh, I disagree.

I mean, you want to be in the forefront.

Yeah, I thought she was retired from porn stardom.

Well, it hurt her, right?

She had to go on tour, and she did of the some of the places were actually looking out for people to touch her and arrest them and everything, which they normally wouldn't do.

But because it was stormy and it was she was anti-Trump and shut down a lot of good events.

They could touch her because of that?

Yeah, well, no, the other way around.

Yeah, the other way around, yeah.

So that, you know, when you go to events, you sometimes reach out and

touch the people performing, and the performers may touch you.

It's just part of the...

Is that okay?

It's part of performance.

Well, no.

No, it's not.

All right.

No, it's not.

But most places, you know, may overlook that.

But because it was Stormy Daniels, the cookies were like, no.

So if you go in, let's say she's doing a gig in a maybe a Trump-friendly area.

Correct.

The

local authorities might pick that day to go and do a spot-check.

Right, and spot check everything.

Now, I was reading that article, and it said something about her writing career in the porn industry has been put on hold.

And I didn't realize, I mean, I know there's complex storylines in porn movies.

Complex movies.

It's interesting that she, you know,

everybody can't do it.

She develops those complex stories.

Well, everybody can't just write about the movie.

No, the dialogue alone is so difficult to noodle out.

Oh, it's you.

Come in.

Ding-dong!

Feature delivery.

Come on in.

We're just out by the pool.

We're just out.

We're just out by the pool.

Come on.

This is a really good plot, by the way.

They just came up with

complex.

Do you write?

No.

Are you a screenwriter in the industry?

Part-time.

Part-time, yeah.

Part-time.

Well, there is a lot of production that goes into these.

There's all kinds of productions.

And that's one of the things, you know, look, it has been, you know, when you watch a lot of the movies, you see them in the same place.

Oh, yeah.

The same house.

The porn industry will rent a house for a day and film, you know, 20 or 30 movies.

Oh, don't say that.

Because I did stay in a porn house once.

What?

Really?

In fact,

our wonderful host, Glenn Beck, I was actually the one I would say was responsible for this happening.

Because

we were in LA,

gosh, it was just a month ago.

No, it was a few months before.

It was six months ago, maybe?

Oh, is it that long?

Maybe not.

I mean, it was this year, though, for sure.

So we're in L.A.

and

we go to this house, and it's exactly what you would picture a house.

Like, what would a porn director think rich people have?

This is what it felt like.

So it was very very white and modern.

White and modern, wide open space.

Wide open spaces, lots of glass everywhere, kind of everything and like different floors and

like a big open pool, but protected, somewhat private with really like nice views.

And so the way it was, I don't know if it's like an Airbnb or something, but it was like all of us, the whole show, went out to this.

Instead of getting 12 hotel rooms, we had a bunch of people out there because we did the TV.

I thought we did when we went to the Super Bowl in San Francisco, too.

We stayed at the house.

I didn't know that.

It was a porn house.

I'm going to find out pretty soon.

I'll tell you that.

Well, it was Nicholas Cage's house.

It's his old house.

So it's possible.

It's possible.

It's possible.

So when we pull into the house, one of the people, I will not out this person, but one of the people who

is with us traveling

says, and it wasn't Jeffrey, shockingly.

One of the people says, wait a minute, I've stayed in this house before.

And so

how do you,

that's random.

And then he says, and you know what?

It's a porn house.

Now, I didn't know there was such a thing as a porn house, but apparently, like very commonly,

the same, as Jeffy just pointed out, the same sets get used because you can just rent the house for a day and film a bunch of stuff at the same time.

So apparently he had stayed in this house earlier with a previous radio show that I won't name.

And for protecting the innocent here.

And while they were there, they were like, this looks like a porn house.

I bet this has been a porn house.

And they assigned one of the producers find the movie that this house was in.

Nice.

So, of course,

how many porn movies are, I mean, every day there's probably 7,000 made.

That's my,

I don't know, right?

So, how could you ever find it?

So, they stay at the house for like a week.

They leave.

Two months later, he gets a text, I found it.

So, he had done some research.

He had done a lot of research.

That's a good bid right there.

Wow.

And had sent a screenshot

of

one of the scenes

out by the pool area.

Now, God only knows what else happened in this house.

I mean, I went immediately into emergency surgery to just

please just dump like bleach into my body to disinfect.

They do clean it.

That's icky.

You would assume they clean it.

Though, you know, I think potentially lighting it on fire is a better solution.

Yeah.

But apparently it was actually a porn house.

And God only knows how many movies have been made in this thing because it just, it's exactly what you would think like Ron Jeremy would think is the place to open.

It's that type of situation.

I found it.

I love the FOT too.

I found it.

You got to love the dedication of a young producer just to just watching hours and hours and hours of porn to try to find, to quote unquote, try to find the house.

Like, I've got a free pass.

It's work.

I swear.

So that's.

fantastic.

Congratulations to Jim Acosta, too, by being back into the White House fray of things.

And the White House has now sent their rules for the journalists to go.

But this kind of goes to my theory a while ago, and I thought for sure it was going to happen this time around, and it's going to happen soon.

But I think Trump is just going to cancel the daily briefing.

Just cancel it.

Stop doing it.

We're not going to do it anymore.

Follow me on Twitter.

Shut up.

Catch me out on the tarmac.

Catch me on the way to the helicopter.

If there's something important, I'll call you in.

Other than that, we're talking about that.

I mean, because he's not required to do it.

No, you don't have to.

And I will say, Trump does way less press conferences than any previous president.

He does not come out and do formal press conferences very often.

But he catches up.

He answers stuff all the time.

I mean, they're asking questions.

But yeah, he does a lot of informal stuff, and that's the way he deals with the press, which I think there's no problem with that at all.

I mean, I think sometimes there is value in the formal press conference with the president because, you know, you're setting a date.

People are prepared to get their best questions in theory.

Like, it's you know, and he did one.

He's that one was one example.

He does them occasionally, but very infrequently.

However, the Daily Press briefing with Sarah Huckabee Sanders, has she been doing them?

I haven't seen them anymore.

Is she still doing them?

As far as I know, I don't know.

She goes on trips with Trump, so she's still around.

You know what I mean?

There's been reports that she was

on her way out.

Yeah, I don't think that's true.

I think she's

still there.

But

maybe the media has just stopped covering them every day, where like they used to.

Oh, that's possible.

They used to put them on TV every single day.

And then that boasts to, we'll just don't do them.

We just won't do them.

You're not going to cover them.

We're not going to do them.

That's fine.

Get out of here.

We'll call you.

I mean, they are just shows.

And

this is the problem with the people like Jim Acosta, who is using that not to try to get to any truthful answers.

Absolutely no care for that.

He's trying to, you know, make more people download his, like, you know,

you know, the Jim Acosta future podcast that he's going to host.

Right.

And he wants to be on movie posters or whatever.

You know, he's trying to make a big deal out of himself.

He wants to sell his book or whatever.

No doubt about it.

Whatever this leads to.

Acosta wants the attention.

Yes.

This is all about attention for Jim Acosta.

He's the most self-aggrandizing person in the media.

You know, you were talking earlier about

Cortez making soup, and we have how people are just enamored with her making soup on Instagram.

Yes.

And they're calling it the new fireside chat.

And you saw that Beto O'Rourke, how they were all crazy about him making steak on

his making steak and cutting up steak.

And it was just a beautiful thing, and he's so hot.

And so now, remember when he said that he wasn't going to be running for president in two years?

Is that channeling?

Did you even believe him at all when he said that?

Not a word.

Because now, you know, he's open.

Oh, is he already?

He's open.

He's already open to a run.

Wow, it's been a full week since he said he wasn't.

Yeah, you know, look, it's the Democratic Party.

I'm out there.

You know, it's possible.

It's possible.

Yeah, what a surprise.

Triple 8-727-B-E-C-K.

Are you dreading that awkward Thanksgiving dinner conversation that inevitably turns to politics?

Hey, Susan, could you pass the brown gravy, please?

I don't know, Ted.

Can it cross your wall of bread without being turned back?

Oh, here we go.

Don't get trapped.

Get prepared.

By reading Glenn Beck's new book, Addicted to Outrage.

And you might want to pick up a couple of extra copies for your less enlightened family members.

You know, immigrants built this country.

Oh, I'm going to

Addicted to outrage.

The new book from Glenn Beck.

Available everywhere books are sold.

With Pat and Stu and Jeffy, whose podcast you could check out wherever podcasts are sold for free, just like mine, Pat Gray Unleashed, you'll find it there.

And then you'll find the Jeffy podcast, should for some reason you want to.

And what's it called again?

Chewing the fat.

All right.

Oh, okay.

Okay.

Is there like a picture of you there?

Oh, on a steak, right?

Isn't there a picture of you on a steak?

That's correct.

That's correct.

You're priceless.

It's just on a steak, isn't it?

It's priceless.

Because it was chosen by someone else, if I'm not mistaken.

It was chosen by someone else.

What about the name?

You came up with a name, though, right?

That was not Pagre.

I came up with the name.

From Pagre at least, yeah.

And you thought about that because that's a common phrase to use.

It's a common phrase when you're having a conversation with someone, you know, chewing the fat.

That's what you do.

It's an old phrase.

Yeah, it's an old.

Is there any other meaning to it?

Is there any other alternative?

If there is, I certainly hadn't thought of it.

Oh, you mean that Jeffy's

overweight?

Yes.

I see.

Oh, wow, I just got that.

You could use it.

You could think of it that way, couldn't you?

I guess someone could.

Why would you?

That's a fair point.

Why would you?

Why would you?

Now, you don't go into politics all that much on a podcast.

Really?

I mean, look, that's for you guys.

It's an escape, yeah.

That's for you guys.

And Glenn likes to, you know, the founding fathers, blah, blah, blah who cares

i love that attitude yeah founding fathers blah blah blah what i care about is stories you know like the 1.5 uh billion dollar mega millions winner has not come forward yet what uh that money is still out there

it's got till uh how long do they have he's got until april

april 21st of to of next year but still well do you take your time getting everything serious well that's what that's what they're trying to say is that maybe that's possible but it's been a long time now yeah it's been It's been a month or so, over a month.

More than a month, I think.

And I would say, too, like, you start getting to that risk of, like, if you get hit by a car tomorrow, your family doesn't get it, right?

It's in South Carolina, so do you think maybe they lost it in the hurricane?

That's what I'm wondering.

Do they lose the ticket?

What happens if you lose it?

Or maybe you forgot you bought it, and maybe, you know, six months from now, you pull it out from between the seats of your pickup truck.

I mean, how bad do you feel then?

Pretty bad.

Pulling that billion-dollar ticket out from between the seats, going, oh, that's right.

I got to get news for you here, Jeffy.

You'd feel good if you pulled out a billion-dollar ticket from between your seats.

You feel good about that.

As long as it's leeway, you can still play April.

Yeah, as long as it's before April.

If you find it in June, you're not feeling very good about it very good because one day late.

Oh, you don't think they give you something anyway?

No, there's no leeway.

Really?

There's no leeway.

It's gone.

That's amazing.

Tick-tock, tick-tock.

What are they waiting for?

Maybe they're just getting all their financial planning in place before they do so.

Because what do you pay with that?

By the way, we should also point out today, happy birthday to Pat.

Oh, my God.

Happy birthday.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Big celebration of coming in and sitting with this guy.

32 years old today.

32 o'clock.

I'm starting to feel a little old.

Wow, you're that old.

My early 30s now.

What?

What are you laughing?

What?

Glenn, back.

Mercury.