The 'Exhausted Majority'? - 10/11/18

The Blaze Radio Network.

On demand.

Glad back.

Well, you can take this to the bank.

Obamacare will eventually get repealed, but it will not be the GOP leading the charge.

It is going to be the Democrats.

At this point, I don't think the left ever really intended for the Affordable Care Act to actually live up to his name.

That's what we said at the beginning this is destined to fail in catastrophic uh in catastrophic form

ten years ago americans with employer provided health care had an average deductible of about three hundred dollars oh how far we have fallen because of obamacare the average deductible now is four times what they were before Obama.

A decade ago

to today,

it's now $1,400

in deductibles.

$300 to $1,400.

That's a 212%

increase.

Deductibles are growing at a rate eight times faster than wage growth, 12 times faster than inflation.

And these are not my numbers.

They didn't come from the Heritage Foundation or the Cato Institute.

This is from the annual report from the Kaiser

Family Foundation.

And by the way, did I mention they're base, you know, behind the Progressive Iron Curtain of California?

Did I also mention that Kaiser helped spin the left's talking points when the Democrats were trying to pass the Affordable Care Act and tell us that, oh, no, this is going to be fantastic for everybody?

Yesterday, President Trump wrote an op-ed in USA Today titled, Democrats Medicare for All Plan will Demolish Promises to Seniors.

He goes on to explain how the plan would cost an

insane $32.6 trillion during the first 10 years.

The president continued by slamming the left's open border policies and calling out their socialist policies.

USA Today's tweet pointing out the Trump op-ed read, quote, Democrats want to outlaw private health care plans, taking away freedom to choose plans while letting anyone cross the border.

We must win this, end quote.

Well, apparently, shockingly, Jim Acosta from CNN took major beef with this.

He fired back both at the president and USA Today with a little tweet of his own, quote, this column may break the record for the number of falsehoods from a president ever published in a newspaper op-ed.

Just this tweet alone is false.

Outlaw private health care plans, letting anyone cross our border, huh?

Fact check.

False and false.

Come on, USA Today.

Now,

I know I shouldn't expect journalists these days to do any kind of actual journalism.

I mean, that's so old-timey.

Remember when they actually didn't lie to us?

It's kind of funny, actually, it's really sad, that it's painfully obvious that journalists like Acosta haven't even read the left's proposal on Medicare for all.

It's H.R.

676.

It has 123 Democratic co-sponsors.

That's more than half of the House Democrats.

And it reads, and I quote,

it shall be unlawful for a private health insurer to sell health insurance coverage that duplicates the benefits provided under this act.

End quote.

CNN,

how is the president lying?

You see, you didn't point out that the president was lying when the president said, you're going to be able to keep your doctor, you're going to be able to get a refund.

refund.

In fact, you're going to save all kinds of money.

You wouldn't do the math on that.

It was simple math.

But it required you to tell the truth about the bill.

Now,

now

you are denying that the Democrats want to stop all private health care.

It's in their bill.

How low can you guys go?

How much water can you carry before it snaps your back?

How much can you ignore?

The replacement for Obamacare is coming, and it is so radical that the left-leaning media can't even see it anymore.

The Affordable Care Act was a setup.

We told you it was.

If the left takes full control in 2020, you will finally see America, the new America that we have been progressing toward the entire time.

It's Thursday, October 11th.

This is the Glenbeck program.

Let me give you some good news.

May I give you some good news?

You sure can.

There is a new study out.

They spoke to 8,000 people.

They also did 31-hour interviews, six focus groups, and it was conducted between December 2017 and September 2018.

And

here's what they were looking for.

Want to find out about how Americans feel about white privilege, sexual harassment,

you know, all of the PC stuff.

the Me Too witch hunt.

They say there are seven distinct clusters now in America: progressive activists, traditional liberals, passive liberals, politically disengaged, moderates, traditional conservatives, and devoted conservatives.

Now, according to the report, 25% of Americans are traditional or devoted conservatives.

25%.

Whoa, wow, that's really low.

Well, only 8% of Americans are progressive activists.

Excuse me?

Their views are even more out of the mainstream and are less typical.

Two-thirds of Americans do not belong in either

extreme progressivism as progressive activists,

or as traditional devoted conservatives.

The vast majority is now considered something called the exhausted majority.

The members of this two-thirds of our society share a sense of fatigue with our polarized national conversation, a willingness to be flexible in their political viewpoints, and

have a lack of voice in the national conversation.

Most members of the exhausted majority dislike political correctness.

Among the general population, 80%

believe that political correctness is a problem in our country.

Even young people are uncomfortable with it.

74%

ages 24 to 29 and 79%

under the age of 24

think this is a problem.

The woke

are in the extreme minority in this country.

Youth

not supporting political correctness.

And

they're not supporting the race thing either.

Whites are ever so slightly less than average to believe political correctness is a problem in the country.

Whites.

79% share this sentiment.

Instead, Asians, 82%.

Hispanics, 87%.

Native Americans, 88%.

One of the focus group members, an American Indian, said, It seems like every day you wake up and something's changed.

Do I say Jew or Jewish?

Is it a black guy, an African American?

You're on your toes because you never know what to say.

Political correctness in this country is becoming frightening.

Hmm.

That was a Native American.

You know, as those whites,

which are the least offended,

as those whites are standing up to protect the helpless Native American.

I think that's the thing that gets me the most.

Are the people who are not, it's almost like, how did you get into this conversation?

How are you a part of this conversation?

You're not the one that is the redskin.

How are you standing up and telling Native Americans how they're supposed to feel when they don't feel that way in poll after poll after poll?

One part of the standard narrative of the data, partially affirmed, is that African Americans are most likely to support political correctness, but the difference between them and other groups is much smaller than generally supposed.

Three quarters of African Americans oppose political correctness.

Three quarters.

This means there are only four percentage points less likely than whites and only five percentage points less likely than the average to believe that political correctness is a real problem in America.

While 83% of respondents

who make less than $50,000 dislike political correctness, 70% of those who make more than $100,000 are skeptical.

You want to know why Trump won?

You want to know why Corey Booker and all of this nonsense is not going to win?

I, I, you know, yesterday,

yesterday we had a call from a listener, and I

was not my best self, and I jumped down his throat, and I should have said, What is making you feel this way?

I know what's making him feel this way.

Portland is making him feel this way.

The guy who yesterday we found out is building a 200 or built a 200-pound bomb bomb and was going to detonate it on the national mall on election day.

That's what's making him feel this way.

The news reports where they are saying, mobs, no, this is just petitioning your government is making you feel this way.

Getting up every morning and saying, okay, do I say Jew or Jewish today?

Which do I say?

Can I say transgendered?

Or what exactly do I say?

When they are trampling RuPaul

for not being politically correct on transgender issues, you got problems.

That is why Corey Booker and Heidi Heitkamp and all of the others are not going to win.

It is why they are wildly out of step.

It is why you're winning.

It's why Kavanaugh is a Supreme Court justice today.

And I want to just keep hammering this home every day.

The left is not going crazy because they're winning.

The left, did you see what

Attorney General, what's his name?

Eric Holder.

Eric Holder said yesterday.

Yeah, we have the audio, I think of that.

Can we play the audio if we have that?

Listen to what Eric Holder is now saying.

It is time for us as Democrats to be as tough as they are, to be as dedicated as they are, to be as committed as they are.

Michelle always says, Michelle Obama, I love her, you know, she and my wife like really tight, which always scares me and Barack.

But Michelle says that, you know, when they go low, we go high.

No.

No.

When they go low, we kick them.

Stop.

This is what happens to a country that has lost its underpinnings of the Judeo-Christian world.

When they go low, we kick them.

Yesterday, Hillary Clinton was all in the news for saying what

we can't live in a country like this.

We can't live.

We cannot.

The time for civility is

past, basically.

After we win elections, then we can be civil.

We can't be civil with these people.

What was the other quote that he went on to say yesterday because it involved these people?

Where he said, I want to see if I can find.

Oh, shoot, I don't have it.

The Eric Holder thing?

Yeah, the Eric Holder, where he said, these people.

He said, use rage to vote to be rid of these people.

Yeah, use rage

to be rid of these people.

Well, let me flip this around.

What do you mean by these people, Mr.

Holder?

Because these people, we've learned, is, of course, racist.

We know what you...

That's a dog whistle.

That's an Eric Holder dog whistle.

And everybody knows what they're saying.

Look,

I understand why we're angry, because I'm angry.

I'm angry every day.

I look at the news and I'm,

they're going to get people killed.

They're going to get people killed.

And when people, as I said in 2009,

at some point,

They're going to drag people out of their chairs in their studios and beat them to death in the streets.

When these people

who are dismissing and encouraging these people to be violent, when that is happening,

a lot of people are going to say, well, they deserve it.

No.

No.

We cannot become

what they are.

We have to hold on to to what we've always been.

But boy, it is tough.

But I will tell you, if we lose our minds, we'll lose.

Because as I showed you in that poll, 80%

of people are on our side.

Now, that doesn't mean politically.

That means they're tired of this.

They're tired of the political correctness.

They're tired of being told what to think, what to say, what to do, who to reject,

what to post, what not to post.

They're tired of it 80%.

Keep your cool and you win.

Simply Safe Home Security is something that you might want to consider, you know, seeing that you have a former attorney general saying we have to kick them when they're down.

Simply Safe Home Security, great security system.

And right now, you can get a really good deal on it.

When you go to simply safebeck.com, I want you to go there.

I want you to look at how much money you're going to save.

They have this great chart.

Have you been there?

Have you been to the website?

Not in a while.

Yeah.

Look at it.

They've got

this chart that shows you how much money you're saving because you actually own the system.

So you're not renting it from somebody for five years.

It's really affordable.

And then for $14.99 a month with no contract, you can get out anytime.

You just call them up and say, I don't want to have the monthly monitoring this month.

You're going to save even more.

What are you paying now for a wired, old-fashioned, old-timey, hey, look, we used to be in the horse and buggy business.

Now we're doing your alarm system.

We'll call that sheriff for you if there's a problem.

How about you get SimplySafe?

It is today's technology.

SimplySafe.

You'll get get 10% off right now off the system at simply safebeck.com.

That's simply safebeck.com.

For your home or your office, it is simply safebeck.com.

Glenn Beck.

It is time for us as Democrats to be as tough as they are, to be as dedicated as they are, to be as committed as they are.

Michelle always says, Michelle Obama, I love her, you know,

my wife, like really tight,

which always scares me and Barack.

But Michelle says that, you know, when they go low, we go high.

No, no.

They go low, we kick them.

Fight, fight, fight.

When's the last idea?

That's what the new Democratic Party is about.

That's what the new Democratic Party is all about.

Democrats, is that who you are?

Is that who you are?

Is that what you want?

They are encouraging people to be violent.

He is encouraging people, let's just say not to be violent, but to fight dirty and in the streets.

America, is this what we want?

Is it just about the win at all costs?

I hope I know the answer to that.

I hope I know the answer to that.

But I just want you to remember one thing.

If you are somebody who has been looking for an end to this madness of political correctness, This madness of you're a racist, you're a homophobe.

80% of the nation agrees with you.

Now is the time to be reasonable, filled with common sense, and welcome people back into the fold.

There is a concerted effort outside of our country to get us to fight with one another.

Remember the story that we told you about about a week or two ago of

the feminist activist that was on the subway and she was pouring, I think they said it was bleach,

on all those who were, you know, man spreading.

And we're like, look at this, this is crazy.

Well, we find out now that that actually is Russian propaganda.

That never happened.

That was filmed by the Russians and put into

our system as a poison to get us to hate feminists more.

Say, look it out.

Exactly what we did.

We're going to take you to a story I thought was a joke.

I thought was a joke.

Where have the Russians gone?

How deeply

are they into

our consciousness?

What will they actually do?

Is it all about politics?

Stephen Kent, friend of the program, and quite honestly,

I mean, probably the biggest Star Wars geek on the planet.

Welcome to the program.

Stephen, how are you?

Doing well, Glenn.

Good morning.

Tell me this is a joke.

It's not a joke.

There is a study out from Morton Bay at the University of Southern California that looks at the role that online bots, particularly the Russian persuasion, might have played in the discourse on social media surrounding The Last Jedi.

Now, that might.

Wait, wait, wait, wait, wait, wait.

Yeah.

So you just kind of ran by

surrounding the last Jedi.

The movie.

The Last Jedi.

Nice low-hanging target being a Star Wars movie.

What do people care about more than politics?

I would say that it's probably the light side versus the dark side and the eternal struggle in a galaxy far, far away.

You know,

you've mentioned, Glenn, like they prey on these very emotional and personal issues on social media.

It's not just about politics and Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

It can be about kneeling, the national anthem.

It can be about something that a celebrity might have said, and then it's amplified and sort of turned up to 11 so that people get really heated about it.

Star Wars is in that category too, and there might be some evidence to show that this is actually happening every day.

Give me the evidence.

This is incredible.

Yeah, so it's circumstantial in many ways, but that's by nature of what we're dealing with here.

When you're talking about foreign influence and particularly malicious activity coming from Russian bots or trolls or sock puppet accounts, You are talking about a moving target, people who are deleting their accounts, changing their information, making new accounts, staying active so that they can't actually be tracked to a given location.

And if Morton Bay, the researcher at USC, could prove definitively that these are Russian agents, then he should be working at the CIA.

But he's not.

He's just a researcher at USC.

And what you look at is you look at the characteristics of social media accounts online.

Kind of what I just mentioned is what behaviors do they engage in?

Do they speak in all caps?

What words do they use?

And then is their account there the next week when you look them up again?

These are sort of things that you look for when you're talking about foreign influence online.

And it might be Russians, it might be the Chinese, it might be Iranians, or it might be some Floridian with a bone to pick with the rest of the country.

You know, but that's

what we live in.

What did they plant into our society?

Well, in this case, what they planted, there was evidence that there were 16 accounts that could specifically be Russian-linked, 105 that sort of had a question mark as to where they could be originating from, that are jumping online when The Last Jedi comes out and people are starting to debate about the movie.

And then they start throwing in the tweets about the feminazi,

Admiral Holdo, and then they start throwing in tweets about how masculinity is under assault because Poe Damerin wasn't able to leave the ship.

And then they start throwing in tweets about SJW droids and the fact that there was a droid in the hospital.

I remember those.

Yeah.

And so, but the important thing, Glenn, is that that comes from real people too.

And you can't really distinguish what comes first, like the chicken or the egg.

Did the Russian, you know, bot or troll online plant the thought in a conservative or, you know, activist or Star Wars fan online, and then they sort of echo it?

Or did it go the other way around?

Because it is reasonable to look at Star Wars and see some sort of like you know progressive fingers in the pot but there's also this discourse online that happens where you sort of amplify other opinions that you see you see someone upset about the feminazis now taking over star wars kathleen kennedy or you know the the the asian girl in the new star wars movie and If you get amplified about that and feel like, oh, well, someone else is angry about that too.

I can now feel a little bit more angry.

Then the discourse just rapidly gets more radical.

And it's pretty reasonable to think that there are foreign actors who engage in this malicious activity.

Stephen, it's interesting, I think, and this is part of the crime against journalism that's happened, making every effort of what Russia has tried to do in America about Donald Trump.

You know, it's like,

look at the scope of this.

The fact that they are trying to go in there and stir people up over not just politics, but culture and Star Wars and all of these kind of separate separate things, Kaepernick, all of this stuff.

And not just separating us, Stu, I think also

pushing us into a place.

I hear this all the time.

I know I am, like this.

When did everything become political?

They're pushing everything, all pop culture, everything into politics.

Yeah, there's a great book out right now called Addicted to Outrage by Glenn Beck.

Towards the end of part one, and at least in the audio book, it's chapter 19.

They're talking a lot about the role that foreign actors and particularly Russians might play in trying to sow discord.

And what we do know about Russians that were able to do in the 2016 election, we don't know if they actually were able to impact the results and how people voted, but we are able to determine that they get their fingers into the way that we talk.

And what's most important, I think, about American politics and culture is not that we are able to agree on everything political, but that we're actually able to go to a movie theater and sit next to our neighbors in the dark and smile at a Star Wars movie.

But then, when you go in and you've sort of been reading these things online and you've had people tell you that now it's like liberal propaganda and that it's not the Star Wars you grew up with, then you can't even do that.

And think about what that does to a culture, not in the course of one year, but in the course of 10 years.

We'll have nothing in common if we allow people to manipulate us like this and get us hooked on outrage on a constant basis about anything, whether it's politics or media.

Stephen, thank you for writing about this.

This is in the Washington Examiner.

Thank you for

writing about this.

Is it because it was Star Wars that this popped up on your radar?

Or why is it that no one else is catching this, Stephen?

Well, I would say that there was a pretty good deal of writing done about this.

And for me, I did catch this because I've got Google Alerts set up for Star Wars and I care a lot about it.

But, you know, I live in Star Wars Twitter as well as conservative and libertarian Twitter.

You know, these are kind of different ecosystems.

And the dialogue in Star Wars Twitter is toxic.

It was so mean when these movies came out, particularly around Solo and The Last Jedi.

The Last Jedi really sort of agitated right-wing Twitter.

And Solo really agitated left-wing Twitter.

Everybody was arguing about these different things and just using language that you just don't see or you didn't see a couple of years ago in Star Wars.

And then you turn on your favorite conservative podcast, right?

And I have a couple.

And they're sort of then echoing those sentiments.

And then their actual fans are going out and engaging in Star Wars discourse.

But it's not really clear like who is genuine and who is not.

And who's coming to it as a really interested fan and who's coming to it as a political activist who just really wants to make people angry.

And that's what we have to remember when we get online: there is no guarantee that the person, even if they have a real name and a photo associated with their account, is a genuine human being who wants you to leave this conversation happy.

I don't know if you've ever won an argument on Twitter.

I have not.

But

it's the equivalent of a foreign city.

You need to be getting off the airplane in this new city and just assume that you're not safe anywhere you go and you should just talk to people that you know and that you trust.

Stephen, thank you very much.

Always good to talk to you.

Yeah, going real pleasure.

May the force be with you both.

Stephen Kent,

he's got a great sense of humor.

He's really a smart guy.

You listen to his podcast,

follow him at Twitter.

What's his Twitter handle?

It's got to be like Yoda Kick's ass.

I think it is Yoda Smells.

I lost it.

Here we go.

It's at

Stephen underscore Kent89.

Yeah.

Follow him.

He's a smart guy.

All right.

Our sponsor this half hour is Filter Buy.

Filter Buy.

Why should you change your filter?

Right?

Right?

That's the argument I make to my wife all the time.

Why should we change our filter?

Right.

We bought it with the house.

We'll sell it with the house.

Yeah.

And then

the repairment comes because your air conditioning or your heating isn't working.

And I start complaining.

Like, why is it so warm in here?

What's the deal?

It's not even working.

This is stupid air conditioner.

Technology sucks.

And that's when the mechanic says, why didn't you change your air filter?

And then I'm like, that's what I think.

That's what I've been telling my wife this whole time.

Why hasn't she changed the air filters?

May I suggest you get Filter Buy?

Filter Buy, filterbUI.com.

Filter Buy makes all of the filters here in America.

So it's an American company, American Jobs.

And they'll make them for any size.

Turn it around 24 hours.

You have the filter, so when you need a filter, here's the best part: you'll save 5% if you just

check the box.

Yeah, you know what?

Send this to me every time I'm supposed to change my filter.

That way, you don't even have to think about it.

It just arrives at your door.

You pop it in, throw the old one away, and you're done.

Filter by saves you time, saves you money, you breathe better, and you don't have that weird conversation with the mechanic when he comes out and is like, when's the last time you changed this?

I gotta go in the other room.

Filter, B-U-I.com.

That's filterby.com.

Have you been following the Kashagi story?

This is the journalist, Washington Post journalist.

He's a Saudi citizen who's just disappeared.

He went into, I think it was in Istanbul,

and he was going into the Saudi

Embassy because he needed documentation that he he was divorced from his wife because he was going to get remarried.

So he goes to the Saudi embassy.

Now he is not an enemy of the Saudi crown prince, but he is a critic and they were friends and everything else.

Now he's a critic of the Saudi crown prince.

And

so he goes into the Saudi embassy.

uh there in Istanbul and his fiancée waits for him outside.

She's in the car and she waits and she waits and she waits and she waits and he never comes out.

When she calls and says,

Where is

you know, where's Kashagi?

They say,

I don't know, he left a long time ago.

He, no, he walked out.

He was here.

We got the paperwork and he left.

She's like, no, I've been waiting outside.

They say, we don't know what you're talking about.

He left.

CCD CC TV cameras show him going in, but no one ever coming out.

Now there's an update on this.

Coincidentally, Coincidentally,

about an hour after he arrived,

some planes arrive from Saudi Arabia, their Saudi Arabian crown prince,

royal planes.

And these guys get off and they have suitcases.

And they go in to the embassy.

Now, did anybody ever see Alfred Hitchcock's rear window?

If they had just left an hour later with those same suitcases and put them on the plane and then left, it might be a little weird, but what do you have?

Unfortunately, what we do know now is they got off the plane and they were driving to the embassy and one of them stopped for extra empty suitcases

and another one went shopping for a bone saw.

Then they went to the embassy.

An hour later, they're leaving with heavy suitcases.

Now, I don't know about you, but

I don't even know where you buy a bone saw.

But if I'm getting off a plane with light suitcases, I buy a bone saw, I go to a house where a guy has been missing now, and then I leave with heavy suitcases, and I fly out of the country on my own private jet under diplomatic immunity.

I don't know about you, but I think there's something suspicious going on there.

We should call Grace Kelly and Jimmy Stewart because I think I saw something out of that window.

By the way, plenty of bone saws on Amazon, so you should be fine.

Really?

Yeah, just seriously?

Well,

they call them butcher saws.

Okay.

But you should be fine.

Don't worry about it.

Amazon choice, $22.99.

Cut right there.

I understand that.

Like, if you're living in, you know, you're living in Colorado.

You're living in Idaho or something.

You got to get a bone saw.

I get that.

If you're selling bone saws in Manhattan, I think maybe or to the Saudi embassy.

Yeah, they're not doing any butcher work.

I don't think that they're going out and go, you know, we're going to have venison tonight.

I don't think so.

That's not a good

sign.

No, that's wow.

That's frightening.

I mean, that is like, you know, I mean, that's,

it's, it's like international incident.

It's movie stuff.

Uh, by the way, we're going out on tour.

We're coming to a city near you.

Grab your tickets.

Uh, Richmond, Virginia, Hershey, Pittsburgh,

Cleveland, anywhere.

See it all on Glenbeck.com slash tour.

Yes.

Come to, and if you don't,

I'm just saying I have a bone saw.

I'm just saying.

You have a buy the tickets or don't.

Are you threatening the audience?

No, I'm not.

No,

I'm thinking that we're going to have elk.

I have some Saudi friends with lots of luggage and a bone saw.

And you're sure you're not making a threat against the listeners.

No, I'm not.

No.

Actually, what we are doing, we're helping the Democratic Party at our Addicted to Outrage tour.

We're going to be giving them tips on things that they can do.

And I'd like to take it a little further than Eric Holder did.

And that is, you know, if we go low, they kick us.

When they kick us, we buy a bone saw.

Right.

There has been almost no Democratic 2020 candidates have even mentioned bone saws yet.

They have a long way to go in this campaign.

So maybe that could be, you know, I don't know, Spartacus's campaign slogan: vote for Spartacus.

I know where to buy a bone saw.

Just say,

buy your tickets now, glennbeck.com/slash tour.

Glenn Beck.

I am thrilled to have and introduce you to Helen Pluckrose.

She is the editor-in-chief editor-in-chief of Arrow magazine.

She has written an article that I want to go through with her, but I also want to point out that if you follow the news a couple of weeks ago, I think it was,

of these three scientists that came out and tried to publish papers that were complete nonsense of the dog, I think it was the rape culture in dog parks on dogs.

And one of the responses before they published it was they, did they get permission from the dogs?

They were afraid that maybe they were violated.

I mean, it's crazy what happened.

They published one article that was

they just took a chapter of Mein Kampf and I think changed it.

What did they change it to, Stu, do you remember?

White people are feminine.

I don't remember.

Helen will remember.

It's pretty remarkable.

We'll hopefully chat with her about that just a little bit.

Helen Pluckrose joins the program now.

Hello, Helen.

How are you?

Hello, I'm very well.

Thank you for inviting me.

You bet.

Now, you're in London now?

I am.

Okay.

First of all, thanks for coming on the program.

I want to talk to you about your essay, How French Intellectuals Ruined the West, Postmodernism, and Its Impact Explained.

I read the article, and

let's just say, my audience is very smart.

I am not the sharpest knife in the drawer.

So pretend you're talking to somebody that

doesn't really know much about this

because you are talking to that person.

And I'm trying to understand it, but postmodernism itself just doesn't make sense at all to me.

And so I want to make sure that I have it right and the audience understands it because I think it is the disease that is

the cancer for the Western world, is it not?

Well, I I don't think it's it's the only cancer.

I I think it's certainly a a problem that's uh coming up in how we understand knowledge and how um we on on the left are looking at ethics, and I think that's feeding into a a rise on the other side of um an increase in in nationalism and um anti-intellectualism and a a kind of reversion to some uh utopian uh past which never never existed.

But uh yes, it it is it is a significant um problem which has affected affected how we do how we decide what is true and and how we evaluate um rights and and people's standing in society.

Right, and so this is the source of you know gender fluidity and uh and really intersectionality and all of this stuff that we're hearing that most people wake up every day and they're like, Okay, what new term do I have to to learn today?

What can I say?

What can I not say?

This is the source of that.

Would you agree with that?

I would, yes.

Intersectionality is very explicitly defined by its founder as contemporary politics applied to postmodern theory.

Okay.

So let's start at the beginning of postmodernism.

Is it related at all to the Dadaist movement that grew out of the First World War,

where they were trying to make a point of nothing really has any meaning, and then that kind of just went awry.

Is is is any of the roots in that movement at all?

Yes, I mean, postmodernism, it's its antecedents, which I don't actually go into in huge detail because they're just so varied, but it comes out of a lot of counter-Enlightenment philosophy, it comes out of absurdist art.

It it's a kind of coming together of an artistic and um a philosophical movement.

And the artistic side of it is actually really fun.

We d we don't have to worry at all about um uh postmodernism in art.

It's when it starts being applied to society and we're starting to understand society as um completely constructed in systems of power and knowledge is a construct of this power, that it comes from language, that language is dangerous because it constructs reality.

That's sort of the key ideas which are underlying the problem that we're seeing now.

Now, you say that it doesn't have a, that it's not anything worrisome in art, but I would consider literature art as well.

And

this is now how we are being taught that we have to read literature, that we read it through the lens of oppression, white, male, European oppression.

Even if the author is saying, no, no, that's not what this story is about.

That's not the author is not even the last word on this.

It is the postmodernist that can take and read that text any way they want, correct?

Absolutely, yes.

I mean, I think there there's a slight confusion because that approach to literature is part of the cultural philosophical problem.

But a postmodern book, for example, would be a very different thing.

It would be something that had no clear plot, that didn't have an ending.

There's one which is just the beginning of a lot of stories which doesn't add up.

So that is a style.

That is almost completely separate from

the moralistic thing.

All right, so you're saying as an artist, you could create something that has no meaning, but it is only when it's used as a critique that it starts to get into trouble?

Yes, yes, exactly.

I mean, some wonderful, some very fun TV shows, apparently, of postmodern, but they're not political, so they're not the same problem.

Great, okay.

So tell me how it

where it grew and how it grabbed us by the throat or our university systems.

Well the the original postmodernists are just a small group of very, very prolific writers in the late 60s, including Jean-François Liotard, Jacques Derrida, Baudrillard

and particularly Michel Foucault.

And they came together all from different disciplines and all seemingly at the same time with the same message that they were disillusioned with the modern period, they were disillusioned with Marxism and they were disillusioned with religion and institutions and they they thought that these were all metanarratives.

They were big comfortable understandings of things that had just fallen apart.

This this comes after the World Wars, the the fall of empire.

All these sort of certainties were crumbling and

there was a a shift in society to try to understand are the things that we thought were true actually true.

The postmodernists are those who took this to a new philosophical level and simply said, No, this reality is not something we find, it's something that we make and we make it in the service of power.

So it is powerful groups which have decided for us what is true and these are understood to be white heterosexual rich men and this should be overturned, it should be unpicked.

But the first postmodernists were not

partic they didn't have a particular

political goal.

They were certainly leftist but they weren't they were they were generally quite aimless.

They wanted to sort of pull things apart, show problems with it.

It wasn't until the late 80s and early 90s when a lot of feminists and critical race theorists, queer theorists, etc.

said, well, taking everything apart is all good and well.

Yes, we need to deconstruct things.

Yes, we need to see that everything is socially constructed.

But we have to have some kind of reality if we're going to address anything.

We cannot, for example, address

sexism against women unless we agree that women are a certain thing that experience certain things in certain times and places.

So there was a a change here to bring back some kind of objective reality, and that was systems of privilege and power that could then be analyzed, but very subjectively, from the perspective of experience and with the assumption that we are always looking at a power imbalance in any interaction between different groups.

Okay, so can l let me let me let me go back and because I I think people might be thinking, why

are we talking about postmodernism?

How does it relate to my life?

This, I believe, is critical

to if you don't understand this, or at least have a basic handle on it, you don't know what you're fighting.

You don't know what's really happening.

You don't know who's behind a lot of this or what the theories are behind it.

So let me first say, postmodernism, the modern world is the world that

was created, that chased out the Dark Ages.

It's the world world created by the Enlightenment of science and reason and

empirical evidence.

And even, I mean, when you hear people say mathematics is racist,

this is because

they're trying to deconstruct anything that holds the modern world together.

Is that correct?

Yes,

they think that it has been constructed unfairly, that a lot of voices have been left out, and this relates somehow to a lot of knowledges.

I particularly have a problem with the idea that irrational and unempirical

knowledge is the the property of women or

just of non-white people.

So, yeah, that that is that is how it works.

Okay, I'm going to take you

before we move forward, I want to take you back one more step.

I'm going to take a break and then we come back.

I'd like you to help me on this because it's my understanding that Derridan Foucault

came over to the United States, that this was really kind of shaped in frustration from the 1968 Paris riots, and in frustration that they're not going to be able to take this whole thing down unless they take it all down.

They've got to take all the systems down.

They're not going to win through culture.

And that

it was actually

much more strategic in its

planting of a virus, if you will.

And I'd love to hear your take on that, if that's true or not, when we come back, we're with Helen Pluckrose

and we also have to ask her about the greatest prank ever.

Her and two other scientists went and they spent a year just writing peer-reviewed papers and see if they could get them published.

They got seven published, and they're complete nonsense.

Seven.

And what they learned out of that is astonishing and it kind of falls right into this.

First, let me tell you about our sponsor of this F-Hour.

It's a Casper mattress.

If you want to sleep on a great mattress, get a Casper mattress.

It'll help you get a...

a great night's sleep.

Once you try a Casper, I think you're going to really love it.

And if you don't, no big deal.

Just send it back.

And actually, you just call them or write to them and they come and pick it up.

You don't have to worry about it.

Casper will ship it right to your front door in this little teeny box.

Believe me, you're not going to believe that's your mattress when it comes.

Do not open it by the front door.

Open it where you want your mattress because as soon as you open it, it is a full mattress.

You're not going to believe how they did this.

But from its engineering to its packaging, to letting you try it for 100 nights, this is why Casper has over 35,000 five-star reviews on all of their products across Casper, Google, and Amazon.

Sleeping on it is the best way to try it out.

Sleep on it and test it out yourself for a hundred nights in your own home, risk-free.

Go to casper.com/slash Glenn and use the promo code Glenn for $50 off the purchase of your select mattresses.

That's casper.com/slash Glenn.

Promo code Glenn.

You'll also get $50 off the purchase of the select mattress at casper.com.

Promo code Glenn.

Terms and conditions do apply.

From Helen Pluckrose's article, How French Intellectuals Ruined the West.

Despite all the evidence that racism, sexism, homophobia, transphobia, xenophobia are at an all-time low in Western societies, leftist academics and social justice activists display fatalistic pessimism.

This is coming from the postmodernist

take.

Now, Helen,

I've tried to find good purposes for this, and the way it is being enacted now, it just seems like a total,

I don't know, an embrace of total chaos and destruction.

I can understand why a lot of

people who are not understanding how this has worked,

particularly conservatives, can see this as completely destructive, but there there there was a good purpose to it.

There was

there are good aims to it.

I mean I I am a liberal so you and I will probably not agree entirely on what on what good aims are, but when

postmodernism

postmodernism arose and the second wave of it, it's very important to sort of focus on the second wave which which diversified into critical race theory, intersectionality, queerism, etc.

That's That's what we're seeing now, much more than these earlier very obscure ideas about knowledge.

But they came at the time following the end of the civil rights movements.

They uh claimed to be the heirs of um Martin Luther King, of second wave liberal feminism, of gay pride.

They came and they hit the US and the UK

um particularly because we were in a position of a sort of of culturally of of taking

of what what had happened recently for the Brits Empire had just collapsed and we were there was an enormous amount of post-colonial guilt in the US

seeing the end of the Jim Crow era and sort of reckoning with a history of slavery.

So society was largely geared towards continuing this very positive sort of civil rights movement and making society freer, more equal for everyone.

So Helen, you know, you...

very different to that.

So you said a minute ago, and maybe we just have a different

definition.

I'm a classic liberal,

as we would know here in America.

I'm a libertarian.

I think that anything that makes man more free is good.

Anything that builds the individual up and is

empowering for the individual, I think is a good thing.

And I support it.

And I think that many Americans feel this way, you know, with political correctness.

You know, I go back to handy capable.

You know, nobody wanted to say, if that really hurts somebody's feelings, that,

you know, nobody wants to do that, or very few people want to do that.

You know, it does kind of say, well, the next generation is going to just assume, you know, just going to attach the same meanings behind handy capable as handicapped, but you know, so it's a little worthless over the long period of time.

But I don't think anybody, I think, generally speaking, people are fair.

What this is turned into

is

oppression.

Yes, I mean, I think that's something that we have to hold on to because when if we accept that

everybody is generally trying to be fair, is generally trying to be good and to do good for their societies, and they actually care about their fellow human beings, then yes, we have this situation where the vast majority of us are still very much in line with modern principles

of equal opportunity, freedom, rights.

And we have to understand that a lot of the people who have taken on and internalized a lot of the postmodern ideas are also trying to do good and trying to be fair.

But what we have to look at is how this is working in practice.

We are seeing a rising authoritarianism,

a totalitarianism from

the activists who are drawing on these ideas which have come out of these series.

I believe that this is a small part of the population, but it is drawing in more of the left

because they want who are kind of internalising some of these ideas because the ideals are good.

The ideals that women, people of colour,

LGBT should have the same rights as everybody else is what is underlying this and these aims are good.

A lot of less liberals who really should know better are thinking well how bad can this be if they have these aims?

It is a problem because it is supremely irrational, it is supremely illiberal, it is taking us away from the progress that we made in the universal liberal advance of the civil rights movements and equal pay for women, the decriminalization of homosexuality, etc.

It's not continuing that.

It's really doing something quite different now.

So I want to continue our conversation on this and

the notion that

it's a race to the bottom.

With the intersectionality,

you're flipping the pyramid just upside down, but it is still a pyramid

where

the one who has

the most

points, I guess, in their favor of I've been abused with this, this, and this, and by these groups and this group and this group, they become the power.

It sounds like it's just not just deconstruction.

It is constructing something that is authoritarian in nature.

And I want to go there, and I also need to find out a little bit about the hoaxes that Helen and two other scientists did who were just they were looking at these peer-reviewed publications and saying they don't even make sense I think I could write something that was genuine nonsense and get it published they had seven published in a year

you're listening to the Glenn Beck program Helen Pluckrose uh is uh a scientist in in England.

She is the editor-in-chief of Aero magazine and she

she's an academic in exile now.

Helen,

yesterday, I spent a couple of hours with Dr.

Deborah So, do you know her?

Yeah, yeah, come on, admirer.

So

we were talking, and she said, you know, Glenn, this is a very small number of people who are actually knowingly engaged in the silencing and everything else.

And you kind of said the same thing, that you think this is a very small minority, but the power structure has changed.

It has been flipped on its head.

And

I don't understand,

maybe it is a very small number, but they are very powerful in the effect that they have.

You know, otherwise, Deborah Sowe wouldn't have told me that, you know, even tenure couldn't have saved her job had she stayed.

You know, Weinstein and what happened to him and his wife.

I mean, it is, it's stunning

the effect that is happening in our culture and the way the media is not standing for common sense.

Yeah, well I'd like to address that, but first of all, I just wanted to to say you've referred to me and to my collaborators a few times as scientists, but I think it would be researchers.

Yeah, I am a literature student and Peter is a philosopher.

James is a mathematician, but he's also engaged in the humanities, so I wouldn't want people to be

mistaken for thinking that we're scientists.

But yes, I mean, I think we cannot

over

I mean, we we do have to have to look at how powerful this narrative is now in certain institutions.

I mean, we couldn't, for example, say that it that it is

it is powerful overall of society.

Both your country and mine have both recently voted conservative.

And I think this is

partly to do with some fear of this strange narrative rising on the left, which has caused many who were sort of centrist and leaning left to go further right.

As a leftist, I'd like them to come back again.

So that is why this is of concern to me.

May I stop you there and ask you for clarification on something?

I think, and I'm not sure, especially over in England, but I think that there is a misunderstanding sometimes with the press.

There are bad people who are racist and xenophobes and everything else.

But I think that

this multiculturalism has taken people to a place to where they are,

English are proud of their culture.

And you either like the queen or you don't like the queen.

I think most people are like, yeah, it's you know, it's part of our tradition, but we shouldn't be paying for it.

And the multiculturalism that has made it racist to even say, yeah, I'm proud to be English.

I'm proud to be American.

I think that is being taken as racist, where I don't think it's meant as racist by the vast majority of people.

They're just proud of who they are and where they came from.

Well, I I certainly agree with that.

I I don't see the problem as as multiculturalism itself.

I mean, I am I'm in London and

we generally do do quite well with this, with

different cultures, there's a great range of different cultures, and walking through London is

quite exciting.

You go through Chinatown and you can go through various different areas.

There are also, yes, some considerable problems with a lack of assimilation with some groups.

What

the idea that

it is prejudiced to

be

to to to like your own tradition.

That that that is the problem.

And I don't think it is only um Conservatives who see that as a problem.

I don't know if you're familiar with with John Haidt and his moral foundations,

which puts um this loyalty and this like of tradition on the conservative side.

I I see quite a lot of this on the liberal side too, and I I think those on the far left who um mistake a liking for one's own traditions and culture as a hatred for everybody else's and as a form of racism are actually denying some some pretty

basic things core and neutral and even even positive aims yeah

so can we just spend a couple of minutes on on what you guys did

to try to get

nonsense published and peer-reviewed

and

you were hoping maybe to get one, but you had seven in a year, and some of the topics were insane.

Which one were you responsible for?

Well, I took a part in all of them.

I took the lead on one which it was called When the Joke's On You, which was a bit cheeky, but

which argued that there is no acceptable way to criticize social justice scholarship and activism, and that anybody who mocked it or did a satire of it or a hoax, academic hoax of it, was trying to preserve their own privilege.

And that one was accepted quite quickly and was apparently an excellent contribution to

philosophy.

So, but you took you guys found out that you couldn't just publish nonsense.

Exactly, yeah, as you pointed that out.

Right.

You actually to

join in on the on the grievance club.

Is that i is that accurate?

Yes, you really have to understand and navigate a complex arrangement of of rules.

So it isn't we couldn't say anything that was was crazy, but we had to stay very firmly within orthodoxy and this developing body of theory.

So sometimes, yes, we take a a mad idea like um uh unwanted humping among dogs reveals weight culture in humans and that we should train men like dogs and then we'd have to find some way to link this to the theory in in that case we looked at assumptions about implicit bias and claimed that we could read it in humans in their interactions with dogs and that was the the hook that enabled us to build on a lot of theory to support this this claim and for it to be accepted and then honor does exemplary scholarship

Unbelievable.

What was the

you took Adolf Hitler's Mein Kampf

and how much of that text did you leave in and what did you change?

That's quite difficult to explain.

James took the lead on that one, so I'm not entirely clear on what

anyway, but the important thing to remember is if you read it through, you would not immediately think, but this sounds just like Hitler.

You know, it has been changed to intersectional feminism.

The point of that one was really to draw on the

grievance and the totalitarian kind of feel of that.

But also we wanted to see, we wanted to prove that we could make theory fit absolutely anything if we just brought in enough different bits of it.

So that one is incredibly complicated, bringing in bits of theory from all over the place.

But in the end,

it builds up to,

yes, to make that kind of we must all bond together in the same thing against the common enemy

narrative work.

When this came out,

and I mean, I would think that this would be something that, you know, the...

the world that you travel in would be outraged that those things were accepted

and

you would be viewed as a whistleblower.

Hey, wait a minute, we've got a problem.

Have you had any response like that from your peers?

Surprisingly, yes, we have.

Good.

Yeah, we were delighted, for example, that Mother Jones, which is often extremely critical of criticisms of feminism

and sort of academic leftism, actually came down on our side.

BuzzFeed remained quite neutral and they're also often known for

really uncharitable.

You know, you see them say anything with an English accent.

It's like here in the Carolinas, if you ever come down in the Carolinas, they'll say horrible things, but they'll follow it with this tone of, you just want want some sweet tea?

But they're telling you to leave.

And I think you have the same, the English just have the same, the same charm.

It was quite distasteful.

We have a habit of understatement.

A little bit, a little bit.

Helen, thank you so much.

And I would love to fly you in from London and sit down and

spend a couple of hours with you and even your cohorts at some point.

I find you fascinating and refreshing.

And thank you for having the courage to speak out and explain things to

the rest of us schlubs.

Well, thank you.

Thank you very much.

It is also unnecessarily complicated.

If I can break it down a bit,

that's great.

Thank you very much.

I appreciate it, Helen.

Helen Pluckrose.

You bet.

Helen Pluckrose.

It is, I'm sorry if this is airing in a time zone in the morning morning and you're like, good God, Glenn, I haven't even had my coffee.

I apologize.

It is really

complex and kind of heady to take, but I wanted to make sure that

we got her to speak on record on it.

And hopefully we will on the podcast have a deeper conversation where we can really get into it.

But this is something that you need to understand postmodernism.

It is the root of what we are

feeling now, and it is set to destroy the Western way of

life and the modern world.

You can get

a very basic understanding of it.

It is what we talk about in the book Addicted to Outrage,

but not like Helen explains it.

I mean,

it's a rookie explanation, but it is one that you can get your arms around.

Addicted to Outrage, it's available everywhere now.

Critical that you understand.

And also, we're going to be out and about.

We're going to be in a town near you.

You can find out at glennbeck.com/slash tour.

And Stu, you're coming, right?

I will be there.

Yes.

And

we're going to be helping the postmodernists.

We're going to help them.

I think so.

I mean, I've been looking.

There's a big article today about who's running for president for the Democrats in 2020.

Oh, yeah.

Really?

And who's taking the steps?

And I think we're going to have some material on some of these targets.

Really?

Yeah, I think so.

Yeah.

So

I'm offering my help on the tour, and we're going to be giving their platform, the Democratic platform.

We might even come up with a few slogans for some of these contenders.

It's something you don't want to miss.

Glenbeck.com slash tour, Addicted Outrage.

All right.

Did you see the

stock market yesterday?

A little terrifying.

Yeah.

A little bit.

What did gold do yesterday?

I can't figure out where this money is going.

Yesterday lost 831 points.

Today, down 149 presently.

Bitcoin, crypto went down.

Bonds went down.

Where's the money going?

Where's the money going?

It does look like it's up, but it's just

having a problem with the chart.

It's definitely up, though.

I mean, that's not surprising.

This is where money goes when people get uncertain, right?

Right.

When things go uncertain, that's where money always flies to gold.

Can't find any place else that it went.

Look, we are headed for troubled times, and

this is normal and natural.

We have kept this thing up with the Fed in an unnatural way.

When we hit an election, if the Democrats take control of the Congress and

of the House and the Senate, you're in for a wild, wild ride for the next two years where nothing is going to get done and chaos will ensue, I believe, financial chaos.

Please protect yourself.

In fact, right now they have at Goldline, they have a

packet that they have put together.

It's a research project that they did on what they think the election might mean for the future if it goes to the Democrats, goes to the Republicans.

What is it going to mean?

Please read this.

You need this information to make informed choices of where we are and what you're going to do tomorrow.

866 Goldline.

Get that free information now.

866GoldLine or goldline.com.

Today,

I really appreciate it.

So, can we look at the Senate here a little bit?

Yeah, we're going to do a full breakdown of everything, of all of the House and Senate today before we leave.

Okay, we can do that.

So, let me give you just a couple of things then from polling we had over the last couple of days.

The polling since the Kavanaugh thing has been really good for Republicans in the Senate.

It's looked really positive.

There hasn't been enough of it to necessarily know that the two are tied, but it does seem like

real positive things have happened in red states where Republicans were a little bit on the ropes at one point.

For example, I'll give you a Ted Cruz.

Ted Cruz going up against Robert Francis O'Rourke.

He's an Irishman.

You mean Obetto?

Oh, yeah.

Oh, that's Betto.

Most Irish people are called Betto, so I should point that out.

But Robert Francis O'Rourke is running against Ted Cruz.

Some of the polls, there's one poll that had him tied at one point.

Several polls showed Cruz only up by one or two.

The New York Times is doing something really, really interesting in which, you know, normally you kind of see

well, I didn't say that.

They're doing something interesting in that.

Like, normally you see polls, and you see it, like, if you think of it as a sporting event, like a football game happens, and then you would see the score afterwards, right?

Like, you're not seeing the play-by-play of the game with a poll, you're only seeing the results at the end.

New York Times is trying something this cycle that's different, which is they're actually showing you as they make the calls who is voting for who, and you see the poll build slowly as you watch it.

It's addicting to watch, uh, and uh, it's kind of interesting because one of the things you'll notice is how many calls they have to make to get anybody to agree.

At one point, uh, yesterday, um, the Texas Senate poll, they had made 17,700 phone calls and had 285 people who had responded.

Oh my god, that's how hard it is for them to get people on the phone anymore to take these polls, which is part of the reason why it's hard to read, you know?

Yeah, because I mean, who's going to answer?

Yeah, who's going to do that?

But Cruz in that poll wound up up nine points in that one.

He seems to have

opened up a lead there again, and I'm not surprised by it either.

Not a surprise.

So we'll get into all the details coming up.

Glenn Beck.

Our thoughts and our prayers are with the people of Florida today.

Please be safe.

Know that we are praying for you.

Know that America has your back.

Your fellow Americans are either there or on their way with help.

You are not forgotten.

Yesterday, Rick Scott said, Hurricane Michael is the worst storm the Florida panhandle has ever seen.

It is.

It is the first time a Category 4 or stronger has made landfall on the Florida panhandle.

They usually don't whip around like that

and

do the kind of destruction that happened yesterday.

Over a million power outages are there.

It's not just the coast, but it's also inland.

The threat to the Carolinas, I want to give you an update.

Some of our partners for Mercury One are already there.

Somebody cares about setting up a pod hot meal station in Panama City Beach.

They already had that location identified.

They're setting it up now and going to be feeding people.

Have a second location in Tallahassee in case that's needed.

As soon as the assessment is done in South Carolina, we have our network of volunteers.

They will be on site.

Team Rubicon yesterday was

trying to get everything tied down in North Carolina because of the heavy rain.

They were, you know, just cleaning up from the last one.

Due to the timing between Florence and Michael

and the fact that FEMA has a hold on major supplies right now, Team Rubicon is in need of purchasing Tyvek suits and N95 masks with valves.

Both items are used on flood operations to protect all of the volunteers from the muck with the suits and then the mold and the nasty from the air.

They're having a hard time getting a hold of them.

We need, it's about $100,000 worth of these.

The actual number is $96,000.

We are trying to support them, but we really need your help.

If you could donate any, $5

will help a lot.

Please go to mercury1.org/slash hurricane relief.

100% of the proceeds go directly to, for instance, this product

to buy this product for Team Rubicon or for the people who are feeding or mucking out houses.

100% will go to Hurricane Relief.

Just go to mercury1.org/slash hurricane relief.

We really need your help and your donations.

If you can do that now, it would be much appreciated.

It's Thursday, October 11th.

This is the Glenbeck program.

So I don't know if you noticed this, but yesterday,

it was a little scary if you had money in the stock market.

What is it?

The third largest

point fall, I think, in history, American history, something like that.

But, you know, when you look at it

historically, it's kind of unfair because the stock market is up so high.

Down again today.

Bonds are down.

debt is up.

Where is money going?

What is happening?

Is this the beginning of something or is this just a bump in the road?

We go to Stephen Moore, economist at the Heritage Foundation.

Hello, Stephen.

How are you?

Hi, Glad.

No, I've been better.

This has been

a couple of three or four days we've had in the stock market.

You're right about that.

And so, look, but I remain pretty bullish.

Look, the dollar is down now to 25,400.

It was up well over 1,200 points higher than that a week ago.

I like to buy these dips.

But you look at the fundamentals of the U.S.

economy with the tax cuts, the deregulations, the high employment.

I'm still really high on the U.S.

economy.

I'm still high on the stock market, especially at these

low prices right now.

So what happened yesterday?

What spooked it?

Well, good question.

We're all scratching our head wondering what it was.

I mean, Donald Trump seems to think it was the Fed, and there's no question that the Fed interest rate hike and their announcement that they're going to continue to raise interest rates certainly moved people out of stocks into bonds because when interest rates rise, then bonds are more attractive relatively than stocks.

Usually those effects of

Fed changes are short-term, so I don't think you're going to see a long-term effect from that.

Although I tend to agree with Donald Trump that here we've got this booming economy, we don't see real signs of inflation, although energy prices are rising, but other commodities are pretty stable or actually falling in price.

So I don't see a big inflation gain and I mean, you know, pick up.

And what Trump is saying, and I think there's some truth to this, is to the Fed and

Jerome Powell, why are you taking a punch bowl away from this poverty just when it's getting going?

And

I tend to think that he's right about that.

You know, look, I don't want inflation, but just because the economy is picking up doesn't mean you're going to have more inflation.

I don't think that the Fed's job is to squash a stock market rally and a pickup in employment, as we've seen in record numbers.

Yeah,

I would tell you, Stephen, you know, I'm an inflation watcher and hyperinflation

watcher.

I was really concerned with all the repatriated money that was coming in and the tax breaks, and we haven't seen it.

Yeah, show me the inflation.

I mean, look,

I have to admit, you know, I admit when I'm wrong.

I'm a conservative who admits when I'm wrong.

I'm not wrong all that often, but I did predict we'd see higher inflation as a result of all the money creation by the Fed.

And the truth is, we haven't seen it.

And by the way, one of the reasons for that is we have international trade.

We have all sorts of technological change that makes goods and services cheaper over time.

And trade and technology are two things that really keep prices down and affordable.

And so my only point is I just think the Fed acted preemptively and prematurely in raising rates

in a a way that wasn't necessary.

I am a little concerned, by the way, Guan, about the increase in the price of oil.

It's gone up to $80 a barrel.

That's like equivalent of $4 a gallon gas.

Why is that?

Why is it gone up?

That's like a tax on the economy.

Why has it gone up?

You there, Stephen?

Stephen, are you there?

Yeah, maybe I'll.

I'm going to hear what you just said.

Okay.

Why is oil going up?

Well, that's a good question, question, too.

It looks like because there's been disruptions

in the Middle East with respect to Iraq, and so you're seeing

a big sell-off as a result.

I mean, a big rise in the price because people are really concerned about

the price,

the global reduction in supply as a result of the price of the.

So bring Texas back online.

Bring Texas back up.

Bring Texas back online.

Well, that's the point.

Look, I think oil prices are going to fall.

I just was out in Midland, Texas, in the middle of the Permian Basin.

I've never seen anything like it, Glenn.

I mean, everywhere you go, all they're doing is drilling, drilling, drilling, drilling.

And, you know, it's anywhere you can stick in the ground, they're drilling for oil and natural gas.

So

I don't think we're going to see a continuation, you know, over the next year or so of these higher prices.

In fact, I think they're going to dwindle back down again.

So, you know, I think that the

big problem right now is just fear.

You know this.

The stock market is driven by fear and greed.

That's a truism for 150 years, and people are afraid right now that, and by the way, there was a lot of profit taking.

I did this myself.

When the Dow hit 26,500, I said to my wife, honey, let's take some of these profits and get out of the market.

And I think a lot of people did that.

Stephen,

let me ask you this.

I don't know if this is true or this is an old wives' tale, but the last president that I heard really take on the Fed

was Ronald Reagan.

And we had 19% interest rates shortly after that until he stopped talking about the Fed.

And the Fed has a lot of control.

I mean, and

a lot of people say it's,

you know, somehow some kind of violation for the president to question the Fed.

And I wrote a column on this last week, and I lied.

The president is this chief executive officer of the country, right?

He is the one who is supposed to help manage our economy.

If he doesn't think the Fed is doing the right thing, why shouldn't he speak out?

Now, look, I don't want to see a politicization of the Fed,

but I think there's a lot of, look, one of the lessons we've learned, Glenn, you and I have talked about this over the years.

These are not some kind of oracles on high at the Fed.

They act as if they're the temple with all of the knowledge and all of the intelligence, but they've made so many mistakes over the years.

You mentioned, I remember the 70s, as you do, when we had literally 20% mortgage interest rates.

That was all because of Fed mistakes.

You know, I would make the same case that the Fed

was the one that built up this bubble that led to the housing crisis in 2007 and 2008.

Why do we keep thinking these people are somehow godlike?

I don't know.

I don't know.

Let me ask you about

the NAFTA replacement

and

also

the trade war that we have going on with China.

I fear that Donald Trump really likes trade wars

and we're not ⁇ that this isn't a negotiation tactic.

If it is, you know, great.

But do you think, is it, Stephen?

Or is this what he really fundamentally believes, that tariffs are good?

Here's my view.

And I've talked to Donald Trump many times about this, you know, and he said this at the Rose Garden.

I was at his Rose Garden ceremony last week when he announced the new trade agreement.

And he basically said, look, I will,

I will,

I am using these tariffs as a tool, as a negotiating tactic to get better trade agreements.

Now, I'm a free trade guy.

I think you are too, Glenn.

So I used to tell Donald Trump I don't agree with you on your trade strategy, but I got to say, so far, you know, the kind of apocalyptic view has not happened.

Trump is getting some good deals.

He got a deal with Mexico.

He played Canada like a fiddle here, where he basically said, you know, we're just going to go ahead without you with Mexico.

And Canada at the 11th hour, literally 11 o'clock on the night before the deal had to be sealed, Canada came and said, okay, we agree to the deal.

He's going to get a good deal, I think, with Europe.

And then that leads to Canada.

I mean, to China.

And this is where I think Trump is going to take a very hard line.

And I happen to agree with that.

I don't know.

You and I haven't talked about this, Blen, but I am a hard liner when it comes to China.

I'm a free trade guy, but China, we don't have free trade with China.

China's cheating.

They're stealing.

$300 billion of Euro intellectual property.

They're building up their military.

They're like

the whole Soviet Union in terms of a lot of the the tactics they're using.

And so I do think Trump should get tough with China.

What do you think?

I think so, too.

I just want to make sure that we understand the symbiotic relationship of mutually assured economic destruction when it comes to China.

Well, let me challenge you on that one.

You know, I'm going to, of course, a trade war would hurt us.

But I think the way Trump looks at it, and I think he's right about this, look, if we can't trade with China, we sneeze.

If they can't trade with us, they catch pneumonia.

And I think there's a lot of truth to that.

I mean, they can't,

their economy depends on access to America's $15 trillion consumer market.

I mean, damn near everything you buy in Walmart

is made in China.

And so Trump is playing that card and saying, look, we're not going to give you unfettered access to our markets if you're not going to play by the rules.

I talk to company CEOs all the time in Flanders who basically say it's almost impossible to penetrate the China market.

You've got to give up ownership of your company.

You have to give up your trade secrets, your patents.

I mean, we can't live with that.

And Trump is right, I think, when he says, look, I didn't start this trade deal, this trade war.

They started it 10 years ago.

I would feel better if

they also weren't our bank at the same time.

I would feel better about it.

Trevor Burrus: Stephen, quickly, one quick question for you, and you probably have a real insight on this.

We were kind of talking about the steel tariffs and these things going on allies

like Canada as a way of negotiating and bringing these countries to the table for what was kind of like a NAFTA 2.0 type of situation.

Well, that happened, but the steel tariffs are still on Canada.

Do you have any idea why, or is this going to change at any point?

Well, this is one of the issues that I find my, you know, as you know, I'm a big fan of Donald Trump.

I hope, right, the tax plan with my buddy Larry Kudlow.

But I just disagree with this policy.

I don't see the wisdom in steel and auto and aluminum tariffs or auto tariffs, but especially not steel and aluminum, because we have something like 100,000 Americans who are employed in steel and auto, but we've got 6 million other manufacturers who use use steel and aluminum in what they produce.

I was over at Anheuser-Busch a couple of weeks ago.

They, you know, when they make

Budweisers, they're using a lot of aluminum for those cans, and they say their prices are going up, and that's going on around the country.

Our auto producers, our autos are more expensive because of the steel tariffs.

So my point to Trump is: this isn't even creating factory jobs.

We're going to lose factory jobs as a result of this.

So I disagree very strongly with the steel and aluminum tariffs.

I think they do more harm than good.

Does he look like he's softening?

No.

Do you think I don't see it?

I don't see it either.

Evergreen response to that question, isn't it?

No, he's not.

Yeah, no, and I think at the Rose Garden last week, he said how he was boasting about how all the steel jobs we're creating.

It's true, we are creating steel jobs, Mr.

President, but we're losing auto jobs.

We're losing jobs in other areas that manufacture equipment, trucks,

those kinds of things that use steel and aluminum.

So it's a dumb policy.

I wish we would reverse it.

And by the way, the auto carers, same thing.

Even the U.S.

auto industry doesn't want the auto carers because

so many of their supplies come from

countries abroad.

The steel might have come from

Canada.

The assembly might have come from Mexico.

The parts might have come from Taiwan.

I mean, this is the modern American and global economy at work, and we put ourselves at risk here.

But at the end of the day, I think Trump is going to prevail on China.

I think I'll make a prediction within six months.

I think China is going to come hat in hand and make some real concessions to Trump.

And ultimately, if that happens, you're going to see the biggest stock market boom you ever saw.

Stephen Moore, thank you so much.

Good to talk to you, my friend.

Say hi to Larry.

How's he feeling?

How's Larry Cuddling?

He is the picture of health, and he's even stopped smoking.

Good for him.

Good for him.

Make sure you say hi to him for me, will you?

All right, we'll do it.

All right, Stephen Moore from the Heritage Foundation.

Sponsored this half hour is my Patriot Supply.

So I have been thinking and praying about the people in Florida and all of the devastation in this country that we have had over the last couple of years, you know, between fires and natural disasters.

By the way, did you see?

Did you see the report on NBC yesterday where they were talking about we can't call these natural disasters anymore because this is a man-made disaster?

Oh, geez.

Are you kidding me?

No.

We went over this yesterday in the news news and why it matters.

No, read the IPCC report about what they say about hurricanes.

Well, basically, nothing.

I have to send you this because it was so agonizing.

These are not natural disasters.

Hurricanes are not natural disasters anymore.

It is crazy.

Anyway, how are these people affording to go live someplace?

Their house has been devastated.

They are going to have to put everything into getting their lives back.

How are they going to do that?

Plus, rent a hotel, plus feed their family.

Best thing you can do is be prepared yourself.

Preparewithglenn.com right now.

You can have two weeks of food, two weeks, breakfast, lunch, and dinner for $75.

You take your family out for a dinner and it's $75.

This is two weeks of food, breakfast, lunch, and dinner.

Get one for each of your family members.

They're easy.

They float.

They also come in

a, you know, a box that is easy to store.

Preparewithglenn.com.

Please go there now.

Preparewithglenn.com or 800-271-63, 800-200-7163.

Glad you're here.

Let me go to Jerome in Ohio.

Hello, Jerome.

You're on the Glenbeck program.

Hey, Glenn, how's it going, man?

Good.

Well,

the...

I don't want to say his name, but the gentleman that you got into with it yesterday

and stuff, that was me three years ago.

I was ready to fight, I was ready to punch, ready to stomp, you know, the whole nine yards.

And then

I

sorry, I found hope.

And my,

sorry.

My daughter was born.

She was born four months early.

And

my focus went from everything going on around the world to what was going on in my house, my household.

And

and uh it was uh

sorry, it was uh challenging.

Um we were

she was she was born November 1st and she was in the hospital until until Easter.

And she came home and she had a G-tube and um she was on oxygen and stuff like that, but she was home.

Um I am remarried remarried and me and my wife, we have, between us, we had three daughters and we tried for about 10 years and nothing ever happened.

And then out of the blue, wife calls me and says we need to have a conversation.

And she told me that

she was pregnant.

And it's, I don't know, I

I sympathize with the gentleman

you were talking with

because I still have moments where I want to get angry and stuff, but then I'd stop and take a step back and breathe and just

think of my daughter, you know?

So did you think, did you gain hope or did you gain perspective?

Yes.

Both.

I gained both.

It's just, I had hope because

I want a better world for my daughter.

Yeah.

The great,

Jerome, thank you for sharing that and thank you for

thanks for your honesty of emotion there.

The good thing is, and this is what I tried to impress on our caller yesterday after

he hung up, unfortunately, was

we're winning.

We're winning.

Common sense is winning.

It doesn't feel like it, but that's just because the power structure that you are used to is no more.

And when you look at what's happened and you look at the Democrats saying the things that they're saying now

that, you know,

Eric Holder today, the latest is, you know, when they go low, we kick them.

That's not an American principle.

That's not the way we should behave.

I don't want that from our side.

I don't think people want it from their side.

New research shows 80% of the American people feel the same way.

That's a good thing.

We're winning.

Mercury.

We have more on Florida coming up in just a second.

Can we take a look at also the

election numbers?

I think it's about time we start getting

your analysis, Stu, because I know you love stats, and there's nobody better looking at the numbers than you.

Thank you.

The polls are hitting, and they're coming in fast.

And yes, there's a lot to understand about where that's going.

We could definitely get into that.

Should we start there, or do you want to start with some of the hurricane stuff?

Well, I don't know if I want to talk to somebody who cannot agree with NBC News that these are not natural disasters.

These are man-made disasters now.

So, was it man-made that we went an entire decade basically without getting one hurricane hitting the let me ask you something about that, sir?

Yes.

Would you agree with me that over the last 10 years, in the last 10 years, we have seen a dramatic increase in hurricanes here in the United States since we dropped out of the Paris Accords

yes or no sir it is a yes or no answer you're saying has it gone from zero to two in the time that

I mean since we've been out of that uh is that an increase

I mean yeah the trend is not increasing that we we have one year that had more than another year is that what you're trying because we had I'm asking you in the last 10 years have we seen a pickup of these

so-called natural disasters

just in the last couple of years?

Thank you for your question, NBC.

Yeah, there has been an increase from all of the years of the year.

Thank you very much.

Now, let's go talk.

That's journalism these days.

It is.

Here's what the IPCC says.

Remember, this is Al Gore's favorite place to go for climate information.

This is what they say about hurricanes.

Numerous studies towards and beyond the fifth assessment report of the

FPCC have reported a DDD

decreasing trend in the global number of tropical cyclones and/or the globally accumulated cyclonic energy.

There is low confidence regarding changes in global tropical cyclone numbers under global warming over the past four decades.

There is consequently low confidence in the larger number of studies reporting increasing trends in the global number of very intense cyclones.

This is the UNIPCC report,

the latest update.

To bring it out of a boring UN talk, what they're saying is total number of hurricanes going down, and there is low confidence in any change in the increase.

What they say is like, well, because they used to say there's going to be more frequent and intense hurricanes.

Then they realized that the frequency thing wasn't happening.

It's going to be more intense.

They don't even have evidence of that.

And so that's.

Excuse me, Mr.

Bregier.

Is this not the strongest storm

on record that has hit the Florida panhandle.

That is the report.

Thank you, sir.

I rest my case.

Here's the summary: the IPCC once again reports that there is little basis for claiming that drought, floods, hurricanes, and tornadoes have increased, much less increased due to greenhouse gases.

Not exactly the story you're getting on the media when they're trying to say we have 10 years now.

We have 10 years now.

They've renewed this.

They've upped their commitment.

And in response, I tell them, up yours.

So

it is pretty remarkable.

Okay,

let me ask you this as we get into the poll numbers.

I believe there is a chance we see a red wave because of Kavanaugh.

That we were concerned that there would be this massive

blue wave in both the House and the Senate.

I think we see a red wave, not a tidal wave, but a red wave.

It's possible.

first of all i would say kavanaugh if if the last two years have been any indication kavanaugh will be ancient history by the time this election happens it's like three weeks from now honey like these things go away for example uh the the access hollywood tape happened right about this time in 2016 right about now it was october 8th or 9th it's october 11th today uh and that by the time the election came as we saw had basically no impact

i mean this stuff goes away fast.

And I think there will be.

I don't think this is because

it's not just Kavanaugh.

If they would have

left it alone, lick their wounds, but they're not.

They're doubling down.

Hillary Clinton, yesterday, we can't live with these people.

Eric Holder comes out.

That's the news today that he says

when they go low, we kick them.

And the crowd cheers.

And he follows it with, this is who the new Democratic Party is.

It's amazing.

That's amazing.

Michelle Obama pushed back on that today, by the way, kind of in an interesting way.

But

what you see, I think, is if you are under control, you can make these stories go away.

Their craziness in the Kavanaugh thing could probably be forgotten by a lot of voters.

If you would look at from the time that Donald Trump came down to the escalator to today, probably his cleanest month was October of 2016.

After that

tape came out, he was buttoned up for the rest of that time and made very few statements and wound up winning the election because people were able to kind of forget about sort of this craziness and scandals that were going on and looked more at Hillary Clinton and her craziness and scandals.

So if you look at this,

they could get it to go away.

Doing things like we're going to kick them when they go low

and

people saying, it's not a mob.

What are you talking about?

That sort of stuff is not going to help them.

Nope.

And so far, since the Kavanaugh thing, what we've seen is really encouraging numbers for the GOP, particularly in the Senate.

The Senate has, you know, we had a lot of races.

We talked about the Robert Francis O'Rourke versus Ted Cruz situation, where Cruz,

that poll came out at 52.43, a nine-point lead.

Now, Cruz had been, there was one poll, I think, that had them tied.

Most of them settled around three or four points with Cruz leading.

That's expanded in multiple polls now to nine or ten points.

I think it's going to be more than nine or ten points.

Yeah, but Pat Gray, who's not in here with us today, but he was talking on his show, I think it was yesterday or the day before, believes that it's going to be over 10 points.

Yeah,

I think it'll be between 14 and 18 points.

Another interesting poll that came out yesterday, again, from the New York Times, and this is, you know, they're doing this live polling thing I mentioned last hour.

How many calls does it take to get 778 responses in Texas?

How many calls do you have to make to get 778 people to talk on the phone to you?

The number?

51,192.

Oh, my gosh.

They had to call 51,000 people to get 778 to actually participate in the poll, which is incredible.

Okay, well, you're calling Texas.

And if it's marked with a New York number or the New York Times, I understand that.

But I mean, this is overall, like, for example, New York, they also polled the Eastern Long Island District, New York one.

And what they found, 502 responses, they had to make 27,178.

It's crazy.

Are you answering?

Seriously, do you know anybody that would take the time to answer that?

Nobody does, and that's why I wouldn't.

Again, if you take into account that factor, which has totally changed over the last 20 years with cell phones and

telemarketers and all those things, it's amazing these guys get even close to accurate results from polls because you're self-selecting a group of people who want to participate in them.

And it's like, you know, who knows if they're representative.

That's why Google Home should include some sort of an fMRI so they can just read our brain scan.

That would make it a lot easier.

It would make it a lot easier.

Things would just come to your door that you knew you wanted.

I'd love that.

Another interesting poll that came out of the New York Times, though, however, was the test of the Taylor Swift effect.

Remember, Taylor Swift, after

all this time being silent on politics, decided to dive into it inexplicably with a ridiculously

again like you almost feel like with her PR team, if you're going to come out and do this, at least have like sensible observations and don't be just bumper sticker, you know,

you know,

quote tweeting Huffington Post, right?

Like, that was the level of analysis she provided in her little post.

But again, she's one of the biggest celebrities in the world.

How does this happen?

She's from Tennessee.

She came out in a Tennessee race.

The biggest thing that she talked about was Marcia Blackburn saying how anti-women she was and how she didn't care about, she wanted to keep gays out of stores and all these ridiculous things that aren't true.

Well, the first poll has come out since that.

And

most of the calls were after that.

54 to 40 Blackburn leads.

14 points.

This was a race that was in the toss-up category.

Wow.

Now, if that polling holds, I can think we could safely understand that more people care about what Kanye West thinks about politics than Taylor Swift.

But we'll see if that holds or not.

So we could look at Senate, possibly a red wave in the Senate.

Yeah, I think, you know, so we talked about this a little while ago.

Which makes sense.

People know that's where the Supreme Court is happening.

and also people are in red states right and they're going to become more excited to vote more passionate about voting the the the house we're seeing sort of a slight turn to the opposite effect where purple districts um sometimes it has been tilting a little bit blue a little more blue not much to tell from it i think already the house is in real real danger i mean i it would be a surprise at this point if the republicans were able to pull out the house not impossible it would be a surprise um uh but for the senate real quick, we had 10 toss-up races that we were talking about before.

And I believe it was three or four that the Republicans had to win to control the Senate.

I think it was three.

They had to win three of the 10.

At the time we talked about it, the Ted Cruz race, in which he was favored by only three points, was the

best case right now.

That's changed dramatically since we talked about that a couple of weeks ago.

Now,

Ted Cruz seems to be on solid ground and more than a three-point lead.

Heidi Heitkamp seems to be in massive danger.

I would say it looks like two races were decided with the Kavanaugh hearings, barring some other major development.

Heidi Heitkamp voted against him.

She looks like she's toast in North Dakota now.

Joe Manchin voted for Kavanaugh.

He looks like he's safe.

So those two races are not even in the toss-up category anymore, in my mind.

And neither really is the Cruise one, which gets you down to about seven toss-ups, which the Republicans need to win one.

One of the seven will keep the Senate in Republican hands.

This is a much improved situation from even when it was just a couple of weeks ago.

The Kavanaugh thing, I think, is a big part of it.

We don't know that for sure yet.

I think it'll play out in the next week or so when we really have a lot of results, but it looks very promising in the Senate, better than it's looked probably all year.

So that's a good thing if you care about that.

So

let me explain something.

This election

could mean that

I know technically we have three branches of government, but I believe we kind of had five.

We have the press and the people, okay?

Five.

Executive, legislative,

and judicial are the three in the Constitution.

Then you have the fourth, which is the press and the people.

I believe what happens in this election could put all five branches into chaos.

If they win the House, the House will go nuts and they will impeach, they will subpoena, which those subpoenas will go to the Senate.

The Senate will be in chaos because of it, because of the Democrats.

They will put the administrative in chaos because it will be under impeachment and it will also

have testimony that it has to give that it will fight.

They're going to subpoena his tax records.

He will fight that, which will go into the Supreme Court, which the people will rise up and destabilize the fifth branch, if you will, the people as they stand up and they're starting to fight kind of back and forth in the streets, you know, not in a mob sort of way, just in an antifos sort of way.

They will, the House will then again, I think, try to impeach Kavanaugh or at least get him to recuse himself from anything having to do with the administration.

You watch.

And the press is already in chaos.

All

every piece of society could be in chaos based on this election.

It's going to be a fun couple of years, isn't it?

It's going to be a fun couple of years.

Thanks, Du.

Will you give us a quick report maybe every day here as things start to change?

Yes, sir.

And give us a look on the polls.

I'd also like you to

summarize the polls that I gave this morning on the people about the, you know, what is it, 8% of the people are progressive hardliners, 29%

are conservative hardliners, and the rest are being called the, what was it, the burned-out

core or the

tired core, the people that are in the middle saying, I don't want to be a part of either of these.

It's pretty remarkable, and I think good news.

All right.

Exhausted majority.

Exhausted majority.

Thank you.

All right.

Heads up.

Hackers exploited security vulnerabilities at Facebook.

50 million accounts have been put into jeopardy.

But it's only 50 million.

That's it.

All right.

They have digital keys.

Now, bad guys have digital keys that keep you locked in so you don't have to re-enter your password every time.

Facebook says they've fixed this vulnerability.

They've informed law enforcement.

Have you been informed?

Lifelock.com, they are on the job looking for the things that you might miss, things that you will only see when there is trouble.

LifeLock also has not just identity theft protection, but now adding the power of Norton Security.

Now, Norton is protecting you against the threats to your devices.

So you have identity and now your devices, too.

Nobody can stop all cyber threats, prevent all identity theft, or monitor all transactions and all businesses.

But the new Lifelock with Norton Security can see the threats that you might miss on your own.

So go to lifelock.com or call 1-800-LifeLock.

Use the promo code Beck, get an extra 10% off off your first year, plus, $25 gift certificate from Amazon for annual enrollment.

That is promo code BEC.

Terms do apply.

You go there right now.

Use the promo code Beck at Lifelock.com.

Glenn Beck.

Tonight on TV.

No catastrophe is too catastrophic.

No apocalypse is too apocalyptic.

No sports questions are too

be answered.

I don't know what's going on here.

Glenn takes your calls live on the air.

The show starts at 5 p.m.

Eastern, so get in line a little early at 888-727-BEC.

Only on the Blaze.

Yeah.

Welcome to the program.

Tonight on the TV show,

we've got a lot to cover.

We're going to take your phone calls.

You can ask anything, talk about anything.

And if you get on the air, we are going to send you a free autographed book, which look at it this way.

It's free.

So just call, make something up.

Doesn't matter what you're going to say.

We autograph it, which does devalue the price of the book.

You know, it sales a little bit, but you can tear that page out and you bring it to a thrift store and get like two bucks for it.

And then you can, you do that a few times.

You'll have enough for a month-blaze subscription.

And then you're

just keep calling.

Keep calling and get calling.

Oh, my God.

This is like a freaking money printing machine.

We've discovered it.

Right.

Ask whatever's on your mind.

Talk about whatever's on your mind.

What we have missed.

What we have wrong.

888-727-BECK tonight.

Facebook and the Blaze live.

Call in about 4:30 Central Time.

Back.

Mercury.

Eastern Time.