'One Outrage at a Time'? - 9/24/18

The Blaze Radio Network

on demand Glenn Battlegation was lobbed at Kavanaugh last night.

This one comes from Deborah Ramirez, a Yale classmate of Kavanaugh, who told

the New Yorker that Kavanaugh thrust his

thrust his penis in her face, causing her to touch it.

She claims that both of them were highly intoxicated.

No.

All right.

First of all, the story should have never made it to print.

It is telling that the New Yorker ran it while the New York Times and Washington Post have stayed away.

Ramirez admits that she had spent six days, quote,

assessing her memories.

Before really, truly recalling what had happened.

She also admits that there are, quote, significant gaps in her memories of the evening.

Like the Ford allegation, no one can collaborate, and Kavanaugh has flat out denied it has ever happened, as has many people that she said were there.

They have all come out now since and said, I've no recollection of this even happening.

It's totally out of character.

So how did this make it into a national publication?

Have the rules of journalism changed or suddenly spontaneously combust?

No.

It's just that there are no real rules of journalism anymore.

The real journalists have left.

Advocates and torch bearers have taken their places.

And in the digital world where you can assassinate someone's character in 0.7 seconds, go ahead, try it.

Google Kavanaugh.

It'll take you 0.7 seconds for Google to come back with 128 million results.

That's how fast it happens now.

If someone can make a false claim on Twitter, it'll be retweeted 10,000 times plus.

The correction, if it even comes from the original poster, will only get what, 10 or 20 tweets, maybe?

That's what Democrats are doing to Kavanaugh now.

And they know it.

And sadly, so does Kavanaugh.

It's amazing what we're seeing in our country right now.

Is this the country that you want your kids to grow up in?

Is this fairness?

No,

this is social justice.

Social justice in the postmodern world means that it doesn't matter if Kavanaugh did it.

Somebody like Kavanaugh did do it.

It doesn't matter if it happened to these victims because it has happened or something like it has happened to other victims.

And it all balances out in the end, or so they think.

I just ask any of anybody who is so

sure of themselves today, on one side or the other,

if this were happening to you,

would you think this was a fair process?

The left has taken this hearing and completely turned the rules upside down.

The term reasonable doubt has always meant that if it exists, you have to assume the person is innocent.

Reasonable doubt.

Well,

I can't find any reason

to believe.

These people on Twitter yesterday were all absolutely positively sure Kavanaugh was guilty.

Well, I'm not absolutely positively sure he's not.

How could you possibly based on two people that their stories fall apart once it leaves them?

The left has now rewritten the definition.

There's no evidence, not one single corroborating witness to any of these claims, not one.

Now that's enough to get you laughed out of a courtroom.

But for some reason, the quote resistance wants reasonable doubt now to shift toward the accuser.

Keep in mind, these are the same people, the very same people, who are supposedly for criminal justice and prison reform.

Isn't it exactly the problem?

Haven't we been in a society that will believe the white woman instead of Emmett Till?

Wasn't that the problem?

This one white woman's testimony who claimed he touched her, he grabbed her, and he made lewd comments to her?

That's why nobody went to jail

because the reasonable doubt went to her.

If reasonable doubt shifts towards the accuser, can you imagine how full our prisons will be?

Can you imagine living under a government where reasonable doubt always sides towards the prosecution?

If there is no evidence, if there are no witnesses to any of these claims,

I'm sorry.

But Kavanaugh must get confirmed.

Now, if they have witnesses

and we have reasonable doubt,

well,

he probably should be concerned.

But if we can get to a point to where it's clear to all of us who are honest,

then he should go away.

Senate Democrats know the game they're playing.

Their ultimate goal here, it's the midterms, 2020.

The Supreme Court confirmation hearing is just a tool of the left used to influence another court, and that is the Court of Public Opinion.

It's Monday, September 24th.

This is the Glen Beck program.

You know, this has been coming for a long time.

It's just that we have to get off this train.

We've accepted it from each of our parties for a while.

Do you remember when,

oh, who was it from Arizona?

The Mormon from Arizona,

Pat,

or Nevada, Nevada.

What's his name?

Harry Reid.

Harry Reid.

When Harry Reed stands up and says, you know, Romney, I got a call.

Romney.

Romney didn't, he didn't pay his taxes.

Now it's out there.

That was a lie.

He knew it was a lie, but he knew that the press would take it and run with it, and it would get out there and it would poison the well.

Our president, Raphael Cruz, was involved in the plot to assassinate Kennedy.

What?

It was a lie.

He knew that it was a lie, but it got into the press and it poisons the well.

Kavanaugh, now Stormy Daniels attorney, is now saying that he was part of a rape gang.

Now it's to a rape gang.

He's part of a rape gang.

It's a lie,

but it'll get out and it'll destroy him.

This is not the first time that this has happened, but

I wanted to go back into history and see how does this play out?

Eventually, how does this play out?

Well, if you go back in time,

Especially if you go back to the party politics

looking for the third president of the United States.

Who is going to be?

Who's going to be president?

Is it going to be Adams or is it going to be Jefferson?

Now, Adams had already seen what the press can do and what pamphleteers could do, and so he comes up with the Sedition Act, which is absolutely against everything that we ever said we were for in America when

it comes to the press and freedom of speech.

But he had enough of people just lying in the press.

So there was a big turmoil.

And Jefferson thought that Adams had betrayed the Republic, and also because

he thought he was going to go to war with France, and

he was going to start a foreign war, and he wanted nothing to do with it.

So they become enemies.

These friends become enemies.

And during the election,

the two of them

start to lob

charges against each other.

Jefferson,

or at least the people around Jefferson, he never said this because he was above it.

But his campaign accused President Adams of having, quote, a hideous hemaphroditical character, which neither has the force or firmness of a man nor the gentleness and sensibility of a woman.

So he calls Adams a Maphrodite.

So what happens?

Adams, his team, responds, well, Jefferson is a mean-spirited, low-lived

fellow, the son of a half-breed Indian squaw sired by a Virginia mulatto father.

So his mom is an Indian squaw, and his dad is half white and half black.

It went down from the, it ended with those guys,

I think Adams made the claim that if Jefferson was going to be president,

all of your daughters would be raped and there would be heads on pikes all the way down the streets, right?

Right, Penn?

Yep.

That's where the story usually ends, right?

Even Martha Washington got involved in this.

She told a clergyman of Jefferson that Jefferson was one of the most detestable of all mankind.

So this is going back and forth.

and that's where we think the story ends

but in trying to find out

how does this end

how have we corrected this course before

let me tell you a story you probably haven't heard there was a pamphleteer his name was james callender

James Callender was a guy, he was Scottish and he came in and he was on the side of Jefferson, and he was a pamphleteer, and he would pretty much say pretty much anything like

Adams is a Hemaphrodite.

And he would print these things and pass them out.

Jefferson, of course, was

far too good of a fellow to be involved in anything like that.

He wouldn't I don't know James Callender.

Oh, that's that's outrageous that you would say that

The thought was at the time that Jefferson had hired Callendar to say these things, but of course, absolutely not.

1801, the Sedition Act.

Callender is thrown in jail.

He gets the stiffest penalty of any of the players of the press under John Adams.

He's fined $200, and he has to go to jail for six months.

So he goes and he serves his jail time.

He pays his $200.

And when Jefferson becomes president, he pardons Callender.

Well, Callender wants to see him right away because what about my $200?

And you, you know, I think you might owe me some money, too.

I mean, I haven't been able to work.

What about the $200 and, you know, some of so what do they say about combat pay?

Jefferson pretends he doesn't know him.

Jefferson says, I look, I pardon the guy.

That's all he gets.

So then what happens?

Well, he says, look,

Jefferson paid me to tell these stories.

He paid me.

Jefferson says, I didn't pay him.

He said, she said.

I didn't pay him.

Yes, he did.

No, I didn't.

Yes, you did.

No, I didn't.

Yes, he did.

Unfortunately for Jefferson, Calendar had letters from Jefferson, including payments for the things he wanted him to say.

So all of a sudden, now Jefferson is exposed as this liar.

He releases the letter.

So what happens then?

Well, the people who support Jefferson, they won't have any of it.

And so they decide that they're going to start a new rumor.

And so the supporters of Jefferson, who are just trying to protect the president, the supporters start circulating the rumor that Callender actually is such a bad guy.

He's such a bad character.

You can't believe a thing he says.

How do we even know those letters are true?

Because Callender is the kind of guy who abandoned his wife while she was dying of venereal disease.

Callender

is outraged.

How dare you say that?

Well, is your wife alive?

No.

Didn't she die?

Yes.

Didn't she die of some horrible disease?

Yes.

But not venereal disease.

And I was with her every step of the way, unless I had to work.

She died of typhus,

not venereal disease.

But because the supporters of Jefferson were so intent on getting making sure they protected their political guy, Callender does something else.

Callender

releases a rumor

that Thomas Jefferson

had been making babies with Sally Hemings.

Now, when that failed,

when that failed to catch on at the time, he immediately switched the story and said, oh, he's been making babies.

He's been making passes.

He's been having an affair with his neighbor's wife.

So, how does this end?

This ends in history being changed.

This ends in some lies

coming back to haunt,

sometimes up to a century or two later,

to continue to destroy and smear.

Now, people people will say, well, the DNA evidence.

No, no.

No.

The DNA evidence did not prove that.

The DNA evidence proved that it was someone in the Jefferson family.

But where did Kavanaugh get that rumor?

He didn't make it up.

That rumor was published in a newspaper, in an op-ed.

But it wasn't saying that Jefferson did it.

It was actually a smear to get people to not vote for Thomas Jefferson.

But the smear originally

was something that apparently people knew in the area.

That Thomas Jefferson's brother was a sot.

Thomas Jefferson's brother was not a good guy.

And Thomas Jefferson's brother was using the slaves.

as breeders.

The original rumor was not about Thomas Jefferson, it was about his brother.

But perhaps that wasn't good enough for Callender.

He needed to build on that.

And that smear continues today.

So before we all jump to our team jerseys, before we all say, I am absolutely positive,

let's just remember that how we behave and what we say and what we do

can last centuries

and have ramifications that we have no idea

are coming.

Maybe more importantly, remember that whatever we create, whatever this system of justice is, our children are going to have to live under it.

As summer fades, recent market shifts could give homebuyers a leg up in the latter part of the year.

In July, for instance, the national inventory of homes listed above 350,000 rose 5.7.

That's according to Realtor.com.

Now, with that slight change, it gives you competition because people are eager to sell their house and close before the holidays.

If you are interested, serious buyers have a leg up on people who are trying to sell their house.

Now is the time to pick up the phone and call American Financing because they have access to every loan in the industry and they can help you find a down payment.

Now, American Financing, they employ salary-based mortgage consultants.

They don't work on commission, they work for you.

They have an A-plus rating with the BBB and over 1,800 Google reviews.

They offer a convenience of e-sign so you can complete your documents from the comfort of your own home and on your schedule, and there's no upfront fees.

If you're looking to close on a house, you're looking for a loan, you're looking for somebody who's not going to, who's not going to sell you something that is not right for you, it's American Financing.

Call them now, 800-906-2440.

800-906-2440.

That's AmericanFinancing.net.

American Financing Corporation, NMLS 1-8-2-3-3-4, www.nmlsconsumeraccess.org.

Another story from history,

cautionary tale coming up in just a second with some, I think, some kind of bone-chilling audio.

As we continue with the Kavanaugh story, did you read the story from The New Yorker?

Yes.

On the

new allegation came out last night.

Seems pretty bogus to me.

You can't get anybody to corroborate any of these stories.

In fact, you have the opposite.

Yeah.

She got saying no.

I don't remember anything about that.

Right.

She names people, and male and female, friends of hers

are saying, I don't remember that.

And that's completely out of character for Brett Kavanaugh, many of them have said.

Yes.

But her friends, though, also are saying, I don't even remember this.

I have no recollection of this.

And those are the people that the second accuser is naming.

We know the first accuser had the same problem.

And the second accuser in the story says, well, it took me a few days before I was comfortable saying that it was Brett.

My memory was so foggy.

But after spending six days with my attorneys.

Now she's totally clear.

How'd that happen?

A cautionary tale when we come back.

All right.

So now the New Yorker has come out with a news story on Kavanaugh.

And it's important that you actually read the story.

This is from Rowan Farrow, so he's got credibility in this.

And I, for one, Am not here to tell you that Kavanaugh is innocent because I don't know him.

I'm not here to tell you that I believe the victims or throw the victims under the bus because I don't know them.

All I can do is look at the facts.

So let's look at the facts.

Here's the latest allegation.

Let me just give you some of the highlights of this.

It's from The New Yorker.

Again, don't take my word for any of this.

Read it yourself.

The claim dates to 83-84 academic school year when Kavanaugh was a freshman at Yale.

The offices of at least four Democratic senators have received information about the allegation, and at least two have begun investigating it.

Republican staffers also learned of the allegation last week in conversations with a New Yorker, and they expressed concern about its potential impact on Kavanaugh's nomination.

The Democrat Senate offices reviewing the allegations believe that they merit further investigation.

Quote, this is another serious, credible, and disturbing allegation against Brett Kavanaugh.

It should be fully investigated.

Okay,

so I want to, I want to, this is another serious,

credible, and disturbing allegation.

I don't know if this is serious.

Maybe as an allegation goes, I guess it is serious.

I don't know if it can be taken seriously,

but

it is not credible,

but it is disturbing.

The woman at the center of the story is Deborah Ramirez.

She's 53.

She attended Yale with Kavanaugh, where she studied sociology and psychology.

Later, she spent years working for an organization that supports victims of domestic violence.

The New Yorker contacted Ramirez after learning of her possible involvement

in an incident involving Kavanaugh.

The allegation was conveyed to Democratic senators by a civil rights lawyer.

For Ramirez,

the sudden attention has been unwelcome and prompted difficult choices.

She was at first hesitant to speak publicly, partly because her memories contained gaps because she had been drinking at the time of the alleged incident.

In her initial conversations with the New Yorker, she was reluctant to characterize Kavanaugh's role in the alleged incident with certainty.

However,

After six days of carefully assessing her memories and consulting with her attorney, she now felt confident enough of her recollections to say that she remembers Kavanaugh had exposed himself at a drunken dormitory party and thrust his parts into her face and caused her to touch it without consent as she pushed him away.

So for the first 35 years after this incident,

she wasn't certain that it was Brett Kavanaugh, but after six days with her attorneys, now she is.

Kavanaugh has already responded, said this did not happen.

People who knew me

at the time know that this didn't happen.

I've said so.

This is a smear, plain and simple.

Okay, so here's this is what she says.

They were both freshmen at Yale.

She was invited by a friend on the women's soccer team to a dorm room party.

She recalled the party that it took place in a suite at Lawrence Hall in

part of Yale, known as Old Campus, and that a small group of students decided to play a drinking game together.

We were sitting in a circle.

People would pick who drank.

Ramirez was the one that was picked repeatedly.

She said, I quickly became inebriated.

At one point, a male student pointed a gag plastic penis at her direction.

Later she said, she was on the floor, foggy, and slurring her words.

as that male student and another stood nearby.

Ramirez now has identified the two male onlookers, but at her request, the New Yorker is not naming them.

Well, why?

Seriously, why?

If this is about justice, that this shouldn't be done to a woman, why not name all of the men who were doing this to her?

That is a serious question that I think people on the left need to answer.

If this isn't just a campaign against him, and you find her credible enough, why wouldn't you out the other two men that were involved in this?

A third male student then exposed himself to her.

I remember a penis being in front of my face.

I knew that's not what I wanted, even in that state of mind.

That's not a real penis, some of the other students said, laughing at her confusion and taunting her, one encouraging her to kiss it.

She said that she pushed the person away, touching it in the process.

She was raised as a devout Catholic in Connecticut, and she said she was shaken.

I wasn't going to touch one of those until I was married.

I was embarrassed and ashamed and humiliated.

She remembers Kavanaugh now standing to her right and laughing and pulling up his pants.

Brett was laughing, she said.

I can still see his face and his hips coming forward, like when you pull up your pants.

Now, wait a minute.

She is hazy.

She's groggy.

She doesn't remember it.

Six days ago, she wasn't willing to say that it was Brett Kavanaugh.

Now she says, I remember his face.

Well, did you not remember his face seven days ago?

Sincerely, another honest question.

How come you can remember it clearly now, but a week ago you couldn't?

She then said somebody yelled down the hall.

Brett Kavanaugh just put his penis in Debbie's face, she said.

It was his full name.

I don't think it was just Brett, and I remember hearing it and being mortified that this was out there.

So did he say both names?

You say you don't think it was just Brett.

You also say you know it was the first two names, yet you also said seven days ago you don't know for sure who did it, but now you recall clearly his face and not just the first name, but first and last name being shouted.

She acknowledged that there are significant gaps in her memories of the evening.

If she ever presents her story to the FBI or members of the Senate, she will inevitably be pressed on her motivation for coming forward and questioned about her memory giving her drinking at the party.

And yet, after several days of considering the

matter carefully, she said, I'm confident about the pants coming up.

I'm confident that it was Brett.

She said, that's what stayed with her most forcefully, is the memory of the laughter expense from Kavanaugh and the other students.

It was kind of a joke, but it was clear to me it wasn't a joke.

Now, the New Yorker, now listen to this, this is journalism today.

The New Yorker has not confirmed with any other eyewitness that Kavanaugh was even present at the party.

In fact, the opposite.

The magazine contacted several dozen classmates of Ramirez and Kavanaugh regarding the incident.

Many did not respond to interview requests.

Others declined to comment or said they didn't attend or remember a party.

A classmate of Ramirez, who declined to be identified because of the partisan battle over Kavanaugh's nomination, said that another student told him about the incident either on the night of the party or in the next day or two.

The classmate said that he is 100% sure that he was told at the time that Kavanaugh was the student who exposed himself.

He independently recalled many of the same details offered by Ramirez, including that a male student had encouraged Kavanaugh as he exposed himself.

The classmate, like Ramirez, recalled the party took place in a common room on the first floor entry B of Lawrence Hall.

I've known this all along.

It's been on my mind all these years.

When his name come up, it was a big deal.

Another classmate, an emergency room doctor in California, recalled overhearing soon after the party a female student tearfully recounting another student incident at the party involving a gag with a fake penis.

You then have the ones that she actually

named

without naming.

One of the male classmates, I don't think Brent would flash himself to Debbie or anyone for that matter.

I have no idea, zero recollection of it.

In a statement of the two male classmates who were involved in the incident, she alleged.

The wife of a third male student, she said, was involved, and three other classmates.

Now, these were the people who were there in the circle.

They all disputed Ramirez's count of the events.

We were the people closest to Brett during the first year at Yale.

He was a roommate of some of us.

We spent a great deal of time with him, including the dorm where this incident allegedly took place.

Some of us were also friends with Debbie Ramirez during and after the time at Yale.

We can say with confidence that if that incident Debbie alleges ever occurred, we would have seen or heard about it, and we did not.

The behavior she describes would be completely out of character for Brett.

In addition, some of us knew Debbie long after Yale, and she described, she hadn't described this incident until Brett's Supreme Court nomination was pending.

Editors from the New York contacted some of us because we are the people who would know the truth, and we told them we never heard or saw this ever before.

Another former friend said, a woman,

I'm best friends with this woman.

We're best friends.

We shared intimate details of our life.

I was never told this story by her or by anyone else.

It never came up.

I didn't see it.

I've never heard of it happening.

She was part of the larger social circle, blah, blah, blah.

They went on

that

Debbie and I became good close friends before we arrived at Yale.

She was honest and gentle, yada, yada, talking about how she has attended their weddings and has been at weddings with the so-called accusers, attended their weddings, or not the accusers, but the

people, the perpetrators, the people allegedly involved.

And they have photographs of her taking pictures, I mean, in pictures, taking, you know, standing side by side, laughing and being with Brett Kavanaugh.

So, what's the truth?

I guess it's it's just who you believe.

And how do you know who to believe?

Well, depending on what group you're in,

we can go back again in history and

we can figure out how people are going to react.

For instance, in 1955, it all came down to one woman's testimony.

One woman.

She was a white woman.

She was a seemingly nice woman.

She said that a black boy came in and grabbed her by the waist said lewd things to her and touched her

well was that true

well the boy was emmett till he was brutally murdered at the time

the south believed the woman the town believed the woman she was a woman of of good standing And in fact, this is what the mother of Emmett Till

said at the time about the accuser.

It's my opinion that the guilt begins with Mrs.

Bryant.

And I want to see Mrs.

Bryant punished, her husband, and any other persons that were in on this thing.

And I feel like the pressure should start from the President of the United States and be channeled all the way down to the township of Money, Mississippi.

And I'm certainly of the opinion that inasmuch as my son had to die, that I don't want his death to be a vain thing, if it can further the cause of freedom, then I will say that he died a hero.

Now, anyone who wants to say that these two people are just rabble-rousers, remember, that's what people said about Emmett Till.

He was just a

rabble-rouser.

For those who are defending the accuser, remember, you're on the same side as she was.

You're on the same side as those who let the actual criminals go because they believed her, because you have to believe her.

She's a white woman.

She's a woman of good standing.

Little did we know at the time her motivation was her husband was beating her at the time.

She didn't confess until 2008, right before she died.

We don't always just automatically believe the accuser.

And we have to be careful because people have different motivations what we have to do is look for the facts and when there's enough facts

that's when you can move forward

so what is ransomware

well

it's this nasty software that locks you

you out of your computer and then somebody demands ransom money to restore access to it.

Cyber criminals demand payments with a certain time or risk losing access to your data forever or that they'll release your data.

The average ransomware demand was over 500 bucks.

So

what are you going to do?

Don't automatically open email attachments from unknown sources and most importantly use up-to-date computer security software.

Tons of threats out there.

You can't follow all of them.

But that's why we have new Lock Identity Theft Protection.

It adds the power of Norton's security to help you protect against the threats to your identity and to your devices that you can't easily see or fix on your own.

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

But the new Life Lock 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 for an extra 10% off your first year, plus a $25 Amazon gift card with annual enrollment.

That's promo code Beck at 1-800LifeLock or lifelock.com.

Promo code Beck, terms apply.

We're going to get into the Ted Cruz and Betto debate here in just a few minutes.

Also, we have Heather McDonald joining us.

She is a woman who wrote the Diversity Delusion, and

she's written a few things about this Brett Kavanaugh thing that I think America needs to hear.

She is somebody that really understands,

I think, the things that I tried to capture in the book Addicted to Outrage.

She understands it.

She's been there at the front lines, and maybe she can help us figure out how are we to react.

What are we supposed to do,

first of all, with this Brett Kavanaugh?

information that we have.

What's the best way to react to that?

But she also goes into

our children and what we need to be looking for with our children and how we are to look ahead for colleges and universities.

I'm going to talk to Heather McDonald coming up in just a second.

Glenn Beck is coming live to talk about the right path forward and to make fun of the people standing in the way.

He might not be able to save the country, but at least we can all go down laughing.

Glenn Beck Live, the Addicted to Outrage tour, on tour this fall.

Glenn back.

It's Monday, September 24th.

This is the Glenn Back program.

Heather McDonald was on with us a couple of weeks ago, and I was running really late, and we ran out of time, and I was really bummed because she is, she's an amazing, amazing woman.

She has the best-selling book, War on Cops.

She is also with the Manhattan Institute, contributing editor for the City Journal.

She also has her roots in deconstruction and postmodernism.

She's the author of the book The Diversity Delusion.

Heather McDonald, welcome back to the program.

How are you?

Well, thank you so much for having me on again, Glenn.

It's a real pleasure to talk to you.

So we were just getting into some good conversation, and we had to cut our conversation short last time.

Let me pick it up because you've written some really fascinating things about Brett Kavanaugh.

Bring me up to speed and the audience up to speed on

what your thoughts are on this whole mess.

Well, so far, Glenn, the conservative response has been a completely legitimate one, which is to say that the timing of the charges brought against Kavanaugh are completely

spurious, shows that this is simply intended to scuttle the nomination as opposed to getting to the truth.

There have also been legitimate questions about the credibility of his accuser, Professor Ford, pointing out that the

she has

is for somebody who's allegedly traumatized by this allegedly searing event, she can't even remember what year it occurred, where the house was, that this party was where she was allegedly assaulted by Kavanaugh.

Those are very legitimate points to make, but I think it ducks a more fundamental question, which is that even if it were true what she alleged, should that outweigh

Kavanaugh's clear record in public service and the three and a half decades of life in which he has participated in the public sphere?

And I argue that it shouldn't.

And again, I'm just putting aside for a moment all the questions of credibility.

I think what we're seeing here is the fruition of the feminist mentality that reverses the order of the realm of public action, public ideas, a civilization that is seen as too male, and putting that below issues of Eros and personal involvement.

As far as I'm concerned,

let's take this out of the current

Kavanaugh situation and imagine a hypothetical from a liberal perspective.

One of the most liberal lions of the Supreme Court was William Brennan.

He massively expanded the welfare state,

the

defenses for criminal defendants.

If he had, as a 17-year-old, engaged in some borish, adolescent, aggressive,

alcohol-fueled male behavior, would a liberal really say that that one unprecedented and unrepeated incident should undercut

a lifetime of contributions to the liberal exposition of the Constitution.

And I would imagine they would say that it shouldn't.

So, Heather, isn't it, haven't we already decided this as a society, though?

Because we've already decided that

if you are tried and convicted of even murder,

your records are sealed.

Because as long as you don't repeat it, what you do under 18 doesn't should not be held against you for the rest of your life.

So I'm not saying that he's innocent or guilty.

I have no idea.

I don't know why we're even discussing it with the amount of evidence that we have.

But

even if he is guilty of this, societal laws come from us.

Society has already said, look, if you're under age, we're not going to hold that against you as long as you've reformed.

Well, you know, there's some, if you've committed murder, I think that that they you are going to be tried as an adult.

But you're clearly right, Glenn, we do have different standards for juveniles.

And we are not obviously obeying the law here.

You know, the the the Senate Judiciary Committee is twisting itself into knots to try and accommodate these last-minute accusations that are being brought forward clearly to torpedo.

But

even if that were not the case, if juvenile records were not sealed, to me it is simply preposterous to think that a one-time incident as a 17-year-old of aggressive sexual behavior counts more in the life of a public figure, a public intellectual who is involved in the world of ideas, that that counts more than what his contributions have been as a federal judge.

And certainly, again, if we want to bring it back into a feminist perspective, which I don't think is particularly relevant, but if we want to say that a public figure's treatment of females should be influential in how we evaluate his public career,

he has been a leader in the treatment of females as clerks.

He was the first judge to have an all-female class of clerks.

He's had a majority of clerks.

His female clerks have been unanimous in testifying to his character.

And when you're a clerk for a judge, that's not an easy gig.

I mean, it's pressure.

You're working together late at night.

I mean, if you are a dirtbag, that's the kind of scenario where it comes out, is it not?

Absolutely.

You're working late nights.

This is the very domain where Eros comes into play.

There's plenty of room for sexual harassment, if not actual sexual involvement.

And we have heard absolutely nothing.

If there had been any

hint of this, it would have come out.

But again, Glenn,

you seem to be moving towards conceding that in some situations this might be relevant.

If it turned out, let's say, that James Madison, one of our most important founding fathers, who was one of the prime architects of the theory of the separation of powers, one of the most important contributors to the Federalist Papers, understanding

how

to try to restrain government power, which was the big accomplishment of the slow patient evolution of constitutional thinking in Europe.

If it turned out that he was a skirt chaser,

that he had patted the butts of his domestics, again, I argue that is not relevant to his contributions to public life.

And to say that it is,

to say that we should actually reconsider James Madison's contributions, and this is a pure hypothetical.

Right, I don't agree.

I do not agree that

that takes away from his accomplishments.

However, we're looking at somebody in history, and I don't think we can have revisionist history.

I mean, if you know, okay, if that's who he was, it's like Winston Churchill.

Winston Churchill, was he a good guy or a bad guy?

Well, if you lived in India, he was a really bad guy.

You lived in Europe, he was a good guy.

So, which is he?

He's both.

He's both.

We are both flawed and

great at times as human beings.

So, you just have to look at it on the balance.

You know, if

Kavanaugh, let's say Kavanaugh

did this.

I would look at this as something that happened in 1982.

And the next thing that I'd have to do is: is there any evidence that he didn't learn from this?

If he is still doing it, if he was still doing it, it would matter.

But there is no evidence, not only at the two times now that they say, because another one came out last night, the two times, there doesn't seem to be any evidence at all,

but it also happened 35 years ago with nothing else.

The guy has lived

an exemplary life.

Well, yeah, and I guess I'm taking a very absolute out-there position.

You're absolutely right.

I mean, this needs to be stated.

He has led an exemplary life.

He has been a champion for women's rights.

There is, apart from this completely groundless charge that came out in the New Yorker, which all of the people that were allegedly at the party deny, where he was engaged in the typical drunken, borish hookup culture of

sexual drunken brawling.

Even so, I just think that we are the feminists are trying to take our civilization down, Glenn.

They are denying the realm of ideas and public action, which has been male in the past, and saying that the realm of Eros, which is a different realm which drives men and women insane,

is the realm of Chthonic desire, that that and women's sort of grudge matches about that

should have priority, that we're reversing what I think is the order for how civilization goes forward.

And if they win on this, if they win on this, the feminist war on what is perceived as male civilization is is going to become all the more extreme.

So, Heather, I want you to go.

Um, we're going to take a quick break, and then I want when you come back, I want you to go and talk about something that I read in one of your articles, I think, in the City Journal, about how

this event, if it did indeed happen, this event, this kind of thing, is actually

something that was in a way spurred on by

the women's rights movement, by these this extreme death of chivalry and you know death of of all kind of moral standards I'd like you to go into that because I think that's fascinating when we come back with Heather McDonald author of the diversity delusion

So if you're trying to sell your home, now is the time to sell it.

It looks like the economy is changing and it's becoming a buyer's market.

For most Americans, your home is the biggest investment you'll ever make.

And that's why I urge you to try RealEstateAgentsitrust.com.

I want you to reach out to RealEstateAgentsitrust.com and see the difference because the difference is in the outcome of buying or selling a home.

We have over about 1,500 agents all over America who their word is their bond.

They're fans of the show.

They share your sensibilities.

They want a square deal.

These people have all been fully vetted and handpicked by my team for their knowledge, their skill, and their track record.

And thousands of families have already put RealEstateAgents I Trust.com to the test, and the results are really, truly remarkable.

You can find out yourself, just go to RealEstateAgents I Trust.com.

Real EstateAgents I Trust.com.

If you want your home sold fast and for the most amount of money, or if you're moving into a new area and you just want somebody who can really listen to you and help you find the right place, realestate agents i trust.com

we're talking to heather mcdonald about brett kavanaugh and heather you wrote in the um

in the city journal um you wrote an article uh called the feminist narcissism and

you right in the middle of it you said something remarkable that um

The most salient fact about this alleged episode is not going to be discussed.

And you go in to say

this is kind of what society was pushing, wasn't it?

Well, absolutely.

Sexual liberation was based on a complete

lie, which is that the male and female libidos are identical.

That we could strip away the traditional methods that civilization has developed to tame

and civilize the male libido, thing, the ideas of male chivalry,

respect for women,

gentlemanliness, and on the female side, the norms of female modesty, prudence, and ladylike behavior.

We could strip away those norms.

We could say that they're oppressive, patriarchal,

sexist, and women and men could meet mano amano on the sexual battlefield and everything would be great.

And it turns out that's not the case.

What we have on college campuses today is not an epidemic of rape, Pace the Feminist.

What we have is a drunken hookup culture

where males are now allowed to act as borishly as they want.

Females try to catch up.

They drink themselves blotto precisely in order to

reduce their sexual inhibitions.

And there's a a lot of drunken one-night stands.

Males are biologically wired to want as much sex with as many different females as possible.

Females have very different responses to sexual intercourse, biologically, hormonally.

They develop feelings of intimacy and a yearning for connectedness afterwards.

And what happens on these college campuses after these drunken hookups, sometimes the females feel abandoned

or they can keep up having sex with a guy and

trying to seduce him for months and then decide after having fallen into the grips of the Title IX bureaucracy and the campus rape

massive administrative

industry on a college campus, they retrospectively reclassify their experience as rape

even though they don't even usually report it, and it was largely voluntary.

But what's going on now on college campuses and the New Yorker story about the party that Yale Kavanaugh was allegedly at is a perfect demonstration of what's going on, is sexual liberation having a nervous breakdown.

And now you have this bizarre situation on college campuses where virtually the same students who 30, 40 years ago said to the adults, get out of our bedrooms, no more oversight from the college administrators, no more in loco parentis rules.

We can handle this ourselves.

Now you have students

asking the adult administrators to write rules for sex.

Are you kidding me?

Then these rules, these affirmative consent rules look like something you'd see for buying a used car or a mortgage contract, for something that is the very realm of the inarticulate, the ambiguous, the fraught, the chthonic.

And it is a very, very strange turn of events.

And it results from the fact that we have denied the natural differences between the sexes, but the feminists are not willing to say sexual revolution was a mistake.

They want to preserve the prerogative of maximal promiscuity for girls.

And so they're responding with this bizarre legalistic response.

And the next step clearly is having a college dean present for every drunken

coital coupling that goes on in a in a student dorm so that afterwards when this comes before the extraordinarily inadequate but but bizarrely complicated sexual assault tribunal situations that there can be more third-party evidence.

But this is, we are reaping what we sowed in the 1960s.

I find it amazing that what you just outlined was the death of the chaperone because we know human nature is human nature.

And so get rid of the chaperone, get rid of everybody.

Then things

take the course of human nature.

and now we're back to more of a legalistic chaperone I mean it's it's insane we've made a return journey except now it's really oppressive and quite frightening for everybody involved that's absolutely right and the other thing that we did Glenn we used to have the default for premarital sex at no

and it was not ironclad obviously there were plenty of females who opted out of that default in college or elsewhere, but that no gave them power.

It meant that when they were forced with an importuning male with a surging hormones, that a no did not have to be negotiated in media race.

It was assumed and the male had to persuade the female to opt out of the no.

The sexual liberation reversed that default.

Now the default for premarital sex on college and elsewhere is yes, and females have to negotiate a no.

And what they find, you have even the New York Times' newly formed gender editor, the Times is so far into

pursuing the left-wing feminist revolution that they now have an entire bureau devoted to

covering alleged gender and patriarchy issues.

She wrote an op-ed describing sex she had as a 19-year-old with an older man that she admits was actually not coercive, but she didn't really want to have sex.

Okay, all right.

She went along with it because it was too hard to bargain a no-out of the situation.

All right, back in just a second with Heather and McDonald and the diversity delusion when we come back.

You're listening to the Glenn Beck program.

Last week

I published my book, Addicted to Outrage, and it is kind of a starter's guide into what's happening to us and

into the realm of postmodernism.

But it is really, truly only a starter's guide.

If you have read it yet,

you need to pick up the diversity delusion.

Heather McDonald is, you were actually...

You were an academic that was kind of into deconstruction and postmodernism, were you not, Heather?

To my great regret, I certainly was, Glenn.

I had come to college fascinated by language, and I loved very florid,

just strange language of Faulkner and Melville.

And Deconstruction in the 70s was the hottest thing going, and it purported to be about language, and yet it had a very perverse view of how human beings communicate and even what the self is.

But I was too ignorant to be critical of it at the time.

Fortunately, I eventually studied linguistics when I was in England and went back to start my PhD under my professors in college who were

the biggest exponents of deconstruction at the time and realized that everything that I'd learned was not just nonsense, it was literally madness.

I wasted so much time poring over the works of the academic fraud Jacques Derrida trying to understand them.

But it did give me

one thing that I'm grateful for though, Glenn, is that in the 1970s, I was in college before multiculturalism hit the academy.

So as perverse as Deconstruction was,

We read the greatest authors without anybody thinking to complain about their gonads and melanin.

So I read Chaucer, Spencer, Milton,

William Wordsworth, Wallace Stevens, and poured myself into the beauty of their language.

Today, a college student is being given a license for ignorance and a license to hate by the faculty and by college administrators who are

complicit in this destructive narrative that Western civilization is the source of all racism and sexism and oppression in the world, and that the greatest works of our civilization, if not world civilization,

can be rejected simply on the facile ground that the authors or creators or painters or philosophers were not of the students' own gender and race.

This is narcissism, it's closed-mindedness, and it is going to destroy our society and lead possibly to war.

Well, I think we're on the verge of that now.

I mean,

what fascinates me is

we have had these new ideas and these, or at least what most of society thinks are new ideas, the Me Too movement, even,

the cisgender,

you know, language that's coming out, all these things.

And nobody asks, wait a minute, where is that coming from?

Who's printing up words while we sleep?

Who's changing definitions while we sleep?

This virus, this postmodernist or now social justice combination

has been unleashed on us and it is

I mean I

is there much more of this to unleash on us Heather?

Well, you know, people I've been saying that for the last 30 years and it always gets worse.

I think our imaginations are not adequate to imagine what comes next.

College now is one ruthless competition in who can be top victim.

And

the gays have been pushed aside because that's been now completely legitimized, rightly so, arguably, whatever your position is.

Now it's trans, but that won't last.

I mean, there's going to be some new victim category that will trump the trans category, which we now have 116 and still metastasizing versions of gender.

And so what we have on college campuses are students acting out little psychodramas of oppression before an appreciative audience of deanlets and vice provosts of diversity, equity, and inclusion who use the student narcissistic pathos to expand their dominion.

People have to pay attention to what's going in college, going on in college, because as you say, Glenn, it is now in the world at large, and it is destroying meritocracy.

The sciences are now being subjected to the diversity delusion.

Scientific departments are being forced to hire by gender and race rather than scientific merit.

It's going to take down our competitive edge and again it is producing

division unlike anything we've seen before.

Well, the diversity delusion is

the name of your book and it's aptly titled.

It is a delusion, but I think it's a delusion also on the people who are on the part of the people who are not involved because we delude ourselves and laugh it off and say, oh, listen to these crazies.

These crazies have an enormous amount of power now

and are really actually at the front of the dog.

We're at the tail of the dog.

And they're feeding it all kinds of crap.

And it is.

It's changing us, and we're dismissive of it.

And because we're dismissive of it,

we don't do anything.

But let me get to that point.

What do you do?

What do you do?

First of all,

I can underline what you've said more.

You cannot ignore this stuff.

It is being funneled into the so-called real world

at a dizzying pace by college graduates.

They're taking up the corporations, they're occupying the human resources departments, they're occupying the centers of power.

When Google fired a computer engineer, James DeMoore, in August of 2017 for daring to question in a reasoned, fact-based 10-page memo, daring to challenge the feminist orthodoxy at Google.

When the CEO fired him, he used the exact same language of bethos imported from the Academy saying that, well, Google's employees were hurting, that James DeMoore had harmed them because of writing a rational argument.

This is transforming our world.

What we can do,

the core fallacy behind the diversity delusion Glenn is the idea that

racism and sexism is baked into the American identity and polity, that everything that we see around us is the product of racism and sexism.

That

the most absurd instantiation of this is on college campuses, which are the most privileged, open-minded, in some ways, environments in human history, and students there claim that they're at existential threat.

If they can believe that on a college campus, which is preposterous,

they can believe it anywhere.

But as long as that remains the elite's dominant narrative about America, you're going to have the free speech crisis in the name of protecting these oppressed victims, and you're going to have the assault on meritocracy.

So what all of us have to do is to reject at every possible moment and opportunity the idea that Americans today remain fundamentally bigoted and racist.

It is true that our history is an appalling one.

We were blind for too many decades to the grotesque betrayal of our founding principles, whether it came to slavery or Jim Crow

segregation.

But we have changed enormously.

And Americans today are ready

more than they ever have been to be post-racial, but the diversity czars on campus and in corporations are not willing to allow us to be such.

So, Heather, the one problem that you come across is we are divided now into camps.

And I believe there are actually three camps.

There are those on the right, a very small number, that want it their way or the highway, and they're not going to take any different.

And it's really a totalitarian kind of philosophy.

Then you have the Antiphon,

the leaders of postmodern thought that want to destroy the West.

But the third group is about, I think, about 70% of the American population.

And it includes independents, Democrats, and Republicans that don't really know what's going on, but they like capitalism.

They like the country.

they feel the same way, they might differ on policies, but they are not for all of this bullcrap.

Would you agree with that, or are there only two camps?

Well, 70%, I think, is optimistic.

I think that there are certainly people, very many people, who don't agree with that, but we're in a race against time.

You know, I still believe in the university's mission as it was originally conceived.

I believe in universities.

I think they should be the places where we're down on our knees in gratitude for the accomplishments of our civilization, for beauty and wisdom.

But it is the case that as we push more and more people to go to college, as they graduate and come out into the world, they are bearing this diversity virus with them and they are transforming the culture and they agree with the Do you send your kids to ⁇ I had Michael Reckinwald from NYU over the weekend on our podcast, and he said, don't, I wouldn't send my kids to college.

I wouldn't,

he said, I, fact, never thought I'd be the person saying this, homeschool.

I wouldn't put them in any school.

Yeah, I mean, we're going to have to get to homeschooling for college soon and recreate the practice of the aristocracy in the 18th and 19th centuries of a tutor, you know, that would take the child on the grand tour of Europe.

That would certainly be preferable to what we've got now.

The other thing, obviously, that

people, your listeners, have to do, Glenn, is do not even think about giving money to your alma mater unless you've given

done due diligence and can be confident that

it upholds the practice of disinterested, depoliticized study and is teaching students there the due gratitude that they owe their inheritance.

That's very hard to find.

I mean, there's not many colleges that you can be 100% confident about.

University of Dallas, the St.

John's campuses, Hillsdale,

but certainly

getting close.

Yeah.

At the very least, you know, it's hard to get parents to turn down the possibility of credentializing their child,

but

arm him before he arrives on campus and encourage him to not take the trendy courses, to try and find something that will immerse him in greatness and not

create in him either the anger, false anger, or the false sense of

guilt.

Because when a student steps on campus a day, all he hears about is toxic masculinity and white privilege.

Those are phony ideas

that are taking up precious opportunity

to learn something great instead of something debasing and false.

Heather McDonald, thank you so much for being on the program.

The name of the book is The Diversity: Delusion: How Race and Gender Panorama Corrupt the University and Undermine Our Culture.

It is absolutely happening.

She lays it out very, very clearly, along with the steps that you should take in your own life.

Thank you so much, Heather.

Appreciate it.

I'm thrilled to welcome a new sponsor to the program, Relief Factor.

Excuse me.

Relief Factor is

a pain reliever, if you will.

It actually works on

your

inflammation in your body.

Tanya and I both started taking this last year, I think around Christmas time, and I was just at the end of my rope.

I just, you know,

you get pain so bad where you're just like, I can't do it anymore, and you're willing to do anything.

I am, I've always been a guy, you know, better living through pharmaceuticals.

I think pharmaceuticals are killing us.

I think the painkillers we're being given by our doctor, I just think they're poison,

but I still have pain.

So, what am I going to do?

So, I started taking Relief Factor, and I am not kidding you.

I would not do these commercials if it didn't work for me.

Works for me, works for Tanya.

We take Relief Factor, we take it three times a day.

It's 100% drug-free, created by doctors.

It's all natural, blah, blah, blah.

But it helps your body fight against inflammation.

I want you to try it for three weeks.

If it doesn't work, just stop taking it.

You'll be out 20 bucks.

But if it works, you're in for a new life.

70% of people who order the three-week quick start order more.

That says a lot.

That was the key that I actually started taking it on.

I heard that and I'm like, all right, I'm going to give it a shot.

I did.

Three weeks later, I ordered more.

You want drug-free, natural way to ease your pain?

Go to relief factor.com.

Go there now.

ReliefFactor.com.

Pat Gray, fellow Texan.

Do you agree with my statement that if Ted Cruz is lo if Ted Cruz loses to Betto,

you know, Robert Francis,

that

Texas is not really Texas anymore.

Oh, yeah.

Absolutely.

It's shocking to me that this guy even has 5% in Texas.

Yeah, I know.

He should be, Ted should be 30, 40 points ahead of this guy.

He's the anti-Texas candidate.

He really is.

Against guns.

Police.

You know, against police.

Just universal health care.

He's for

socialism, borders, all of it.

I mean, it's just crazy.

It's crazy.

And you see the polls.

Do you believe the polls?

There was one poll that came out last week.

Yeah, that had him up by nine.

Right.

That had

Ted Cruz up by nine.

Yeah.

It may be that people are starting to hear him speak more, and now it's sinking in.

Now, we can't have this guy be.

Yeah, I don't care how dashing and cool he is.

I mean, I just think,

especially in Texas, somebody who goes on running for a Republican that is the darling of the media, that is that is on Ellen and

Jimmy Fallon and they're fawning over him and Hollywood loves him and doing fundraisers, you would think that Texans would be like, okay, all right.

No.

And I hope that's what's starting to happen.

They had a big debate on Friday.

I know.

And we're going to go over that and

show the rest of the world if Ted Cruz loses Texas,

I think we as a nation may have lost Texas, and that changes things dramatically.

Glenn Beck, Mercury.

Glenn Beck is coming live to talk about the right path forward and to make fun of the people standing in the way.

He might not be able to save the country, but at least we can all go down laughing.

Glenn Beck Live, the Addicted to Outrage tour, on tour this fall.

Glenn Beck.

Well, nothing says the patriarchy like Prospector Pete.

Am I right?

Right?

I mean, you think of, you know, well, I'm just going to go get some gold.

You think of that guy and you're like, oh, my gosh.

Oppression.

The hierarchy.

Patriarchy.

Living in a wood cabin in squalor in the mid-1800s, fighting every day to achieve the American dream just for the pan.

Well, I'm just looking for some gold, baby.

You can see how many people he oppressed.

Oh my gosh.

And Al Pos Prospector Pete, even though he's been dead for, you know, about 170 years, maybe,

you know, the old 49er is back at his old work.

He is

keeping kids on college campuses down.

They don't see the hard work and isolation that goes into being an American in the ultimate wilderness.

They don't see the possibilities of achieving a dream.

All they see is racism and genocide.

President Jane Close Connolly said in a statement to the university, as our diversity grew and more voices were heard, we came to know that the

1849 California gold rush was a time in history when the indigenous peoples of California endured subjugation, violence, and threats of genocide.

Today, the spirit of inclusity is reflected in our students, faculty, staff, staff, alumni, and community.

Today's beach is not connected to that area, to that era.

I will tell you this, they're so inclusive that they're going to get and push everybody who disagrees with them away and push them into a closet or maybe they can beat them, set them on fire, or put them in jail.

Recent resolution to the statue removed reads.

Multiple scholars have cited the California Prospectors, also known as the 49ers.

Don't even get me started because that football team, I'm going after that football team next, but also known as the 49ers, as culpable in violent and genocidal acts against the indigenous people of California.

Well,

I know.

I killed families, whole groups of families, using my little mining tin there in the water.

I used it as a deadly frisbee.

Prospectors in California perpetrated

colonialization, white supremacy, racism, and exclusion ideals not only against indigenous American communities, but also women, people of color, and dare I say it, non-Protestant communities.

The document reads like a neo-Marxist rant straight out of a sociology textbook.

Oh,

maybe that's because it is.

I talk about this in my book, Addicted to Outrage.

If you haven't gotten it yet, you must get it today.

It is the beginning of your starter course of understanding not only the world we're living in and the insanity that is going around us, but how to stop it.

This is one more example of postmodern social justice, and you cannot ignore it, and you cannot win if you're fighting the way we've been fighting.

You must understand what it is, what the goal is, what the desire is, what the desirable outcome, not only for the whole social justice movement but to get you personally to do once you understand that you're prepared to fight and win

but this is just another example of postmodern social justice changing everything we think we know about our world

well

yes

it's Monday September 24th this is the Glenn Beck program did you by any chance um hear the um the podcast that I released Saturday, Pat?

No.

Would you, if you have time today, spend the time and go back and listen to that podcast?

You can find it on iTunes or Stitcher or wherever you get podcasts.

And listen to it.

It's the Saturday podcast, episode three of the Glenbeck podcast.

It's Michael Rechtenwald.

He is a former NYU professor.

I listened to it twice over the weekend.

There was so much to learn from that.

And the scales fall off your eyes.

You're listening to him and you're like, this is a guy who was

part of the postmodern world.

He was teaching it up until recently.

And I can't remember.

It was one of the students seriously said that they were a

like a silver-winged dragonfly.

And that's what they wanted on their records.

That they were a silver-winged dragon or dragonfly, something like that.

And the other was a large and spacious building.

And you had to refer to them as a large and spacious building.

When you called on him in class?

Yes.

You can't call him Mr.

or Mrs.

He's a large and that is a large and spacious building.

Okay.

All right.

And

he just, he thought it was funny until he realized they were serious.

Then he tweeted it out, and the administration and all of his postmodern Marxist friends turned on him.

And he, he was a guy who used to write white papers for communists.

He was a published communist.

Wow.

And he has turned in record time and is now trying to ring the bell to anybody who will listen to him.

Please, if you haven't listened to the podcast from this weekend, please do episode number three, wherever you find podcast, Michael Reckinwald.

I'm guessing he doesn't work there anymore?

No, he doesn't work there anymore.

Wow.

Yeah, they actually put him on

a medical leave because they were very concerned about his mental health.

Oh, well, yeah, if you have a problem with somebody identifying as a silver-winged dragonfly, and you think that's unusual.

Right.

You've got to go.

Yeah, you've got to go.

You got to stay.

You're a hat.

You've got to get some rest.

Clearly, you're mentally unstable.

Right.

Isn't that crazy?

It's unbelievable.

It's crazy.

It's unbelievable.

So tell me about the Betto debate.

It happened on Friday.

Yeah.

Betto and Ted Cruz were debating.

Give me some of the highlights.

Some of the highlights to me were Cruz hitting Betto on his stance on police because he's so supportive of of

the kneeling at the NFL football games and

what that supposedly represents.

So Cruz was kind of hitting him on those because

there's not too many things more anti-Texan than going after police or the military.

And Betto seems to do that on a pretty regular basis.

So

this clip is Cruz talking about how offensive Betto has been with his police comments.

Let me say right now, I think it is offensive to call police officers modern-day Jim Crow.

That is not Texas.

That's your time, Senator.

Please, please, audience, please.

No applause.

What Senator Cruz said is simply untrue.

I did not call police officers modern-day Jim Crow.

And I, as well as Senator Cruz and everyone here, mourn the passing of Officer Hall in Fort Worth.

My uncle Raymond was a sheriff's deputy in El Paso.

In fact, he was the captain of the El Paso County Jail.

He's the one who with the tragic shooting death of Botham Jean.

You have another unarmed black man killed in this country by law enforcement.

Now, no member of law enforcement wants that to happen.

No member of this community wants that to happen.

But we've got to do something better than what we've been doing so far.

If African Americans represent 13%

of the population in this country, that they represent one-third of those who are shot by law enforcement, we have something wrong.

If If we have the largest prison population on the face of the planet and it is disproportionately comprised of people of color, we have something wrong in this country.

Republicans and Democrats should be able to work together with how would you fix it?

Notice he doesn't say blacks in prison, he says people of color.

Yeah, because a new study came out and showed this weekend that our

prisons are

made up a great deal by illegal immigrants.

Yes, Hispanic, illegal immigrants.

Right.

Not Irish, like Betto.

Not Irish.

No.

Yeah.

So you have to say people of color

if you want a comment like that to be anywhere close to accurate.

So did he say?

He said he, in the context of what he was saying, he kind of said that.

But of course, he denies that he was talking about the police.

But everybody knows when you look

at his statement in context, yeah, he kind of did compare the police to Jim Crow laws and talked about how we're still going through Jim Crow today.

It's just as bad today as it was back in the gym.

That is so offensive

to say

to police, but also to the African-American community.

That is not true.

Not at all.

To compare what people are going through today,

even in the worst sections, to compare it to today, to the 1940s or 30s, Jim Crow laws, even the 50s or 60s, 60s, it's not even close.

Yeah, and that's kind of what Cruz was saying,

told Betto in this clip how irresponsible it is that he's saying that about police.

I believe everyone's rights should be protected, regardless of your race, regardless of your ethnicity.

But I'll tell you something.

I've been to too many police funerals.

I was here in Dallas when five police officers were gunned down because of irresponsible and hateful rhetoric.

I was at the funeral in Houston at Second Baptist Church where Deputy Goforth had been shot in the back of the head at a service station because of irresponsible and hateful rhetoric.

Just now, Congressman O'Rourke repeated things he knows aren't true.

He stated, for example, white police officers are shooting unarmed African-American children.

The Washington Post fact-checked that claim and conclude Congressman O'Rourke was wrong.

But I'll tell you something, that rhetoric does damage.

That rhetoric divides us on race, it inflames hatred.

We should be bringing people together.

So here's the problem.

You can hear it between the two of them.

If you're just looking for a guy you like,

Peto's likable.

He just seems likable.

When you listen to Ted, he sounds like he's a politician.

That's the problem with Ted Cruz.

Has been the problem with Ted Cruz for a while.

I hope to God we are not the society in Texas, at least, that is doing a personality.

Well, I just like him.

I don't know.

He's just, he just, he sounds like me.

I don't care if they sound like me.

I know.

I know.

We're looking for somebody who will get things done in Washington that we want them to do.

We're looking for people who share our principles and values.

I'm looking for somebody to stand by the Constitution.

Yeah, please.

That's all I want.

That would be nice.

And Ted Cruz does that, and we all know it.

Even the Houston Chronicle, though,

said that Cruz won this debate.

Now, they kind of claim that Betto was more likable, likable, as you just said, but Cruz drew more blood, as they put it.

In this knife fight, Cruz drew more blood.

And

we've got one other clip here about Betto talking about the unarmed black men.

The tragic shooting death of Botham Jean.

You have another unarmed black man killed in this country by law enforcement.

Now, no member of law enforcement wants that to happen.

No member of this community wants that to happen.

But we've got to do something better than what we've been doing so far.

If African Americans represent 13%

of the population in this country, that they represent one-third of those who are shot by law enforcement, we have something wrong.

If we have the largest prison population,

so here's the amazing thing.

That wasn't an act of law enforcement.

It wasn't.

That was a woman who happened to work as a police officer, coming home, being in the wrong place, and shooting somebody.

That's a strange story.

It is a strange story.

It's a bad story.

I don't think it looks good to me.

She's also been charged with manslaughter.

Right.

So it's not like she's getting away with it.

She's not getting away with it.

And it was not in

her daily job.

I don't know what happened to her.

I don't know what was going on in her mind at that time.

She walks into

an apartment.

She thinks is her.

There's some guy.

She says, you know, stop talking, stop moving around.

What are you doing?

She pulls out her gun and shoots him.

That's horrible.

horrible for

anybody.

But she wasn't acting as a police officer.

She was acting as a citizen at that point.

And

she was wrong.

And she should go to jail.

I mean, just based on what I hear, it does sound like manslaughter.

So she's being charged with manslaughter.

What else should we be doing?

That's exactly what should be happening.

I want to talk to you a little bit about cryptocurrency.

Tika Tiwari from

the Palm Beach master course, the crypto master course,

he's a guy who we've been listening to about cryptocurrency.

And I have to tell you,

I don't know what's happening with the economy.

I mean, Pat, you just saw a story that I saw yesterday.

They're saying that in the next few months, they think the next recession is going to be a depression deeper than the Great Depression.

I think that's probably true.

I don't know what's going to be the straw that breaks the camel's back.

We're just in the longest period of recovery ever, and it's insanity what's happening.

And we're also in the biggest debt situation we've ever been in.

I don't mean just the country, you know, as a whole.

I mean individuals, individuals, too.

Bitcoin, they're talking now about the dollar just taking a free fall.

I don't know.

I have no idea.

But I do know this.

The dollar in 1964, 65 was

for a $10 bill would buy you about $80 worth of stuff today.

$10 bill.

What happened?

We devalued our money.

That's a hidden tax.

Bitcoin.

I want you to find out all about Bitcoin.

I don't know what the future holds, but I think it's insanity for somebody to not have at least a hundred dollars in bitcoin but you need to learn about it first go to smartcrypto course calm find out about bitcoin and and blockchain and and cryptocurrency in general to find out why this is a game changer 877 pbl back 877 pbl back or go to smartcrypto course.com

So going out on the road for the book tour, you can go to Glennbeck.com slash tour or glenbeck.com addicted to outrage.

And you can find the tour dates.

The 25th of October, I'm going to be in San Antonio.

Then the next night in Houston, and the night after that, here in Dallas at the Majestic Theater.

Get your tickets now.

You can find them at glennbeck.com slash tour.

But then we go to Richmond, Hershey, Pennsylvania, Pittsburgh, Cleveland.

Excited to be up in Cleveland, where I think they just found the next president of the United States.

Baker Mayfield?

Yeah, I think so.

Yes.

I think so.

Yes.

Was that not?

I mean, I'm not a sports fan.

That was incredible.

Oh, it was great.

That was incredible.

Except for those costumes that they wear.

I don't like their costumes.

The uniform?

Yeah.

Yeah.

Sure.

Yeah.

Yes.

Those costumes.

Yeah.

Those costumes.

Anyway, that's November 4th in Cleveland.

We'll have costume talk, Cleveland.

November 13th, Kansas City.

November 14th, Evansville, Indiana.

Then Tulsa, Oklahoma, Tampa, Florida, and Orlando, Florida on December 1st.

We cannot wait to see you.

Make sure you get your tickets now at glenbeck.com slash tour.

You should come with us on

the first leg all through Texas.

I think we're just going to do a bus.

Yeah, it'll be fun.

So you're just going to bus to San Antonio, then to Houston, then back to Dallas?

Yeah.

Yeah.

It'll be fun.

Yeah.

It'll be fun.

Texas is a great place to see a show, and we invite you to come.

And

it's going to be a lot of fun.

Join us.

Have you never seen one of our live shows?

I haven't done one.

It's been a while, six, seven years, probably.

Probably longer than that, isn't it?

I don't think I did anything since.

Maybe 2010.

Yeah, maybe 2010.

So join us.

It will be interesting.

And by the way, my apologies.

My apologies to one man

because

I know he is hounded everywhere he goes.

And everywhere, everywhere Colonel Sanders goes, they're like,

he looks just like Glenn Beck.

And

I feel sorry for him.

Yeah.

I feel sorry for him.

Yeah, apologies to Colonel Sanders.

Everywhere I go, I'm like,

it's like Colonel.

Is that Colonel Sanders?

No.

No.

Colonel Sanders has been dead for a long time.

A long time.

I know that kind of, you know,

we know that.

We thought maybe that was you.

All right.

We have still yet to come.

We have,

I want to talk to you about the

some of the some of the things that are happening all around the country.

I want to show you how crazy the elections have gotten around the country.

And I want to make one stop in Arizona with Dr.

David Brill.

Have you seen this story yet?

This is amazing.

I think I have a different take on this than most people.

So he has six brothers and sisters,

Paul Gosar, who's running against Brill.

He has six brothers and sisters, and this race or

this commercial opens up with them saying, you know, he would care about health care if he wanted to really save the country.

Oh, well, he'd take guns off the streets if he would really care about the country.

He would do all these things.

And then they introduce themselves.

And they're all brothers and sisters of

Paul Gosar.

Yeah.

and so it's a campaign ad for his opponent.

Yeah, they're saying, no, vote for my brother.

Six of his ten siblings got together and did this campaign against him.

Now, mom has commented, and mom says she is crushed by

that these six have done this to their brother.

Can you imagine that?

Kind of shows how ugly things have gotten, doesn't it?

I think families turning against themselves?

Not since the 1860s.

Yeah.

I don't think this has happened since the 1860s.

You know, you wonder how, you know, the Civil War had people in families.

Some would fight with the North, some would fight with the South.

And they were killing each other, literally killing each other.

I don't think I've seen this since then, but I have a perspective on this that I want to share with you because I think it actually backfires on Brill.

And I'd love to get your thoughts on it.

Next.

All right.

There's an ad in Arizona that has come out against a Republican, Paul Gosar,

and it is a Democratic ad.

And can we play the ad, please?

I want you to listen carefully.

Paul Gosar, the congressman, isn't doing anything to help rural America.

Paul's absolutely not working for his district.

If they care about health care, they care about their children's health care.

They would hold him to account.

If they care about jobs, they would hold him to account.

If he actually cared about people in rural Arizona, I bet he'd be fighting for Social Security, for better access to health care.

I bet he would be researching what is the most insightful water policy to help the environment of Arizona sustain itself and be successful.

And he's not listening to you and he doesn't have your interests at heart.

My name is Tim Gosar.

David Gosar.

Grace Gosar.

Joan Gosar.

Gaston Gosar.

Jennifer Gosar.

Paul Gosar is my brother, my brother.

And I endorse Dr.

Brill.

Dr.

Brill wholeheartedly endorsed Dr.

David Brill for Congress.

Jeez.

Wow.

What's your initial reaction?

It's ugliness.

It's

of course it's the typical tactic that if he cared about things, he would go about them exactly the way I think he should.

Yes.

Rather than there's another way to do this.

There's another way to care about people.

There's a completely different way,

another path to our goals.

One of them was talking about the environment.

I mean,

I mean, how many times have we heard this in our own families?

Somebody like that.

And she was talking about, you know, if he really cared about the environment in Arizona, I don't think that that's Arizona that she's sitting in.

That looked an awful lot to me like Colorado.

And so I don't, I don't,

I don't think she was sitting in Arizona.

But

beside the fact, I think this is going to play the opposite way.

Because I think

maybe

I'm old-fashioned and I just don't know anymore.

I think there's a lot of us who have put up with this in our own family or our own in-laws in-laws for quite some time.

You know, we all have either family or in-laws who are those pretentious,

holier-than-thou

liberals that talk down to us, treat us like garbage.

I mean, I remember I had a

I had a situation

in my in-law family where

it was during the Reagan administration.

So it was not your current in-law family.

No, no.

It was a previous administration.

And

we didn't need to go into this path.

But it was during the Reagan administration.

And

she was just going on and on and on and on about Ronald Reagan and how evil he was and how could you vote for him.

And

I'm trying to be nice.

And I'm like, look, you know,

I got to the point where I said, you know,

this is my house.

Stop.

Stop right now.

You're a guest in my home.

Stop it right now.

No.

And I think people have been in those situations where,

you know, the family disagrees and there's this split and it's really sad.

And I, for one, this would make me want to vote for him.

Gosar.

I would, I would actually look at that and go, oh, dear God, brother.

You've got, I know what your, I know what your whole life has been like.

Yeah.

I know what you're doing.

What a nightmare your Thanksgiving gatherings once.

Oh, Oh, my gosh.

And the fact that mom came out and spoke against the siblings that did this.

I mean, when mom comes out and says, I'm ashamed and I'm heartbroken that they would do this, that's saying something.

I mean, how can I hold them up to be, oh, the great moral standard, really?

You've just broken your mother's heart.

Is there anything worse that you can do?

And he's handled it pretty well, actually.

He just said, you know, I love my brothers and sisters, but they're big anti-trump people

that's a pretty calm pretty reasoned measured response to what they're doing to him when you put your your politics over your family yeah it's ugly and over your mother that is i just i don't even know what to say My sisters don't all agree with everything that I say.

My one sister, she's a hippie and

she's not actually, but she doesn't, you know, she doesn't agree with everything I say.

I don't agree with everything she says.

We get along, you know,

and if we didn't,

I can't imagine.

But if you ran for office, she certainly wouldn't campaign against you.

No.

No.

It's one thing to say, look, you don't know my brother.

My brother is a hothead nightmare, whatever.

Yeah.

Okay.

My brother has secrets in his past, and we as a family want you to know.

That's one thing.

That's one thing.

But when you just disagree ideologically.

What difference than

what makes your opinion more important?

You're playing on the family name.

That's just

wrong.

Yeah.

Just wrong.

And I, again, I don't know.

I think that they are going to.

You think people will go the opposite direction

because of that ad?

It'll backfire on them.

You don't?

I don't know.

I don't know.

Things are so contentious, and we're such

team choosers now.

And if you're on one team, you just

can't support the other team, no matter what.

So I don't know.

I hope so.

So what's it going to be?

Somebody asked me this last week.

They said, okay, so

your thesis is that we're addicted to outrage.

Yes, we are.

And we're addicted to politics and we just can't.

I mean, we'll betray our families.

We'll betray our families for our politics.

There's no reason in that.

I mean, you know, that's just, that's just blind

rage on what's happening.

And we both feel it.

They said, so what's the bottom?

Because everybody has to hit a bottom.

And I said, I don't know.

I don't know.

I don't know what the bottom is because the bottom, the bottom that we're headed for is a crash of biblical proportions you know yeah it's this it's this financial wreckage that is just going to leave all of us blind and when that happens I don't think we wake up I think we go deeper I think we I think we're we are then the people saying no no no no I need a handout I need I need the government I need the government so too I don't think we I think if we don't hit bottom before a crash when we do crash we destroy it all

and you know, we're in this area of nastiness to each other.

Like, you know, over the weekend, you tweeted out a legitimate question to

Alyssa Milano.

You asked her a genuine question.

Yeah.

And she came back with nothing but snarkiness.

They just, it can't be.

Well, here's what.

So

she had posted something along the lines that, let me see, here it is.

Let me see if I can go back to her original tweet.

Because wasn't she,

it was about the Kavanaugh thing, right?

Yeah, and she said, you know, she fully believes him.

I fully believe her.

The accuser.

Right.

I fully believe her.

I fully believe her.

Yeah.

And so I tweeted, why?

I ask this with all sincerity and do not wish to fight as I do want the bad guys to go to jail and my daughters never to face this.

But I don't want my son or my daughters to live in a world without reason or evidence.

That world is why many innocent blacks have gone to prison.

That's great.

Reasonable.

What's wrong with that?

Yeah.

So she writes, so Glenn Beck, you want prison reform and an FBI investigation of Kavanaugh.

Starting to sound like a progressive.

Welcome to the resistance.

No, no, that's not what I said.

And you didn't answer the question.

So I wrote back,

why respond to a sincere inquiry with a red meat response?

I do think prison reform is needed, and I have for many years.

Please respond sincerely.

I am for, I should say, I am neither for or against Kavanaugh.

I am for truth, justice, and decency.

If the roles would reverse,

would your position reverse as well?

The roles have reversed.

We've got

a clear indication of that already with Keith Ellison.

They don't believe anything that the accuser says.

5% of Democrats believe the accuser in the case of Keith Ellison.

Why?

Because he's a Democrat.

Brett Kavanaugh is a Republican, so they wholeheartedly believe his accuser.

But she has, when it comes to Keith Ellison, she has evidence.

Yeah.

She has witnesses.

She has people that have corroborated what she has said.

Correct.

She has her, I think it's her son that has corroborated it.

She has text messages.

She has emails.

She has a video.

She has all of it.

Yeah.

And

they don't believe her.

And these two accusers have nothing.

I mean, it's just, it's amazing.

It's really hard to stay calm,

but we have to, we have to be the reasonable ones where the others who are starting to wake up say, I don't want to be with those people because those people are, those people are jerks.

Those people don't make any sense.

They're mean.

They're angry.

I want to be over with these people.

And I don't know how many people we can get, but

if we don't start to

develop a group where decent people can gather, be safe from all of this insanity, not slash each other's throat, not be about vindictiveness and venom, but be about reason and truth and science.

If we can be those people,

we're the ones remaining standing because the other two sides will kill each other.

They'll kill each other, and we will be the place that everyone will run to.

I'm anxious to see if Alyssa Blatt can truthfully answer my question.

All right, my Patriot supply.

Hurricanes, earthquakes, cyber warfare.

Every American should have a plan to get through an emergency.

My gosh, it was horrible here this weekend.

Were you here this weekend with the rain?

Yeah.

I mean, everything was shut down.

It was crazy rain, unlike my family has ever seen.

I was stuck in L.A.

LA because they canceled all the flights for a day.

And my wife said it started, and within a couple of hours, the pool, which usually has, you know, a good foot from the top, she said it overflowed.

Was it the same in your house?

No, we've got an automatic thing.

It kind of expels the

automatic.

Excuse me, Mr.

Heisenberg.

Starting.

Yeah.

It's just, it was

crazy.

Anyway, no matter what the natural disaster is, hurricane or fires, the government response and repair to infrastructure can be very slow.

And

it happened in

Puerto Rico for a reason.

We already had three massive emergencies that the government had to respond to.

By Christmas of last year, they said, we're out.

You're going to have to handle it.

The next emergency, you're going to have to handle.

Please.

Go to my Patriot Supply for food storage.

It's easy to have a four-week emergency food kit.

You'll save $100 when you go to this website, preparewithglen.com.

That's preparewickglenn.com.

Four-week food kits ship fresh, discreetly to your door.

Do it now.

Order right now and save $100 per kit on the bestseller this week, 800-200-7163.

800-200-7163 or online at preparewickglenn.com.

Whatever this world cooks up, you'll know with this food, you're prepared.

Preparewithglenn.com, 800-200-71-63.

Glenn Beck.

Look at this.

A response to my tweet from Wake Me Up

Once Trump Has Been Impeached.

So you know it's coming from

an open-minded source.

Right.

Melissa Milano, Glenn Beck is not for truth or justice.

A few minutes ago on his radio show, he just compared Brett Kavanaugh to Emmett Till.

Did I do that?

No.

Did you do that?

No, you did not.

I did not.

No, that's disgusting.

A young black kid accused of rape and brutally killed because of racism and fear.

Not comparable.

Wait a minute.

Hold it.

Wait, I didn't compare and I don't compare.

But you're saying Emmett Till, a young black kid accused of rape and brutally killed because of racism and fear.

Well, this is an older white guy that is also being accused basically of rape and his career is being killed.

Now, yes, it's not the same,

and I'm not comparing them, but they're both accused of rape.

And in the Emmett Till, this is where I did draw the comparison.

Whenever we just listen to

a popular voice or the voice that is convenient, in this case with Emmett Till, it was a white woman.

And the white woman was part of the power and she was part of the, you know,

the system down in the south.

They listened to her.

Do we have time, Sarah, to play Emmett Till's mother?

This is what she said right after

they killed and

they're trying to find the

people that were responsible.

And the accuser, a white woman, comes out and says he

tried to touch me and he put his arms around my waist and

said nasty things to me.

His mother said that wasn't true, but everyone was listening to the white woman who had no evidence, just her word.

Listen to what Emmett Till's mother said.

It's my opinion that the guilt begins with Mrs.

Bryant, and I want to see Mrs.

Bryant punished, her husband, and any other persons that were in on this thing.

And I feel like the pressure should start from the President of the United States and be channeled all the way down to the township of Money, Mississippi.

And I'm certainly of the opinion that inasmuch as my son had to die, that I don't want his death to be a vain thing.

If it can further the cause of freedom, then I will say that he died a hero.

Further the cause of freedom.

So what is she saying?

It would be, he would die then

a just death if he furthered the cause of freedom.

Well, if you want to see what further the cause of freedom,

look at all of the facts, Take emotion out of it.

Take your own political agenda, no matter what it is, out of it.

Look at the facts.

Don't just take one voice of an accuser and put more stock into that accuser's voice because she's either saying the things that you like or want to hear.

Or she's standing up against somebody that you don't like.

That's not justice.

If we are going to say that Emmett Till died for a reason, we must then look at facts of every case.

Glenn, back.

Mercury.