'What If'? - 7/2/18

The Blaze Radio Network

on demand.

Glad back.

You'll be very happy to hear that Chelsea Handler does not think about having that baby.

Chelsea Handler is not a mom and apparently is very excited about that fact.

She had two abortions many years ago and she never thinks, God, I wish I had that baby.

Now, you may be

with me and the rest of America in thinking that you also are happy that she is not around any children.

And that would be an understandable instinct.

However, that's not where I want to take this today.

I would rather go to the idea that, you know, we're in a world where There's a lot of important decisions about to be made.

We have a Supreme Court opening.

July 9th is the day, which is a week from today.

You can't release big news like that on July 4th week.

Everyone's on vacation.

The justice will be named on July 9th.

And

it will be a big

decision because we are looking at potentially the future of many huge cases.

And I know.

That that has certainly been covered.

With Chelsea Handler, I think you have the situation where she's saying, God,

I never think, God, I wish I had that baby.

You know,

the sad thing there is, and she had two abortions in a year.

The sad thing is, you know, the baby doesn't really get a chance to decide that one for themselves.

Wouldn't have minded them weighing in on that one, but they don't get that chance.

And it's sort of part of this

left-wing fear-mongering about what's going to happen with this court going forward.

Now, first of all, there's

a lot of steps to go through before you get to a Roe versus Wade being overturned.

There is a long distance from here to there.

The map, there's not a straight line there.

You're going to need massive GPS to find it.

It's going to be hard.

I mean, the reason why Roe versus Wade wasn't overturned before is because Ronald Reagan picked a justice that didn't go the right way on it.

That's how hard this is to do.

Once you get Roe versus Wade overturned, what happens?

Well, some states will probably ban abortion.

However, it will not be the majority of states, most likely.

And it will still leave abortion legal in the majority of states, which with a little travel, anyone can get one.

We're getting massive fear-mongering, however, from the left.

Jeffrey Toobin has really lost it on this one.

He's on CNN all the time.

He writes

that there will be massive problems here.

It will overrule, if the court goes to the conservative direction here that we expect, it will overrule Roe v.

Wade, allowing states to ban abortions and to criminally prosecute any physicians and nurses who perform them.

It will allow shopkeepers, restaurateurs, and hotel owners to

refuse service to gay customers on religious grounds.

It will guarantee that fewer African-American and Latino students attend elite universities.

Think of the way you have to spin these things to make them sound this way.

I mean,

yes, banning abortion could be an outcome in some states.

It will still be legal in other states

unless we get some constitutional amendment.

Not to mention, even if we got a constitutional amendment, it would be legal in many other places.

Beyond that, you have

it will allow shopkeepers, restaurateurs, and hotel owners to refuse service to gay customers on religious grounds.

There is no evidence

to support that.

We all know what the Masterpiece cake shop case was about, and it was not about just

saying no to gay customers because they walk in.

It will guarantee that fewer African-American and Latino students attend elite universities.

Well, that's, you know, you're talking about affirmative action there, which is a law

to put people into college based on the color of their skin.

How can anyone defend that?

I mean, think about that with another color.

Think of how indefensible it would be if you said, oh, you know what?

We're going to make laws that make more white students go, even if they don't deserve it.

You may think that that's coming, but it's certainly not part of the law.

Not to mention, ask Asian Americans how they feel about that particular concept, because they have been, and

this just came out, I think, last week, in which Asian students should be 43%

of the student base at Harvard, and instead they are 15%

because of affirmative action.

They don't want to have too many Asians.

But that's apparently okay.

It will also mean the Second Amendment will prohibit states from engaging in gun control,

including the regulation of machine guns and bump stocks.

Really?

All of this is going to happen.

All of this is going to happen at any moment.

And I think we've lost sight as to what the world actually thinks about abortion.

We get this idea from our media that everywhere else in the world, this is an obvious thing.

That women should be able to walk into any equivalent of 7-Eleven and have an abortion on demand.

And that is not at all how the world looks at this.

Now, in America, where they say that

we are too restrictive on abortion,

we have

unlimited access to abortion pretty much at any time in Washington, New Jersey, New Mexico, Colorado, Vermont, New Hampshire, Alaska, and Washington, D.C.

Pretty much free fall.

Really no restrictions on it.

Now, the other 43 states restrict abortion after a certain point in pregnancy, which the left seems to think is completely oppressive to women.

Three states, Virginia, South Carolina, and Iowa, prohibit abortion after the 28th week.

Think about the oppression there.

Think about it.

You've only got seven months to figure out what to do.

That is, wow, incredibly restrictive, guys.

I mean, now, it gets worse.

20 different states prohibit abortion at the point of viability, which is around the 24th week.

Six months?

Six months does not seem long enough to figure out how to pull the trigger on that pregnancy, in almost a literal sense.

11 states prohibit abortion after the 20th week of pregnancy.

And as a blanket rule, abortions are legal in every single state before a pregnancy has reached its 20th week.

Again, we're talking about five months here.

Five months.

I know that's really oppressive,

and it may seem incredibly oppressive to you.

But a lot of pro-choice people actually think that women in America are shackled with

reproductive slavery.

So let's look around the world for a second here because we're seeing, we're told that this is such a backwards hellhole when it comes to women's rights.

Now, you can find your abortion paradise in a place like China where abortion is not only legal at any point in the pregnancy, but is also encouraged and quite frequently required.

A lot of times there's a little forcing, enforcing that one against your will, but no one's going to hold China up as an example.

So let's look to Europe.

Abortion is legal in England up to 24 weeks, but there is no time limit if there is substantial risk to the women's life or massive problems with the pregnancy.

Netherlands mandates a five-day waiting period between the initial consultation and the abortion.

Mandates a five-day waiting period.

Clinics must provide women with information about abortion alternatives, and only after all of that is abortion legal to the 24th week.

That means England and the Netherlands are more restrictive than 10 states in America.

Socialist Sweden allows abortions until the 18th week of pregnancy and bans most after the 22nd week.

In the four-week gray period, a woman can get an abortion only if it's approved by the National Board of Health and Welfare.

You imagine demanding women go to a national board of health and welfare to get their abortion approved?

In Spain, abortion is legal in the first 14 weeks of a woman's pregnancy, but allows abortion up to 22 weeks in cases of fetal deformities.

In Denmark, abortion is available on demand up to 12 weeks of pregnancy.

Much more restrictive than us.

Afterward, exceptions are made for cases of rape, threats to the woman's physical or mental health, risk of fetal defects, and cases where the woman can demonstrate a lack of financial resources to care for the child.

Can you imagine in America asking a woman to say, oh, prove that you're too poor for this kid to the government?

Can you imagine how the left would react to that?

In Germany, abortions after the 12th week are completely banned

except in cases of serious threat to the mother's physical or mental health.

Women who want a first trimester abortion, a first trimester abortion, that's the thing that Roe v.

Wade guaranteed

you'd have access to.

They are subject to a mandatory three-day waiting period and a counseling session.

That means that Germany, Germany, is more restrictive than almost all of the United States, including Utah.

Abortion in Belgium is legal until 12 weeks after conception and is required for women to have six days of counseling prior to the abortion.

God made the universe in six days.

It's a long time.

In Fashion Forward France,

abortion is also legal.

only up to 12 weeks.

In Finland, abortion is available up to 12 weeks of pregnancy if

a woman can provide a social reason for seeking to terminate her pregnancy, such as poverty, extreme distress, or already having at least four children, which, if you're a fifth child right now, you realize really sucks.

Like, ah, you can't really deal with a fifth one.

In Italy, a woman has 90 days from the date of conception to request, request, request an abortion.

Under the law, the termination must be due to health, economic, social, or family reasons.

In Switzerland, abortion is legal up to 12 weeks.

If, if,

if a woman files a written request stating that she is in a situation of distress, then the doctor has to give her a comprehensive information about the procedure,

then the doctor has to discuss the decision with her in detail,

then the doctor has to give her an information sheet with the addresses of counseling services where she can get moral and material help and be informed about adoption.

Switzerland.

In Portugal, a woman can only get an abortion up to the 10th week after a mandated three-day waiting period.

Abortion is illegal in Poland, except for cases of rape, fetal malformation, or serious threats to the woman's health.

Andorra allows abortion only in cases where it is necessary to save the life of the pregnant woman.

And abortion is entirely prohibited in Malta.

Do not go to Malta for your abortion.

Or Liechtenstein also bans it as well.

How many states in America have banned abortion entirely?

If I remember correctly, the answer to that is zero.

We act as if the rest of the world has embraced this, where we really are on the other side of it.

The most abortion-friendly countries in Europe are more strict than almost all of America.

The most restrictive countries in Europe are tougher on abortion than all, all of America.

And Europe is supposed to be more enlightened than the United States.

We're told that over over and over and over again.

And maybe the truth is, for this particular topic, they actually are.

Glenn Beck.

It's Stu in for Glenn Beck, who's on vacation.

I mean, on the day where Dunkin Donuts has talked about releasing Donut Fries.

So, I mean, he's always out when the big stories happen.

But hopefully, he'll be back next week, and he can taste test them for you.

Susan Collins was on CNN.

And if you think Roe vs.

Wade is getting overturned and a justice is going to skate through,

Susan Collins got a lot to say about that.

Collins and Murkowski are two pro-choice Republicans.

And that word, if you couldn't hear it through the radio, had massive air quotes all over it.

About 65 pairs of air quotes around the term Republican when I talked about Susan Collins and Lisa Murkowski.

However, she was on CNN to talk about

whether she will vote for a Supreme Court justice that may overturn Roe versus Wade.

Listen.

There's a big difference between overturning some precedents such as Plessy versus Ferguson, which was overturned in the school desegregation case of Brown versus the Board of Education versus overturning a ruling that has been settled law for 46 years, 45 years,

and it involves a constitutional right and has been reaffirmed by the court 26 years ago.

Indeed, Justice Roberts has made very clear that he considers Roe v.

Wade to be settled law.

I would not support a nominee who demonstrated hostility to Roe v.

Wade

because that would mean to me that their judicial philosophy did not include a respect for established decisions, established law.

This line of thinking is insane to me.

I mean, their job is to go in there and examine the law as it relates to the Constitution.

Of course you should overturn laws that are unconstitutional.

Of course you should.

Of course you should.

That is your job.

You know, I mean, there is this bizarre argument that Roe versus Wade has some sort of immunity against

as opposed to every other case.

Every liberal in the world will tell you you got to overturn Citizens United, which was the case that allowed people to spend money

with their own political opinions.

The exact thing the First Amendment was designed to protect.

I got to overturn that next week.

But Roe versus Wade is settled law.

It's settled law.

There's this argument that goes back and forth between the left and the right, where the left says, Yeah, there's a living constitution, and the right says, Well, I'm an originalist.

I'm a textualist.

I want to look at what was there in the documents.

And sometimes there are arguments that are passionate on both sides, but one is right and the other one's really dumb.

That's where we find ourselves with the Supreme Court.

One side is saying, Hey, you know how it's our job to protect the Constitution and make sure the things that go on in this country are constitutional?

I say we do that by looking at the document and doing the things it says

inside of it.

Look at the words, read the words and have that inform

what we do.

And the other side saying, you know, I don't like that law all that much.

Let's change it.

Or I wish the law said this, so let's put it in there.

Or, you know, that one makes me feel bad.

Let's show some empathy and change the thing around.

Or, you know, if I were to design a society, it would be more like this country or that country.

Let's do that here

by edict.

That is not the way the Supreme Court is supposed to react.

It's not the way they're supposed to operate.

You know, Susan Collins,

it's hard to tell.

There's a split here between people who say, look, she voted for Gorsuch.

She's giving lip service here to the idea that she would oppose a Trump nominee because of her Roe versus Wade stance.

And when it comes down to it, she's going to be fine.

She's going to vote for it.

They need these votes.

They need pretty much every one of them.

So someone like Susan Collins can probably go a long way in stopping this.

There's going to be a lot of pressure on red state Democrats to vote for this nominee.

It's going to be very difficult, but I would not be surprised if none of them come along.

The Democrats tend to be able to keep their flock in one straight line.

The other thought here is she's saying,

you know, maybe she's just saying, I am not going to vote for someone who comes in here and outwardly opposes abortion.

I mean, there's really not a lot of examples of this.

There's a couple justices on the list that have spoken outwardly about how they would rule on that case or have

given opinions on this.

You know, one of the speculations is Mike Lee might be off the board because Lee has obviously spoken, he did so

on the show the other day, about what a poor legal decision Roe versus Wade was.

Will she vote for someone who has been that outspoken about their opposition to Roe versus Wade?

And that's a question that's open.

The other thought is she's going to oppose

anyone

because she does not want Roe versus Wade to be overturned.

So unless she really believes it's not going to be overturned, she's going to vote against them and it's going to make it almost impossible to get somebody through.

That being said, the map sets up very nicely for Republicans in the Senate in November, so it may not be an issue.

We'll have more on this coming up.

It's Stu Infor Glenbeck on the Glenn Beck program.

It's Stu in for Glenn Beck here on the Glenn Beck program.

He's on vacation this week.

We have Pat and Stu, reunion tour coming up tomorrow, as well as Thursday.

Pat Gray will be hosting on Friday.

Good week of shows this week for you.

And then Glenn returns on Monday.

If you think the Supreme Court isn't that big of a deal, you may remember the horrible decision.

made by Chief Justice John Roberts on,

well, really not once, but twice on Obamacare, leaving Obamacare in place.

And we're getting updates now on how that's going for everybody, which is really good.

If you're one of these people who was skeptical on Obama, maybe you thought you weren't going to keep your doctor?

Or are you going to be surprised?

Because this is going really well.

In 2009, the Obama administration authorized $30 billion in financial incentives.

to encourage the adoption of electronic health records and everything from large teaching hospitals to solo practices.

due to the administration

the administrative requirements 40% of the providers who participated were penalized in 2016 for failing to hit the meaningful use targets the administrative was for the administrative requirements were such a nightmare Congress created a mass escape hatch in 2017 according to the Hill

electronic data security has turned out to be another lie a 2017 Accenture survey estimated that 26%

of all Americans had their personal medical data stolen from electronic medical record systems.

Half of those people, half of those people ended up as victims of medical identity theft.

On average, victims suffered a $2,500 loss in each incident.

Now, I do remember the Obama administration telling us that we were going to save $2,500

when Obamacare was passed.

Is it possible they just wanted to save us from the burden of having to spend that $2,500?

Is that possible?

I think we should at least entertain the possibility.

But I mean, $2,500 per incident and half of the people, that's what, 13% of Americans?

In 2015, more than 100 million patient records were stolen.

But this is where it gets really good.

If you thought, and those are mistakes, right?

You have a new program, you want everyone to participate in

40% blow it and you have to pass an escape hatch.

Okay, there's a little problem there.

Sure, 26% of all Americans had their medical information stolen and half of those had identity theft issues that suffered an average of $2,500 per incident.

Sure, but those are mistakes.

Here's the design of Obamacare, and this is where it gets really good.

When the Obama administration restructured private individual insurance, it created bloated policies that people were not voluntarily purchasing.

So you're forcing people to buy these things they don't want.

To me, completely unconstitutional.

For some reason, John Roberts disagreeing with that one.

Not counting the money spent on state and federal exchanges, the federal government spent $341 billion.

from 2014 through 2016 on subsidizing individual coverage so that people would buy it.

So again, you create this really crappy product that people don't want to buy.

You force them legally to make them buy it.

Of course, they don't want to pay that price or they can't afford that price.

So you take money from evil rich people and you give it to the insurance companies to subsidize the cost of these insurance policies.

The cost, again, $341 billion from 2014 to 2016.

All of this spending managed to increase private coverage by

1.7 million people, slightly less than half of the natural increase in the civilian labor force.

So, again,

half of the natural increase was the amount of people that we actually increased coverage for and the private market.

The cost per person,

$200,000.

We insured people at a rate of $200,000 per person.

The feds could have saved money by closing the exchanges and giving people who qualified for subsidies a check for $50,000 for each of the three years.

Those people could have then spent $20,000 for their own unsubsidized policy and use the rest to either cover out-of-pocket costs or buy a nice used car.

$200,000 per person.

And this is the case over and over and over again with these bloated government policies.

And, you know, look,

the point where the Supreme Court shouldn't step in and say, hey, you know, look, this is a bad policy.

There is a policy out there.

There's plenty of them in America where we waste a bunch of taxpayer money inefficiently on programs.

That's something we do all the time.

That was different than Obamacare because Obamacare was written incorrectly.

We all know the whole tax versus fee argument.

You go back and find out how they subsidize the states.

These were all

constitutional issues.

And John Roberts basically went in and was like, you know what?

I think the law should say this instead.

And then just rewrote it.

But the idea that these programs are a good idea in the first place, over and over again, we see the same scenario play out.

$200,000 per person.

You could just throw money at people, throw it at them, and save money.

You could save a lot of cash and a lot of taxpayer dollars and a lot of heartbreak.

These are bad policies.

They've hurt people.

They've had to lose their doctors.

They've lost access to the treatment they were receiving.

And all of that costs us $200,000 per person.

Insane.

I don't know who's going to be in there to overturn it.

I don't know if you had

a new justice come in that was really conservative, would they have any chance at overturning parts of Obamacare?

I mean, perhaps.

But again, John Roberts is still there, and he seems to be the wonderful wall.

He's the wall that we want on the border around Obamacare for some reason that no one seems to understand.

So I don't know who we're going to get.

A lot of people online are tossing around the name Ben Shapiro for Supreme Court justice, which I kind of like.

I mean, the guy's very smart, you know, has a

went to Harvard, right?

Harvard legal mind.

He's a little outspoken, potentially, for Susan Collins' taste, I think.

That may be a problem.

And I don't think, I'm not sure the administration loves him all that much.

He went on Bill Maher this weekend to talk about civility because we're here in the era of Trump.

And as we know, everything bad that happens

in the realm of incivility is Trump's fault, including a long-term local newspaper

disagreement that occurred when Donald Trump was hosting The Apprentice.

That's also Donald Trump's fault.

These things are really getting out of control.

Shapiro went on with Bill Maher to talk about it.

Listen, can we just say incivility is bad across the board?

Yes, but you can't be opposed to it.

Why is it that we're only opposed to the Democrat?

You're only opposed to incivility when it's Donald Trump.

But suddenly Maxine Walter is anti-Maxine.

Because, Ben, you can't walk into a room and see an elephant and a mouse and not know which one is bigger.

But it's not an elephant and a mouse.

It's too big.

But it is, really?

Yes.

Threatening to lock up journey off the bank.

I needed 600 officers to protect me at Berkeley.

Yes, it's an elephant and an elephant.

Yes, it's an elephant and an elephant.

Bill Biden in 2007.

But that didn't come from Mitt Romney, that he's going to put y'all back in chains about black people.

This stuff pre-existed, Donald Trump.

But that dude was terrible.

But that didn't come from the president at Berkeley.

It came from the vice president when he was saying that Mitt Romney, the cleanest person ever, okay, was a guy who was going to put y'all back in chains.

To pretend incivility started with Donald Trump.

No, no, not incivility.

I'm talking about the level to which it's at, where you're through.

I agree with you.

Do you really think Donald Trump respects the rule of law?

I mean, if somebody.

No, no, but I think the Constitution itself is a pretty damn durable document, thank God.

Yeah, yeah,

I would agree with that.

It is pretty durable.

In fact, it's the most durable Constitution in the world by quite a long stretch.

This is an amazing weekend for this all to be happening, by the way.

Ben Shapiro talking about incivility, and he's been protested, but even worse, you know, 600 officers to protect him at a speech.

And it's not just Shapiro, it's tons of conservative speakers that go and get attacked.

I mean,

Charles Murray was attacked at a speech,

you know, not what, last year?

Is that Trump's fault too?

Every conservative speaker that goes and gets hit with pies and gets screamed at until they have to leave

the campus, is that Trump's fault?

There's no reason.

Like, I don't like the stuff that Donald Trump does when it comes down.

I didn't like what he said to, you know, people in crowds and go after him.

And, you know,

I don't like that.

And we've talked about it many times, but he certainly didn't start it.

And the elephant and the elephant is a much more apt description.

In fact, this weekend, as this is all going on, I'm Bill Maher, the co-founder of Vox Media, Joshua Topolsky,

tweets about Ben Shapiro.

And someone tweets to him, says,

you know, I guess saying because Ben Shapiro is Jewish, he's supposed to be liberal.

I guess that's the way that's supposed to work.

I don't know if maybe anyone who happens to be Jewish can explain to me, you know, if that's in the Torah?

Where do we find that exactly?

Ben Shapiro is the Jew who helps other Jews onto the train, the co-founder of Vox Media wrote.

He then deleted the tweet, which

tends to happen when you accuse people of being Nazi collaborators.

However, he says he did not delete it because he's apologizing.

He says he deletes it because a mob of right-wing babies were flooding his mentions.

You see, it's the right-wing's fault.

It's got to be Donald Trump's fault that you accused Ben Shapiro of being a Nazi sympathizer.

Again, I, you know,

I never think anybody should be be fired for a tweet, so I don't care.

I mean, you can stay there.

But, I mean, it tells you who Vox is.

It tells you exactly what you're dealing with, at least with some of the people there.

I think there's, you know, some good stuff that comes out of there as well.

But you got to think it's limited after seeing stuff like this.

It's hard to understand.

I mean, in the middle of, we're talking about incivility, right?

Incivility.

This is a Donald Trump thing.

Incivility.

By the way, a 33-year-old California man has been arrested on charges of trying to kill the family of FCC chairman Ajit Pai.

Now, there are a lot of reasons to threaten to murder someone.

None of them good, right?

There's a thou shalt not that appears in front of the word murder over and over again in certain contexts.

And that's a good way of thinking about it.

Thou shalt not murder.

However, if you're going to threaten someone

with death,

is net neutrality really the thing that's going to put you over the edge?

The fact that you think in the future, in theory, your Netflix may buffer

is a reason to threaten a public official with death?

I mean, I i love my netflix

but i think you may have lost perspective here

glenn back it's due in for glenn on the glenn beck program he's away this week obviously a big uh holiday week hope you're gonna have some good good stuff planned you know i feel like a lot of people don't really respect this holiday like we do some of the other big ones We don't really, I don't know, throw as big a celebration as one might expect.

Of course, I'm talking about Bobby Benilla Day,

potentially my favorite American holiday, which was yesterday.

If you don't know Bobby Benilla and Bobby Benilla Day,

you may not be a big sports fan, but Bobby Benilla played, he was a pretty good player back in the day, in the 90s, played for the Mets and the Pirates, among other teams.

But his departure from the Mets is now stuff of legend.

So he was owed $5.9 million

in 2000, and they wanted to buy out his contract.

It was not working out.

He's fighting with the manager, wanted to leave the team.

So

he is negotiating his departure.

They don't want to pay him $5.9 million, though,

because, you know, they don't like him and they want him to go away.

So instead of paying him $5.9 million,

they negotiate a deferred compensation plan.

God, I want this deferred compensation plan so badly.

Instead of receiving $5.9 million in 2000, he would receive $1.19 million

in 2011

and 2012

and 13 and 14 and 15 and on and on and on all the way to 2035.

So instead of receiving $6 million in 2000, he gets $1.2 million

every year from 2011

to 2035.

Amazing.

Something like $28 million instead of five.

Now you think, why the hell would the Mets want to do this?

This makes no sense.

Well, at the time, they had some different information.

They wanted to pay for players right at that moment to make a World Series run, which they made.

There was some success to it.

They wound up trading the player they got.

They got another one of their all-time greats.

There was some success there.

But the reason why they thought it was going to work out financially is because they had these incredible investments.

They were guaranteed 15% a year on these investments, and they were only paying 8% interest.

Almost a guaranteed win there.

Pretty big deal.

I mean, it's like giving you money.

The only slight problem with the 15% guaranteed returns is it came from an investment advisor named Bernie Madoff.

So they made this whole deal believing they were going to make all this made-off money for decades to come, and that one didn't work out all that well.

Anyway, I hope you celebrate this week.

Happy Bobby Glen back.

So we have some new information about America's favorite socialist, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez.

Very excited to tell you about it.

It's been a big week for socialism.

Mr.

Lopez Obrador,

the new coming-to-be, soon-to-be president of Mexico, has won the presidential election there.

First time a big-time leftist has won in a long time.

You might think, wait a minute, the last guy wasn't a big-time leftist?

Apparently not.

They've gone further, but he won 53% of the vote.

And it looks like we're going to have, it's going to be an interesting part of this because, with all the stuff already going on with Mexico, they haven't been big fans of us recently.

And the idea of potentially renegotiating trade deals and things like that could be a a big time

complication to this process.

Also, the president has outwardly said he is not going to try to stop anybody from crossing the border.

Now, you might think, wait a minute, was the last guy trying to stop people from crossing the border?

Apparently, yes.

This is what it's been like when they've been trying.

Can you imagine the opposite will be?

But the good thing is they're going to bring socialism there.

And then socialism will make the country so great, no one will want to leave.

When's the last time you saw people trying to escape a socialist or communist country?

I don't think it's ever happened.

I mean, Cuba, it's really more about the heat.

It's just too hot there.

They want to go to the cool, the quiet, cool breeze of Miami instead.

Because there, it's not warm at all.

And North Korea, look, sure,

you know, that's more of an issue.

Local weather patterns, you wouldn't understand.

Plus, everyone, you know what happens is you go south, you're like snowbirds.

You go south, and then you can't get back in.

That's the problem there.

And sure, you know, there may be some evidence of a wall that used to stand up so that people would get shot when they tried to go over it in Germany.

But that was, again,

people, they were concerned.

It was a high wall.

You go over that wall, you fall on the other side, ankles break.

So this was for the had nothing to do with trying to escape.

It was all to do with helping because they didn't want, no one wants health insurance costs to go up.

No one needs a broken ankle.

But Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, she is the person who beat Joe Crowley, was one of the highest-ranking Democrats, I think fourth in line there.

Talked about as a potential replacement for Nancy Pelosi at some point, and he got smoked in his election.

Now, some people are going out of their way to say that this is about demographics, and that's wrong.

Okay.

Now, there, I think, are

three districts as diverse as this district in America that did not have, that had white representatives, and two of the three are stepping down, and then there's this one.

So, that was the fourth.

I think there's one left.

So, I mean, this is, you know, look, you get to vote for whoever you want.

If you have a community that is diverse in whatever way, you can vote however you like.

That's part of America.

You can vote however.

I mean, I would never vote based on skin color or heritage.

That would never be something that I would do.

Many people do, and many people get it encouraged.

A lot of people think that that's a good idea.

I am not one of those people.

I do not think you should ever, ever, ever vote based on skin color.

Really bad things have happened in the past when that's gone on.

I could actually send you back to some of the countries we've been just talking about where a lot of that goes on and has gone on in the past.

But Ocasio-Cortez has been your standard sort of liberal activist for many years.

She won this race.

She's 28 years old

and

she's kind of the phenom of the left right now.

She's pretty new to politics.

In 2016, she voted and tried to

celebrate the candidacy of Bernie Sanders, helped campaign for Bernie.

Not a huge surprise.

She also protested against the Dakota Access Pipeline and visited there, visited Flint, Michigan as well, which is a big thing with the public water supply, the

public water supply, which somehow is a left-wing cause, that that went wrong.

Isn't that not a right-wing point?

The public water supply,

the government screws things up a lot.

Okay, we won't get into that one again.

She then went back back to work for a restaurant in Union Square in Manhattan.

A very capitalist area that has a lot of left-wing protests in it.

If you've ever been to Union Square, we did the show for many years in New York City.

And Union Square, you go around,

it's

a friendly place for tourists, but it's a very upscale area.

surrounded by trendy restaurants and such, trendy shops, along some chain stuff.

Like, it is, it's not exactly a socialist paradise.

However, if you go to Union Square, you'll almost always find a bunch of socialists chanting about something or other.

It's an interesting location for that activity.

But she wound up getting

an ask from the former veterans of the Sanders campaign to see if she wanted to run for Congress, which she did, and she won.

Now, her brand of socialism has been interesting since.

She kind of portrayed herself as

Jenny from the block, right?

She was,

she grew up in the Bronx.

She said, girl from the Bronx was the way she kind of touted herself.

There's been some questioning of that lately.

People have kind of looked back into her childhood and found

maybe she didn't grow up in the Bronx all that much.

In fact, she grew up in Yorktown Heights.

in New York, which is kind of being presented as this super upscale area.

Now, I spent lot, a good chunk of my summers in Yorktown, which by the way, I don't think I've ever heard anyone call it Yorktown Heights in my entire life.

Everyone always calls it Yorktown.

At least that's

as far as I've known.

But my aunt lived in Yorktown for many years, and my grandparents lived nearby, so I was shuttled back and forth between those two locations quite a bit.

And I did a lot of time in the summer up there.

It's a nice area.

It's not, I wouldn't say it's a, you know, to paint it as this Beverly Hills-esque town is, I do not think, accurate.

It's nice.

It's a nice, it's a working-class town.

Now, I mean, the average salary is high, but that's because it's in Westchester County.

And, you know, there's a lot of people who live there who bring that average up quite a bit.

But it's not.

You would not go there and think, oh my gosh, here's

this socialist is living in

Beverly Hills.

She's basically 90210.

It's not that.

It's being a little bit overstated in the media today.

But Yorktown is a nice place

and certainly, you know,

significantly different than the Bronx.

It's a suburb.

I mean, it's Westchester County, right?

This is not, you know, this is not the school of hard knocks.

It's a nice place to live.

So

this has been, she had a fight with

John Cardillo over at Newsmax about this, where he apparently,

he's the one that brought some of this to people's attention.

And she writes back that she didn't go to Brown or the Ivy League.

I went to BU.

Try Google.

I guess his first article mentioned that she was in the Ivy League.

However, BU, like, do you claim BU as an argument?

for your working-class upbringing.

BU costs $70,000 a year to attend.

Now, she's very smart, apparently, so probably had some sort of scholarship.

But I don't think you can act as if you didn't have a nice education when you go to Boston University.

This is, it might not be Ivy League, but it's pretty elite.

$70,000 a year?

It's a lot of money.

She also

fired back and was upset about

her family, her story, her home, and her identity was stripped

by

John.

I don't know if that's accurate.

Seems as if

she was portraying her upbringing in a way to make her story more friendly for voters.

I'm a kid from.

It is legitimately what Jennifer Lopez did, right?

Jennifer Lopez wanted you to know she was Jenny from the block.

She hasn't changed.

She wanted to emphasize that she was from the Bronx.

She was down.

She's the same girl from the block.

She used to have a little.

Now she has a lot.

And you're supposed to relate to Jennifer Lopez because of that.

Now, as far as I understand, Jenny was actually from the block at some point, which is a difference of the stories here.

But the idea is your PR approach is to tell people, hey, I'm from your town.

We see this all the time in elections.

People move in, you know, like Hillary Clinton moves in.

Oh, yeah, but I went to New York once.

Yeah, okay.

I don't know if that means that you should be senator, but since we know your name so well, congratulations, you've won.

That's the thing that you do.

You move into the town and you act like you had some familiarity with it.

It's kind of a standard thing.

Now, she did spend time in the Bronx, so I think that's part of it.

But I, you know, the Yorktown, Yorktown Heights part of the story, apparently not as notable.

She also, as a socialist, has some strange habits.

For example, after winning her election, and you know, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez is very pretty, I would say.

Now, you might say, wait a minute, isn't that demeaning?

How dare you call a woman pretty?

I don't know.

I think it's true.

She's 28 years old.

She's quite attractive, and probably part of the reason she won.

You know, I mean, like, look, we all know that better-looking candidates are what political parties look for.

You look for better.

Why do you think that that the left is always threatening to run celebrities?

Because they have all the good-looking celebrities on their team.

And so that is part of it.

You know, I mean, that is, you know, it's part of the package.

You want to have someone who's good-looking

and can,

I don't know, is telegenic, right?

They're going to go on television all the time.

And you might say, wait a minute, I look at the blaze and it doesn't seem like you focus on that at all.

That's true.

It's a good point.

It's a very good point.

None of us know why we're on television.

I tried to start on radio so you wouldn't have to look at me every day.

So don't blame me.

But Ocasio-Cortez had an issue with a lot of people saying that they wanted to know what shade of lipstick she was wearing.

Now, I assume it was some government-designed lipstick.

perhaps straight out of the Castro regime that she imports, but no.

Apparently,

it's a capitalist brand of lipstick, which she went on Twitter, a company you may note that works for profit,

and tweeted

the brand and type shade of lipstick to her audience.

Now it is sold out on Sephora's website.

Sephora, you might know, another company

run on the profit motive, and this I know because approximately 40% of my salary goes to Sephora.

Thank you, Lisa, my lovely wife.

She is now touting this lipstick color, and everyone's going crazy for it.

It's a strange world we live in, where socialists are so

open

to embracing capitalism when it benefits them.

We see this all the time.

Tonight on TV, I'm filling in for going on television as well tonight.

We're going to go through some of the lifestyles of the rich and socialist.

I want people to be able to see how these wonderful celebrities that have now come into your living room through the television every day

based on their belief in redistributing wealth and how they actually redistribute it to themselves.

We'll go over that tonight on television, 5 p.m.

at theblaze.com/slash TV

or on your local cable provider.

But I love this part of this.

Now, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez worked very recently

at a restaurant in, as I mentioned, Union Square.

Now, normally these issues, like,

there's an ex-co-worker that doesn't like her very much, apparently.

And normally I would say these stories are pathetic.

Like, this happens left and right.

People try to look back and find one worker who worked for them that didn't like them from many years ago.

And these stories are a little lame, honestly, in most cases.

You know, this happened certainly, you know, with Mitt Romney

when people were talking about, well, he once went on a trip and put his dog on the roof.

And like, he once gave an illicit haircut to someone who was when he was 18 years old.

And there's,

you know, they're meaningless stories because they go back so many years.

This one, however, is a little bit interesting to me because

Ocasio-Cortez is only 28.

She was working at a restaurant six months before she started running for Congress.

This is part of her sort of wonderful story, right?

Like, she's, uh, she's, you know, girl from the Bronx, really Yorktown, but girl from the Bronx, who loves the Bronx so much that she works in Manhattan.

And that's something you're supposed to like if you're from the Bronx, apparently.

But what I thought and the thing I thought was interesting is this.

She's being hailed as the new face of the Democratic Party, a Democratic socialist.

But

the people she worked with, generally speaking, like her.

However, one waitress had a bad memory of working with Ocasio-Cortez, 28, as she tended bar at the very busy Cinco de Mayo celebration in 2017.

The end of the night, when it came time to split the $560 in tips that she had received at the bar, Ocasio-Cortez gave the waitress only $50.

After the waitress complained to her manager, her take was doubled to 100.

So, again, if you've ever worked at a restaurant, they pull all these tips and you're tipping out if you're a bartender, right?

You're going to give some money to maybe some of the servers, maybe some of the

bus boys, whatever.

Apparently, this waitress was supposed to get $100 and only got $50, meaning that the Democratic Socialists did not properly redistribute the wealth.

It is exactly the thing that they're supposed to be wanting to do.

However, when they're working at a capitalist restaurant to get money for their capitalist lipstick,

so they can tweet about it on the capitalist social media site, apparently redistributing the wealth no longer applies.

Glenn Beck.

888-727-Beck is the phone number.

It's Stu In for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program talking about

socialism and its rise here in America.

There's a podcast out called The Butterfly Effect by John Ronson, and it's really an interesting listen if you like these sorts of things.

It follows the butterfly effect kind of of what happened

when

a guy in Montreal decided, you know, it would be cool if we did a YouTube for porn

and basically decided to figure out a way to make streaming porn available to the masses.

What changed in our society?

You know, it used to be, this is not a great commentary, but it used to be that reputation, infamy, disease, yuckiness, the fires of hell for all eternity, was a trade-off for a lot of money.

And that was at least a decision that you could theoretically understand.

Jenna Jamieson is known as a porn star, but also known as a multimillionaire, right?

There was that idea that you went in and you sacrificed a lot of things, but at least you got rich out of it.

I mean, Stormy Daniels is another example, right?

You probably didn't know her name until very recently, but still, she somehow made a lot of cash.

And yes, you pay a high price forever.

The best possible outcome for you past 30 is a rumored affair with someone more famous than you at a golf tournament, but still, there's the money.

At least you're making a decision.

It's not a decision I would advise, but you're making a decision.

Now, the supply of porn is so high, and almost all of it is free, and it's basically wiping out the people making it.

New girls come in, they do their first time on camera, they make some money, and then they make a little bit more for each escalating, degrading thing that they do.

But in a few months, they're gone, and no one wants them anymore.

Their reputation is in the trash.

They've got no money in their pocket, and they've got a lot of new antiviral medications to pay for, which are not cheap, even with the wonders of Obamacare.

I know it's surprising.

So, the podcast goes through this, and the free porn has led to an increase in infidelity, in ED, among young men,

along with incredible improvements in data analysis.

But the worst thing, other than the pain that comes from the fire that is never extinguished, but never consumes, is Montreal, the ugliest capitalist thing in the world and the ugliest capitalist industry came from Montreal.

We lost it to Canada?

This is a disgrace.

You're listening to the Glenn Beck program.

It's due in for Glenn Beck on the Glenn Beck program, vacation week, and I believe it was a gift sent from the heavens

that LeBron James would sign a new contract when I'm hosting by myself.

Because we all know that Glenn would not even know who LeBron James was.

Glenn would

have absolutely no idea.

He would probably think it was a former

progressive activist that he read about once in some nerdy letter that he paid way too much money for.

However, LeBron James

goes to Los Angeles.

Going to the Lakers, $154 million

over four years,

$38.5 million

per season.

Now, he turned down $35.6 to stay at home because who could afford those Akron real estate rates at only $35.6 million?

It's going to be an interesting thing to watch.

One of the overlooked stories about LeBron James is how he returned to Cleveland and then held them hostage every single year, opting out of a contract every single year to get every single dime he could to stay there.

The complaint was always that you couldn't get enough people to come play with LeBron.

Well, part of that is probably because no one knew if he'd stick around for another season or not.

The other part about it is it's just not true.

This past team started out with Kyrie Irving.

You may remember him from taking and making all the big shots in the championship season that they had.

But he just couldn't bring himself to play with LeBron anymore.

But that's definitely not LeBron's fault.

He makes everybody around him better.

So they traded him for Isaiah Thomas, fresh off bringing the Celtics to the conference finals and averaging 29 points a game.

But that one couldn't work out either.

But it's not LeBron's fault.

He makes everyone around him better.

And of course, Kevin Love, who is the most sought-after free agent in the league.

Sure, he averaged 26 points and 13 rebounds a game before LeBron, but

he sucks now, too.

That's not LeBron's fault, however.

He makes everyone around him better.

George Hill, sure, last year he averaged 17 points a game, but he couldn't make it work with LeBron.

However, that's not LeBron's fault.

He makes everyone around him better.

Kyle Corver, he can shoot, but he's too old.

I mean, he was an all-star way back in 2015.

Do you even remember how old you were back in 2015?

Ancient history.

And his failings are not LeBron's fault.

He makes everyone around him better.

You know, Jeff Green averaged over 17 points a game.

That was a couple years ago, though, too.

And that's certainly his performance is not LeBron's fault.

He makes everyone around him better.

Rodney Hood was averaging 17 points a game this season until he came with LeBron.

But that's not LeBron's fault.

He makes everyone around him better.

And J.R.

Smith averaged 18 points a game in a season for the NBA.

Remember that?

But he's total junk, too.

I mean, did you see that play?

He forgot the score.

He delayed a final shot by a couple of seconds in an important game, which totally justified LeBron doing nothing in overtime of that game.

Sure, I'm leaving out the fact that it was one of the greatest plays.

I mean, he really played one of the greatest games I've ever seen him play.

But still,

if they had won that game,

they may have only lost that series in five games instead of four, which would have been incredible.

Remember, LeBron makes everyone around him better.

By the way, in their first 15 seasons, Jordan played, Michael Jordan played with an all-star six times.

It was Scotty Pippen all six times.

LeBron played with 14 all-stars.

So the fact that he has never played with anybody makes no sense.

He's played with 13 players that have made an all-star team at some point in their career, including six future Hall of Famers.

But please give the man some help, Cleveland.

What is wrong with you?

And this follows, by the way, a long-term approach of LeBron James to leave the situation that he's in for something that personally benefits him.

Now, in our capitalist society, that is a wonderful thing that I treasure.

But LeBron, as the Hillary Clinton supporter, doesn't exactly,

I don't know.

I don't give him quite as much leeway there.

LeBron leaves his team when he believes there is a better situation for LeBron somewhere else.

Remember, he left the Cavs, who were coming off the best record in the NBA, to go to Miami.

Everybody remembers that.

But what people don't look at is he did the same thing when he left Miami to come back to Cleveland.

Yeah, it was his hometown, and that had maybe something to do with it, but it was an objectively better situation he was going into.

Instead of flailing around for a few more years with Bosch and Wade in full collapse, he got Kyrie Irving and the number one overall pick in the draft,

which an impatient LeBron forced the team to trade for Kevin Love, who everyone complains about now,

who they could have had as a free agent a year later.

And now, after finals loss number six, it's time to run away to find a better situation again for LeBron.

The only difference between his move to Miami and his move back to Cleveland was the PR.

He brought his talents to South Beach, and then he's coming home to Cleveland.

Notice how each time he moves somewhere, the attention to it drops.

It was this big festival on TV the first time.

Then it was this wonderful, heartwarming letter.

Now he says, like on Instagram,

yeah, going to L.A.

See you there.

Look, he obviously wants to go and

increase his future earnings when it comes to television and movies, and he has every right to do that.

LeBron James is probably going to end up as a top 10 player of all time.

And he has every right to chase the glamour and the attention that he can get only probably in Los Angeles or maybe New York.

He's going to go to Los Angeles where he may be as high as the fourth best player in franchise history.

And that's something that's going to stick out.

I mean, sure, maybe it's more like eighth.

You know, but people think I'm a LeBron hater, but I'm really not.

I mean, I, you know, just because I'm nice, I'm not even counting George Miken.

He was on the look, he was on the Minneapolis Lakers.

I'm not even counting him.

But good for LeBron.

I will be legitimately happy to see him actually play in something other than the weakest conference in any sport in my lifetime.

That will be interesting to see, and I'm willing to see it.

When LeBron originally returned to Cleveland, he wrote a letter explaining the incredibly,

incredibly selfless move he was making because no one explains how selfless LeBron is better than LeBron.

He wrote, I always believed that I'd return to Cleveland and finish my career there.

I just didn't know when.

Apparently, he still has to get that one scheduled.

I guess that's maybe on the schedule for 2025, 2026.

We'll see.

We'll see, Cleveland.

You get to find out someday soon.

Now, Cleveland will always have this championship that they got, and that's a big, big deal.

I, for one, completely understand this as a Philadelphia Eagles fan.

Quite honestly, Nick Foles could join ISIS tomorrow, and all I'd want to do is give him a hug.

So I get it.

I get how much you're never going to lose a connection if you're Cleveland to LeBron James.

But let's be honest: LeBron isn't, isn't it?

It's not about Cleveland with LeBron.

It's not about going home.

Whether it's for a better team or more glitz or warmer weather or a few extra dollars, which always need to be maximized.

LeBron is and always is about LeBron.

It's Stu Inforglen on the Glenn Beck program taking a couple of different vantage points here to look at the Trump administration and how it's operating.

First of all, let's go to Maxine Waters.

Maxine Waters, who of course is, you may know her as the insane congresswoman, who recently called for people to harass Trump administration employees in the street, at restaurants, and at gasoline stations, as she called them,

because, you know, the Trump administration is all so evil, and people like Sarah Huckabee Sanders deserve to get harassed because it's always okay for a Democratic woman to say, hey, go ahead, go on out and harass a bunch of women.

That's fine with me.

Here is Maxine Waters now talking about Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer.

I'm going to, again, I'm not intimidated by him.

I think he does not deserve to be the President of the United States, and I simply stand up to him.

And so he'll keep doing that, as he has done throughout his limited career of his.

And I'm going to get on.

We're talking about what we as Democrats are doing to deal with the most important issues of our times, important issues that we need to be focused on, and providing the kind of public policy that will help create housing in this country.

We have a housing crisis that will try and protect Obamacare, the ACA that they're trying to tear down every day, that will deal with infrastructure so that we can create jobs.

We can walk and chew gum at the same time.

I can defend against him and I can promote good public policy.

I intend to do that and let him call me whatever he wants to call me.

Let him say whatever he wants to say.

He will not stop me.

He cannot cause me to shut down.

That's what they would like to do.

They want me to run away.

They want me to stop talking.

They want me to be quiet.

But he can't do that to me.

I won't stand for it.

And not only did you have that, you know,

the right came after you, but you had even the leadership of the Democratic Party, Nancy Pelosi.

Were you surprised to have the leadership of your own party come out and essentially call you an American?

Uh-oh.

Well, you know, I was surprised that Chuck Schumer, you know, reached into the other house to do that.

I've not quite seen that done before, but one of the things I recognize being an elected official is in the final analysis,

leadership like Chuck Schumer's will do anything that they think is necessary to protect their leadership.

And so what I have to do is not focus on them.

Yeah, that's what you need to do.

Here's a, you know, again,

attempting to make herself the victim after she's called for the harassment of public officials.

She's the victim.

She's just trying to do the right thing.

And the darn Trump administration, darn you, is trying to stop her from doing her thing.

So there's one view, complete failure, failure on housing, infrastructure, Obamacare.

You know, she calls out Trump for having a limited career.

Maybe that's a good thing.

Maybe politicians' careers should be limited.

Got a little proposal called term limits I'd like you to take a look at, but we'll get to that in a second.

Here's the other side from the African American community, as well.

A man named Henry Davis uploads a video of himself talking about the state of the economy for him.

I was just sitting here watching

President Trump

talking about Fox Conn and

explaining all of the things that he's doing for America.

And he had this black lady

come up there and give give a little speech about

how

her life has changed because of some of his accomplishments and whatnot.

And I'm just so proud.

I'm just proud to be an American, you know.

And again, Barack Obama, I respected the office.

I respected the fact that he was the president, but

ain't nobody like Trump, man.

If you you want to work, it's jobs out here.

And I'm literally like, I'm just crying because

I'm just

like, it's just, it's just a good time to be alive

and to be able to witness what's really going on.

And we got a chance.

I'm just talking about from a black perspective.

If you really want to work, and get up off your ass and do something, you can do it.

I just thank God for President Trump.

You know, I ain't never met the man.

I don't know the man.

But I'm just talking about what he doing for our country and what he doing for our people.

Black people working.

You know what I'm saying?

Jobs is coming back.

Factories is opening up.

You know,

he helping with the drug epidemic and all that.

It's just a It's just a beautiful time to be alive, y'all.

Y'all got to excuse me, but I'm wearing my feelings on my shoulder right now, and I'm just happy to be an American to where at least I know I'm free.

Go Trump

and cry.

So, there you go.

Two perspectives, both from the African-American community,

one of which will be completely ignored,

and the other one will be echoed day after day after day.

You know, both of them should have some weight.

This is something that's real that's going on.

Whether you like Trump's policies or not, the African-American unemployment rate is as low as it's ever been.

That's something to celebrate.

You'd think the left would want to celebrate that, whether it was their policies, whether they want to say it was actually Barack Obama who did all of this, whatever you want to say,

at the very least, shouldn't you be thrilled by these developments?

These are good moves in the right direction.

And when it comes down to real people who are actually living it, they're feeling a lot of that.

And it's something that you'd think the media would want to highlight in a different world.

But no,

it'll be Maxine Waters on television every day telling you the exact opposite about how she needs to be there to protect that very worker, Henry Davis.

I don't think there's a lot of protection going on there.

The government is not here to help.

Back with more in a second.

It's Stu in for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program.

Ipanilla Day.

Glenn back.

Breaking news in the world of international trade as the Mexican president has been elected,

a socialist, and he's going to up the battle on what we are seeing with tariffs around the world.

Axios has obtained a leaked draft of a Trump administration bill ordered by the president himself that would declare America's abandonment of fundamental World Trade Organization rules.

The draft legislation is stunning.

The bill essentially provides Trump a license to raise U.S.

tariffs at will without congressional consent and international rules be damned.

The details, the bill titled the United States Fair and

Reciprocal Tariff Act, or FART, would give Trump unilateral power to ignore the two most basic principles of WTO and negotiate one-on-one with any country key parts of this bill.

The most favored nation principle, that countries can't set different tariff rates for different countries outside of free trade agreements, and bound tariff rates, the tariff ceilings that go

each WTO country, it's a World Trade Organization, if they've already agreed into previous negotiations.

Now, FART would be the equivalent of walking away from the WTO and our commitments there without us actually notifying

our withdrawal, said a source familiar with the bill.

Good news is that Congress would never give this authority to the president, the source added, describing the FART Act

as insane.

FART is not implementable at the border, given FART would create potentially tens of thousands

of new tariffs on products.

And FART would completely remove us from the set of global trade rules, which is a big deal.

Behind the scenes, Trump was dream.

Excuse me.

Behind the scenes, Trump was briefed on FART in late May, according to sources familiar with the FART situation.

Most officials involved in FART's drafting, with the notable exception of hardline trade advisor Peter Navarro, think that FART is unrealistic or unworkable.

USTR, Commerce, and the White House are involved in all of the elements of FART.

Now, the FART Act is

big time, it's raising the stakes here in the world of trade.

In the White House meeting to discuss FART earlier this year,

Legislative Affairs Director Mark Short bluntly told Navarro that the FART Act was dead on arrival and would receive zero support on Capitol Hill, according to sources familiar with the exchange.

Navarro replied to Short that he thought that FART would get plenty of support, particularly from Democrats.

But Short told Navarro he didn't think Democrats were in much of a mood to hand over more authority to Trump, even for FART.

Spokeswoman Lindsey Waters at the White House said it is no secret that POTUS had frustrations with the unfair imbalance of tariffs that put the U.S.

at a disadvantage.

He has asked his team to develop FARTs

to remedy this situation and create incentives for countries to lower their tariffs, which is, you know,

it's an important concept.

The current system gives the U.S.

no leverage and other countries no incentive, and that's why the administration believes we need FART.

Walters, however, signaled that we should not make this FART bill

and act as if it's anything like a done deal.

The only way that this would be news is if the FART Act were actual legislation that the administration was preparing to roll out, but it's not.

She was referring to the FART Act.

Principals have not even met to review any text of FART on reciprocal trade.

And that's an important part of this story.

A lot of people are going to get down the road and think, hey, this is a done deal.

It's not at this point.

And you need to note, as Axios points out, the specificity of Walter's quote.

Trump directly requested FART

and was verbally briefed on FART in May,

but he has not met with the principles to review the FART yet.

There's an important

part of this.

The bottom line, as a smart trade watcher told Axios,

quote, the Trump administration should be more worried about not having their current authority restricted rather than expanding authority as the FART Act would do.

And apparently they are going out on a limb here to make sure they send the message that the administration should hold the FART in.

And as someone who really cares about free trade,

the United States Fair and Reciprocal Tariff Act, or FART,

to me is not the right direction to go for this country.

You know, I know there's a lot of disagreement on tariffs, but really, you're going to go...

go, I mean,

I just don't think, I don't think fart

is the right answer for our economy at this time.

We've made so much progress, and then we're going to go fart, and then it's going to be all reversed.

I mean, look, fart would knock out all the good things that happened

with the tax bill, I think.

You know, you're talking about tens of thousands of tariffs.

People are going to, people, fart will become a bad word.

People will think of farts and think negative things

is that what we want out of this country

i don't think it's appropriate at all

and i hope that you know you

you will maybe take a moment and call the white house and say

hold the fart in

because what we need in this country is not another fart we need free trade.

We need capitalist principles.

We need low regulation.

This is understood throughout the rest of the economy.

It doesn't seem to be understood on the borders.

And that's why FART isn't the answer.

You know, it might make sense to think that

if you pass FART,

you'd be able to keep people out of, you know, maybe you'd slow down the influx of various trade

malfeasance.

But I don't think that's the way this is going to go.

And I hope you'll call the White House today.

Just let them know.

You know, FART's not the answer, guys.

Fart is not the answer.

Hold the fart in.

I know we go a little bit, a lot of people don't like to go too much into depth on

trade policy, but I felt like it was important today.

And I appreciate you allowing me

the leeway to do that.

If you want to talk about FART, our number is 888-727-BECK.

It's Stu quite clearly filling in for Glenn Beck on the Glenn Beck program.

On Twitter, at World of Stew is where you can tweet to me.

A lot of people commenting on the FART Act, whether they want it to pass or not, the Fair and Reciprocal Trade Act.

The hashtag don't pass the fart,

hold the fart in.

These are

really important things because, look, free trade's important, and there's not enough discussion.

It's an uncomfortable topic sometimes on conservative radio these days.

A lot of people don't want to talk about fart and

what happens with it.

People don't want to know.

And, you know,

it stinks.

It stinks.

And a lot of people are tweeting that exact phrase about fart.

It stinks.

So I'm...

I'm trying to get a movement started here because, you know,

you've heard me on the show before talking about free trade.

I think it's really important.

It's really important that we we don't have extra tariffs on products coming into the country.

I don't think that's a good idea, and that's why I oppose FART.

That's why I do it.

By the way,

in a move that comes directly from Satan,

McDonald's in the UK has decided to ban plastic straws.

And what will they go to?

You may have seen them before, before if you've ever visited the seventh level of hell, the paper straw.

There is nothing on this earth, even fart,

that is worse than the paper straw.

The paper straw.

Have you ever, has anyone

at a restaurant who thinks paper straws are a good idea ever had to take a drink out of a paper straw?

Here's the thing with paper.

When you put fluid on it, it like

it gets wet and it crumples and then it gets pieces of the paper come off in your mouth while you're drinking.

It is the worst thing humanity has ever done.

Give or take a couple things.

There's a couple things in there that maybe you'd put in this group.

All 1,361 McDonald's restaurants in the UK and Ireland.

This is the way you can tell this is a UK story, will benefit benefit from the new anti-plastic straw policy.

Benefit?

That doesn't make any sense.

It is

literally designed by Satan.

The paper straw.

By the way, new developments in the world of soda taxes.

And you know, if I'm going to fill in, Stu, by the way, in

Glenn, the Glenbrook program.

You know, I'm going to talk about

sugar taxes because I hate them so much.

The soda tax was passing all over California in city after city after city, and the beverage industry has tried a new approach.

Instead of fighting the ordinances city by city, it is turning to the states, trying to pass laws preventing any local governments from taxing their products.

This is kind of an interesting development

because

it's sort of progressivism eating its own, or in this case, maybe drinking its own.

Because here it is, the approach that the left takes all the time.

They always try to get things out of the local and into the state and then into the federal.

They always try to get the power higher up and centralized.

They always try to escalate things in this way.

So here's their new fancy tax.

They want to tax people who like soda.

And now they're just going straight.

The soda companies are like, all right, we'll just go to the states.

We'll go to the states and get soda taxes banned there.

And that is apparently what they're trying to do in California.

And California's going along with it because they don't want to deal with

the way that the beverage companies are acting, and good for big beverage.

I support you wholeheartedly.

The exact opposite about how I feel about FART and the FART Act.

Because that I do not support.

Okay?

I do not support FART.

We're also experiencing apparently the biggest revolution in movie ticket prices in decades.

I find this to be fascinating.

As a proud and loving supporter of Movie Pass, if you don't have Movie Pass,

get it while it's still there.

Apparently, they're having some financial troubles, at least according to this article.

However, what they do is for about what is it, 10 bucks a month, you can go see unlimited movies in the theaters with a couple.

And I say unlimited, it's not the right word because, you know, it's limited.

But the difference is very minor.

You can't go see like 3D movies.

You can't go see the same movie twice.

There's a couple of restrictions like that, but they're pretty minor.

You can't really go enough.

You're not going to be limited by this, by your movie pass subscription.

It's available in basically for every single theater in the United States, something like 90-something percent of theaters.

And they have a...

have really now changed, whether they succeed or not as a company, have changed the way people are buying movie tickets.

And now a bunch of other theaters are doing subscription plans.

AMC has one for 20 bucks a month.

You get three movies per week at its locations.

Now, look, that's not as good as Movie Pass, but still, I'd much rather have that than the old way.

I mean, the old way was, you know, it's 10, 12 bucks a movie.

And you never wanted to take a chance on a crappy movie.

Like, if there was a movie that was sort of on the borderline, you never wanted to go to it because you walk into the theater, you you get halfway through, you're like, I've wasted $12.

This sucks.

You know, so you just don't, you don't go.

You stay home.

With Movie Pass, I'll go see all the crap they can churn out in Hollywood.

And this is a good thing for theaters, right?

Because I went to take my kids to some kids' movie in which I had Movie Pass and saved money on the tickets.

However, then I went inside and ate like $60 worth of food at the dining theater because I'm

overweight.

And those are the types of things that I do, like most people who go to movies.

So,

well, I don't know why they wouldn't want this.

I can say that I know it does encourage you to take chances on movies.

To take a chance on a movie you think is maybe borderline.

Maybe you think there's a part of it that looks interesting, but you might walk out in the middle of it if it sucks.

Well, you can do that with Movie Pass and these new subscription services.

Now, I don't know if I would have walked out in The Last Jedi because The Last Last Jedi, I was not a huge fan of it.

I did see it twice, and you say, Well, why would you go see a movie you don't like twice?

Well, it's Star Wars, right?

It's a Star Wars sequel, and for some reason, I feel like I owe it to them to see all their movies, even when I don't like them.

I mean, you go through the prequels, there weren't a lot, there wasn't a lot there,

but you still go to every single one of them, which is a strange thing.

I mean,

it is, frankly.

However,

Mark Hamill,

even Mark Hamill didn't seem to like The Last Jedi all that much.

Now, spoiler alerts minor here if you haven't seen it, but Luke's not exactly the guy you thought he was

in the movie.

Here's Mark Hamill talking about his role and how it played out in The Last Jedi.

Idealistic character.

He was the most optimistic character.

And

I said, you know, even if I did something ghastly, like picking the wrong

young student,

that I would

redouble my efforts.

I wouldn't just go off to an island for 30 years.

But that's not my job.

I have to do what I can do the best to realize the vision of the writer, in this case, Ryan Johnson.

So, I mean, it had to, it was tough on me because it's, you know, I was sort of old school George Lucas and you have to make way for the new generation so I had to figure out how can I best make this work and there's lots of backstory I made up for myself that wouldn't

concern the audience in any way and that's when I made the analogy of being the Beatles generation where all you need is love and in in effect we failed because I think the world is much worse now than it was then.

Holy crap.

Dark analysis of your own role.

Here's a guy who had this really big movie a million years ago, and he waits and waits and waits and waits.

And I don't know how many, how often you've gone back and looked at Star Wars.

Mark Hamill,

objectively,

is not a good actor.

Now, I love those movies, but Mark Hamill

is not good in them.

Okay?

He's something that you overlook in a retro sort of fashion.

And you're like, I have a warm feeling in my heart about those movies.

So therefore, I will ignore his acting.

I mean, I'm sorry, but it's true.

And then you wait all of this time.

You wait through an incredibly long delay.

Three terrible prequels.

And then another long delay.

Where it seems like it may never come back.

And then like, we're doing it.

We're bringing in JJ.

JJ Abrams is going to make the new movie.

And guess what, Luke?

You're going to be in it.

They probably call him Luke, I'm assuming, and not Mark.

Luke, you're going to be in the movie.

Congratulations.

It's wonderful.

Here's your big comeback.

And you read the script.

And then you're in the last eight seconds of the movie and you don't say anything.

So that's your...

That's rough.

Then

they bring you into the movie.

And I swear they made that first one just so they didn't have to expose long stretches of acting for Mark Hamill.

Then they bring him into this new one, and I swear they gave him this role of like quiet brooding guy so he didn't have to speak.

He could just wear a beard.

They even covered his face with a beard so he couldn't express a lot.

And then they run through the whole thing, and

he had a mistake with a student, so he ran away to an island for 30 years.

Like, what?

I mean, it just really wasn't that good.

And then they bring in Woody Harrelson for the solo thing, which I just can't take anymore Woody Harrelson.

Like, you know, I mean, there's got to be a maximum amount allowed of Woody Harrelson in one's life.

And I hit it during cheers.

So think of how torturous this is for me.

I will say it's not as torturous as the Fair and Reciprocal Trade Act or FART.

And we'll get into that a little bit more.

Coming up,

Pat Gray, which we're really excited about.

Also, Jeff Fisher will be here.

888-727-BEC.

It's Stu in for Glen Beck.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

It's the Glen Beck program.

Joined by Pat Gray and Jeff Fisher, which I'm very excited about.

Half of that.

Welcome.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Oh, thank you, Stu.

I'm excited as well.

Yeah, I'm excited about this week, actually, because tomorrow we have a Pat and Stu reunion tour moment, which I'm excited about.

Also on Thursday.

As well.

And then Pat Gray.

On Friday.

On Friday.

So it's a big week.

Big week.

And then you'll have to slum it with Glenn next week, which is not going to, you're not going to like that.

Yeah.

Sure.

Oh, sure.

So big day today.

We talked a little bit about LeBron James leaving and going to the L.A.

Lakers.

Strange move, I think.

I mean, I know he has a home there and he loves it, apparently.

A couple homes, right?

I don't know.

In LA.

He has two LA.

More than one in L.A.

I heard that he had bought two within the last year or so in L.A.

I mean, it's a fun city, you know,

if you like non-stop nonsense.

It's great.

If you like to take, I don't know, two and a half to three hours to go five miles

and you like non-stop communism, it's a great place to live.

There's an income level in which LA becomes bearable.

And he's that level.

He's certainly north of it.

Yeah, he is.

I don't know what the level is, but I think it's

north of it.

Yeah, you're right.

I think it's probably true.

I think if you make

$3 million a year

plus.

That's probably about the level?

I would say that's probably about the level.

And, Jeffy, I don't think you're completely clear of the hassles there.

I think you got to go to helicopter level before you're

clear of the hassle.

$3 million still sounds like you're still struggling.

But I mean,

you're still struggling.

You could buy an okay home, maybe maybe a 2,000 or 2,500 square foot home.

Maybe.

You know, maybe.

Maybe you could have an average size home and you could have decent groceries on $3 million a year.

Maybe.

Maybe.

If you're lucky.

Yes.

If you scrimp.

It's amazing.

We talked about this a little bit late last week about how the Bay Area now in San Francisco, of course, a little north of there, now earning $117,400 qualifies you as low income in some counties.

Unconscionable.

A family of four must earn $117,400 a year.

Very low income, very low, is considered $73,300.

Wow.

Okay.

Imagine this place.

I mean, even if you were like playing for the San Francisco Giants, you might not be able to afford a home.

Yeah.

The median home price now, $935,000.

That is just absurd.

It's crazy.

It's absurd.

The whole state is crazy.

Yeah.

Which is why it's great, you know, when you sell a home in California and move to Texas because you can afford something considerably better.

Yeah, we had

similar moments,

right?

Coming from the Northeast down here, and it seems like

someone brought out the pricing gun and mispriced all the houses.

Like

some more, like the dumbest.

It's beginning to change, however.

It is.

It is beginning to change.

It's gone up almost 40% in the last five years.

It changes when you come here, right?

Like when you're here and you start getting used to the prices, all of a sudden they start seeming high again.

But that's not what it was like when we came down here.

It felt like everything was like on the sale rack by mistake.

Yeah.

And that is not the way.

And I don't know.

LeBron might be hitting some of those.

I mean, the tax bills are legitimate.

They were saying if he had gone to Philly for the 76ers, the contract, he would have saved $11 million in taxes over the four years.

And Philly's not even a good tax.

Well, he left.

And I'm sure the taxes in Ohio are much less than they are in California.

And he left $54 million on the table not staying with the Cavs.

$54 million over the life of the contract.

So it wasn't about money for him.

I will say he maximizes every cent, though.

I mean, he kept opting out of the contract with Cleveland to get the extra new max deal every single time for one year, which, you know, kind of holds Cleveland hostage.

Yeah, it does.

And why would any big free agent want to go there when he's only committed to for one year?

So now at least he's committed to four years or at least three years, actually.

Yeah, he's got an option.

Yeah, with L.A.

So that'll be interesting.

It'll be interesting to see him play in the West.

It'll be interesting to see him dealing with all the Hillary Clinton policies he supported.

Right.

Because now he gets to deal with all those new taxes and all the regulations, all the things getting in his way.

Yeah.

Sometimes it's nice to see that.

Yeah, I know Pat always says he loves it when liberals eat their own, and it's kind of, it's kind of nice to see him.

It's almost an example of that.

It's also going to be interesting to see if he can carry that team.

It's him and Lonzo Ball now.

Woo!

Yeah.

They're going to get crushed by everybody.

They'll get somebody, though.

They'll bring somebody in.

I don't know who that's going to be.

At least the White Leonard.

I don't think they can get him this year.

Next year, though.

But, yeah, not this year.

LeBron can carry the team.

And the other one is

he can carry the team to a certain extent, like he did with Cleveland.

They won't get to the finals, though.

Not in the Western Conference.

No, I don't think so.

They're not getting anywhere near that.

They're not even going to be in the Western Conference.

That would be quite an achievement if he's able to get the team.

He got DeMarcus Cousins.

They're talking about DeMarcus Cousins.

Maybe that.

Maybe that's enough.

So another story I wanted to bring up with you guys, and Jeffy, I think you'd be the expert.

A lot of people were very critical of the show today, I have to admit.

Multiple times.

Yes, and that's part of the reason.

Multiple times I've been hit with, because I did two segments today, one on the Fair and Reciprocal Trade Act, or FART.

Is it actually called Fair and Reciprocal Trade?

Yes, that's the name of the act.

I swear someone in the Trump administration who

doesn't like the bill did it on purpose.

It has to be, right?

They couldn't have possibly screwed that up.

But the FARD Act,

or I was thinking, it also could be the Trump administration intentionally leaking a fake bill to Axios just to have everybody

to do this.

I don't know.

It could be that easy.

It could be that too.

But the FARD Act, and also I talked about a podcast

about

the business of porn.

And multiple people said, why are you doing these segments without Jeffy in the room?

You have an expert on staff

who knows both of these topics in great detail.

Well, I don't like to discuss my porn business.

You know, that's

stacks issues involved.

But I am concerned.

This one I had to bring you in for.

Donut fries.

I know.

Donut fries

from Dunkin' Donuts.

They look good.

They look really good.

And

I had emailed your

producer,

whatever she goes by, and she said she wasn't going to get them.

I don't know who's running this joint, Stu.

No, apparently, not you.

I'm not even close.

Not even close to my getting them.

I mean, the donut fry seems like a really good director.

Yeah,

and Mr.

Kale and Grilled Chicken over here now, who hasn't had

Mr.

Healthy Eater all of a sudden.

Since Pat and Stu ended, all of a sudden Pat's dropped all his weight.

He's Mr.

Healthy Guy now.

It's really infuriating.

It's healthy.

It's not something I support.

I will be honest.

It's not something I support.

Are you into the donut fry idea?

I think sometimes we get a little carried away with this stuff, with these novelty things.

And

I like things that are savory to be savory and things that are sweet to be sweet.

Mixing the two doesn't really excite me very much.

Like the donut bun for a hamburger, I don't like that.

That was really sweet.

That was really, I mean, that was tough to take.

Yes.

And you did have that on the air.

I did have that on the air.

It's amazing.

The amount of chewing we've done into microphones in 20 years is not a good broadcasting

talent.

They kind of remind me of the Burger King French toast sticks.

That's what they look like.

Oh.

So I don't know.

Those are very greasy.

They are very greasy, but not bad.

I'm not a big fan of those.

I don't know.

They were pretty good.

I'd rather have just French toast.

Thank you.

Have you ever had funnel cake fries?

Funnel cake fries.

I don't know.

Do we have that at the Texas State Fair?

I think we do have them at the fair.

I think so.

They have them at the Texas Rangers games, and we were broadcasting from Dallas.

Were they awesome?

Oh, my God.

They're so good.

Really?

They're so good.

I don't know.

There's something about like a funnel cake is not something that's easy to eat.

It's kind of a weird thing to eat.

I mean, Jeffy, I mean, I know you eat it in one bite, so it's easy for you.

They're not very difficult.

But the fry delivery system for a funnel cake is excellent.

Because then you can dip them in like a they have like a raspberry sauce or something.

Oh, that sounds good.

Oh, yeah.

Serious, man.

If you go to a Rangers game right behind home plate, got to go.

Do they come with the powdered sugar on them or do you

do that as well?

They come with powdered sugar on them.

Okay, good.

As you probably know, I'm surprised.

I'm surprised you were able to put that one together.

We stumbled onto something, though, that's very, very healthy at my house.

It's called nut or butter cereal.

Have you ever tried that?

No.

Oh, my gosh.

Oh, man.

I thought I loved Reese's Pita Butter Cup cereal.

To me, this is better.

This is better.

That sounds delicious.

Nutter butter cereal cereal.

Nutter butter cereal.

I mean, that's screaming.

That's incredibly healthy.

Not a drop, not a grain of sugar in it.

Not one grain.

And look,

I would say.

Not one grain.

Not one grain.

I would say the same goes for Nila banana pudding cereal.

Oh, my gosh.

I didn't know they had that.

Which is, I think, in the same line because I think they got an Oreo and a Chipsahoy.

I don't know.

I've looked for it in stores, and I cannot seem to find it.

Has anybody done bananas foster cereal yet?

Because I'm all over that.

I don't think so.

I'm all over that.

But the point here, though, is not just how delicious these foods are.

The point is, in a world run by Alexandria Cortez,

we don't have nut or butter cereal.

Oh, for sure.

We don't have banana pudding cereal.

Right.

In a socialist world, we lose these capitalist

inventions.

Yep.

And it's not a world worth living in.

No, it's not.

true.

No, it's not.

No, it's a sad world.

It's a world dominated by suicide, is what it is.

It's a sad world.

I mean, Venezuela got it wrong.

They tweaked.

What's their inflation?

Their inflation rate right now in this socialist

Shangra law,

they've kept it pretty steady

lately.

The inflation rate is just a little bit, just a tiny bit above 43,000%.

Just a shade over

there.

They didn't go far enough.

Oh, okay.

That's why they didn't go far enough.

Someone's got to get it right.

I just read that article the other day.

That's amazing.

Somebody tried to excuse socialism.

And they said, everybody's painting

Venezuela is a failed socialist place.

And the problem with Venezuela is they didn't go far enough.

It's always the problem every time.

Okay, good.

You know, it's amazing, too.

Think about it.

We have people in Venezuela, a million bolivars for one cup of coffee now.

A million.

That's the rate.

43,000% interest or inflation.

And where now are all of these Hollywood celebrities who were down there encouraging the people to vote for Sean Penn, Denny Glover?

There's a huge slew of them.

And they were praising, I mean, Michael Moore, praising Venezuela as this hope.

Now, Venezuela was actually in pretty good shape before the socialists got in charge there.

Well, they should be.

They're oil-rich.

Exactly.

I mean, you know, it wasn't any necessary miracle of capitalism.

They just had a lot of oil

and they were able to sell it.

And they were not, I mean,

they had some corruption, just like everybody does.

But you have to be pretty bad to screw up that economic system.

When you've got that much oil, you're an OPEC oil nation on this side side of the planet.

And you're that, I mean, we used to get a lot of oil from them before we became, you know, not best buddies anymore.

So

when the government took that over, they ran it right into the ground.

Yeah.

And now you have people there in Venezuela hunting for stray dogs to eat.

Yeah.

To eat.

Yeah.

While we have nutter-butter cereal.

Right.

And there's an argument between these two systems.

Hard to believe.

We've got a pudding made into a cereal.

A pudding.

And they're scavenging zoos for food.

Yes.

They're eating like, I mean, you think about it, you don't want to get into a zoo with one of those animals, lions and tigers and bears.

Oh, my.

Yet

they're willing to go hunt them down.

That's right.

To eat them.

I mean, there is a big difference in the systems here.

I think one works better than the other.

Yet, here's America.

We want our Democratic socialists.

socialists, we want Bernie Sanders, we want Bernie Sanders campaign volunteers, not the ones that are shooting at congressmen per se, but the ones

that are winning elections apparently now in New York.

Amazing.

Although, if we do get the ones that are shooting at congressmen, we'll just ignore that they shot congressmen, we won't pay any attention to that.

Really did disappear fast.

I mean, think about this: what are we, a year, a little over a year

since a Bernie Sanders volunteer almost assassinated 10% of all elected Republicans in Washington.

Okay.

And a year later, we're talking about the incivility of Republicans.

I mean,

you got to give the media some credit here.

You got to admire their work a little bit.

It's pretty amazing because they've worked hard on that.

That's incredible to turn that one around.

Yeah.

All right.

On the show today, Pat Gray Unleashed.

Jeffy, are you going to let him in as well?

Jeffy will be there to chew the fat

at 1230 Central.

He gives me a segment.

They've titled it Chewing the Fat.

Well, it's what you talk about when you're like a bunch of friends standing, you know, you're around, you're just kind of hanging out, talking about the news of the day.

A lot of times you'd say, we're just going to chew the fat a little bit.

So that's why your segment's called that.

Okay.

Right, Pat?

Right.

Yes, exactly.

That, and he's fat.

And man, I tell you what, it is good to be.

It's good to be here.

I miss you so much.

I miss you so much.

All right.

Pat Grandley, coming up in just a minute.

Check it out at theblaze.com/slash TV or radio.

And on the app, of course, as well.

You can get it anytime.

It's Stu in for Glenn on the Glenn Beck program.

Back with more in a second.

All right, 888727 Beck is the phone number.

It's Stu in for Glenn Beck.

We'll be back with Pat tomorrow.

Let's go to Rick in Ohio.

Welcome to the Glenn Beck program.

Hey, Stu.

Yeah, the fart stinks, but if we hold it in, we run the risk of ripping the guts out of the country.

So sometimes, sometimes it's just better to let it rip.

But most importantly, I'm worried about the beer fart and the egg fart.

Those are tariffs hitting those particular products very hard.

You're right.

And I don't think it's fair or reciprocal, to be perfectly honest with you.

Thank you for the analysis, Rick.

I appreciate it.

Lots of analysis at World of Stew on Twitter of really picking apart this bill, the Fair and Reciprocal Trade Act or FART.

We'll be back with more maybe tomorrow on the Glendeck program.

Glenn, back.

Mercury.