3/24/17 - Full Show

This is the Blaze Radio on Demand.

And welcome to the program.

Today, a really big day.

Today is the day of the healthcare.

It either passes or it doesn't.

And if it doesn't, Donald Trump has said he's done with health care.

I want to hear from you.

Yesterday, it was overwhelming.

This audience called in and said, reject it.

Don't do Ryan care.

But if you don't, Donald Trump says he won't go for it again.

Where do you stand on this?

We'll give you all the details, and we want to hear from you right now at 888-727-BECK.

I want to hear your voice on this.

888-727-BECK, we go there right now.

I will make a stand,

I will raise my voice, I will hold your hand, cause we have won.

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

I mean, that's pretty amazing.

Hello, America.

Welcome to the Glenn Beck Program.

We're just discussing what does it mean that the president is done with this?

I mean, first of all, you don't write the law anyway.

Right.

It doesn't come from you.

You sign it at the end,

and it's up to Congress to do it.

It's up to Congress.

Then it goes to the Senate.

So if they write a tremendous bill, you're going to now veto it because you're throwing a temper tantrum?

Or

is he saying, I will, I don't know, sabotage it or I will

make sure that I'm, you know, that I speak out against it or what?

It's an amazing thing.

It was a bizarre threat.

Bizarre threat.

And it's not, you know, it's being received as if he gets to say that the health care bill will no longer exist if they don't vote for it today.

And it's like, well, they're co-equal branches of government.

The Congress can do whatever they want.

And if you want to veto it, then you can veto it.

But that's not really.

But I will tell you.

I mean, I really don't understand this.

I really think

this is Bannon's play for chaos.

We all know that

chaos is coming in the healthcare world because this is not going to last.

It has to be changed.

In my opinion, it has to be fully repealed, pulled up by the roots, and the free market restored

and

freed up.

I mean, we can't go back to what we had because what we had wasn't working.

It was a hybrid of socialism and capitalism.

Now, it's even a worse hybrid of socialism and capitalism.

There's only two answers.

You go single-payer full socialism or you go full capitalism.

You know which side I'm for.

The president has said from the beginning, he is for full-fledged socialism.

Not in his words, but he says a single-payer government pays for everybody on everything.

He said a lot of things about it, but he did say that as well.

Oh, he was that he was crystal clear on, though.

So what does this mean?

Who would be advising the president to say these things?

I'm just not going to, I'm going to take my ball and go home.

Well, I mean, look.

It's got to be solved.

I don't know that anybody advises him to say it.

He just says it.

I mean, that's him.

That's Trump's speak right there.

Well, I think it's his negotiation, right?

He's saying, I don't want to spend any more time on this.

He's now threatening to blame Paul Ryan for it.

He's now saying that, you know, they should have done tax reform first.

And, you know, it's a big problem, but it's like, it's amazing how far our Overton window really goes.

I mean, you know, think about this.

Like, if we had, let's just say, scale from one to 10, one being the least amount of government possible in healthcare, 10 being single-payer, you know, England.

Let's say we were at a five in 2008, and Barack Obama comes in, passes Obamacare, and it moves from a five to an eight.

This bill essentially is making it go from an eight back to a seven.

Okay.

Or a seven, five, and some would argue an eight, five.

Yeah.

So, but it's barely moving the needle.

Yeah.

And so all the conservatives.

Massey actually said it's worse than Obamacare.

He did.

He did.

Yeah.

Well, I think it is because it's a fix that accelerates the bankruptcy.

Right.

Well, maybe.

I mean,

it might.

I mean,

it does cut the deficit.

I mean,

300 billion.

300 billion.

The new one actually is less than that.

It's only 150 billion.

Right.

But so you go from a five, then you go to an eight with Obamacare.

Let's say this moves back to a seven.

And the conservatives are saying, well, no, we want a full repeal, which would only move it back to a five.

Right.

Where is the plan that moves it from a five to a four or a three or two?

I mean, that's what we used to argue for.

Our hardcore conservative argument is returning it back to a point where too much government was involved anyway.

That you have control of the House, the Senate, and the presidency.

Where's the plan that makes it more conservative than it was in 2008?

Where's that plan?

I mean, it doesn't exist.

And it doesn't even exist.

Because there's no one.

Look, because we knew this.

We knew this.

Well, I have a lot to say that I will not say.

We knew this going in that

there is a progressive gene that is in the Republican Party.

And when it came to Medicare or medical care,

Donald Trump is a progressive.

So you have Paul Ryan, who we used to all agree was a progressive, that

was

not the guy

to come and tell us about Obamacare.

Nobody wanted to hear from Paul Ryan.

When was that?

Two years ago?

The president comes in, Mitch McConnell and Paul Ryan, they're the architects of this.

Along with

Donald Trump, they're the ones that are going to give us the right kind of health care for conservatives.

No.

We were fools to believe it.

Now, the question is:

do we send a message?

Because all that's going to happen,

the Freedom Caucus is going to stand, and the Freedom Caucus will say no.

Then Donald Trump will say, along with the press, it's the Freedom Caucus's fault.

It's these constitutionalists' fault.

I'm perfectly, you know, me, I'm perfectly willing to be the outcast.

Yep, that was us.

I'm uncomfortable in any other position.

I am too.

Yep, that was us.

I refuse to do anything that is unconstitutional.

Yep.

You want to, you want to make it better?

We will make it better.

You just want to fool around and try to make the sewer.

You're putting air fresheners in the sewer pipes.

It's a sewer pipe.

I don't care how you try to freshen the smell.

It's a sewer pipe.

I don't want to be in the sewers.

I'm not going to recommend air fresheners.

I'm going to say, hey, what do you say?

We open up the little lid and we climb out of the sewer and walk around in the forest and the clean air.

What do you think?

Yeah.

You want an argument to pass it?

Is it worth it?

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

So if, let's say, they passed the perfect bill in the House,

everything went perfectly, and you had the perfect bill in the House that got passed, it would go to the Senate, and the Senate would not pass that same bill.

They would amend it however they wanted, and they would pass a Senate version of it that you'd have to come together with afterwards.

So if you want this process to continue, there's an argument to say the House get get it passed because you weren't getting that bill anyway.

It's going to go.

I don't think Mitch McConnell is going to improve it.

He's not going to improve it.

However,

the Senate's going to come up with something and they can pass something as well.

Then you can come together and try to find a bill.

If I had, but you'd kill the argument is you kill the process here if it ends in the House and it's over and you have no chance of repealing Obamacare.

I mean, it's not a good idea.

If I had confidence that anyone in the Senate would listen to it, they're going to make it worse.

Oh, yeah, they'll make it worse.

So if I had any confidence that the Senate would listen to, you know, Ted Cruz, Mike Lee, or any of those guys, Rand Paul, I'd be for that.

But get it out of their hands, get it over to the Senate in the hands of Rand Paul.

But don't you have to, don't you, isn't it a good idea to give Rand Paul a shot at it?

I mean, he's certainly been pretty good on health care as they've talked about this debate.

No, I don't think so.

So why not give him a chance?

Because he's not going to be listened to.

He's going to be listened to as much as he's being listened to right now.

Not at all.

But I mean, you ⁇ the argument is from the Trump administration, you don't pass it in the House now, you don't repeal Obamacare.

Now, that's not technically true.

However, the way many Republicans in Congress seem to worship the White House.

I don't want to own this.

I don't want to own this.

Yeah, but you might not want to own it, but it hurts people.

Obamacare hurts people.

And Ryan care or Trump care will hurt people even more.

Well, arguably, I don't know if that's true, honestly.

But still, I mean, certainly it would be a savings and spending for the country.

Here's how it hurts people even more.

It not only hurts people.

You're looking at the tax savings, and so maybe some people have tax savings.

That's not going to help us in the long run

because all they'll do is those evil people, they just wanted to have their tax savings.

That hurts the conservative movement because this, whatever it is, will be deemed the conservative health care plan.

This is not conservative.

This is not free market.

This isn't anything we stand for.

This is a progressive health care plan.

Yeah.

I don't want anything to do with it.

They could do better, and we deserve better.

This is like, you know, we talked about this a couple of days ago.

It's like if

Obamacare was a turdburger, this is a turdburger cut in half.

Okay, well, you're still eating turdburger.

You're still a turdburger.

Yeah.

I don't want that.

And I do think, too, you want want the fastest route to single-payer is you pass the Republican plan.

Yep.

And then, if that is a disaster, which it very well might be, then they're going to say the only way to fix this is to make it single-payer.

Right.

So that's another thing to consider here.

Because they will say, we've tried the Republican light.

We've tried Obama light.

We're going full in because this thing is collapsing.

And it's no, no.

I refuse to have my name and our credibility on that piece of garbage.

Why?

You will then.

You will then officially own it.

I don't want to own this.

We as

conservatives will own this mess because what people will say is Obamacare would have been better than this.

Now, the Republicans, they gave us something, and look at what they came up with.

We need the Democrats to fix it because Obamacare was better than this.

And believe me, they will fix it.

No.

Call your congressman one way or another

because

I do believe the president will pull out.

I do believe Trump will say, fine, we're moving on to something else.

And he will target the freedom caucus.

He will target all those guys.

And that probably hurts your tax reform plan, too, because he won't listen to them.

And I think that's wait a minute.

Sounds like,

wow, sounds like prophecy.

First of all,

there's no good outcome, it doesn't seem, from any of this.

But the other part of it is, like, doesn't this show how little

Donald Trump's administration as a whole whole cares about Obamacare actually going away?

Like,

they're like, well, you know what?

If you don't want this one thing, I'm done with this week.

This week is the end of my

attention to this issue.

You know why, Stu?

Because he is the kind of guy that, I mean, I've heard when we were hiring for HR, did an interview with a guy who said,

I said, number one priority for HR for me is insurance.

And he said,

I can understand that.

And I said listen my view on insurance and I told him what I what I felt his mouth opened up and he said

wow

and I said you have a problem with that and he said no no I've just never heard anyone ever say that and I said listen if my family can't use it, doesn't think it's right, has to go and do other things,

I can afford that.

My employees can't afford that.

If I'm not covered on this insurance, they're not covered on this insurance.

There's no two standards here.

What's right for my family is right for everybody's family.

And he said, I have been in boardrooms recently where all of the CEOs and all of the board of directors are there and we're all talking about insurance.

He said, because that's happening in boardrooms all across America.

And he said, this is what they say.

Somebody on the board of directors will look and say, don't they have?

He said, this is a quote,

don't the people have that Obama thing?

Can't we just dump them into that?

That is, I believe, Donald Trump as a businessman.

That's the way he looks at it.

There's a lot of people who are in business that say, dump them into Obamacare.

I don't care.

Get it off my books.

I don't think he does care.

You have to have an outlook, not as a businessman and not as a politician, but somebody who actually cares about the people and knows the government system never works.

Never.

And, you know, Trump cares about the win here, right?

Yes.

Trump cares about the win saying he kept a promise.

And those things are good.

I mean, you want that.

I tried, and it was their fault.

Now this, protecting your home has

not always been easy, not always been cheap.

How much do you pay for your security cost?

Sometimes you'll pay up to $50, $60 a month just for the monitoring.

But don't worry,

the system is free.

Yeah, that's if you're lucky they try to convince you the system is free, but you're locked into a two or three or four-year contract paying $60 a month.

You've paid for that security system over and over and over again.

How do I know?

Best-selling security system from SimplySafe, completely wireless, top of the line, state-of-the-art technology, is about $600.

So how many times are you going to pay for your security system?

Over and over and over again.

And they lock you into a contract.

SimplySafe, it's $14.95 a month.

You can cancel at any time.

You own the system.

It's fully wireless.

So if you live in an apartment and you're going to move to another one, you live in a house and you're getting ready to move, you take the security system with you.

And again, it's top-of-the-line state-of-the-art technology.

Get a 10% discount right now when you go to simply safebeck.com.

Be protected by the end of the week.

Well, next week, not this week, because it's Friday, thank God.

10% discount, go there now, simply safebeck.com.

That's simply safebeck.com.

The Glenn Glen Beck Beck Program,

the fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

The Glenn Beck Program.

The Glenn Beck Program.

888-727-BEC.

Looking forward to hearing your voice on this.

What do you do with Trump Care?

Yes or no?

Do we pass it or not?

The president says if you don't pass it, he's not coming back.

Let's go to Sam in Oregon.

Hello, Sam.

Go ahead.

You're on the Glenbeck program.

Thank you, Glenn.

Yes, I say kill this bill.

It's completely worthless.

But my bigger and only influence on politics anymore is the fact that without term limits, Congress is a joke and they're never going to do anything that's worthwhile.

You might as well just quit wasting your time listening to them.

I happen to agree with you.

I like this point, though, however, because if the result of this is Trump complains about how bad Congress was, this was also a campaign promise that Donald Trump made to push for term limits.

It would be an interesting time to pivot and say, you know what?

This is what's wrong with it.

All these people here have been here for whatever the argument is.

I don't care.

I'm just saying it's a good thing.

He could do that.

He could do that.

Let's see if he does.

It would be great if he did.

If he was using this as a way to set up Paul Ryan, and I know this is a little bit of the, you know, the John Roberts after he rewrote the law to get it by.

I don't think it's his intent, but I think he's playing his hand where he is.

And if he does something like that, maybe he's, I mean, maybe that's good.

Maybe.

Let's go to Adam in New York.

Hello, Adam.

You're on the Glembeck program.

Hello.

Hi, go ahead.

All right.

No, I just wanted to call in and say that I think Trump's completely wrong for saying either pass this version of Obamacare light or I'm going to move on to something else.

He needs to be persistent about keeping a campaign promise that he made.

And I'm one of the people that voted for him so that we could repeal Obamacare completely and not get this, you know, Obamacare on a file.

So, how do you feel?

Because this is probably one of the bigger things.

I mean, you want to talk about a mixed bag.

Looks like Gorsuch, and we'll get into this later,

is going to be the next Supreme Court, and that's great.

At the same time, on the same week, you have this debacle.

So, how are you feeling about

you?

Feel betrayed, you feel good, how do you feel?

I feel pretty betrayed.

I mean, yeah, we got Gorsuch in the Supreme Court, which is great.

That's great.

But past that, really, if he's not going to repeal Obamacare, if he's not going to build the wall, if he's not going to keep any of his other campaign promises, then what is he going to be doing for the next three and a half years?

Well, wait, he is taking, he's taking bids on the wall.

Do you not believe that that's going to happen?

No, I don't think it's going to happen at all.

I think it's going to be something that he's going to do pretty much exactly what you're saying about Obamacare.

He's going to pay Congress for it not happening.

Thank you very much, Adam.

You're listening to the Glenn Beck program.

Mercury.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

While we're here on healthcare, I want to give you a blast from the past.

Who said this quote?

In my district, right now, there's a lot of misunderstanding about what it is we're doing.

And once we get it done, then we can have the chance to really explain it.

Who said that?

Blast from the past.

Nancy Pelosi.

Yeah, we're going to stick with Nancy Pelosi.

Stick with Nancy Point.

Well, it is a blast from the past.

It happened last night on MSNBC.

Who said it?

Republican Chris Collins.

Now, of course, Nancy Pelosi said the identical thing, essentially.

And we went crazy.

Everyone went crazy.

Here's Chris Collins, a Republican.

A Republican saying the exact same thing.

Yeah.

You got to pass it to know what's in it.

Let me go to Gail in Michigan.

Hello, Gail.

How are you?

Hi, Glenn.

And I just wanted to let you know I pray for you guys all the time, and God bless you all.

Thank you.

I think

Rand Paul and all of the Freedom Caucus, all of them out there fighting against this bill need to stick to their guns because they're just fear-mongering again.

And

it's just bad.

I mean, I know they can do better.

I know they can do better than this.

They already have done better than this.

They passed a bill when they knew the president wasn't going to sign it.

In 2015.

In 2015, that did everything.

All they have to do is just pass that bill in the Senate.

But again, that bill is just flat.

That was not an improvement on the current system.

That just was the current system.

They said, bring it back from Obamacare to what it used to be.

Where's the thing that makes it better than where it used to be?

But that's what they promised.

That is.

They promised that they would bring it back to where it used to be.

That's not what will fix things.

That's not what we want.

But that's where they promised us.

They have that bill.

They've already passed that bill.

They passed that bill because they knew.

That it would never pass the Senate and it would never go to the president to sign.

And they would just have all of us sheep go, look, look, they're on our side.

Gail, thanks.

Mike in New York City, welcome to the program.

Honestly, at this point, I don't care anymore.

I mean, it doesn't seem like the people in Washington care, so why should I?

Oh, my.

Nine years of arguing at this point.

It's so hard not to feel that way.

We just had that whole discussion yesterday at the end of the show.

Yesterday at the end of the show,

we fessed up.

We don't care.

I mean, I care, but I

only care because of work.

I really do.

I only care because I have to come in here every day and try to make sense of it for the American people.

But we know it's not going to make sense, and we've been shown that time and time.

So, I mean, I can't say.

I don't know what to say anymore.

I know.

You know, well, what do you think this means?

It means they don't care.

It means they're in it for them.

It means that they don't care about you.

In fact,

I'm convinced most of them don't even like you.

And

so why do we care?

Well, what does this mean?

What comes next?

I don't know.

More bad stuff from people who don't really even like you.

I mean, I got nothing else to say anymore.

So I only care because I know that's part of our job.

I'm with you.

I'm with you, Mike.

Thanks.

Let's go to Case in Washington.

Hello, Casey.

Hello.

Good morning.

Good to talk to you again.

Saw you down in Safe Gold Field a couple of years ago, and I'm happy to talk with you.

By the way, I'm a grandson of Alexander Milliner.

Pretend that people in this show don't know who Alexander Milliner is.

Was one of Washington's drummer boys that you have featured on your programs with Mr.

Barton.

Ah,

okay.

See, I knew they wouldn't know or remember.

Yeah,

I wanted you to won't go over it, though.

Abigail Barton was his wife, so maybe Mr.

Barton should look into that.

I'm not for the Affordable Care Act the way that they want to do it right now.

I think the Freedom Caucus should go ahead and keep what they're doing.

I'm a 65-year-old retired Boeing worker.

I'm not on medical.

I'm trying to wait for the dust to settle.

I appreciate the work that you're doing.

My grandfather was coined.

the father of the concept of group life insurance, and all those people paid homage to him.

But today, they're looking more at greed in the insurance companies, but we need to get back to a free market system.

Yes.

Casey, you don't fit in the Seattle area.

I don't know what you're doing there, but

I'm from Iowa.

You're from Iowa.

Yeah, but you've been working at Boeing in Auburn or Seattle?

I worked both in Winton and also up at Everett Putting Together 77776737.

Scan, I was a former radio announcer in Iowa and Omaha.

Wow.

What street did you live on?

Can you give give us a little more detail?

Casey, thanks, Matt.

I appreciate it.

Brian in Ohio.

Hello, Brian.

Hello, Glenn and the boys.

It is so nice to talk to you guys.

I'm a long-time listener from Ohio Marine Corps veteran.

I just wanted to call and say we should definitely kill this bill.

And another thing that a lot of people are not talking about is that the middle class, they want to talk about all these people that are added to the roles.

Well, they could add these people out of the rolls all they want and say they have insurance, but whether we can afford to use that insurance to help us move our lives is a whole nother story.

How do you mean?

I mean, Glenn, it's gotten so bad over the past seven years that I've worked for my employer from where our insurance was to where it is now.

Oh, no, I could almost barely afford with insurance to go to the doctor and be able to pay my bills to

go see a physician.

Brian, thank you.

I mean,

I have to tell you,

we feel your pain.

We feel your pain.

And

I am watching my company

I, because

of Mary's birth, my first child, I was, I don't even know, 21, 22 when she was born.

And I was, you know,

doing okay, but not okay enough to be able to afford major complications of a child

without insurance.

And

she had strokes at birth, and she was in intensive care for about a week.

And I remember there was a baby

in a incubator that was a preemi.

And it was actually cordoned off.

You couldn't go close to it.

And they said

even a cough close to the incubator could collapse the lungs of this baby.

It was so fragile.

And I remember this couple, and they must have been 18 years old.

I mean, really young.

And they were devastated.

And I remember walking by.

I mean, when you all have kids in,

you know, intensive care in the, in the, you know, for newborns, all the parents kind of bond a little bit.

Even if you don't talk, you just kind of look at each other.

You've gone through this.

And

I'll never forget the look of that kid who was just a couple years younger than me at the time.

And I remember thinking, the doctor said they don't have insurance.

And I remember looking at her, and she was all about the child, and looking at him, and he was like me, all about the child and all about, good God, what what does this mean to our life?

And I'll never forget it.

And I happened to be working for a company that had unbelievable medical insurance.

It was Edens Broadcasting.

And Gary Edens was the best.

And he made sure that everybody had the best insurance.

And I never had to worry about anything with Mary.

And then when I started going to other places with existing, pre-existing conditions and everything else, it really controlled our life.

Cobra became a big part of our life for a while.

And there's nothing more difficult for a parent than having to worry about medical insurance.

So

I get it.

I get it.

And as apparently one of the few employers that actually care, the one thing we have to do is get this insurance out of the hands of the employers.

You just, we need to have,

we need to have bigger groups of people.

You should be able to, you know, join, you know, your churches

medical care, your, your, whatever group you're in, the, I don't even know, the, the New York Yankees medical care.

Why would you even need, you should be able to join any group you want.

Yes.

You should be able to post on a message board, I would like to create a new group of people who have insurance.

Join now.

Correct.

The point is that the regulations stop this all the time.

These sorts of things, if you had a pre-market, could happen easily.

They want to trap us

into the medical care from our employers.

And those groups, those pools are not big enough for some, especially small businesses like ours.

It's just not big enough.

And that should stop.

And again, this bill doesn't attack that at all.

At all.

Why don't we have a bill that attacks that issue?

Because nobody is, I'm convinced

that people go to Washington and they might actually be convinced that they're trying to do it for the American people, that they actually care about the American people.

And I think a lot of them do when they first start.

And then they get so far removed from the American people and so far removed and they get into this esoteric, you know, free market stuff

or

political stuff that they lose track on why it is they believe in the free market in the first place.

And they just get lost.

And listening to voices in Ohio saying, you could hear the pain in his voice, could you not?

Yeah.

How can Donald Trump say

to that man,

you pass this?

He's saying, please don't.

I can't afford it now.

How can you listen to the voice of somebody who may have voted for you and say you take this or i'm giving you nothing

that's not a group of people that actually care about you

and what they're trying to do is kind of the worst of both worlds here because you could say okay we're going to keep it the way it is and that's terrible but at least it's not a change for people and it makes it easy for politically I mean, so if he does nothing, he can blame Democrats, he can blame Republicans, but it's never his fault.

You know, you go back to.

And I'm not looking for somebody.

I hate, well, I don't want it to be my fault.

I hate that, but

I'm only willing to take that if you're going to try to do something bold.

Surprisingly, exactly.

That's the point of point.

It's like even going back to 2008 is not bold.

I mean, you know, we know what they said in 2008.

Jonathan Gruber wrote a report for MIT where he wrote, hey, if there's no Obamacare, there will be 54 million people uninsured by 2019, I think was his estimate.

Now, these estimates have all been wrong.

However, that's what they're saying is going to happen with GOP care

by 2024.

So you here are what?

Delaying this number by a couple of years for multiple trillions of dollars over the long run,

and you don't solve any of the problems.

If you're going to go and change what you have, why not change it to something good instead of something slightly less bad potentially?

So

let me tell you a story.

Yesterday, I had a meeting with all of the top executives.

They flew into town from Mercury Real Estate.

This sponsor, but it ties into this.

Mercury Real Estate is a company that I started with my brother about three years ago.

We announced it about a year and a half ago.

We started it and we had a hundred real estate agents and

we were looking for real estate agents that first were fans of the show, not casual listeners, fans of the show.

Because I know one thing, our fans trust each other and they like each other.

And it's because the real fans of the show have just a set of principles that they live by or try to.

Well, the results were fantastic.

And so we announced Mercury Real Estate, Real Estate Agents I Trust.com, where we line you up.

So, yesterday, I go into this meeting and I sit with them and I said,

Tell me what the people are saying.

Tell me what you're hearing about that.

I didn't care about the numbers, I didn't care about, you know, the business stuff.

I wanted to know what people were saying.

And one of the guys sitting at the table said, Glenn, let me tell you about our real estate, one of the real estate agents who I won't name, but is in Washington state.

This woman got a listing

and she was working with the wife.

And she went over to the house and she said, okay, you got to paint, you got to clean up your yard, you got to do this, you got to do that.

And it was a poorish family.

And she said, you know what?

I'll come over.

I'll help you.

So she went over on her weekends and she helped, you know, put plant new plants in the flower bed for curb appeal.

She helped this woman paint her whole house on the inside.

Her husband, it comes down to sign the contract, she did this all before signing the contract.

When her husband finds out that it's realestagents I trust.com and her wife said, or the real estate agent says this Glenn Becks company, her husband hates my guts and said, absolutely not.

Absolutely not.

She didn't get the deal.

She didn't get the contract.

Here's the part of the story.

I said, how is she?

And she said, she's currently helping some other person paint their house.

She hasn't changed.

Doing the right thing,

even if you lose,

doing the right thing will pay off.

I think this real estate agent is going to be a superstar.

From the woman whose husband said no, I think that woman is going to say to everybody she knows, boy, this woman actually cares.

You want to sell your house on time for the most money with people you can trust?

Go to realestateagentsitrust.com.

That's realestateagentsitrust.com.

This is

the Glenn Beck Program.

Mercury.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

I don't know who's been banging down the door for a chips movie.

Everyone.

Everybody.

But that is coming out.

Everybody.

When is that chips movie coming out?

Right after Emergency in Squad 51.

Chips.

One out of 12, one out of two.

Who watched series?

Who was watching chips?

Was that chips just for your

sexually frustrated mom to watch?

I mean, seriously.

It does seem like it does seem like that.

Because it wasn't a good cop show.

No.

It wasn't a good drama.

It wasn't a good comedy.

No.

It was just

two guys that your mom would have thought were cops.

Astronomers would have thought.

28% on Rotten Tomatoes for chips.

Oh, wow.

That's a shot.

I'm surprised that.

So life starts today.

That space thriller with

tremendous.

That looks really good.

Yeah.

Back in a minute.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

Mercury.

This is the Blaze Radio on demand.

Last hour, we just opened up the phones.

We talked to you.

Was there a single person that said, no, no, no, let's go with the Ryan Trump plan?

No.

No, no.

Yesterday there was one.

Yeah, yesterday there was one.

And yesterday, I think there were more people that agreed with us that I don't care anymore.

I just don't care anymore.

Because they're just going to do whatever they want to do.

And even if they do something good, they'll end up screwing it up later.

For instance, in my opinion, not passing this is good because it gives you a chance to go back and say, okay,

let's really do it right.

But instead, what they'll do is they will blame it on the conservatives, the freedom caucus, and then they'll come back most likely and do something far worse than this.

So that just makes me say, I don't really care, whatever.

You guys are going to screw it up anyway.

Whatever.

Now let's switch.

That was healthcare.

Let's switch to Gorsuch.

Did you hear Chuck Schumer yesterday?

You want to talk about a guy who is out on planet 10.

It's Chuck Schumer.

We begin there right now.

I will make a stand.

I will raise my voice.

I will hold your hand.

Cause we have have won.

I will be my drum.

I have made my choice.

We will overcome.

Cause we are one.

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

It's pretty cute.

Chuck Schumer.

He's got Gorsuch down.

I think he dealt him a death blow.

A death blow.

He dealt him a death blow.

He said they're going to filibuster

because Gorsuch is an extremist.

And if anybody in America watched Gorsuch at all, you know he's out of control.

He's out of control.

He's out of control.

Listen to the case made by Chuck Schumer yesterday.

This morning, I'd like to lay out the reasons why I'll be voting no on this nomination.

Please.

Not first.

First,

Judge Gorsuch was unable to sufficiently convince me that he'd be an independent check on a president who has shown almost no restraint

from from executive overreach.

Unlike Barack Bunmahuma,

never overreached.

And, you know, you don't want people with ideologies on the bench, you know, like Sodomior or Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

You do not want those people on the bench.

My goodness, you don't want that.

Second, he was unable to convince me that he would be a mainstream justice

who could rule free from the biases of politics and ideology.

Is this amazing.

Are you real?

Are you kidding me?

To the American people, this is so offensive.

It's so obviously untrue, and it's just a bunch of crap.

But inside Washington circles, this is what you get praised for.

If you're willing to go out and blatantly lie to help your team, that is, you get a gold star.

That's the highest honor.

Well, yeah, and he's ignoring the fact that he's got four justices that vote in lockstep with everything he believes every time without exception.

Four of them vote exactly the same way, left,

leftist, extreme left, every single time.

So, who's he trying to kid here?

Everybody knows it.

Everybody knows it.

His career and judicial record suggests not a neutral legal mind, but someone with a deep-seated conservative ideology.

None of them are new.

He was groomed by the Federalist Society.

Stop.

Stop.

Oh, my God.

Oh, my gosh.

Could you tell me about what a a federalist is?

Wow.

Pat.

What is a federalist?

Well, like,

it's a person who is akin to Satan.

No, no, no.

Yes.

No.

Yes, it is.

Yes, but.

Yes.

Yes, but that's a Satan that believes that the states

are supreme and the individual is supreme and the federal government has

limited power.

Just like

Satan.

It's almost the opposite of Satan.

But

the Federalists believe that the individual has power.

And Satan believes, give me all the glory and I'll force everybody to do the right thing.

This is a man who once had a library card.

Oh, my gosh.

Whoa.

He didn't mention the one time.

He was groomed.

He was in the slodge.

Hang on.

Yeah.

He was groomed by the Elks Club.

Thank you.

He was groomed by the Elks Club.

And you know, you know how, well, they're satanic rituals, as we all know.

Oh, no, the Elks Lodge.

Performed in the basement of the Elks Lodges all over America right now.

Yeah, my dad and mom were an Elks Club.

I was glad to get away from them.

Are you glad?

Because I thought I could have been an Elk.

Yeah, I could have been an Elk today.

If I hadn't gotten away from them, I would have been holding up signs.

I was deep-seated

saying, yeah.

No, I have Elk.

You have elkiness.

You do have some.

You do have some Elkiness.

You do.

I am attracted to club nights.

I've always suspected that.

You know what I mean?

Yeah.

You know, where you go and you sit and you play cards and

stuff like that.

He's a member of the Federalist Society.

No, no, no.

He said he was groomed.

There's groomed.

There's more.

Listen, you're groomed by the Federalist Society.

He has not shown one inch of difference between his views and theirs.

Oh, my God.

And finally,

he is someone who almost instinctively

is powerful over the weak chooses corporations over working Americans.

There could not be a worse time

for someone with those instincts.

Oh, my God.

Oh, no.

Isn't his record with corporations over people like 49% to 51%, something like that?

I mean, it's, yeah, it's.

And he takes it on a case-by-case basis.

And what kind of judge is supposed to say, well, you know, last time I did rule in favor of the corporation.

I should rule in favor of the person this time.

Oh, the answer to your question, John Roberts is the answer to that question.

John Roberts, who is John Roberts.

Yeah, who is John Roberts?

But I mean, that's not the way you do it.

You're supposed to, you know, there's not supposed to be an inch of difference between the Constitution and the judge, the justice.

That's what it's supposed to be.

There's not supposed to be an inch of difference.

He should rule that way every time.

Yep, every single time.

Have you been groomed by the Federalist Society?

Yes, I hope I have been.

By the way, as far as ideological bent,

the New York Times did a chart of left-to-right justices and where Gorsuch would be.

And he would be the second most conservative justice

as they tell the story, except for Clarence Thomas.

However, who is the most liberal judge?

Justice, you brought up Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

She's second.

Number one, most liberal justice, Sonia Sotomayor.

More liberal than Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

You think Chucky voted for Sotomayor?

Better believe it.

Wow.

Oh, yeah.

She's going to be around a while, too.

I mean, it's just ludicrous to think that they're neutral on every political issue.

Now, they're not supposed to rule politically, but they do, and we know it.

And that's why

a Republican president looks for a guy like this, and a Democrat looks for a person like Ginsburg or Sotomayor.

Wait.

If you had a judge

that was up there that was guaranteed to go with the Republican, guaranteed to go with the Republican president every single time,

would you vote for him?

No.

No.

Neither would someone.

I don't want a justice that goes to the Republican president.

I don't want one that goes to the Constitution.

So there's a difference between what they have is they have somebody that will rule on politics or ideology.

Every time.

Every time.

What we are asking for is someone that is rooted in the Constitution.

When you're rooted in the Constitution, left and right doesn't matter.

Republican, Democrat doesn't matter.

It's just what does the Constitution say about this?

That is the most fair you can be.

What Chucky wants is Chuck wants somebody who will deal not in justice, but social justice.

that is not the role of the supreme court that's not in the constitution i do not want someone who will rule with the with the republicans every time

or 80 of the time or 20 of the time guaranteed no

I want somebody to rule with the Constitution 100% of the time because the parties will always flip as we are noticing.

And I will say this standard only applies to the right.

Neil Gorsuch is up there, and they're testifying about Roe versus Wade and abortion.

Of course, they're asking him all these questions about it.

He said, if Trump asked him about Roe versus Wade and how he would vote on it, he said he would have walked out of the room.

And they asked him, well, what about

the law of the land?

Is it settled

case law?

And he said it has been ruled on many times and it is the law of the land.

Now, that makes me nervous, though his other rulings point to the fact that he will be on the right side of Roe versus Wade.

Man, he better be.

Well, wait, wait.

To say it is the law of the land.

Right.

So nothing he said disqualifies him.

So was Jim Crow laws.

My point is, though, if you ask Sonia Sotomayor, hey, you throw her at Roe v.

Wade, oh, absolutely.

We don't do that.

I know.

No, we don't do that.

And it's burned us many times, by the way.

However, that is, again, you want someone who's going to actually look at the Constitution and read what's in it.

ZipRecruiter has been used by Fortune 100 companies and thousands of small and medium-sized businesses because they needed to find the perfect candidate in the most efficient manner.

With ZipRecruiter.com, you can post your job on 200-plus job sites, including social media networks, Facebook and Twitter, all with a single click.

You can find any candidate in any city, any industry, nationwide.

You post once and watch your qualified candidates roll into ZipRecruiter's easy-to-use interface.

No juggling the emails or calls to your office.

You screen the candidates, you rate them, and you hire the right person fast.

Isn't that what you want?

Right now, you can post your job on ZipRecruiter for free by going to ziprecruiter.com/slash Beck.

You need to fill a role at your office?

Please try this.

It's free.

You'll be amazed.

It's how we hire people.

You should give it a shot.

Ziprecruiter.com/slash Beck.

It's free, ziprecruiter.com/slash Beck.

Lend that program.

Triple 8727 back.

Mercury.

The Glenn Beck Program.

Kelly Shackelford, who is an attorney for the Liberty Institute fighting for religious freedom and really one of the guys on the front lines and has developed Trumpnomine.com just so people can pay attention, see everything about Gorsuch,

watch the hearings, and read all the important facts that you might need to know to make a decision.

Kelly Shackleford, welcome to the program.

How are you?

Good, Glenn.

Thanks for having me.

This has been a really quite uninteresting

hearing week.

I mean, it's been good.

He's rock solid,

unflappable,

but there have been no fireworks until we find out yesterday from Chuck Schumer that he was groomed by the Federalist Society

and

hasn't shown, shocking, and he hasn't shown any daylight between them.

And he's an extremist.

And am I hearing Schumer right that he's saying that the Democrats are going to filibuster?

I mean, that's what everybody's reporting.

I mean, that's what he said, but I just, I have a hard time believing that.

We'll see.

It would be an incredibly foolish move.

You've got Gore Sichira who, as you said, they couldn't land a punch on at all.

And they've got to make him extreme.

I mean, to filibuster, you know, they tried to filibuster Alito.

They got 25 votes.

And Alito had statements against Roe v.

Wade in public and a long history.

They have nothing really on Gorsuch.

He's about almost 3,000 opinions, 2,700 or so, that he was a part of.

And this is the thing, Glenn, this is so funny when you look at this.

97% of his opinions were unanimous.

99% he was in the majority.

So it's hard to make him into something crazy.

And yet, that's where they would want to fight and die over the filibuster.

Because if they do, then I think the odds are great that even the moderate Republicans will feel comfortable saying, okay, Harry Reid took out the filibuster on the lower court judges.

We're going to take him out on the Supreme Court.

There's no reason to have this filibuster anymore.

Is there any reason, is there anything that gives you any doubt that

Gorsuch gets in and

he's John Roberts?

When it comes down to it, he screws us in the end?

Well, you just never know with anybody because they can be the right person, have the right opinions, have the right philosophy.

But then when it push comes to shove, do they have courage?

Do they have courage to do the right thing when the pressure's on?

And that's tremendous pressure.

Like if we're talking about, you know, overturning Roe v.

Wade or something like that, if you get the numbers where that's the case and that's the vote.

Obviously, with his whole life work

of originalism and his opinions and everything, he gets an opinion and he says this isn't in the Constitution.

That's what he's going to say.

Absent, you know, doing something like you say, like a John Roberts.

I know a couple of people were...

or I say a couple, there were people that were concerned about what he said on last day, which was

that the Obergefeld opinion, the same-sex marriage opinion, was settled law.

And a lot of people said, whoa, what does that mean?

He admitted it's settled law.

And I just didn't take that as something huge.

He's a court of appeals judge.

For him, it was settled law.

I mean, he had to follow it because it was a higher court.

That doesn't mean that, you know, everything that's already decided was in settled law now, that when he got a new case with facts and allowed him to analyze it with a proper judicial approach, that he wouldn't have a different opinion.

So we won't know until we see.

He's got the philosophy, the approach of a scalia of the conservatives on the court.

I do think the first part of your question, Glenn, I do think he's going to be on the court.

I think they're having the vote on April 3rd and then it'll go.

I think that the idea is for them to get that out of committee and then to have the vote on the floor of the Senate and to be done by their recess on April 7th.

So I think it's highly likely that by April 7th,

he's going to be Justice Gorsuch.

We'll see.

But that looks like the schedule.

And the only question is what you're asking about.

Are they going to filibuster?

And if they do, I think all they're doing is ending the filibuster, which politically would not be smart because the next battle is probably going to be even more ferocious because it's really about to control the court.

This is reporting.

And

that's the one where a lot of people will really care.

That's the one where they'll be able to ratchet it up because you're going to lose a liberal on the court.

And so, all of the TV, you know, spots and everything else.

And if they get rid of the filibuster then, it will look very unfair and everything else.

If they filibuster now and the Republicans are like, fine, we're just, you, you nuked us before, we nuke you.

We don't need this anymore.

We're just moving forward.

Nobody will really care at this point, but they'll have a chance to that being real fire against the Republicans the next time.

I agree.

That's why it really doesn't make any sense to me.

I mean,

the only rationale for this is that the base is so extreme and that people like Schumer feel like they have to placate their base, that they're doing things that are even incredibly politically foolish.

But I'm sure the Republicans assume now, you know, we're assuming something.

We're assuming that 52, at least 50 Republicans will hold strong and say, well, this is so outrageous that, of course, we're going to end this filibuster.

And Harry Reid ended it on all these other things anyway.

We're assuming that will happen.

Sometimes we get surprised by the Republicans and what they do.

So we'll have to wait and see.

Tell me what the Federalist Society is or what you know about it.

The Federalist Society is sort of a debating society.

It's considered conservative,

but really what they do is they hold meetings all over the country with lawyers, really the top lawyers, the top judges around the country, and they bring them in, and there's always two sides.

They always have two of the top intellectuals or four of the top intellectuals debating whatever very mundane but particular constitutional or statutory or legal issue.

And sort of it's somewhat of a meeting where people gather, they hear intellectual discourse from two opposite sides, and

it's considered the more conservative one because they're actually fair.

There's a liberal one that doesn't do the same thing, but it's considered the conservative one.

And because of that, I think usually at their national meetings, I have one big national meeting amongst local meetings around the country.

Usually four or five of the Supreme Court justices, usually the more conservative ones, will show up and speak at those as well.

Right, okay, but they meet in secret and they're all wearing cowls, right?

No, it's all public.

People can come.

They allow membership.

They don't ask you what your beliefs are.

It's nothing like that.

It's really

a group that values

things like what is the law?

What does the Constitution say?

And

again, they're very fair in that they always have an equal number of people on each side in these debates because they want to learn what the thoughts are, what the arguments are.

But as a result of actually trying to hew to what the law is, they're seen as more conservative.

Do you you think, Kelly, that

how do you think Neil Gorsuch would rule on the idea of Glenn Beck having Coca-Cola and MMs for breakfast today?

Would he approve of that?

I don't know what this has anything to do with.

We were talking about a group of people who take a little boat and fill it with golden babies, send it across the pond, and offer it to the owl god.

I don't know how you got exactly there,

but I know how you got to the others.

What others think of that?

Kelly.

Kelly, God bless.

Thank you so much.

Kelly Shackleford, go to Trumpnominee.com.

Trumpnomine.com.

Back in a minute with the final chapter in our war on women.

The Glen Beck Program.

Mercury.

The Glenn Beck Program.

Despite all the challenges we face, I remain convinced that, yes, the future is female.

Just look at the amazing energy we saw last month as women organized a march that galvanized millions of people all over our country and across the world.

So which is it?

Is there a war on women?

Or is the future female?

And what exactly does the future is female mean?

Hillary Clinton and others have expended a lot of time and energy selling the war on women, so this new phrase would seem a little out of step with that effort.

But it's important to note that this new phrase and effort comes complete with another attempt to pass the ERA, the Equal Rights Amendment.

The initial effort to get the ERA added to the U.S.

Constitution never happened, but there are many that say it wasn't necessary in the first place.

If the Equal Rights Amendment passes, we'd have no choice.

Under the draft, women would be drafted and forced into combat.

And the president is staunchly against it.

The club begins a new era.

That's ERA, not ERA.

ERA supporters have a tough time keeping the debate focused on what they see as ERA's main goal, economic equality for women who in 1982 earned 59 cents to every man's dollar.

As a registered nurse, Carol makes less than men who fix cars, drive buses, or trim trees.

That's why Carol wants the Equal Rights Amendment ratified.

There were several factors that wound up dooming the movement.

First of all, there were already laws on the books that guaranteed women equal rights.

In certain circumstances, such as when marriages break up, a case could be made that women's rights were and are superior to men's.

Yet the perception of many is that there is an ongoing war on women and women are faring poorly in it.

What I would say to people who think that women already have equality in our country is to really open their eyes to look at the issues of pay equality, violence against women, pregnancy discrimination.

By all means, please, let's truly open our eyes and look at each of those issues.

The never-ending claim of those who are supposedly fighting for women's rights is that women make anywhere from 78 to 87 cents for every dollar a man makes.

In fact, the 1982 news report claimed it was just 59 cents on every dollar.

If we indeed are going to open our eyes to this issue, then we will find that even the liberal Washington Post has debunked this faulty claim every year since 2012, calling it false.

Study after study has found that when comparing similar experience, education, skill level, and commitment to job length of women and men, there is virtually no gender disparity in pay.

None.

In fact, in 147 America's largest 150 cities, young women make 8%

more than men.

All right, what about violence against women?

Huge increase of rape in America.

We're told now that things have gotten so bad that one out of every five women will be raped on an American college campus.

If accurate, that would be a higher percentage of rape than what occurred during the Rwandan genocide.

The good news is, it's not accurate.

It's an outrageous falsehood.

Sexual assaults in the United States have actually plummeted since the mid-1990s, falling by nearly 60%.

Domestic violence is down 63%,

and partner violence has dropped by a whopping 72%.

As for pregnancy discrimination, I'm not even sure what that is, quite frankly.

In general, reproductive rights and pregnancy discrimination are nothing more than euphemisms for abortion on demand.

It was about these reproductive rights that a law student, Sandra Fluke, testified just a few years ago.

Without insurance coverage, contraception, as you know, can cost a woman over $3,000 during law school.

$3,000?

Condoms are like 20 cents a piece.

That is, I mean, if you want to do the math, about 15,000 sexual encounters.

Law school generally takes three years to complete.

To pull off 5,000 encounters a year, a woman would have to average almost 14 sexual encounters every day.

So let's say 15 on a good day and maybe just 13 on a slow hookup day.

Even on the days where you can't fulfill your normal allotment of hookups on Tinder, that doesn't leave you a lot of time to study case law.

Now, for those who like to scream about the war on women, nothing gets them more angry than standing in the way of a woman's right to choose to abort her baby.

The fact is, nothing fits the description of war on women better than the actual killing of female babies.

If pro-life advocates had their way, there would be 52 million more people on Earth today than there are.

Slightly over half of these would be women.

Living, breathing, life-experiencing women.

Take a moment and hear them roar.

If pregnancy discrimination is really about benefits available for female employees, Current U.S.

law dictates that a parent, nearly always the mother, can take 12 weeks of leave from her job.

Some employers offer paid leave.

For others, it's unpaid.

But almost exclusively, it is women that take advantage of this benefit.

Still, it's often claimed that the U.S.

has the worst pregnancy benefit of any industrialized country on earth.

However, In a nation built on liberty and personal responsibility, it's ludicrous to believe that the government would or should force employers to pay women who leave their jobs for three months regardless of the reason.

It's even more foolhardy to expect that in a nation built on liberty that the government would or should impose maternity leave taxes on others, on the childless, on the single adults, on the elderly, on anyone other than those who have chosen to start their family to provide the benefits to the mothers leaving their jobs.

In the 1950s, only 19% of mothers with young children worked outside of the home.

81% of mothers stayed at home with their kids.

The 1960s brought about a sexual and social revolution to the United States and to the American family.

Discontented women like Betty Friedan began telling moms that they couldn't be fulfilled by raising a family, that in fact, something was wrong with them if that's all they did.

Women, stay-at-home moms, suddenly under siege for not wanting to be more.

They could have it all, but not by raising their family.

They had to leave their family and enter the corporate world.

It's truly ironic to note that even as women were being encouraged to leave their homes and enter the world of corporate America, the same feminist movement, as with so many other movements of the time, quickly became mixed with something other

than the need for women to do something outside the home.

The anti-corporate message of Marxism was also added to this mixture.

How did you account for women's subordination?

What was your explanation for why women were oppressed?

We thought it was

a mixture of

men and capitalism.

It seemed to me that if you were going to change women's position, you needed to change the society.

So somehow doing more than changing diapers became intermingled with Marxism.

I was in those small consciousness raising groups, but at first with my characteristic arrogance, I thought I was in them not because I was oppressed, but rather because I was going to bring them real politics.

They needed an economic analysis.

They needed Marx.

They needed Engels.

They needed all those things that I could bring them.

And thank the guttus, they got to me before I got to them.

I was in a group which was a rather swatty group, actually, because we wanted to read about anthropology.

And I had the idea that somehow or other anthropology provided some mystery key.

Anyway, we all sat down and read Engels.

Then we read Simon de Beauvoir.

And so we read things and discussed them.

And then we would have these heart-rending sessions about saying, we are not a proper consciousness raising group like the Americans.

We need to talk more personally.

So, as with many movements in the 1960s and 70s, Marxism and radicalism poisoned the direction that this movement would take.

What may have started out as a way for women to discover new talents that they never knew they had and to spread their wings to fly a little morphed into yet another way for radicals to infiltrate American society.

For those radicals, this movement had the added benefit of striking at the very foundation of American life, the American family.

Whereas in the 1950s, 81% of mothers with young children stayed home with them.

By 2000, that number had dwindled to 23%.

And in the meantime, with no one, no mother or father in the home full-time, nearly every aspect of American life has suffered as a result.

But there is a silver lining in this story.

In the recent years, the downward trend of mothers choosing to work inside the home has been reversed.

As of the latest year that statistics are available, 29% of American mothers with children have chosen to stay at home and raise their young families.

It just may be that a significant number of American parents are realizing that there is a war being waged in this country, and it is a war on children, and that someone needs to fight the battle in the home

starting next week in an exclusive serial on the Glenbeck program.

You'll learn the truth about the war on women.

Listen to the entire catalog of cereals now online at glenbeck.com/slash serials.

You know, what I'm thinking is that the pendulum has swung so far one direction

that

it's swinging back the other direction

in the home.

The things that were common sense for our grandmothers, our mothers got lost with,

at least mine did, with the equal rights movement.

She was battling

the

she was, you know, had one foot

one place and one foot the other.

She couldn't go for the Marxism burn your bra thing, but she also wanted to be more than a stay-home mom, and she was confused.

That confused the daughters, and now our daughters are

starting to swing back the other way.

And it reminds me of the gods of the carpet

copybook headings.

Listen, just this last.

Then the gods of the market tumbled and their smooth-tongue wizards withdrew, and the hearts of the meanest were humbled and began to believe it was true.

That all is not gold that glitters, and two and two do make four.

And the gods of the copybook headings limped up to explain it once more.

As it will be in the future, it was at the birth of man.

There are only four things certain since social progress began: that the dog returns to his vomit, and the sow returns to his mire, and the burnt fool's bandage finger goes wobbling back to the fire.

That's where we are.

It's going wobbling back to the fire, but it is, it's

waking up.

And after this is accomplished, and the brave new world begins, when all men are paid for existing, and no man must pay for his sins, we're right there as surely as water will wet us as surely as fire will burn the gods of the copybook headings with terror and slaughter return we are at that point to where no man pays for his sins no man is just every man is just paid for existing and two and two don't equal four but it soon will again that's what's happening Goldline is our sponsor this half hour.

According to one expert, the different perspectives of Chairwoman Yellen and President Trump further underscore the potential for a future collision rather than productive collaboration.

Donald Trump versus Janet Yellen, the clash getting closer to happening.

The markets had been looking for real progress from Trump's promise on tax reform and regulatory rollbacks and the rollback of real reform in health care.

That's not happening.

The market shrugged off the market 15 Fed interest rate increase in anticipation of the Trump-spurred economic growth.

But if you notice what's happening to the stock market right now,

it is starting to say, wait a minute, maybe that's not going to happen.

So what does come next?

Only God knows.

But two and two do equal four.

And when the gods of the copybook headings return,

it's not pleasant.

I would have gold, something that is eternally true.

Gold.

Find out the risk for buying gold or silver and putting it in your portfolio.

Call 866-465-3546.

The only company I recommend doing business with is Goldline, 1866 Goldline, 1866 Goldline or Goldline.com.

This is the Glenn Veck program.

Mercury.

You're listening to the Glenn Beck program.

Can we play a little bit of the Kate Winslet thing?

This is from the War on Women.

This is a speech she gave in England about women empowerment.

But as you listen to this, ask yourself: what part of this do you not want your son to also hear?

And it was my turn.

Kate Winslet, are you ready?

The question is:

Are you ready for me?

I would tell myself

she was talking about fat shape.

I would tell myself, come on, are you ready for me, world?

And so I kept working.

I kept working and I kept trying my best.

And then one day,

I was cast as Rose in Titan.

She says, I was this fat girl from a sandwich shop from the worst part of London.

The most,

the most unlikely candidate.

Kate from the sandwich shop in Reading.

Suddenly acting in one of the biggest movies ever made.

Right there.

I mean, I wouldn't want to encourage my son to be Rose from Titan.

Listen to this.

You can be.

You can be from anywhere and you can do anything.

Believe it.

It is possible to overcome your fears.

What if I fail?

Fall over my big feet.

Who cares?

Be you, be you.

I learned to embrace my flaws.

To make no apology for who I am, I dug deep.

Stop.

What part of this do you not want your son to hear?

We're not telling our sons this.

We're only telling our daughters this.

Sons,

you can be anything, believe in yourself,

and chart a great, bold course forward.

The Glenn Beck Program,

Mercury.

This is the Blaze Radio on Demand.

I love this headline.

Movie studios think you'll pay crazy amounts of money to watch movies in your home.

What?

All right, hang on.

Wait, what?

I've been doing that for years.

I know.

They've been talking about, they're talking now about when they release a new movie.

So today, life comes out, which I want to see.

If they charge you, quote, a crazy amount of money that they think you'll pay it so you can just watch it on TV on opening night or, you know, for the first 20 days while it's in the theaters.

Yes.

Now, what's the crazy amount?

Quote,

$30.

Have they been to a movie theater

besides by themselves lately?

By the time you buy your ticket, your wife's ticket or your kids' tickets plus

popcorn, you're at 50 bucks, man.

That's easy.

I eat my own popcorn.

I stay at home.

I watch it in the comfort of my couch.

Yeah, I'll pay that.

I'll pay that.

I'll pay that in a heartbeat.

And they are saying

30-day delay.

Yeah, more than that.

So it would come out 30 days in theaters only.

You have to wait a month.

Then you get to see it in.

Yeah,

that's pretty good, though.

That's pretty good.

That's only a month after.

I'm all for it.

I'd pay 30 days.

They're pretty close to that.

I mean, sometimes they're, you know, they're within three months.

I think it is three months.

Yeah.

Only for

it was three is you know the more successful the movie the longer it is yeah right six months or nine months i don't know i mean i'm willing to pay it me too i'm willing to pay 50 bucks to see it when it's out right now that was their initial one yeah i'm willing to pay 50 bucks you're you're not you're probably come close to breaking even at 50 bucks for a night to the theater Yeah, because you're going, you're going out to eat beforehand or you're eating at the theater.

You know, then maybe you have snacks and then the tickets.

I mean, you're at 50 bucks.

A lot of talk about.

We begin there right now.

I will make a stand, I will raise my voice, I will hold your hand.

Cause we have won.

I will beat my drum.

I have made my choice.

We will overcome.

Cause we are one.

The fusion of entertainment and enlightenment.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

I mean, we're just sitting here.

Look, some of these things,

I want the option.

Like, I will go see life in the movie theater if I can.

I want to see it in the movie theater because it looks like a big screen spectacular.

And there's something about being in the movie theater.

Yeah, I like the movie theater.

There are other movies that are not that big of a deal that you're like, okay, sing, just put it on my damn TV.

Watch sing with my family in the family room.

You know what I mean?

Yeah.

So it depends.

I just want the option to be able to do it.

Movie theaters don't want to go out of business, but movie theaters are doing a good job of reinventing themselves.

Yeah, they are.

But they're still getting that help of the extra.

Now, even they're fighting for, they're saying that you can pay extra money for, we still, you're not going to be able to see it at home until 30 or 35 days after it's released.

So they're still forcing you to go to the theater.

If you want to see it brand new.

If it's a big movie, you're not waiting for Star Wars for 45 days.

And I'm not going to see Star Wars.

I don't want to rent Star Wars and watch it on my TV.

I want to watch Star Wars and surround sound.

And there are times that I want to watch things.

What was the movie you saw?

Get Out?

Yeah.

I heard that was a great movie to watch in a movie theater.

Yes, it was.

Because you experienced

everyone else.

Yeah.

Everybody's cheering and

gasping.

You want to watch movies and it encourages movie makers and

cinemas, theaters to actually make the experience great.

I don't want to watch something that I can watch on my big screen TV at my home, and it's the same experience.

Yeah, I mean, everyone likes options, right?

So I'd love to have the option.

I don't think it'd be something that I would use that often, though.

I mean, when I want to see a movie, I'll go to the theater and see it.

If not, I mean, I'm not, if I'm willing to wait 30 days, then I don't need to pay the premium.

You know, what's amazing is movie theaters knew that,

at least the movie companies knew that this is the way theaters should be run years ago.

I remember in 1982, I'm in Washington, D.C., and the Movie Association, the Motion Picture Association of America had a screening room.

And I don't remember what I saw.

It was, it might have been the new Star Wars movie when it first came out.

The second, well, let's see, the third, the Empire Strikes Back.

Empire Strikes Back.

I may have seen that in Washington, D.C.

in a screening room.

And I remember, I was like 19 years old, and I'm like, holy cow, you should have seen this theater.

They had recliners and they had a little table and they had people coming up and you could order food, you could order drinks, and it was the greatest thing ever.

Well, that's what we have now.

At least here.

I don't know if this has hit every city in America.

But Dallas has a lot of really awesome ones.

What's the one we go to?

The Movie House and Eatery is.

Oh, my gosh.

The movie.

Phenomenal.

Is it Movie House and Eatery?

Yeah.

Movie House and Eatery.

You have one of those.

It's phenomenal.

Phenomenal.

The dine-in theater is really the way to go because you knock out dinner and the movie at the same time.

And usually food is pretty good.

Food is not bad, but you're dropping more than 50.

Yeah, you are.

Oh, yeah.

Well, you're getting two things out of it.

You're going to dinner and you're getting a movie.

Plus, you pay a premium price for that really nice seating.

It's always $12, no matter when you go.

They don't have matinee prices or any of that.

It's always $12 across the board.

And it's also, you get the assigned seating.

I like that, too.

I do like that.

And it's clean.

Beautiful,

you don't have to go.

It's so comfortable.

Yeah, you go early if you want to, eat before the movie, or you can go right before the movie, and you know where you're going to sit.

I like the reserved seating.

It's really comfortable.

The only problem is it's almost too comfortable because I fall asleep at almost every movie now because I'm reclining back and I'm like,

I'll let me rent this at home.

Cheyenne brings a blanket with her.

Really?

Yeah, she's like, it's cold.

I bring in a blanket.

She brings a blanket and she's asleep.

And I'm like, why am I paying $12 for her to sleep?

Stay at home, babe.

Yeah, she's telling you before you leave the house that you're going to be able to do.

I'm going to sleep.

She's like, I'm going to take a $12 million food that she ordered, and it's tough.

I know.

I sit next to her all the time.

Oh, you're not going to eat that.

You're asleep.

She's asleep.

Anyway, so let's change gears here and let's go to global warming because Al Gore had a

frightening.

A new message for everybody.

He now poses a great danger that could even threaten the future of human civilization itself.

The future of human civilization.

Human civilization itself.

It fell.

Now, let me ask you something.

And I mean this sincerely.

If you were never, ever questioned or pushed back and you were given all kinds of awards

for all of your, whatever you said, everybody worshiped you.

And you said, I'm never going to talk to people who disagree with me.

I'm never going to debate them

because they're deniers.

And

And you were effective at taking everyone who disagreed with you and painting them into a monster.

And you could do that for 20 years.

How wrong would you be on almost everything that you said after a 20-year drift?

You would be as wrong as Al Gore is.

You would be.

Because that's exactly what he does.

I mean, when nobody's pushing back on him at all, the guy can say.

He will not go to any hostile environment where people will test him, where

they'll give a little pushback.

Never.

Well, this happened to you, right?

Yeah.

When you were in Houston?

Yeah.

They said when Inconvenient Truth came out in 2005, was it?

They said, okay, he's only doing interviews with those who have seen the movie.

So I went to that crappy movie, went through that experience, suffered through the whole thing, then went back to him.

Yeah, no, he's not going to do the interview.

Well, you said he'd do the interview of it.

No, he's not doing any of those interviews.

So the only place he would go were to friendly outlets uh you know he would go to all the that was few and far between i think after i mean he was because he ended up uh getting pushed back on some of those interviews and he was like i can't do that so imagine can't just think guys how lucky we are that people push back yeah i mean we can well i thought we could we could defend our position um because People call us a pariah all the time.

I mean, there's a blessing in that.

Otherwise, you'd be as wrong as this guy is.

I was just in the Persian Gulf region, and the scientists

for the last couple of years, one of the lines of investigation they've been pursuing has led them to the conclusion that significant areas of the Middle East and North Africa are in danger of becoming uninhabitable.

And just a taste of this, to link it to some of the events.

Hold on just a second.

Hold on just a second.

You're saying parts of the Middle East are uninhabitable?

Uninhabitable.

So, like parts of Saudi Arabia

and Iraq and Syria

are not green, luscious land that is fertile for mankind to live?

Yeah.

I'm having a hard time getting there.

Is there a term to describe that sort of environment?

Well, I don't know if anybody is up on this.

It's called a desert.

Oh, okay.

I've never heard of that.

Yeah.

Well, it's a new scientific.

I've heard of dessert.

Is it the same as desert?

No, it's the opposite.

There's no way to grow anything.

It's just a a little sand.

It sounds like dessert.

It's not.

It's very different.

The Union are going through, and I know that's another source of stress because we're now on the eve next week of the Brexit

process.

But think for a moment about what happened in Syria.

Let's think about that.

You know,

we look at the gates of hell opening.

They've long since opened.

But before the gates of hell opened in Syria, what happened?

What happened?

What happened?

A climate-related extreme drought.

And the scientists have published these peer-reviewed studies for several years now showing exactly why it's related to the climate crisis.

And this is an important point as he makes it here.

It's not that he never receives pushback, but built into his worldview is that everyone who does pushback is a Holocaust denier.

Yes, he is.

Is someone with such little credibility, they should never be listened to under any circumstances.

And to be honest, and those who get government money to do studies that will back you up are the greatest scientists of the world like dr maslowski um and it's funny because say it like

dr mav lowski yeah right that guy so the point here though is that

in some months

in some of the months in thumb of the thumber month we should play that quote again so good uh but my but i think largely as a society we're all falling into this right this is what social media is doing to everybody because people you get pushback on social media, but everyone who disagrees with you, you just automatically just say is nuts or, you know, is crazy and you shouldn't listen to it.

You're a denier, you're a hater, you don't care.

And so people don't get legitimate, honest pushback on any of their points.

It's what we talked to with Megan Phelps Roper, who used to be in the Westboro Baptist Church earlier this week.

And since you never face honest questions anywhere, people wind up just being in their little

brain and never get pushed.

The guy is actually blaming the Syrian war.

Yeah, we're getting there.

On climate change.

I mean, the unmitigated gall of that is just, it's hard to get your head around it.

He's saying that the final outcome in Brexit.

You know, I mean, he's speaking in the United Kingdom in Brexit is because of that.

Because of climate change.

Ultimately, the beginning cause is climate change.

From 2006 to 2010,

60% of the farms in Syria were destroyed and had to be abandoned.

Had Had to be abandoned.

80% of the livestock were killed.

The drought in the eastern Mediterranean is the worst ever recorded.

The records only go back 900 years, but

it's historic.

It's historic.

And 1.5 million climate refugees were driven into the cities of Syria, where they collided with another million and a half refugees from the Iraq war.

They ran smack into them because the million and a half were just standing there.

And then the refugees ran directly into them.

And then the ones who were standing there already were pithed.

And a war broke out.

It's interesting.

The guy that I read yesterday, the guy who wrote

Homo Deus,

the brief history of tomorrow, he said that starvation is done, a thing of the past.

And the only reason why we have famine now is because some politician wants people to starve.

Like perhaps Bashir Assad.

Yes, perhaps that.

Now this.

How do you protect your most valuable items?

We trust Liberty Safe.

Nothing like the peace of mind that comes from owning a Liberty Safe.

Do your homework like I did.

Every Liberty comes with a lifetime warranty and their customer service is number one.

Customer service is really important to me.

But also how they're made and who makes them, where are they made.

Liberty Safe is all made here in America.

That's great, but I don't buy an American car unless it's better than the European car.

If it's better than the European car, great.

This is the best built safe.

Bar none.

I love Liberty Safe.

And they are all built here in America.

Now you can save up to $250 off when you buy a Liberty Safe.

Go to LibertySafe.com, use the promo code Beck,

and the discounts are automatic and matching mail-in rebate is also offered there.

Best built safe on the planet.

Go to libertysafe.com and type in Beck.

And right now you can find great deals deals on the Liberty Safes at Cabela's.

When you go in, you will not see Liberty Safe, you will see Cabela's on the safe door.

Those are all made by Liberty.

The same amazing quality and lifetime warranty.

And right now, Cabela's is having their great outdoor days, and they have some excellent deals on Cabela's safes by Liberty.

Check out your nearest Cabela's and find the Liberty Safe that's right for you.

Glenn, Beck

Mercury.

888727B.

This is the Glenn Beck Program.

Welcome to the program.

So glad you're here.

It's Friday.

I'm going down to Houston.

I'm in a...

My wife and I are going to Chuck Norris and his wife's charity tonight and doing a fundraiser for them.

I've painted something for the charity,

and I'm going to have Chuck sign it on the side.

It's my version of Chuck Norris.

It kind of looks like him.

It does look like him.

It does.

It does look like him.

So anyway, so

if you're down in the Houston area, you can find more about it at Clembeck Arch.

Do the artists get to make that determination?

No, it does.

It does look just like him.

No, the artists.

No, you don't get to say that.

Jeffy is saying, as an outside observer, whether it looks like Chuck Norris, you don't get to correct him and say, does it look like Chuck Norris?

It looks a little like him.

That's what I said.

Oh, my gosh, it looks a little like him.

It looks just like him.

No, it does.

I think it does.

Yeah.

But you don't get to make that determination wrong.

Thank you.

Riffraff.

Okay.

Let's see.

Let's talk about the story where the scientists have tried to hire.

How many scientists tried to hire this guy?

40.

They went to 48 different scientific journals.

Okay.

48 scientific journals,

and they

tried to get this

particular scientist on the board to do peer review.

And you just heard Al Gore talking about how important peer review is.

And the thing is, only 40 of them accepted this.

Out of how many?

48.

48.

48 were approached.

40 of them said yes to accepting him to do peer review studies.

The one issue was he

wasn't a scientist at all.

In fact, his last name was

Fraud.

40 of 48 scientific journals hired a guy named Fraud

with fake credentials.

Well, there's absolute consensus by scientists

on this issue.

Yeah, but are they peer-reviewed by people like this?

Peer-reviewed by Dr.

Fraud.

They shouldn't have let on until they had actually peer-reviewed some stuff.

Right, that's great, though.

And they said they think that this sort of misconduct, because they think a lot of these places are just doing it.

They'll take anybody who submits something.

Of course, they will.

Of course they will.

And this is why Willie Soon,

who is a really respected scientist, he's from.

Well, he was.

Yeah, he was until he became a skeptic on man-caused global warming.

He's calling it an anti-science movie.

He said that

they need to create a place in hell to put UN's climate science and predictions.

Now, he originally signed on.

Didn't he originally sign up?

Wasn't he the original signer of that?

I'm not sure.

I don't know.

He's been a known skeptic for quite a while.

But he was in on it.

I mean, not in on it, but he believed he thought there was enough evidence to say, hey, we should study this.

We should look at it at first, wasn't he?

You know, i we've talked to so many scientists over the years that it may be i know he's we've had him on he's an astrophysicist at harvard he's not just some guy right right but because he's skeptical he's been ostracized from it does say once a friend of the ipcc yeah

i think he was original scientists yeah the second and third climate assessment ipcc cited my work very prominently and then all of a sudden they stopped reaching out because we're running out of favor in a sense because he started to become skeptical he started to look at the actual evidence he started to see that all the climate models were wrong.

He started to see that what they were saying just wasn't true.

I mean, every drought,

every heat wave, every cold wave, every snow, every non-snow is blamed on the same stinking thing.

And it's just, it's ludicrous.

Except your, your daughter just did, had to do a report on climate.

The whole class on this internet class was asked to do their opinion on climate change.

And so she wrote her skeptical opinion.

And she was out of 35 students, the only

one

who was skeptical.

Wow.

Everybody else, including the teacher, wholeheartedly in love with how do you know that?

Because

they publicly share.

Yeah.

I mean, they all

post it online.

Yeah.

They all post their opinions, including the teacher.

And it was unanimous other than my daughter April.

Good for you.

Yeah.

Good for you.

You must be so proud.

I'm you, Holocaust denier.

Holy cow.

I know.

Well, in thumb thumber month, according to thumb of Dr.

Matth Lowski's research,

back into me.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

Mercury.

The Glenn Beck Program.

Amen, brother.

So let me ask you this.

Let me ask you this.

Who said, Who gives the media these documents?

It's the state services.

Do you mean that the president is behind these reports?

Or do you believe that politicians are behind these reports?

I'm going to go further.

I blame the president.

Who said that?

Let me give you another hint.

He is now saying that there is that the president is

orchestrating a plot against him

by surveilling him and releasing information against him.

I mean,

is it the guy in France?

It's the guy in France.

He says that the president of France, Francois Holland,

is orchestrating a plot

and

it's against him.

And he is just trying to lie about him and release all of these secret details about him.

Is this just being repeated all over the world?

Is that what's happening?

I guess.

I guess.

That's weird.

Might as well.

It worked.

Yeah, I guess.

They're now saying, is the European Spring in the making?

How long ago was it?

I talked about a European spring.

Well, that's what.

Around the same time as the

Caliphate.

Yeah.

Yeah.

About the same time as the Caliphate.

I said next.

Caliphate will happen, and then next will be.

European Spring.

I thought it would happen a lot faster, but now

they're reporting.

Hey, are you repeating up spring?

I know, I know.

That's crazy talk.

That's crazy talk.

I mean, looking at that French presidential election, too, because the polling is out, and

Le Pen is the one that everyone's talking about, obviously, because that family comes from the National Front,

which is sort of seen as this very right-wing, if not,

you know, people call them fascists all the time.

But you go back, I mean,

they have,

this is definitely the best showing they've ever had.

I mean, you go back to 2002, this happened, because the way they do their presidential election in France is they have everyone's in the same pool, and then the top two go to a runoff.

And unless someone gets over 50%, which is, I believe, never happened in any of their presidential elections.

So there's always a runoff election between the top two.

Her dad,

the dad of this family, the founder of the party, who's seen even as more radical

than the daughter.

Holocaust in there.

Right.

So he,

this is back when Jacques Chirac was in, and he, the first round, Chirac got 20%, Le Pen had 17, and then the socialist had 16.

No one found the socialist.

They were like, oh, I can't believe the socialists didn't beat the fascist, was their way of taking that.

I went to the runoff after that, and Chirac won 82 to 18.

Wow.

So basically, every single vote outside of the votes that Le Pen got in the first round went to Chirac.

They only went from 17 to 18 in the two rounds.

So, what are they doing?

What is she getting now?

So, to just

going through these year by year here, real quick, didn't make the runoff in 2007, didn't make the runoff in 2012.

The polling right now in 2017 has in first place, not second place, first place is Jean-Marie Le Pen at 27%.

And then Macron, the next guy, is at 26, between 20 and 25, 26%,

depending on the poll.

So that looks like a very tight race where Chirock won fairly handily in the first round of the other election and then blew him out in the second round.

This one, it looks like Le Pen might win the first round.

Now, she's still an underdog to win the final election, but I think the last poll had

the head-to-head as a...

16-point margin.

And that sounds like a big margin.

However, when it's only two candidates, an eight-point swing in either direction, and if a terrorist attack tends to do things like that, terrorist attack happens, that could easily switch these people, and she could be the president of France.

Why don't these people just do their elections right?

I think they are right.

I think this is better.

Yeah, I think so, too.

I think it's a better system than what we have.

No, it is not.

I totally do.

No, it is not.

The only thing I would say is it should happen instantly.

The instant runoff voting is, I like it.

I think Maine just passed it, by the way, which is they have a big pool.

Everyone can vote for whoever they want.

And then you prioritize who you vote second.

So you can vote for a third party if you want.

But like, if you're the person, person, you know what?

I think Gary Johnson is the best president.

However, I don't think he's going to win.

So my second choice will be Donald Trump because I don't want Hillary.

Okay.

You could do that.

Well, if we're going to prioritize, here's what I'm going to prioritize: toast first.

Yeah.

Bread second.

So French toast, French bread.

What about fries?

Those aren't really French.

Then I would go.

Then I would go to French in its name.

Their style.

Their style.

I'd go for their style, and I'd go for their food.

What about the kissing?

That's a great one.

French kissing is also very, very good.

I can't even put politics on the way they elect their president in the top five.

I like the way they elect their president.

They just elect all crappy presidents.

They don't have any small government.

That's because of the French people.

Right, but that's not the election process.

Long time ago.

Right.

It would be nice to be able to, because I mean, look, you go back to the election.

Everyone was like,

binary choice here.

I don't like the people that didn't like Donald Trump, that voted for him anyway, just said, look, I don't like him, but it's him or Hillary, and I don't want Hillary.

Well, in this system, you'd be able to say, I want whoever, and then my second choice is Trump.

So when

your top choice was eliminated and did not finish in the top two, the vote will go to Trump and you'd be able to get exactly what you want.

Every single person who wanted that thing to happen, where they wanted to vote vote for their conscience, but didn't want to get Hillary elected, would have been able to do that under this system.

All right, can we talk about the one thing that I think we really need to talk about?

And that is if you're a lesbian

and you like girls, but you don't like girls, and excuse me, but I have to be technical here because this is real science now.

If you don't like girls with penises, then you are a sisophobe.

Huh?

You're what now?

Do you have that, Pat?

Do you have the audio?

Because this is

very important.

This is very important, right?

A transphobe or a cisophobe, which

I just want him to explain it.

Okay, or her, I'm sorry.

There's been a lot of discussion around genital preferences and transphobia.

In this video, I'm going to use the word cis-sexism instead of transphobia, but they're really similar words.

At its most basic, cis-sexism means prejudice or discrimination against transgender people.

So, what's been happening is that some people are making the argument that it's not cis-sexist at all to only be attracted to people with one kind of genitals.

For example, these people might argue that being attracted to only women with vaginas in no way negatively affects trans people.

On the other hand, I would argue that it's more complicated than that.

We all have our implicit biases built into our preferences, and gender isn't as simple as just the genitals you have.

But after I say that, I usually get a bunch of blatantly cis-sexist responses.

So, I thought I'd address all of those responses at once.

Isn't that amazing?

Okay, so if you believe that a woman with a penis is a man, you're civilizing the physical penalty.

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

If you are not attracted.

Yeah, you even have to be attracted to a transition.

You have to be attracted.

If you're not attracted to a woman with a penis, you are transphobic or cis-cystphobic.

This is nuts.

Number one, you're being homophobic.

In this argument, I often get accused of homophobia, lesbophobia, or lesbian erasure by lesbians who believe that I'm trying to change their or lesbian erasure.

What would lesbian erasure be, Jeffy?

I'm not sure, actually.

Can Can you look it up?

Even you don't know what that is?

Check out the erasure while we hear the rest of this.

Is it a lesbian eraser of the band erasure?

Is that possible?

Like, they just read, they have like a cover band that are all lesbians.

I don't know.

To explain

a lot like a dude,

when you say lesbians, do you mean women with a vagina and not women with a penis?

I don't have a strong stance on

And I'm straight or like conversion therapy.

Those responses are rooted in cis-sexism.

This is because I'm not telling lesbians that they can't be lesbians.

If you're a woman who only likes women, go ahead, identify as a lesbian.

But some women have penises.

And if the fact is some lesbians have been affected by the women's penises,

by definition, then they're not a woman.

Okay, so remember what Paulina told me when we were in Poland.

Just don't go off the cliff with the rest of humanity.

She said, the righteous didn't suddenly become righteous.

They just refused to go over the the cliff with the rest of humanity.

I think this is one of those things that

they're doing.

A woman has a vagina.

Yes.

A man has a penis.

A woman cannot have a penis.

I'm sorry.

Take a look.

You don't have one.

No, no, no.

Look at this.

I'm on my computer right here.

No, I don't.

No, that's not a woman.

That's not a woman.

We'll talk about that off the air.

Please don't take any screenshots of him.

Yeah, I don't really.

It is.

It feels like we're just talking about two different things.

I get stuck at this every single time we have this conversation.

It's like they are discussing something that we're not discussing.

I don't know.

Like, that is every child that's born, you get a birth certificate that says right then, you know, male or female.

And, you know, you can say, like, there might be some, like, gender identity can be something else, I guess.

Right?

Like, you could say, but that's like a different category.

It's a different conversation, a different topic.

Like a gerbil one day.

That doesn't make you a gerbil.

That's how that works.

It doesn't work like that.

You can feel like a woman if you want to, but if you've got the man unit, you're a man.

Okay.

You got a hoo-ha, you're a woman.

And that's

all there is to it.

Quite honestly,

if you cut it off and tuck it in,

your chromosome still says,

your genes still tell

if you have the surgery, I mean, there's a discussion there.

Right.

Yes.

At least you're committed yeah come on because that's at least that's a lot less that is a lot come on every woman in the world would go to the doctor immediately if she opens up her pants one day and that's hanging there she's like oh my god what is that going to the doctor there's a problem she doesn't go like what some women have that she doesn't do that they don't no they don't

yeah and it's i don't know everything

a matter-of-fact way like this has always been the

best deal.

They're creating an entirely new language.

Yeah.

There's an entirely new

thing.

CIS.

It starts every word involving gender begins with cis or whatever.

I mean, it's.

And that's what, a male who's a male and attracted to women, right?

A male with has a.

I guess.

Has a has male, a man unit and is attracted to women is like the traditional way that people thought about it in this scary old times when they didn't understand what

she was talking about.

Like that, those old things.

I was going to, I can't say.

Lesbian erasure, by the way.

Yeah, trans bashing.

Is that what it is?

I think so.

By lesbians?

It's interesting.

Yeah.

There's been a real hostility, I guess, between lesbians and transgender because they say, because lesbians say, you're not real women.

And so there is this hostility between lesbians, women,

who are bashing

and saying to transgendered women that they're not women.

And so there's a fight in between.

Can I tell you something?

There is something to be said for the weightlifter, the guy weightlifter.

Sports may actually end this nonsense.

That's what I'm thinking, too.

The girl, where was that?

Where the women's weightlifting champion just went to a guy who's going to beat the runner up by 45 pounds.

Yeah.

New Zealand.

Right.

And all the women are going, it's a dude.

Weightlifter.

Oh, no, no.

Are you transophobic?

Everyone's super progressive until they're in a competition against a guy.

Yeah.

And then they're like, no, he can't compete.

Why not?

It may actually be sports that ends this nonsense.

And again, like, I don't see how you can argue to have a separation.

I mean, why is there a WNBA?

Let the women come in and play against the NBA players and see how they do.

If they can outperform them, then let them all play together.

And you know what's going to happen?

There's going to be no women playing.

That's what's going to happen.

And, you know, because it's...

It's like white people

on the basketball court.

Yeah, very few.

Let the best players play.

Right now, there happens to be black people who are playing better basketball than white people.

Okay, good.

And the market has decided that.

Right, let the best players play.

i mean it's just it's it's crazy i mean you live in a it's you live in a country where it's 76 percent white people and 87 percent i think of the nba is is is african american that's totally true you know and and most of the people who are white are are from like germany well when we come

but the point is

but like that's the market saying One group of people somehow, for whatever reason, has outperformed another group.

And you should, that's okay.

That's okay.

okay.

When we come back, we'll tell you about the prom dates that are randomly assigned by a lottery at a school so nobody is left out.

We'll give you that.

And now this.

Have you ever wondered what outrageous comfort is?

Sleep a few nights on a Casper mattress and you'll know.

Casper mattress is the perfect mattress engineered for a great night's sleep.

Really engineered.

Are you actually outraged by the comfort?

Like you wake up in the middle of the night pissed off at your bed because you're too comfortable?

No, that doesn't mean outrageous like i'm outraged you're just pissed off no you know what how dare you bed this is too comfortable i don't want to get up you have those moments well actually i am but i'm not screaming at the bed i'm screaming at the alarm clock or my wife who is nudging me uh it ships free in a box so small you won't believe it holds a mattress casper mattress try it out for a hundred nights in your own home risk-free if you don't love it

They will pick it up and take it away and refund every single penny.

No questions questions asked.

Go to casper.com, use the promo code Beck.

There's nothing to lose on this.

Try it.

You're going to love this bed.

Casper mattress, get $50 off the purchase of your mattress.

Casper.com, promo code Beck.

Casper.com, promo code Beck.

Terms and conditions do apply.

You're listening to the Glenn Beck program.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

I mean, I could tell you about the prompt dates that are randomly assigned by lottery so nobody gets left out.

I could tell you about that story, but really, the headline says it all.

We've only got a couple of minutes here before we go for the weekend.

Anything that we have left to, that we haven't gotten to that we said we were going to?

Dr.

Maslowski.

A request did come in about an hour ago from Stu for this famous Al Gore clip and Pat's take on it.

And

some of the models

suggest to

Dr.

Maslowski that

the

North Polar ice polar

during some of the summer months could be completely ice-free

within the next five to seven years.

Okay, now that was given about 10 years ago.

So

was Mazlowski really wrong?

Because

he gave the impression in some of his studies studies

that during some of the survival, 775%

could,

but not necessarily will.

So he was exactly right.

This is the Glenn Beck program.

Mercury.