Glenn Beck – The Second Of A Five Day Series – The New Republic , Americas Future (day 2)

Glenn Beck: Know! Your! Czars!

VOICE: It’s time for another episode of everyone’s favorite show, Know! Your! Czars!

GLENN: Yes, that’s right. As I told you yesterday, the White House is very upset with me and the information that I’ve been giving out all week on the czars. They are not denying things like, you know, Van Jones’ history as an admitted radical communist and the fact that he’s never disavowed that. They’re upset that we’re calling him a czar. That’s their complaint. I’ve shown the history of a guy who is literally founding revolutionary communist organizations around America and they don’t like what I have been putting on his virtual business card. He’s not a czar. He’s a special advisor.

Yesterday the liberal blogs became very upset with this little old radio segment on the radio. Why? Shocking surprise: They had the exact same complaint as the White House. Yesterday in this segment I called Peter Orszag the budget czar. The budget czar. Weird how the White House and liberal blogs are worried about the same thing at exactly the same time. But at least they’re consistent because I’m sure you can remember the outrage on the left when the Christian Science Monitor was calling him the budget czar. Or when CNN was calling him the budget czar. Or all of that incredible outrage from the left when Rachel Maddow called him the budget czar during an interview with the budget czar. Oh, and do you remember the picket lines on the left when Business Week was using the term budget czar under the Bush administration, or the left just hated it when Bush was treated unfairly. I think I’ve hit a new high point here. I can get attacked from the left even when I’m quoting Rachel Maddow. That is impressive.

Anyway, let’s get to today’s czar. He’s the sort of guy who understands a really good meal although, you know, he can be a bit of a downer at a dinner party. You know, when you grill up a nice steak on the grill, when it’s seasoned and sizzling just in that perfect way. And when you slowly place those grilled onions right on top. Yes?

STU: I have a guess.

GLENN: Yes?

STU: Is it Bobby Flay?

GLENN: No, it’s not. Sorry, I don’t think you guys understand what a czar is. Is it ‑‑ no? Even Rachel Maddow understands that. Anyway, you have this pile of perfectly sizzling steak smothered with grilled onions. You walk over to the table and set them down right there on the…

STU: Right. Is it Emeril Legasse?

GLENN: It’s not time to ‑‑

PAT: Bam!

GLENN: So you have this steak, you bring it to the table and this is where that czar is sitting during the dinner party. And he’s likely to say something like this:

(Audio plays)

GLENN: Okay. In case you missed what he was saying there, and applauded for, was quoting our willingness to subject animals to unjustified suffering will be seen as a form of unconscionable barbarity, morally akin to slavery and the mass extermination of human beings. Can anybody pass the A‑1?

Okay. Do you know the name of the czar? Yes? Stu?

STU: Is it Paula Deen?

GLENN: Ooh, sorry, sorry. No, the name of the czar.

PAT: Chef Boyardee?

GLENN: Okay, no, it’s not. Today’s czar is Cass Sunstein, our fabulous regulatory czar. Will surely his comparison between your steak and the Holocaust couldn’t possibly leak into his job writing just about every regulatory control we have on pretty much everything. But at least you’ll know what’s coming when you know your czars ‑‑ I’m sorry, sorry, when you ‑‑ when you know your special, special ‑‑ I got it, I got it. When you know your special advise‑czars.

VOICE: Ooh, sorry. Just like everyone who plays this game, you lose. But at least you’ll die a little smarter just for listening to… Know! Your! Czars!

GLENN: By the way, do we have the Bill Maher audio from yesterday? You remember yesterday Bill Maher had just a burst of honesty from the left. He said that Obama should just force healthcare through, whether people wanted it or not because they were too stupid. Listen up.

MAHER: But yeah, I mean, you know, they’re talking about 60 votes. Forget this stuff, 60. They can’t get Americans to agree on anything, 60%. 60% of people don’t believe that evolution in this country. He just needs to drag them to it. Like I just said, they’re stupid. Just drag them to this. Get healthcare done, you know, with or without them. Make the gang of six an offer they can’t refuse. This Max Baucus guy, he needs to wake up tomorrow with an intern’s head in his bed.

GLENN: Okay, stop. Whew. We’re just too stupid to understand it. And then what we should do is we should make an offer the gang of six can’t refuse. And if that’s not mob enough for you, then we should just have somebody wake up with an intern’s head in their bed.

Now, the clip from Rachel Maddow where she called the budget czar a budget czar, we were looking for this yesterday because the White House is upset with me, and the liberal media is upset with me for calling czars czars. The budget czar in particular has come up from the White House and now from the liberal press. Well, the budget czar, when she called him the budget czar, has another moment of honesty, although not quite as blunt. Listen up.

STU: Actually this is a transcript here, Glenn.

GLENN: We don’t have the audio?

STU: There’s no audio on this one.

GLENN: Okay, here it is. The brewing conservative attack on this new budget is that you’re soaking the rich to pay for all of the spending, that sort of reverse class warfare, to pay for the spending and to pay for this sort of down payment on healthcare plans. What is your response to that both politically and as a budget czar? Orszag says, well, this is exactly what the president campaigned on: Soaking the rich to pay for all this. That’s exactly what the president campaigned on. Again as we emerge from the recession, we are ‑‑ we need to get these deficits under control. That’s going to require some shared sacrifice. Again this is fully consistent with what the president campaigned on. There’s the budget czar, as Rachel Maddow called him, basically admitting that they ran their campaign on soaking the rich. Well, they ain’t lying. They told all of us this was gonna happen before he was elected. They told us that they were going to fundamentally transform America, and they are. Now, we deserve the government that we get. Are we awake enough now to make new choices?

  • Glenn Beck – The First Of A Five Day Series – The New Republic , Americas Future
  • Glenn Beck – The Second Of A Five Day Series – The New Republic , Americas Future (day 2)
  • Glenn Beck – The Third Of A Five Day Series – The New Republic , Americas Future (day 3)
  • Glenn Beck – The Fourth Of A Five Day Series – The New Republic , Americas Future (day 4)
  • Glenn Beck – The Last Of A Five Day Series – The New Republic , Americas Future (day 5)
  • Glenn Beck – The First Of A Five Day Series – The New Republic , Americas Future

    Day one from Glenn Beck:

    Where is the discussion on all this “change” that’s happening in Washington?

    Am I hateful if I ask:

    Can we survive this debt? If so, how?
    What is the rush on healthcare? Cap and trade?
    Who is writing these bills?
    Will Washington READ and Understand these bills?
    Why is it grassroots if you’re for it and astroturfing if you’re against it?

    He’s right. There were members of congress just today who insinuated that these types of questions being asked about public policy were based in hate, bigotry and racism. Questioning your government is not only important, but in a democratic republic, it is required!

    Brian Brown—The Man! Opposing Gay Unions With Sanity & a Smile

    http://nomblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/05/brian_brown_copy.jpg

    Go Brian Brown!

    You know, I have to say that there is a huge need for a logical approach to the gay marriage fight.  It’s been a blessing to our movement that Brian Brown and the National Organization for Marriage have risen so swiftly to the forefront of the fight.

    We need people like Brian who can speak clearly and coherently about the reasons behind the pro-marriage movement.  Redefinition involves so much more than gay rights activists lead us to believe.  So much of their argumentation involves incendiary flame wars and insinuation, thoroughly mixing truth and lie into a story that they’re trying to sell to the public, hook line and sinker.

    I’ve interviewed Brian on Voice of the Nation and he is articulate, logical in his arguments and completely clear.  He and NOM are a great addition to similar efforts being made through UFI and the Digital Network Army.  It was a joy to have him on the show with us.

    Kudos Brian Brown! Nice writeup!

    –Beetle Blogger

    From The Washington Post:

    “The institution of marriage has always been between a man and a woman. Yes, there have been homosexual relationships. But no society that he knows of, in the history of the world, has ever condoned same-sex marriage. “Do they always agree on the number of partners? Do they always agree on the form of monogamy? No,” Brown says, but they’ve all agreed on the gender issue. It’s what’s best for families, he says. It’s the union that can biologically produce children, he says. It’s all about the way things have always been done.

    “I think it’s irrational that up until 10 years ago, all of these societies agreed with my position” on same-sex marriage, he says, and now suddenly that position is bigotry. “The opposition is trying to marginalize and suppress us,” he says. “Usually, that happens with positions that are actually minorities. But we’re the majority.”

    “You have to take them seriously,” says Peter Montgomery, a senior fellow for the liberal People for the American Way. “They’ve raised a tremendous amount of money that they’re funneling into various states. They’re mostly responsible for putting the Maine veto on the bill.”

    Brown is confident that if people hear his message, they will believe it. “People already believe it,” he says, “but the issue is so deep-seated that they’ve never had to create an argument for it. Now we have to give people the language to do that.”

    Go NOM!

    Court: Doctors Must Inform Patients That “Abortion Ends Life”

    lifephoto by Chaps1

    A Small Victory for Life!

    If courts and doctors acknowledge the life and potential of preborn babies, then the acknowledgment of preborn human rights are not far behind.  The uncomfortable reality is that it’s more than just one woman’s choice involved here.  There are two individuals involved in abortion, not just one.

    Isn’t it ironic that a group calling itself “Planned Parenthood” would so completely deny the rights as well as the responsibilities of parenthood over a child?

    Here’s hoping this sentiment continues to spread.  This development in child’s rights is long overdue.

    —Beetle Blogger

    From CRI: South Dakota Doctors Must Inform Patients “Abortion Ends Life”
    In a key ruling, last week a federal judge upheld a South Dakota law requiring women be told that abortion ends a human life. The ruling came as a result of a lawsuit filed by Planned Parenthood Minnesota, North Dakota and South Dakota to challenge South Dakota’s informed consent law, passed in 2005.U.S. District Judge Karen Schreier decided that in conformance with the law, doctors must disclose “that the abortion will terminate the life of a whole, separate, unique, living human being.” However, Schreier did agree with Planned Parenthood that doctors should not be required to inform women they may suffer from suicidal thoughts or that they have an “existing relationship” with their preborn child.”This is the unraveling of Roe (v. Wade). This is a huge, fatal blow to them,” said Leslee Unruh, founder of the Alpha Center pregnancy counseling center in Sioux Falls.

    Planned Parenthood is considering appealing the decision in hopes of preventing doctors from discussing the termination of human life through abortion.

    “This is a monumental victory for the pro-life movement and for freedom of medical information,” explained Karen England, executive director of Capitol Resource Institute. “Abortion does end a human life and that undeniable fact will now be shared in South Dakota. Hopefully similar policies will spread throughout the country.”

    Follow

    Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.