Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

The media went has been going nuts over Reza Aslan’s new book about the “historical” Jesus, “Zealot”. It’s gotten plenty of praise from the left, and anyone upset over it has been portrayed as being anti-Muslim. But the manufactured uproar over Aslan’s Islamic faith is only a distraction from the real issues: he has obscured the facts about his educational background and his deep ties to progressive organizations. Aslan is first and foremost a progressive, whose goal is to raise doubts in believes in Jesus and ultimately have the leave the faith like he did. Glenn laid out the truth during the opening monologue of Wednesday’s Glenn Beck Program.

Get more an Aslan and the questions raised about “Zealot” from TheBlaze.

Well, hello, America, and welcome to The Glenn Beck Program and to TheBlaze. This is the network that you are building, and it is important that we build it, because there’s a problem with truth, and there’s a problem with truth in the media. And we’re all following the media like zombies, and it’s true, you know it is, because why isn’t America – I was out in California. Gas is $4.11 out there. Why is nobody talking about that? Because the media isn’t talking about it.

We follow the media, and this book is evidence. The media is hyping this book about Jesus, and whenever the media decides we’ve got to tell you about this book about Jesus, it’s fairly safe to assume that it’s not going to make Jesus look really good. I saw this book while I was out. I’ve been gone, I think, for what, five weeks now, and I saw it popping up everywhere. And I knew something was up.

And I called the studio, and I called the staff. And I said do me a favor, look into this book, and most importantly, tell me who this man is. Who is the author? Well, NPR was billing this as “Christ in context.” Woo, NPR says that? The Seattle Times wrote Zealot “looks at the age Jesus lived in to expand what’s known about the historical figure.” Really? And Publishers Weekly named it one of their best new books. It’s got to be good.

Generally, it is positive all the way around with anybody in the media, no controversial language attached to it whatsoever, as is the case whenever I or pretty much any Conservative appears on mainstream media outlets, and we mention Jesus. Not surprisingly, the book has ended up to be just another attack on Christian beliefs, and yet no one in the media or the administration is condemning it, which I thought was weird, because I know if I condemn or write a bad book about, let’s say, the Prophet Muhammad, well then I’m going to be responsible for the Benghazi attacks, right?

I mean, do you remember the horrible, evil video questioning Muhammad? It was denounced by Hillary Clinton. It was denounced by President Obama. I guess we just have to go shoot up an embassy to get some attention here, but that’s not what Christians do. But I thought that they were against any denigration of any religious figure? I mean, the president, I guess he was a little more clear when he went in front of the UN. What exactly did he say?


VIDEO
President Obama: The future must not belong to those who slander the prophet of Islam.

 

Ah, that’s it. That’s it. The future can’t go to the people who slander the prophet of Islam. The man who made the video slandering it, and it was an awful, went to jail. This guy, the guy who slanders Jesus, is he going to be condemned? No, they’re giving him cover. You see, it started out strangely. Initially the media failed to point out that the author, Reza Aslan, was a Muslim.

Now, I want to be really clear here. I don’t really care. A Muslim has every right to write a book about Jesus. You don’t like Jesus, you like Jesus, you’re a Muslim, you’re a Hindu, you’re a Christian, I don’t really care, but it should be pointed out, and this is the same thing, a Christian has a right to do a book about Muhammad or a video – freedom of speech.

But I don’t think everybody agrees on that one. And the important thing is if I’m writing a book about Muhammad, everybody should say full disclosure, he’s a Christian. Same thing with this guy; full disclosure, he doesn’t like Christianity. He’s a Muslim. But the media and the author were hiding it at the beginning for some reason. Now, there was an interview early on with NPR, and here’s what he said.

VIDEO
Q: Are you still a Christian?

Reza Aslan: No, I wouldn’t call myself a Christian because I do not believe that Jesus is God, nor do I believe that he ever thought that he was God or that he ever said that he was God. But I am a follower of Jesus, and I think that sometimes, unfortunately – I think even Christians would recognize this and admit it – those two things aren’t always the same, being a Christian and being a follower of Jesus.

Yeah right, this guy’s absolutely brilliant. Hat’s off, he’s brilliant. He is. Are you a Christian? No, but I am a follower of Jesus. I think I’d call myself that. Really? No mention here that he’s a Muslim who holds the view that Jesus Christ is not the son of God. He does say Jesus isn’t the son of God.

Now again, the fact that Aslan is a Muslim doesn’t matter to the story. In fact, that’s the red herring. The reason why I bring this up is the fact that they’re dishonest about it. That’s what matters. Because as it turns out, he’s being dishonest not about the Islam thing. He is not forthcoming about a lot of things, himself, Jesus, and most tellingly, the associations that reveal his real motivations behind writing the book Zealot.

What is it? It is the latest progressive attempt to change and rewrite history. That’s what it is, and that’s the number one priority now for Progressives. From naming streets after communist labor activist Cesar Chavez to making movies glorifying the murderous revolutionary Che, Progressives are trying to cement the legacy of the radical revolutionary and the leftists.

And that’s what they’re trying to make Jesus into. He was just a radical. He was just a revolutionary. He was just like Che. And if you believe anything else, you’re into the dustbin of history. That’s what they’re doing, and the scary part is it’s working because no one is exposing it. Tonight, we’re going to do just that, and it’s up to you then to carry the water and spread this around to all of your friends.

We’re going to show you the truth behind this author that he and no other media source has even bothered to point out. And when we do, they’ll say oh, there he goes on the chalkboard and the conspiracies. Nope, it’s all out in the open, didn’t take us long to find it. You can find it yourself. Don’t take my word for it. Do your own homework. Get to the truth about well, why? Why? Why is this guy doing it?

Well, he’s just a scholar, right? He’s a scholar. He’s got a passion for this. That’s what he’ll have you believe. When you dig down, people will say no, no, no, it’s because of his faith. No, it’s not about that. So that leaves he wants fame, he wants money, or he wants power. To find out why he’s doing this, you have to begin to uncover the many falsehoods surrounding this book and the author.

Let’s start with the first dishonest claim. He’s a religious scholar and a historian. In fact, I’m quoting him, he has a PhD in the history of religions. That’s how everyone is identifying him because that’s how he identifies himself. In fact, he gets a little snotty about it. In an interview on Fox News, he declared himself a historian and a PhD on the history of religions.

Well, let’s look at this and see how the facts compare. Can you please play the history of religions, or do we have that coming up later? Because I know he has four degrees. He has, in 1995, he got a BA in religion, in religious studies, a BA. That’s not a PhD – Santa Clara University. In 1999, Masters in world religions from Harvard. Okay, good, not a PhD. In 2002, a Masters in fine arts in fiction, interesting – in the University of Iowa.

In 2009, a PhD in sociology. That is bizarre. So he’s studying us. He’s learning how to write fiction, and he learns how to speak the religious language. Wow, it’s a fascinating work here. But you know what I notice, there’s no history degree. There’s no history degree. He’s not a PhD in religions, and he’s not a historian. It’s possible that his Harvard theology degree included some history credits, but that’s not the same, not even on the same planet as an expert with a PhD in the history of religions.

Please play the Fox News piece here where he goes on. Listen to how he says it.

VIDEO
Reza Aslan: To be clear, I am a scholar of religions with four degrees, including one in the New Testament. I am an expert with a PhD in the history of religions. I am a professor of religion, including the New Testament. That’s what I do for a living, actually. To be clear, I just want to emphasize this one more time, I am a historian. I am a PhD in the history of religions.

]Uh uh, no, no he’s not. He’s not a PhD in the history of religions. He is not a historian. I tell you what, next time I’m on any channel, I’m going to insist that they put historian underneath my name. I spend a lot of time looking at history, a lot of time. Do you think they’d let me get away with historian? How about if I said I was a PhD in American history, and I don’t have that? Would anybody allow me to get away with it?

A cursory glance at his book reveals serious flaws in both fact and logic. But before I leave there, could you please put up where he’s teaching now, because he said I want you to know what I’m teaching here. This is what I do. I’m a professor of history specializing in the Gospels. No, actually he’s at UC Riverside, and he’s in the department of creative writing. Really? He also is…he’s at the University of Southern California in public diplomacy, which is an interesting place for him to be.

He’s also a contributor for The Daily Beast, but my favorite, my favorite is the last one. Can we put this up? He’s a sometimes professor, sometimes professor, and Tiffany, if you can please find that for me. He’s a sometimes professor, and what he’s doing is he’s teaching people something fantastic. He’s teaching people Middle Eastern revolution. That’s what he’s a professor of, revolution through – go ahead, here it is – revolution “on the art of protest in the Middle East, examining protest literature, film, art, and music. There it is, Drew University.

That’s not the same, is it? Now, his education started as most education does. He was a Christian before going into college. And colleges are doing a great job turning people out that are not Christians anymore. It’s there that his professors started teaching him.

VIDEO
Reza Aslan: I became very angry. I became very resentful. I turned away from Christianity. I began to really reject the concept of Christ.

Interesting. So it’s not surprising to me that the elitist godless professors sway him away from Jesus, but that’s his starting point – anger, resentment, rejection. But he stays in school. He gets his several degrees. For a religious expert, he doesn’t seem to have a grasp on even the most basic facts, but he’s busy teaching revolution in the Middle East so…

Now, Aslan was deflecting the NPR question of his own religious views, but he also blatantly lied about the point in the Gospels. Go back to the NPR piece here where he made this claim in the interview. Watch this.

VIDEO
Reza Aslan: I do not believe that Jesus is God, nor do I believe that he ever thought that he was God or that he ever said that he was God.

Okay, got a problem with this one, because Jesus made it very clear that he was. He was either God, the son of God, or the Messiah. He’s in the God circle there. And I don’t care how far you get away from it, if you read the Gospels, it’s pretty clear that’s who he’s saying he is. It’s one of the reasons why everybody wanted him dead. He refers to himself as I Am, which is the holy name of God, at least four times. In Mark, Jesus is asked, “Are you the son of God? And he says “yes.” Well, that seems like it’s pretty clear. So why would a religious scholar make such an easily disprovable claim?

The string of dishonesty seems to be a pattern here. Judging his work on his merit, judging him just – forget about everything about that he lied about his PhD, he lied about what he does for a living, what he’s currently teaching, that he’s a professor of. Let’s just judge him just based on the book Zealot. We showed you the one disputed claim. Here’s another one. He wrote in the Washington Post that “the Gospels are not, nor were they ever meant to be a historical documentation of Jesus’ life.”

He said, “These are not eyewitness accounts of Jesus’ words and deeds. They’re testimonies of faith, composed by communities of faith written many years after the events they describe.” Okay, this claim is flat-out false. Let’s go to the Gospel of Luke. Luke says “Inasmuch as many have undertaken to compile a narrative of the things which have been accomplished among us, just as they were delivered to us by those from the beginning were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word, it seemed good to me also, having followed all things closely for some time past, to write an orderly account for you, most excellent Theophilus, that you may know the truth concerning the things of which you have been informed.”

Now, that’s what it actually says, so I don’t know you can say that it was just a thing on faith. Oh, I remember, I remember, he said because this was written a long time, sometimes 30-40 years after, right? And so the authors weren’t reliable because it was 40 years after his death and after it happened. Well, that seems to be a logical problem here, professor. How are we supposed to take your book seriously 2,000 years later if 40 years couldn’t get it right?

If you need more evidence, read the book. I’m not a book burner. I’m not somebody – you can read the book. It’s garbage. We wanted to give you a taste here. We wanted to establish the clear pattern of dishonesty, but why is the real question, why? What is the reason behind it? That’s what we try to do on this show. We go back to that one question, why?

Well, to answer why, you have to look at who he really is. Who is he? He’s not who the media says he is, and he’s not who the detractors say he is. The media says he’s a God professor of Gospel history. No, no, he’s not. He’s got a PhD in Gospel history. No, he doesn’t. No, he doesn’t. And it’s not who his detractors say. He’s a Muslim, just trying – no, he’s not. He is a Muslim, but that’s not what his motivation is. It begins with Aslan Media. Now, why would this guy who’s so focused on God and religion, because that’s what he is, he’s a professor, why does he have Aslan Media? Go back to what he’s teaching. What is he teaching sometimes at Drew? He’s teaching the art of revolution and protest through literature and music. That’s what he’s doing. So he’s producing literature and media.

Now, who is Aslan Media? Well, they’re operating under the fiscal sponsorship of this group, the Levantine Cultural Center. Well, who are they? Well, they’re easy to figure out. They’re partners with CODEPINK on the founding committee of a project called Narrative 4. What’s Narrative 4? Well, that’s a project dedicated to creating social change, and that was a…that’s a project of the Tides Center. This is starting to look familiar, isn’t it?

He’s also a board member on the National Iranian American Council. Now, who are they? Well, they’re funded by George Soros. He’s also on the Board of Directors of this. This is great. Let’s take our Ploughshares. Take our swords and pound them into ploughshares, so the Ploughshares Fund, which is launched with money from the Tides Foundation. Now, Tides funnels money to the Ploughshares, and now the Ploughshares sends it back to Tides, and they can fund other progressive groups like Media Matters.

Ploughshares also has helped fund the launch of the Center for American Progress. Ploughshares also donates heavily to the International Crisis Group. Isn’t that great? Oh, that’s Samantha Power, which brings us back to the International Crisis Group, the responsibility to protect the Gaza flotilla. Remember when CODEPINK was there? It’s funny. It’s funny that all he wants to do is talk to you about Jesus – does he now?

Whenever somebody wants to change history, it usually comes back, when you really look into it, to the same cast of characters, unless they’re being demonized. If they’re being demonized by the mainstream media, you know none of these people are involved. If they’re being hailed as a God, you know the ends justify the means, Progressives are back, you know, the ones who believe it’s okay to lie as long as the end, the result is the one that you desire.

So forget about this guy being a phony Muslim or a phony scholar. Who is he? He’s a radical Progressive. He is also hardcore anti-Israel. The 2010 flotilla, remember CODEPINK? Yeah, he said about this particular point in history in the world, he said, “At what point are rational, peace-loving, Israel-supporting people of the world going to stand up and say ‘enough’? How much longer are we to bear the Hasbara propaganda…,” that’s an interesting phrase, “…that places the image of the State of Israel above its well-being?” You see, he knows what’s better for Israel than Israel does. I’ve heard that before. I think the president said it.

“How much longer are we going to accept the cries of victimization from the strongest and…,” get this, “…richest nation in the Middle East?” It’s no longer Saudi Arabia. It’s Israel to this historian and PhD in the histories of religion. “How much longer are we going to put up with a policy of collective punishments that has led to the slow starvation of 1.5 million people?”

He also is mainstream at least with the mainstream media and this administration and with George Soros and with the Tides Foundation. He thinks the Muslim Brotherhood is wonderful. “On the Muslim Brotherhood, make no mistake, however the current uprising in Egypt turns out, there can be no doubt that the Muslim Brotherhood will have a significant role to play in post-Mubarak Egypt, and that is a good thing.”

In an interview on the Muslim Brotherhood website, he said, “I decided to study religion in school, even though I planned on being a writer, because of my experience at Santa Clara University, a Jesuit university steeped in the promotion…,” you can hear it coming, can’t you, “…of social justice. The Jesuits taught me that whatever I did for a living, it must benefit society, it must be for the greater good; I must work towards justice and peace.”

Justice and peace, he said these words very carefully to the Muslim Brotherhood’s official English language. Why? Well, I think Americans really need to understand the Muslim Brotherhood is the freedom and justice party. But how does freedom and justice come about with the Muslim Brotherhood? They believe according to their own websites the only way to achieve freedom and justice is with sharia law.

See, this guy is very good at speaking two languages at once. He’s a media guy. He’s a media guy. He’s a radical. There’s a difference between the Catholic understanding of social justice and the Muslim Brotherhood understanding of social justice and freedom, even a difference between the George Bernard Shaw social justice. I mean, he told us why bother keeping somebody alive if there’s nobody, you know, that’s benefiting from their life in society?

There’s a difference. Even the Catholic version of social justice, which I’m sure he doesn’t really even understand that if there’s one God, he sorts things out. And that one God, why would he let his son be crucified? Why would he let his son – Catholics believe this – why would he be crucified? To set the example.

There’s a difference between man’s justice and God’s justice, but see, he seemed to miss that in his Catholic education. Make no mistake, it’s not because he is a Muslim. He’s not writing a book slamming Jesus because of his Muslim beliefs. He’s not writing it because he’s an amazing historian and has uncovered some incredible new facts that the world has to hear.

Make no mistake, he is a progressive radical above all else. He wants to change our understanding of history and our relationship to God to create social change. That’s what he’s teaching at Drew University. I mean, at least when he’s a visiting professor occasionally at Drew University, the class has chosen, they know what they’re walking into, to witness the art of protest in literature, film, art, and music.

What he is currently doing, he’s acting it out. His goal is to cause doubt in believers of Jesus and ultimately have them leave their faith like he did so Progressives will have more devoted followers who can do whatever their hearts desire tells them to do – change our history, change our traditions. That’s what this is really all about, and the good news is for Reza, bad news for us, he’s not trying to do this alone.

VIDEO
Michelle Obama: And Barack knows that we are going to have to make sacrifices. We are going to have to change our conversation. We’re going to have to change our traditions, our history. We’re going to have to move into a different place as a nation to provide the kind of future that we all want desperately for our children.

 

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

Would you allow yourself to be locked up in a windowless room for four days without food or water? What if you would be paid about $1 million a day for your troubles? Well, that is exactly what happened to one college student, and a settlement was just reached that makes the man $4 million richer. Why was he locked up in the first place? Glenn reacted to the story on radio this morning.

TheBlaze reported:

A 25-year old college student reached a $4.1 million settlement with the federal government after he was abandoned in a windowless Drug Enforcement Administration cell for more than four days without food or water, his attorneys said Tuesday.

The DEA introduced national detention standards as a result of the ordeal involving Daniel Chong, including daily inspections and a requirement for cameras in cells, said Julia Yoo, one of his lawyers.

Chong said he drank his own urine to stay alive, hallucinated that agents were trying to poison him with gases through the vents, and tried to carve a farewell message to his mother in his arm.

Get more on this story HERE

“They haven’t even explained how it happened, they haven’t fired anybody for it,” Glenn said.

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

Today on Pat&Stu, the guys (seriously) thought about buying a house in Detroit for $1. Why? They believed it would make an excellent advertisement space the show. Genius? Crazy? Both?

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

Apparently Gov. Christie believes that Senator Rand Paul will be an eventual nemesis in the 2016 GOP primary, because he’s lashing out at him…again.

This time the NJ governor went after Paul on “pork” spending, and went on to accuse him wanting to bringing home the federal “bacon” more than anything else.

Really? The senator who is trying to cut spending across the board in the federal government and cut the budget not only in his own office, but across his entire state. Needless to say, Senator Paul isn’t one to back down, and his response to Gov. Christie is nothing short of epic.

Watch Christie’s statement here:

As you probably noticed, the statement that started on a seemingly amicable note, took a quick turn.

“I find it interesting that Sen. Paul is accusing us of having a ‘gimme gimme gimme’ attitude towards federal spending when, in fact, New Jersey is a donor state. We get 61 cents back for every dollar sent to Washington,” Christie said. “Interestingly, Kentucky gets a $1.51 on every dollar they send to Washington. So if Sen. Paul wants to start looking at where he’s going to cut spending to afford defense, maybe he should start looking at the pork barrel spending he brings home to Kentucky.”

Paul hit back Tuesday during an appearance on CNN’s “Situation Room”

Watch:

“This is the king of bacon talking about bacon,” Paul said about Christie and his own brand of “pork barrel” spending. He also explained that the majority of federal spending in Kentucky goes to military bases in the state.

“What does he want to do, shut down military bases in Kentucky?” he continued. “In order to have enough money for national defense, which I think is a priority for the government, you have to be willing to cut spending in other places, and Governor Christie and others have been part of this ‘gimme gimme gimme’, gimme all this money.’”

Paul went on to warn Christie that “it’s not very smart” to “pick a war with me.”
“And it’s not a good way to grow the party,” he added. “Why would he want to pick a fight with the one guy who has a chance to grow the party by appealing to the youth and appealing to people who would like to see a more moderate and less aggressive foreign policy?”

“Somewhat of a low blow,” Pat pointed out, while continuing to laugh.

“Paul’s budget by the way,” Stu interjected, “slashed spending in every area, and eliminated many departments. He would be more than happy to cut spending in Kentucky. He will not shy away from that.”

“Yeah, I mean you can’t get into a spending argument with Rand Paul,” Pat added. “That’s ridiculous.”

“Yeah…stupid,” Stu continued. “You’re going to lose that one…badly.”

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

Glenn called the Salt Lake City Tribune’s wild accusations against him ‘one of the most irresponsible things I have ever, ever witnessed.’ in media. Out of all the smears that have been thrown at Glenn, this one stands out – but the paper’s reaction to this blatant mistake is even more outrageous than the article itself. The whole situation has made Glenn reconsider his longstanding opposition to boycotts.

In the past, when Glenn has strongly disagreed with a company he has always chosen to create something in order to replace it. Back in 2011, Levi’s announced that they were the “uniform of progress”. Glenn wasn’t happy, but he chose to spend his money on creating something new – 1791 Jeans. Those jeans were offering a high quality jean, much like Levi’s was doing, but they were Made in the USA and represented the values of freedom and liberty over progressivism.

Today, Glenn was presented with a similar issue. The Salt Lake Tribune has demonstrated a complete and total disregard for the truth. One of their readers submitted a piece of commentary that impiled Glenn is a Nazi sympathizer because he displayed pieces from World War 2 era Germany at the Independence Museum, which displayed the history of America and emphasized periods of light and dark over the past few centuries. The paper decided to publish the piece on their website despite factual errors, including inaccurate information on the name of the venue and the event.

The author also grossly mischaracterized the museum and Glenn’s intent when she said I can’t help wondering what prompted Beck to collect such macabre objects and include them among his personal belongings. What are the virtues of owning Göring’s love letters, Hitler’s signature or a few drops of his blood? Surely, harboring such items adheres to a personality cult and suggests a sympathizer rather than a critic.”

Glenn explained in the weeks leading up to the event that the museum was intended to show the points of light and dark in history and the importance of faith to American history.

Pat and Stu, alongside many readers, have pointed out the inaccuracies of the piece to the Salt Lake Tribune, a Salt Lake City paper that saw enough merit in the article to publish it for the public. In response, the paper has chosen to simply say it was an opinion piece:

How does Glenn respond to a company that has given up on the values of it’s profession?

“I think the “Salt Lake Tribune” is a slanted, bigoted newspaper. That doesn’t care about facts, apparently, doesn’t care about facts. At least when it comes to us, which is strange,” Glenn said.

For years, Glenn has been vocal about his distate for boycotts. He would rather there be more voices than less, and people would pick the winners by voting with their dollars and their time. That’s why he has created TheBlaze as an alternative to the mainstream media, and 1791 Jeans as an alternative to Levi’s. Both businesses have been succesful.

But Glenn also said that throughout history when people have been confronted with bigotry and hatred, they have used boycotts to change things. He pointed to Martin Luther King during the Civil Rights movement in the 1960s and South Africa during apartheid.

“I have been look at what changes things. For instance, what changed Apartheid? What changed that? People getting together and saying ‘I’m not going to buy anything from South Africa. Won’t trade with you.’ So it was a boycott that applied a lot of pressure” Glenn said.

“We are a different people. That’s what my whole speech was about yesterday, we are different. We believe in you can make it, you can do it. We are positive, create something. Don’t destroy something.”

“However, there has to be a part of it that has to be ‘don’t do business with people who are trying to take you apart’ and be very clear. We don’t do business with these kinds of people. We don’t.”

Stu and Glenn did have a disagreement over the issue on air. Glenn’s record on boycotts, which Stu has always supported, is that there shouldn’t be the formal activism component that the left uses with boycotts. Instead, the focus should be on creating alternatives. But on radio today, Glenn said there needed to be more “teeth”:

From radio:

Clearly, the debate wasn’t going to be settled in one day.

But going back to the original question: Has Glenn changed his stance on boycotts?

Right now, his stance doesn’t really seem to be different than his call for people to “put your money where your heart is”, in other words support the businesses that represent your values. Create alternatives where there are none. Live your principles. And don’t support those businesses that tear down and mock the things you know to be true.

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

These days, Rush Limbaugh rarely appears on TV for interviews, but he made an exception this week when he appeared on Fox News. During an interview with Greta Van Susteren, Rush lashed out at the GOP saying a “battle” for the Republican Party is underway between “mainstream” Republicans and true conservatives who rely on principle over politics. Meanwhile, he lambasted President Obama for “relishing the opportunity to put into play what the leftists have only dreamed about in faculty lounges for 50 to 75 years.”

Lead story up on TheBlaze is Limbaugh just ripping in to the president in a rare TV interview. He says he is ‘relishing in the opportunity to put into play what those in faculty lounges only dreamt about’ for years. And that’s true, absolutely true,” Glenn said on radio this morning. “He also says that the media and those in Washington are doing everything they can to discredit those who identify with the Tea Party, and he specifically points out Ted Cruz as being a guy who has it going on, knows what’s happening, and he says what people have to – listen to this, this is from Rush Limbaugh – ‘work within the Republican party to take it over.’”

Glenn admitted to not listening to much talk radio as of late, but he found himself overjoyed at the idea of Rush admitting to problems within the establishment GOP. “Never thought I would be able to say to you Rush Limbaugh said ‘do everything you can to work within the Republican party to take it over,’” Glenn said. “Honestly, Rush was a little like Bill O’Reilly at times, where he had his blinders on, about five years ago, kind of going down that road. I thought he’s kind of just going down and he’s a Republican, but that’s not who he is. Not at all. And he has come out strongly.”

Stu, who is more familiar with what Rush has been covering on his radio program, pointed out that both Rush and Glenn have been arguing for the importance of maintaining values for quite some time.

“I think the fundamental point you both make is the actual values – he’s been talking about this a long time – conservative values,” Stu explained. “We talk about the libertarian leaning of it, but it’s not about the politicians that fold all the time. Rush Limbaugh’s been calling out people like John McCain for a long time.”

Sadly, much like Glenn, Rush rarely gets a fair shake from the mainstream media. Words will be taken out of context, mistakes will be exploited, and credit will rarely be given. Glenn encouraged his listeners, however, to continue to be vigilant and do their own homework.

“Do your homework, America. Be intelligent, be informed, and find out who is giving you the news. When you can watch the news and decode it, the whole world changes, but it is up to you to do it, because they are never going to report what Rush Limbaugh is actually saying,” Glenn said. “What Rush Limbaugh is actually saying is there are forces in the GOP world that want nothing more than to destroy anybody with an independent voice that stands for the Constitution and Tea Party.”

“It’s interesting. It’s a fascinating story on Rush Limbaugh today,” he concluded. “And Rush Limbaugh, I am proud, proud to be on Premier Radio Networks with you, and I am proud to be on talk radio, which you, sir, are responsible for and carried on to many AM radio stations, which you, sir, are responsible for keeping alive.”

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

Don’t miss the Glenn Beck Program, tonight at 5pm ET only on TheBlaze. Not a subscriber? Sign up for your 14-day free trial HERE.

The media is in love with Reza Aslan’s new book Zealot, which claims to provide a ‘historical’ look at the life of Jesus. NPR called it ‘Christ in context,’ while the Seattle Times wrote, ‘Zealot looks at the age Jesus lived in to expand what’s known about this historic figure.’

Over the last week or so, the book shot from obscurity to number one on the Amazon bestseller list. It is always curious when the media decides to trumpet a book based on Jesus, and the situation becomes even more suspect when you begin to uncover who Aslan really is.

“The name of the book is Zealot. The guy who has written it – in no way controversial. There’s no controversy attached to this at all in the mainstream media, which is strange,” Glenn said on radio this morning.

Aslan is Muslim, and while that has little to no impact on his ability to write a book about Jesus, the media and Aslan have sought to minimize that fact. During an awkward interview with Fox News, religion correspondent Lauren Green attempted to broach the subject with mixed results.

GREEN: Well, this is an interesting book. You are a Muslim, so why did you write a book about the funder of Christianity?

ASLAN: Well, to be clear, I’m a scholar of religions with four degrees, including one in the New Testament and fluency in biblical Greek, who’s been studying the origins of Christianity for two decades, who also just happens to be a Muslim? It’s not just I’m a Muslim writing about Jesus. I’m an expert with a Ph.D. in religions, but I have been obsessed –

GREEN: It still begs questions why would you be interested in the founder of Christianity.

ASLAN: Because it’s my job as an academic. I am a professor of religion, including the New Testament. That’s what I do for a living actually. So it would be like asking a Christian why they would write a book about Islam; I’m not sure about that, but honestly, I have been obsessed with Jesus for really 20 years. I have been studying his life and his work and the origins of Christianity, both in an academic environment and in a personal level for about two decades. Just to be clear, this is not an attack on Christianity. My mother is a Christian, my wife is a Christian, my brother-in-law is an Evangelical pastor. Anyone who thinks this is an attack on Christianity has not read it yet.

In reality, a little bit of research into Aslan and his past shows that the motives behind him writing this book have very little to do with religion.

Zealot is the latest in the progressive attempt to rewrite history,” Glenn said. “The amazing thing is, it’s working. It’s working… It’s not that he’s a Muslim. It’s the fact he’s a liar and a progressive.”

Aslan went out of his way to emphasize his academic background in order to claim authority on the subject, but there has been very little said about the nature of his education.

“Okay, he has four degrees and here they are,” Glenn said. “1995: BA in Religion from Santa Clara University. 1995: Master of Theological Studies from Harvard. Then in 2002, he got Master of Fine Arts in Fiction from the University of Iowa. Then in 2009, he got his only Ph.D. He’s a Ph.D. in Sociology from the University of California, Santa Barbara. So where is the Ph.D. in the history of religions? He doesn’t have one.”

“Well, the problem is, he’s not a historian. At least according to his credentials,” he continued. “He does not have a Ph.D. in the history of religions. He has a Ph.D. in Sociology. What he does for a living? He teaches creative writing. That’s what he does. He teaches creative writing.”

Considering how much pride he seems to take in his degrees, it is surprising to learn that Aslan’s credentials are not exactly as he described. On tonight’s Glenn Beck Program, Glenn will take a deeper look at some of the passages in Zealot that contain fairly obvious factual errors to anyone who has read the Bible, in addition to some of Aslan’s affiliations and funding.

“This is a rewriting of our history. This is a shedding of our traditions and our beliefs and our history. That sounds familiar. And the press is doing it and most of America is going gleefully down that road,” Glenn said. “Why? Because nobody’s pointing it out. And even when we point it out, the rest of the media is not going to pick up on this. [They] won’t make a big deal out of it.”

“Tonight we are going to do a half hour on this guy that you don’t want to miss,” he concluded. “Facts on this man that the media is not going to give you. And when you hear and you will ask, ‘Why? Why haven’t I heard that?’”

Don’t miss the Glenn Beck Program, tonight at 5pm ET only on TheBlaze. Not a subscriber? Sign up for your 14-day free trial HERE.

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

The new book Zealot claims to provide a ‘historical’ look at the life of Jesus, and its author, Reza Aslan, is being hailed as a ‘neutral historian’ and ‘religious scholar’ by many in the media. Tonight, Glenn exposes the real reason Aslan wrote this book… and it has nothing to do with religion. Don’t miss the Glenn Beck Program TONIGHT at 5pm ET only on TheBlaze. Not a subscriber? Start your 14-day free trial of TheBlaze TV HERE.

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

On Saturday, the Salt Lake Tribune published an article by Alexandra Karl called “Glenn Beck’s Nazi Exhibit” that attacked the Independence Through History Museum Glenn curated for Man in the Moon.

Let’s just say, the author clearly didn’t do her homework – the article is filled with a tremendous number of factual inaccuracies, including misstating the name and location of the event, in addition to sloppy reporting that misidentified several of the artifacts in the museum.

Perhaps most frustrating, however, is the ever-apparent fact that Karl, who, according to her bio is ‘an art historian and educator’ living in Salt Lake City, clearly did not bother to attend the Museum herself, and her reporting obviously suffered as a result.

On radio this morning, a furious Pat decided to go line by line through the article to point out all of the errors in the piece. “Glenn, you brought up something yesterday that I looked into after the show, and I just haven’t been able to let go of. I can’t let go of it until we get this resolved,” Pat said angrily.

“Let it go,” Glenn pleaded. “This comes from Pat. Yesterday, he was obsessing about this all day on the plane.”

In the article, Karl refers to the event as Man on the Moon instead of Man in the Moon and writes that the event took place at the Rio Tinto Stadium. In actuality, the event took place at the USANA Amphitheater (the article was updated on Monday to reflect this mistake).

“Now, even if you had a passing interest in accuracy and/or truth and you were writing what you considered to be a scathing exposé on someone, wouldn’t you at least try to get the location of the main event right,” Pat asked. “She couldn’t so much as Google where the event took place?”

“No, not necessarily, not if I was a journalist in today’s world,” Glenn quipped. “She doesn’t care.”

Ultimately, Karl surmises that based on the items in the museum, Glenn must be a Nazi sympathizer. “Surely harboring such items adheres to a personality cult and suggests a sympathizer rather than a critic,” she writes.

“So here Alexandra moves beyond simple buffoonery into defamation territory, suggesting that Glenn, who’s fought so hard for Israel, for Jews, he’s fought so hard he received the Defender of Israel award… a guy whom Benjamin Netanyahu referred to as a ‘friend of Israel’… is a Nazi sympathizer,” Pat said. “That goes beyond plain unadulterated stupidity… that’s character assassination and defamation territory.”

Despite Pat’s outrage, Glenn was not particularly offended by the incident. Obviously, Karl is entitled to her opinion and she is entitled to write and publish her opinion, but one could only hope that for the sake of its readers, the Salt Lake Tribune uses this as a learning experience when choosing what to publish for public consumption.

Editor’s note: This article has been updated for clarity. It originally referred to Karl as a reporter for The Salt Lake Tribune, which they have said on their Twitter account is inaccurate and emphasized she is simply a reader who contributed a piece and therefore they aren’t responsible for the inaccuracies in the content. But as Stu said…


 

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

The Mayor of San Diego, Eliot Spitzer, Anthony Weiner – all are confirmed perverts, yet none of them have gone away. They are all still very much in the political game despite their shameful and in some cases repeated misbehavior. Why do they keep getting a pass and what does it mean for the ‘war on women’ if they do?

The Chair of the San Diego Democratic Party tried to excuse disgraced Mayor Filner, who has been accused by seven women of unwanted sexual touching.

“Democrats aren’t going to give him a pass, but may be willing to give him the benefit of the doubt because we’ve waited so long, nearly 20 years, for a mayor who could put forward a progressive agenda,” she said.

Filner’s not the only progressive getting a pass because of his agenda. Eliot Spitzer and Anthony Weiner are both running for public office in New York City, with many residents saying they are OK with their lewd private lives as long as they maintain their policies.

“The guy’s a total dirtbag. The guy is abusing, physically abusing women. The democratic party, they like their progressive policies more than people – they don’t see people as an individual. They see people as the collective,” Glenn said.

“Yes, some women have been abused by this guy, yes, but his policies are going to be so good for the collective that you are going to have to break a few eggs,” Glenn said mocking the progressive mindset.

Glenn asked listeners to imagine a situation where a woman is caught alone with someone like Filner, Weiner, or Spitzer. Would threats of screaming and making their actions public scare them? No, because the progressives and the media have shown that progressive ends are more important than character, morality, and individual victims.

“This is why you can’t selectively enforce the law, because when you do, those who would violate the law are taught a very important lesson. Nobody cares. Scream all you want. Nobody’s listening,” Glenn said.

He warned that if Filner is ultimately given a pass that he will become more and more dangerous – not to conservatives but to women.

“He is going to become more and more dangerous, not to conservatives, not to conservative ideas and freedom, but he’s going to become more and more dangerous to women because of the pass that he has been given. If you take someone in power and protect him after you know he is abusing his power and his power as a man, he becomes more and more dangerous, and think about how dangerous this guy is going to become,” Glenn said.