The 2016 election will come down to one word: Authentic

April 16, 2015

Writer

Phony politicians have crippled American politics for way too long. They pretend to be grassroots, but really they are backed by corporate elites and donors with endless money to spend on influence in Washington, DC. The apathy the American people showed to Hillary’s announcement is just the latest example. People are hungry for the truth. They want authenticity. And it’s not going to come from the establishment of either party.

2016 election is going to come down to one word, and that word is authentic. I really, truly believe if it doesn’t happen this time, we are done as a nation because people are absolutely starving for something or somebody that’s real. We don’t even have to agree with them all the time. We just have to believe that they’re real. If anybody starts smelling like a focus group or you can tell that they’re just going after polling numbers, phony concern, processed language, anything like that, anything that is fake, it is over that fast.

In 2008, Hillary Clinton got wrecked. She was destroyed because he basically showed up in Iowa expecting to be crowned the nominee. So, now what is she doing? She’s going to be just like you. She’s riding around in a van pretending to be an average person, going to Chipotle, you know, like she always does. Come on. She is so desperate to appear normal when we all know she’s not normal. And that’s okay.

Her first campaign ad was excruciatingly boring, but it was real people. You’re made to believe that they are just regular people. They’re just people just like you doing mundane jobs just like you. But they’re not regular people. This woman, show this woman. This woman here, she’s not a regular person just planting her garden. No, she’s in this for a reason, because she is a big-time former abortion lobbyists who was leading a campaign for Wendy Davis. So, having her in this spot was speaking to all of her supporters—see, we’re just like you. We’re abortion activists.

So now Hillary is riding around in a crappy van, and actually it’s not a crappy van. It’s a $75,000 van. Wait. Dana has a great show. She’s going to be talking about the van tonight. But she’s driving around, she’s talking to people at gas stations. When do you think Hillary Clinton actually got out at a gas station and pumped? By the way, I like the Chairman Mao outfit she’s wearing there, I mean, because that’s what the regular people in Iowa wear are designer Mao jackets like that one.

When do you think she actually was at a gas station and was looking through the beef jerky? Really? Do you think she’s actually gone to the gas station and said, “Man, there’s Duck Dynasty T-shirts and key chains and everything everywhere; these guys really are big”? She’s not hanging out at gas stations. It’s not who she is, and that’s perfectly okay.

She was the first lady back in the 80s. Then she was the former first lady. Then she was a senator. Then she was the Secretary of State. Now she’s running for president again. She’s an elite with access and connections to powers that few in human existence have ever achieved. That’s okay. She used to be poor, and then—because they were both attorneys, I mean, poor is kind of relative here. She did go to Yale, but now they’re mega million dollars rich.

She’s a woman with ambition to be president of the United States. Good. I think she’d have a better chance if she were just honest about it and say look, okay, I’m never really quite comfortable hanging out at the gas station. No one’s buying this rollout, and it’s really laughable. Saturday Night Live, did you see it this weekend, hitting her harder than they did the Sarah Palin? It’s rough, and it’s because she’s a phony, and everybody knows she’s a phony. Just accept who you are and be honest about it.

She can’t even be honest about the fans on her social media sites. A study was done of her Facebook page. Again, we had to go across the ocean. We had to go to I think it was The Guardian in England to get anybody in the media to do a job. They found something odd about her followers. Seven percent of her followers were from Baghdad. That’s not really comforting or real. And on Twitter, it was revealed that 15%, about 544,000 of her Twitter followers, are bogus accounts.

If her team is willing to lie about Facebook and Twitter fans and make people up just out of whole cloth, what else are they willing to lie about? Why can’t we just be honest about what we really, truly believe? Honestly, this is why I would love to see a campaign between Ted Cruz and what’s her name up in Massachusetts, Tiffany? The woman, Elizabeth Warren, you know, Cherokee people?

I’d love to see those guys because except for the “I’m from an Indian tribe,” at least they’re honest. Wouldn’t you love to have a debate—we talked about this on radio today, a debate where Ted Cruz is like this is the Constitution, and this is what I believe because I believe in these founding principles and here’s why. And she says okay, that’s fine and everything, but it doesn’t really work. I’m a Socialist. I don’t believe in communist Russia. I believe in Sweden, and we should be more like Sweden, and this is why it works.

To tell you the truth, I think the Sweden argument would probably win at this point in this country, but I could at least live with it because we’d have an honest debate. And everybody right now is just sick of these lies. Debbie Wasserman Schultz, she was asked to answer a simple question on abortion, is it okay or not to kill a seven-pound baby just before birth in the womb? Two networks tried to get her to answer. She danced around this answer every which way so she didn’t have to say yes or no. Watch.

VIDEO

Megyn Kelly: At what point is it appropriate to say it’s no longer just between a woman and her doctor?

Wasserman Schultz: What is appropriate from our perspective, I’ll speak for myself, but I think I can speak for most of my party, and that is that a woman’s right to make her own decisions about her body should be between her and her doctor, and that in terms of personal liberty, we definitely have a different opinion, Rand Paul and I do. And there is a Supreme Court decision though that answers those questions for us.

Megyn Kelly: But that Supreme Court decision, Casey, says the state has a say.

Wasserman Schultz: That’s right, and states have done so.

Megyn Kelly: But what it recognized is that it’s not just between a woman and her doctor; that the state has a right to step in on behalf of the fetus and say at some point that fetus does obtain rights. You know, you would admit that you can’t have women aborting third-trimester babies just on a whim, right?

Wasserman Shultz: Certainly not on a whim.

Not on a whim. Okay, stop. Okay, so she’s fine with killing a seven-pound baby if the mom and the doctor say it’s okay. All right, what’s the problem with that? I disagree with it, entirely disagree with it, but what is the problem with that? The problem is that third-trimester abortions is only popular with about 15% of the American people. You’re down to—let’s be really, really overly fair and say cut that number in half, 7% of the American people would be okay with what she just said. That’s why she’s not saying it, but that’s what she means.

She’s totally fine. You want to kill the baby, if the doctor and the mom say I want to kill it instead of giving birth to it, they’ll kill it right before birth. That’s fine. She is all in favor of giving somebody that choice to commit murder. Okay. But that’s not the way the game is played. She can’t be who she really is because she’s playing politics. The inner conversation that she’s having in her head when they ask that question is if I say something wrong, then the pro-choice people will be mad at me. If I say it’s okay, then I’m okay with killing a baby, so I’ll just really say nothing. I’ll let people read between the lines, and then you get those fake answers—oh, it’s choice, choice, choice.

It’s a bunch of phonies. And this isn’t merely a Democratic problem. This is a political problem. This is a problem that we have accepted. This is all Astroturf. And here are the people that really know it and are not going to put up with it anymore—the college age. If Jeb Bush decides to run, trust me, you are going to see a similar reaction to Hillary’s announcement. Nobody is buying into the organic grassroots Jeb Bush campaign. I’m not falling for it. I don’t think anybody else is.

But the media is all about the establishment. Did you see them today running after Hillary? This is the most amazing video. Okay, here they start running because her van just passed. She’s going to the back. She’s going to the back. Oh my gosh, look, there she goes. There she goes. Quick, everybody grab your cameras. We’ve got to get her out of the car. We’ve got to get that shot. It’s crazy. There are no actual literal people there, just reporters falling all over themselves, and they fall over Jeb Bush too.

But they crucify people like Rand Paul or Ted Cruz, even though there is genuine excitement for those guys. Let’s talk about Ted Cruz here for a second. Say what you want, but the guy is not establishment. That much is really clear. They hate his guts. Now, how much of that is resonating with the public? Well, I think pretty well.

I want you to listen to an answer that Ted Cruz gave that I think is the right answer to give. Now, he happened to give this at an agricultural summit in Iowa, and it would have been very easy for him to give another answer, but he didn’t because it’s not what he believed. This is him saying he was against ethanol with a bunch of farmers in Iowa. Watch.

VIDEO

Ted Cruz: Look, I recognize that this is a gathering of a lot of folks who the answer you’d like me to give is, “I’m for the RFS, darn it.” That would be the easy thing to do. But I’ll tell you, people are pretty fed up, I think, with politicians that run around and tell one group one thing, tell another group another thing, and then they go to Washington and they don’t do anything they said they would do. And I think that’s a big part of the reason we have the problems we have in Washington is there have been career politicians in both parties that aren’t listening to the American people and that aren’t doing what they said they would do.

That is exactly the problem, and it’s exactly what we’re tired of. Most politicians would be too afraid to do just that. It was not that hard. Just tell the truth. He was applauded for telling the truth. That is what people are hungry for, starving for, to be truthful. We’ve had our share of career politicians who have come into office saddled with political debts that they have to pay, and I have to ask you a question, how’s that working out for us? Working out well? The president, no matter which side, the president gets in office, and he’s handcuffed. The country ends up paying the ultimate price because the politicians are too afraid of special interest groups—too many conflicting debts that they have to pay.

Critical theory destroys truth and justice

Editor's note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Critical theory once stood out as the absurd progressive notion that it is. Now, its maxims are becoming an integral part of ordinary political discourse. The more you repeat a lie, the more you will believe it, and this is the very dangerous place in which we find ourselves today.

Take this critical theory maxim as an example: If we desire justice, we must sometimes champion what may appear superficially as injustice. It's a necessary evil, if you will, the necessity of “controlled injustice.”

By using truth through fabrication and controlled injustice for justice, we’ll save the republic. We’ll be acting in a noble way.

This definition of justice is defined by the “oppressed,” not the “oppressor.” It is the greatest happiness for the greatest number. To achieve this justice, however, we need to endorse acts on occasion that, while seemingly unjust, serve a higher purpose. It will ensure the stability and the unity of our republic, and this may manifest in ways that seem contradictory to our values. But these are the necessary shadows to cast light on “true justice.”

And isn’t that what we are all after, anyway?

Here’s another critical theory maxim: Sometimes we find the truth through fabrication. Our pursuit of truth sometimes requires a strategic use of falsehoods. The truth is a construct that has been shaped and tailored to promote the well-being of the collective.

We sometimes need to accept and propagate lies designed by "the system” — not the old system, but the system that we’re now using to replace the old to get more justice through injustice and more truth through fabrication.

We’re engaging in a higher form of honesty. When we fabricate, it’s for the right reason. We are reaching up to the heavens fighting for a higher sort of honesty. To fortify the truth, we occasionally must weave a tapestry of lies. Each thread, essential for the greater picture, will ultimately define our understanding and ensure our unity under this infallible wisdom.

The election is coming up. Does this maxim sound familiar? Many think it is imperative that we secure our republic through election control to maintain our republic. Sometimes, we might need to take actions that by traditional standards might be questionable.

The act of securing elections requires cheating. It's not mere deception. It is a noble act of safeguarding our way of life. We're on the verge of losing this democracy, and without deception, we will lose it.

To ensure it doesn't fall into the hands of those we know will destroy it, we may have to make a few fabrications. We're fabricating stories to be able to control or secure the republic through our elections. By using truth through fabrication and controlled injustice for justice, we'll save the republic. Therefore, we'll be acting in a noble way. Stealing an election from those who wish to harm our society is truly an act of valor and an essential measure to protect our values and ensure the continuation of our just society.

If we desire justice, we must sometimes champion what may appear superficially as injustice.

I know it's a paradox of honor through dishonor. But in this context, by embracing the dishonor, we achieve the highest form of honor, ensuring the stability and the continuation of our great republic.

Let this be heard, far and wide, as a great call to patriotic action. As we advance, let each of us, citizens of this great and honorable republic, consider these principles. Not as abstract or paradoxical but as practical guides to daily life. Embrace the necessity of controlled injustice, the utility of lies, the duty to secure our electoral process, and the honor and apparent dishonor. These are not merely strategies for survival. They are prerequisites for our prosperity.

We all have to remember that justice is what our leaders define, that truth is what our party tells us. Our republic stands strong on the values of injustice for justice, honor through dishonor, and the fabrication of truths. To deviate from this path is to jeopardize the very fabric of our society. Strength through unity; unity through strength.

We've heard this nonsense for so long. But now, this nonsense is becoming an instituted reality, and we are entering perilous times. Don't be fooled by the narratives you will hear during the march to November. Never let someone convince you that the ends justify the means, that a little bit of injustice is needed to achieve a broader, collective vision of justice, that truth sometimes requires fabricated lies and narratives. If we do, justice will cease to be justice, truth will cease to be truth, and our republic will be lost.

Top 5 MOST EVIL taxes the government extorts from you

David McNew / Staff | Getty Images

"In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes." -Ben Franklin

The injustice of taxation has been a core issue for Americans since the very beginning of our country, and it's a problem we have yet to resolve. This belief was recently reignited in many Americans earlier this month on tax day when the numbers were crunched and it was discovered that the government was somehow owed even more hard-earned money. As Glenn recently discussed on his show, it's getting to be impossible for most Americans to afford to live comfortably, inflation is rising, and our politicians keep getting richer.

The taxpayer's burden is heavier than ever.

The government is not above some real low blows either. While taxes are a necessary evil, some taxes stretch the definition of "necessary" and emphasize the "evil." Here are the top five most despicable taxes that are designed to line the IRS coffers at your expense:

Income Tax

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

"It would be a hard government that should tax its people one-tenth part of their income." -Ben Franklin

On February 24th, 2024 we hit a very unfortunate milestone, the 101st anniversary of the 16th Amendment, which authorized federal income tax. Where does the government get the right to steal directly out of your paycheck?

Death Taxes

Dan Mullan / Staff | Getty Images

"Now my advice for those who die, Declare the pennies on your eyes" -George Harrison

Not even in death can you escape the cold pursuit of the tax collector. It's not good enough that you have to pay taxes on everything you buy and every penny you make your entire life. Now the feds want a nice slice, based on the entire value of your estate, that can be as much as 40 percent. Then the state government gets to stick their slimy fingers all over whatever remains before your family is left with the crumbs. It's practically grave-robbery.

Payroll

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

"The power to tax is the power to destroy." -John Marshall

What's that? The nice chunk of your paycheck the government nabs before you can even get it to the bank wasn't enough? What if the government taxed your employer just for paying you? In essence, you make less than what your agreed pay rate is and it costs your employer more! Absolutely abominable.

Social Security

VALERIE MACON / Contributor | Getty Images

"We don't have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much." -Ronald Reagan

Everyone knows the collapse of Social Security is imminent. It has limped along for years, only sustained by a torrent of tax dollars and the desperate actions of politicians. For decades, people have unwillingly forked over money into the system they will never see again.

FICA

Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Images

"What at first was plunder assumed the softer name of revenue." -Thomas Paine

FICA is the payroll equivalent of Social Security. Your employer has to match however much you pay. It means it costs your employer even more to pay you—again, you'll NEVER see that money. At this point, are you even working for yourself, or are you just here to generate money for the government to frivolously throw away?

5 DISTURBING ways World War III will be different from previous wars

Oleg Nikishin / Stringer | Getty Images

Has World War III begun?

Over the weekend, Iran launched an unprecedented attack against Israel involving over 300 missiles and drones. This marked the first direct attack on Israel originating from Iranian territory. Fortunately, according to an Israel Defense Forces spokesperson Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari, 99 percent of missiles and drones were successfully neutralized by Israeli defense systems. Iran claimed that the operation against Israel had concluded and that no further offensive was planned, although the possibility of another attack is still present.

This has left many people, including Glenn, wondering the same thing: did we just witness the start of World War III?

Glenn recently had a World War II Air Force Veteran as a guest on his TV special, who told stories of the horrors he and his brothers-in-arms faced in the skies over war-torn Europe. This was a timely reminder of the terrors of war and a warning that our future, if it leads to another world war, is a dark one.

But, if Glenn's coverage of the Iranian attack revealed one thing, it's that World War III will look nothing like the world wars of the twentieth century. Long gone are the days of John "Lucky" Luckadoo and his "Bloody Hundredth" bravely flying their B-17s into battle. Over the weekend, we saw hundreds of autonomous drones and missiles clashing with extreme speed and precision over several different fronts (including space) simultaneously. This ain't your grandfather's war.

From EMP strikes to cyber attacks, here are FIVE ways the face of war has changed:

EMP attacks

New York Daily News Archive / Contributor | Getty Images

The entire modern world, on every level, is completely dependent on electricity. From your home refrigerator to international trade, the world would come to a grinding halt without power. And as Glenn has pointed out, it wouldn't even be that hard to pull off. All it would take is 3 strategically placed, high-altitude nuclear detonations and the entire continental U.S. would be without power for months if not years. This would cause mass panic across the country, which would be devastating enough on its own, but the chaos could be a perfect opportunity for a U.S. land invasion.

Nuclear strikes

Galerie Bilderwelt / Contributor | Getty Images

Nuclear war is nothing new. Many of us grew up during the Cold War, built fallout shelters, and learned to duck and cover. But times have changed. The Berlin Wall fell and so did the preparedness of the average American to weather a nuclear attack. As technology has advanced, more of our adversaries than ever have U.S. cities within their crosshairs, and as Glenn has pointed out, these adversaries are not exactly shy about that fact. Unfortunately, the possibility of an atomic apocalypse is as real as ever.

Immigration warfare

Nick Ut / Contributor | Getty Images

The strategy of strangling an opposing nation's economy to gain the upper hand is a wartime tactic as old as time. That's why the Border Crisis is so alarming. What better way to damage an opponent's economy than by overburdening it with millions of undocumented immigrants? As Glenn has covered, these immigrants are not making the trek unaided. There is a wide selection of organizations that facilitate this growing disaster. These organizations are receiving backing from around the globe, such as the WEF, the UN, and U.S. Democrats! Americans are already feeling the effects of the border crisis. Imagine how this tactic could be exploited in war.

Cyber shutdowns

Bill Hinton / Contributor | Getty Images

Cyber attacks will be a major tactic in future wars. We've already experienced relatively minor cyber strikes from Russia, China, and North Korea, and it is a very real possibility that one of our adversaries inflicts a larger attack with devastating consequences on the United States. In fact, the WEF has already predicted a "catastrophic" cyber attack is imminent, and Glenn suggests that it is time to start preparing ourselves. A cyber attack could be every bit as devastating as an EMP, and in a world run by computers, nothing is safe.

Biological assault

WPA Pool / Pool | Getty Images

Don't trust the "experts." That was the takeaway many of us had from the pandemic, but something less talked about is the revelation that China has manufactured viruses that are capable of spreading across the globe. We now know that the lab leak hypothesis is true and that the Wuhan lab manufactured the virus that infected the entire world. That was only ONE virus from ONE lab. Imagine what else the enemies of America might be cooking up.

The government is WAGING WAR against these 3 basic needs

NICHOLAS KAMM / Contributor | Getty Images

The government has launched a full-on assault against our basic needs, and people are starting to take notice.

As long-time followers of Glenn are probably aware, our right to food, water, and power is under siege. The government no longer cares about our general welfare. Instead, our money lines the pockets of our politicians, funds overseas wars, or goes towards some woke-ESG-climate-Great Reset bullcrap. And when they do care, it's not in a way that benefits the American people.

From cracking down on meat production to blocking affordable power, this is how the government is attacking your basic needs:

Food

Fiona Goodall / Stringer | Getty Images

Glenn had Rep. Thomas Massie on his show where he sounded the alarm about the attack on our food. The government has been waging war against our food since the thirties when Congress passed the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938. They started by setting strict limits on how many crops a farmer could grow in a season and punishing anyone who grew more—even if it was intended for personal use, not for sale on the market. This sort of autocratic behavior has continued into the modern day and has only gotten more draconian. Today, not only are you forced to buy meat that a USDA-approved facility has processed, but the elites want meat in general off the menu. Cow farts are too dangerous to the environment, so the WEF wants you to eat climate-friendly alternatives—like bugs.

Water

ALESSANDRO RAMPAZZO / Contributor | Getty Images

As Glenn discussed during a recent Glenn TV special, the government has been encroaching on our water for years. It all started when Congress passed the Clean Water Act in 1972, which gave the government the ability to regulate large bodies of water. As the name suggests, the act was primarily intended to keep large waterways clear of pollution, but over time it has allowed the feds to assume more and more control over the country's water supply. Most recently, the Biden administration attempted to expand the reach of the Clean Water Act to include even more water and was only stopped by the Supreme Court.

Electricity