Free Audio of The Glenn Beck Program available on TheBlaze Radio
Live 9am-Noon weekdays

Great Moments in Progressive History: Che Guevara

The year: 2015

The place: the Revolutionary-of-the-month t-shirt give away and literacy awareness day hosted jointly by UNSECO and OWS

Today’s revolutionary… Che Guevara!

You know kids, great leaders like Che don’t have to be so few and far between.

In fact, you, son…

Yes, you…

You look like you and the great revolutionary whom we hold in highest regard may have some things in common.

You see son, Che was no ordinary Marxist revolutionary.

He was much like you and your douchey Occupy Wall Street buddies… born of rich parents…

Unwilling to work for his keep and angry about it…

All he was missing was the 18th century German poetry degree, iPhone and skinny jeans…

…which means you’re already doing better than him!

But don’t worry son! As long as we keep the money away from the greedy capitalist pigs the redistribution is working!

Like all Marxists, Che believed in the sound principle of “from each according to his ability, to each according to his need”

Oops, I read that wrong!

What I meant to say was “from each capitalist pig according to his tax bracket and to each government agency that believes that all capitalists are in fact pigs!”

Speaking of pigs, that’s something else you and Che have in common!

Did you know that as a kid, Che was referred to as Chancho?

It means pig! Because he didn’t bathe very often…

…but even revolutionaries need to look good at White House correspondence dinners.

So maybe you should throw on some more deodorant, because seriously dude, you kind of reek.

Onward though, despite your stench… Che was a doctor, he even traveled to South America to blame the greedy American capitalists for all the poverty he saw.

And that’s why, when he met the Castro brothers…

Oh, don’t worry son, Fidel Castro is next month’s revolutionary t-shirt.

Che decided to join up with the Castro’s to overthrow the Cuban government, because it was backed by the greedy US capitalist pigs!

Once the Castro regime was in place, Che was placed in charge of the La Cabana Fortress prision to maintain peace and order.

And, of course, to make sure everyone in Cuba kept to a strict belief system. Nonbelievers were handled with extrajudicial executions! We can’t have any pesky capitalists in our Marxist utopia!

Che enjoyed murdering people so much that as soon as he was promoted, he made sure to grab an office with a view of the firing squad.

Finally, Che went off to foment Marxist revolution elsewhere until the evil Bolivian soldiers backed by the CIA took him out.

So now it is up to you, son! You must take up the mantle and continue to bring peace to the nations of the world.

Translating Harry Reid’s Senile, Evil Lies

I can’t decide if Harry Reid is evil or just senile—so let’s just say he’s evnile.

How do I know this? He’s a lying liar who lies.

A couple weeks ago, Harry Reid posted an article called “The Facts About the Koch Brothers” on the front of his Senate site.

FS-KOCH-FACTS-FRONT-SENATE

It’s no longer on the front of the Senate site because he had to hide it because it was likely a violation of Senate rules.

Of course given that it’s Harry Reid, it’s completely littered with lies.

We’re going to focus on just one sentence from his “facts” because it is my belief that every word is a lie, with the possible exception of pronouns.

Here’s the sentence: “The Kochs spent $400 million on misleading attack ads.”

FS Koch Political Spending Chart-01

That gives you a nice visual of Charles and David Koch writing a check for over $400 million dollars. However when you actually click on the source for Harry’s “fact” you’ll find this on really unbiased (sarcasm) “Republic Report.”

“Koch PAC specifically spent $4.9 million in disclosed contributions.”

Hmmm. So where did they get over 400 million?

“…But they also spent over $407 million on undisclosed campaign entities.”

You might ask yourself, if they were undisclosed how do you know about them?

You’ll be shocked to hear that Republic Report is not doing its own journalism on this story. It’s linking to a story on The Washington Post. And shockingly The Washington Post proves that every single thing they say is a lie. Here’s where they get the number: “Together, the 17 conservative groups that made up the network raised at least $407 million during the 2012 campaign.”

We should also note that only nine of the 17 groups filed taxes. Soon the other eight will file and Harry can further inflate his lie. Awesome!

Now that we have some information, let’s go and look at Harry’s claim, “The Kochs spent $400 million on misleading attack ads.”

Is every word in this sentence a lie?

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. makes a cutting gesture across his neck, referencing House Oversight Committee Chairman Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who caused an uproar last week when he made the same gesture to order microphones cut as the top Democrat on his panel was trying to speak about the Internal Revenue Service scandal over targeting of conservative political groups, Tuesday, March 11, 2014, during a news conference on Capitol Hill in Washington, Tuesday, March 11, 2014. Reid said that he thought the accusations of IRS misdeeds deserved answers. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite) AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nev. (AP Photo/J. Scott Applewhite)

First “The Kochs.” It’s not “The Kochs”, it’s a combination of 17 conservative groups that the Koch brothers are affiliated with in some way.

Two. The word “spent.” That’s not what the sentence says at all. The network raised at least $407 million. It clearly says “raised.” Spent and raised are two different things.

Three. “$400 Million.” The way they get to this number is so insulting to your intelligence you’re not going to believe it. They took every donation from every donor from all across America to all of these 17 organizations and credited them all to the Koch Brothers.

For example, one of these organizations is Americans for Prosperity. They alone have 90,000 donors. Harry Reid is giving credit for every dime donated by all donors to all these organizations to two people, the Koch Brothers.

To be fair, our unbiased source Republic Report notes that the Koch spending is Pac, individual, and outside spending. In this context, outside spending apparently means the spending of every single person in America who agrees with the Koch brothers.

Four. “Ads.” Actually they didn’t spend all of this money on ads. Some of it went to salaries and overhead but also as The New York Times points out: “Americans for Prosperity spent tens of millions of dollars in political advertising….while investing equally large sums to build a national grass-roots organization.”

So if you can believe The New York Times, which I admit is a stretch, it’s probably around half or less that actually went to ads.

Number five. “Misleading attacks.” Were those ads misleading attacks?

Congratulations you picked our video daily double. Here’s a sampling of ads that Koch related organizations ran during the election.

Certainly registering people to vote is not a misleading attack ad.

So, “Koch Brothers” is a lie. “Spent” is a lie. “$400 million” is a lie. “Misleading attacks” is a lie. “Ads” is a lie.

What’s left of this sentence is just “on.”

When we translate Harry’s original sentence from his native language of “Evnilian” to English it looks very different.

“The Kochs spent $400 million on misleading attack ads” is translated to “Seventeen conservative and or libertarian organizations that have similar beliefs to the Koch Brothers raised $407 million from hundreds of thousands of donors who have similar beliefs to the Koch Brothers of which they spent probably around half on ads some portion of which were attacking and an even smaller portion of which were misleading depending on your political views. Also the fact that I posted this is a violation of Senate Rules and I’m equal parts evil and senile. I am evnile.”

That sentence makes for a terrible attack website. But that’s what happens when you’re honest in translating Harry Reid’s Lies.

Harry Reid and Republic Report left out this little tidbit from the article they sourced: “The left has its own financial muscle, of course; unions plowed roughly $400 million into national, state and local elections in 2012.”

In his evnility, Harry must have also forgotten all about how the Koch Brothers donated to some of his close buddies like co-author of Obamacare, Max Baucus-Democrat, Mark Pryor-Democrat, John Dingell-Democrat, Tom Harkin-Democrat, Mary Landrieu-Democrat, Diane Feinstein-Democrat, Chuck Schumer-Democrat, Hillary Clinton-Democrat, Joe Biden-Democrat, Barack Obama—Democrat.

Remember Harry Reid is an evil, senile, evnile old man. Oh, and according to Pat Gray, he’s also the worst living human being on the planet.

Ruining Your Heroes: George Bernard Shaw

You’ve probably seen the play My Fair Lady or have at least heard of the film with Audrey Hepburn, right? Delightful musical.

If you haven’t seen it, I’m sure Glenn Beck has.

FS-GLENN-BECK-SMUG

He loves the theatre.

The famous playwright George Bernard Shaw won an Oscar for the screen play “Pygmalion” which “My Fair Lady” is based on.

Georgey is a really popular guy. Just look on social media and you’ll find countless people who have made a hero out of the playwright George Bernard Shaw. Why? Because he sure had a lot of cute sayings. Like this one:

FS-GBS-PIN-FAMILY

“A happy family is but an earlier heaven.” Adorable.

You can tell how much he loves people. I found some other quotes from George Bernard Shaw that aren’t as well know. Like this one:

FS TITLE CARD HEART TEXT
“A great many people would have to be put out of existence simply because it wastes other people’s time to look after them.”

I told you he loves people. Oddly enough, no one has bothered to pin that one on Pinterest. Hmm.

I mean sure, George Bernard Shaw was an avowed Fabian socialist who LOVED eugenics and yeah, he believed everyone should have to justify their existence. You probably remember this classic:

Sure not everything Georgey said was so flowery and beautiful but he did have such a magical way with words.

Who wouldn’t want to celebrate such a wonderful, wonderful man who also said this:

FS TITLE CARD PIGGY TEXT

“I appeal to the chemists to discover a human gas that will kill instantly and painlessly. Deadly by all means, but humane not cruel.”

See, he’s so nice he wants the mass murder to be done in a humane way.

In 1934 he also wrote:

FS CUTE TEAROUT DECENT HUMAN

“The moment we face it frankly we are driven to the conclusion that the community has a right to put a price on the right to live in it … If people are fit to live, let them live under decent human conditions. If they are not fit to live, kill them in a decent human way.”

Again… kill them in a decent, human way.

Sure this might be a little creepy, but let me lighten things up with this GBS classic:

FS TITLE CARD WATER GLOBE

“The Nazi movement is in many respects one which has my warmest sympathy.”

Yeah the same guy our education system says is a genius was pretty much a fanboy of Hitler.

The New York Times wrote about his admiration in 1933. In the article, George Bernard Shaw describes Hitler as “a very remarkable, very able man,” and was a genius to realize “Germany had been kicked long enough.”

In fact, he sang Hitler’s praises every chance he could.

FS TEAROUT PRAISE HITLER

And he really didn’t care for the people Hitler was treating harshly. He had some choice words for them.

FS CUTE TEAROUT JEWS
“Stop being Jews and start being human beings.”

To be fair later on, he did start to question Hitler a little bit.

FS CUTE TEAROUT MARRIAGE
“Instead of exterminating the Jews, he (Hitler) should have said, I will tolerate Jews to any extent as long as no Jew marries a Jewess. That is how he could build up a strong, solid German people.”

And by the way, he wasn’t just a fan of Hitler, George Bernard Shaw had a solid man crush on Stalin. He visited Russia and wrote:

FS CUTE TEAROUT RUSSIA

“There is not a more interesting country in the world today to visit than Soviet Russia, and I find traveling there perfectly safe and pleasant…Tomorrow I leave this land of hope and return to our Western countries of despair.”

He even recounted how generously he was fed by his hosts saying, “Starvation? Why, I’ve never eaten so wonderfully!” Mind you, his visit was during Stalin’s great famine when millions were dying of hunger.

Let’s not forget George Bernard Shaw’s love for another great Dictator: Mussolini! Shaw was such a fan he could imitate the dictator on the spot. You gotta watch his Mussolini impersonation:

He loved these despicable dictators because he thought they had the right ideas.

FS TEAROUT DICTATORS

I would agree with George, that yes, they do, do things. They killed people. I’m pretty sure that’s what he liked about them.

George Bernard Shaw sure did hate people, but he loved animals! He was a staunch vegetarian.
He is often quoted by PETA as saying:

FS-GBS-PIN-KITTY

“The worst sin towards our fellow creatures is not to hate them, but to be indifferent to them. That is the essence of inhumanity.”

Someone even published a George Bernard Shaw Vegetarian cookbook. Bizarre.

I’m wondering if you were to make a stew out of the people he wanted to humanely kill, would that be vegetarian? As long as you don’t use beef broth, you should be ok.

That degree hanging on your wall is as worthless as a piece of toilet paper

I never went to college so I missed out on all the keg parties and, apparently, a surplus of good grades.

Contrary to the concept of school as you knew it growing up, A’s are pretty easy to come by these days. In fact the only thing you have to work really hard to get are D’s and F’s. In college today, an A is over four times as common as a D or an F combined.

It’s a drastic change from the 15% of students who received  A’s in 1960.

The pool is a little higher today. Ok, it’s a lot higher. If you look at this chart you’ll see that 43% of all letter grades given today are A’s.

Screen Shot 2014-03-24 at 2.10.10 PM

And this sort of makes sense if you think about it. No one wants to pay $40,000 a year to hear that they’re dumb.

College is one of the rare businesses in which you pay them and at the end of the experience they tell you how well they did. If you’re a parent and you send your kids to school and they get A’s you feel good about the purchase. But if your kids get F’s you feel like they wasted your money.

And amazingly these institutions of higher learning, that do little other than indoctrinate kids against the evils of capitalism, sure do understand incentives.

It may be hard to get into an Ivy League school, but according to Walter Williamsprofessor of economics at George Mason University, that’s where the hardship ends.

According to his research, our 1.1 trillion dollars in college debt is sure buying some awesome grades at some high brand schools.

Take Brown University for instance.  Two-thirds of all letter grades given at Brown University are A’s.

At Harvard, fifty percent of all grades were either A or A-. And 91 percent of seniors graduated with honors.

I’ve got news for you if 91 percent of people are graduating with honors, it’s not honors.

Eighty percent of the grades given at the University of Illinois are A’s and B’s.

At Columbia University, fifty percent of students are on the Dean’s list.  I’ve got news for ya if 50% of students are on the Deans list,  it’s not the Deans list. It’s just a list of half of the school.

And how about Stanford? Only 6 percent of student grades at Stanford were a C or below.

Or let’s take the case of the University of Michigan, the average GPA was 2.57 in 1950. Let’s watch it go up up up up to 3.27 today.

Screen Shot 2014-03-24 at 2.12.00 PM

As you look at the average GPA skyrocket, ask yourself this question. Do you think our kids getting smarter by this much?

I’m going to guess no—but they totally should get an A for Effort!

With kids spending 19 hours a day on Twitter, it’s highly suspicious to see GPA’s skyrocket. And business leaders are becoming more skeptical of potential employees’ inflated grades.

When business leaders were asked if college students are prepared for the workforce, only a third of them said yes. And only 11% strongly agreed.

WILSON GALLUP CHART 11 PERCENT

We’re putting our kids into six figure debt for 11% of businesses?

Whenever I talk about college, people say you don’t understand, no one will hire you if you don’t have a degree!

WILSON GALLUP CHART 71 PERCENT

That’s true, in one quarter of American businesses. And yes, if you want to be a neurosurgeon, you should probably have a piece of paper that says neurosurgeon on it. But six figure debt and the freshman 15 only gets you an advantage at one quarter of American businesses?

This is the type of scam that makes Bernie Madoff shudder with jealously.

Oh and by the way, a huge chunk of your tax dollars are going to pay for it.

How is the Obama Administration dealing with this? They’re trying to create more incentives to inflate grades by offering more cash to colleges that graduate students on Pell Grants.

Pretty soon this is going to be Zimbabwe. Their inflation got so bad that everyone in the entire country was a trillionaire but no one had any real money.

FS-ZIMBABWE-NOTE

We’re becoming a country where everyone is on the honor roll but nobody knows what they hell they’re doing.

The above is based off the “Anti-Social” segment from The Wonderful World of Stu on TheBlaze TV. Watch the highlights below:

Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV
Get Glenn Live! On TheBlaze TV

IF YOU WATCH ONE CRAZY SPORTS VIDEO TODAY, MAKE IT THIS CLASSIC

Remember: When playing baseball, make your outs count.

Lately, there has been a lot of crazy sports highlights going viral (like this incredible ping pongvideo and the craziest end to a high school basketball game you’ll ever see  or the one where a normal baseball game turns into a high contact sport ) which reminded me of a classic game played by former LA Dodgers and Oakland A’s player Jason Grabowski when he was in the minors.  Two outs, three collisions, and one catcher who was really, really sore the next day. Watch the amazing clip below:

Nate Silver and that NY Times Election Prediction Liberals Love So Much

First of all, let me say that unlike almost every conservative on Earth right now, I don’t think Nate Silver is a hack.

I think he’s actually a really smart numbers geek.  He writes the blog FiveThirtyEight, which is now hosted by the New York Times (though I’ve been reading his stuff long before it was part of the Times.)  The reason he is controversial to conservatives right now and why liberals think he is a saint, is because he is predicting that Obama has a 78.4% chance of winning reelection.    To a lot of people, that sounds completely insane.

Two quick things before we delve into the accuracy of that claim:

1)     I would describe Nate Silver as an admitted liberal, with a soft spot for markets.  He is strangely libertarian on some things, which I like, even though I don’t usually agree with him on policy.

2)     He was one of the first people that I remember who predicted Republicans had a good chance at taking the House back after the ’08 election.  This is during the time when most liberals (and some conservatives) were saying the Republican Party was about to become a regional party with no hope of ever winning another election.  He also was recently yelled at by holier than thou ‘scientist’ Michael Mann about global warming.  So, he can’t be all bad.

So, what about Nate Silver’s model as it stands right now?  In my opinion, I think he is significantly overstating the chances of an Obama win, with a few caveats.

For example, his own model says that if he has predicted 0.8% of voters’ choices incorrectly, Romney would win the popular vote.  If that were to happen (again, by his own model) Romney would almost certainly win the electoral college as well.  (A Romney win in the popular vote and a loss in the electoral college has only a 5.1% chance of happening, according to Silver.)

Look, if you get 0.8% of voters wrong and your prediction falls apart—you probably aren’t 80% sure of it.

I don’t think Silver is intentionally making it look like Obama is a sure thing because he’s liberal.  I just think he’s a tad too cocky on this one.  That’s not the worst thing in the world.  Wall Street stat geeks were too sure of themselves with the algorithms that led to the financial collapse.

Global warming scientists are too sure of themselves with their models of the future.

Human beings do such things.

One of the features of Silver’s model is that when the race remains static, and the election gets closer, whoever is ahead becomes more of a sure thing.  That’s why his model seems to absurdly show Romney’s chances to be only slightly better than they were before the first debate.

Basically, to him, a 2 point lead that’s confirmed by numerous polls is incredibly convincing.  That’s about what’s happening in Ohio, and if Romney loses Ohio, it’s going to be pretty difficult for him to win.  I’d say Romney’s chances probably are about one in five if he loses Ohio, so it’s not completely ridiculous if you really trust the polls.

Many of the polls however, just look sketchy.  They show samples that are more optimistic for Democrats than the electorate was in 2008.  If more Democrats come out to vote than did in 2008, than yeah—Mitt Romney is losing.  But, does anyone actually believe that’s reality?   2008 was a historic election for Democrats.  Barack Obama is simply not going to repeat that enthusiasm again.  It is not happening.

On the other side, while a 78% win seems like a sure thing– let’s put it in football terms.  Essentially, Silver is saying the Boston Romney’s have the football, down by a field goal to the Chicago Obama’s with 2 minutes left in the game.  First and ten from their own 31.  Romney could get a field goal to send it to overtime, or score a TD and grab a win.  Or they could go three and out and lose.  I can’t say that sounds THAT far off from what is happening in the election, yet, an NFL team in that situation has only a 22% chance of winning.

To me, the data says Romney’s chances are about twice as good as Silver says.  That still puts him as a slight underdog.  Beyond that, I’m depending on divine providence, hanging chads, or the Koch Brothers hacking electronic voting machines with the help of Grover Norquist or something.

The bottom line is that if Obama wins, everyone is going to think Silver is a genius.  If Romney wins, his credibility will be destroyed.  Neither is fair, but both are painfully unavoidable.

By the Numbers: The Auto-Bailout

If you’ve been watching the Glenn Beck Program for the past week now, you may have seen some idiot dressed up in a goofy costume each night trying desperately to make a serious point about the Obama administration’s failed policies and the upcoming election.

Unfortunately, said idiot is me. Just another perk of working for Glenn Beck, I guess.

One topic we covered last week was some of the numbers on the auto-bailout while I was wearing a “Chuck the Dump Truck” costume. Clever, right?

 

Not as clever as Obama spinning the auto-bailout , though.

In the face of an election less than 3 weeks away, Obama is clinging to his praise for the auto-bailout. I give you the numbers that the Obama Administration doesn’t want you to see before November 6—in a stupid costume nonetheless. Watch here:

To see me dressed in other idiotic costumes, check out the past segments of By the Numbers:

By the Numbers: Presidential Polls

By the Numbers: Voter Registration

By the Numbers: Labor Participation

By the Numbers: Why America is Better than Europe

Mitt Romney swings the debate polls by 69 points

I woke up this morning with an odd and unfamiliar feeling. That feeling was optimism.

After Romney’s slaying in the debate last night, I’m starting to think he might actually have a shot at this thing.

Even the liberal media had no choice but to admit that Romney clenched the first debate by a long shot.

Chris Matthews in his typical unintelligible fashion, had an angry meltdown and implored the president to “Watch MSNBC, you’ll learn something every night.”

Michael Moore tweeted “This is what you get when you pick John Kerry as your debate coach.”

And Van Jones said Romney “out Obama’ed Obama” and won the debate last night. Van Jones, people. Van. Freaking. Jones.

There is a poll out from CNN that is also contributing to my optimistic state of mind. Now I usually don’t think these debates affect the polls very much, but this time is different.

In CNN’s post debate polling, 67% thought Romney did the best job in the debate.

That is a phenomenal stat, but it gets even better when you put it in perspective. Let’s looks at this poll from a historical standpoint.

In the last debate of 2008, John McCain lost to Obama by 27. You read that right…McCain -27.  Last night, it was Romney +42.

That lead is almost absolutely unheard of in presidential debates, a 69 point swing from the last time Obama took the debate stage.

Going back to Reagan, only Bill Clinton ever won a debate by 42 points, but that was in 1992 with a third party splitting his opposition.

In that debate, Clinton had 58% saying he won, over Bush’s 16% and Ross Perot’s 15%.

Romney is also the only Republican to acquire such a large lead in this poll.  In fact, his lead was three and a half times as big as any other republican since 1980, including Reagan.

Bush won the second debate by 12 over Gore, Reagan had a mere 3 point lead over Mondale in 1984.

Historically, a +42 for a Republicans is completely uncharted territory.  It was a horror show for Barack Obama.  The downside is that debates have traditionally only moved the polls by a maximum of around three points.  The upside is—this is one of the widest victories of all time.

Next Blog Post

  Read Story »