Rand Paul heats things up with his budget proposal

This morning on radio Kentucky Senator Rand Paul joined the program to discuss is new budget proposal, which Glenn may have wished was a marriage proposal after hearing all the details.

Senator Paul ran for office in 2010 in large part because he believes the Congress should have a rule that forces them to balance the budget. The balance budget proposal Republicans in Congress were pushing for late last year said it would accomplish a balanced budget in five years. This exactly what Rand Paul’s budget proposal claims to do, unlike Representative Ryan’s plan, which takes twenty-eight years to balance the budget.

“I like Paul Ryan,” Senator Paul told Glenn. “I think he’s a smart guy, and he’s helping the entitlement reform debate, but his budget doesn’t balance for 28 years—and that’s before you even talk to Democrats. So you’re starting out with your initial plan being 28 years to balance. I just don’t think that’s tenable or should be our position.”

The Senator went on to explain what makes this budget different from the Ryan Plan that is getting so much media attention. Rand Paul’s plan not only does entitlement reform, but also immediately starts Medicare reform.

“We let senior citizens have the Congressional health care plan,” Sen. Paul explained. “And I think this is consistent with the Tea Party platform where we always said we don’t want special privileges for Congressmen, we don’t want special carve-outs for people. We want everybody to get the same sort of attitude from legislation. But, if you give all senior citizens the Congressional healthcare plan, and you do it immediately, it saves a trillion dollars over ten years. It does a lot of the things that Paul Ryan’s does, but his waits ten years, and then give the choice of staying in Medicare.”

The CBO scores the Ryan Plan as zero savings, but that’s assuming people will choose to leave Medicare.

Senator Paul adds that the other big difference between his and Rep. Ryan’s, he explains, is “we do a flat tax of 17%, corporate and individual.”

This was something Glenn and Pat clearly liked the sound of, because within thirty seconds listeners and the Senator were hearing Barry White singing in the background.

Unfazed by Glenn and Pat, Senator Paul continued, “I think what you would see is you would really see the economy grow like it hasn't grown that long time. That would be cutting our corporate tax in half. There would be very few deductions. So, it would be much simpler and I think really that's what with we need to get everybody off the sidelines from basically not investing.”

Glenn agreed with the Senator, his plan would be a huge start to the engine of America’s economy. Knowing that anyone who wants to balance a budget in Washington is an “extremist” he asked, “How can we help you get this done?”

“Letting your 14 million listeners in on the clue is always a big help,” Sen. Paul answered.

Rand Paul also told Glenn he’s been speaking with conservatives in the House this week, and believes that they will be introducing to “conservative alternative” to Paul Ryan’s plan after seeing the five year balanced budget proposal.

Glenn also wanted to know how Sen. Paul’s plan affects the defense budget.

Rand Paul explained to Glenn that because they eliminate four departments, and cut a lot of spending, it allows them not to have a sequester. “Instead of having military spending go down, like the sequester would have, ours actually allows for a gradual increase in military spending over time,” Rand told Glenn.

“So, how does that work?” Glenn asked.

Senator Paul explained that due to the amount they are able to eliminate in spending, through the elimination of the Departments of Commerce, Energy, Education and HUD, that they avoid the sequester.

It was pretty obvious from the return of the Barry White backtrack that Glenn, Pat and Stu really liked the sound of this.

“Wow, that’s amazing,” Stu said.

When Pat asked the Senator what his plan was for dealing with the fit the left will throw over this, he said, “I guess we take it for what it's worth. We realize they're on the other side of this, but we also realize the country is broke, that we are now borrowing $50,000 a second and it's untenable. So, they can squawk all they want, but we're trying to save the country while they're letting Rome burn.”

Next Glenn asked Rand Paul what his thoughts were on Occupy, if he [or anyone in Washington] was paying attention to the radicals that are in bed with Occupy and what they’re planning for the summer.

“I’m concerned about the whole philosophy that if you’ve got three cars and I have a moped, that I should send the President over to your house to get one of your cars,” Sen. Paul answered. “Because the next step is, if you accept that philosophy of redistribution of wealth, why wait for the President to get one of your cars? Why don't I go to your house with a brick and take what I want? Or go to the storefront? So, the idea that it’s the government's job to take from those who succeed and give to those who don't …once we accept that philosophy, it's a short step from that to violence. So, I do worry about accepting this idea of transferring wealth from one group to the next, because in times when there's a crisis and people don't get their checks, like in Greece, then they riot and say it's mine—you promised me my check, and so I'll just go to the storefront and take what I want.”

This may have been one of the first Congressmen Glenn has interviewed that really seemed to understand the Occupy movement, or at least what it is capable of, as he followed that up by asking Rand Paul, “is there a candidate that is running that has a really, really nasty cold that could go off the rails and get really sick and could you be their vice-president?”

“Well, I've told people if there's any kind of secret plan for that happen, it's to secret, they haven't even told me about it,” Sen. Paul answered.

“You are what the Tea Party, I believe, is looking for,” Glenn told the freshman Senator. Later adding, “You've said more in the last eight minutes than I think most of these candidates have said the entire race.”

“I made the mistake of reading this book Broke before I got into office,” Rand Paul replied, “I have all this information bottled in my head.”

Glenn next asked Rand Paul what listeners could do to help support his budget.

“Call your Congressman, your senators. Tell them that we have to balance the budget, and it's the most important thing facing our country. It's the number one threat to our national security, and you have to cut spending. It's not about raising taxes. It's not about punishing your neighbor,” Sen. Paul answered.

This week on the Glenn Beck Podcast, Glenn spoke with Vox co-founder Matthew Yglesias about his new book, "One Billion Americans: The Case for Thinking Bigger."

Matthew and Glenn agree that, while conservatives and liberals may disagree on a lot, we're not as far apart as some make it seem. If we truly want America to continue doing great things, we must spend less time fighting amongst ourselves.

Watch a clip from the full interview with Matthew Yglesias below:


Find the full podcast on Glenn's YouTube channel or on Blaze Media's podcast network.

Want to listen to more Glenn Beck podcasts?

Subscribe to Glenn Beck's channel on YouTube for FREE access to more of his masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, or subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

'A convenient boogeyman for misinformation artists': Why is the New York Times defending George Soros?

Image source: Simon Dawson/Bloomberg via Getty Images

On the "Glenn Beck Radio Program" Tuesday, Glenn discussed the details of a recent New York Times article that claims left-wing billionaire financier George Soros "has become a convenient boogeyman for misinformation artists who have falsely claimed that he funds spontaneous Black Lives Matter protests as well as antifa, the decentralized and largely online, far-left activist network that opposes President Trump."

The Times article followed last week's bizarre Fox News segment in which former House Speaker Newt Gingrich appeared to be censored for criticizing Soros (read more here). The article also labeled Glenn a "conspiracy theorist" for his tweet supporting Gingrich.

Watch the video clip below for details:


Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

The former ambassador to Russia under the Obama Administration, Michael McFaul, came up with "7 Pillars of Color Revolution," a list of seven steps needed to incite the type of revolution used to upend Eastern European countries like Ukraine and Georgia in the past two decades. On his TV special this week, Glenn Beck broke down the seven steps and showed how they're happening right now in America.

Here are McFaul's seven steps:

1. Semi-autocratic regime (not fully autocratic) – provides opportunity to call incumbent leader "fascist"

2. Appearance of unpopular president or incumbent leader

3. United and organized opposition – Antifa, BLM

4. Effective system to convince the public (well before the election) of voter fraud

5. Compliant media to push voter fraud narrative

6. Political opposition organization able to mobilize "thousands to millions in the streets"

7. Division among military and police


Glenn explained each "pillar," offering examples and evidence of how the Obama administration laid out the plan for an Eastern European style revolution in order to completely upend the American system.

Last month, McFaul made a obvious attempt to downplay his "color revolutions" plan with the following tweet:

Two weeks later, he appeared to celebrate step seven of his plan in this now-deleted tweet:



As Glenn explains in this clip, the Obama administration's "7 Pillars of Color Revolution" are all playing out – just weeks before President Donald Trump takes on Democratic candidate Joe Biden in the November election.

Watch the video clip below to hear more from Glenn:


Watch the full special "CIVIL WAR: The Way America Could End in 2020" here.

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn's masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multiplatform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.

Start your free trial and get $20 off a one-year subscription with code BANTHIS.

Modern eugenics: Will Christians fight this deadly movement?

Photo by Olga Kononenko on Unsplash

Last month, without much fanfare, a new research paper disclosed that 94 percent of Belgian physicians support the killing of new-born babies after birth if they are diagnosed with a disability.

A shocking revelation indeed that did not receive the attention it demanded. Consider this along with parents who believe that if their unborn babies are pre-diagnosed with a disability, they would choose to abort their child. Upwards of 70 percent of mothers whose children are given a prenatal disability diagnosis, such as Down Syndrome, abort to avoid the possibility of being burdened with caring for a disabled child.

This disdain for the disabled hits close to home for me. In 1997, my family received a letter from Michael Schiavo, the husband of my sister, Terri Schiavo, informing us that he intended to petition a court to withdraw Terri's feeding tube.

For those who do not remember, in 1990, at the age of 26, Terri experienced a still-unexplained collapse while at home with Michael, who subsequently became her legal guardian. Terri required only love and care, food and water via feeding tube since she had difficulty swallowing as a result of her brain injury. Nonetheless, Michael's petition was successful, and Terri's life was intentionally ended in 2005 by depriving her of food and water, causing her to die from dehydration and starvation. It took almost two excruciating weeks.

Prior to my sister's predicament, the biases that existed towards persons with disabilities had been invisible to me. Since then, I have come to learn the dark history of deadly discrimination towards persons with disabilities.

Indeed, some 20 years prior to Germany's T4 eugenics movement, where upwards of 200,000 German citizens were targeted and killed because of their physical or mental disability, the United States was experiencing its own eugenics movement.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas documented some of this history in his concurring opinion in Box v. Planned Parenthood of Indiana and Kentucky, Inc., Justice Thomas describes how eugenics became part of the academic curriculum being taught in upwards of 400 American universities and colleges.

It was not solely race that was the target of the U.S. eugenics movement. Eugenicists also targeted the institutionalized due to incurable illness, the physically and cognitively disabled, the elderly, and those with medical dependency.

In 1973, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down Roe v. Wade, which wiped out pro-life laws in nearly every state and opened the floodgates to abortion throughout the entirety of pregnancy. Since then, 60 million children have been killed. Abortion as we know it today has become a vehicle for a modern-day eugenics program.

Since the Catholic Church was established, the Truth of Christ was the greatest shield against these types of attacks on the human person and the best weapon in the fight for equality and justice. Tragically, however, for several decades, the Church has been infiltrated by modernist clergy, creating disorder and confusion among the laity, perverting the teachings of the Church and pushing a reckless supposed “social justice" agenda.

My family witnessed this firsthand during Terri's case. Church teaching is clear: it is our moral obligation to provide care for the cognitively disabled like Terri. However, Bishop Robert Lynch, who was the bishop of the Diocese of St. Petersburg, Florida, during Terri's case, offered no support and was derelict in his duties during the fight for Terri's life.

Bishop Lynch had an obligation to use his position to protect Terri from the people trying to kill her and to uphold Church teaching. Indeed, it was not only the silence of Bishop Lynch but that of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), which also remained silent despite my family's pleas for help, that contributed to Terri being needlessly starved and dehydrated to death.

My family's experience, sadly, has turned out to be more of the rule than the exception. Consider what happened to Michael Hickson. Hickson was a 36-year-old, brain-injured person admitted to a Texas hospital after contracting COVID-19. Incredibly—and against the wishes of Michael's wife—the hospital decided not to treat Michael because they arbitrarily decided that his “quality of life" was “unacceptably low" due to his pre-existing disability. Michael died within a week once the decision not to treat him was imposed upon him despite the efforts of his wife to obtain basic care for her husband.

During my sister's case and our advocacy work with patients and their families, it would have been helpful to have a unified voice coming from our clergy consistently supporting the lives of our medically vulnerable. We desperately need to see faithful Catholic pastoral witness that confounds the expectations of the elite by pointing to Jesus Christ and the moral law.

A Church that appears more concerned with baptizing the latest social and political movements is a Church that may appear to be “relevant," but one that may also find itself swallowed up by the preoccupations of our time.

As Catholics, we know all too well the reluctance of priests to preach on issues of abortion, euthanasia, assisted suicide, and other pro-life issues. We have heard that the Church cannot risk becoming too political.

At the same time, some within the Church are now openly supporting Black Lives Matter, an organization that openly declares itself hostile to the family, to moral norms as taught by the Church, and whose founders embrace the deadly ideology of Marxism.

For example, Bishop Mark J. Seitz of El Paso, Texas, knelt in prayer with a cardboard sign asserting his support for this ideology.

Recently, during an online liturgy of the mass, Fr. Kenneth Boller at The Church of St. Francis Xavier in New York, led the congregation with what appears to sound like questions affirming the BLM agenda. Moreover, while reading these questions, pictures of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery, assumed victims of racial injustice, were placed on the altar of St. Francis Xavier Church, a place typically reserved for Saints of the Catholic Church.

Contrast these two stories with what happened in the Diocese of Lafayette, Indiana, where Rev. Theodore Rothrock of St. Elizabeth Seton Church fell victim to the ire of Bishop Timothy Doherty. Fr. Rothrock used strong language in his weekly church bulletin criticizing the Black Lives Matter movement and its organizers. Consequently, Bishop Doherty suspended Fr. Rothrock from public ministry.

In 1972, Pope Pius VI said, “The smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God." It seems that too many of our clergy today are enjoying the smell.

I encourage all who are concerned about the human right to life and about Christ-centered reforms in our culture and our Church to raise your voices for pastoral leadership in every area of our shared lives as Christian people.

Bobby Schindler is a Senior Fellow with Americans United for Life, Associate Scholar at the Charlotte Lozier Institute, and President of the Terri Schiavo Life & Hope Network.