Glenn: 'NBC has crossed the line' with misleading coverage to support progressive agenda

The mainstream media here in America has been on the decline for quite some time. When was the last time anyone turned on the news and trusted the anchor to give you the truth without an agenda? It happens all the time - most of the anchors on the nightly news are operating with some kind of message or agenda they are trying to shove down the throats of the American people. But no network or company has sunk to the ethical lows of NBC and MSNBC, whose reporters are flat out lying and distorting facts and audio tapes. Are they looking for ratings? If so, it's a failing strategy considering FOX News remains the number one force in cable news and conservatives like Glenn outshine progressive voices across all multimedia platforms wherever they appear. Are they just shilling for the President and the progressive administration because they don't know any better? Whatever the case, they've made it clear they have no interest in telling the truth and have decided to just flat out lie. Glenn ran through their ugly, hateful, misleading, hypocritical track record today on radio.

"NBC has crossed the line. You have not heard me say this ever before. NBC has crossed the line and they are burning the bridge behind them," Glenn said. "You have no credibility at all. The ratings are going to tank on NBC. Because Americans are fair."

Glenn said that MSNBC has been headed down this road of non-reporting for a while, but said things are now shifting into high gear. For example, when news breaks that Obama's dad was not tortured by the British as he claimed in his memoirs, but does MSNBC report on that? No, instead their weekend anchor and commentator Melissa Harris-Perry says that African American men displaying patriotism post-9/11 (aka wearing NYPD hats in solidarity with those who lost their lives saving others) is a form of PTSD!

"That's one of the most racist things I've ever heard.  As if we're not supposed to be proud of the actions of the NYPD.  Think about what they did!  Are you kidding me? " Glenn said.

Meanwhile, Martin Bashir continues to show an anti-religion undertone when attacking Mitt Romney. For example, he allowed his guest Frank Schaeffer to attack both Mormonism and Islamism when Schaeffer said, "Looking at the religious right you have to balance their hatreds.  Do they hate the Mormonism of Mitt Romney more than they hate the pretended Islamic faith quote/unquote of the president?"

""Got it?  That's just anti‑religion.  That's not anti‑Mormon.  That's anti‑religion.  That's anti‑God.  Does the right hate Mormonism more than Obama's supposed Muslimism?  Wow."

"Only NBC is referring to Barack Obama constantly as a Muslim.  Only NBC.  Why are you guys keeping that alive?  I don't know anybody who's rational that believes that he's a Muslim.  I don't think there's anybody rational that believes he believes in anything but Barack Obama.  If there's a God, it's in his pants.  It's in his suit.  It sits behind his desk.  It wears its shoes.  His God is Barack Obama.  Why are you sleeping that lie alive?  How does that benefit your cause?" Glenn said.

But Bashir joined in on the attacks by reading an op-ed by a Mormon willing to throw Romney under the bus:

"Let me read you something from a New York Times editorial this week.  It's written by David Mason, a Mormon professor, and I'm quoting him:  'I suspect that Mr. Romney is such a typical politician that should he occupy the Oval Office, he'll studiously avoid the appearance of being anything but a WASP.  Mormons are certainly Christians enough to know how to spitefully abuse their power'," Bashir said.

Glenn noted that this is MSNBC's agenda: Find the one Republican or Mormon or whatever else group they are attacking to be complicit in their agenda and give them the ability to say 'it's not us saying'. Sadly, when you take that as a whole (Joe Scarborough loves to throw his 'fellow' Republicans under the bus) you can see their patterns emerge.

And then there is Lawrence O'Donnell, who attacked the Romney's for claiming the equestrian sport of dressage helped Ann Romney with her multiple sclerosis.

"Now, Mitt Romney has always told the story of the family's entry into the breathtakingly so‑called sport of dressage as a therapeutic option for Ann Romney's multiple sclerosis," O'Donnell said.

O'Donnell continued, "There are a lot of things you can do to try to deal with MS.  But come on, dressage does not appear in any of the more traditional courses of treatment."

But did Mitt Romney claim it was a form of treatment? No.

Mitt Romeny said, "I guess it's the sport of dressage.  Not many people are familiar with it, but something for which she has a passion.  And frankly her getting back on a horse after she was diagnosed with MS was able, she's convinced, to help her regenerate her strength and renew that vigor."

"It's where her passion is, and putting her back on her horse means something to her," Glenn said. "Her mental attitude is everything.  I'm sorry, doctor, tax attorney, actor, writer, socialist, commentator Larry O'Donnell.  Larry knows that there's many things that you can do to treat MS.  He's a doctor, of course.  He played a doctor on TV, or something, or he's written a line about a doctor or something.  I didn't hear that Romney was saying here that dressage appears as any of the more traditional treatments for MS.  What America heard, if they would have been listening, is that Ann felt like it helped her."

"The economy is on fire.  The country is facing more problems than we have faced possibly, possibly since the Civil War, at least since the 1960s.  We're charting the course for the next generation in the next six months.  Whoever is president will be the one that charts the course for the next generation, and that's why it comes back to Andrea Mitchell," Glenn said.

"Andrea Mitchell flat‑out smeared Mitt Romney on Monday with a heavily edited tape.  This isn't the first time they've done this.  A heavily edited tape."

"If she worked for me, she would have been fired.  If she would have done it to Barack Obama, she would have been fired.  And everyone in the chain of command would have been fired."

And did she apologize? No. She only said, "We didn't get a chance to play that.  So here it is now."

Wow, after the damage was done she threw the full tape out there in the most half hearted way imaginable.

"They completely edited a tape, spun it in a complete opposite direction, and that's your apology.  No apologies.  Do not watch or support NBC in the any way, shape or form if you believe in the truth.  That's my family.  I am not for boycotts, but I am also not for editing people's words for a political agenda.  And they've done it with Zimmerman and it was dangerous.  And they're doing it now with a guy who could be president, and it's dangerous.  Enough, NBC.  Send a message to NBC.  Enough."

 

Most self-proclaimed Marxists know very little about Marxism. Some of them have all the buzzwords memorized. They talk about the exploits of labor. They talk about the slavery of capitalist society and the alienation caused by capital. They talk about the evils of power and domination.

But they don't actually believe what they say. Or else they wouldn't be such violent hypocrites. And we're not being dramatic when we say "violent."

For them, Marxism is a political tool that they use to degrade and annoy their political enemies.

They don't actually care about the working class.

Another important thing to remember about Marxists is that they talk about how they want to defend the working class, but they don't actually understand the working class. They definitely don't realize that the working class is composed mostly of so many of the people they hate. Because, here's the thing, they don't actually care about the working class. Or the middle class. They wouldn't have the slightest clue how to actually work, not the way we do. For them, work involves ranting about how work and labor are evil.

Ironically, if their communist utopia actually arrived, they would be the first ones against the wall. Because they have nothing to offer except dissent. They have no practical use and no real connection to reality.

Again ironically, they are the ultimate proof of the success of capitalism. The fact that they can freely call for its demise, in tweets that they send from their capitalistic iPhones, is proof that capitalism affords them tremendous luxuries.

Their specialty is complaining. They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They sneer at Christianity for promising Heaven in exchange for good deeds on earth — which is a terrible description of Christianity, but it's what they actually believe — and at the same time they criticize Christianity for promising a utopia, they give their unconditional devotion to a religion that promises a utopia.

They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They think capitalism has turned us into machines. Which is a bad interpretation of Marx's concept of the General Intellect, the idea that humans are the ones who create machines, so humans, not God, are the creators.

They think that the only way to achieve the perfect society is by radically changing and even destroying the current society. It's what they mean when they say things about the "status quo" and "hegemony" and the "established order." They believe that the system is broken and the way to fix it is to destroy, destroy, destroy.

Critical race theory actually takes it a step farther. It tells us that the racist system can never be changed. That racism is the original sin that white people can never overcome. Of course, critical race theorists suggest "alternative institutions," but these "alternative institutions" are basically the same as the ones we have now, only less effective and actually racist.

Marx's violent revolution never happened. Or at least it never succeeded. Marx's followers have had to take a different approach. And now, we are living through the Revolution of Constant Whining.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.

Americans are losing faith in our justice system and the idea that legal consequences are applied equally — even to powerful elites in office.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) joined Glenn Beck on the radio program to detail what he believes will come next with the Durham investigation, which hopefully will provide answers to the Obama FBI's alleged attempts to sabotage former President Donald Trump and his campaign years ago.

Rep. Nunes and Glenn assert that we know Trump did NOT collude with Russia, and that several members of the FBI possibly committed huge abuses of power. So, when will we see justice?

Watch the video clip below:


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 corporate media is doing everything it can to protect Dr. Anthony Fauci after Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) roasted him for allegedly lying to Congress about funding gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China.

During an extremely heated exchange at a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Paul challenged Dr. Fauci — who, as the director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, oversees research programs at the National Institute of Health — on whether the NIH funded dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Dr. Fauci denied the claims, but as Sen. Paul knows, there are documents that prove Dr. Fauci's NIH was funding gain-of-function research in the Wuhan biolab before COVID-19 broke out in China.

On "The Glenn Beck Program," Glenn and Producer Stu Burguiere presented the proof, because Dr. Fauci's shifting defenses don't change the truth.

Watch the video clip below:

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.

Critical race theory: A special brand of evil

wal_172619/Pixabay

Part of what makes it hard for us to challenge the left is that their beliefs are complicated. We don't mean complicated in a positive way. They aren't complicated the way love is complicated. They're complicated because there's no good explanation for them, no basis in reality.

The left cannot pull their heads out of the clouds. They are stuck on romantic ideas, abstract ideas, universal ideas. They talk in theories. They see the world through ideologies. They cannot divorce themselves from their own academic fixations. And — contrary to what they believe and how they act — it's not because leftists are smarter than the rest of us. And studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country. Marx was no different. The Communist Manifesto talks about how the rise of cities "rescued a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life."

Studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country.

Instead of admitting that they're pathological hypocrites, they tell us that we're dumb and tell us to educate ourselves. Okay, so we educate ourselves; we return with a coherent argument. Then they say, "Well, you can't actually understand what you just said unless you understand the work of this other obscure Marxist writer. So educate yourselves more."

It's basically the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, the idea that when you point out a flaw in someone's argument, they say, "Well, that's a bad example."

After a while, it becomes obvious that there is no final destination for their bread-crumb trail. Everything they say is based on something that somebody else said, which is based on something somebody else said.

Take critical race theory. We're sure you've noticed by now that it is not evidence-based — at all. It is not, as academics say, a quantitative method. It doesn't use objective facts and data to arrive at conclusions. Probably because most of those conclusions don't have any basis in reality.

Critical race theory is based on feelings. These feelings are based on theories that are also based on feelings.

We wanted to trace the history of critical race theory back to the point where its special brand of evil began. What allowed it to become the toxic, racist monster that it is today?

Later, we'll tell you about some of the snobs who created critical theory, which laid the groundwork for CRT. But if you follow the bread-crumb trail from their ideas, you wind up with Marxism.

For years, the staff has devoted a lot of time to researching Marxism. We have read a lot of Marx and Marxist writing. It's part of our promise to you to be as informed as possible, so that you know where to go for answers; so that you know what to say when your back is up against the wall. What happens when we take the bread-crumb trail back farther, past Marxism? What is it based on?

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism.

It's actually based on the work of one of the most important philosophers in human history, a 19th-century German philosopher named Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism. And, as you'll see in just a bit, if we look at Hegel's actual ideas, it's obvious that Marx completely misrepresented them in order to confirm his own fantasies.

So, in a way, that's where the bread-crumb trail ends: With Marx's misrepresentation of an incredibly important, incredibly useful philosophy, a philosophy that's actually pretty conservative.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.