Ann Coulter discusses her new book, The View, and the election

September 28, 2012

Writer

If Ann Coulter joined Glenn on radio this morning to discuss her new book, Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama. Ann's new book explains the Left's agenda to patron minorities, in particularly black Americans, and lie to the rest of the country while they're doing it. After being attacked by Whoopi and the most of the ladies of The View for "daring to write a book about black people," Glenn was a much friendlier interview.

"How dare you talk about race! Have you ever been black, Ann Coulter?" Glenn asked sarcastically, mocking the confrontation that occurred between her and Whoopi the previous day.

Unfortunately your browser does not support IFrames.

Watch More News Videos at ABC

2012 Presidential Election

Entertainment & Celebrity News

"Basically what she said to you Ann was how dare you talk about black people," Glenn commented.

"Well, it did become clear during the interview that they haven't cracked the book," Ann responded.

She noted how that actually made it a great interview, because they were throwing all of the myths out that she wrote about in her book.

"As I told Whoopie it's not how black people feel, and hurting America, and black America most of all," she added.

Not all figures on the left are opposed to Ann's book. Left leaning Juan Williams, a political analyst at Fox News, actually likes the book.

Glenn even noted that his eyes were opened up even more after reading the book. It incomprehensible how he is always labeled the racist because he doesn't have any black supporters as a conservative.

"We try to reach out over and over again - we want to be inclusive," Glenn said, "but the left continually paints us into everything that we are absolutely not. And somehow or another that's our fault."

Ann agreed, and commented on the huge historical events that have been warped to fit the liberal agenda. Most blacks were originally Republicans , because it was Republicans who led the movement to put an end to slavery. It was the GOP that, for the next 100 years, kept introducing the Civil Rights legislation that was repeatedly shot down by the Democrats.

It was the Republican platform that had anti-lynching legislation, anti-poll tax legislation, public accommodation legislation, etc. The Republican platform in 1956 endorsed Brown vs. Board of Education. The Democratic platform did not - in fact, in 1956 they ran a segregationist on their ticket.

"All the segregationists were Democrats, and they were not conservative Democrats - like we're always told," Ann noted. "They were liberal Democrats and they're still being honored by Democrats like Bill Clinton, who invited J. William Fulbright to his inauguration — an extreme segregationist. William Fulbright voted against the Civil Rights Act of '57 and '60, pushed by Eisenhower, and of '64 and '65 — he signed the Southern Manifesto, and Bill Clinton gave him the Presidential Medal of Freedom. And at the speech, he commended Fullbright for teaching Americans to see Russians as people too. Well, he couldn't see black Americans as people too."

"And this is the history of our party. The roles have been reversed. As I said in my column this week, 'someday when America society comes to an enlightened understanding about the evil of abortion, as they did with slavery, the roles are going to reverse the history of that too. And suddenly, the Republicans are going to be the pro-choicers, while Democrats fought to save little baby fetuses sleeping in their mother's womb'. It's just a completely inverted history."

The question that leaves us with is how? How was that history changed? How did they erase everything Republicans were? The left now goes as far now as saying that the GOP is a party "that Lincoln would be ashamed of." When in fact, quite the opposite is true. He would be ashamed of the left. Frederick Douglass would be ashamed of the Democrats.

In Ann's book, she quotes Frederick Douglass, who said:

"Let us stand upon our own legs, work with our own hands, and eat bread in the sweat of our own brows. When you, our white fellow countrymen, have attempted to do anything for us, it has generally been to deprive us of some right, power or privilege which you yourself would die before you would submit to have taken from you. When the planters of the West Indies used to attempt to puzzle the pure-minded Wilberforce with the question, How shall we get rid of slavery? his simple answer was, "quit stealing." In like manner, we answer those who are perpetually puzzling their brains with questions as to what shall be done with the Negro, "let him alone and mind your own business." If you see him plowing in the open field, leveling the forest, at work with a spade, a rake, a hoe, a pickaxe, or a bill—let him alone; he has a right to work. If you see him on his way to school, with spelling book, geography and arithmetic in his hands—let him alone. Don't shut the door in his face, nor bolt your gates against him; he has a right to learn—let him alone. Don't pass laws to degrade him. If he has a ballot in his hand, and is on his way to the ballot-box to deposit his vote for the man whom he thinks will most justly and wisely administer the Government which has the power of life and death over him, as well as others—let him alone; his right of choice as much deserves respect and protection as your own. If you see him on his way to the church, exercising religious liberty in accordance with this or that religious persuasion—let him alone.—Don't meddle with him, nor trouble yourselves with any questions as to what shall be done with him."

This reminded Glenn of the clip that was released yesterday of the woman in Ohio with her "Obama phone."

This is exactly what you're talking about right now.

"I mean, this is slavery. This is slavery," Glenn said referring to the dependency on government Americans are being led to.

"And it's heartbreaking," Ann responded. "So much horror that has been done to the black family and the black community with specific policies by the Democrats. As you will find in my book, blacks were much more likely to be married than whites, up until the Great Society programs."

It's hard to believe that anyone who understood the magnitude of the Civil Rights movement would be, now, slapping it on all the other issues they care about as a tool to push their policies forward. Things like abortion on-demand, "homeless rights," gay marriage, and voter fraud.

She noted that, on the issue of voter fraud and voter i.d. laws, the left doesn't seem to mind insulting black Americans to make their "arguments" against the legislation. Based on their own word, they seem to think that being that black people are too stupid or too poor to get an i.d.

"The only people that have been keeping the blacks from voting are the Democrats, and the Republicans fought to get blacks the right to vote," Ann added.

Ann's book is mostly about more recent events and current figures on the left than the history of the Civil Rights movement. In her book she goes through public figures, like Chris Matthews, who are always shouting "racism" at the people they disagree with, but really have no foothold in the black community. It's simply a talking point and a tool they use to shutdown the people who disagree with their political ideology.

So how do you combat that? How to you beat a narrative being run by the mainstream media and half of our political leaders?

"How do we repair this? How do we come together as a people? A divided house is not going to stand," Glenn said. "And does Romney win?"

"I still think he win. The only danger is that the racial from the left will work again. I think Obama or any Democrat would have won in 2008 no matter what. We were running John McCain. The economy collapsed right before the election. It is a fact that more white people voted for Obama than they had in 50 years," she answered.

"But the point of this book is to remind people of the racial bullying has never produced anything good."

Ann Coulter will be joining Glenn's radio program occasionally through November 6th. You can get Mugged: Racial Demagoguery from the Seventies to Obama HERE.

RADIO

Joe Lieberman calls out Democrats for anti-Semitism

The FEC is broken – H.R. 1 will break it differently

FLICKR/DonkeyHotey

The FEC is bad. The House of Representatives isn't doing anything to make it better.

When it passed H.R. 1 by a vote of 234-193 on Monday, Congress attempted to address a laundry list of nationwide problems: rampant gerrymandering, voting rights, and the vulnerability of elections to foreign interference, among other concerns. But H.R. 1, billed as the "For the People Act," also takes a shot at reforming the Federal Election Commission (FEC). It fails.

The FEC isn't good at enforcing the nation's campaign finance laws, and, when it is does, it's often an entire election cycle after the given offense. As it is, candidates don't have much difficulty circumventing campaign finance laws, undermining the fairness of elections and opening the door to further corruption.

The FEC was created by the Federal Election Campaign Act following the Watergate scandal, as Congress sought a better way to police federal campaign laws and prevent future presidents from interfering with investigations as Nixon had. The FEC has six commissioners, and no more than three can be of the same party. Four votes are required for most actions taken by the agency, and that hasn't been an issue for most of its history. But since 2008, the frequency of 3-3 tie votes has increased dramatically. It's why the FEC is slow to investigate cases and even slower to prosecute offenses. Supporters of H.R. 1 complain, with good reason, that the FEC has become toothless. But H.R. 1's reforms introduce new and potentially volatile problems.

FEC's rampant dysfunction won't be fixed by H.R. 1— the bill doesn't get at what actually went wrong. Since its inception, the FEC has been able to operate without excessive gridlock, and, for the most part, it still does. At the height of FEC turmoil in 2014, the FEC only had a tied vote 14 percent of the time (historically, it has been closer to one to four percent of the time) on substantive matters, although many of these tie votes occur on matters that are particularly contentious. The greater problem afflicting the FEC is touched upon by NBC Washington's findings that the Republican and Democratic commissioners of the FEC almost always vote as blocs. At various times, both Republican and Democratic commissioners have put party interests ahead of their agency's responsibilities.

At various times, both Republican and Democratic commissioners have put party interests ahead of their agency's responsibilities.

H.R. 1's Democratic supporters instead believe the FEC's six-commissioner structure makes it dysfunctional. H.R. 1 introduces a new system of five commissioners —two from each party and one independent, eliminating tie votes. But that independent commissioner's de facto role as a tiebreaker would grant them far too much power. Save for Senate approval, there's nothing preventing a president from appointing an "independent" like Bernie Sanders or Angus King.

The bill's proponents are aware of this problem, creating a Blue Ribbon Advisory Panel that will help inform the president's decisions. But this panel has problems of its own. The Blue Ribbon Advisory Panel's decisions are non-binding and not public, a result of its exemption from the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), which ensures the transparency of advisory committees. There are arguments against FACA's necessity, the panel's deliberate exemption from the law undermines the idea that its goal is to ensure non-partisanship. Instead, H.R. 1 will allow future presidents to tilt the scales of the FEC in their favor, a fate the post-Watergate creators of the FEC were so desperate to avoid they originally had members of Congress picking commissioners before the Supreme Court ruled it unconstitutional. Apparently, the solution to excessive gridlock is one-party control.

H.R. 1 also seeks to grant unilateral powers to the Chair of the commission in the name of expediency, again giving leverage to the Chair's party, and allows the General Counsel to take actions independent of commission votes. While some of the FEC's problems, such as its notoriously slow pace and the delayed appointment of commissioners under Presidents Obama and Trump, might be solved with legislation, the consolidation of power in the hands of a few at the expense of the FEC's integrity is not a winning strategy.

The FEC is afflicted by the same problem that has afflicted governments for as long as they have existed – governments are made up of people, and people can be bad. The Founders, in their wisdom, sought to limit the harm bad actors could do once in power, and the FEC's current structure adheres to this principle. Currently, the consequences of bad actors in the FEC is dysfunction and frustration. But under H.R. 1's reforms, those consequences could be blatant corruption.

Michael Rieger is a contributor for Young Voices. Follow him on Twitter at @EagerRieger.

'This is craziness': Why Dems have shunned Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz

Wikimedia

On Monday's radio program, Glenn Beck and Stu Burguiere discussed former Starbucks CEO and progressive Howard Schultz, a lifelong Democrat who has not only been disowned by the Democrat Party but he can no longer set foot inside of a Starbucks store because of his success in business.

In this clip, Stu explained how at one time Starbucks only sold coffee in bags until Schultz, an employee at the time, convinced the company to open a Starbucks cafe.

Click here to watch the full episode.

At one point, the owners came close to closing down the cafe, but Schultz eventually managed to purchase the company and transform it into the empire that it is today.

Stu continued, describing how Schultz, a lifelong Democrat, went on to implement liberal corporate policies that earned the company a reputation for being a "beacon" of liberalism across the country.

"And now he (Schultz) can't even get into the Democrat Party," Stu said."That is craziness," Glenn replied.

Citing a "60 Minutes" interview, Glenn highlighted the journey that Schultz traveled, which started in the New York City projects and evolved, later becoming the CEO of a coffee empire.

"This guy is so American, so everything in business that we want to be, he has taken his beliefs and made it into who he is which is very liberal," Glenn explained.

Catch more of the conversation in the video below.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

CLOSER LOOK: Who is Rep. Rashida Tlaib?

Wikepedia

This weekend, March 17, Rep. Rashida Tlaib will be speaking at (Council on American Islamic Relations) CAIR-Michigan's 19th annual "Faith-Led, Justice Driven" banquet.

Who knows what to expect. But here are some excerpts from a speech she gave last month, at CAIR-Chicago's 15th annual banquet.

You know the speech is going to be good when it begins like this:

CAIR-Chicago 15th Annual Banquet: Rashida Tlaib youtu.be

It's important to remember CAIR's ties to the Muslim Brotherhood. Think of CAIR as a spinoff of HAMAS, who its two founders originally worked for via a Hamas offshoot organization (the Islamic Association for Palestine (IAP)).

A 2009 article in Politico says feds "designated CAIR a co-conspirator with the Holy Land Foundation, a group that was eventually convicted for financing terrorism."

The United Arab Emirates has designated CAIR a terrorist organization.

In 1993, CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper told a reporter for the Minneapolis Star Tribune:

I wouldn't want to create the impression that I wouldn't like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.

In 1998, CAIR co-founder Omar Ahmad said:

Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran … should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on Earth.

Notice the slight underhanded jab at Israel. It's just one of many in her speech, and is indicative of the growing anti-Semitism among Democrats, especially Tlaib and Omar.

Most of the speech, as you might expect, is a long rant about the evil Donald Trump.

I wonder if she realizes that the Birth of Jesus pre-dates her religion, and her "country." The earliest founding of Palestine is 1988, so maybe she's a little confused.

Then there's this heartwarming story about advice she received from Congressman John Dingell:

When I was a state legislator, I came in to serve on a panel with him on immigration rights, and Congressman Dingell was sitting there and he had his cane, if you knew him, he always had this cane and he held it in front of him. And I was so tired, I had driven an hour and a half to the panel discussion at the University of Michigan Ann Arbor campus. And I sit down, my hair is all messed up, and I said, 'Oh, my God, I'm so tired of this. I don't know how you've been doing it so long Congressman. They all lie.' And he looks at me and he goes. (She nods yes.) I said, 'You know who I'm talking about, these lobbyists, these special interest [groups], they're all lying to me.' … And he looks at me, and he goes, 'Young lady, there's a saying in India that if you stand still enough on a riverbank, you will watch your enemies float by dead.'

What the hell does that mean? That she wants to see her enemies dead? Who are her enemies? And how does that relate to her opening statement? How does it relate to the "oppression" her family faced at the hand of Israel?

Amid accusations of anti-Semitism, Omar and Tlaib to speak at fundraisers for terror-linked organization

Glenn Beck on Wednesday called out Reps. Ilhan Omar (D-Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (D-Mich.) for their blatantly anti-Semitic rhetoric, which has largely been excused by Democratic leadership. He noted the sharp contrast between the progressive principles the freshmen congresswomen claim to uphold and the anti-LGBTQ, anti-feminist, anti-Israel groups they align themselves with.

Later this month, both congresswomen are scheduled to speak at fundraisers for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, a pro-Palestinian organization with ties to Islamic terror groups including Hamas, Hezbollah, al-Qaeda, and the Islamic State.

Rep. Tlaib will be speaking at CAIR-Michigan's 19th Annual Banquet on March 17 in Livonia, Michigan, alongside keynote speaker Omar Suleiman, a self-described student of Malcolm X with links to the Muslim Brotherhood. Suleiman has regularly espoused notably "un-progressive" ideas, such as "honor killings" for allegedly promiscuous women, mandatory Hijabs for women, death as a punishment for homosexuality, and men having the right to "sex slaves," Glenn explained.

Rep. Omar is the keynote speaker at a CAIR event on March 23 in Los Angeles and will be joined by Hassan Shibly, who claims Hezbollah and Hamas are not terrorist organizations, and Hussam Ayloush, who is known for referring to U.S. armed forces as radical terrorists.

Watch the clip below for more: