Ann Coulter on last night's debate: "You want this man in the White House"

Ann Coulter was one of the first conservatives in the media to say that Mitt Romney was going to be "the guy" for the GOP. She got a lot of heat for saying he was the best choice and Republicans best chance to win.

It looks like Ann was right.

"It was a bloodbath last night," Glenn said to Ann when she joined them on radio this morning.

"Yes, it was," she responded. "And as I said earlier this week to you, I thought just letting people get a look at him, what you and I have seen in him: he's smart, he's prepared, he's poised."

Not only did Mitt Romney win the debate hands down, he was able to present himself to the American people. So many Americans that aren't tuned into to politics only know what the mainstream media is saying about Mitt Romney. Last night he was able to present himself to the average American.

"People are just shocked to actually see Mitt Romney utterly in control of the facts and competent, and you so want that man in the White House.  The way he explains things with facts and figures, but not in a confusing way," Ann said. "And he just comes across as an incredibly decent man.  There's no elitism.  There's no, "Oh, he reminds me of my first husband" business.  He was charming, he was friendly.  Even when he was criticizing Obama policies, he always did it with a smile on his face, and it reminds me of during the primaries when I was a big Romney supporter and many of my friends and colleagues were not, and every time they would see Romney give a full speech such as after he won the Iowa caucus and then after he won New Hampshire, different people would say to me at different times, "Wow, that was the best speech he's ever given.  If he would only give them like that all the time." He does!  Watch him."

No one was really sure what Mitt Romney was going to do in this debate. The media, by underestimating him, actually raised the bar for what President Obama had to do as a result. But, no on expected the poor performance that Barack Obama gave last night. Glenn compared it to Al Gore's former presidential debate performances - the heavy sighs.

"He kept looking down and frowning," Glenn said. "Where Romney would look at the president, he addressed him in the eye, looked him in the eye the whole time.  It's one thing to say something about somebody behind their back.  It's another to look them in the eye and kindly say, "Mr. President, you're wrong." And he did. When Obama was trying to dish it, which was about four-seconds, when he was trying to dish it, he wouldn't look Romney in the eye.  He really wouldn't go after him and look him in the eye like a man."

Not only was Mitt Romney's demeanor stronger and more presidential, but his appearance was much stronger.

"I mean, Obama looks like a guy who has grown ‑‑ who's lost so much weight, he's wearing a suit that's too big for him.  He looks anemic," Ann added. "I seriously am wondering whether he's trying to communicate to us that he doesn't want this job anymore."

One of the most telling parts of the debate for the president was the closing.

"Thank you. And I want to thank Governor Romney because I think this was a terrific debate and I very much appreciate it. All those things are designed to make sure that the American people, their genius ‑‑ their grip, their determination is channeled. And they have an opportunity to succeed.  And everybody's getting a fair shot and everybody's getting a fair share.  Everybody's doing a fair share and everybody's playing by the same rules."

After hearing the audio clip, this is what Ann had to say: "As I think Romney pointed out to him that it was relatives and friends and donors to the Obama campaign that were getting all these massive grants for green companies that then went under, another fantastic line ‑‑ sorry, we'll get back to what you think the point was.  Another fantastic line was when Romney said about Solyndra and all these green companies that have lost, he said, you know, one of my friends said, "You don't just pick winners and losers.  You pick all losers"."

Glenn believes that after the president's performance last night, we're about to see a full assault on the senses of the American people. The media and the administration's candidate is in trouble, and they're going to have to unleash.

"What do you think is coming?" he asked Ann.

"I have been anticipating, and the reason I wrote the book [Mugged], that there would be a lot of racial Mao Maoing again trying to guilt Americans into reelecting the first half‑black president and I don't know, maybe they'll give up on that now," she responded. "I must say, and I hate to even mention it because it sounds like, you know, conservative paranoia, but it is simply a fact that no book of mine has been so ignored, completely ignored.  I mean not even attacking me when I'm not there, as this book."

"The mainstream media does not want anyone to know this book exists."

In light of the national conversation surrounding the rights of free speech, religion and self-defense, Mercury One is thrilled to announce a brand new initiative launching this Father's Day weekend: a three-day museum exhibition in Dallas, Texas focused on the rights and responsibilities of American citizens.

This event seeks to answer three fundamental questions:

  1. As Americans, what responsibility do we shoulder when it comes to defending our rights?
  2. Do we as a nation still agree on the core principles and values laid out by our founding fathers?
  3. How can we move forward amidst uncertainty surrounding the intent of our founding ideals?

Attendees will be able to view historical artifacts and documents that reveal what has made America unique and the most innovative nation on earth. Here's a hint: it all goes back to the core principles and values this nation was founded on as laid out in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

Exhibits will show what the world was like before mankind had rights and how Americans realized there was a better way to govern. Throughout the weekend, Glenn Beck, David Barton, Stu Burguiere, Doc Thompson, Jeffy Fisher and Brad Staggs will lead private tours through the museum, each providing their own unique perspectives on our rights and responsibilities.

Schedule a private tour or purchase general admission ticket below:

Dates:
June 15-17

Location:

Mercury Studios

6301 Riverside Drive, Irving, TX 75039

Learn more about the event here.

About Mercury One: Mercury One is a 501(c)(3) charity founded in 2011 by Glenn Beck. Mercury One was built to inspire the world in the same way the United States space program shaped America's national destiny and the world. The organization seeks to restore the human spirit by helping individuals and communities help themselves through honor, faith, courage, hope and love. In the words of Glenn Beck:

We don't stand between government aid and people in need. We stand with people in need so they no longer need the government

Some of Mercury One's core initiatives include assisting our nation's veterans, providing aid to those in crisis and restoring the lives of Christians and other persecuted religious minorities. When evil prevails, the best way to overcome it is for regular people to do good. Mercury One is committed to helping sustain the good actions of regular people who want to make a difference through humanitarian aid and education initiatives. Mercury One will stand, speak and act when no one else will.

Support Mercury One's mission to restore the human spirit by making an online donation or calling 972-499-4747. Together, we can make a difference.

What happened?

A New York judge ruled Tuesday that a 30-year-old still living in his parents' home must move out, CNN reported.

Failure to launch …

Michael Rotondo, who had been living in a room in his parents' house for eight years, claims that he is owed a six-month notice even though they gave him five notices about moving out and offered to help him find a place and to help pay for repairs on his car.

RELATED: It's sad 'free-range parenting' has to be legislated, it used to be common sense

“I think the notice is sufficient," New York State Supreme Court Judge Donald Greenwood said.

What did the son say?

Rotondo “has never been expected to contribute to household expenses, or assisted with chores and the maintenance of the premises, and claims that this is simply a component of his living agreement," he claimed in court filings.

He told reporters that he plans to appeal the “ridiculous" ruling.

Reform Conservatism and Reaganomics: A middle road?

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

Senator Marco Rubio broke Republican ranks recently when he criticized the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by stating that “there's no evidence whatsoever that the money's been massively poured back into the American worker." Rubio is wrong on this point, as millions of workers have received major raises, while the corporate tax cuts have led to a spike in capital expenditure (investment on new projects) of 39 percent. However, the Florida senator is revisiting an idea that was front and center in the conservative movement before Donald Trump rode down an escalator in June of 2015: reform conservatism.

RELATED: The problem with asking what has conservatism conserved

The "reformicons," like Rubio, supported moving away from conservative or supply-side orthodoxy and toward policies such as the expansion of the child and earned income tax credits. On the other hand, longstanding conservative economic theory indicates that corporate tax cuts, by lowering disincentives on investment, will lead to long-run economic growth that will end up being much more beneficial to the middle class than tax credits.

But asking people to choose between free market economic orthodoxy and policies guided towards addressing inequality and the concerns of the middle class is a false dichotomy.

Instead of advocating policies that many conservatives might dismiss as redistributionist, reformicons should look at the ways government action hinders economic opportunity and exacerbates income inequality. Changing policies that worsen inequality satisfies limited government conservatives' desire for free markets and reformicons' quest for a more egalitarian America. Furthermore, pushing for market policies that reduce the unequal distribution of wealth would help attract left-leaning people and millennials to small government principles.

Criminal justice reform is an area that reformicons and free marketers should come together around. The drug war has been a disaster, and the burden of this misguided government approach have fallen on impoverished minority communities disproportionately, in the form of mass incarceration and lower social mobility. Not only has the drug war been terrible for these communities, it's proved costly to the taxpayer––well over a trillion dollars has gone into the drug war since its inception, and $80 billion dollars a year goes into mass incarceration.

Prioritizing retraining and rehabilitation instead of overcriminalization would help address inequality, fitting reformicons' goals, and promote a better-trained workforce and lower government spending, appealing to basic conservative preferences.

Government regulations tend to disproportionately hurt small businesses and new or would-be entrepreneurs. In no area is this more egregious than occupational licensing––the practice of requiring a government-issued license to perform a job. The percentage of jobs that require licenses has risen from five percent to 30 percent since 1950. Ostensibly justified by public health concerns, occupational licensing laws have, broadly, been shown to neither promote public health nor improve the quality of service. Instead, they serve to provide a 15 percent wage boost to licensed barbers and florists, while, thanks to the hundreds of hours and expensive fees required to attain the licenses, suppressing low-income entrepreneurship, and costing the economy $200 billion dollars annually.

Those economic losses tend to primarily hurt low-income people who both can't start businesses and have to pay more for essential services. Rolling back occupational licenses will satisfy the business wing's desire for deregulation and a more free market and the reformicons' support for addressing income inequality and increasing opportunity.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality.

Tax expenditures form another opportunity for common ground between the Rubio types and the mainstream. Tax deductions and exclusions, both on the individual and corporate sides of the tax code, remain in place after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Itemized deductions on the individual side disproportionately benefit the wealthy, while corporate tax expenditures help well-connected corporations and sectors, such as the fossil fuel industry.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality. Additionally, a more complicated tax code is less conducive to economic growth than one with lower tax rates and fewer exemptions. Therefore, a simpler tax code with fewer deductions and exclusions would not only create a more level playing field, as the reformicons desire, but also additional economic growth.

A forward-thinking economic program for the Republican Party should marry the best ideas put forward by both supply-siders and reform conservatives. It's possible to take the issues of income inequality and lack of social mobility seriously, while also keeping mainstay conservative economic ideas about the importance of less cumbersome regulations and lower taxes.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate studying economics at Tufts University. He is a contributor for Lone Conservative, and his writing has appeared in Townhall and The Daily Caller. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Is this what inclusivity and tolerance look like? Fox News host Tomi Lahren was at a weekend brunch with her mom in Minnesota when other patrons started yelling obscenities and harassing her. After a confrontation, someone threw a drink at her, the moment captured on video for social media.

RELATED: Glenn Addresses Tomi Lahren's Pro-Choice Stance on 'The View'

On today's show, Pat and Jeffy talked about this uncomfortable moment and why it shows that supposedly “tolerant" liberals have to resort to physical violence in response to ideas they don't like.