Sen. Rand Paul: Gang of 8 bill 'dead on arrival' in House

On radio this morning, Glenn spoke with Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) about two key issues: immigration reform and the Supreme Court’s decision on California’s Proposition 8 and the Defense of Marriage Act. Sen. Paul explained why he has faith in Speaker John Boehner and his Republican colleagues in the House and what the SCOTUS rulings mean for civil rights.

One of the gems to come out of the Senate’s immigration bill is a provision that seems to incentivize the hiring of illegal immigrants for business owners who wish to avoid paying Obamacare related penalties. “I'm thinking about lobbying to become an illegal immigrant so I wouldn't have to participate in Obamacare,” Sen. Paul joked.

“Isn’t that amazing,” Glenn asked. “We were talking about this this morning that if you are an employer, you can avoid all of the fines by hiring what used to be illegal immigrants. And so I mean, how do the labor unions even claim to represent the American worker and ignore this will cost so many people their jobs.”

Yesterday, TheBlaze had a remarkable story about five senators who voted for the immigration bill, but when pressed for specifics were unable to answer basic questions about the bill’s provisions. Much like the Affordable Care Act, this seems to be a case of ‘pass it to know what’s in it.’ It is all but certain the immigration bill will get through the Senate with flying colors, but there still appears to be a glimmer of hope in the House.

Sen. Paul emphatically said that the ‘Gang of Eight’ Senate bill will be “dead on arrival” in the House. But there is still a very real concern that the House will pass a Trojan horse-type bill that will look great to start but will ultimately be gutted by the Senate.

“So in the House… does John Boehner have the spine not to bring something to the floor,” Glenn asked.

“I think it's dead on arrival. The Senate bill is dead on arrival in the House,” Sen. Paul said. “The question is how does the conference committee work… I think the Speaker can decide on any one day what comes to the floor and what doesn't. He said he will not pass something with majority Democrats and a minority of Republicans. If he sticks to that, I think that we're pretty well protected. He has the power to protect us, and he said he will.”

“Do you believe him,” Glenn asked.

“I think, you know, I have very much desire – I very much desire to have immigration reform that does positive things, not bad things, and I hope that he's going to stand tall on this,” Sen. Paul responded.

“That wasn't the answer to the question,” Glenn said laughing. “The answer is really quite simple yes or no, but I'm to the going to push you on that.”

Next, Glenn moved on to the Supreme Court decisions on Prop 8 and DOMA. While Glenn is happy to have the government further distancing itself from regulating marriage as per the DOMA ruling, he believes the Prop 8 decision could pose a threat to our civil liberties.

“Let's start with Proposition 8,” Glenn said. “The idea that the government, now the Supreme Court has is that if the government decides not to back what the people have passed now twice, if they don't represent it and say, ‘We care about this,’ then it has no place to even go to the Supreme Court. So in other words, the people [are on their own].”

“Yeah, I want to preface this, Glenn, with making sure that you know how radical you are because you're sounding like Ron Paul on this issue,” Sen. Paul quipped. “Well, here's the thing on the marriage thing… What I would say is that when they affirmed the lower court or they sort of let the lower court decide on Proposition 8, I think they do it on a technicality… It is a way of technically punting so they don't make a decision on states deciding. So I don't think they are saying that California can't decide. I just think they did a technical punt, and so they're trying to say nothing is what they're trying to say.”

“But in doing that, the other side of the coin is there are 34 states who have decided in favor of traditional marriage. Those are affirmed now,” he continued. “I live in Kentucky and we have it as part of our Constitution. So I think… the good side to this ruling is they have affirmed that this is a states issue and the states can decide… They could have come down and affirmed the decision to strike down Proposition 8. They just let it stand without taking a position on it, which is different than affirming the rejection of Proposition 8. If they would affirm rejection of Proposition 8 and nationalized that, they would have overturned 34 states with traditional marriage and I think all you‑know‑what would have broken loose then. So they did take a more moderate course here, and I think traditional marriage laws are still upheld now in 34 states.”

As Stu pointed out, however, there is a still the concern that the state could ‘veto’ the will of the people, and it is now clear that the courts will not be in a position to defend them.

“What do you believe the Constitution says,” Glenn asked.

“I think on marriage, nothing,” Sen. Paul said. “And it says essentially the Ninth and Tenth Amendment leave it to the states. Our Founding Fathers never conceived of marriage being anywhere distant in Washington. And I would tell people who are for traditional marriage, the battle's going to be lost at the federal level. Concentrate on your state.”

Science did it again. It only took 270 million years, but this week, scientists finally solved the mystery that has kept the world up at night. We finally know where octopuses come from: outer space. That explains why they look like the aliens in just about every alien movie ever made.

RELATED: Changes in technology can be cause for concern, but THIS is amazing

It turns out octopuses were aliens that evolved on another planet. Scientists haven't determined which one yet, but they've definitely narrowed it down to one of the planets in one of the galaxies. Hundreds of millions of years ago (give or take a hundred), these evolved octopus aliens arrived on Earth in the form of cryopreserved eggs. Now, this part is just speculation, but it's possible their alien planet was on the verge of destruction, so Mom and Dad Octopus self-sacrificially placed Junior in one of these cryopreserved eggs and blasted him off the planet to save their kind.

This alien-octopus research, co-authored by a group of 33 scientists, was published in the Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology journal. I'm sure you keep that on your nightstand like I do.

Anyway, these scientists say octopuses evolved very rapidly over 270 million years. Which sounds slow, but in evolutionary terms, 270 million years is like light speed. And the only explanation for their breakneck evolution is that they're aliens. The report says, “The genome of the Octopus shows a staggering level of complexity with 33,000 protein-coding genes — more than is present in Homo sapiens."

Lucky for us, they landed in the water. Otherwise, we might be octopus pets.

They mention that the octopus' large brain, sophisticated nervous system, camera-like eyes, flexible bodies and ability to change color and shape all point to its alien nature. Octopuses developed those capabilities rather suddenly in evolution, whereas we're still trying to figure out the TV remote.

These biological enhancements are so far ahead of regular evolution that the octopuses must have either time-traveled from the future, or “more realistically" according to scientists, crash-landed on earth in those cryopreserved egg thingies. The report says the eggs arrived here in “icy bolides." I had to look up what a “bolide" is, and turns out it's a fancy word for a meteor.

So, to recap: a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, an alien race of octopuses packed their sperm-bank samples in some meteors and shot them toward Earth. Lucky for us, they landed in the water. Otherwise, we might be octopus pets.

President Trump's approval rating is rising, and Democrats — hilariously — can't seem to figure out what's going on. A few months ago Democrats enjoyed a sixteen point lead over Republicans, but now — according to CNN's recent national survey — that lead is down to just THREE points. National data from Reuters shows it as being even worse.

The Democratic advantage moving towards the halfway mark into 2018 shows that Republicans are only ONE point behind. The president's public approval rating is rising, and Democrats are nervously looking at each other like… “umm guys, what are we doing wrong here?"

I'm going to give Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi a little hint. We know that the Left has enjoyed a “special relationship" with the media, but they might want to have a sit down with their propaganda machine. The mainstream media is completely out of control, and Americans are sick of it. We're DONE with the media.

RELATED: The mainstream media wants you to believe Trump is waging war on immigrants — here's the truth

Look what has been going on just this week. The president called MS-13 gang members animals, but that's not the story the media jumped on. They thought it was more clickable to say that Trump was calling all immigrants animals instead. In the Middle East, the media rushed to vilify Israel instead of Hamas. They chose to defend a terror organization rather than one of our oldest allies.

Think about that. The media is so anti-Trump that they've chosen a violent street gang AND A GLOBAL TERROR ORGANIZATION as their torch-bearing heroes. Come on, Democrats. Are you seriously baffled why the American people are turning their backs on you?

Still not enough evidence? Here's the New York Times just yesterday. Charles Blow wrote a piece called "A Blue Wave of Moral Restoration" where he tried to make the case that the president and Republicans were the enemy, but — fear not — Democrat morality was here to save the day.

Here are some of these cases Blow tries to make for why Trump is unfit to be President:

No person who treats women the way Trump does and brags on tape about sexually assaulting them should be president.

Ok, fine. You can make that argument if you want to, but why weren't you making this same argument for Bill Clinton? Never mind, I actually know the reason. Because you were too busy trying to bury the Juanita Broaddrick story.

Let's move on:

No person who has demonstrated himself to be a pathological liar should be president.

Do the words, “You can keep your doctor" mean anything to the New York Times or Charles Blow? I might have saved the best for last:

No person enveloped by a cloud of corruption should be president.

I can only think of three words for a response to this: Hillary Frigging Clinton.

Try displaying a little consistency.

If the media really wants Donald Trump gone and the Democrats to take over, they might want to try displaying a little consistency. But hey, maybe that's just too much to ask.

How about starting with not glorifying terrorist organizations and murderous street gangs. Could we at least begin there?

If not… good luck in the midterms.

In the weeks following President Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, the mainstream media was quick to criticize the president's pro-Israel stance and make dire predictions of violent backlash in the Middle East. Fast forward to this week's opening of the US Embassy in Jerusalem and the simultaneous Palestinian “protests" in Gaza.

RELATED: Just another day in Iran: Parliment chants death to America after Trump pulls out of nuclear deal

Predictably, the mainstream media chastised Israel for what they called “state-sanctioned terrorism" when the IDF stepped in to protect their country from so-called peaceful Palestinian protesters. Hamas leaders later admitted that at least 50 of the 62 Palestinians killed in the clashes were Hamas terrorists.

“In our post-modern media age, there is no truth and nobody even seems to be looking for it …. This is shamefully clear in the media especially this week with their coverage of the conflict between the border of Israel and the Gaza strip," said Glenn on today's show. He added, “The main media narrative this week is about how the IDF is just killing innocent protesters, while Hamas officials have confirmed on TV that 50 of the 62 people killed were working for Hamas."

The mainstream media views the Palestinians as the oppressed people who just want to share the land and peacefully coexist with the people of Israel. “They can't seem to comprehend that in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, only one side is actively trying to destroy the other," surmised Glenn.

Watch the video above to hear Glenn debunk the “peaceful Palestinian protest" fallacy.

Here are a few headlines regarding the protests in Israel: 'Global protests grow after Israeli killing of Palestinian demonstrators,' the Guardian. 'Israel kills dozens at Gaza Border,' the New York Times. 'Palestinians mourn dead in Gaza as protests continue,' CNN. 'Over 50 Palestinians in massive protest are killed by Israeli military, bloodiest day in Gaza since 2014 war,' ABC News. 'Gaza begins to bury its dead after deadliest day in years,' BBC.

RELATED: Here's why Israel used lethal force during mass protests in Gaza yesterday

In each, the spoken or unspoken subject of the sentence and villain of the story is Israel. Innocent Palestinians murdered by the cruel Israelis. This is the narrative that the mainstream media has promulgated. Few have mentioned that the majority of the “protestors" that died were members of Hamas, the militant (and highly anti-Semetic) Sunni-Islamist organization that has been labeled a Foreign Terrorist Organization by the U.S. State Department.

A senior Hamas official told reporters that 50 of the 59 people killed in Monday's protests were members of Hamas, and the remainder were “from the people." So…they were all Hamas.

As usual, mention of such membership has been left out of the mainstream media's anti-Israel, pro-Islam narrative.

As usual, mention of such membership has been left out of the mainstream media's anti-Israel, pro-Islam narrative. Maybe they think of Palestinians as underdogs and they love a good scrap. Well, they aren't underdogs. But their outburst have been glorified for so long that it's near impossible to disagree with that narrative.