Did a reporter seriously ask Jay Carney these questions?

We have heard some bizarre questions from reporters in the White House press pool over the years, but yesterday, Mediaite’s Tommy Christopher took it to a whole new level when he peppered White House Press Secretary Jay Carney with some downright bizarre questions about Obamacare and the debt ceiling debate.

“It is so simpleminded and pandering that I wonder if there's something wrong with him,” Glenn said of Christopher on radio this morning. “Because listen to this question asked by Mediaite yesterday in the press room.”

CARNEY:  Tommy.

CHRISTOPHER:  I have three questions.

CARNEY:  Three?

CHRISTOPHER:  Yeah.  First of all, I don't know if you're aware of this but when I had a heart attack three years ago, I was uninsured and haven't been able to get insurance ever since then. Listening to all the pressure on the president negotiate a lot from inside this room made me think, is there a chance the president would be willing to delay Obamacare for a year if Republicans were to agree to delay heart attacks for a year?

“Okay. Stop,” Glenn said. “Notice that there's nobody in the press room laughing. Nobody laughed at that because that is such an outrageously stupid question. You seriously question the man's IQ. I mean, what, are you applying for a job? Is that what you're doing? Really, is that what you're doing? Are you applying for a job? Would the President delay Obamacare for a year if the Republicans decide to delay heart attacks for a year?”

“I mean, that's just mindless stupidity,” Pat agreed. “And it went on. There was more.”

CHRISTOPHER:  My second question, I was talking to my mom this morning actually and she asked me to ask you to please open government back up again. And I know you can't just do that, but she's really worried about her Social Security check. And I told her, you know, don't worry, Mom, we'll get it taken care of; I don't want you to worry. But, you know, Steve Rattner last night said that October 23rd is one of these drop-dead dates, you know, when stuff starts to pile up. And so I guess my question is, you know, should she be worried?

CARNEY:  What I would say about that which goes to the issue of the debt ceiling is that the basic premise of the United States always pays its bills on time is not jeopardized. So that's the position the President has taken.

“Okay. I'm talking to Mommy? So I'm already questioning his IQ on the first one,” Glenn said.

“Tommy's talking to Mommy and Mommy wants to know about the Social Security check… You cannot default. He is picking and choosing. You cannot, according to the Constitution, default. And why no one will say that is beyond me. If you aren't paying your Social Security checks, that, again, will be by choice – the President's choice, not Congress' choice. And if anybody thinks that the President would choose not to pay Social Security, then that says something about the President of the United States… Now, here's the third question.”

CHRISTOPHER:  Do you remember the last debt ceiling deal there was a plan floated that was called the McConnell plan where congress would authorize a debt ceiling increase for, I think it was a year, year and a half, and it would hold a vote every so often so the Republicans could vote no, but it would require 2/3 majority to overrule. So it gave the president the authority. Is something like the McConnell plan in the air now, being discussed now? And if not, why not?

“Oh, those are three hard-hitting, brutal questions,” Pat quipped. “I'm worried about whether the Republicans will agree to delay heart attacks for a year… That's got to be embarrassing. How do you let the guy back in the office? [Mediaite has] got some actual people who work there, some real journalists who work there and are really trying to do some actual work. And then you got this clown? Really?”

“I mean that's the guy you send to the White House,” Glenn asked. “Tommy and his Mommy?”

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


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.