Rand Paul teams up with Harry Reid, touts their ‘very warm personal relations’

Last month, Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) raised eyebrows with his comments about voter identification laws. In Memphis for the Republican National Committee’s spring meeting, Paul told the New York Times he thinks Republicans are taking the wrong approach when it comes to the voter ID debate. More recently, Paul touted his “very warm personal relations” with Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-NV). Reid is supporting Paul’s bill aimed at creating a fund for emergency transportation projects. While Glenn said just a few days ago that he really enjoyed what Rand Paul had to say at a dinner in Texas, Pat discussed his growing frustration with Sen. Paul on radio this morning.

“I'm starting to sour. Someone help me… I need a Rand Paul lifeline,” Pat said. “He endorsed Mitch McConnell in Kentucky… That kind of seems like a betrayal. [Then the] voter I.D. thing a few weeks ago… Something else we're finding out this week: [He is] pretty good friends, has a pretty good relationship with Harry Reid.”

When it comes to the voter ID laws, Stu failed to understand where Paul is coming from. He ran through some statistics that show nearly all demographics support some sort of voter ID.

“Let me give you some of these numbers. Voter ID is among the most popular things that a Republican ever speaks of… Among various demographic groups, who opposes voter ID? What percentage,” Stu asked. “Among men, 19% oppose it. Among women, 19% oppose it… Retirement age people, 18% oppose it. Young people between 18 and 39, 18% oppose it… How about white people? 17% oppose it. But you'd expect that because they're evil white people… African-Americans, only 26% oppose it… Only 32% of Democrats oppose voter ID.”

With that in mind, one has to wonder why the Republican Party doesn’t make a bigger issue out of the policy. Furthermore, why is Paul encouraging the GOP to not make a big deal out of the issue?

“We like Rand Paul, and he does things well… I think he's trying to play the game, which is the opposite of what his dad played. His dad was Dr. No, and he said no to everything,” Stu said. “He's trying to say, ‘Well, look, we don't want people to be offended’… That doesn't seem to be his thought process on a lot of other issues – minimum wage, tax hikes on the wealthy. All these things are, around the country, very unpopular… But he still talks about those.”

Another head scratcher is Paul’s recent praise of Reid. During an appearance on CNBC, Paul explained how his new legislation would pay for emergency transportation projects with repatriated taxes. The bill has apparently garnered bipartisan support, including Reid.

“Senator Reid and I actually have very warm personal relations and we’ve been meeting informally for months, both us and staff, to try and do something good for America,” Paul said. “I’m a glass-half-full kind of guy. I like Harry Reid personally. I’m working hard with him.”

“Now, I know we're supposed to love everybody, get along with everybody,” Pat said. “I don't get the political gamesmanship of being polar opposites on the political spectrum and then you pal around with the guy. You don't have to hate him, you don't have to spit on him as you pass him in the continue building… [But] I don't understand how that happens. When you're diametrically opposed. You don't agree on anything that's good for America supposedly. How is it possible?”

The interesting thing about Paul is that he is so strong on so many issues, and he has attempted to bridge gaps between the GOP and certain demographics in ways few others have. Ultimately, Pat and Stu look forward to having the opportunity to ask Paul about many of these things in the future.

“Beyond this particular issue, he's known for being soft on the border. He's been in touch with that sort of Chamber of Commerce sort of position,” Stu said. “Again, we can't say enough that Rand Paul is really, really freaking good on a lot of things and has stood up for a lot of important issues, at times where it's been really tough to do so. And in many times he's been one of the only people out there doing it.”

“So this is not to say Rand Paul has all of a sudden gone from this wonderful guy to this terrible guy,” he concluded. “That's not what we're talking about. But these stances have added up lately, and it's something I think worth talking to him about.”

Front page image courtesy of the AP

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.