Why did Glenn call the GOP the amazing tower of Jell-O?

The GOP promised action on 12 issues in the first 12 weeks in Congress. They have acted, unfortunately they’ve acted extremely cowardly so far. From folding on immigration and Obamacare they have completely caved to progressive pressures. The latest failure was backing down on a slam-dunk bill outlawing abortions past the point where the baby can feel pain.

Below is a transcript of this story from radio

GLENN: It looks like the Republicans are abandoning the immigration campaign promises as they have abandoned the abortion promises too. So...

PAT: No. Because we were promised that they were going to hit hard. The 12 items in 12 weeks thing.

GLENN: But they are. They're hitting it hard. And the Keystone oil pipeline hasn't gone through either.

PAT: Except for those three things.

GLENN: But other than that...

PAT: So the first three weeks of the 12 weeks are a total wash. But after that, we'll buckle right down and get these taken care of. So nine items in nine weeks.

GLENN: But don't worry, it's only immigration. So they're folding on the small ones. Abortion, immigration --

PAT: It doesn't get any bigger than those.

GLENN: No.

PAT: It really doesn't.

GLENN: And you could even say, okay, abortion --

PAT: Let's keep killing babies. Let's just keep killing babies at the rate we have been. It's only 45 million now since 1972. Why not do another 45 million?

GLENN: Yeah. So let's just wait the next time.

PAT: Don't even worry about it. Why bother. Then the flood of illegals across the border, I wouldn't worry about that at all.

GLENN: You could say, why? But here's the deal, this is what scared them off of this, the president's approval rating is back to 50 percent.

PAT: Well, in Gallup, but it was 40 percent in some other poll last week.

GLENN: You don't understand, it's 50 percent in Gallup now. So they should panic. They should abandon their principles.

PAT: Because his approval rating is back up.

GLENN: His approval rating is back up. So the people must be with of him. It's insanity.

PAT: He has free health care going. Free Obama phones. Free food to the masses. Doing the free community college. Free child care. He's offering freebies to everybody not paying anything into the system. Of course, 50 percent are with him because 50 percent aren't paying any of the freight. Of course, they're always going to be with him. How is it they can't figure this out? How is it?

GLENN: I don't know. I don't know.

PAT: I don't understand it. It's really not rocket science.

GLENN: I was thinking this morning. I was listening to something Rand Paul said. And he was on stage with -- Rand Paul and Ted Cruz were on stage together. They were both talking and they both made a lot of sense. I thought to myself, how is it that Romney and Jeb Bush can get together, and they can -- they can work together to take people out, but we can't get Rand Paul and Ted Cruz together and say, look, you guys -- and maybe Scott Walker. You guys, work together. Bobby Jindal, work together. And take out the -- the progressive Republicans and take out the Jeb Bush and the Mitt Romneys, and then we'll decide between you guys. Why can't you guys all stand together? That's what they're doing. What the hell is wrong with you guys.

[break]

So I get up this morning, and I think to myself, why can't we get -- if we can get Jeb Bush and Mitt Romney to get together and meet and say, hey, I don't know -- you know, why don't we all meet and take out all those nasty Tea Party guys, why can't the Ted Cruz -- and what's his name? Rand Paul. Why can't they get together and maybe even -- I don't know. We need to talk -- let's get Walker on. Let's see if we can get him on.

PAT: I'd like to talk to Scott Walker. He seems great.

GLENN: Yeah, I think I'd like him. I think he's a candidate worth considering. And even Marco Rubio. Even Marco Rubio, why can't these guys get together and say, we're all for small government. So let's go against the progressives. When we get into the debates, all of us, we just focus on the progressive policies of these two.

If they all got together and said, look, we're just going to work together. We're nonprogressives. They're progressives. If you want progressive, then go vote for the Democrat. We don't believe in the progressive principles. So we'll all stand together. And when the debate questions are asked, we won't attack each other. We'll turn our guys to these guys and say, look, a few of us on stage, here's the big choice, America. The first choice you have to make is, are we going to believe in big government has the solution or that government is the problem?

If government is the problem and the people are the solution, then you should consider one of us four. If you believe that the government solves all the problem and needs to babysit everyone, then it should be Mitt Romney and Jeb Bush and Mike Huckabee. You take those guys. We believe in small limited government, and that's the first choice Republicans have to make. Which direction?

I don't know why they can't get together and do that. Because that's exactly what the progressive Republicans are doing. They're getting together and saying, let's take out Rand Paul and let's take out Ted Cruz. What are they thinking?

PAT: Mitt and Jeb already met in Utah. Right?

GLENN: Yeah, it's already happened. And Jeb Bush called the Clintons to say, hey, just want you to know, we're going to be running. They're all on it together.

PAT: The Clintons and the Bushes are incredibly close.

GLENN: What is wrong with our guys?

STU: I guess the argument is they would align themselves and have a situation where all four of them are splitting that vote. And then whoever from the establishment side pokes their head out, and they will work together, then, you know, you will have four Ted Cruz-type guys splitting votes and none of them win. I mean, the only way to work together --

GLENN: Here's what will happen. All the Jeb Bushes and the Mitt Romneys will work together, and they will take them out. They'll target them one after another. So what you do is you target all four of those guys. Target Jeb Bush. Number one target, Jeb Bush. And in the debates, you just target the policies of Jeb Bush. Look, I think it's important -- no matter what they ask you. I think it's important to understand, that Common Core is wrong. And I'm against Common Core and all the guys here are against Common Core. We don't believe that they should at that we should repeal and augment or replace -- we believe we should repeal Obamacare and then let the free market system work it out.

He likes big government health care. And so does Mitt Romney. And when you have people pointing that out, then they'll be forced to make a choice. I don't understand. That's exactly what they'll do. They can say the same thing. Well, one of us is going to lose.

STU: But they did. And they met together.

GLENN: Right. Because they're willing. Because they actually believe in something. They're willing to lose. Mitt Romney has even said this. Jeb, if it's not me, it should be you. Can I get Ted Cruz to say that about Rand Paul and Rand Paul say that about Ted Cruz? Hey, if it's not me, it shouldn't be Ted Cruz. If it's not me, it should be Rand Paul. No. I don't think they will.

GLENN: I don't think they will. And you already have Mitt Romney saying that about Jeb Bush.

STU: He's not outwardly saying that.

GLENN: Yes, he did. He said, if Jeb Bush runs, I don't think I will run because there will at least be someone there that will carry on what I believe needs to be done.

STU: And that was before he decided to run.

GLENN: Right. So now he won't say that. But he was saying that -- but in their meeting, they're bringing this up. Instead, we have all these progressive Republicans playing the game of, oh, we're going to be tough. Boy, are we going to be tough. Give me the 12 in 12. The idea -- and we need to have Chris Stewart on again.

STU: Yeah, he's not available today.

GLENN: Maybe tomorrow?

STU: Either later this week or next week. Do you have an update on that, Jeffy?

JEFFY: I do not.

GLENN: So he'll come on.

PAT: He will.

GLENN: He said, you know, I'll come on once a week and tell you about the 12 in 12. And the idea was, I voted for Boehner and a lot of us did because we have an agreement that Boehner will get really tough on these things. And we'll pass these 12 things in Congress. You'll see, Glenn.

Okay. Good, I want to be wrong. I want to be wrong.

And I like Chris. And I know Chris. And I disagree with his point of view here, but I know he's trying to do the right thing.

PAT: And if these 12 things worked out, it would be great.

GLENN: It would be great.

PAT: But so far, I haven't seen any of the 12 actually come to fruition.

GLENN: Okay. Well, here's what happened. I got up this morning, and I'm reading the news and I'm looking at how the Republicans seem to be folding on immigration. They just folded on abortion.

PAT: Right. That's two of the things.

GLENN: They're now talking about how Barack Obama's poll numbers are up. And so, well, if his poll numbers are up, we're worried about that, because maybe we should be more like Jeb Bush.

Oh, my gosh. Towers of Jell-O.

PAT: So the Keystone Pipeline was one of the issues.

GLENN: Let's go through the 12. Let's see where everything stands. Who has the list of 12?

PAT: I do.

GLENN: Okay. Go ahead.

JEFFY: I do.

PAT: So does Jeffy. Keystone Pipeline. Border security.

STU: Keystone Pipeline is --

GLENN: Was passed in the House. And it is now being dragged down by the Democrats in the Senate. So it's being blocked by the Democrats in the Senate.

PAT: Okay. Border security, which they've apparently folded on already. Right?

GLENN: Yes. What they're doing is, they're saying they're going to do the immigration reform, but not the border security.

PAT: This, to me, if it's not the most important, it's certainly top two.

GLENN: Can I tell you something, you know what pisses me off? Have you guys seen the fence that Saudi Arabia is building?

STU: Yeah, 600 miles.

GLENN: Yeah, of fence.

When Israel builds a fence --

STU: It is hateful.

GLENN: It is hateful, and it's the Holocaust. When Saudi Arabia builds a 600-mile fence, it's not apartheid, no, it's common sense.

STU: It's to keep ISIS out, by the way. Because they're implementing that policy because we couldn't handle ISIS in the country that we were supposed to be handling them in. We've let that happen.

So instead, now, Saudi Arabia has to build a fence, which is the supposed response we were going to have to another problem in America that we couldn't handle and never built the fence. It's just a cacophony of failure.

PAT: So you have Keystone.

GLENN: Keystone is bogged down in the Senate.

PAT: Border.

GLENN: Border looks like they're done -- no, they'll do the immigration reform. They'll make people citizens, but they won't secure the border.

PAT: Yes. That's what will happen.

The REINS Act, which is to pull back the regulatory agencies who have become the most powerful in Washington --

GLENN: Don't know anything about that.

STU: Very good. It's Mike Lee. Mike Lee priority. It actually would make a huge difference to the country.

PAT: It would be great.

STU: It's not sexy at all. Basically all the regulation that goes in there, Congress would have an opportunity to say, no, not on that part. No.

GLENN: You want to know one of the most non-sexy issues of FDR's reign, was the commerce laws. Nobody paid attention to that. I'm trying to remember. What was the name of that court case that went to the Supreme Court?

STU: Yeah, I know what you're talking about.

GLENN: So, anyway, it was a non-sexy thing. That changed everything in America.

STU: It's the justification of every single government action today.

GLENN: Because they said it's state lines. Crossing state lines. So anything crossing state lines now can be regulated by the federal government. So that one court case changed -- if you just reversed that one thing, it will roll back progressivism 100 years. One hundred years. Make huge difference in everyone's life. Make an impact you would actually feel. When Mike Lee says it's not sexy, the REINS Act, nobody is paying attention to it. Nobody even understands that court case. I can't even remember the name of that court case. Do you have it?

STU: There's been multiple ones. There's the one with the wheat. I'm trying to think of the one that is well-known. I can't find the stupid name of it.

Wickard versus Filburn.

GLENN: And the one with the wheat is really important too. That was the guy he was going to make bread with wheat on his own property, and he wasn't allowed to.

STU: That's Gibbons versus Ogden. Yeah, that was the one where he wanted to make it on his own property. In theory, that would affect the entire wheat market.

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: So they can regulate what he does on his own property because someone in Idaho might have the price of wheat affected by what he's doing in his backyard.

GLENN: So everything changed. When he says the REINS Act is not sexy. Fine. Little changes like that, that nobody is paying attention to, make all the difference in the world.

STU: This is essentially an anti-Cass Sunstein law. Which would make it so that people like Cass Sunstein, who aren't elected, who go in there and write thousands of pages of regulations after we pass a law --

GLENN: It's the health care bill.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: The health care bill, it just said page after page after page, the regulations shall be determined by the Secretary. And so there were no -- there were no -- the law was just empowering people to come up with all the laws.

STU: Yeah, exactly.

GLENN: And that's not the way it's supposed to be. Congress is supposed to pass the laws of the regulations.

STU: Congress can say, wait a minute. We don't agree with that regulation. It's not in the spirit of the law. They can vote on that. There has to be approval on this. It's not sexy at all, but it would be very important.

GLENN: Huge. Any idea where a that stands?

STU: I have not heard a word about it yet.

PAT: I don't think they're doing anything on it.

JEFFY: Not yet.

STU: They have 12 weeks. They could get to some of the stuff before the 12. The progress so far, not so great.

PAT: Tax reform, the only one talking about it, that I've heard, so far is the president.

GLENN: Well, and Ted Cruz. He's talking about repeal the IRS. Shut down the IRS.

PAT: Yeah, but the one who is really driving this bus right now is the president, on raising taxes.

GLENN: Did you guys see the show last night? Did you get a chance to watch the TV show?

PAT: No.

GLENN: Tonight I have him on again. It is -- here's the biggest thing. David Buckner is an adjunct professor at Columbia. He's also a consultant for some of the biggest corporations around the world. He spends time all around the world. Mainly in Europe and in Russia and in China.

And we talked about tax policy and hyperinflation last night. And because he said, two years ago, that the United States government is going to start raising interest rates. And when they start raising interest rates, unless they put us in the poppy field and make us feel like everything is okay, that's when everything starts to fall apart. He explained this last night in a way that I have not understood. He's on again tonight. He'll go into it a little bit more.

The reason why we can't now lower our tax rates, think of this. What's happened to all of the money? The president prints all this money. And who gets all this money? We printed all the money. Who gets the money? Who is he giving the money to?

STU: You mean, like the fed?

GLENN: Yeah, the fed prints all the money, and where does it go?

STU: The banks. So they can have more capital.

GLENN: Correct. So we've all heard. The banks aren't giving out any loans.

STU: They're sitting on it.

GLENN: They're sitting on that money. They're not sitting on that money here. They're investing over in places like Europe because the interest rates are higher over there. Here it's 0 percent. So they're borrowing money. They're lending money overseas because they can make money overseas. If we start to raise our -- our -- or lower our income tax, that means that money is going to start coming back here. If we raise our interest rates, it means, okay, we can invest here, because you'll put the money back on shore, and that money will make money.

If you lower the rates, all that money that's off shore making money someplace else again will come back here. And when you do that, what happens? All of that inflated money comes rushing back into the United States, and now you have hyperinflation. He's like, we're just -- we're just screwed.

STU: Thanks, David.

[laughter]

JEFFY: Not if we make it through the list of 12.

[laughter]

GLENN: Watch last night's episode and watch tonight's episode with David Buckner. Really fascinating conversation. Understood things about the economy I just didn't understand. Really fascinating.

All right. What else is on the 12?

PAT: Appointing a special prosecutor to investigate the IRS.

GLENN: Not going to happen.

PAT: Continue to work to repeal Obamacare and have a replacement for it.

GLENN: A replacement!

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: They're already folding on that.

PAT: The Unborn Child Act, which prohibits abortion for those unborn children who actually can feel pain. Twenty weeks and above.

GLENN: And they just folded on that.

STU: They say they'll revisit that one.

PAT: Audit the fed. They haven't done that.

GLENN: No. That's not going to happen.

PAT: Reform the EPA.

And the Antiquities Act, which deals with federal land in the west, and the president's ability to use a law that has nothing to do with that in order to claim that federal land, which I believe is exactly what he's doing with Alaska right now.

STU: So far so good is what you're saying?

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: G.O.P. tower of Jell-O!

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.