“I don’t like 1% of what he’s done!” Pat and Stu lose it on Trump caller

July 13, 2015

WRITER

For some reason, a lot of callers have been big Donald Trump fans. Despite having laid out policy after policy from Trump that show him to be left of most Democrats on issues like immigration, many people called into the show today trying to say he was going to be tough on the border. Stu literally couldn’t take it, and nearly exploded on one caller who didn’t seem to grasp just how progressive The Donald’s politics are.

Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it may contain errors:

PAT: Donald Trump. Donald Trump. Trump. Trump. Trump. It's amazing how obsessed they are with him. 239 times in one 24-hour period. That's more than ten times per hour. That's a lot of Donald Trump. And this is why we talk about him and try to put this into perspective. His candidacy into perspective. Because he is -- as we've mentioned sucking all the oxygen out of this campaign. That's all anyone is talking about. Certainly CNN is.

STU: Well, I was on Twitter in the break. And someone wrote, it's about time to move on the beat on Donald Trump. When he's first? When he gets to eighth place, I'll start considering it. When he drops out of the race, I'll consider it. When we have a Republican Party that has a bunch of good options selecting a person who donated to his competitor, who donated to the person running for the Democrats multiple times.

PAT: How do you defend that?

STU: A guy who said he was Obama's biggest cheerleader?

PAT: Yeah.

STU: How can that -- I'm not going to move on from that. Screw that. That's a terrible idea.

PAT: A guy who was a Democrat as recently as 2009.

STU: '9. Not 1969.

PAT: A Democrat.

STU: 2009. I'm not going to move on when he's in first place.

JEFFY: And you commenting on the Twitter point, Stu. Last month, on Twitter, according to topsy.com, Donald Trump led the pack with almost 2 million mentions.

STU: And who is second?

JEFFY: Jeb Bush with 338,000.

STU: Seriously.

PAT: 2 million.

JEFFY: 800,000. Almost --

STU: But basically six times as many mentions as any other candidate. You think I'll shut up about him now? This is the most important time to be running our mouth about Donald Trump. Because this is not a guy -- it's not just that if he were the nominee he would definitely lose, he has higher negatives in both parties than pretty much any other candidate.

PAT: Oh, yeah.

STU: He would definitely lose. He would definitely -- absolutely with 100 percent certainty if he was the candidate, Hillary Clinton would be handed the nomination. I mean, you would definitely -- that's not even part of the argument for me. If you have a principled guy that goes in there and loses, I can deal with that. I can live with myself if I voted for a guy who actually believes in things that are -- you know, that have some sense -- some foundation in freedom and liberty.

But when you have a guy like Donald Trump out there. He doesn't even believe these things. It's one thing if you have a candidate that is bad that at least believes in principle. This guy is the exact opposite. He doesn't believe in it. He's not a good candidate. He has no good features. This is not a guy who, well, I can see why people like him. He's just louder than everyone else.

PAT: And as tough as he is on immigration supposedly, which he's getting all the publicity about now, he's an amnesty guy. He wants amnesty. How tough is that on illegal immigration? I want a path to citizenship. I want the amnesty thing. Oh, that's -- that's tough. Well, he's tough because he's said that some of them are not good people that come across the border. And he keeps talking about building a wall between the US and Mexico. Well, first of all, you're not going to be able to build a wall between the US and Mexico. We can't even get a fence. We can't even get a fence that was mandated by law.

STU: But every one of these candidates says they'll be tough on border security.

PAT: Every one of them. Even the Democrats will say that. Oh, we'll secure the border. That's first and foremost.

STU: And for those of you that says, well, he'll do it. When he's criticizing Mitt Romney that he's too conservative on the border. As of 2012. It's inexplicable. It's an inexplicable time. At least Herman Cain was a guy that came around and people didn't know much about.

PAT: But he had conservative principles.

STU: Yeah. But Donald Trump is constantly on the record as a leftist. He's a guy who said universal health care is a birthright. This is not Barack Obama. It's considerably to the left of Barack Obama. That policy is -- it's -- he's praising Canadian health care. Canadian health care. You think this guy is a G.O.P. candidate? I don't even want him as a Democratic nominee. I would be disappointed, with the exception of he would be very beatable, but if he was the guy and we had a possibility of him being president as a Democrat, I would be disappointed.

PAT: And yet Jim in Colorado likes him. Hi, Jim, you're on the Glenn Beck Program with Pat and Stu.

CALLER: Oh, great lead-in, fellows.

STU: Sorry. I didn't mean to rant that long about that. I apologize.

CALLER: Well, you know what, you probably added 10 more new fans for him for every second you stay on it.

STU: I don't see how. I understand that. Hold on one second, Jim. Before you go on from that point. It's a point I hear a lot. And I understand that. And I think that's part of the reflexive sort of response to Trump. Which is, they see him being attacked, and therefore like him more. Which I understand from the media. If it was just CNN saying he was an evil right-winger, I would get it. It's not that. All over the conservative space are people who will say, wait a minute. This guy is not bad because he's outspoken. Not boughs he's going to make us lose. But bad because he believes in liberal policies. He's not a conservative. And that complaint I don't understand running away from if you consider yourself conservative.

PAT: What do you like about him?

CALLER: I understand only leftists are allowed to evolve. I do understand that.

STU: From 2012?

CALLER: I'm going to try to help you understand where Trumpmania is coming from.

PAT: Okay. Let's hear it.

CALLER: We've had several people in the last 15 years that speak the truth. Speak what we want to hear. Let's go to Allen West to Herman Cain to Sarah Palin. What happens to them? The leftist media, the G.O.P. establishment, they attack, attack, and attack until they're gone. You're not going to be able to do that with Trump. Trump right now, and you can go back 16 years, you and MSNBC and CNN can play --

STU: How are we getting lumped in with these people?

CALLER: Sixteen years ago.

STU: 2012 is not 16 years ago!

CALLER: Okay. 2012.

STU: 2015. March of 2015 is not 16 years ago. I cannot accept this.

CALLER: He evolved on gay marriage in six months.

STU: Oh, and you're going to praise that as a characteristic in a president you want?

CALLER: No, no, I'm not. But no one is giving him a hard time about it.

STU: I am. You are. You won't do it for Trump. You'll do it for Hillary Clinton. But you won't do it for Trump. It's insanity.

PAT: It's inconceivable. I just don't -- it's inconceivable from a conservative, Jim. Jim, let me ask you this, okay.

You like him because he speaks truth. What truth is he speaking? Help me out with that, give me the incredible policies that Donald Trump has that he is stalwart on.

CALLER: Let me tell you. We can sit hear and listen to the three-second soundbites.

PAT: No. Just give me the truth that he's speaking that you were responding to.

CALLER: I am. I'm trying.

STU: Go for it.

PAT: The truth.

CALLER: We can listen to the three-second soundbites --

PAT: No. I know what we can do. But just tell me the truth that he's speaking.

CALLER: Of Republican candidates saying we're going to build a wall. We can sit there and listen to a three-second sound bite. And then they have to go the moderate route and they never mention it again. Donald Trump gets stuff done.

PAT: What stuff does he get done?

STU: Bankrupting casinos? What does he get done?

PAT: He built a few buildings.

STU: You know how he gets it done? Eminent domain. He steals people's properties, their private property, and gets giant casinos built. Congratulations for using the government that way.

CALLER: Okay. No one is going to like 100 percent of what --

PAT: I don't like 1 percent of what he does!

STU: All right. Can you hold on? I want more from Jim.

PAT: Hang on. That's unreal. I can't take it.

STU: I don't get it. We're up against a break. We need to come back, Jim. There has to be something there. There has to be a rational thought there somewhere.

PAT: He loves the fact that he's talking about building a wall and he'll keep talking about that. He's an amnesty guy!

STU: That's what I was saying. He hasn't evolved on that. That's his current policy.

Woke ideology trumps medicine in America's top 5 medical schools

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

Progressive ideology has infected our most prestigious medical schools and is seeping into our medical system.

As Glenn covered in his latest TV special, "diversity, equity and inclusion" (DEI), and leftist rhetoric have overtaken science and medicine as the focus of medical schools across the nation. The next generation of doctors and nurses is being force-fed DEI and "anti-racist" nonsense at the expense of slipping standards. This has led to a decline in people's trust in the medical industry and for good reason. Woke ideology has already been the driving force behind at least one medical malpractice case, and more are undoubtedly on the way.

All of this is being spearheaded by universities, which have integrated DEI practices into the fabric of their programs. Our top medical schools now require students and staff to participate in mandatory DEI and "anti-racist" classes and training and are adjusting the standards to reflect this new shift in focus. Here are 5 statements from the top American medical schools that show that medicine is no longer their primary focus:

Harvard Medical School

Boston Globe / Contributor | Getty Images

Taken from the Harvard University "Unconscious bias" resource page:

“As members of HMS, we each have a responsibility to create an inclusive community that values all individuals. Barriers to inclusion may include assumptions we make about others that guide our interactions. Recognizing our Unconscious Bias is a critical step in developing a culture of equity and inclusion within HMS and in our partnerships with other communities.”

The Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine

Rob Carr / Staff | Getty Images

Pulled from the JHM Office of Diversity, Inclusion and Health Equity blog:

“One-hour live, virtual unconscious bias training ... [w]ill be required at all Johns Hopkins Health System (JHHS) entities for managers and above; hospital nurse leaders; credentialed providers (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners); and for school of medicine faculty and trainees (including residents, fellows, medical and graduate students, and research postdocs), as well as those at a manager level or above.”

Stanford University School of Medicine

Philip Pacheco / Stringer | Getty Images

Found on the Stanford Medicine Commission on Justice and Equity page:

“The Commission on Justice and Equity—composed of external and internal leaders, experts, and advocates—represents an institution-wide, collaborative effort to dismantle systemic racism and discrimination within our own community and beyond.”

Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania

Education Images / Contributor | Getty Images

Taken from the Penn Medicine Commitment to Inclusion, Equity, and Antiracism site:

“We openly acknowledge the role of structural forces of oppression as primary drivers of the disparate health outcomes. We believe that working to reverse the underrepresentation of historically excluded groups is critical in achieving equitable health outcomes. While this is an ongoing journey for our program, here are some of the tangible steps we have taken to achieve an inclusive culture”

Columbia University Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons

Jeenah Moon / Stringer | Getty Images

Pulled from the Vagelos College of Physicians and Surgeons Diversity, Equity, Inclusivity, Justice, and Anti-Racism page:

"Courses are being revised to be more inclusive and informed by the key principle of race as a social construct and a social determinant of health. We are training faculty that Anti-Racism is not an add-on to a course. Anti-Racism is a pedagogy - a manner of teaching, designing courses, and measuring learning outcomes. We make sure that the classroom environment is inclusive by holding space for respectful conversation and ensuring that we address any “classroom ruptures”– a disorienting dilemma or situation when a bias or microaggression that may occur, providing real time opportunities for professional development, learning, and growth. Racist actions and remarks are never tolerated at Columbia University and will be dealt with following established protocols."

Critical theory destroys truth and justice

Editor's note: This article was originally published on TheBlaze.com.

Critical theory once stood out as the absurd progressive notion that it is. Now, its maxims are becoming an integral part of ordinary political discourse. The more you repeat a lie, the more you will believe it, and this is the very dangerous place in which we find ourselves today.

Take this critical theory maxim as an example: If we desire justice, we must sometimes champion what may appear superficially as injustice. It's a necessary evil, if you will, the necessity of “controlled injustice.”

By using truth through fabrication and controlled injustice for justice, we’ll save the republic. We’ll be acting in a noble way.

This definition of justice is defined by the “oppressed,” not the “oppressor.” It is the greatest happiness for the greatest number. To achieve this justice, however, we need to endorse acts on occasion that, while seemingly unjust, serve a higher purpose. It will ensure the stability and the unity of our republic, and this may manifest in ways that seem contradictory to our values. But these are the necessary shadows to cast light on “true justice.”

And isn’t that what we are all after, anyway?

Here’s another critical theory maxim: Sometimes we find the truth through fabrication. Our pursuit of truth sometimes requires a strategic use of falsehoods. The truth is a construct that has been shaped and tailored to promote the well-being of the collective.

We sometimes need to accept and propagate lies designed by "the system” — not the old system, but the system that we’re now using to replace the old to get more justice through injustice and more truth through fabrication.

We’re engaging in a higher form of honesty. When we fabricate, it’s for the right reason. We are reaching up to the heavens fighting for a higher sort of honesty. To fortify the truth, we occasionally must weave a tapestry of lies. Each thread, essential for the greater picture, will ultimately define our understanding and ensure our unity under this infallible wisdom.

The election is coming up. Does this maxim sound familiar? Many think it is imperative that we secure our republic through election control to maintain our republic. Sometimes, we might need to take actions that by traditional standards might be questionable.

The act of securing elections requires cheating. It's not mere deception. It is a noble act of safeguarding our way of life. We're on the verge of losing this democracy, and without deception, we will lose it.

To ensure it doesn't fall into the hands of those we know will destroy it, we may have to make a few fabrications. We're fabricating stories to be able to control or secure the republic through our elections. By using truth through fabrication and controlled injustice for justice, we'll save the republic. Therefore, we'll be acting in a noble way. Stealing an election from those who wish to harm our society is truly an act of valor and an essential measure to protect our values and ensure the continuation of our just society.

If we desire justice, we must sometimes champion what may appear superficially as injustice.

I know it's a paradox of honor through dishonor. But in this context, by embracing the dishonor, we achieve the highest form of honor, ensuring the stability and the continuation of our great republic.

Let this be heard, far and wide, as a great call to patriotic action. As we advance, let each of us, citizens of this great and honorable republic, consider these principles. Not as abstract or paradoxical but as practical guides to daily life. Embrace the necessity of controlled injustice, the utility of lies, the duty to secure our electoral process, and the honor and apparent dishonor. These are not merely strategies for survival. They are prerequisites for our prosperity.

We all have to remember that justice is what our leaders define, that truth is what our party tells us. Our republic stands strong on the values of injustice for justice, honor through dishonor, and the fabrication of truths. To deviate from this path is to jeopardize the very fabric of our society. Strength through unity; unity through strength.

We've heard this nonsense for so long. But now, this nonsense is becoming an instituted reality, and we are entering perilous times. Don't be fooled by the narratives you will hear during the march to November. Never let someone convince you that the ends justify the means, that a little bit of injustice is needed to achieve a broader, collective vision of justice, that truth sometimes requires fabricated lies and narratives. If we do, justice will cease to be justice, truth will cease to be truth, and our republic will be lost.

Top 5 MOST EVIL taxes the government extorts from you

David McNew / Staff | Getty Images

"In this world nothing is certain but death and taxes." -Ben Franklin

The injustice of taxation has been a core issue for Americans since the very beginning of our country, and it's a problem we have yet to resolve. This belief was recently reignited in many Americans earlier this month on tax day when the numbers were crunched and it was discovered that the government was somehow owed even more hard-earned money. As Glenn recently discussed on his show, it's getting to be impossible for most Americans to afford to live comfortably, inflation is rising, and our politicians keep getting richer.

The taxpayer's burden is heavier than ever.

The government is not above some real low blows either. While taxes are a necessary evil, some taxes stretch the definition of "necessary" and emphasize the "evil." Here are the top five most despicable taxes that are designed to line the IRS coffers at your expense:

Income Tax

Joe Raedle / Staff | Getty Images

"It would be a hard government that should tax its people one-tenth part of their income." -Ben Franklin

On February 24th, 2024 we hit a very unfortunate milestone, the 101st anniversary of the 16th Amendment, which authorized federal income tax. Where does the government get the right to steal directly out of your paycheck?

Death Taxes

Dan Mullan / Staff | Getty Images

"Now my advice for those who die, Declare the pennies on your eyes" -George Harrison

Not even in death can you escape the cold pursuit of the tax collector. It's not good enough that you have to pay taxes on everything you buy and every penny you make your entire life. Now the feds want a nice slice, based on the entire value of your estate, that can be as much as 40 percent. Then the state government gets to stick their slimy fingers all over whatever remains before your family is left with the crumbs. It's practically grave-robbery.

Payroll

Bloomberg / Contributor | Getty Images

"The power to tax is the power to destroy." -John Marshall

What's that? The nice chunk of your paycheck the government nabs before you can even get it to the bank wasn't enough? What if the government taxed your employer just for paying you? In essence, you make less than what your agreed pay rate is and it costs your employer more! Absolutely abominable.

Social Security

VALERIE MACON / Contributor | Getty Images

"We don't have a trillion-dollar debt because we haven't taxed enough; we have a trillion-dollar debt because we spend too much." -Ronald Reagan

Everyone knows the collapse of Social Security is imminent. It has limped along for years, only sustained by a torrent of tax dollars and the desperate actions of politicians. For decades, people have unwillingly forked over money into the system they will never see again.

FICA

Kevin Dietsch / Staff | Getty Images

"What at first was plunder assumed the softer name of revenue." -Thomas Paine

FICA is the payroll equivalent of Social Security. Your employer has to match however much you pay. It means it costs your employer even more to pay you—again, you'll NEVER see that money. At this point, are you even working for yourself, or are you just here to generate money for the government to frivolously throw away?

5 DISTURBING ways World War III will be different from previous wars

Oleg Nikishin / Stringer | Getty Images

Has World War III begun?

Over the weekend, Iran launched an unprecedented attack against Israel involving over 300 missiles and drones. This marked the first direct attack on Israel originating from Iranian territory. Fortunately, according to an Israel Defense Forces spokesperson Rear Admiral Daniel Hagari, 99 percent of missiles and drones were successfully neutralized by Israeli defense systems. Iran claimed that the operation against Israel had concluded and that no further offensive was planned, although the possibility of another attack is still present.

This has left many people, including Glenn, wondering the same thing: did we just witness the start of World War III?

Glenn recently had a World War II Air Force Veteran as a guest on his TV special, who told stories of the horrors he and his brothers-in-arms faced in the skies over war-torn Europe. This was a timely reminder of the terrors of war and a warning that our future, if it leads to another world war, is a dark one.

But, if Glenn's coverage of the Iranian attack revealed one thing, it's that World War III will look nothing like the world wars of the twentieth century. Long gone are the days of John "Lucky" Luckadoo and his "Bloody Hundredth" bravely flying their B-17s into battle. Over the weekend, we saw hundreds of autonomous drones and missiles clashing with extreme speed and precision over several different fronts (including space) simultaneously. This ain't your grandfather's war.

From EMP strikes to cyber attacks, here are FIVE ways the face of war has changed:

EMP attacks

New York Daily News Archive / Contributor | Getty Images

The entire modern world, on every level, is completely dependent on electricity. From your home refrigerator to international trade, the world would come to a grinding halt without power. And as Glenn has pointed out, it wouldn't even be that hard to pull off. All it would take is 3 strategically placed, high-altitude nuclear detonations and the entire continental U.S. would be without power for months if not years. This would cause mass panic across the country, which would be devastating enough on its own, but the chaos could be a perfect opportunity for a U.S. land invasion.

Nuclear strikes

Galerie Bilderwelt / Contributor | Getty Images

Nuclear war is nothing new. Many of us grew up during the Cold War, built fallout shelters, and learned to duck and cover. But times have changed. The Berlin Wall fell and so did the preparedness of the average American to weather a nuclear attack. As technology has advanced, more of our adversaries than ever have U.S. cities within their crosshairs, and as Glenn has pointed out, these adversaries are not exactly shy about that fact. Unfortunately, the possibility of an atomic apocalypse is as real as ever.

Immigration warfare

Nick Ut / Contributor | Getty Images

The strategy of strangling an opposing nation's economy to gain the upper hand is a wartime tactic as old as time. That's why the Border Crisis is so alarming. What better way to damage an opponent's economy than by overburdening it with millions of undocumented immigrants? As Glenn has covered, these immigrants are not making the trek unaided. There is a wide selection of organizations that facilitate this growing disaster. These organizations are receiving backing from around the globe, such as the WEF, the UN, and U.S. Democrats! Americans are already feeling the effects of the border crisis. Imagine how this tactic could be exploited in war.

Cyber shutdowns

Bill Hinton / Contributor | Getty Images

Cyber attacks will be a major tactic in future wars. We've already experienced relatively minor cyber strikes from Russia, China, and North Korea, and it is a very real possibility that one of our adversaries inflicts a larger attack with devastating consequences on the United States. In fact, the WEF has already predicted a "catastrophic" cyber attack is imminent, and Glenn suggests that it is time to start preparing ourselves. A cyber attack could be every bit as devastating as an EMP, and in a world run by computers, nothing is safe.

Biological assault

WPA Pool / Pool | Getty Images

Don't trust the "experts." That was the takeaway many of us had from the pandemic, but something less talked about is the revelation that China has manufactured viruses that are capable of spreading across the globe. We now know that the lab leak hypothesis is true and that the Wuhan lab manufactured the virus that infected the entire world. That was only ONE virus from ONE lab. Imagine what else the enemies of America might be cooking up.