The Internet: What America Can and Should Be Again

What should our politicians learn from Nike and Reebok?

What did I mean yesterday when I said we're not selling America to anybody? What is the brochure of where we want to go, as conservatives or constitutionalists?

We know where Bernie Sanders wants to go. He wants to take us to Sweden, 1970. He wants to take us to a socialist or Marxist utopia --- and we know that, he's clear on that. And that is actually why he's winning with so many people. He has received more votes than Donald Trump. Why? Why is that? Because Bernie Sanders has a destination.

Conservatives are either about beating Hillary Clinton, building a wall, restoring the Constitution, going back to the Reagan era --- all things that don't mean anything, really, to most people. It's not a destination. We need to find a way to start talking about America and the promise of America and what America can and should be. Why do I get on this plane with you?

Sure, you've talked to me about your pilot. You've talked to me about Hillary Clinton. And she's a great pilot and can take us to wherever you're going. But I don't know where she's going, other than corruption. Bernie Sanders, I don't know if I would trust him as the pilot, quite honestly. If my pilot looked like him, I would look at the co-pilot. What does the co-pilot look like? But at least I know why I'm getting on the plane --- I'm going to Sweden 1970. Donald Trump, he's the pilot. Where is he taking us? And Ted Cruz. Ted Cruz, I know is a great pilot, I know what instrumentation he's using. I know he's got the best maps. His map is the Constitution. But what does that mean about our destination? Where are we going?

Yesterday, I asked that question. And I'm not sure I have an answer yet. But as we were on the air, we talked about it, and I believe the best way to describe where we're going is the internet.

America was the world's internet in the 1800s. America was a place where anyone could go and do anything, without a license. You didn't have to have a certain education. You could learn it yourself. There was no government interference. And you could start your own business. You could dream anything and do it. You wanted to be a singer, you could be a singer. And you could suddenly become a very popular singer. You wanted to build a car, you could build a car. You wante to get your own education, you could get your own education. If you wanted to deal in drugs, you could go into the back alleys. You could go on the dark net and deal drugs.

America was the internet. The Constitution allowed you to live your life, not in the virtual world, but in the actual world, in the same way the internet allows you to live in the virtual world.

Nothing good happens unless you do it. That's a German pacifist poet and writer who opposed the war in Germany. His name was Erich Kästner. Nothing good happens unless you do it.

Can't the same thing be said about America? Can't the same thing be said about the internet? It exists. It's a place of creativity. It's a place of freedom. But you still have to pick up your phone. You still have to pick up your tablet. You still have to pick up your keyboard. You actually have to get on to the internet. You have to open your computer. You have to do it. You have to dip your toe into the water. You have to choose to participate. No one can force you to participate. No one can tell you how much to participate. You can ignore the internet. You don't have to have a cell phone. You don't have to go on the web. You can choose to own a set of encyclopedias. You can choose to never use Google. But you limit yourself from something that has great possibilities and great opportunity.

And so far, nobody is making the case that I didn't get mine, even though I refused to get on the internet. I didn't get my search engine for free. You didn't give me those results for free. No, you have to go and search for those results. You can enjoy participating by traveling through the creation of others, if you go online. Or you can create your own thing and build an app. You can learn from what others have posted.

Today, I was on the way into work, and I found pictures of the earth at night from the International Space Station and the things that they are learning about us just by looking at the lights of the cities at night. But the problem is, the Space Station is circling so fast, they're taking pictures --- and the university that is doing this over in Spain said, "We can't recognize some of the cities." And so they put the cities up online, and said, "Does anybody know this city? At night, this is a view from space of this city. Does anybody recognize this?" They're using collective minds that happen to be like me who just stumble across their images and go, "Oh, I know that city."

You can do and see and find and build anything, ways to participate and create and travel through the internet. I was in space this morning looking down at the earth at night.

But even though the possibilities are endless, even though there are as many possibilities as there are people, nothing good happens unless you do it. The same is true for America: Nothing good happens unless you do it.

I was reading a guy named Ezra Taft Benson this morning. One of his quotes: "The biggest business of any life is just making decisions. While one of the greatest gifts of God to man is the right of choice, God also gives us the responsibility of those choices. We put our own lives in the direction of success or failure. Nobody else does it. We may not only choose our ultimate goals, but we also have the right to determine and decide for ourselves in many cases the means for which we will arrive at those goals. And by our industry or lack of it determine the speed by which these goals are reached. This takes individual effort and energy and, without it, we fail. And in doing so, it will not be without opposition or conflict. What is true there is you have to do it."

Rebook, years ago, had a market share of athletic shoes. And they marketed themselves as an aerobic shoe. Aerobics were really popular at the time. And so they marketed themselves as a way to do aerobics.

Nike did something else. Rebook marketed themselves as a shoe that would do great athletic achievement. But Nike made their shoes available to everyone for any kind of situation. They could be worn to create athletic achievement, but they could also be worn at work. They could be worn at night to have fun. You could wear it as a fashion statement. You could wear it outside in the garden.

The difference was, you had to do the action. The action was inherent. You actually had to put the shoes on. And once you put the shoes on, you had to just do it. The shoe meant nothing. The shoe could be anything for anyone. But you had to just do it.

Now, how do you describe a destination? How does Ted Cruz or any constitutionalist stand in front of people when Bernie Sanders can say, "I got free stuff for everybody, and we're going to take you to a place that looks like Sweden."

Have you ever been to Sweden? I just went to Sweden this last, doing a show we're going to be airing soon. Sweden is one of the most amazing countries I've ever been to, really beautiful. Really odd, because it's a socialist nation and everything is cookie-cutter and you really don't have a choice of living in a big house because everybody lives in an apartment because no one can afford a big house because of the taxes, but Stockholm is a beautiful, clean city. Sweden is an unbelievable country. So I can understand why people would want to go to Sweden.

How do you get a nation that doesn't understand anymore, to just do it? You can wear this shoe to go anywhere. How do you get them to understand that the constitutional framework creates that atmosphere? How do you get them to go and imagine an America like that?

I'm not sure yet. But it shouldn't be that hard. Because the internet is that place. The internet is America prior to the Progressive Era. We're now starting to talk about regulating the internet. We're now starting to talk about putting taxes on it, making sure you have a license, regulating the news and the blogs. We're now starting to spy on you. Every keystroke is monitored.

We're about to wreck what we have, just like we wrecked what we had in the 1800s, where men were free to say, "I want to start an electric company. I want to start a phone company. I want to start a railroad. I've got an idea, how about we string wires all the way across the nation so we could have a telegraph and you could actually talk to each other."

Do you know who rode the Pony Express? Do you know what the ads said for the Pony Express? They were looking for 12-year-old boys --- imagine just starting that ad today, "Looking for 12-year-old boys." We were looking for 12-year-old boys, orphans preferable. The expectation of life was about a year. Imagine advertising, "Hey, by the way, we've got a job for kids. We're looking for orphans. 12-year-olds. Because they got a lot of stamina. They're small. And, by the way, you're expected to be dead in a year. And for this commercial enterprise, we just want to bring the mail from one side of the country to the other." We would never do that.

But one of the greatest Pony Express riders was a 12-year-old boy. He lived past his year. He fought in World War I. He was 70 at the time. And he saw what was happening to the world, and the United States said, "We can't use you. You're too old." He said, "Really?" He got on a ship and he went over to England. He asked England, "Will you take me?" They said, "You bet. We'll take anybody." He fought in World War I and lived.

The destination that I have in mind, the destination of where we need to go, what our country looks like, is a country that doesn't say, "You're too old. You're too stupid. You don't have this. You don't have this certificate. You don't have this degree. I'm sorry, you haven't filled out your paperwork." The America that I see that I want to go to is a country that is bound by laws, not by men, where its people are free to explore and just do it.

Featured Image: Screenshot from The Glenn Beck Program

Avenatti arrested: The lawyer now needs a lawyer

David McNew/Getty Images

At this point, I think there are about - oh - four thousand potential Democrats that may try and run for president in 2020. But we can probably take one off the list. "The creepy porn lawyer", also known by some as Michael Avenatti, was arrested yesterday afternoon in Los Angeles. And the reason why he was arrested kind of makes you think there's some kind of invisible force out there that's making sure either irony or maybe even karma is receiving it's daily offering. Michael Avenatti was just arrested for… Domestic Violence.

The alleged victim filed the complaint on Wednesday, but the incidents began on Tuesday. The woman involved is said to have bruising and swelling on her face and was kicked out of Avenatti's Los Angeles area apartment. Avenatti could be heard screaming, "This is BS, this is effing BS! She hit me first!"

RELATED: THIS spotlight hound masquerading as an attorney just got laughed out of court

Yeah, I don't think the whole "she hit me first" line is going to be a good strategy to use in court. He might want to revise that… I'm just saying.

You know, I wonder if the media - specifically CNN and MSNBC - are going to be doing any mea culpa's over the next 12 to 24 hours? They basically became Avenatti's PR wing over the past 8 months. From March to May, the two networks had Avenatti on the air over 100 times. He gave 147 interviews on both cable and network TV. MSNBC host Lawrence O'Donnell actually said quote, "Michael Avenatti is becoming my co-host. I've got to say."

And this was actually before he dragged Julie Swetnick into the limelight to attack Kavanaugh. You know I wonder, will this teach networks like CNN and MSNBC to maybe take a step back on over hyping and exposing every crazy, and even salacious, person or claim that comes out simply because it may be anti-Trump or GOP? Could this be a learning moment? Yeah… probably not, but one can dream.

And speaking of Kavanaugh, I've got to read this twitter exchange between one user and Avenatti on October 5th that said:

Brett Kavanaugh will be confirmed, and it's Michael Avenatti's fault. Seriously.

And then Avenatti replied:

You are right. I should have turned my back on my client. Told her to "shut up" and stay quiet because people like you apparently believe assault victims are to blame. This line of thinking is disgusting and offensive to all survivors.

Well that was then and this is today. Here is Avenatti's statement last night.


Michael Avenatti: 'I Have Never Struck A Woman' | NBC News youtu.be

Umm, in the court of Avenatti, #metoo and public opinion now a days - by the standard that he helped create - is this statement not "disgusting and offensive to all survivors" as he tweeted back in October? Is he not immediately guilty as accused? I wonder if all the men and women screaming at Kavanaugh and GOP Senators in elevators can now see the pandora's box that they wanted opened.

The answer is no… he's NOT guilty as accused. Avenatti is innocent of this crime… UNTIL he's found guilty. We have to presume he's innocent until all evidence comes out proving he's not. That's how this works. Let's lead by example and do something radical here… let's actually wait for all the information and evidence to come out before we convict someone of a crime.

And that right there is the real irony here. Avenatti will get the due process that he deserves, but I doubt neither he - nor anyone screaming for Kavanaugh's head - will realize what happened.

It's been a busy week for former First Ladies, and for current First Lady Melania Trump. It has also been busy for one woman who, twenty-odd years ago, while working at the White House for then-President at the age of 21, shot to fame in the most embarrassing way possible.

Monica Lewinsky has released "The Clinton Affair," a docuseries that premieres this weekend on A&E;, a six-part series examining those cringe-inducing days and months surrounding her affair with Bill Clinton.

RELATED: The #MeToo movement proves to be too strong for the Clinton apologists

In an article for Vanity Fair early this year, she wrote:

Some closest to me asked why would I want to revisit the most painful and traumatic parts of my life — again. Publicly. On-camera. With no control of how it would be used. A bit of a head-scratcher, as my brother is fond of saying. Do I wish I could erase my years in D.C. from memory, 'Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind' style? Well, is the sky blue? But I can't. And in order to move forward in the life I have, I must take risks — both professional and emotional…. An important part of moving forward is excavating, often painfully, what has gone before. When politicians are asked uncomfortable questions, they often duck and dodge by saying, 'That's old news. It's from the past.' Yes. That's exactly where we need to start to heal — with the past. But it's not easy.

She added:

Filming the documentary forced me to acknowledge to myself past behavior that I still regret and feel ashamed of," she explained. "There were many, many moments when I questioned not just the decision to participate, but my sanity itself. Despite all the ways I tried to protect my mental health, it was still challenging. During one therapy session, I told my therapist I was feeling especially depressed. She suggested that sometimes what we experience as depression is actually grief… Yes, it was grief. The process of this docuseries led me to new rooms of shame that I still needed to explore.

Meanwhile, Bill Clinton—a man who has been accused of all sorts of terrible things, a close friend of Harvey Weinstein—recently admitted that he didn't feel the need to apologize to Lewinsky. Lewinsky disagrees.

I'm less disappointed by him, and more disappointed for him. He would be a better man for it… and we, in turn, a better society.

The #MeToo movement has been a wrecking ball to so many men, yet Bill Clinton, perhaps the most prolific of them all, has escaped unscathed.

One man undoes shocking climate change study because... math

Pierre Leverrier/Unsplash

The left cries "science" about anything they want to consider a settled matter. Those who disagree with the left's climate change narrative question this "science." So, the climate change crowd are branded hysterical tree-huggers, and the anti-climate change crowd are naïve hicks.

The truth about climate change, like the truth when it comes to many issues, probably falls somewhere between the two extremes. But when it comes to climate change, it's hard to have a conversation about the "science" when the scientists running the show are already convinced they're absolutely correct and they have the unquestioning major media to back them up.

RELATED: 🤣😂🤣: WaPo claims climate change is the real reason for migrant invasion

Just two weeks ago, a study published in the scientific journal Nature claimed that the oceans are warming much faster than anyone previously thought. Cue the panic and blame the President! It was a high-profile story splashed across major media outlets who were eager to promote more science that confirms one of the left's fundamental doctrines.

The study claimed ocean temperatures have risen around 60% higher than the estimate by the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. But Nicholas Lewis, a British mathematician and climate-change critic quickly found a "major problem" with the study's conclusion.

Then yesterday, the two scientists who wrote the study admitted Lewis is right about the mistakes they made in their calculations. Now they say oceans aren't actually warming as fast as they reported. Climate scientist Ralph Keeling, who co-authored the report, says they miscalculated their margin of error – which is 10 to 70% – much larger than they originally thought.

Now they say oceans aren't actually warming as fast as they reported.

A 10 to 70 percent margin of error? I thought this climate change science was absolute. Imagine if your job had a margin of error that generous.

Keeling said:

Our error margins are too big now to really weigh in on the precise amount of warming that's going on in the ocean. We really muffed the error margins.

The whole incident is being laughed off as a minor error. But if it wasn't for some British dude poring over this research in his basement and willing to cry foul, this latest climate change "science" would continue to be broadcast as absolute truth. Just like it always is.

UPDATE: Here's how the discussion went on radio. Watch the video below.


Ocean Warming Research “Mistake" youtu.be


House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, from California, is doing everything she can to make sure she is re-elected in January to her spot as House Speaker.

Reasons Nancy Pelosi could give: Because she led the Democratic caucus for 16 years, and under her the House shifted hands. In fact, she was House Speaker for four years under Presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama.

RELATED: Sorry Nancy Pelosi, Apple's record-shattering buyback program is proof positive tax breaks work

Reason she actually gave: Because she's a woman.

During an interview on CBS Sunday, Pelosi said:

You cannot have the four leaders of Congress [and] the president of the United States, these five people, and not have the voice of women. Especially since women were the majority of the voters, the workers in campaigns, and now part of this glorious victory.

The pink wave, they're calling it. A rise in women politicians, supposedly in reaction to Donald Trump.

Here's the general argument, as described by Politico:

Push her out, and men may take over the party at a time when more than 100 women are heading to Capitol Hill and after female voters have been thoroughly alienated by President Donald Trump. Embrace her, and she'll prioritize legislation empowering women on issues ranging from equal pay to anti-harassment legislation.

Of course, she has a reason to use identity politics instead of merit: There's a concerted effort to have her un-seated.

At least nine representatives have come out and said that Pelosi will be out.

At least nine representatives have come out and said that Pelosi will be out. Filemon Vela said:

I am 100% confident we can forge new leadership.

Led by, Rep. Ed Perlmutter (D-CO), these are the representatives who have openly called for Pelosi's outing: Reps. Bill Foster (D-IL), Seth Moulton (DMA), Kathleen Rice (D-NY), Tim Ryan (D-OH), Kurt Schrader (D-OR), Conor Lamb (D-PA), and Filemon Vela (D-TX). Campaign staff for incoming Reps. Abigail Spanberger (D-VA) and Jason Crow (D-CO) have said they won't vote for Pelosi.

If they have a single ounce of dignity left, they won't, at least not just because she is a woman.