Say Something, I'm Giving Up on You

Editor's Note: The following is based on Glenn's monologue from September 8, 2016.

Yesterday, I was on the set filming a new series we're doing called The Vault, which starts in two weeks. It's a show based on all of these unbelievable pieces of American history we have. My daughter Mary and Jeremy work on set in the vault, and they are responsible for the library. Jeremy was gone yesterday, so Mary was on the set with me, and she is such a guard and protector of all of these artifacts. She had a seizure in the middle of filming.

I got up this morning, and I was feeling guilty because she had a seizure. We stopped to take care of her, and sometimes she just needs to sit down for a while, about 20 or 30 minutes to just kind of recover from it. After she stabilized, one of the guys took her to my office where she just rested for a while. And it bothered me all the way through filming --- I wish I was sitting next to Mary right now --- but I had to continue on with the filming.

I was thinking about that this morning, and I was thinking about all the things I've done as a dad. You know, I've made choices along the way, and there's just no way to win as a parent. No matter what you do, no matter how hard you try, you've either done too much or not enough. It's a no-win situation.

I don't know if you're like this at all, but I'm like this in my marriage and I'm like this with my kids. There are things that I want to say, but I am so bad at saying the wrong thing.

First of all, Raphe and Uno, my dog, we're the only men in the house. And men and women have completely different languages. I learned early on, in my first marriage, no matter what I say, I lose. If I just say I've been saying that --- very bad idea.

Why haven't you told me . . .

I have.

Well, I didn't hear it.

Well, hello.

Now when I do say something, my wife Tania, she still looks at me like, What the hell is wrong with you?

I'm like, I'm just telling the girls that . . .

Don't say that to a girl.

Okay, so there's nothing I can say. Because if I say something, it's wrong. If I don't say something, it's wrong.

It's awful. And there are things that I want to say, but I don't know how to say it because I'm afraid that it will make it worse. Does anybody else feel this way? You feel, I missed the opportunity to say this, and now it's going to be a bigger deal. And I don't want it to be a bigger deal. I just have to say something. I wish somebody else would say something. Maybe something is going to change. All of a sudden, you find yourself in this place to where it's horrible, and now you really don't know what to say.

If we were more honest with each other, all of our relationships would change. If we were just able to speak and not just hear, but listen. I'm sometimes --- really, most times --- I'm a really bad listener. And Stu will verify this because he roles his eyes every time I cut him off because I always think I know what he's going to say. And I know he is always like, No, that's not what I was going to say, but that is my pattern because I hear and I don't always listen. I've known that for a long time, and I've never said that to Stu. And it probably is very frustrating because he thinks I don't know it --- and I do.

This morning, I was listening to a song by Damien Rice, and I wish we could play it on the air. But one of the wonderful things about technology is you're heard on a billion different platforms, and you can't afford the rights to absolutely everything. We used to be able to play a song and say, Hey, here's what it is.

Christina Aguilera did a song called Say Something with Damien Rice of A Great Big World. So it's this great song, and I want to read the lyrics to you. I want you to think about your relationship. If your relationship -- with anybody -- has ever been in a bad place and you don't know what to say:

Say something, I'm giving up on you

I'll be the one if you want me to

Anywhere I would have followed you

Say something, I'm giving up on you

And I'm feeling so small

It was all over my head

I know nothing at all

What's remarkable about this song is it's a duet, and it shows that both sides in this relationship are feeling exactly the same way.

Say something. They both know. But (a) they don't know what to say for the other side. And (b) they're not hearing what the other person is saying, which is exactly the same thing. I don't want this to be over, but I'm about to give up.

So how does this relate? Remember, this is a duet. I've said for a very long time now, I don't condemn anybody for making a different decision on politics. I don't condemn you. I understand. I get it. I get it. I look at things differently than you do, but I respect you and I get it.

Now, I don't understand those people who have had 17 choices in front of them and they were on the first bandwagon with this guy. I don't get that. But that's 20 percent of 30 percent. That's a small number in America, and a small number of this audience. The vast majority of this audience is most likely saying, I don't want Clinton, and I really don't want Trump, but he's the best thing going. It's going to be binary, so it's going to be one of these two, and I get that. I really do. I understand that. I can't make that choice --- nor can Pat or Stu. Jeffy, I think, is going to make that choice, but I won't condemn him.

I think there are a lot of people in this audience that feel horrible about that choice, but they don't know what else to do. So human nature says condemn anyone disagreeing with you because it will make you feel better about your choice. Two can play that game, but I'm not going to play that game. Because there are no good choices.

What I'm choosing to do, I'm not happy about. What you're choosing to do, most likely you're not happy about.

Now, there are those people who absolutely believe every word that Donald Trump says, and it's great for them. There are those people that are voting for Hillary Clinton who believe everything she says. But there's a vast majority of people, I believe, in the Hillary Clinton camp, that don't believe a word she says, that think she's bad. But they're saying, We can't have Donald Trump. Just like we're saying, We can't have Hillary Clinton.

And what we're doing is dividing ourselves, really. Not in half, but dividing ourselves into thirds.

Those people who actually are the alt-right. Those people who from the beginning believed in a strongman and have authoritarian tendencies. Now, not all the people that were joining Trump at the very beginning believed that, but that's where that base of anger, rage and shut down anybody else who thinks differently comes from. That's an authoritarian strain. That's a very small minority, but it exists. There's one-third, not evenly distributed. The next third are the people who say, I don't really like that guy, but I like him better than her. Then there's the other third that says, I don't like either of them, and I can't go there.

What we're going through right now is birth pains. In 60 days, we give birth to something, and we're in the room right now. This is the time where your wife is like, Get your hands off me. I'm never going to let you touch me again. And screaming at you and saying all kinds of things you know she doesn't mean. She's going to be fine the moment the pain stops. The moment she gives birth, that's all going to be over.

We need to be the ones in the room that just smile and say, Uh-huh. I know. I know. Breathe, honey. Breathe.

The husband will cause massive problems in the relationship if he didn't understand that and says, Well, you, bitch. How dare you! Can you imagine how stupid that would be, to get into that argument, while she's having labor pains, while she's giving birth, and you're taking everything she says as not emotional outbursts that are unreasonable because of the pain she is in? That would cause permanent division.

We need to understand, we're giving birth to something new, to an entirely new life. And whether that life turns out to be good or Damien, we don't know. But as parents that gave life its start, we better be one. We better be together or the baby will control us. It will be able to control us because it will play us one against another.

There are patterns in life. So as I'm listening to this song today, quite honestly, I first think of me, but then I want to start with you. I don't know what you want me to say because I feel like I say it to you every day: It's okay. I support you. I'm not your enemy. I'm an enemy of totalitarianism. I'm an enemy of progressivism. I am an enemy of anybody who wants to control and stifle anyone else. But I do not believe that is the vast majority of people on either side.

I support you. I don't know what you want me to say, but I'm willing to say it. I just don't know how you're going to hear it.

But on the other side, say something because I'm about to give up on you. I get bashed. Anybody who is in our camp, all the people who are listening right now who are in my camp, I think they're saying the same thing to you: Say something. I thought we were together. I thought we were one. I thought we understood each other. I love you. I don't want to go away. I don't want you to go away. But I'm about to give up on you. Say something.

All you have to say is, I get it. I get it. I get it. I don't agree with what you're going to do, but I get it. And we're still together.

I have to break the patterns in my own life where I don't say the hard things to the people that I love because I'm afraid to make it worse. I don't think we can make this any worse. This is the biggest divorce of the American family I've ever seen in my lifetime. I don't think I can make it worse.

Say something, because I'm about to give up on you.

Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:

Featured Image: Glenn Beck on the new set of The Vault, which premieres the week of September 12.

The number of people serving life sentences now exceeds the entire prison population in 1970, according to newly-released data from the Sentencing Project. The continued growth of life sentences is largely the result of "tough on crime" policies pushed by legislators in the 1990s, including presidential candidate Joe Biden.

Biden has since apologized for backing those types of policies, but it seems he has yet to learn his lesson. Indeed, Biden is backing yet another criminal justice policy with disastrous consequences—mandatory drug treatment for all drug offenders.

Proponents of this policy argue that forced drug treatment will reduce drug usage and recidivism and save lives. But the evidence simply isn't on their side. Mandatory treatment isn't just patently unethical, it's also ineffective—and dangerous.

Many well-meaning people view mandatory treatment as a positive alternative to incarceration. But there's a reason that mandatory treatment is also known as "compulsory confinement." As author Maya Schenwar asks in The Guardian, "If shepherding live human bodies off to prison to isolate and manipulate them without their permission isn't ethical, why is shipping those bodies off to compulsory rehab an acceptable alternative?" Compulsory treatment isn't an alternative to incarceration. It is incarceration.

Compulsory treatment is also arguably a breach of international human rights agreements and ethical standards. The World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) have made it clear that the standards of ethical treatment also apply to the treatment of drug dependence—standards that include the right to autonomy and self-determination. Indeed, according to UNODC, "people who use or are dependent on drugs do not automatically lack the capacity to consent to treatment...consent of the patient should be obtained before any treatment intervention." Forced treatment violates a person's right to be free from non-consensual medical treatment.

It's a useless endeavor, anyway, because studies have shown that it doesn't improve outcomes in reducing drug use and criminal recidivism. A review of nine studies, published in the International Journal of Drug Policy, failed to find sufficient evidence that compulsory drug treatment approaches are effective. The results didn't suggest improved outcomes in reducing drug use among drug-dependent individuals enrolled in compulsory treatment. However, some studies did suggest potential harm.

According to one study, 33% of compulsorily-treated participants were reincarcerated, compared to a mere 5% of the non-treatment sample population. Moreover, rates of post-release illicit drug use were higher among those who received compulsory treatment. Even worse, a 2016 report from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health found that people who received involuntary treatment were more than twice as likely to die of an opioid-related overdose than those with a history of only voluntary treatment.

These findings echo studies published in medical journals like Addiction and BMJ. A study in Addiction found that involuntary drug treatment was a risk factor for a non-fatal drug overdose. Similarly, a study in BMJ found that patients who successfully completed inpatient detoxification were more likely than other patients to die within a year. The high rate of overdose deaths by people previously involuntarily treated is likely because most people who are taken involuntarily aren't ready to stop using drugs, authors of the Addiction study reported. That makes sense. People who aren't ready to get clean will likely use again when they are released. For them, the only post-treatment difference will be lower tolerance, thanks to forced detoxification and abstinence. Indeed, a loss of tolerance, combined with the lack of a desire to stop using drugs, likely puts compulsorily-treated patients at a higher risk of overdose.

The UNODC agrees. In their words, compulsory treatment is "expensive, not cost-effective, and neither benefits the individual nor the community." So, then, why would we even try?

Biden is right to look for ways to combat addiction and drug crime outside of the criminal justice system. But forced drug treatment for all drug offenders is a flawed, unethical policy, with deadly consequences. If the goal is to help people and reduce harm, then there are plenty of ways to get there. Mandatory treatment isn't one of them.

Lindsay Marie is a policy analyst for the Lone Star Policy Institute, an independent think tank that promotes freedom and prosperity for all Texans. You can follow her on Twitter @LindsayMarieLP.

President Donald Trump's personal attorney, Rudy Giuliani joined Glenn Beck on Tuesday's radio program discuss the Senate's ongoing investigation into former vice president Joe Biden's son, Hunter Biden, and reveal new bombshell documents he's currently releasing.

Giuliani told Glenn he has evidence of "very, very serious crime at the highest levels of government," that the "corrupt media" is doing everything in their power to discredit.

He also dropped some major, previously unreported news: not only was Hunter Biden under investigation in 2016, when then-Vice President Biden "forced" the firing of Ukraine's prosecutor general Viktor Shokin, but so was the vice president himself.

"Shokin can prove he was investigating Biden and his son. And I now have the prosecutorial documents that show, all during that period of time, not only was Hunter Biden under investigation -- Joe Biden was under investigation," Giuliani explained. "It wasn't just Hunter."

Watch this clip to get a rundown of everything Giuliani has uncovered so far.

Use code GLENN to save $10 on one year of BlazeTV.

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.

For most Americans, the 1980s was marked by big hair, epic lightsaber battles, and school-skipping Ferris Bueller dancing his way into the hearts of millions.

But for Bernie Sanders — who, by the way, was at that time the oldest-looking 40-year-old in human history — the 1980s was a period of important personal milestones.

Prior to his successful 1980 campaign to become mayor of Burlington, Vermont, Sanders was mostly known around the Green Mountain State as a crazy, wildly idealistic socialist. (Think Karl Marx meets Don Quixote.) But everything started to change for Sanders when he became famous—or, in the eyes of many, notorious—for being "America's socialist mayor."

As mayor, Sanders' radical ideas were finally given the attention he had always craved but couldn't manage to capture. This makes this period of his career particularly interesting to study. Unlike today, the Bernie Sanders of the 1980s wasn't concerned with winning over an entire nation — just the wave of far-left New York City exiles that flooded Vermont in the 1960s and 1970s — and he was much more willing to openly align himself with local and national socialist and communist parties.


www.youtube.com


Over the past few weeks, I have been reading news reports of Sanders recorded in the 1980s — because, you know, that's how guys like me spend their Saturday nights — and what I've found is pretty remarkable.

For starters, Sanders had (during the height of the Soviet Union) a very cozy relationship with people who openly advocated for Marxism and communism. He was an elector for the Socialist Workers Party and promoted the party's presidential candidates in 1980 and 1984.

To say the Socialist Workers Party was radical would be a tremendous understatement. It was widely known SWP was a communist organization mostly dedicated to the teachings of Marx and Leon Trotsky, one of the leaders of the Russian Revolution.

Among other radical things I've discovered in interviews Sanders conducted with the SWP's newspaper — appropriately named The Militant (seriously, you can't make this stuff up) — is a statement by Sanders published in June 1981 suggesting that some police departments "are dominated by fascists and Nazis," a comment that is just now being rediscovered for the first time in decades.

In 1980, Sanders lauded the Socialist Workers Party's "continued defense of the Cuban revolution." And later in the 1980s, Sanders reportedly endorsed a collection of speeches by the socialist Sandinistas in Nicaragua, even though there had been widespread media reports of the Sandinistas' many human rights violations prior to Sanders' endorsement, including "restrictions on free movement; torture; denial of due process; lack of freedom of thought, conscience and religion; denial of the right of association and of free labor unions."

Sanders also traveled to Nicaragua and met with socialist President Daniel Ortega. He later called the trip a "profoundly emotional experience."

Sanders also traveled to Nicaragua and met with socialist President Daniel Ortega. He later called the trip a "profoundly emotional experience."

Comrade Bernie's disturbing Marxist past, which is far more extensive than what can be covered in this short article, shouldn't be treated as a mere historical footnote. It clearly illustrates that Sanders' brand of "democratic socialism" is much more than a $15 minimum wage and calls for single-payer health care. It's full of Marxist philosophy, radical revolutionary thinking, anti-police rhetoric, and even support for authoritarian governments.

Millions of Americans have been tricked into thinking Sanders isn't the radical communist the historical record — and even Sanders' own words — clearly show that he is. But the deeper I have dug into Comrade Bernie's past, the more evident it has become that his thinking is much darker and more dangerous and twisted than many of his followers ever imagined.

Tomorrow night, don't miss Glenn Beck's special exposing the radicals who are running Bernie Sanders' campaign. From top to bottom, his campaign is staffed with hard-left extremists who are eager to burn down the system. The threat to our constitution is very real from Bernie's team, and it's unlike anything we've ever seen before in a U.S. election. Join Glenn on Wednesday, at 9 PM Eastern on BlazeTV's YouTube page, and on BlazeTV.com. And just in case you miss it live, the only way to catch all of Glenn's specials on-demand is by subscribing to Blaze TV.

Justin Haskins (Jhaskins@heartland.org) is editorial director of The Heartland Institute and editor-in-chief of StoppingSocialism.com.

Candace Owens, BLEXIT founder and author of the upcoming book, "Blackout," joined Glenn Beck on Friday's GlennTV for an exclusive interview. available only to BlazeTV subscribers.

Candace dropped a few truth-bombs about the progressive movement and what's happening to the Democratic Party. She said people are practically running away from the left due to their incessant push to dig up dirt on anybody who disagrees with their radical ideology. She explained how -- like China and its "social credit score" -- the left is shaping America into its own nightmarish episode of "Black Mirror."

"This game of making sure that everyone is politically correct is a societal atom bomb. There are no survivors. There's no one that is perfect," Candace said. "The idea that humanity can be perfect is Godless. If you accept that there is something greater than us, then you accept that we a flawed. To be human is to be flawed."

Enjoy this clip from the full episode below:

youtu.be


BlazeTV subscribers can watch the full interview on BlazeTV.com. Use code GLENN to save $10 off one year of your subscription.

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.