Following his interview with Senator Ted Cruz, Glenn shared his impression of the exchange on his radio program Monday.
"For the very first time, I heard Ted Cruz calculate. And when that happened, the whole thing fell apart for me," he said.
Glenn blamed himself for the inevitable letdown.
"It's my fault," Glenn said. "It's my fault for believing that men can actually be George Washington."
He went on to share an idea that would sound "outrageous" to some.
"I am not here to fight for the saving of America. I am not here to fight for the saving of this land. I am not here to save the system that we have built. I am here and you are here --- we all are here --- for this time to save the idea of America," Glenn said.
Read below or listen to the full segment for answers to these principled questions:
• What is the idea of America?
• What reason should Senator Cruz have given for his decision?
• Should Glenn have supported Marco Rubio?
• Will the two major parties destroy the idea of America?
• Would Glenn still vote for Senator Cruz?
• Has the Republican Party become like PETA?
Listen to this segment from The Glenn Beck Program:
Below is a rush transcript of this segment, it might contain errors:
GLENN: For the first time -- and I'm sorry if that was too contentious for people.
STU: It's what we should do, right?
GLENN: And I will tell you, that's not what I expected, but there was something in there. And I'm not going to go into it. There is something there, where I have private conversations with people. And I know private -- I know what was said, and I know -- I know the story. And for the very first time, I heard Ted Cruz calculate. And when that happened, the whole thing fell apart for me. And it's my fault. It's my fault for believing that men can actually be George Washington. It's my fault.
I should have said, "You know who can win? You know who could beat Hillary Clinton? Marco Rubio. And I disagree with him on the Gang of Eight, and there's about 80 percent that I do agree with him on. And he's kind of a politician, but he's a different kind of politician: He's a young politician. He's a Hispanic. He can win. Let's go for it!" Instead, I said, "Let's find a truly honorable man." And that will always let you down. It will always let you down.
STU: Yes. I kept thinking this weekend of like, you know, we keep -- there's a lesson that we're supposed to learn, I believe a pretty important person once talked about it, in that: Don't put your faith in man. That's not the right place.
GLENN: It's not the place. It's not the place.
PAT: Well, and but we thought we were putting our faith in the principles that he held.
GLENN: Yes. Yes.
PAT: And -- and -- because he led us to believe -- and he did it through his work, that he was going to be a man of his principle. Because he was.
GLENN: Here's how he could have -- here's how he could have addressed this today.
PAT: "You know what, guys, I caved. I need donors. They all left. I caved." Just tell the truth.
GLENN: Yes. Yeah. "Guys, here's the thing: I said -- he's reframing what he did in Cleveland.
PAT: Yeah, you can't say what you're saying now and what you said in Cleveland are the same thing.
GLENN: They're not.
PAT: Everybody knows they're not.
GLENN: One is, vote for Donald Trump. And one is, vote for your conscience. There's a clear difference.
PAT: Big time.
GLENN: But he's recasting that now.
GLENN: And, yes, was he trying to force Donald Trump and the G.O.P. to come closer? Yeah, I think he was.
PAT: Even if that's what he was trying to do, what have they done to get closer? Nothing! Nothing.
GLENN: So he said -- so he could have come on and said --
PAT: I don't buy it.
GLENN: -- "Look, guys, here's the thing: My supporters are yelling at me." And I know that, because so are mine.
GLENN: My donors, who were all in with the G.O.P., they're all saying, "I'll never fund you -- I won't fund you for the Senate. I won't fund you for the run in 2020." And I have to make a decision. So the question is: Do I completely shut myself out of this game, or do I play the game as much as I possibly can? Look, there's nobody that has held out longer than me, he should have said.
STU: It wouldn't be accurate, but it would be close to that.
GLENN: It wouldn't be accurate, yes. They're down to 12.
You know, if you count us and Ben Shapiro and everybody else, they're down to 12.
STU: Kasich is a candidate --
GLENN: Yes. Kasich!
PAT: Ben Sasse.
GLENN: Ben Sasse.
STU: Ben Sasse. Mike Lee. And when's the last time anyone asked Ben Sasse about this? He was able to avoid it completely because he was honest and said what he believed early on.
STU: So people stopped bugging him about it.
GLENN: Yes. So, anyway -- and people would have stopped bugging him about this.
So, anyway, if he would have just come on and said that, I would have had a lot easier time. But to become the politician --
GLENN: -- is -- is disappointing. Really disappointing.
STU: Well, two things --
GLENN: But I don't want to get into a situation to where -- I think Ted Cruz is still a good man. I I think he's a good man. I do think he prayed on this. And I can't argue with him. I think everybody's back is up against the wall. And so I'm not going to condemn him. He is, still, I believe, a good man. He is just a politician, first. I've never put him into the category of politician, and that's my fault. He is a politician.
STU: Right. And that's not a condemnation of him, it's a condemnation of our decision-making process, I suppose.
GLENN: Yes, yes.
STU: And so two quick things, positive on Cruz: Number one, he's got the balls to come in here and face this.
GLENN: Not a lot of people would do that.
STU: Not a lot of people would do that.
Number two: He'll still be one of the best senators in the Senate. You know, we had this same sort of issue with Rand Paul when he endorsed Mitch McConnell.
STU: And we gave him a really hard time about that, and it's forever changed the general way we think about him.
STU: He's a good senator. He's right on almost everything --
GLENN: And I still support him. I'd still vote for him.
STU: I still support him. Right.
GLENN: But I know who he is.
STU: I don't separate him from the pack. He's just a good, quality conservative senator with good Libertarian leanings. And he's usually right. And that's what I'll think about Ted Cruz in the future.
GLENN: Yes, yes. Yes. Yes.
STU: He's Rand Paul, and that's okay. He's still going to be one of the best senators.
GLENN: Yes. Yes.
STU: But this idea that now he's bringing to us the binary choice argument --
PAT: I hate that.
STU: -- is so --
PAT: That drove me nuts more than just about anything in that conversation.
STU: Oh, just about anything. It's so ridiculous.
PAT: It's a binary choice? No, I thought it was vote your conscience.
STU: Conscience and principles.
PAT: Those are mutually exclusive. I'm sorry.
STU: And if you haven't heard the binary choice argument before --
GLENN: Everybody has.
STU: Well, but just to review.
STU: Basically, Hillary Clinton is going to be bad on 100 percent of the things. We know she's a liberal and she's nuts. On the other side, you're going to have someone who might be good on some things. Maybe he's at least saying he's for a flat tax and the IRS --
PAT: And he gives us no indication to think he will be better on anything.
STU: Well, let me finish. Maybe he's better for more localized education. Maybe he's better on campaign reform term limits. Maybe he's better on foreign policy that's a little bit more sensible. Maybe he's better on monetary policy. You know, better on the fed. Maybe he would give us better Supreme Court justices.
What I just described to you is straight off the David Duke website. That is his platform. Those things are his platform. So if we had a binary choice between David Duke -- who would be better than taxes than Hillary Clinton -- he would be better on localized education than Hillary Clinton. Are we to cross the line and vote for David Duke because, "Well, he's better on X, Y, and Z?" And to me, that's why it's not a binary choice.
GLENN: Binary choices as we said, last hour, lead you to a kakistocracy.
GLENN: Say it.
GLENN: You can't, can you? Nobody can.
STU: The point is --
GLENN: But it is a government run by the worst people of society. Because everybody keeps saying, "Well, it's the lesser of two evils." And eventually you get down to Pol Pot or Mao.
GLENN: I mean, eventually you get there.
Now, we're not anywhere close to that.
STU: Right. And obviously --
GLENN: But you are on that road.
STU: Obviously, Donald Trump is not as bad as David Duke.
STU: But the point is, there has to be a line of principle. And obviously Cruz is saying here that Trump doesn't violate that line. Because I think every mainstream Trump supporter would say, "I'm not going to vote for David Duke in that scenario."
STU: However, every argument they make about Donald Trump could be applied to David Duke.
STU: You could get anyone that isn't Hillary Clinton, you could apply these arguments to.
GLENN: See, this is the problem: The problem is we have divided ourselves in teams, and it doesn't matter if your team is inflating the ball or not. If the other side is inflating the ball, you cry bloody murder. If your side is inflating the ball, it doesn't matter. That's the problem. We're all wearing jerseys, it doesn't matter what is happening anymore. I'm for my team.
This is -- this is exactly what our Founders warned us about. George Washington was clear. Thomas Jefferson was clear. Adams was clear. They were all clear!
This is the end of the republic if you just play teams. And that's the problem. We're playing teams.
Look, I want you to listen very carefully to me because this is going to sound pretty outrageous: I am not here to fight for the -- for the saving of America. I am not here to fight for the saving of this land. I am not here to save the -- the -- the -- the -- the system that we have built. I am here and you are here -- we all are here for this time to save the idea of America.
America is no more than that: an idea, that all men are created equal and endowed by their Creator with certain inalienable rights. And among them life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That you have charge over your own life and you only answer to God, and God gives you those rights, and you give some of those rights to the government for protection. And the minute that that government begins to infringe on any of those rights, it is not just your -- not just your willingness, it is your duty to overthrow anyone who would take those rights away.
Those rights are what have us say, "I can do this. I can build a better mousetrap. I could be president. I could build a rocket and go to Mars. I can be left alone. I can participate. I can not participate." It's an idea that had never, ever happened before.
And right now, what we are arguing about is the -- is the destruction of our banking system. The destruction of our two-party system. The destruction of our capital. The destruction of law and order, whatever the hell that even means anymore. The destruction of our culture. The destruction of our churches, whatever the hell that means anymore.
I don't care if my children are more rich or less rich than me. I don't care. I don't care.
What I do care is that my children are free to be able to chart their own course, free to be able to work or not work and starve. My children have a right to worship in the way they see fit and to move as their conscience tells them to move.
Right now, we have become PETA. Shame on all of us. Why not -- just if you won't vote for Hillary our you won't vote for Trump, why not just cover me in a bucket of blood? Why not just shame me in the public square? Why not run them out of business? They're climate deniers!
There is no difference between the two teams anymore. Oh, sure, one's for a little lower taxes. One is the for border, one is not. One is for international rule, one is for national rule.
Which one is for the idea that all men are created equal, that all men have a right to pursue their own happiness and make their own goddamn decision? Which one? Which one?
I contend neither of them. And so we will just soak each other in buckets of blood. We'll be a happy little bumper sticker community that shames one another into making sure you walk in goose-step with all the other Hillary supporters or walk in goose-step with all the other Trump supporters. Because she's going to mean the destruction of America. No, no, says the Hillary supporter, you must vote for us because he means the destruction of America.
I contend they both mean the destruction of the idea.
GLENN: So I apologize for my outburst in language. I don't apologize for the thoughts behind it. But sometimes, when you're doing four hours a day live, that's what happens. Welcome to the program. Welcome to real life.
When we come back, next hour, the debates.
STU: Oh, good.