Who Is the Most Honorable Family in Politics Today?

With both George and Barbara Bush being hospitalized just days before the presidential inauguration --- and in light of the respectful letter Mr. Bush sent President-elect Trump about missing the festivities --- Glenn and his co-hosts paused to reflect on the Bush family.

"Say what you want about the Bush policy, but they respect the office of the presidency," Co-host Pat Gray said.

Glenn concurred, noting the reverence Bush 41, Bush 43 and Jeb have for the United States and the presidency.

"I truly believe that the Bush family is one of, I would say probably the, most honorable family in politics today," Glenn added.

Enjoy this complimentary clip from The Glenn Beck Program:

GLENN: Do we have an update on George and Barbara Bush? I know she was hospitalized yesterday, which was really concerning. But he has been -- he was really sick, he had to have an operation yesterday to remove something from his throat, a blockage in his throat. Supposedly doing well. She is just in, as a precaution, because she was coughing a lot.

JEFFY: I'm sure she was just -- I mean, that happens a lot. Husband and wife come in like that. And she's really concerned and starting to freak out.

GLENN: Yeah, they're the kind of couple too though that I think love each other so much and have been together for so long, that they're the kind of couple that dies together, you know what I mean?

I said that to Tania. She said -- because I hadn't heard that Barbara Bush was in the hospital. She had just gotten a text alert. And I said, "No, it's George H.W. Bush."

And she said, "No, Barbara has just been put in too." And we were talking about it. And I said, "That's the kind of couple that they die together." They're just this sweet pair that go together.

And she said, "I don't know. I think maybe they'd do anything to not have to comment on why they're not going to go to the Trump inauguration."

What do you think is the giant scam?

STU: I don't know. His letters seem to kind of --

GLENN: I didn't read the letter. I didn't read the letter.

STU: I mean, he said like, "My doctors tell me if I go outside in January, I might wind up 6 feet under."

GLENN: Yeah.

STU: It's interesting that really until the election, the Bushes really did not show any love at all to Donald Trump.

PAT: Yeah.

STU: Since then, they have really respected the process and they support him.

GLENN: They have to. That's what we're supposed to do. We're supposed to do that. You can disagree with the policies --

PAT: Say what you want about the Bush policy, but they respect the office of the presidency. I think -- I think H.W. did. George W. Bush. As much as I'm not a fan, he did and does.

GLENN: I have -- and Jeb.

PAT: Jeb.

GLENN: I truly believe that the -- the Bush family is one of I would say probably the most honorable family in politics today. Do you think of a -- do you think of a family -- I mean, there's very few.

STU: Yeah, they definitely respect the office. And I think they do those things well. I mean, you would expect it. It's the only family that I can think of off the top of my head that's had two president --

GLENN: Kennedys.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: Well, not two presidents.

PAT: Name another guy too, name another man who would have put up with the bashing he's received over the last years, where everything has been blamed on him. It was absurd the things they blamed on him. They said nothing about him. He never said anything. You never heard George W. Bush, "No, I didn't do that. That's not my fault. That's Obama." You never heard any of that come out of him. He just took it. He just took it.

STU: Cheney was a little bit more outspoken.

PAT: And you would expect that from Cheney.

GLENN: Yeah. George Bush said to me right at the end of his time in the Oval, he said, "I am prepared -- I did what I felt was right. And I am prepared to be the most hated man in the next 50 years. Let history, once everybody involved in this is gone, let history judge."

PAT: Hmm.

GLENN: "I'm prepared."

Reform Conservatism and Reaganomics: A middle road?

SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images

Senator Marco Rubio broke Republican ranks recently when he criticized the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act by stating that “there's no evidence whatsoever that the money's been massively poured back into the American worker." Rubio is wrong on this point, as millions of workers have received major raises, while the corporate tax cuts have led to a spike in capital expenditure (investment on new projects) of 39 percent. However, the Florida senator is revisiting an idea that was front and center in the conservative movement before Donald Trump rode down an escalator in June of 2015: reform conservatism.

RELATED: The problem with asking what has conservatism conserved

The "reformicons," like Rubio, supported moving away from conservative or supply-side orthodoxy and toward policies such as the expansion of the child and earned income tax credits. On the other hand, longstanding conservative economic theory indicates that corporate tax cuts, by lowering disincentives on investment, will lead to long-run economic growth that will end up being much more beneficial to the middle class than tax credits.

But asking people to choose between free market economic orthodoxy and policies guided towards addressing inequality and the concerns of the middle class is a false dichotomy.

Instead of advocating policies that many conservatives might dismiss as redistributionist, reformicons should look at the ways government action hinders economic opportunity and exacerbates income inequality. Changing policies that worsen inequality satisfies limited government conservatives' desire for free markets and reformicons' quest for a more egalitarian America. Furthermore, pushing for market policies that reduce the unequal distribution of wealth would help attract left-leaning people and millennials to small government principles.

Criminal justice reform is an area that reformicons and free marketers should come together around. The drug war has been a disaster, and the burden of this misguided government approach have fallen on impoverished minority communities disproportionately, in the form of mass incarceration and lower social mobility. Not only has the drug war been terrible for these communities, it's proved costly to the taxpayer––well over a trillion dollars has gone into the drug war since its inception, and $80 billion dollars a year goes into mass incarceration.

Prioritizing retraining and rehabilitation instead of overcriminalization would help address inequality, fitting reformicons' goals, and promote a better-trained workforce and lower government spending, appealing to basic conservative preferences.

Government regulations tend to disproportionately hurt small businesses and new or would-be entrepreneurs. In no area is this more egregious than occupational licensing––the practice of requiring a government-issued license to perform a job. The percentage of jobs that require licenses has risen from five percent to 30 percent since 1950. Ostensibly justified by public health concerns, occupational licensing laws have, broadly, been shown to neither promote public health nor improve the quality of service. Instead, they serve to provide a 15 percent wage boost to licensed barbers and florists, while, thanks to the hundreds of hours and expensive fees required to attain the licenses, suppressing low-income entrepreneurship, and costing the economy $200 billion dollars annually.

Those economic losses tend to primarily hurt low-income people who both can't start businesses and have to pay more for essential services. Rolling back occupational licenses will satisfy the business wing's desire for deregulation and a more free market and the reformicons' support for addressing income inequality and increasing opportunity.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality.

Tax expenditures form another opportunity for common ground between the Rubio types and the mainstream. Tax deductions and exclusions, both on the individual and corporate sides of the tax code, remain in place after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act. Itemized deductions on the individual side disproportionately benefit the wealthy, while corporate tax expenditures help well-connected corporations and sectors, such as the fossil fuel industry.

The favoritism at play in the complex tax code perpetuates inequality. Additionally, a more complicated tax code is less conducive to economic growth than one with lower tax rates and fewer exemptions. Therefore, a simpler tax code with fewer deductions and exclusions would not only create a more level playing field, as the reformicons desire, but also additional economic growth.

A forward-thinking economic program for the Republican Party should marry the best ideas put forward by both supply-siders and reform conservatives. It's possible to take the issues of income inequality and lack of social mobility seriously, while also keeping mainstay conservative economic ideas about the importance of less cumbersome regulations and lower taxes.

Alex Muresianu is a Young Voices Advocate studying economics at Tufts University. He is a contributor for Lone Conservative, and his writing has appeared in Townhall and The Daily Caller. He can be found on Twitter @ahardtospell.

Is this what inclusivity and tolerance look like? Fox News host Tomi Lahren was at a weekend brunch with her mom in Minnesota when other patrons started yelling obscenities and harassing her. After a confrontation, someone threw a drink at her, the moment captured on video for social media.

RELATED: Glenn Addresses Tomi Lahren's Pro-Choice Stance on 'The View'

On today's show, Pat and Jeffy talked about this uncomfortable moment and why it shows that supposedly “tolerant" liberals have to resort to physical violence in response to ideas they don't like.

President Donald Trump has done a remarkable job of keeping his campaign promises so far. From pulling the US from the Iran Deal and Paris Climate Accord to moving the US Embassy to Jerusalem, the president has followed through on his campaign trail vows.

RELATED: The media's derangement over Trump has me wearing a new hat and predicting THIS for 2020

“It's quite remarkable. I don't know if anybody remembers, but I was the guy who was saying he's not gonna do any of those things," joked Glenn on “The News and Why it Matters," adding, “He has taken massive steps, massive movement or completed each of those promises … I am blown away."

Watch the video above to hear Glenn Beck, Sara Gonzales, Doc Thompson, Stu Burguiere and Pat Gray discuss the story.

Rapper Kendrick Lamar brings white fan onstage to sing with him, but here’s the catch

Matt Winkelmeyer/Getty Images for American Express

Rapper Kendrick Lamar asked a fan to come onstage and sing with him, only to condemn her when she failed to censor all of the song's frequent mentions of the “n-word" while singing along.

RELATED: You'll Never Guess Who Wrote the Racist Message Targeting Black Air Force Cadets

“I am so sorry," she apologized when Lamar pointed out that she needed to “bleep" that word. “I'm used to singing it like you wrote it." She was booed at by the crowd of people, many screaming “f*** you" after her mistake.

On Tuesday's show, Pat and Jeffy watched the clip and talked about some of the Twitter reactions.

“This is ridiculous," Pat said. “The situation with this word has become so ludicrous."