This Student Just Dropped the Mic in Debate With His Teacher Over Definition of Terrorism

The left took over the education system long ago, but the arrogance of some teachers still has a way of causing your jaw to drop to the floor. The latest offender is a 12th grade English teacher who got into a verbal sparring match with one of her students over the definition of terrorism.

In a video that is now going viral, the student uses facts to support his arguments and even points to the definition of terrorism found in Merriam-Webster's dictionary. But the teacher refuses to concede, going so far as to say she's "smarter" than the dictionary.

"The teacher is incorrect, and what the teacher says about the dictionary towards the end is unbelievable," Glenn said on radio Wednesday.

"If this teacher were teaching my kids --- and I don't care if it was about the definition of something that wasn't being politically charged --- and I had tape, I would right now be saying, you must fire this teacher. Just the sheer arrogance."

Watch the insanity unfold in the video below.

What's your reaction? Share it with us in the comments section.

GLENN: Hey, wait. Wait. I have to get your comments on this: Student versus teacher audio, please. I think this came yesterday.

PAT: Okay.

Oh, I love this. I love this.

GLENN: Did you see -- this is a teacher trying to tell the student that they are -- they are wrong about the definition of terrorism. The teacher is incorrect, and what the teacher says about the dictionary towards the end is -- is unbelievable.

If this teacher were teaching my kids -- and I don't care if it was about the definition of something that wasn't being politically charged, it was just -- and I had tape, I would right now be saying, you must fire this teacher.

PAT: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Just the sheer arrogance. But listen to the insanity.

VOICE: It's not a terrorist attack, when there's no political aim.

VOICE: That's not true.

VOICE: A terrorist -- when you commit violence to further a political goal.

VOICE: You are wrong. You are wrong. Terrorism does not have to have a political agenda.

VOICE: That's literally the definition! That's literally -- when you use violence to further a political aim, that is the definition of terrorism.

VOICE: No, you're wrong.

VOICE: That is the definition of terrorism.

VOICE: You're dealing with a tainted definition.

VOICE: Are you just going to do what the alt-right does? It's everyone else's fault. It's everyone else's fault. It's everyone else's fault. That's what the alt-right does.

VOICE: Terrorism means that you can be a white man who is a terrorist. There is a message --

VOICE: Oh, my gosh. Yes, obviously. No one denies that. No one denies that.

VOICE: You're denying that. Because all of these are operating --

VOICE: Yeah, but they have a political aim. The Vegas shooter had, as far as we know, no political aim.

Terrorism: The unlawful use of violence -- the unlawful use of violence and intimidation, especially against civilians, in the pursuit of political aims.


VOICE: The Vegas shooter, as far as we know, unless something comes out -- what do you mean? You're not smarter than the dictionary.

VOICE: Yes, I am. I'm -- I am. You're dealing with a highly intelligent woman. Yes. Yes.

VOICE: You're smarter than Merriam-Webster -- you're smarter than Merriam-Webster dictionary? You're smarter -- whoa. Whoa.

VOICE: That could mean any way.

GLENN: Okay. That's 12th grade English! This is 12th grade English class. By the way, in case you aren't watching the show, you're just listening to it. That's not a white kid. That's either an Arab kid or Hispanic kid. That's not a white kid.

PAT: Right.

GLENN: What's the deal here?

This is the kind of indoctrination. And once your kids are smart enough to push back, they will win.

PAT: Yeah.

GLENN: We have to be smart enough to make the logical case. Because nobody has ever pushed back against these people. And then they start to have to say these things, I'm smarter than the dictionary.

STU: That's amazing. By the way, if you think that's some right-wing talking point on the definition of terrorism. Obviously he cited the dictionary. But listen to this, this is Chris Cuomo, who is smarter than the dictionary.

STU: Yeah, he's definitely smarter than the dictionary. We know that for a fact. But listen to him the other day talking about terrorism.

VOICE: One of the things that winds up being prickly here is how we define it. People will say, well, when the brown guy did it in New York City, it's terror. But when the white guy does it, it's not. People misunderstand, I think, the legally -- the contextual relationship between the word "terrorism" and "investigations." I've asked you this before, I'm asking you again now: What does it take for something to be terror to investigators?

CHRIS: Pretty straightforward, if he's motivated by a political motivation, that is, he's protesting, for example, US engagement in Iraq or Syria, he's protesting racial issues in the United States, which is political, that goes into terrorism.

If he's simply angry because of something that's happened in his life, maybe similar to what we saw in Las Vegas, that's not terror. That's simple violence, and that's insanity. I'm guessing in this case, we're going to find that he, as the president suggested, had some mental issues. That doesn't necessarily take me to terror.

VOICE: I mean, people I think confuse who does it with why they do it. And you guys are focused on why it's done and how you can make that manifest in terms of agenda.

GLENN: So I hate to break it to the 12th grade teacher, but even most likely your God of Chris Cuomo at CNN would agree with the dictionary, that maybe, perhaps, you're not as smart, as Merriam-Webster.

STU: As smart as Merriam, but not Webster.

PAT: I believe that agreeing with Chris Cuomo is also a sign that the fourth horsemen of the apocalypse is saddling up and getting ready to ride through town.

STU: True.

GLENN: Oh, I'm looking for Wormwood in my telescope tonight. Thanks, Pat.

In light of the national conversation surrounding the rights of free speech, religion and self-defense, Mercury One is thrilled to announce a brand new initiative launching this Father's Day weekend: a three-day museum exhibition in Dallas, Texas focused on the rights and responsibilities of American citizens.

This event seeks to answer three fundamental questions:

  1. As Americans, what responsibility do we shoulder when it comes to defending our rights?
  2. Do we as a nation still agree on the core principles and values laid out by our founding fathers?
  3. How can we move forward amidst uncertainty surrounding the intent of our founding ideals?

Attendees will be able to view historical artifacts and documents that reveal what has made America unique and the most innovative nation on earth. Here's a hint: it all goes back to the core principles and values this nation was founded on as laid out in the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights.

Exhibits will show what the world was like before mankind had rights and how Americans realized there was a better way to govern. Throughout the weekend, Glenn Beck, David Barton, Stu Burguiere, Doc Thompson, Jeffy Fisher and Brad Staggs will lead private tours through the museum, each providing their own unique perspectives on our rights and responsibilities.

Schedule a private tour or purchase general admission ticket below:

June 15-17


Mercury Studios

6301 Riverside Drive, Irving, TX 75039

Learn more about the event here.

About Mercury One: Mercury One is a 501(c)(3) charity founded in 2011 by Glenn Beck. Mercury One was built to inspire the world in the same way the United States space program shaped America's national destiny and the world. The organization seeks to restore the human spirit by helping individuals and communities help themselves through honor, faith, courage, hope and love. In the words of Glenn Beck:

We don't stand between government aid and people in need. We stand with people in need so they no longer need the government

Some of Mercury One's core initiatives include assisting our nation's veterans, providing aid to those in crisis and restoring the lives of Christians and other persecuted religious minorities. When evil prevails, the best way to overcome it is for regular people to do good. Mercury One is committed to helping sustain the good actions of regular people who want to make a difference through humanitarian aid and education initiatives. Mercury One will stand, speak and act when no one else will.

Support Mercury One's mission to restore the human spirit by making an online donation or calling 972-499-4747. Together, we can make a difference.

What happened?

A New York judge ruled Tuesday that a 30-year-old still living in his parents' home must move out, CNN reported.

Failure to launch …

Michael Rotondo, who had been living in a room in his parents' house for eight years, claims that he is owed a six-month notice even though they gave him five notices about moving out and offered to help him find a place and to help pay for repairs on his car.

RELATED: It's sad 'free-range parenting' has to be legislated, it used to be common sense

“I think the notice is sufficient," New York State Supreme Court Judge Donald Greenwood said.

What did the son say?

Rotondo “has never been expected to contribute to household expenses, or assisted with chores and the maintenance of the premises, and claims that this is simply a component of his living agreement," he claimed in court filings.

He told reporters that he plans to appeal the “ridiculous" ruling.

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.