Taxpayer-Funded Abortions for Illegal Immigrants? Here Are Some of Oregon’s 750 New Laws

Oregon lawmakers passed hundreds of new bills this year, many of which will go into effect on Jan. 1.

While sitting in for Glenn on today’s show, Doc and Kal talked about some of the new state laws for 2018. They couldn’t figure out why Oregon needed 750 new laws; how do you even think of that many things to tell people not to do?

Here are some of the new laws set to be effective in Oregon on New Year’s Day:

  • The gas tax will rise 4 cents to 34 cents.
  • The age limit to buy tobacco will increase to 21.
  • Oregon judges will be able to issue “extreme risk protection orders” taking away firearms from people deemed an immediate threat to themselves or family members.
  • Speed limits will be lowered from 25 mph to 20 mph for residential streets in Portland.
  • Women who are in the country illegally will be able to get an abortion paid for by taxpayers.
  • Riding public transportation without paying a fare will be downgraded from a Class A to a Class C misdemeanor (although penalties increase for anyone who evades fare three times or more).

Has Oregon passed up California as the most liberal state in the union? Let us know your thoughts in the comment section below.

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

DOC: All right. We're sharing some of the crazy new laws going into effect as of January 1st. And by crazy, that might be redundant. Crazy new laws. It's just new laws, because most of them are going to be crazy. If you've been around for hundreds of years and you still need this many laws, yeah, this is more about you than actually creating a society where we can all live and just go about our business and try to excel.

Also in Oregon, family members or law enforcement will be able, as of Monday to go to a judge and ask them to remove the firearm from somebody who is deemed a danger to themselves or others.

Who is able to deem them a danger? I don't know.

KAL: You said family members?

DOC: Yeah, family members or law enforcement can go to the judge. But I don't know if it's the family member, if it's their standard: He didn't eat his broccoli today. He's a danger. I don't know if it's -- or it has to have some sort -- do you have to go talk to a professional. And even that professional, what type of professional? Who decides?

KAL: And do they investigate? And what are the standards?

DOC: I guess it's like getting a subpoena from a judge. Can be like, yeah, sure.

KAL: Can't you do that already? If I go to the police and I say, hey, my uncle Bob is a bit of a kook, and he's -- we think he's a danger to himself. Plus, he's got guns. I'd like you to check it out. You can do that already.

DOC: They can't remove the gun. It's more of, they can put him in an asylum for a certain amount of time.

KAL: Or at least put him on the radar.

DOC: Right. Or put him on the radar. And there are standards of how long he can be in and this stuff. But this specifically targets the firearm. And the judge then can say, you can't possess a firearm for a year. Now, here's the thing, they say you can't. Of course, you can still just get one. Remember, Adam Lanza, who shot up the kids at Newton, Sandy Hook. Guess what, he didn't own the gun. He stole his moms. This happens quite often. So this will do no good for what they hope it will do.

Also in Oregon, they're expanding free reproductive health treatments for women, including abortions.

KAL: Ah.

DOC: Even for women who are in the country illegally.

Now, they don't do so much for men's reproductive health. Not a lot of free stuff for men. But a whole lot for the ladies.

KAL: And illegal.

DOC: And illegals, right.

KAL: Because they obviously should get everything.

DOC: If you're an illegal woman, wow, Oregon is a place to be.

KAL: Really?

DOC: Wouldn't that just be a beacon for you?

Some interesting new laws in Indiana. Starting Monday, using a drone to interfere with law enforcement, harass someone, or peep inside of a home is now a class A misdemeanor on Monday. It's punishable up to a year in jail and a 5,000-dollar fine.

This is one of the few areas where I make exceptions and say, we need some new laws and some adjustments or tweaks to old laws. Technology. Budgets change every year, so you need to get together for the budget as a legislature. But new technologies, well, we never foresaw drones. Now these things are becoming a problem. So how do we fit those into current law?

KAL: Yeah, so technology that's advancing and changing, it definitely needs something.

DOC: As of Monday in Indiana, anyone who uses force to rescue a pet from a locked vehicle, is immune from criminal penalties. For example, if you go up to the car and it's really hot and you see the dog suffering and you break the window, no criminal charges for breaking the car window of the car you don't own, provided you have called the cops and you remain at the scene while the cops are getting there. So you call the cops. Go, come quick.

Fido is in the back of the car, and it's really hot. And they go, we're on our way. And you stand there. You break the glass. You cannot be criminally charged. However, you are still liable for half cost of any damage of the vehicle.

KAL: I'm okay with that one.

DOC: Just half of it? Okay.

KAL: If you're someone who is -- I guess it comes down to what is suffering or not. If somebody leaves their pet in the vehicle that could die or be harmed.

DOC: What about these stories where somebody says, I thought it was suffering pet, and it was a stuffed animal. I thought it was a baby, and it was a doll.

KAL: Oh, yeah.

DOC: So now they're only responsible for half the window? And it's my car. Do I have to pay the other half, my insurance? Sorry. It should include, if you get it wrong, you pay the whole damn thing, plus my time and effort to go down there and get it fixed. I don't even want to have to make the call. And I don't want to be without a car, none of that stuff. But they didn't include that.

KAL: That's for next year.

DOC: That's it. Well, we need to leave something for next year.

KAL: 751.

DOC: Protection orders in Indiana on Monday can be issued by a judge. And they can now include an explicit prohibition against harming a family pet. These are protection owners for, like, domestic disputes. Taking custody of a pet away from the abuser with police assistance. And this is a new trend. New laws to protect pets.

In fact, one of the ones that they're continuing to push. And you're going to see this have a big spread in the next year or so. They're going to push this idea of domestic abuse against pets.

So, you know, you go home.

KAL: Isn't there any animal rights protection abuse?

DOC: There are animal laws in some areas and they vary. But what they'll do is put this under the umbrella of domestic.

See, domestic disputes are different. Cops can press charges, even if a spouse says they don't want to in many areas.

So if you punch me and the cop goes, all right, Doc, you punched her. I can say, I don't. It's Kal. He was just drunked up. I get it. No harm. No foul. I'm good. And they don't have to press charges.

If a spouse does that, the officers have the right to press charges. Because so often, people were afraid and they said, no, no, no. We're going to go ahead and push this thing through.

They want that to include pets too. Because they want people to conflate human lives with pets. You may love your pets, but they're different. So this is going to expand in the future where you see domestic disputes can include, well, he slapped the dog or whatever. And you're going to be locked up for that stuff.

On the Basis of Sex. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that you probably didn't expect those five words to come out of me this morning. No, that's not my version of a clickbait headline to get you to pay attention — although that probably just happened — but this is the title to the new movie based on the life of Supreme Court Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

RELATED: Here's the Problem With the New Ruth Bader Ginsburg Documentary

Progressives and liberals have been hovering over YouTube like a pack of rabid wolves, anxiously awaiting the first trailer to drop. And — three days — they got their wish. Something in the last few seconds caught my ear. Watch:

Now my first thought after hearing that went something like this: The word "freedom" is literally the fifth frigging word in the first sentence of the First Amendment. It shows up for the second time just two sentences later. How do you screw that up? I always assumed that liberal Hollywood movie makers had never really read the Constitution, but this is just sad.

But my second thought was that maybe they don't consider the Bill of Rights actually part of the Constitution. However, according to the National Constitution Center, the Bill of Rights officially became part of the Constitution — not a separate document — when it was ratified in 1791. This is rather easy to fact check, so there's really no excuse here.

But then I had another thought. Either liberal Hollywood forgot that the Constitution changed in 1791, or they actually prefer the vaguer pre-1791 version of the Constitution where God-given rights can be excluded if the state so pleases. Think about it. The Bill of Rights is the single greatest roadblock to the radical Left's "progress." Do you hate the fact that private gun ownership encourages self reliance and personal freedom? Do you also hate the fact that dissenting views, opinions and speech can't be silenced and crushed? Then the Bill of Rights is a clear and present danger to your agenda. It's enemy number one.

The new Left that is radically moving toward the extreme absolutely abhors the year 1791.

You see, the new Left that is radically moving further toward the extreme absolutely abhors the year 1791. They wish it never happened. The Bill of Rights is a constant reminder that some FREEDOMS can't be given by the government, they're granted by GOD. And that thought — you being aware of that — scares the hell out of them.

Now, it's possible I thought too much into this. It's also possible the screen writer made a simple mistake and thought Ruth Bader Ginsburg was actually born before 1791, figuring it would be a nice tip of the hat to her longevity. I can actually see how you could make that mistake. But it's also possible that this is a sign of the times we live in.

The Bill of Rights is under attack, maybe more now than ever. It's never been more important to let the Constitution of 1791 be our guide, true north and lighthouse.

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

How did this slip by?

The Left has been foaming at the mouth waiting for this movie to drop and when the trailer finally hit the interwebs, it ended with an embarrassing factual error about the Constitution.

What will happen when the Titan kneels?

Spencer Platt/Getty Images

You can tell that the NFL season is approaching because you can hear the whining from highly-paid athletes as they prepare their kneepads for some kneeling.

In May, the NFL instated a policy that penalizes players who take a knee during the national anthem.

RELATED: VIRTUE SIGNALLING: It's time for the NFL to dump the politics

"A club will be fined by the League if its personnel are on the field and do not stand and show respect for the flag and the Anthem," the statement said. "The Commissioner will impose appropriate discipline on league personnel who do not stand and show respect for the flag and the Anthem."

Tennessee Titan's defensive end Jurrell Casey has decided that he will continue his whining and kneeling.

"I'm going to take my fine," Casey said in an interview. "It is what it is, I ain't going to let them stop me from doing what I want to do. If they want to have these battles between players and organizations, this is the way it's going to be."

Maybe Casey can find work elsewhere. I hear that Universities love to hire self-righteous ranting lunatics.

He added that "At the end of the day, we got to do a job, but I will continue to use my platform to keep on speaking up."

Yes, he does have a job to do. And that job is playing football. His bosses have made it clear that political activism is not part of the job. Who knows, maybe Casey can find work elsewhere. I hear that Universities love to hire self-righteous ranting lunatics. There's also Starbucks. They need a self-righteous CEO.

All anyone can talk about right now is Russia and collusion, and for good reason. Special Counsel Robert Mueller just indicted 12 Russian intelligence officers for cyber attacks and the hacking of cyber-systems in energy, nuclear, water, and manufacturing sectors which you can read about here.

RELATED: There are three tribes when it comes to Trump and Russia: Which tribe do you belong to?

The Trump-Russia scandal, in a word, is maniacal. There are many moving parts that are very hard to solve — or simply don't want to be solved. All of these are "mysteries wrapped in an enigma," asserted Glenn on Wednesday's episode of "The Glenn Beck Radio Program."



From the curious case of Imran Awan to the hacking of DNC servers to "Russian" meddling in elections via social media, all of these deserve scrutiny.

On today's episode, Glenn examined seven scandals that make up the Russia connection:

  1. Russian operatives who used social media to divide Americans during the 2016 election.
  2. The meeting at Trump Tower between Donald Trump Jr., Jared Kushner, Paul Manafort, and Russian lawyer Natalia Veselnitskaya.
  3. The Fusion GPS Dossier funded by the Clinton campaign and the Democratic National Committee.
  4. Voter fraud in Illinois.
  5. Hillary Clinton's emails.
  6. Imran Awan. Awan was an IT staffer for Democrats in the U.S. House of Representatives who was part of a federal investigation and was arrested on bank fraud charges.
  7. Lastly, the 2016 DNC email leaks.

For the entire explanation, tune into the podcast below:


This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

When it comes to Donald Trump, Glenn Beck argues that there are three tribes that categorize the way people examine him regarding his foreign and domestic policy.

Tribe one is the #Resistance. They are the ones who believe that everything President Trump does is bad. They're also the ones who call for impeachment and who label President Trump a "treasonous traitor" even before a summit with a foreign leader takes place.

RELATED: Russia hacking Hillary's emails is no laughing matter

Those, according to Glenn's analysis, include groups like Think Progress, who published an article suggesting that women's rights would be rolled back if the President's SCOTUS nominee is confirmed by the Senate. This tribe also includes progressive talking heads and far Left publications and politicians like The New York Times and Hillary Clinton.

Tribe two are those who defend the President and his actions at all costs. He can do no wrong. These are the people who deny the President's mistakes. They believe the President is a master chess player and everyone else is a pawn in Trump's game.

Both who operate in tribes one and two maintain a "win at all costs" mentality. They don't care what happens as long as their side wins. Glenn calls this a "cult of personality madness."

Tribe three are those who are "free thinkers." These people question the President with boldness and aim for intellectual honesty when evaluating the President's policies and behavior.

Glenn believes tribe one and tribe two are smaller than tribe three.

So, what do all these tribes have to do with Trump and the Russians? Find out in the clip below.

Where do you fall when it comes to Trump and Russia?

When it comes to Donald Trump, Glenn argues that there are three tribes that categorize the way people examine him regarding his foreign and domestic policy.


This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.