Three Things You Need to Know - January 22, 2018

Women's March vs. March for Life

The C word. The F word. The P word. The S word. The D word.

The FCC would surely fine me if I actually told you what was brandished on signs at Women’s Marches across the country this weekend, but you get the picture.

It was an alphabet soup of vulgarity.

The disgusting display at Women’s Marches across the country was appalling for so many reasons.

The worst was how many moms exposed their children to such hatred.

Kids have no idea what this march is about. And I don’t think their parents do either.

Just for a second, think about what you are you teaching your daughters.

What was the message at the Women’s March? Something between “We hate Trump and stay away from our genitalia” I think.

That’s not a productive mission statement.

You need to be for something, not against something.

If those who attended the Women’s March really cared about women’s rights, they would have attended the other rally that happened this weekend: The March for Life.

Their message was much more clear and noble. Let more women be born.

The March for Lifers are literally trying to save the lives of millions of women.

The Women’s Marchers are complaining about Donald Trump.

You tell me which message is more heroic.

The shutdown continues

I’m sure most of you are listening to this right now from inside the safety and security of your Government Shutdown bomb shelters. For those of you that did manage to venture out into the horror, I salute your bravery.

The shutdown is now entering its third day. The Senate has a procedural vote at noon today that could fund the government temporarily until February 8th, but I wouldn’t hold out much hope. Don’t crack the lid on those bomb shelters just yet. The rumor is the relationship between the White House and Chuck Schumer is at an all-time low. Trump met with Schumer on Friday. Trump wanted the wall, and Schumer wanted Amnesty. You can imagine how well that conversation went.

This entire thing is just so silly. The government will eventually get funded, but until that happens we’re going to be forced to watch grown men and women act like children, arguing for things they know they probably don’t have any chance of actually getting. Will the wall get funded?

Anything is possible, but I have my doubts. Will DACA become law? Let’s not forget that Obama had to write an executive order, specifically because he knew both parties wouldn’t be able to successfully vote on it.

One side WILL eventually blink, but - the question is - how long is this going to take? If this stretches through the week, we’re going to get dangerously close to this affecting our men and women in uniform. MIlitary families can’t miss a paycheck. We already pay them next to nothing for what they do. Now, the soldiers risking their lives in combat zones will also have to worry about paying their bills back home.

Both sides are to blame here. Both sides are using military families as a pawn to argue for the highly improbable. You’d think military families would be off limits in this power play between overgrown children, but they’re more than willing to play that card. One Democrat actually tried. Here’s Senator Claire McCaskill on the Senate floor, pleading for an amendment to keep paychecks going to the military:

You’d think Republicans would jump at this and take it. Here’s Mitch McConnell’s response:

The turtle has spoken. Both sides are to blame here, and neither one seems to really care about the military. End this stupidity. Get back to doing whatever it is you guys do. You know, having super cool lunches at the Capital Grille, or whatever. Your arrogance and stupidity has consequences.

N.H.S. Crisis

Great Britain’s government health care system is falling apart.

That is not a conservative talking point. The New York Times reported on it this week, with the headline “Britain’s National Health Service in Crisis.”

The head of Britain’s N.H.S. warned that the system is overwhelmed. Last year he requested four billion pounds in additional funding. He only got 1.6 billion. Also last year, 10,000 nurses quit.

The crazy thing about this New York Times report is that all the things conservatives criticize about socialized medicine, all the reasons we say it’s a bad idea and unsustainable, are actually happening. And the New York Times actually wrote about it!

It’s the kind of worst-case scenario stuff that the Left makes fun of the Right for talking about. For example:

Hospital hallways jammed with beds of frail and elderly patients waiting to be admitted.

Outpatient appointments canceled because there aren’t enough doctors to meet demand.

Patients waiting over 12 hours in emergency rooms before receiving care.

Undergraduate medical students being asked to volunteer to help ease the crush of patients.

Two weeks ago, hospitals were ordered to postpone all nonurgent surgeries until the end of the month. Many British hospitals also declared “black alerts,” meaning they cannot meet patient demand. On Twitter, British doctors described their overcrowded hospitals as “third world conditions” forcing them to practice “battlefield medicine.”

The N.H.S. director warned that the patient waiting list will grow to five million people by 2021, the highest number ever.

If this stuff wasn’t in the New York Times, no one on the Left would believe it coming from me.

A British construction worker learned from the news about the latest round of thousands of postponed surgeries. He said, “If I receive a notification, it will be the third time my operation is postponed. This is a disgrace. We injure ourselves while working to pay our taxes, and the government just leaves us to suffer.”

Are you listening, America? Still interested in that Bernie Sanders government healthcare plan?

MORE 3 THINGS

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."