RADIO

Ben Shapiro: Society is rejecting objective truth as a ‘white, patriarchal norm’

Can a society that rejects science, reason and rationality survive?

Ben Shapiro joined Glenn on today’s show to talk about postmodernism and the dangers of a world where everything is subjective.

When people decided to make their own values, they didn’t realize that science and reason would be thrown out as objective truths as well. In today’s progressive age, even science is seen as a “white heterosexual, patriarchal” view of the universe.

But in the real world, subjectivity doesn’t make for good science or a solid business plan. Shapiro pointed out that a company like Google, which fired engineer James Damore over a memo on men and women in the workplace, may purport to believe in these progressive ideas … but if Google actually lived by them, “it would be out of business in 5 minutes.”

This article provided courtesy of TheBlaze.

GLENN: Joined by Ben Shapiro, who is the editor-in-chief of -- of The Daily Wire. Also, the most-listened to conservative podcast in the world.

Welcome, Ben Shapiro.

BEN: Hey. Good to see you.

GLENN: How are you? So what books would you like to ban today?

BEN: Wow. I mean, after that list, I don't know what's left.

GLENN: Yeah, I know.

BEN: I mean, I got to go with the children's books since I'm separating those in the middle of the night.

GLENN: You go to these college campuses all the time. And you speak. When I went to college -- I spent more time in the parking lot than in the actual classroom. But you were taught how to think. How to find answers.

I mean, I was -- the professor that I learned so much from, I had no idea where he stood on any issue. Because he would argue so hard on one side. And then flip it around and argue on the other side. And you believed both of them.

BEN: Uh-huh.

GLENN: Nobody is doing that anymore. In fact, that's frowned upon.

BEN: Yeah, that's usually reserved for law school. Really. Like, when you go to law school, that's what they say. They're going to teach you how to think like a lawyer. But when you're in undergrad, they don't bother with that anymore. They're teaching you how to think, but it's how they want you to think. So they're teaching you what to think, more than how to think.

GLENN: So what are you seeing when you go to college campuses?

BEN: I think there's a lot of pent-up energy. I think there's a lot of pent-up anger. Because I think people there are largely bored. I think there's a reason that if you show up on a Wednesday night to hear me talk, in the middle of the week, you know, in the middle of the brutal cold and a thousand people show up -- and I don't think it's because I'm that great a speaker. I mean, I'm fine. But I think it has more to do with the fact that there is some hole that's being left intellectually on these campuses.

And anyone who even attempts to fill that hole on campuses is being treated with a certain amount and reverence, simply because the colleges have left the field wide open. You don't even have to be that good at this stuff, in order to be seen as somebody who has something valuable to say, I think.

GLENN: You're pretty good at this stuff.

BEN: You're allowed to say it. I'm not.

GLENN: Yeah. You're pretty good at this stuff. You and Jordan Peterson are probably the best thinkers, I think on the right, right now.

BEN: Well, thanks. That's high compliment because Jordan is fantastic.

GLENN: Yeah. Jordan is amazing.

And he's having the same kind of success that you are, where he's -- and he's a guy who wasn't looking for it.

BEN: Right. Right. That's one of the things -- it's really fascinating. There's a whole group of people who have really come to prominence in the last three or four years. They're really disparate politically. You're talking about people like Jordan Peterson or Sam Harris or Brett Weinstein. Or me. And all these people disagree with each other on a huge variety of matters. But there's two things they seem to have in common: One is that they actually purport to care about data. And they won't just dismiss data, if it disagrees with their position. And the other is that they seem to be willing to say no to things.

And there's something that I have started terming the Bartleby effect. Which is, there's this short story by Herman Melville called the Bartleby, the Scrivener.

GLENN: I'm not sure if that's on the list -- the approved list from GQ.

BEN: Yeah, I'm not sure either. But the short story is about this guy who is -- he's a scribe at a Wall Street law firm. And one day his bosses come in and they ask him to do something. He says, I prefer not to. And they don't know what to do with him because he's not actively saying no, but he's not saying yes. He just says, I prefer not to.

They leave him alone. Eventually, after saying, I'd prefer not to, to everything, he ends up dying basically alone and in prison.

But the purpose of the story is to say that society cannot tolerate people who refuse to kind of go along to get along. Well, that's true. But if you look at all the people who have risen to prominence, people like Jordan, Jordan rose to prominence not based on his latest book -- which is actually a pretty late development.

He rose to prominence because in Canada, there's Bill C-16, which essentially mandated that you use transgender pronouns.

And Jordan, a couple of years ago, said, I'm not doing that. That doesn't accord with the realities of psychological development. So I'm just not going to do that.

And people lost their minds. And suddenly, he was this major figure in Canada just for saying no. Sam Harris has become a major figure because he was on Bill Maher's show, and he said, Islam might be more dangerous religion as a general matter than Christianity.

Because the facts bear out that there are more violent Muslims worldwide than violent Christians. And he was run out on the rail by the left. Suddenly, he had this new following, that people were saying, listen, this guy's willing to undergo a certain amount of pressure, in order to say what he wants to say.

For Brett Weinstein, it was the same thing. So saying no, I think gives a lot of college students a feeling. Like, if you're willing to say no and take a risk to say no, then you must have some sort of rooted, eternal values to which you are subject. And this means that you have some sort of gloss on life that is more than what my professors are saying is possible out there.

STU: But it's not just saying no. It's saying no because of logic and reason.

GLENN: Right.

STU: You know, that's why everybody is famous now, of saying no.

No. I'm not male or female.

GLENN: Right.

STU: That's not the same. And it's -- and we are -- have disconnected from all logic, all reason, all science.

BEN: Yes.

GLENN: And just -- and because everybody is just saying, no, well, I don't have to take that. I have different facts.

BEN: It's a really fascinating development to watch, as all these people on the left, who proclaim that they were so pro-science are throwing people out of the ranks.

Like, I don't know if you saw this conversation between Sam Harris and Ezra Klein. Sam Harris is on the left. I mean, Sam is a real Democrat. And Ezra Klein went on his show and called Sam Harris a racist because Sam Harris looked at actual data about IQ differentiation among groups.

He actually read Charles Murray's book and had Charles Murray on his program. And said, listen, Charles Murray is not attributing all of this to biology, but there's some pretty clear evidence that there's at least a biological component to IQ. And Ezra Klein went on Sam Harris' show, and without any data at all, called him a racist. That's because there's this newfangled philosophy that says that all reality is subjective. All reality is what you feel about the reality.

And so science is not subjective. Science is what science is. And that means scientists are surprised when they find themselves out on their ear for the first time.

GLENN: Well, I don't think people really took postmodernism really seriously.

BEN: Yep.

GLENN: And that's what -- we are living in the post-modern world. And if you don't know what postmodernism is -- modern -- the modern lifestyle is the age of reason. Enlightenment. The idea that we take science and facts and we look at all of it. That was modern thinking. We've now thrown that away. We're postmodernism. And instead of now being ruled by a church, we're ruled by some other religious doctrine. I just don't know what it is.

BEN: Yes.

GLENN: But it is a religious -- it's dogma.

BEN: So I'm writing a book about this right now. And I think what's happened here is the culmination of essentially a 300-year process, where what originally happened was, there was -- postmodernism is the rejection of values on behalf the subjective.

So where it makes a certain amount of sense, where people logically resonate to postmodernism is they say postmodernism applies when it comes to morality. That your morality is not objective. Right? We all have our own morality. That life is a series of power political struggles. And what you say as morality, you're only saying that, because it benefits you to say that that's morality. And so a lot of people buy into that.

Well, that though was an outgrowth of the rejection of postmodern -- postmodern value rejection was an outgrowth of the rejection of religion. The idea was, if there's no objective religion out there, then what defines values in here?

And so people said, okay. Fine. Well, we can deal with the postmodern values struggle. Because we'll make our own values. We'll make our own value systems. But they forgot that science is a value. Reason is a value. Rationality is a value.

And so a lot of the folks who were very reasonable and very interested in reason, enlightenment thinkers, were some of the biggest people promoting postmodern values. And then they were surprised when -- when the Frankenstein monster turned on its master. All of a sudden, all these people who are promoting postmodern values said, well, science is a value too. So why exactly should we take science seriously?

If you're saying that reason and rationality is the highest values, but you're only saying that because you're a reasonable, rational, intelligent person. You're only saying that because of your high IQ. You're only saying that because you benefit from the scientific consensus.

Like, there are papers that are now being written on the postmodern left saying things like, science is a creation of the white male, heterosexual patriarchy.

I mean, there was this fascinating thing. I talked to Jordan about this other day. This Google memo that came out, from -- that was revealed in the James Damore lawsuit against Google, where they put out a paper saying, white values versus non-white values.

And among white values were things like rationality. Things like winning and losing. Things like scientific progress. These things were actually listed as white views of the universe, as opposed to objective views of the universe. What I said about it on my show is that, if Google lived by the values that it purports to hate, it would be out of business in five minutes, obviously, right? Google bases its own business on all of these values that it purports to think are white, heterosexual, patriarchal norms. But that's the value system that has built the West. And we're rejecting that now.

Because we thought that we could separate religion from science. And that that break could be clean. And instead, it turns out, that by rejecting religion, by rejecting the idea that there's an objective truth about morality in the world, we're also going to reject the idea of objective truths generally.

And you see some people struggling to put that back together. I'm struggling to put that back together. I think Jordan is struggling to put that back together. I think there are people like Steven Pinker or like Sam -- Sam Harris, who are trying to keep the religion out of it. And trying to restore the Enlightenment vision of science. But I'm not sure how can you do that.

GLENN: It doesn't work.

BEN: I'm not sure how you can remove the base of the science.

There's this weird idea -- you were saying this earlier. You know, there's this weird idea that history began today.

Well, a lot of Enlightenment advocates think that history began in 1750. That's when history began. There's no history to science. That science started in 1750. That good thought began in 1750. There's a rooted philosophy of the West that goes all the way back to Sinai and that carries forward through the sermon on the mount, and then all the way forward, through Lot.

GLENN: There is no way you can understand the West without understanding the Bible.

You don't have to believe --

BEN: This is right.

GLENN: -- in the angels and the magic tricks and the fire and all of that. You don't have to. But you do have to read it and go, what is this trying to teach, and how did this form what we have?

BEN: Exactly.

GLENN: And everybody is trying to throw that out.

Without that, you've completely taken all the cornerstones out. You've taken the cornerstone and all of the foundation of the house out. You've got nothing left.

BEN: This is right. I think the history of this 19th and 20th centuries are enough to prove this.

I mean, mass chaos and the bloody slaughter of an enormous portion of the globe, on the basis of rationality, should be enough to show you that rationality unmoored to some sort of higher value system is pretty dangerous stuff.

GLENN: Back with Ben Shapiro in a minute.

GLENN: Welcome back to the program. Joining us, Ben Shapiro.

STU: Glenn, I hope Ben is -- he understands what's happening in DC. With a very -- very interested guy in the DC city council. If you remember, his name is, let's see, Trayon White, and he initially talked about the big conspiracy that a lot of people are not discussing about how Jews are controlling the weather.

GLENN: Damn you. Notice Ben lives out here in Los Angeles. And it's beautiful all the time.

STU: It is.

GLENN: Coincidence, I don't think so.

STU: Do we have the initial clip of him driving in his car, watching like three snowflakes falling and blaming it on the Jews --

VOICE: It's just snowing out of nowhere this morning, man.

Y'all better pay attention to this climate control, man. This climate manipulation. And DC keep talking about we're a resilient city. And that's a model based off the Rothschild controlling the climate, to create natural disasters. They can pay for it on the cities. Be careful.

BEN: Wow.

GLENN: So the Rothschild. How deeply connected to the Rothschild, are you?

BEN: We really don't talk about this, except in our Friday night meetings. We really try to keep this under wraps. But I will say, the last time I traveled to Atlanta, I brought a tornado with me. Then that big snowstorm in DC was the next day because I traveled to DC.

GLENN: Holy cow. There it is. He has admitted it. Now, there's an update to this story, I don't know if, you know, Ben.

STU: Yeah, it's pretty exciting. I guess he was doing a tour to -- a little penance for his previous comments. And he went to the Holocaust museum. And, you know, this is going to turn out well obviously.

BEN: Oh, good. This is a sitcom here.

GLENN: He did not find the weather machine.

(laughter)

GLENN: He did not find it there.

STU: He did examine a picture of a girl walking through a crowd, surrounded by German soldiers. And the girl was wearing a sign. The sign said, I am a German girl and allowed myself to be defiled by a Jew.

White, this councilman, then asked the tour guide, are they protecting her?

Meaning, are the Germans, Nazi soldiers protecting this girl? No, the guide said. They're marching her through.

Marching through is protecting, White responded.

Of course, the guide pointed out they thought that maybe they were humiliating her.

Now, White then decided halfway through the tour to just bolt. He just leaves the tour and goes outside and waits outside on the street. Once he leaves, a member of his staff suggests that a picture of the Warsaw ghetto resembles a, quote, gated community. The rabbi doing the tour points out, yeah, I wouldn't call it a gated community, more like a prison.

So it's not going well for this particular gentleman.

GLENN: I want to get Ben's view as one of the most hated Jews in America, perhaps the world. I would like to get his view on this gated community and what I think was probably a condominium complex of Auschwitz. When we -- when we come back.

GLENN: So back with Ben Shapiro, who has been following Kanye West and Shania Twain for some strange reason.

BEN: They're both in the news.

GLENN: Yeah, I know.

BEN: Kanye came out with a bunch of kind of bizarrely conservative tweets. He tweeted his support for Candice Owens, the other day, who is a compatriot of Charlie Kirk over at Turning Point USA and a black woman who is a supporter of Trump. Then he tweeted also something about how self-victimization is a disease. And all these conservatives are like, oh, my God. Kanye is on our side, man. Kanye is here.

GLENN: I don't know if I want Kanye on our side.

BEN: So this is my take.

GLENN: Can we remember who Kanye is.

BEN: It's so amazing that we on the right have this scorn for the people on the left. Because we're like, look at how they worship celebrity. Look at how they worship celebrity. First of all, Donald Trump is the president of the United States now. Also Kanye West is -- the only reason you care about what Kanye West thinks and he's just not muttering to himself on a corner somewhere, is because he's a big celebrity.

And this bizarre notion that somebody whom the cameras have focused in on has been conferred with a greater-than-average wisdom is the stupidest thing I have ever heard.

As someone who grew up in Hollywood and knows a lot of people the cameras have focused in on, let me just say the folks in the music industry, the folks in Hollywood, they don't know anything. There are a few writers who are somewhat smart. You're talking about these musicians. You're talking about the actors.

GLENN: Oh, come on. Ben, I don't believe that at all.

Of course, they're dolts. A lot of them are just dolts. A lot -- I think there are a lot of people in powerful or public positions, that are as dumb as the city councilmen in Washington, DC.

BEN: Oh, yeah. No question.

GLENN: Have no idea. Never read a book. Don't know history. Have no idea what they're talking about.

BEN: Keith Ellison was almost the head of the DNC. And I'm not sure he's wildly smarter than Trayon White. They both give money, apparently, to the same nation of Islam event. So it's one of the greatest disappointments of life, is Adam Corolla, is that when you're a kid, you look around. You look at the adults. You see they all have houses. And they have cars. And they have nice stuff, and they can do what they want at night. And it looks great. And you figure, they must be so smart. I mean, they've got all these nice things. They've got houses and cars.

And then you grow up and you realize, all the same people who are stupid when you're a kid, they're still stupid when you're adults.

And so that means they all have houses and cars too. And that's not the same thing -- there's a guy who Josh Groban did one of the great routines ever. If you haven't seen it, go to YouTube and look it up. It's so funny. It's him singing the tweets of Kanye west.

And it's him singing things like, fur pillows are hard to sleep on. And it's -- how he wants a giant fish tank. He's looking for a giant dancing fish tank. The same guy who is tweeting about how he needs a giant dancing fish tank is the same guy tweeting deep thoughts about self-realization.

And we're like, yeah, man. Because we're so hungry for any sort of legitimacy on the right. We are so hungry for anyone who is famous, to say we're not the worst people in the world and we're not crazy.

And, particularly, if that person happens to be a minority like Kanye, that we are just willing to glom on to anything. It's an amazing thing.

GLENN: So how do we fare? How do we get through this?

BEN: Do we?

GLENN: Do we, really?

BEN: I don't know. Again, I think we've lost so much of the idea that what validates us is the community that we live in or the God to whom we are subject. And instead, what validates us is a famous person saying something that makes us feel good about ourselves. And that's not a very good thing.

GLENN: So I have to tell you, I am -- I drove to the studios today. We're in Los Angeles. I drove to the studios today. And I turned on the radio. And I heard about a doctor talking about how she's doing regression therapy. But not just for this time line. But all of your alternative time lines.

BEN: Whoa.

GLENN: Yeah. So I don't know if she uses the flux capacitor to do that, I don't know how that works.

But I heard that, and at the top of my lungs, alone in the car today, how does anyone live here? How do you live here?

It's this weird thing that there is this little group of --

BEN: Yes. It's pretty alive intellectually. Right? Peter Thiel just moved down here, from San José. Jordan Peterson is out here a lot. Dave Rubin is out here. Dennis Prager is out here. The Claremont Institute is out here. There's a lot out here actually. And I think one of the reasons is, because when you're constantly balancing off the crazy of the other side, it is intellectually stimulating. I mean, you actually had to hear about that crazy regression thing, and now you can use it on the air. I mean, if you're back home now, you would be maybe talking about normal stuff on the radio.

GLENN: No, I wouldn't be talking about normal stuff, but I wouldn't be talking about Texas.

BEN: Right. Exactly. That's what I mean. If you're tuning into the radio on your way into the station, it wouldn't be talking about regression therapy.

GLENN: No.

BEN: The thing is that all of the crazy that's happening in LA, all the crazy that's happening in San Francisco, there are roots to that too. So we on the right tend to think of that as being just the latest craze, the latest fad. But there are some pretty pagan roots to all this. And I think what's really going on right now, is a battle between Judeo-Christian monotheism a reversion to a certain level of paganism. Because that's just witchcraft, right? I mean, regression therapy for alternative time lines, that's just witchcraft kind of stuff.

I'm not saying we should burden you or anything. But I am saying that --

GLENN: It is.

BEN: -- you guaranteeing me that you'll make my life better by talking about a life that I have never lived, is a form of you trying to guarantee a level of control in the universe to human beings. That human beings simply do not have over the universe. And that we can't exercise over the universe.

GLENN: I wrote a book. A novel, I don't know, eight years ago or so, called the Eye of Moloch. And it's Biblical in its nature.

Because if you look at -- if you look at how people were worshiping and -- and who Moloch is, he -- he wants you to have, you know, orgies. Crazy sex. Do whatever you want.

BEN: Yep.

GLENN: Destroy everything. And then sacrifice the baby of -- of that union. I mean, we're worshiping Moloch. We just don't know it.

BEN: I think that's right. It's under the guise of pantheism, which sounds a whole lot nicer. And it's also being concealed by the fact that we're still living -- your car runs out of gas, and you're running on the fumes. We're still living on the fumes of the Judeo-Christian value system.

So all the same people in Hollywood, who are promoting these sorts of values, same people who will use that regression technique, most of them are married. Most of them have kids. Most of them still have not been divorced. Right? The fact is, we see the high-profile divorces in Hollywood. But the truth is, most of the people who live in Hollywood are fairly normal human beings, or at least they live fairly normal lifestyles.

This is Charles Murray's point in Coming Apart, right? He says that upper-class white folks who live on the coast and are the, quote, unquote, thought leaders about single motherhood. They don't live those lifestyles. They're not single mothers. They're not living impoverished lifestyles. They're basically doing what everybody else does, with maybe the exception of going to church.

So they're living off the fumes of this Judeo-Christian history. But they're promoting this new lifestyle to a bunch of people, who are being suckered by it. Because they think, oh, this is what the successful people do.

What the successful people do is they're all members of sex cults. And out here in LA, that's really not what's going on. The face they put forward to the world is everyone is depraved because we're all experimenting and this is our thing.

But you the truth is that I find it a high point of amusement that all of the people who are so open about their promiscuity -- you know, the starlets who are so open about their promiscuity when they're 17, 18 years old. By the time they're 30, they're settling down, they're married. They have kids. Right?

They're living the same lifestyle as somebody living out in Oklahoma and Texas. They just won't tell you that. Right? The stuff that the media want to focus on, the stuff they want you to focus on is the sexy stuff. The stuff when they're 19. They're dancing naked with members of the same sex.

That's the -- by the time when they're 30 -- look at Miley Cyrus' new videos. And they basically look like Shania Twain videos. Right? All of a sudden, she's doing videos on the beach with her boyfriend. Looks like they're going to settle down. Looks like they're going to have kids. Because it turns out that the human drive for solidity and the human drive for some sort of value system is stronger even than the human drive for depravity or at least it is when you realize you're going to die at some point and depravity is going to catch up with you.

GLENN: Yeah, talk to me about Shania Twain. Your opinion on Shania Twain, a Canadian. Asked who she would have voted for. So she couldn't vote. What a ridiculous question to even ask her. She shouldn't have answered the question.

But the way she answered the question was, based on the values of the people who voted for him, which is her audience --

BEN: Right.

GLENN: -- I would say I would have probably voted for Donald Trump.

BEN: Right.

And now she's apologized in a long Twitter storm apology about, you know, I'm not a racist. I'm not a sexist. I don't believe in a lot of the same things that President Trump does. I was just trying to answer the question. But really I shouldn't have spoken out. Really?

First of all, this may be the most Canadian thing ever. Like, speaking out about an election that you couldn't take part, and then apologizing for a vote you could never cast. That's pretty Canadian.

GLENN: Michael Buble, I'm in New York -- and I walk into a hotel lobby. Michael is there. He sees me. He calls across the lobby. It's like 1 o'clock in the morning. He's like, Glenn! I turn around. I walk up. And he's like, I want you to know. I was just in a fist fight over you.

I said, what?

He said, I was at a hockey game someplace in Canada. And somebody said, I can't believe you're friends with Glenn Beck, and you go on the air with Glenn Beck.

And he's like, dude, he's a nice guy.

His politics?

We're Canadian. Why do you care about his politics?

And he said, he actually -- the guy threw a blow. They were throwing punches.

BEN: First of all, I want to see Michael Buble in a fight. I'll bet --

GLENN: I'll bet he's good.

BEN: Shockingly good. That's the only time he loosens the tie completely. Takes off the skinny tie, unbuttons that top button, just goes to work.

Yeah, I think that it is incredible. The level of intellectual bullying to which people are being subjected at this point. Where, you even say you voted for Trump or you say, hey, I support some of the things that Trump is doing.

The fact that so many people -- this goes to my generalized theory of the media. Everybody is seeing -- we live -- so to go back to scientific models, we live in a pre-Copernican era, as far as the media is concerned. They think that the world revolves around Donald Trump. Right? Donald Trump is the center of the universe, and everything revolves around Donald Trump.

This is a lie. The world revolves around the media. Right? The media has decided Donald Trump is the sun in this universe. But the sun and the universe are the media.

That's why Donald Trump is president right now. Is because the media cares so much about Donald Trump. So the fact that people are even asking Shania Twain about Donald Trump is because the media cares so much about Trump.

It's not Trump who is asking Shania Twain about Trump. It's the media asking Shania Twain about Trump, because Trump is the only thing that matters in the universe.

Because to the media, he is the only thing that matters in the universe.

GLENN: How long do you think the media has? Bill O'Reilly has said to me, the media is on its last legs.

BEN: You know, I think that they still have so much power, especially through the reinstitution of gatekeeping in the social media. That, I'm more skeptical than that.

I remember after 2004, after Bush won reelection, the line from the right was, well, the old media is dead. Right? We just defeated the old media. If the old media had its way, John Kerry would have been reelected.

That was 14 years ago. And they're still going, and they're still having a pretty major impact.

GLENN: So how do -- with the new gate keeping -- do you know who Edwin Black is?

BEN: Yeah, yeah.

GLENN: Okay. Had Edwin Black on last week. Fascinating. Need to talk to him about his theory of analytical ghettos.

STU: Algorithmic ghettos.

GLENN: Sorry. Algorithmic ghettos. And he said, we're all being -- we're all being put in a ghetto. And it's just an algorithm that's doing it this time. But the walls are being built.

How do businesses like The Daily Wire, TheBlaze, your voice, my voice, how do we stay on the other side of the wall?

BEN: So I think it's really a matter of, there will have to be new neutral platforms that are built. And I think people will find them.

So the fact that my podcast is so popular, is not because iTunes favors my podcast. Right? It's because people can go to a variety of different podcasting sources and seek it out, which is what they've done. Right? It was really more organic than anything else.

So I think people -- people still want to hear different perspectives. If they try to reinstall the gates, I think they'll find there are a lot of people that will want to tear those walls down again.

And it's going to take a while. It's going to take a while for that to happen. Because, again, it took Facebook ten years to build the sort of dominance. Fifteen years to build this sort of dominance. But I think they are fighting a losing battle. But it's going to take a little more time than I think people think it's going to take.

GLENN: Yeah. Ben Shapiro from The Daily Wire, and the Ben Shapiro Show. You can watch him online at The Daily Wire. You can also get his podcast at iTunes, wherever else you go to find your podcast. Ben, thank you so much. Appreciate it.

Ben will be joining us, I believe today. You coming on the show today? For TV. We're going to spend an hour. Talk a little bit about Los Angeles and what's happening here. And the -- the different -- the thinking that you don't hear about in Los Angeles.

Nobody is paying attention to it. But there is something happening here. We'll talk a little bit more about that tonight on TheBlaze at 5 o'clock.

RADIO

WARNING: Will the "AI Bubble" CRASH the Stock Market?

The AI revolution promises to change everything, but what if it’s leading us straight into another financial collapse? Glenn Beck and economist Peter Atwater break down the eerie parallels between today’s AI boom and the 2008 housing crash, revealing how speculative hype, overvalued tech giants, and circular corporate investments are inflating a dangerous bubble. Could this “AI gold rush” be the next market disaster waiting to happen?

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

GLENN: Is it not a bubble?

I don't know. Are we close to AGI or not close to AGI.

Again, I don't know.

Is it to change things? Yes. I saw a story in our show prep today. I'm not going to get a chance to get it. It's about other countries that are building these giant server farms. Their electricity and their water is being shut off because all of it being diverted to these big server farms. And if we're not careful, that's exactly what's going to happen to us.

Peter Atwater is a guy that Stu and I have been talking about for a while because he's comparing this AI bubble. He's like, "Look, I wanted to show you a chart. I'm not smart enough to figure out the chart. But let me show you a chart, and I want to show you a chart that I did in, like, 2007 or 2008 with the housing bubble! Wow, they kind of look exactly the same. And it's a little frightening."

Peter is with us now. Peter Atwater from the College of William & Mary. He's an adjunct lecturer there. He's the guy who coined the term K-shaped recovery.

Welcome to the program, how are you, sir?

PETER: I'm great, Glenn. Thanks very much for having me.

GLENN: You bet. Okay. So can you explain the housing -- or, not the housing bubble.

The AI bubble. Do you believe it is? And if so, why? And what does that mean?

PETER: I do believe it is.

And I study confidence and its impact on what we do.

And so what I see in the AI bubble is a lot of similarities to what we saw during the housing bubble. Where everybody wants to be involved.

There's a social frenzy to it. There's a want to, you know, make a lot of money, to see the opportunity in it.

There's a lot of speculation.

And what matters so much, to me as a researcher, is that this network that existed in the -- in the housing bubble. Where mortgages were sliced and diced.

And you had these conveyor belts that moved everything from, you know, mom and pop's house to folks all over the world.

GLENN: Right.

PETER: Now, it's within the AI system. Where you have enormous amounts of capital moving, but also equipment.

So it looks a lot like the Just In Time Network that we saw stumble during COVID.

GLENN: Okay. That doesn't make me happy. But there's a difference between the housing bubble, where it was all being inflated and resold and repackaged. And this, which does seem to be a game-changer on productivity. Where housing was not.

This seems to be like it could be a real game changer for economies. Agree or disagree?

PETER: Oh. There's no question, it will be a game changer. But we can think about it the same way we said dot-com was going to be a game changer. Like railroads. And all of these other things that we have in terms of speculative mania.

There's real productivity. Real improvement that comes from it. But what happens is that investors anticipate it happening far sooner, in far larger scale.

And much more profitably than it ever does.

GLENN: So what are you predicting? How is this going to -- how is this going to happen?

What's a bad case scenario, not necessarily worst?

I don't know if I can handle worst. Bad case scenario, and realistic scenarios.

PETER: Yeah. So to me, the realistic scenario is that valuations come down dramatically. At the same time, the build-out continues at a much lower pace.

And eventually, maybe a decade from now, it all settles out.

But in the meantime, there's a lot of financial pain that's going to go along with it. Particularly because today, more than 40 percent of an S&P 500 ties to AI.

GLENN: Like seven companies. Right?

PETER: Seven companies, and -- and the ones that are closest to them. So that, you know, retirees, pension plans, you know, folks that invest in index funds, have a super sized allocation to AI whether they realize it or not.

GLENN: Can you give me an example of this happening in history, that's not housing, but more industry?

PETER: Sure. You can go back to radio. In the -- in the 20s. I mean, RCA was a mammoth weight in the markets. Because people were incredibly excited about it.

You saw it even -- go back even further to canals. We -- we love new technology. Particularly where we can identify the efficiencies that we see coming from it.

STU: One of the things that's really interesting about the trends you've highlighted, Peter, is this sort of circuitous relationship with these companies. It's too complicated to go through all of it.

Just to give you one quick relationship here. And tell me if I'm understanding this right.

OpenAI, of course, buys a bunch of chips from NVIDIA. They're spending a ton of money with NVIDIA. NVIDIA is investing $100 million into OpenAI. OpenAI is -- has a 300 billion-dollar cloud deal with Oracle.

Oracle is spending tens of billions of dollars in chips with NVIDIA. And then NVIDIA is investing into OpenAI. There's a bunch of these arrows, that are pointing in this circular directions. And it seems like companies are flowing money back and forth to each other, and all these arrangements. And you wonder if there's any disruption here.

Are we looking at some sort of short-term collapse of all this stuff.

PETER: The -- the dog eating its tail phenomenon is extraordinary here. And what's so unusual about this one is, in prior bubbles, the -- the conveyor belts were among smaller participants.

But in this one, we had the largest technology companies in the world, to spinning money around, among themselves.

It looked like one of those Esther drawings, where the waterfall just keeps moving in perpetuity. And the challenge, particularly given that OpenAI is at the center of it, is that this is a company that is barely profitable. That is committing to hundreds of billions of dollars in commitments.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: So what does it look like if it starts to fall apart? And what are the signs we should be watching for?

PETER: So what we know right now, is that everybody wants to be affiliated with AI in some way.

And so you end up with these late arrivals to the party.

And typically when a bubble bursts, the last guy to the party, is the first to leave. When you think of this in the context of a mortgage bubble.

Where it was the subprime lenders who showed up right at the tail end.

And then collapsed first. So I'm -- I'm watching to see these companies that are barely AI-related, that have tried to position themselves as being AI industry leaders. Who are likely to fail in the not too distant future.

They just need rarefied air to exist.

GLENN: Like what companies?

PETER: I don't have specific names to throw out there.

GLENN: Sure. Okay.

PETER: But they're typically smaller highly leveraged offerings. To very, very compelling, but untested technologies.

GLENN: Now, this would be -- I mean, if it collapses, I mean, that would be horrific for our economy.

But also, what -- what happens with the race with China? I mean, China is deeper into this than we are, at like crazy.

How -- how does this affect China, what happens to the race, how does -- I mean, how does this not move forward?

PETER: So I am by no means a China expert, but I would expect that if our confidence in AI begins to fall, confidence in AI more broadly will come under question.

STU: Hmm.

PETER: So they then face questions in terms of policy maker credibility. In terms of, why did you commit so much to this?

No difference than a CEO faces that test, when a bubble bursts.

GLENN: So what does success look like to you?

Because I'm not sure -- I had a really fascinating conversation a couple of weeks ago.

And he's going to come on the show in a couple of weeks with Max Tegmark, who is a brilliant AI ethicist. And we were talking about AI, AGI. And he believes that that may not be happening. And he makes a great case on this.

But is that the goal, or, I mean. Because what -- what is the goal that we're not going to hit, that would fall short?

That would cause this kind of stuff?

PETER: So I think you -- we tend to fall short in terms of immediate usage. So volume short.

But also profitability.

You know, if you go back through dot-com bubble. They all imagined this huge, you know, pot of gold at the end of the rainbow. And you're seeing the same wild fascination with the potential profitability for AI.

And, again, that may come, but it's unlikely too come at the speed and magnitude that people now expect. I mean, we're -- we're fans of science.

GLENN: Boy, I mean, in a way, that would be really, really good.

Because that -- what I worry about is AI advancing as quickly as everybody says it is. And then what happens to all the jobs so quickly. I mean, you just can't absorb that kind of an impact. If it happens that fast. So I don't know which is better.

PETER: So typically, we'll see a backlash against new technology. I mean, if you go back to the 1920 bubble burst. And you saw this backlash to, you know, innovate technologies like the vacuum. And the ironing board. And all these things that people said, took jobs away. Well, we'll have that same thing in all likelihood. And this time, too, to a point you made earlier, likely compounded by a greater awareness of the environmental consequences of this, and also, the cost that it creates in the average consumer, in terms of the utility bills.

GLENN: Hmm.

Can you explain one more thing? Because you're the guy who invented the K-shaped recovery. And as Stu and I talked about the K-shaped recovery -- can you explain that? K-shaped recovery.

PETER: Sure. So when COVID hit, I immediately saw that if you were a white-collar worker who could work from home, your confidence improved immediately. Whereas, if you were a, you know, somebody who worked if a warehouse. Or stocked shelves in the supermarket. Or hospital worker.

Your confidence didn't start to improve for a long time.

And from that, what I have seen is that the economy that results from these two different tracks of confidence, are vastly different.

And today, those are the top, whether it's because of the markets, or because of corporate earnings, growth. Those at the top feel invulnerable.

And they're spending like it. They're investing like it. They're living like it. They're living like there's no tomorrow.

Well, on the other hand, those at the bottom today, aren't sure how they will make it through the take. They're delinquent on their car loans. They're now worried about health care costs. And so to me, this K that -- this divide has created two classes of Americans.

You have the increasingly desperate, and those who feel invulnerable.

GLENN: That does not sound stable long-term.

PETER: It doesn't feel stable to me too.

And I worry that those who are in a position to do something about it, we're spending so much of our time in this country, fighting between the left and the right, and we're not seeing that our biggest divide is up and down.

That those at the bottom, there's a bipartisan hopelessness that exists.

GLENN: Hmm.

PETER: That I feel like Washington is not paying enough attention to.

THE GLENN BECK PODCAST

Advice for Men in Their 20s & 30s to Achieve YOUR Life Goals

Watch Glenn Beck's FULL Interview with Matt & Maxim Smith HERE

Are young men prepared for a future dominated by AI, surveillance, and shifting societal rules? Glenn Beck sits down with Matt and Maxim Smith to explore how young men can reclaim their agency and build real-life skills in an uncertain and ever-changing world.

Order a copy of Matt and Maxim Smith's Book: “The Preparation: How to Become Confident, Competent, and Dangerous” HERE

RADIO

Trump told me why he's "DESTROYING" the White House...

Construction for President Trump's ballroom has begun on the East Wing of the White House, and every Democrat in America has lost their mind. Does the President have the authority to alter a historic structure like the White House? Glenn and Stu discuss, as Glenn shares the story where he reveals even Trump was shocked at how easy it was to get the alterations approved.

Transcript

Below is a rush transcript that may contain errors

STU: Well, you still haven't really addressed why Donald Trump for is knocking down the White House for his own --

GLENN: Well, he just hates America.

STU: That's -- what I've been reading. Yeah.

GLENN: Right. And how crazy excited the left should be that he's knocking down something built by slaves. They're like, we've got to preserve that.

Slaves made that!

It's weird.

STU: I actually do have questions about this though.

GLENN: What? What question do you have?

STU: Well, and they come from, you know, everybody's source of thinking these days. Which are group texts.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: I'm on with some friends. I have some really basic questions of like, I feel like, there would be a conversation and a bill passed if we're going to put a giant new building at the White House.

GLENN: No.

STU: That's not how it works at all.

Is it? How's it work? How does this work?

GLENN: You ready? So the president says, I want to change the White House.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: And the White House architect says, how would you like to change it?

And he says, this way. And they say, okay.

Well, you need to approve all the permits. Okay. I approve all the permits.

Okay. We change it. That's literally how it happens.

STU: Really? They can do anything they want.

GLENN: Well, I mean, within reason.

When I say within reason.

I think with restraint from public outcry.

Like, I want to paint the White House black.

Well, you know, as president, you can do whatever you want.

But I don't think that will fly with the American people.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: So there some standards in there. I will tell you about a conversation I had with Trump next.
(music)

GLENN: She's about to become a mom.

She is scared beyond fear. Any fear she's ever felt before. She's maybe the most vulnerable she's ever been in her life. Or even will be.

And thank God, she is in a Preborn clinic. They offer a free ultrasound. She hears the heartbeat. She sees that little face and little hands on the screen.

And in that instant, that crisis feels like a connection.

Because when you see life. When you understand its worth, protecting -- protecting that child becomes everything.

Preborn works every single day to make sure that moment is possible.

They provide free ultrasounds. Counseling. Support to women, who are not looking for judgment.

They just need some hope.

They need some help. And when a mother chooses life. Preborn is there for her. Not just for the birth of the baby. With diapers. And formula. And baby clothes. And books and real community. Preborn is expanding their life-affirming care in the darkest corners of our nation. Would you like to help hurting women and save more babies?

You can do it. $28 will provide an ultrasound. $15,000 will put a machine in a needy woman's center, saving countless lives for years to come.

Dial #250 and make a donation. #250. Say the key word baby. Or go to Preborn.com/Beck. Don't forget I'm with Megyn Kelly this Saturday at the Dickies Arena. You want to get tickets, go to MegynKelly.com.
(OUT AT 10:29 AM)

GLENN: Welcome to the Glenn Beck Program. We're glad you're here.

Thank you so much for listening. You know, Stu has been freaking out about the White House.

STU: I'm not -- I'm not freaking out. I just think it's an interesting. I thought there would be more of a process to something like this.

GLENN: No.

STU: Because I certainly was not think at this point, the American people understand what is about to happen. Which is like, the White House is about to double in size.

GLENN: Uh-huh.

STU: My -- just by my eyeball look at it.

It looks like it will maybe be more than two times the size.

GLENN: It's going to be large! But it's not the actual White House. It's part of the east wing.

STU: That's -- that's a totally misleading commentary.

GLENN: No. It's not.

GLENN: Because the White House is the original piece from the 1700s. Okay?

That's the center house. The east wing and the West Wing was not done until FDR. They were added later.

STU: It was a big deal.

GLENN: The biggest change in the White House since FDR. And happened in our lifetime. Right after 9/11.

The White House became enormous. But it was all underground.

STU: Okay.

GLENN: They completely changed everything underground.

STU: Yes.

GLENN: And we didn't have a conversation about that at all.

STU: Because it's underground!

I assume all sorts of things are happening underground. Our well-known monuments and buildings.

GLENN: Right. Sure.

STU: But this is -- this is -- it's not a -- they keep saying this.

They're going to be changed the West Wing.

GLENN: No. The East Wing.

STU: They're going to be changing the East Wing. That's not what they're doing. This is like doubling the size of the White House.

Now, I'm not opposed to that idea.

I'm just sort of surprised that it wasn't like a big conversation and a bill.

GLENN: All right. Okay. Okay. You ready?

So was Donald Trump.

STU: What do you mean?

GLENN: So I'm in the White House with him. And I'm up in the private quarters with him.

And he is showing me some things that he is doing. And talking to me about some other things that I can't talk about. Because he doesn't want.

I don't know.

STU: He doesn't want to discuss it.

GLENN: I didn't want to discuss it. And I don't know why.

Because it's all really good stuff.

So, anyway, we're taking about it. And then he brings up the ballroom.

And we're walking down the stairs, from the residents, and we're going into the ballroom.

And he says, you know, this is the ballroom that Abraham Lincoln had dinners here.

I said, you know, it's that window over there, that Fredrick Douglass had to open up the window and had to crawl in because they wouldn't let him in because he was black. And Abraham Lincoln was like, let him in. He's my friend. Why is coming through the window?

And we were talking about all the history of the ballroom. And that it's very, very small.

Because it was built in the 1700s. And we keep using that ballroom. And he's like, we have to have a bigger ballroom.

We have it out in the wet, and the cold and the rain. Yada, yada, yada.

And so he said, we come over to a window. And he's like, right there, I will build a big, beautiful ballroom.

And it's going to better than anybody thinks. It's going to be the biggest, most beautiful ballroom. And I'm just trying not to laugh. Because that's the way he describes it.

And he said, you know, surprised that I could do that.

And I said, I bet. How long is that going to take? What's that process like?

And he's like, right. That's what I asked.

He said, I went to the -- I went to the -- I don't know, chief usher or somebody. Whoever is in charge of the White House. I think it's the chief usher. He said, I think we should have a ballroom. He's like, what do I do?

And he said, well, you just have to talk to the architect.

So he went to the White House architect. Now, this is a guy who makes sure the integrity of the White House stays. Okay?

You can't make it into a modern house. Okay? You're not going to redesign the inside. You can add some gold I guess.

You can add a lot of gold, I guess. You can't make it into. You can't wreck the integrity of the White House.

And he said, you know, I just put these flagpoles in. And he's like, all I had to say was, I want to put some flagpoles in.

He said, yes, sir. Where?

He's like, what?

One in the front. One in the back. They were like, okay. Tell us where.

We went out into the yard. Right here. Right there.

And they put them up. And so he's talking to the White House architect. And he said, we've got to have a ballroom. And I think we should have it over here in the East Wing. A big, beautiful -- and he said, but what is this going to take?

And he's like, well, it's going to be very expensive. Are you expecting the people to pay?

And he's like, no, I'll raise the money for it. I'll pay for it, and I'll raise the money, extra, so American people are not going to pay for it.

And the architect said, well, then all you have to do is sign the permits.

And he's like, what?

And he said, well, you have to go through the permitting process.

He's like, how long will that take?

He said, well, the President is the one who controls the process and signs the permits. So as on short as you would like it to be, Mr. President.

And he's like, are you kidding me? And he looked at me, he's like, I'll have this done by spring of next year.

So he can change it. The -- what you have to understand is, the -- the east wing and the West Wing, those -- those are FDR.

So FDR went into a works project. And he added those wings.

The east wing is where the first lady's offices are.

Just the east wing is like, you know, it's -- it's just the east wing.

And it's --

STU: Okay. Shade of the east wing?

GLENN: Yeah. Yeah. But anyway, and so what he's doing is he's taking some of it town, and he's going to link it to the ballroom. And the bail room is going to be the biggest, beautiful ballroom in Washington DC.

It's going to link from there. So you will walk -- if you're in the White House, you will walk from the front door, through the -- the dining room.
Or, the east dining room. You'll go into the East Wing, and you'll go to the ballroom.

STU: I'm looking -- I'm at the renderings as we speak. And that's exactly --

GLENN: I've not even seen the renderings. Just describe it to me. Can I see it?

STU: No. They're mine. This is my computer.

GLENN: Okay.

STU: This is the -- I can't obviously show it to the people here. You can see it over here.

GLENN: Okay. It's big, beautiful. What a surprise, the tables are golden.

STU: By the way, it's different --

GLENN: That's amazing. Holy cow.

STU: My conversation about whether this is the -- the -- you can't. It's already zoomed in. They're not the best images.

Here.

GLENN: There's nothing wrong with that. What is wrong with that? It looks just like the White House.

It fits. It's appropriate.

STU: I was in the middle of saying. It's -- my conversation on this is not whether it is -- looks good or is appropriate or anything like.

I actually think his point on the ballroom is so obvious, every president should have been making it.

The fact that we don't have a big room to have state dinners in.

GLENN: Right.

STU: Unless you wanted to do them off campus everywhere else.

You have to have that, and why not have it at the White House. It makes a lot of sense.

GLENN: Except, I don't want to pay for it, as a citizen. I don't want a dime going for it.

You know what? Hey, all you Frenchies, you can eat on the lawn. Literally, on the lawn.

Just throw the food out on the lawn.

Yeah, I mean, I'm fine with that.

But if he wants to pay for it. If he wants to get rich people to pay for it, go for it.

I don't want any of my tax dollars going for it.

STU: Right. So my criticism is not how it looks. And that we need it.

We actually showed the inside of it. It seems like the facility we should have for these type of events.

We're going to have them somewhere. Why not have them there?

GLENN: Right. And who better to build it than one of the best builders of all time.

STU: Donald Trump. We've had this conversation about how you project American power.

GLENN: Yes.

STU: And I think Trump's approach to -- particularly in the Middle East. I think it's been effective around the world. Of these trappings actually are effective in diplomatic relations with other nations. Donald Trump has a lot of places that are lined in gold. That can have meetings. It's not like that's what he wants it for. The left tries to portray. Of course, he does.

No. It means something to him. And he knows how these people think.

GLENN: No. No.

Because I asked. I -- I won't tell the whole story.

But I really want to, really desperately.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: But, you know, he's gilding everything.

And that's not necessarily my favorite look.

STU: Right.

GLENN: And -- and he -- he came in, Tania and I were alone in the Oval for a while. And we were talking about it.

And he comes in. He says, you know, I'm doing all of this.

You see all the gold? Yes. You can't miss it. You can't miss the gold.

And he's like, you know, it's so important. These foreign leers, they all come from palaces. And they don't understand. And I know, you know, the White House is different. America is different. But they understand power in a different way.

And he said, they are coming from these old countries. And these big buildings.

And these palaces.

And he said, it is important for us to project power.

STU: Yes!

GLENN: And that's -- and that is why he's doing this. Not because he likes gold. He's doing it to project power and wealth.

Notice how many prime ministers.

They're all flying in all the time, from all over the world. You know, I've never seen a president meet with so many foreign dignitaries in the White House all the time!

STU: Yeah. And the media likes to say, well, that's because he's self-important.

And he's --

GLENN: No. He's projecting American power.

STU: Yes. I think so too.

When I say it's important to him.

That's why it's important to him.

He believes it's an important tool in that world.

GLENN: Correct. It's not him.

He knows the language they speak. And not just body language or, you know, spoken language.

All of the entire -- that's what protocol is all about. It all means something.

STU: And so my criticism -- and it's not even criticism.

My observation is not whether it fits. Or whether we need it, or whether it's appropriate.

My -- I don't think my observation here in the group text, that we started this with, which is that, holy crap.

I don't think the American people have any idea what's about to happen. Like every time I bring this up to Glenn.

And we have to understand how these conversations work.

I say, people will look at the White House. And it will be totally different.

He's like, oh, president Tyler did on more than that. In 1940 -- shut up!

That's what I get from Glenn.

Oh, well, there was more changes underground. You don't understand the piping -- that he totally changed the -- the -- the piping back in 1807. You moron!

Okay. I'm sorry.

I didn't know that. What I think of. And, you know, FDR made these changes.

My whole life, it's been the same, pretty much from the outside.

I know what the White House looks like. You go up there, I look at the White House.

It looks like the White House.

It is not going to look like the White House when this is over. It is going to look like the White House plus another White House next to it.

And it's going to be, I think, massively impressive. But I'm surprised there's not more conversation about this.

GLENN: When was the last time you were in Washington, DC?

STU: The inauguration.

GLENN: So you would not believe the difference in the White House grounds.

STU: Hmm.

GLENN: The difference from, you know, when I went with George Bush.

You could stand right at the front gate.

STU: Right.

GLENN: You can't do that anymore.

They've taken the park. The park in the back is all gone.

The security --

STU: Just for security.

GLENN: Everything. All of the trees. Everything that has been done to not see the White House.

Except, for that iconic front.

STU: Yeah.

GLENN: You know what I mean?

Everything is -- is not really -- you don't see it like you used to anymore. You don't walk up to it.

STU: The last -- I was in town for the inauguration. Last time I actually walked by the White House.

It's been a long time.

GLENN: Oh, you would not.

You will not recognize it.

I mean, just driving by and seeing it.

You will get pictures and everything else. But walking by it.

Today, you wouldn't recognize it.

It's -- it's -- what has -- what has happened with security is so sad. When I have the bell from the White House front desk, they're will it used to be a little desk right in the front, right as you walk in. There was a desk, and a bell. And I -- I have it. I think it is from Tyler's, you know, administration.

STU: Of course.

GLENN: And you would walk in. And you would hit the bell. And you would say, I want to see the president.

And somebody would say, okay. All right. Sit over there.

And you would wait. And you might wait all day, but you got -- you can walk in without an appointment and see the president of the United States.

You're not getting within two blocks of the White House right now.

It's sad. It's sad what's happening.

STU: Yeah. And for good. I wouldn't disagree with that either.

It's for good reason, security-wise.

I think back, the classic. I think what everybody thinks of when they think of the White House.

Is the scene from Superman two.

GLENN: Try to remember.

STU: When they showed the White House. And it's supposed to be -- it's a motion picture.

But they were too lazy to actually get video footage of the White House.

So it's just a still.

And you can tell, because there's like things that should be moving. That aren't moving. Right.

GLENN: Is that because --

STU: I think that's Superman.

GLENN: On Independence Day, they blew it up.

STU: But that's another example.

You had that picture of what the White House looked like. And, you know, I guess from certain angles, it looks pretty much the same. From the front. You won't notice it. Because it's kind of wrapped around the back. The back is pretty iconic too.

It's not going to look like that anymore.

In some ways, it will look a lot better or impressive.

It is a major change. That when you say, hey, they're redoing the West Wing, putting a ball room in there. That's not what they're doing.

GLENN: East.

STU: Sorry, East. I hate Glenn.


GLENN: I'm only saying it because I know how much he hates it.