Glenn Beck: Time to drill!!




Congressman John E. Peterson


Pennsylvania's 5th District

GLENN: Let's go to Congressman Peterson. Congressman John Peterson is the guy who brought this bill in front of the subcommittee and, jeez, why do you hate the polar bears so much, John?

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: This has nothing to do with polar bears, but it's --

GLENN: I'm sorry, you're right. Why do you hate the manatee so much?

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: Well, where we produce energy offshore, and that's not just Florida. It's the whole East Coast, it's the whole West Coast, and it's another part of the gulf. Less than half the Gulf's actually been producing the oil. All the energy we've gotten from the gulf has been from (inaudible). So we're the only country in the world, only country, you know, countries like Canada and Great Britain and Norway and Sweden and Ireland and New Zealand and Australia all produce offshore. In fact, everybody gives Brazil high marks for being energy independent, and they are. 15% of that's ethanol. 85% of it is they went offshore and found huge amounts of energy and they are self-sufficient. They don't import anymore. It would take us a while to get there, but we are currently importing 2/3 of our oil, 1/3 from friends, Canada, Mexico and other friendly countries and 1/3 from OPEC. Every year we're increasing our dependence by about 2% and, of course, we know what we've done to price. There's a shortage in the world. Historically we've had about 8 million barrels of oil available in the world and if Country A couldn't produce today or they had a problem, Country B can produce it. Today we have about a million barrels of oil surplus and so if any major country suddenly can't produce, we don't have energy available.

GLENN: Imagine what happens to the world if, God forbid something happens with Iran, God forbid Israel strikes Iran. The price of oil just on the fear of that thing breaking out and spreading, the price of oil will go through the roof. So tell me, Congressman Peterson, what the heck is going on?

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: Well, you know, I've been working this issue for almost a decade. I can debate it with anybody. I know the issue upside down. And I really had high hopes that with today's prices and the pressure, and we're about 88 to 90% of Republicans historically vote for production. We have 20 or 20 something that won't in the aggregate. But in our last bill we had 40 something Democrats help us. In '06 we passed a good offshore bill but the Senate wouldn't do anything with it, they wouldn't deal with it. But we lost it. We're trying to do it again but I thought we would not have a partisan -- there are members on the interior committee -- we're marginal there as far as votes for it, but I thought we would win. But we didn't have one Democrat. We've always had some. So it appears, it appears -- we'll know next Wednesday when we do it again in full committee. Now, that will be probably 80 something members of congress instead of a small -- in the teens. We had 15 members of congress, but it will be a much larger group. If they lock up again, then we'll know that this is a Pelosi plan to stop offshore production of energy.

GLENN: Okay. So here's what I want to do. Could I have you back for a good chunk of time to explain this issue both on radio and television, maybe Monday or Tuesday. I would also encourage you, we have a newsletter that goes out daily and it reaches hundreds of thousands of people. I would encourage you to write, you know, a piece for that explaining how this works, why it's important, et cetera, et cetera, let me mail it out next week and if people want to call for or against their congressmen and say, look, vote for or against it, will you do that?

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: Absolutely. I can't do it Monday night but I'll be in --

GLENN: Well, Tuesday would probably be better because it will come up on Tuesday, right?

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: No, it's Wednesday.

GLENN: It will come up on Tuesday. So Tuesday night would be better.

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: I'd like to make one more point if I can because this is the most misunderstood. Even worse than oil prices in America, the threat to our economy is natural gas. See, natural gas is not a world price. Unfortunately a lot of members of congress still don't understand that. We are approaching $13 for gas. Just a few years ago it was $2. Last year at this time, which is the time of year we don't use much gas because we're not heating and cooling much, we were between $6.50 and $7.50. But right now we're approaching -- we were $12.80 something yesterday. I haven't seen the market this morning but it was $12.80 and rising all day yesterday pennies per hour. Those natural gas prices will drive every major corporation that uses natural gas, the petrochemical industry, the polymers, plastics, fertilizer, people who make glass. I predict if we don't deal with the natural gas issue that all our bricks and glass, bulk commodities that are usually made in our neighborhoods because you can't haul them very far, they will be made in Trinidad, South America where gas is $1 something. They are building plants. Dow Chemical's energy bill for gas in '02 was $8 billion annually. It's now $8 billion quarterly. In '02 they were 60% onshore production. They wanted to stay onshore. They are now 30% onshore here. They had to move to all the countries where there's cheap gas because that's the only way they can sell their products in the world market.

Natural gas this year at home heating season which, you know, the people that are paying their high driving bills now will get a -- last year those who were on propane and home heating oil paid enormous prices. Those will be up another 50% or more this year. And last year they couldn't afford them. But this year the majority of Americans heat their homes with natural gas. They will have somewhere between a 50 and 100% increase on natural gas prices.

GLENN: Holy cow.

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: And that's when the economy's going to stop. Now, there are a lot of companies that I don't think can afford $130 oil, a lot of businesses could absorb that. And I know these natural gas prices. I mean, we for eight years have had the highest natural gas price in the productive world.

GLENN: Don't we have more natural gas than --

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: We have more natural gas, we could be self-sufficient for the next 70 to 80 years. It's everywhere. Now, we're producing more onshore but again, offshore is the best. It's close to our markets, it's close to the cities where we use it. Every time we have zero weather in the wintertime, the New York City gate -- that's what people in New York pay, if they use more than normal, will run up to $20 to $30 a thousand in a few days' time because there's not enough capacity to get it into New York.

GLENN: So tell me, Congressman, again why is this happening? I just had a guy call me a little while ago and said, Glenn, you can figure it out, I can figure it out, all my neighbors can figure it out; we need to do these things. Congress is working against it. His exact quote was, "If my house is on fire and my neighbors are starting to bring gasoline, they've got an ulterior motive."

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: That's correct.

GLENN: And that's exactly what we're starting to look at congress as, what is the ulterior motive. What is going on?

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: Well, the members on the Republican side that don't vote with us on production are usually very close to Greenpeace and Sierra Club and those groups and enjoy a rating from them. In my view, not all, there were 40 something people that I find in the Democratic party. But the majority of the Democratic party is in lockstep. Everybody's talking about the same things now. They are saying it takes 10 years to get; there's no point in doing it, 10 years to get it. There are saying there's 68 million acres leased; that's enough, we don't have the right land leased, we have old tired fields that no longer produce or they never became productive, so they are not being. And they have all these same talking points, there are so many thousand leases, they don't need more. The Democrat members are all using the same talking points and those all come from the environmental community. I've seen them for years. They are the same talking points that have been out there for years. And they are claiming that 82% of available energy in the world is already leased. That's just a lie. That's just not a fact. But they have been using that for years, too. So their talking points, everybody's using them. Norm Dicks used them in the meeting. A young Democrat from Ohio used them on one of the television network shows last night. They use the exact same talking points and they're not factual, but it appears that they have chosen that they are not going to be pro energy, production.

GLENN: But see, this doesn't make sense.

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: I'm for all renewables.

GLENN: Look, we all are. You want to put up windmills and solar panels and clean energy, let's do that. But you can't shut down the economy. And these people, are they just this stupid that they don't understand? I mean, I get the 10-year thing, but do we all have an appointment? Are we all supposed to be some place in 10 years that I don't know about?

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: Well, the thing we don't know -- now, I heard a talking person last night say that the volatility in the market's 50%. I don't believe that. I think there may be a 20 to 25% volatility in the market that I asked two top oil people what they thought would happen at a House hearing, I just walked up, two CEOs. I don't even know them, I never met them. I said, if we would open up the outer continental shelf, what would it do to the market? They said it would take the fear out of the market, that we knew that's going to be soon available, some areas quicker than others, but the process could start. He said it could take 20 to 25% off the price. That was their opinion. So I think if we open up some major areas, if we would say, all right, we're going to do shale oil in the west instead of trying to block it. We have legislation constantly trying to block it. If we're going to do ANWR and offshore and we're going to have a major initiative for coal-to-liquids and coal-to-gas and -- you know, what America needs to have is a plan to be OPEC-free, and we need to tell OPEC that. And we're going to buddy up with Canada, we're going to work closely with Mexico who has lots of energy but don't have the ability to produce it and have a North American agreement where we work together and push the renewables, push coal-to-liquids, push coal-to-gas, hydrogen if it will work, anything that will work. You know, biofuels is what everybody's talking about, but they're minor. And they hit the wall with corn over $7 yesterday.

GLENN: Yeah, let me ask you this. Why isn't anybody, with corn prices climbing as much as it did yesterday, why isn't congress calling for an investigation there? Why didn't the corn companies build more for capacity? Why didn't they invest the record profits in producing more corn? I mean, don't blame the floods or the increased demand. Big corn is to blame, isn't it? I mean, if we're going to blame big oil --

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: Let me say this. There's a lot of people in congress who started as a county sheriff or some political office locally, have never run a business, don't understand the economic systems, must have flubbed through economics class in college because they don't understand economics. But wouldn't talk that way. You know, when you tax something, you get less of it. When you make regulations tougher, you are going to get less of it. If you want to, you are for all the renewables, but they have not renewed. So how do people invest in wind and solar and geothermal and all these renewables if we don't have a five- to ten-year opportunity to recoup their investment. So they are not adequately funding the renewable side, let alone being pro production. You're 86% fossil fuel dependent, 8% nuclear and that's declining because, you know, until we get some new plants out there, we're soon going to be a smaller percentage nuclear.

GLENN: Right.

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: And, you know, 50 to 60 coal plants have been turned down by states because of the fear of the carbon tax. I hear the number one issue in the Senate is the carbon tax. The carbon tax, carbon credits or carbon is going to raise energy prices another 20 to 30%. But then there are those who are scared.

I had a member ask me the other day if we opened up to Australia, would energy get cheap and I said no. He said, why would you ask that? He said, we can't afford to have it get cheap again.

GLENN: Oh, that's Barack Obama. Barack Obama said the same thing. I mean, Barack --

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: Because now you and I are forced to change. We are forced to change. The American public better be tightening up their houses, they better be fixing their windows and doors and insulating their ceilings. They better be doing everything they can do to not use energy this year because I'm going to tell you it's coming, higher prices.

GLENN: Norm Dicks said, his office said to one of our callers that called in, he said -- his office said that energy companies, he's done some -- he's seen some research from a government study that shows that the oil companies, you know, they don't really want this anyway. They don't want the offshore drilling because it won't really -- they won't really benefit from it, either.

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: I don't know what he means by that. Big energy, big oil companies, the top five big ones basically were pushed out of this country because we locked up. You know, George Bush I looked up our continental shelf along with legislators from Florida and California 28 years ago. That's been in place for that length of time. But we've also locked up, you know, the part of ANWR we haven't been able to produce was actually set aside by previous administrations for energy and, of course, everything that looks productive in the West, there's a bill moving to lock it up, lock it up. So if you are an energy company, you are going to go where it's easy to produce energy.

Now, they've also had the problem where they are being -- I see right now another one of the oil companies is being pushed out of Nigeria but what's happening in the world with no surplus in the system, more and more of these countries are now, they have all nationalized them, they are all running them by government and, you know, how well does the government run a business. And they are stealing the money personally and they are -- you know, Mexico is not producing oil anywhere near where they used to but they have great fields but it's because they were running it, they won't let big oil of any country in. And so, you know, almost -- and the high 70% of the oil today is actually owned by governments. And over half of those are governments that are not Democratic. And they are not -- you know, if either one of them topple -- you know, what really is scary is we have these prices of both gas. Natural gas is more vital than oil even. It's more harmful. We have these prices without having had a storm in the Gulf for two years that always disrupts supply, we've not had a terroristic attack on the energy system, and that could happen tomorrow, could happen today, and we haven't had a major country where the Government have a coup and the government top he would, and when that happens, you are going to have war within for a while, you are not going to to produce as much energy. With no surplus, we could be at $200 oil in a week or so.

GLENN: Congressman John Peterson, we will have you back on the program next week. We'll put you on television as well. The vote comes back up again next Wednesday. We'll have you write something for our newsletter so you can lay out what America's facing, what the choices are and we'll get the word out. Thank you very much, congressman.

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: Well, thank you for giving us the opportunity.

GLENN: You bet.

CONGRESSMAN PETERSON: God bless.

From the moment the 33-year-old Thomas Jefferson arrived at the Continental Congress in Philadelphia in 1776, he was on the radical side. That caused John Adams to like him immediately. Then the Congress stuck Jefferson and Adams together on the five-man committee to write a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain, and their mutual admiration society began.

Jefferson thought Adams should write the Declaration. But Adams protested, saying, “It can't come from me because I'm obnoxious and disliked." Adams reasoned that Jefferson was not obnoxious or disliked, therefore he should write it. Plus, he flattered Jefferson, by telling him he was a great writer. It was a master class in passing the buck.

So, over the next 17 days, Jefferson holed up in his room, applying his lawyer skills to the ideas of the Enlightenment. He borrowed freely from existing documents like the Virginia Declaration of Rights. He later wrote that “he was not striving for originality of principle or sentiment." Instead, he hoped his words served as “an expression of the American mind."

It's safe to say he achieved his goal.

The five-man committee changed about 25 percent of Jefferson's first draft of the Declaration before submitting it to Congress. Then, Congress altered about one-fifth of that draft. But most of the final Declaration's words are Jefferson's, including the most famous passage — the Preamble — which Congress left intact. The result is nothing less than America's mission statement, the words that ultimately bind the nation together. And words that we desperately need to rediscover because of our boiling partisan rage.

The Declaration is brilliant in structure and purpose. It was designed for multiple audiences: the King of Great Britain, the colonists, and the world. And it was designed for multiple purposes: rallying the troops, gaining foreign allies, and announcing the creation of a new country.

The Declaration is structured in five sections: the Introduction, Preamble, the Body composed of two parts, and the Conclusion. It's basically the most genius breakup letter ever written.

In the Introduction, step 1 is the notificationI think we need to break up. And to be fair, I feel I owe you an explanation...

When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another…

The Continental Congress felt they were entitled by “the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God" to “dissolve the political bands," but they needed to prove the legitimacy of their cause. They were defying the world's most powerful nation and needed to motivate foreign allies to join the effort. So, they set their struggle within the entire “Course of human events." They're saying, this is no petty political spat — this is a major event in world history.

Step 2 is declaring what you believe in, your standardsHere's what I'm looking for in a healthy relationship...

This is the most famous part of the Declaration; the part school children recite — the Preamble:

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

That's as much as many Americans know of the Declaration. But the Preamble is the DNA of our nation, and it really needs to be taken as a whole:

That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

The Preamble takes us through a logical progression: All men are created equal; God gives all humans certain inherent rights that cannot be denied; these include the rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; to protect those rights, we have governments set up; but when a government fails to protect our inherent rights, people have the right to change or replace it.

Government is only there to protect the rights of mankind. They don't have any power unless we give it to them. That was an extraordinarily radical concept then and we're drifting away from it now.

The Preamble is the justification for revolution. But note how they don't mention Great Britain yet. And again, note how they frame it within a universal context. These are fundamental principles, not just squabbling between neighbors. These are the principles that make the Declaration just as relevant today. It's not just a dusty parchment that applied in 1776.

Step 3 is laying out your caseHere's why things didn't work out between us. It's not me, it's you...

This is Part 1 of the Body of the Declaration. It's the section where Jefferson gets to flex his lawyer muscles by listing 27 grievances against the British crown. This is the specific proof of their right to rebellion:

He has obstructed the administration of justice...

For imposing taxes on us without our consent...

For suspending our own legislatures...

For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us...

Again, Congress presented these “causes which impel them to separation" in universal terms to appeal to an international audience. It's like they were saying, by joining our fight you'll be joining mankind's overall fight against tyranny.

Step 4 is demonstrating the actions you took I really tried to make this relationship work, and here's how...

This is Part 2 of the Body. It explains how the colonists attempted to plead their case directly to the British people, only to have the door slammed in their face:

In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury...

They too have been deaf to the voice of justice... We must, therefore... hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.

This basically wrapped up America's argument for independence — we haven't been treated justly, we tried to talk to you about it, but since you refuse to listen and things are only getting worse, we're done here.

Step 5 is stating your intent — So, I think it's best if we go our separate ways. And my decision is final...

This is the powerful Conclusion. If people know any part of the Declaration besides the Preamble, this is it:

...that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved...

They left no room for doubt. The relationship was over, and America was going to reboot, on its own, with all the rights of an independent nation.

And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes and our sacred Honor.

The message was clear — this was no pitchfork mob. These were serious men who had carefully thought through the issues before taking action. They were putting everything on the line for this cause.

The Declaration of Independence is a landmark in the history of democracy because it was the first formal statement of a people announcing their right to choose their own government. That seems so obvious to us now, but in 1776 it was radical and unprecedented.

In 1825, Jefferson wrote that the purpose of the Declaration was “not to find out new principles, or new arguments, never before thought of… but to place before mankind the common sense of the subject, in terms so plain and firm… to justify ourselves in the independent stand we are compelled to take."

You're not going to do better than the Declaration of Independence. Sure, it worked as a means of breaking away from Great Britain, but its genius is that its principles of equality, inherent rights, and self-government work for all time — as long as we actually know and pursue those principles.

On June 7, 1776, the Second Continental Congress met in Philadelphia at the Pennsylvania State House, better known today as Independence Hall. Virginia delegate Richard Henry Lee introduced a motion calling for the colonies' independence. The “Lee Resolution" was short and sweet:

Resolved, That these United Colonies are, and of right ought to be, free and independent States, that they are absolved from all allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain is, and ought to be, totally dissolved.

Intense debate followed, and the Congress voted 7 to 5 (with New York abstaining) to postpone a vote on Lee's Resolution. They called a recess for three weeks. In the meantime, the delegates felt they needed to explain what they were doing in writing. So, before the recess, they appointed a five-man committee to come up with a formal statement justifying a break with Great Britain. They appointed two men from New England — Roger Sherman and John Adams; two from the middle colonies — Robert Livingston and Benjamin Franklin; and one Southerner — Thomas Jefferson. The responsibility for writing what would become the Declaration of Independence fell to Jefferson.

In the rotunda of the National Archives building in Washington, D.C., there are three original documents on permanent display: the Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the Declaration of Independence. These are the three pillars of the United States, yet America barely seems to know them anymore. We need to get reacquainted — quickly.

In a letter to his friend John Adams in 1816, Jefferson wrote: “I like the dreams of the future, better than the history of the past."

America used to be a forward-looking nation of dreamers. We still are in spots, but the national attitude that we hear broadcast loudest across media is not looking toward the future with optimism and hope. In late 2017, a national poll found 59% of Americans think we are currently at the “lowest point in our nation's history that they can remember."

America spends far too much time looking to the past for blame and excuse. And let's be honest, even the Right is often more concerned with “owning the left" than helping point anyone toward the practical principles of the Declaration of Independence. America has clearly lost touch with who we are as a nation. We have a national identity crisis.

The Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

It is urgent that we get reacquainted with the Declaration of Independence because postmodernism would have us believe that we've evolved beyond the America of our founding documents, and thus they're irrelevant to the present and the future. But the Declaration of Independence is America's thesis statement, and without it America doesn't exist.

Today, much of the nation is so addicted to partisan indignation that "day-to-day" indignation isn't enough to feed the addiction. So, we're reaching into America's past to help us get our fix. In 2016, Democrats in the Louisiana state legislature tabled a bill that would have required fourth through sixth graders to recite the opening lines of the Declaration. They didn't table it because they thought it would be too difficult or too patriotic. They tabled it because the requirement would include the phrase “all men are created equal" and the progressives in the Louisiana legislature didn't want the children to have to recite a lie. Representative Barbara Norton said, “One thing that I do know is, all men are not created equal. When I think back in 1776, July the fourth, African Americans were slaves. And for you to bring a bill to request that our children will recite the Declaration, I think it's a little bit unfair to us. To ask our children to recite something that's not the truth. And for you to ask those children to repeat the Declaration stating that all men's are free. I think that's unfair."

Remarkable — an elected representative saying it wouldn't be fair for students to have to recite the Declaration because “all men are not created equal." Another Louisiana Democrat explained that the government born out of the Declaration “was used against races of people." I guess they missed that part in school where they might have learned that the same government later made slavery illegal and amended the Constitution to guarantee all men equal protection under the law. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments were an admission of guilt by the nation regarding slavery, and an effort to right the wrongs.

Yet, the progressive logic goes something like this: many of the men who signed the Declaration of Independence, including Thomas Jefferson who wrote it, owned slaves; slavery is evil; therefore, the Declaration of Independence is not valid because it was created by evil slave owners.

It's a sad reality that the left has a very hard time appreciating the universal merits of the Declaration of Independence because they're so hung up on the long-dead issue of slavery. And just to be clear — because people love to take things out of context — of course slavery was horrible. Yes, it is a total stain on our history. But defending the Declaration of Independence is not an effort to excuse any aspect of slavery.

Okay then, people might say, how could the Founders approve the phrase “All men are created equal," when many of them owned slaves? How did they miss that?

They didn't miss it. In fact, Thomas Jefferson included an anti-slavery passage in his first draft of the Declaration. The paragraph blasted King George for condoning slavery and preventing the American Colonies from passing legislation to ban slavery:

He has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating its most sacred rights to life and liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating and carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere... Determined to keep open a market where men should be bought and sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce.

We don't say “execrable" that much anymore. It means, utterly detestable, abominable, abhorrent — basically very bad.

Jefferson was upset when Georgia and North Carolina threw up the biggest resistance to that paragraph. Ultimately, those two states twisted Congress' arm to delete the paragraph.

Still, how could a man calling the slave trade “execrable" be a slaveowner himself? No doubt about it, Jefferson was a flawed human being. He even had slaves from his estate in Virginia attending him while he was in Philadelphia, in the very apartment where he was writing the Declaration.

Many of the Southern Founders deeply believed in the principles of the Declaration yet couldn't bring themselves to upend the basis of their livelihood. By 1806, Virginia law made it more difficult for slave owners to free their slaves, especially if the owner had significant debts as Jefferson did.

At the same time, the Founders were not idiots. They understood the ramifications of signing on to the principles described so eloquently in the Declaration. They understood that logically, slavery would eventually have to be abolished in America because it was unjust, and the words they were committing to paper said as much. Remember, John Adams was on the committee of five that worked on the Declaration and he later said that the Revolution would never be complete until the slaves were free.

Also, the same generation that signed the Declaration started the process of abolition by banning the importation of slaves in 1807. Jefferson was President at the time and he urged Congress to pass the law.

America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough.

The Declaration took a major step toward crippling the institution of slavery. It made the argument for the first time about the fundamental rights of all humans which completely undermined slavery. Planting the seeds to end slavery is not nearly commendable enough for leftist critics, but you can't discount the fact that the seeds were planted. It's like they started an expiration clock for slavery by approving the Declaration. Everything that happened almost a century later to end slavery, and then a century after that with the Civil Rights movement, flowed from the principles voiced in the Declaration.

Ironically for a movement that calls itself progressive, it is obsessed with retrying and judging the past over and over. Progressives consider this a better use of time than actually putting past abuses in the rearview and striving not to be defined by ancestral failures.

It can be very constructive to look to the past, but not when it's used to flog each other in the present. Examining history is useful in providing a road map for the future. And America has an obvious road map that, as a nation, we're not consulting often enough. But it's right there, the original, under glass. The ink is fading, but the words won't die — as long as we continue to discuss them.

'Good Morning Texas' gives exclusive preview of Mercury One museum

Screen shot from Good Morning Texas

Mercury One is holding a special exhibition over the 4th of July weekend, using hundreds of artifacts, documents and augmented reality experiences to showcase the history of slavery — including slavery today — and a path forward. Good Morning Texas reporter Paige McCoy Smith went through the exhibit for an exclusive preview with Mercury One's chief operating officer Michael Little on Tuesday.

Watch the video below to see the full preview.

Click here to purchase tickets to the museum (running from July 4 - 7).

Over the weekend, journalist Andy Ngo and several other apparent right-leaning people were brutally beaten by masked-gangs of Antifa protesters in Portland, Oregon. Short for "antifascist," Antifa claims to be fighting for social justice and tolerance — by forcibly and violently silencing anyone with opposing opinions. Ngo, who was kicked, punched, and sprayed with an unknown substance, is currently still in the hospital with a "brain bleed" as a result of the savage attack. Watch the video to get the details from Glenn.