Glenn talks with actor Jon Voight

Related Story


Voight ignites a blog storm in Hollywood


GLENN: Well, I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the career of academy award winning actor Jon Voight died suddenly last week. It's sad. Lab results aren't all available yet, but most experts believe that his career's death was caused by a column that he wrote in which he argued that Barack Obama and the Democrats were using Marxist propaganda to usher in a new socialist era. No. Ended soon after when later he called general Wesley Clark. I didn't think I would ever agree with somebody in Hollywood as much as I agree with Jon Voight. God speed Jon Voight's career, Jon Voight's career, dead at 62. Jon Voight, the actor, currently on the phone with us now. Hey, Jon, how are you? Jon, are you there? Jon?


VOIGHT: Yeah.

GLENN: How are you?

VOIGHT: I'm good. Can you hear me?

GLENN: Can you hear me?

VOIGHT: Yeah.

GLENN: Well, there you go. How's your career doing now?

VOIGHT: I think just fine, Glenn.

GLENN: You know, Jon, I have to tell you.

VOIGHT: I always wait for your introductions. A couple of things. Your introductions are fantastic to me. You know, and the other thing is you are such a visual person, you know, that I actually even on radio, I see you. I see the way, you know

GLENN: I apologize for that.

VOIGHT: I'm telling you, you're fantastic.

GLENN: So Jon, I saw this story, what, about a week ago, week and a half ago and, A, I mean, I don't know what would make you say that

VOIGHT: Well, you read my op ed piece.

GLENN: Oh, yeah, sure did. I can't imagine what would make you say that there's a Marxist or socialist era that they are ushering in with universal healthcare, free college tuition, universal national service, universal 401(k), free job training, wage insurance, free child care, universal preschool, more subsidized private housing, fatter earned income tax credit for the working poor and a Global Poverty Act. I don't know why you would say that they are bringing in some sort of a socialist era. But you know what I find interesting, Jon, is, and I'd like you to talk about this.

VOIGHT: Yeah.

GLENN: The way that the new Hollywood blacklist or the McCarthy era is alive and well in the one town where they should know this is evil to do this kind of stuff.

VOIGHT: Yeah, absolutely, Glenn. As heinous a thing as you can imagine to intimidate people, to try to squelch any kind of, you know, any kind of opposition to this fellow with this kind of intimidation.

GLENN: You had one of the big entertainment writers, I guess, Jeffrey Wells said and I'm just amazed at this statement. He said, quote: You'd think an arch conservative which I don't think, are you you don't think you are an arch conservative, do you?

VOIGHT: No.

GLENN: You lean to the right but you're generally center.

VOIGHT: I would you know, it's very hard. These kinds of, you know

GLENN: Labels.

VOIGHT: Labels that people put on people, I don't go for that anyway. I just think that I'm a person who's trying to find the truth and express it as I, you know, get the opportunity.

GLENN: So this guy said, think an arch conservative, working in an overwhelmingly liberal town, would think about restraining himself for expedience sake if nothing else. They are basically saying you can't have an opinion in your town if you want to have a job.

VOIGHT: Yeah, that's what they're saying.

GLENN: What do you

VOIGHT: Expedient say. Interesting, huh? That's held up as an interested of some sort.

GLENN: How do you how did you react to this? What have you done since the column?

VOIGHT: You know something, I've been kind of I haven't been as aggressive perhaps as I should have been in regard to this, you know, intimidation because it is a very pernicious act and it seems like one of the reasons why I wrote the article was because nobody knows about Michelle Obama. The people who are supporting him and cheering him, you know. If you ask them why they are voting for him, you don't get very, you know, very substantive answers.

GLENN: Yeah.

VOIGHT: You get, well, he's a nice looking fellow, I like the way he talks, he's I like change, I want change. They have no idea what the change is that this fellow is going to usher in.

GLENN: Right.

VOIGHT: And he helps them. Obama helps these people by saying very vague things. Nothing that they can put their finger on. He says things like, he said during one of his speeches he said I don't want you to just believe in me. I want you to believe in your own dreams. Well, what does that mean? It means, of course, that I'm anything you want me to be. But on the other side there's an agenda that he has that is very clear and it's and if you look into his background, you can see very clearly the agenda. And as you mentioned, when I say socialism, all those things you mentioned are part of the package, of course, if Obama becomes President. So they are trying to keep away from any understanding of what he's going to do. And the way they do it is by cutting any kind of inquiry off with this kind of intimidation. So it's a real you know, it's a really very disturbing package that we're looking at here.

GLENN: Jon, you were if I'm not mistaken, weren't you an antiwar activist back in the Sixties?

VOIGHT: I was. I was caught up in that movement as most people were.

GLENN: Sure.

VOIGHT: And probably because of that, I see a little bit more clearly now what's going on.

GLENN: What happened to you? Because you were, along with the Jane Fondas of the world and you went down that path and then what happened? Where did you change? What

VOIGHT: Well, a couple of things changed. First of all, I spent a lot of time with the Vets. I was always considerate of the Vets, thank God for that. And then I saw what happened at the end of the war which I allude to in my article. I heard from the left. And, of course, this leftist movement, it was filled with slogans and propaganda and we just went along with the crowd. It was a very popular thing. And the left was saying that the Vietnam situation was our problem, that we were the problem, that once we pulled out, everybody was going to come together and hug and it was going to be fine. And then, of course, we saw after the Paris peace accords and we pulled out, we saw what happened. The communists came in and there were, you know, two and a half million people slaughtered in Cambodia and South Vietnam. And the peace movement, looking at that carnage just turned away and walked away and never looked back. And it was very disturbing to me, and it didn't the dime didn't drop for a little while but that was the beginning of it.

GLENN: How do they because they're still doing they are still doing this and in many ways the people on the extreme left, for instance, I mean, you can even take it to oil. They don't want us to drill for oil but yet they will buy it from Saudi Arabia, a country that is so oppressive, they will buy it from Russia. They don't have a problem with what Russia is doing. And Putin is an evil guy.

VOIGHT: Pardon?

GLENN: And pow continue is such an evil guy. Where is that disconnect? Why is it just, do you think it's just a is it just a hatred for America or what is it?

VOIGHT: Well, I guess it's many things but it really is a blindness, isn't it? They don't seem to see what they're doing. Of course we would be more environmentally clean than anybody. If anybody was going to raise the environmental question, we would be the best people to be distributing oil and delivering the oil to folks throughout the world because we'll do it in a much cleaner way than anybody else. And besides the economic consequences that we're suffering now and the enemies around the world that are being benefitted by our money. All of that stuff, you know, it just seems like it seems like a no brainer that you would say, well, yes, we should be drilling for oil and we should be developing all those other alternative methods of energy as well at the same time. And then you see this phenomenon that we're looking at with Nancy Pelosi closing down the shop when people obviously want this vote to happen. And

GLENN: And, you know, I was talking about this today, Jon. There's not a single, there's not do you remember when George Bush went on vacation like two years ago and everybody was like, where is George Bush, why is he on vacation. I have not heard that from the media. Where is, where's Nancy Pelosi? Where are the Democrats when America needs a vote on oil?

VOIGHT: Exactly right. And you wonder where you know, obviously it's not it doesn't take very much to know that everybody's pretty upset. And what is the what are the senators and congressmen doing with that anger? I really, I can't, I don't get it. But, of course, the media is in the pocket of the Democratic party and no one's really reporting this.

GLENN: I have to send you some pictures of some pictures that a friend went down, I think it was in Peru, went down to Peru and there were Support Obama posters in the subways and on the highways.

VOIGHT: Amazing.

GLENN: In Peru. And you're like, what? And it was those very socialist iconic kind of images. You know what I'm talking about?

VOIGHT: Yeah.

GLENN: And he goes, I thought of you when I saw them. I have to send them to you. I saw them and I thought, this is exactly what you were talking about, that they're using the propaganda. But it is so odd. Have you ever, have you ever seen a presidential campaign that is global in its nature?

VOIGHT: Yeah. Well, you know, this is there's a strange thing going on, this alliance between the far left and the Islamists. This is a very pernicious and dangerous phenomenon we're looking at.

GLENN: What do you mean?

VOIGHT: Well, somehow the left, you know, look at the crowds that he gathers in Europe. They're lefties. And these lefties are the remains of the communist movement.

GLENN: Right.

VOIGHT: You know? And I saw I had a front row seat at that when I was in the antiwar movement. That was all manipulated by Marxists.

GLENN: And you didn't know it at the time or you just ignored it?

VOIGHT: I put it together later. And then, you know, of course there have been very good books coming out about it. David Horowitz's book was very clear.

GLENN: You remind me a lot of him.

VOIGHT: He was really on the inside of that. I saw little, you know, sprinklings of it but I really wasn't on the inside of that movement. But, of course, SDS took meetings with the communists and it was a communist victory, the antiwar movement shutting down that war.

GLENN: The reaction in Hollywood, I know they went after I love this. The editor in chief of Variety, Peter Bart, went after your quote, intellectual equipment, made fun of your relationship with your family, just went personal on you.

VOIGHT: Uh huh.

GLENN: Really just a hatchet job all around.

VOIGHT: Yeah.

GLENN: What is the reaction for the from the conservatives that you know that are afraid to come out, Jon, that don't have an Oscar?

VOIGHT: Well, you know, obviously there is I don't feel so much listen, I care so much about this country, Glenn.

GLENN: I know you do.

VOIGHT: I'm very concerned about the country, much more concerned about the country than I am about my work but, of course, I'm an older fellow.

GLENN: Yeah.

VOIGHT: You know, people know who I am. I have less ability to be intimidated in a sense than others coming up. You are absolutely right. And with these kind of attacks, they are meant to silence people. And I say that to Peter, jeez, this is as bad as it can be, fellas.

GLENN: But talk to them, did you

VOIGHT: No, I didn't. But, you know, I probably should. I've been running around doing a bunch of things, but I should talk to Peter and let him have it about this. This is really as bad as it can be. This is stuff that we've seen in the past, you know, in Nazi Germany they squelched criticism that was coming up. In every regime and throughout the history since that time, this has been in evidence. And when we've seen it, we've, you know, come out against it. But that is happening in our own country, in our own in this political campaign is quite disturbing.

GLENN: Jon, if you don't mind, I just want to share something. The first time I met you, we had dinner with some friends. And I was really impressed by you for a couple of things. You tried to set the record straight between the two of us right away, and it took a lot of courage to approach me and say the things that you did that we don't need to go into. But you were a courageous man. I looked at my wife when you walked away and I said, wow, there's a man of integrity. And then I watched you the rest of the night, and in the conversation with some very smart people, you were taking notes and what I got from that is you are a man that is still learning. You are a man that still cares enough about this country

VOIGHT: You bet, uh huh.

GLENN: that when you hear viewpoints that you may or may not agree with but you want to find out more about, you were taking notes to be able to research it more. And I have to tell you, very few people are still actively engaged in the learning process, and the learning process of the history of our country and the current history of our country in the future, and I am very impressed with you.

VOIGHT: Oh, thank you so much, Glenn. You know, in terms of learning, I might say, and I probably should say this every time I'm asked to speak, is that there are there's a hidden agenda in this, in this election. People are keeping Obama a mysterious object. But there's some books coming out and everybody should get those books.

GLENN: Yeah.

VOIGHT: There's the Corsi book, Jerome Corsi book, the Obama Nation.

GLENN: What's the other one, Stu? I'm trying to remember.

VOIGHT: The case against Barack Obama, the unlikely rise and unexamined agenda of the media's favorite candidate. These are good books for us to anybody who doesn't know what he's done, who has who every time they are asked a question, what has he done, what are his qualifications and they have no answers, they should read these books.

GLENN: Yeah.

VOIGHT: Something's happening here and we should be aware of it.

GLENN: Jon Voight, we'll talk to you again.

VOIGHT: Thank you, sir.

GLENN: You bet. Bye bye.

'The Handmaid's Tale' got it right, just with the wrong religion

Alberto E. Rodriguez/Getty Images

Just in case The Handmaid's Tale's heavy-handed message wasn't already heavy-handed enough, a recent episode made it clear there's always room for further hysteria. Particularly, in relation to depictions of a “patriarchal society" run by Christian doctrine and determined by men — oh those dastardly men.

RELATED: Christian privilege is the new white privilege

The show appropriates Margaret Atwood of the same name, depicting a totalitarian society led by Christian doctrine in which women's bodies are controlled, and they have no rights. The story sounds familiar, but not in the same way Atwood and the show's creators have so smugly assumed.

Just as tone-deaf as 4th wave feminism itself, and tone-deaf in all the exact same places. Most notably, the show's heavy-handed indignation toward Christianity. Toward the patriarchy. Toward conservatives and traditional values. And just like 4th wave feminism, the show completely overlooks the irony at play. Because there is a part of the world where women and children are being raped and mutilated. In fact, in this very real place, the women or girls are often imprisoned, even executed, for being raped, and they are mutilated in unspeakable ways.

Theirs is a cruel, bloody, colorless life.

There is a place, a very real place, where women are forced to cover their entire bodies with giant tarp-like blankets, which is all the more brutal given the endless heat of this place. There is a place where women literally have one-third of the rights of men, a place where women are legally, socially and culturally worth less than men.

They cannot drive cars. They cannot be outside alone. They cannot divorce, they cannot even choose who they marry and often, they are forcibly married at a young age.

They are raped. A lot. Theirs is a cruel, bloody, colorless life. This is the life of tens, perhaps hundreds of millions of women. And, I'll tell you, their religion isn't Christianity.

Science did it again. It only took 270 million years, but this week, scientists finally solved the mystery that has kept the world up at night. We finally know where octopuses come from: outer space. That explains why they look like the aliens in just about every alien movie ever made.

RELATED: Changes in technology can be cause for concern, but THIS is amazing

It turns out octopuses were aliens that evolved on another planet. Scientists haven't determined which one yet, but they've definitely narrowed it down to one of the planets in one of the galaxies. Hundreds of millions of years ago (give or take a hundred), these evolved octopus aliens arrived on Earth in the form of cryopreserved eggs. Now, this part is just speculation, but it's possible their alien planet was on the verge of destruction, so Mom and Dad Octopus self-sacrificially placed Junior in one of these cryopreserved eggs and blasted him off the planet to save their kind.

This alien-octopus research, co-authored by a group of 33 scientists, was published in the Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology journal. I'm sure you keep that on your nightstand like I do.

Anyway, these scientists say octopuses evolved very rapidly over 270 million years. Which sounds slow, but in evolutionary terms, 270 million years is like light speed. And the only explanation for their breakneck evolution is that they're aliens. The report says, “The genome of the Octopus shows a staggering level of complexity with 33,000 protein-coding genes — more than is present in Homo sapiens."

Lucky for us, they landed in the water. Otherwise, we might be octopus pets.

They mention that the octopus' large brain, sophisticated nervous system, camera-like eyes, flexible bodies and ability to change color and shape all point to its alien nature. Octopuses developed those capabilities rather suddenly in evolution, whereas we're still trying to figure out the TV remote.

These biological enhancements are so far ahead of regular evolution that the octopuses must have either time-traveled from the future, or “more realistically" according to scientists, crash-landed on earth in those cryopreserved egg thingies. The report says the eggs arrived here in “icy bolides." I had to look up what a “bolide" is, and turns out it's a fancy word for a meteor.

So, to recap: a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, an alien race of octopuses packed their sperm-bank samples in some meteors and shot them toward Earth. Lucky for us, they landed in the water. Otherwise, we might be octopus pets.

President Trump's approval rating is rising, and Democrats — hilariously — can't seem to figure out what's going on. A few months ago Democrats enjoyed a sixteen point lead over Republicans, but now — according to CNN's recent national survey — that lead is down to just THREE points. National data from Reuters shows it as being even worse.

The Democratic advantage moving towards the halfway mark into 2018 shows that Republicans are only ONE point behind. The president's public approval rating is rising, and Democrats are nervously looking at each other like… “umm guys, what are we doing wrong here?"

I'm going to give Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi a little hint. We know that the Left has enjoyed a “special relationship" with the media, but they might want to have a sit down with their propaganda machine. The mainstream media is completely out of control, and Americans are sick of it. We're DONE with the media.

RELATED: The mainstream media wants you to believe Trump is waging war on immigrants — here's the truth

Look what has been going on just this week. The president called MS-13 gang members animals, but that's not the story the media jumped on. They thought it was more clickable to say that Trump was calling all immigrants animals instead. In the Middle East, the media rushed to vilify Israel instead of Hamas. They chose to defend a terror organization rather than one of our oldest allies.

Think about that. The media is so anti-Trump that they've chosen a violent street gang AND A GLOBAL TERROR ORGANIZATION as their torch-bearing heroes. Come on, Democrats. Are you seriously baffled why the American people are turning their backs on you?

Still not enough evidence? Here's the New York Times just yesterday. Charles Blow wrote a piece called "A Blue Wave of Moral Restoration" where he tried to make the case that the president and Republicans were the enemy, but — fear not — Democrat morality was here to save the day.

Here are some of these cases Blow tries to make for why Trump is unfit to be President:

No person who treats women the way Trump does and brags on tape about sexually assaulting them should be president.

Ok, fine. You can make that argument if you want to, but why weren't you making this same argument for Bill Clinton? Never mind, I actually know the reason. Because you were too busy trying to bury the Juanita Broaddrick story.

Let's move on:

No person who has demonstrated himself to be a pathological liar should be president.

Do the words, “You can keep your doctor" mean anything to the New York Times or Charles Blow? I might have saved the best for last:

No person enveloped by a cloud of corruption should be president.

I can only think of three words for a response to this: Hillary Frigging Clinton.

Try displaying a little consistency.

If the media really wants Donald Trump gone and the Democrats to take over, they might want to try displaying a little consistency. But hey, maybe that's just too much to ask.

How about starting with not glorifying terrorist organizations and murderous street gangs. Could we at least begin there?

If not… good luck in the midterms.

In the weeks following President Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital, the mainstream media was quick to criticize the president's pro-Israel stance and make dire predictions of violent backlash in the Middle East. Fast forward to this week's opening of the US Embassy in Jerusalem and the simultaneous Palestinian “protests" in Gaza.

RELATED: Just another day in Iran: Parliment chants death to America after Trump pulls out of nuclear deal

Predictably, the mainstream media chastised Israel for what they called “state-sanctioned terrorism" when the IDF stepped in to protect their country from so-called peaceful Palestinian protesters. Hamas leaders later admitted that at least 50 of the 62 Palestinians killed in the clashes were Hamas terrorists.

“In our post-modern media age, there is no truth and nobody even seems to be looking for it …. This is shamefully clear in the media especially this week with their coverage of the conflict between the border of Israel and the Gaza strip," said Glenn on today's show. He added, “The main media narrative this week is about how the IDF is just killing innocent protesters, while Hamas officials have confirmed on TV that 50 of the 62 people killed were working for Hamas."

The mainstream media views the Palestinians as the oppressed people who just want to share the land and peacefully coexist with the people of Israel. “They can't seem to comprehend that in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, only one side is actively trying to destroy the other," surmised Glenn.

Watch the video above to hear Glenn debunk the “peaceful Palestinian protest" fallacy.