Glenn Beck: Recycling overrated


STEPHEN MOORE


Related Story: Gang Green


GLENN: Stephen Moore's on with us. Stephen writes for the Wall Street Journal. Stephen, did you write today's Windjammers article or is that somebody else?

MOORE: Well, I contributed to it.

GLENN: You contributed? Because you just had an article out last week on the insanity of what is going on with energy, and anybody, anybody who says, "Oh, gee, if we just concentrate on alternative energy, everything would be fine because we're all going to get along." No, we're not. No, we're not.

MOORE: Well, no we're not. And you know there's this now proposal in congress called the Gang of Ten which just lops on $80 billion of subsidies but it doesn't allow any drilling and if we're going to have a sensible energy policy that makes us more independent of OPEC oil, we need to be very serious about drilling and nuclear power and coal and all these things that the left is adamantly against.

GLENN: Yeah, but they're not. Let's go over just a little bit of what you contributed in today's, in today's article on Windjammers. This is the most amazing thing that I have heard. This is the environmentalists, where there is solar and wind power being generated, they need the transmission lines.

MOORE: Right.

GLENN: To get the power to the people. What happens?

MOORE: They don't want the transmission lines. It's like when Ted Kennedy didn't want the wind turbines in his backyard. This is a big problem, folks. I don't want to burst people's bubble, but it turns out, Glenn, that wind and solar power aren't the great green energy sources that the left had said they are. And there's a couple of reasons for that. One is that they are incredibly land sensitive. So if you wanted to provide I mean, this is an amazing statistic. If you wanted to provide enough electricity to keep Manhattan lighted up at night, you'd have to convert the entire state of Connecticut into a giant wind turbine farm.

GLENN: Hold on just a second. I'm just thinking of you know, I live there. I'm just thinking of so there would be no people there. Just a wind farm.

MOORE: No, plus there would be none of the endangered species there, either.

GLENN: That would be fantastic. I like that idea. Somehow or another you are saying that's a bad idea.

MOORE: Well, I'll give you another example. People who think solar power is the source, you know, the power source of the future. If you wanted to light up Phoenix, Arizona with sun power, you'd have to have 100 square miles of solar energy paneling to provide enough electricity. These are crazy technologies. They are not good for the environment. They would industrialize the entire landscape of America.

GLENN: Here's the thing. On solar energy, solar energy is I believe on the verge of and when I say a verge, in the next 10 years on the verge of a revolution. MIT is doing some studies where they have found that 15 by 15 foot panels can now actually, they found a way to convert that to make hydrogen to actually run your home on hydrogen. Now they need to find a practical application, you know, somebody that in the business world that says, "Oh, I think I can do something with that" and make it affordable. But they now have the technology to do that. Ray Kurzweil is saying that nanotechnology in five years will make solar energy reasonable, yet we're still talking about five years before the technology arrives and probably 15 to 20 before everybody can have access to it.

MOORE: Well, I'm a little more skeptical on solar energy than you are, Glenn. I mean, I've been I remember the 1970s when people said that, you know, breakthroughs in solar power are going to be, you know, two or three or four years away. Look, I'm pro technology. I'm pro market. Whatever can succeed in the marketplace in the energy industry I'm in favor of. What I'm against is all these subsidies to pick winners and losers.

GLENN: Right.

MOORE: And that's what we're doing in Washington right now.

GLENN: All right. So let me just go through a couple of things here. Duke Energy and American Electric Power announced a billion dollar joint venture to build 240 miles of transmission lines in Indiana.

MOORE: Right.

GLENN: And they can't do it because of all of the red tape until 2014 at the bare minimum. In California there was a protest on the connection of the solar and geothermal fields from Imperial Valley to Los Angeles in Orange County. So that's not happening. Environmental class is lobbying state commissioners to kill another 150 mile link between San Diego and the solar panels because it would jaunt through a state park. It's happening not just in California but it's also happening in Oregon and all over the Dakotas, Carolina, upstate New York, Maine and elsewhere. Your article which I find amazing, garbage collectors in San Francisco may turn into cops.

MOORE: You can't make this stuff up, Glenn. I was in San Francisco a couple of weeks ago. Opened up the San Francisco Chronicle and, you know, San Francisco people believe that they are the most progressive in the country.

GLENN: And they are.

MOORE: They want to have not optional recycling but they want to make it mandatory. They want to have up to $1,000 fines for, you know, throwing the Gatorade bottle in the wrong trash bin. And they are now going to have, as you just said, trash cops that go through people's garbage to make sure they're throwing the newspapers and the pie crusts and the steak bones and all this stuff in the right containers. I mean, this stuff is out of control.

GLENN: But they're saying that they don't want to fine people. They just want to change people's behavior.

MOORE: Well, you know, you can do that if you charge people enough for this. I mean, it's happening all over the country. In Seattle now they've put these tags on people's garbage bins. They call them scarlet letters so that, you know, if people aren't properly recycling, they can be the scourge of the neighborhood.

GLENN: Wait. My hometown of Seattle, you know they got rid of styrofoam cups and plates and plastic knives and forks? Did you know that?

MOORE: Yeah.

GLENN: I mean, Seattle, what the hell has happened to you? I mean, you know what hang on just a second. I just want to have a conversation with Seattle. I grew up in the Seattle area. I know it. And before I left, my grandmother sat me down and she said, you tell everybody you know, everybody you meet that everybody always says, oh, Seattle I hear is so beautiful. She said to me, you tell everybody that it rains like no place else. She was dead serious. And I said, grandma, it does rain like no place else. And she said, good, then you don't have to lie. Just make sure you emphasize that. And I said, you just don't want people moving up here. And she said, Glenn, all of the people that are too crazy for California are moving up here and they're going to wreck this state. And my grandmother was right!

MOORE: She was right. And, you know, I think if there's one place in the United States that may be more whacko left than San Francisco, it might be Seattle. And your grandmother was right. You know, people move up there because there's no income tax and California has taxes through the wazoo. But then they get up there and they want to

GLENN: They want to turn it into what they had.

MOORE: Exactly.

GLENN: That's the way when I lived in Phoenix, everybody says, oh, you've got to move to Phoenix because your allergies won't be bad. When I moved down to Phoenix, it wasn't a desert anymore. Everybody was watering. They were taking their plants from up north and they were watering. I'm like, what the hell is wrong with you? Now you're going to have allergies. I mean, it's just crazy what people do. Stephen, hang on just a second because I've got to get into the, I've got to get into the Ted Turner thing. Not that I like to just poke Ted Turner every once in a while but I've got to get into the Ted Turner thing with you here in just a sec. Back with Stephen Moore from the Wall Street Journal coming up in just a second and your phone calls. The number's 888 727 BECK, 888 727 BECK.

(OUT 11:41)

GLENN: 888 727 BECK, 888 727 BECK. So Stephen Moore who writes for the Wall Street Journal, we're having a conversation about how the environmental Nazis are, you know, making people in seats, they are putting a tag on your trash can which is basically the Scarlet Letter if you haven't recycled your trash properly. They want to charge you a $1,000 fine and have garbage collectors be trash cops, recycle cops. It's craziness what's going on. But you're actually, because of this article, you are actually feeling all kinds of heat, aren't you?

MOORE: Well, yeah. I think a lot of the environmental benefits, and I hate to again burst people's bubbles because, you know, there are some advantages environmentally to recycling, but Glenn, they have been vastly exaggerated. Vastly exaggerated. You know, the ultimate by the way is people who get in their cars, they have got maybe a couple of pounds of recycled goods and then they drive eight miles to go to the recycling center, you know, to dump this stuff off.

GLENN: Give me some stats on why you say it's exaggerated?

MOORE: Well, there's a couple of reasons. One is it takes a lot of energy, you know, to recycle and so

GLENN: Okay. So you're saying let's say because there's thousands and thousands and thousands of Nancy Pelosi books that will never be sold. You're saying that grinding those up back into pulp and make them into another, a successful book like

MOORE: Like the Glenn Beck?

GLENN: Yes. That's a waste of energy? We should just

MOORE: It's not a waste of energy, but the energy, the benefits in terms of, to the environment are de minimis. They are very small.

GLENN: Okay.

MOORE: In some cases, by the way, you know, industry does a lot of recycling when it makes economic sense to do that. But there's this kind of religion out there that it's always the right thing to recycle and in many cases it's much better for the environment to just bury the stuff.

GLENN: Like what?

MOORE: Oftentimes newspapers, oftentimes plastics and things like that that will just degrade over time.

GLENN: Okay.

MOORE: And one of the points I made in the article is there's this myth out there that America's running out of landfill space which is absolutely nuts. I mean, the one thing we have plenty of room for, it's landfill.

GLENN: Have you ever been to the Dakotas? I mean, no offense North or South Dakota. Although, North Dakota, South Dakota's been talking behind your back.

MOORE: We finally found a use for the Dakotas.

GLENN: I mean, there's a ton of space out there.

MOORE: Well, I made the point in the article which was kind of a fun one is that in Montana our friend Ted Turner owns giant amounts of acreage on his ranches and if we converted the Ted Turner ranch into a landfill, we would have enough space on his, on his ranch alone, Glenn, to contain all of the garbage in America for the next 100 years and he would still have 50,000 acres for his bison and his horses.

GLENN: So wait a minute. Hang on. I'm having a hard time, first of all, getting my arms around Ted Turner being a trash collector or being surrounded by trash. I have a hard time believing that one. For the next 100 years. Huh.

MOORE: Now, I have to confess. He owns a whole heck of a lot of property.

GLENN: Yeah, I believe he's the largest single landowner in America, is he not?

MOORE: He's up there. If not number one, he's in the top three.

GLENN: Yeah, makes me feel good. Because I know what he's going to do. He is going to donate that land to either the United Nations

MOORE: Or the Sierra Club.

GLENN: To the Sierra Club and it will never, ever be allowed to be touched.

MOORE: Let's see if they discover oil on that land.

GLENN: Or until the peasants revolt. So are you getting

MOORE: Oh, my gosh, you would think I would have assaulted people's daughters.

GLENN: Which you haven't.

MOORE: I was in this friend's house in San Francisco and I tossed the Gatorade bottle, the plastic Gatorade bottle into the glass container. Oh, my God. Glenn, you would and this was a friend of mine. You would have thought I had made a pass at his daughter. I mean, it was unbelievable. I mean, he just erupted in rage. And this gets to the point I'm trying to make is this has really become a religion. There's a really fun point I have in the article, by the way. You know they are not calling these recycling centers anymore. You know what the new name for these things are now? Reformation. Reformation centers. Redemption, redemption centers.

GLENN: Redemption centers. Okay, I was going to say I've got something to nail to their door.

MOORE: So one of the points I made is whatever happened to liberals who wanted to separate church and state.

GLENN: Redemption. I can redeem you, with paper or plastic. Stephen, thanks a lot, man, I appreciate it.

MOORE: Thank you, Glenn. Bye.

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.