Glenn Beck: Romney talks bailout




Mitt Romney

GLENN: From Radio City in Midtown Manhattan, third most listened to show in all of America. Hello, you sick twisted freak. Welcome to the program. My name is Glenn Beck. Governor Mitt Romney is on the phone with me now and we're just talking a little bit about the bailout package and whether or not it is something that we should do. Governor, I have been against the bailouts of, you know, Bear Stearns, all of these bailouts I've been against. You could have made the case on AIG because it's an insurance company but here we go with a massive program that you're kidding yourself if you don't think that it's at least $2 trillion that it's going to end up being. A lot of people say where's my bailout, why should I bail these people out on Wall Street that have caused this problem.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Well, there's no question no one has any interest in bailing out the guys on Wall Street who caused this problem. In many respects the term "Bailout" is a misnomer. The people who caused this problem ought to lose jobs, ought to lose wealth and are going to face some hard times by virtue of their mistakes but what we want to make sure is that the people on Main Street and the homes all over America, that these folks aren't the ones who are suffering and if we had a meltdown of our financial system where banks and financial institutions couldn't make loans, where your life insurance policy was suddenly worthless, where awful these kind of dramatic changes occurred, you'd hurt a lot of people. A lot of people would lose jobs. You could even throw the country into, well, a very severe recession or even the D word which I don't want to use, but it's that which the treasury secretary and the Federal Reserve are worried about and that's why they are taking such extraordinary action.

GLENN: Explain a little bit of what happened last Wednesday in layman's terms. I don't know if America really has a handle on, we were talking about shutting the country off because of nobody was making loans to each other. Nobody trusts each other anymore.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Well, the challenge all started with exuberance on the part of Republicans and Democrats to give mortgages to people who really didn't have the capacity to pay back the money. Everybody hoped they would but, you know, it was just irrational exuberance as Greenspan used to call it and so all these mortgages were handed out and then the banks, investment banks and other institutions held onto these mortgages expecting to get paid back and when the inevitable happened, when it was clear that people couldn't pay it back and started defaulting, we recognized that these banks and investment banks didn't have as much money as they thought they had and therefore they had to stop lending to new people because they didn't have money to lend. And when you start seeing people having to stop lending, well, then you mean folks can't buy cars, the kids can't get loans for school, that people can't buy homes and you could slam the whole economy shut. And it was that that the Federal Reserve feared and that's why they are proposing such dramatic action.

GLENN: Okay. The country is not for this bailout at this point, and I think that is because nobody has been nobody will use the D word. But if you don't stop this in its spiral out of control, businesses, I mean small businesses, big businesses, it just closes shop almost overnight. Yes or no?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: And that's you are absolutely right. That's the fear. The fear is if all the banks start going under, all right, if the investment banks start going under or if they just can't make loans anymore because they don't have a strong enough balance sheet, not enough cash, if you will, and reserves to make loans to people, well, guess what happens in this country. We have a massive economic slowdown unlike anything we've seen for 100 years.

GLENN: That's a real concern, though. People dismiss that as, oh, that's crazy, that will never happen. That's an actual real consequence of doing nothing or doing the wrong thing.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Well, that's precisely what Secretary Paulson and Chairman Ben Bernanke and people on both sides of the aisle fear. And you can't be 100% sure that would happen but that's what they fear. They are not trying to save the jobs of the folks on Wall Street. They are not crying over those. What they're concerned about is that if Wall Street and the banking sector and the insurance companies go out of business, why, the entire country can go out of business.

GLENN: Okay. Now, the other side, because I am because I now understand exactly, this is not and correct me if you disagree with me but I believe this is not necessarily we all hoped that it would work but this is not necessarily designed to just put everything back in rosy condition. This is to land the plane even in the middle of a field or a forest, just have some pieces of the plane left and not kill everybody on board.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Yeah, Glenn, I think you hit it on the head because even when this is done, there's still going to be dramatic change in our financial markets. Institutions are going to stop we're not going to have investment banks like we used to have.

GLENN: Right.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: New York may cease being the center of financial activity in the world.

GLENN: Which is gigantic. The other thing is, is that we would whether this works or not, we're probably going to live more like my grandparents lived that they were saving the bacon grease, they never threw scraps away, you know, my grandmother fixed our shirts and our pants. I mean, we were thrifty because they went through the Great Depression. We're going to have to, one way or another, reset pretty close to that kind of a lifestyle again.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Well, I don't know that we're going to go quite that far. I'm not planning on saving the bacon grease, but I think people are going to be thrifty. We are with our automobiles now. We're looking at far more fuel efficient cars, we're looking at turning down the thermostats in our homes. We're just saying, you know what, in a world like the one we're living in, we can't afford to be as extravagant with energy and with spending as we've been in the past. And by the way, government is the place to start. We're going to have to rein in these politicians that keep adding new programs and new spending ideas. It's part of what's precipitated the crisis we have.

GLENN: Okay. Now, the other argument against not doing anything would be that we're printing money in the basement. We're adding more debt to some we're doing exactly what caused this. We don't have the money to do it but we're like, oh, no, we can just carry that; don't worry, we're good for it and somehow or another we'll figure it out, things will get better. And so we're doing what we all did in our own personal lives, not everybody, but a lot of people did in their own personal lives, we're doing it on the federal government scale to the Nth degree. How does it not end up destroying the value of our currency and not destroy, you know, the integrity and the credit rating of the United States of America?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: There's no question but that the decision that we're taking to add more debt is something which weakens our currency which makes us more vulnerable in a global competitive world and has the very aspects you are speaking about. It's a question of which one is the worst. Those that are studying the effects of the two directions are saying, look, we're better off here buying some of these mortgages that aren't performing well, that aren't being paid back, we're going to buy them and then over time we're going to try and collect as much as we can from the various homeowners and sell homes and try and create stability. Because what the Federal Reserve is saying is look, when things go down in a fire sale mode, you are going to be in a lot worse shape than if you try and have an orderly, if you will, reorganization of the effort. So they are going to say we're going to add some debt but at the same time we're going to pay it back in a slow but sure way. And that's the you know, that's the there's no easy answer here. There's no obvious answer but it looks like the best one at this current juncture.

GLENN: Okay. The Democrats are trying to add a stimulus package, they are trying to say that judges should be able to be involved and renegotiate your mortgage payment, et cetera, et cetera. Is there anything here that you say, you know what, I'm for this bailout package but I draw the line here; this cannot happen?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Yeah, at some point if you load an aircraft up with too much baggage, it won't take off. And this is an emergency effort to keep our economy from going into a tailspin and congress, you know, should act pretty narrowly and then if they want to do other things, fine. They just passed a $300 billion program to help people stay in their homes and they want to get credit for doing more. You know, let's do that on a separate day if we can. By the way, I think John McCain is right to say, look, if the Federal Reserve steps in or the Treasury steps in rather and keeps a bank from going bankrupt, we better not watch this CEO pay himself a $10 million bonus and so we're going to limit how much these guys can take out of these banks because we're not saving it for them. We're saving it for the citizens who want to borrow.

GLENN: Right. I don't have a problem with that but I do have a problem with telling people that they should have a salary cap.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Well, it's a compensation cap of some kind.

GLENN: But is it only for failures?

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Oh, yes. It's only for those that take money from the government.

GLENN: Then I have no problem. If you fail, you get 10 bucks.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Exactly. It's like saying, if you want the government to bail you out, to buy your bad debt from you, then the government is going to have a say about how much you are going to pay yourself because we're bailing you out so you can keep in business and lend money to our citizens. That's why we're not to pay yourself a big bonus.

GLENN: Good. I don't have a problem with that. Governor, I know you've got to run. Thank you so much.

GOVERNOR ROMNEY: Glad to be with you.

The Biden Admin EXPANDED abortion access because they DON'T believe in the Constitution

Joshua Lott / Stringer, JOSEPH PREZIOSO / Contributor | Getty Images

This month has already produced an extreme example of why we need a functional and more conservative Congress in order for America to have a chance at moving forward—because the Left does not believe in the Constitution.

Sure, if you confronted a Democrat in Congress, they would probably claim some sort of allegiance to the Constitution—but as a practical matter, they do not believe in it.

Instead, the Left has put all of their eggs in the basket of the executive branch. Why? Because it has the furthest reach through all the various departments, and it can move the fastest—in short, because it’s the most dictatorial. It only takes a department head to write a new memo, or even better, the President to sign a new executive order to carry the force of law.

The Left has put all of their eggs in the basket of the executive branch.

Do you recall any of the Left’s favorite Supreme Court decisions over the years—something like gay marriage for example—and how Republicans immediately tried to subvert it, using the executive branch to try to nullify the decision? Yeah, that never happened. But that is exactly what Democrats have done in recent weeks to expand abortion access.

Democrats only consider the Supreme Court legitimate when they approve of the decisions. When the miraculous overturning of Roe v. Wade happened last summer, President Biden called it “a realization of an extreme ideology and a tragic error by the Supreme Court.”

Democrats only consider the Supreme Court legitimate when they approve of the decisions.

Recently the FDA approved local pharmacies to issue abortion pills. For the first 20 years after these pills were developed, they were not treated like typical prescription drugs. They had to be dispensed in-person by a doctor. That in-person requirement is now gone.

Keep in mind that the Left’s go-to line is that abortion is always about the health and safety of women, yet a 2021 peer-reviewed study found that chemical abortions have a complication rate four times greater than surgical abortions. Between 2002 and 2015, the rate of abortion-related ER visits following use of the abortion pills increased by 507 percent.

Chemical abortions have a complication rate four times greater than surgical abortions.

And now the Biden administration is making these less-safe abortions much more accessible. Thanks to the FDA’s rule change, Walgreens and CVS have already agreed to dispense abortion pills in states where abortion is legal—effectively turning these stores into new abortion clinics.

As for states that have abortion bans, "Team Biden" announced a new way around those too. Three weeks ago, the Justice Department issued a legal opinion that the U.S. Postal Service is allowed to deliver abortion pills anywhere, even in places where abortion is illegal. What’s their rationale? That the sender cannot know for sure whether the recipient will use the pills illegally or not. So it’s totally okay.

The U.S. Postal Service is allowed to deliver abortion pills anywhere, even in places where abortion is illegal.

Georgetown Law professor Lawrence Gostin told the Washington Post that this Justice Department opinion is “a major expansion of abortion access in the United States.”

So, to recap—the Biden administration has used the FDA, the Justice Department, and the Post Office, which all fall under the executive branch, to provide an end-run around the Supreme Court’s Dobbs v. Jackson decision.

Expanding abortion was easy—simple policy tweaks and declarations that carry the force of law without an ounce of input from actual lawmakers in Congress—all because it comes from the grotesque, bloated, apparently pro-death executive branch.

Glenn is one of the most outspoken critics of the World Economic Forum and their vision to use crises to reconstruct the world order known as The Great Reset. The recent WEF summit in Davos confirms what Glenn has long warned about: globalist elites seek to upend our democracy, freedoms, and way of life to achieve their utopian climate goals. Here are 15 quotes from the 2023 Davos Summit, revealing their true intentions in their own words:

1. Saving the planet

When you hear the word, "Davos," the first thought that should pop into your mind is an elite group getting together to save the world from imminent climate disaster... at least they think of themselves that way. According to John Kerry:

I mean, it's so almost extraterrestrial to think about saving the planet.

2. Private jets

What most people think when they hear the word "Davos" is a group of global elites flying in on private jets to talk about climate change... and yes, John Kerry does own a private jet, no matter how many times he denies it:

I fly commercial [...] Exclusively.

3. Global Collaboration Village

You always hear some weird, dystopian projects coming out of WEF, like "The Global Collaboration Village," a new metaverse community aimed at strengthening "global cooperation." It sounds like the next installment of Brave New World. According to Klaus Schwab, Founder and President of the WEF:

The Global Collaboration Village is the pioneering effort to use the metaverse for public good, to create global cooperation and to strengthen global cooperation in the metaverse or using metaverse technologies. For me, it's a dream coming true because the village allows the Forum to create a more larger and open platform where everybody can participate.

4. Climate revolution

However, the core theme throughout WEF summits is the immediate need for a climate revolution and how businesses are selfishly blocking the revolution because they want to make an extra buck. Here's how John Kerry summed up the sentiment:

How do we get there? The lesson I have learned in the last years [...] is money, money, money, money, money, money, money.

5. Do or die

This often turns into alarmist language, like having to choose between wealth and our planet's survival... Joyeeta Gupta, Professor of Environment and Development in the Global South at University of Amsterdam, said it eloquently:

If we do the minimum at this pivotable moment in our history, then we and our children – even if we are rich – will live in the danger zone. But if we – business people, governments, citizens, cities – take action today, then we and our children will have a future worth looking forward to.

6. Colossal risks

Potsdam Institute's director Johan Rockström, used similar language, claiming we are "taking colossal risks with the future of civilization":

We are taking colossal risks with the future of civilization on Earth, we are degrading the life support systems that we all depend on, we are actually pushing the entire Earth system to a point of destabilization, pushing Earth outside of the state that has supported civilization since we left the last Ice Age 10,000 years ago.

7. Rain bombs

"Colossal risks" like... rain bombs? We didn't make that up. Ask Al Gore:

That’s what’s boiling the oceans, creating these atmospheric rivers, and the rain bombs.

Courtesy of the World Economic Forum

8. Survival comes down to this

How do we secure our survival? According to UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, we have to "end our addiction to fossil fuels." This entails wiping out our entire energy industry, displacing millions of workers, and relying on global governments to usher in a new green industry. In his words:

So, we need to act together to close the emissions gap, and that means to phase out progressively coal and supercharge the renewable revolution, to end the addiction to fossil fuels, and to stop our self-defeating war on nature.

9. Complete transformation

It isn't hyperbolic to argue that the globalist climate goals will completely transform the world economy. Even EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen admitted:

The net-zero transformation is already causing huge industrial, economic and geopolitical shifts – by far the quickest and the most pronounced in our lifetime. It is changing the nature of work and the shape of our industry.

10. Scientific necessity

Of course, to bring about this "net-zero" transformation, we will have to override small, "political expediencies" like democracy to do what is "scientifically necessary." According to Zurich Insurance Group’s head of sustainability risk John Scott:

We’re living in a world right now where what’s scientifically necessary, and what is politically expedient don’t match.

11. Illegal hate speech

Doing away with "political expediencies" would also require the censorship of dissent, which would likely manifest in hate-speech laws. When asked by Brian Stelter how the discussion of disinformation relates to everything else happening today in Davos, European Commission VP Věra Jourová shared this prediction:

Illegal hate speech, which you will have soon also in the U.S. I think that we have a strong reason why we have this in the criminal law.

12. Climate first

We will also have to forego national interests on the international stage. America won't be able to advocate for policies and interests that benefit Americans. Instead, we will sacrifice national interests for the sake of global climate interests. French economy minister Bruno Le Maire said:

The key question is not China First, US First, Europe First. The key question for all of us is Climate First.

13. The role of war

We can also expect globalist leaders to use crises, like the war in Ukraine, to expedite the "net-zero transformation." Chancellor of Germany Olaf Scholz said:

Ultimately, our goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 has been given an additional boost by Putin’s war. Now we have even more cause to move away from fossil fuels.

14. Blame game

Globalist leaders will continue to blame ALL of the crises in our society on climate change to justify the "net-zero transition," from the energy shortage to "mistrust, selfishness [and] xenophobia." Prime Minister of Spain Pedro Sanchez said:

Our present struggle is not only against Putin or the energy shortage. It is also against fear, mistrust, selfishness, xenophobia, and environmental disaster. And its outcome will define life in the West and beyond for decades to come.

15. Sacrifice for the greater good

While we sacrifice our national interests for the sake of the "greater global good," we can expect our foreign enemies, like China, to benefit. Suisse Chairman Axel Lehmann said:

The growth forecasts now for China is 4.5%. I would not personally be surprised when that would be topped.

Conclusion

Glenn has been clear about the distinction between wanting to transition to green practices on your own accord and being forced into that transition by globalist, unelected elites. Leaders at Davos will continue to use alarmist language to justify their crackdown on democracy and freedom to bring about their leftist utopia. We have to cut through the alarmist language and in order to protect our freedoms.

Glenn has focused on exposing the dark side of the gender movements waging our culture war, and now, there's a new "trend" emerging as an offshoot to the transgender movement. A growing online community, particularly of men, who consider themselves "involuntarily celibate" or "incels" believe they can live a better life as a trans woman. Why? This community purports the world is rigged against men, particularly against traditionally "unattractive men." What's the solution? Stop being a man...

Incel or "involutarily celibate" communities have existed online in the dark corners of Reddit and Discord for years. The groups are marked by a hatred towards women, blaming them for rigging the world in their favor and denying them of sex. Several members of this growing community have been responsible for large acts of violence, most notably Alek Minassian, who killed 10 and injured 16 after driving a van into a busy area of Toronto in 2021.

However, the transgender movement has presented a new option for incel members: if you can't beat 'em, join 'em... or, in the Transmaxxers' case, "become them."

The online Transmaxxer's Manifesto says, “Since females have the upper hand on the dating market, transitioning from male to female will usually improve your options when it comes to getting sex.” According to the manifesto, transitioning to female not only opens up a different pool of sexual partners, but moreover, you gain access to female-only spaces and are “able to extract resources from males.”

“Since females have the upper hand on the dating market, transitioning from male to female will usually improve your options when it comes to getting sex.”

Another member wrote, "If you do not currently feel like living as a female you might have to work on fixing that ... Identifying as male or being emotionally attached to a male body is bad for you if being male results in you living a bad life.”

This new movement is significant because it is in stark contrast to the mainstream narrative that "transgenderism" is an innate quality. Now, it can be an "option" people choose for social advantage. A moderator going by the alias “Vintologi” on the Transmaxxing Discord server, which boasts over 1,200 members, told The Daily Caller:

Transmaxxing is about transitioning for personal gain rather than focusing on things like "gender identity." ... What matters when it comes to medical transition is whether or not said transition would actually be beneficial, thus the extent to which gender identity is innate does not inform us much regarding when medical transition is appropriate.

One incel member on Reddit lamented that he can't Transmaxx to "have sex with white trans women" and to have "all the benefits of [being] female."

Transmaxxing sheds light on a concerning issue as an increasing number of people, particularly the youth, identify as "transgender." What used to be considered as a "finge case" is now being seen as a social advantage. Glenn recently sat down with de-transitioner Chloe Cole, and the amount of pressure she experienced to become a transgender man AS A TEENAGER was ASTOUNDING. She discussed the new community, friendships, and affirmation she gained when she started her transition journey, and she lost ALL of those social perks when she began de-transitioning. She exchanged affirmation for death-threats, friendships for stone-cold silence.

Transmaxxing is a very specific example of a larger movement that is deeply concerning. Not only is the thansgender ideology problematic on its own merits, but now, we are seeing a rise of a distinction of "social advantage" based on gender affiliation. This is deviating away from the original notion that transgenderism is an innate quality. Now, many consider it more "socially advantageous" to identify as transgender than with your biological gender.

At the same time President Biden's misplaced classified documents were sitting in his house, garage, and office at the Penn Biden Center, a whole lot of Chinese money was flowing around him. Is this just a coincidence, or did the Chinese get anything in return? Investigative journalist John Solomon joins to break down what was going on here ...

Want more from Glenn Beck?

To enjoy more of Glenn’s masterful storytelling, thought-provoking analysis and uncanny ability to make sense of the chaos, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution and live the American dream.