Glenn talks with Fred Thompson


Fred Thompson

GLENN: Third most listened to show in all of America. From Rockefeller Plaza in Midtown Manhattan, third most listened to show. Hello, you sick twisted freak. Welcome to it. Little pig, little pig, let me in. Do you feel like the big bad wolf today saying to the House, I'm going to blow your house down if you let me in? Little pig, little pig, my gosh what did they do last night in the Senate? Oh, I am for a bailout but the wool research and the NASCAR tracks kind of make this feel really dirty. But maybe it's just me. And Sarah Palin, tonight the big debate. Sarah, just go out and be yourself. And if you flub it, if you screw it up, then go back to Alaska and keep working on it and come back. Just don't change. Don't let them win. I swear to you I don't know why people -- I don't know why people run sometimes. I really don't. I think this is why Fred Thompson was kind of like, oh, jeez, really? All right, I really don't want the job but, okay, I'll do it. Fred Thompson is with us now. Hello, Fred, how are you, sir?

SENATOR THOMPSON: Hello, Glenn. Hey, man, I'm from the government and I'm here to help you, okay?

GLENN: (Laughing). Run for your life! Jeez, Fred. Let me ask you this: Could you have voted for this last night?

SENATOR THOMPSON: Look, I'm here today with John McCain's folks and with Sarah Palin and I'm focused on her today and I've got a lot of thoughts about this other but, you know, it's not my place just to give my own personal opinions all day when I'm here on their behalf. I will say that the thing that concerns me the most is not that they've come up with a big bill. It's that there's not been time enough. It takes them six months to change a light bulb up there ordinarily and they were kind of giving a (inaudible) and no hearings and none of that. I'd feel a whole lot better about it if we had some other alternatives that were truly considered and some other experts contacted and gotten their ideas who are coming out now, Isaac and Larry Lindsey and people like that who have a great deal of confidence in, who haven't been talked to about it. I'm just not at all sure, from the outside looking in, but not at all sure that we've explored all the options here.

GLENN: That's the longest answer I've ever heard for, these people are fools. Maybe I'm reading too much into it. I mean, it's working so far. The Dow is down 232 points.

Anyway, so let's talk about Sarah Palin. How do you -- people are saying that the McCain people have boxed her in. I don't know if it's the McCain people as much as it is the media. I think she is so afraid of making mistakes now because everything -- I mean, the question that she had on television the other day, "Where do you get your news, where do you get your news, where do you get your news." What do they think? The Dummy Times? She can read. What difference does that make?

SENATOR THOMPSON: That's all about them.

GLENN: Yeah, how do you not lose your confidence when everyone is trying to kill you?

SENATOR THOMPSON: She has undergone what -- I don't know of anybody else in public life since I've been around has gone through. She's undergone a frenzied attack on her and her family and, you know, everything from having her e-mail hacked into, to criticism of her children and her life and they've descended on Alaska, you know, they got more lawyers up there than they got polar bears now trying to dredge up any kind of scandal that they can on her. They have now taken to -- they got a backlash on that. So now they are using the news media to ridicule her and take these little snippets from these interviews and embarrass her. Anybody who's been in public life, certainly Barack Obama and Joe Biden have had these days, have had these answers, have had these particular moments and so forth and they are just doing whatever they can. The media's got a vested interest in her demise. She was not on their short list. They did not get a chance to vet her beforehand. We know what that means. They were surprised. They don't like surprises. They are not getting the access to her that they want and now they are making her pay a price for it. It always happens that way. You always pay a price, and the American people have to decide whether or not this is fair treatment or this is a double standard, and it obviously is. Joe Biden is protected by the fact that his gaffes are so numerous and on such a regular basis that they just kind of shake their head and smile and say that's just Joe being Joe.

GLENN: Do you remember --

SENATOR THOMPSON: And she says a little something, you know, and the world's coming to an end.

GLENN: Do you remember when Hillary Clinton made the, "You know, I was under sniper fire."

SENATOR THOMPSON: Well, Joe did the same thing.

GLENN: I was just going to ask if you knew about, this amazing story. Where is this story?

SENATOR THOMPSON: Where is the story when he was in Iraq, supposedly he got shot at, his helicopter was supposedly forced down in Afghanistan. None of it happened.



GLENN: And yet --

SENATOR THOMPSON: This top level meeting that our officials had in Iran with Iranian officials didn't happen. He apparently didn't know we get half of our coal from -- half of our electricity from coal plants. He certainly didn't know who was President, you know, when the stock market crash happened. You know, he's made ethnic jokes. And this is the guy with a background, with a plagiarism problem. You would think that that would be relevant to today's media, but they're giving him a pass. They mention it briefly and go on, giving him a pass basically because he's been doing it for 35 years and they're just now catching Sarah Palin a little bit here and there and that's, you know, the day of her debate and that's their idea of equal treatment. I'm tired of her getting beat up with no response and I'm like you. I think, just let her do what she's done. It's not exactly like she's been unsuccessful. She has been successful in everything that she has done, and the only people that she's accountable to love her in overwhelming numbers.

GLENN: It's down I think to, like, what is it? 78% or something like that?

SENATOR THOMPSON: I wish some of these detractors had numbers like that.

GLENN: I know. There's --

SENATOR THOMPSON: Compare that to 9% approval rating in congress.

GLENN: Which Barack Obama are part of and John McCain as well.

SENATOR THOMPSON: All of the experience out.

GLENN: So. Fred, what I'm honestly trying to figure out is these weasels, there's too many of these weasels in Washington just sold their soul to the devil. There are a lot of good people there, but there's a lot of people. We are now paying for the people in the Nineties just doing special favors so they could get elected and reelected and reelected. That's what we're paying for.

SENATOR THOMPSON: And we sit back and watch it happen and reward them too often.

GLENN: Right.

SENATOR THOMPSON: We have ourselves to blame for a lot of this, Glenn. You know, it is the ultimate test of democracy when you learn you've got the keys to your own treasury. Now, what we're doing, we're seeing our financial markets brought down as we speak because people in congress who are now leading the reform effort, Barney Frank and Chris Dodd, primarily what they did in protecting reform from Freddie Mae when John McCain was trying to get that changed and all. Now we're looking at an entitlement crisis as we become a more aging population. Social Security and Medicare are unsustainable. We're told that by all the experts. We're seeing the next big crisis play out on a daily basis. We're being told by a few knowledgeable people, neither the politicians, nor the people apparently will have that addressed because it requires some temporary changes. We've simply got to get behind that and make these politicians pay a price for not addressing it and reward the ones who have guts enough to stand up and do it. One of the things McCain doesn't get enough credit for is that when they expanded the entitlement program up there a couple of years ago, he's one of the few conservatives to vote no.

GLENN: Yeah, I will tell you this, that I do believe that he has fought many times against big government. He has fought against earmarks. However, I mean, you're on his dime today. So I'm going to ask you a question about him. I for the life of me don't understand how he could have voted for it when there were earmarks for wooden toy arrows, wool research and say, you know what, if we believe in this package, we do it. I'm a guy who had my arms pulled out of the sockets, for the love of Pete. You do something with honor. But there's no honor in this bill. This is ridiculous.

SENATOR THOMPSON: What they apparently did is take the tax extenders and another bill, totally separate thing, and put it with this because it was "Must-pass" legislation. They do that all the time unfortunately.

GLENN: But why, with the country --

SENATOR THOMPSON: You've got to vote up or down on the whole package.

GLENN: I understand that. But with the country 9-1 against, John McCain standing in front of the capitol building and saying America, this is what they're doing. I believe in the bailout and we need to have a bailout, but I have you on my side. These guys are just going for pork, they're just doing whatever's good for them. You believe in something; I believe in something. You put pressure on them to pass a clean bailout, from three pages to 453? He would have -- it would have been a clear win for him.

SENATOR THOMPSON: I can't speak for him on that because I haven't talked to him about it, but I think it's clear that he got up there and he talked to the people that he needed to talk to and the ones that I haven't and the people whose judgment he relies on. He's been up there a long time, and he concluded that we had to do something and that this was the only thing that was going to be timely enough to do any good, and you had to make those compromises in order to do that. That's the only thing that I can see and, you know, we'll just have to talk to him about that. He's his own best person on that but, you know, he's the last guy, he's the last guy that deserves criticism for not standing up against all odds on things.

GLENN: I know, I know.

SENATOR THOMPSON: That's been his entire career. This gets back to the qualification issue that they mention on Sarah Palin. What's more important? Having the experience doing the wrong thing or being willing to raise a little hell and change things that need to be changed. That's her history. That's her background. That's McCain's background. Compare that to all these other folks on Wall Street and in Washington with all this expertise who we've been relying on. The underlying problem here is that nobody trusts anybody in Washington or Wall Street today and that's the reaction that you're getting. People are sitting back and saying, you know, they may be right, but why should I trust them? I have no reason to trust them.

GLENN: You are exactly right. You are exactly right on that, which goes to this fundamental question. Sarah Palin, somebody coming into this system, and I know she's not -- this isn't just some housewife off the street and say, hey, you're going to be the vice president. I know she has experience and significant experience. She was dealing with corruption in Alaska with the oil industry.

SENATOR THOMPSON: Exactly.

GLENN: And she won. So she's got experience and she's a tough cookie. However, what America likes about her is that she's real and she's connected to people. Is it possible, Senator Fred Thompson, to go to this cesspool and remain true to yourself? Is it probable that you can get into Washington and not be sucked into it and just --

SENATOR THOMPSON: Well, Glenn, I think John has done that. I think John has done that. You'd be surprised at some of those luncheon meetings that we would have up there. I sat next to him on the floor of the Senate for a long time and, you know, the Democrats two or three times a week get together and have their luncheons and plot strategy as to how to defeat Republicans, Republicans do the same thing on the other side of the capitol. You'd be surprised how utterly isolated on some occasions John would be and he would turn out to be right, he would turn out to be doing the right thing but he has been willing to be unpopular and to do the courageous things on occasion after occasion, some of which I've not agreed with him on but he's always been consistent in showing the courage and determination, looking out for the long-term interest of the country. And that's what I tried to do. And that's why I think in my case it's worth a few years of your life but it's not worth your entire life. Because you're not all you can do, until the people determine that there ought to be more people like him, not much is going to happen. And we sit back, I mean, we've got to look ourselves in the mirror. We sit back and we -- all of us spend probably more than is prudent and all of us just let things roll, let the good times roll and the stock market's going up. We ask no questions, and the government is creating Fannie and Freddie and the government is putting everybody in a house whether they can afford one or not. I grew up my life renting, my folks did. And I rented part of my own life. You know, it's not the end of the world if you can't afford it to wait a little bit until you can afford a down payment. But we all go along with all of that. Then it hits the wall and, you know, we're looking for somebody to blame. There are plenty of people that reside in Washington. Wall Street and some of them reside in our own living room.

GLENN: Very good. Fred Thompson, thank you, sir. Appreciate it.

SENATOR THOMPSON: Appreciate it.

GLENN: You've got it. Bye-bye.

SENATOR THOMPSON: Thank you.

It's time for our April 29, 2019 edition of our Candidate Power Rankings. We get to add two new candidates, write about a bunch of people that have little to no chance of winning, and thank the heavens we are one day closer to the end of all of this.

In case you're new here, read our explainer about how all of this works:

The 2020 Democratic primary power rankings are an attempt to make sense out of the chaos of the largest field of candidates in global history.

Each candidate gets a unique score in at least thirty categories, measuring data like polling, prediction markets, fundraising, fundamentals, media coverage, and more. The result is a candidate score between 0-100. These numbers will change from week to week as the race changes.

The power rankings are less a prediction on who will win the nomination, and more a snapshot of the state of the race at any given time. However, early on, the model gives more weight to fundamentals and potentials, and later will begin to prioritize polling and realities on the ground.

These power rankings include only announced candidates. So, when you say "WAIT!! WHERE'S XXXXX????" Read the earlier sentence again.

If you're like me, when you read power rankings about sports, you've already skipped ahead to the list. So, here we go.

See previous editions here.

20. Wayne Messam: 13.4 (Last week: 18th / 13.4)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

A former staffer of Wayne Messam is accusing his wife of hoarding the campaign's money.

First, how does this guy have "former" staffers? He's been running for approximately twelve minutes.

Second, he finished dead last in the field in fundraising with $44,000 for the quarter. Perhaps hoarding whatever money the campaign has is not the worst idea.

His best shot at the nomination continues to be something out of the series "Designated Survivor."

Other headlines:

19. Marianne Williamson: 17.1 (Last week: 17th / 17.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Marianne Williamson would like you to pay for the sins of someone else's great, great, great grandparents. Lucky you!

Williamson is on the reparations train like most of the field, trying to separate herself from the pack by sheer monetary force.

How much of your cash does she want to spend? "Anything less than $100 billion is an insult." This is what I told the guy who showed up to buy my 1989 Ford Tempo. It didn't work then either.

Other headlines:

18. John Delaney: 19.7 (Last week: 15th / 20.3)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Good news: John Delaney brought in $12.1 million in the first quarter, enough for fifth in the entire Democratic field!

Bad news: 97% of the money came from his own bank account.

Other headlines:

17. Eric Swalwell: 20.2 (Last week: 16th / 20.2)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

The Eric Swalwell formula:

  • Identify news cycle
  • Identify typical left-wing reaction
  • Add steroids

Democrats said there was obstruction in the Mueller report. Swalwell said there “certainly" was collusion.

Democrats said surveillance of the Trump campaign was no big deal. Swalwell said there was no need to apologize even if it was.

Democrats said William Barr mishandled the release of the Mueller report. Swalwell said he must resign.

Democrats say they want gun restrictions. Swalwell wants them all melted down and the liquid metal to be poured on the heads of NRA members. (Probably.)

16. Seth Moulton: 20.6 (NEW)

Who is Seth Moulton?

No, I'm asking.

Moulton falls into the category of congressman looking to raise his profile and make his future fundraising easier— not someone who is actually competing for the presidency.

He tried to block Nancy Pelosi as speaker, so whatever help he could get from the establishment is as dry as Pelosi's eyes when the Botox holds them open for too long.

Moulton is a veteran, and his military service alone is enough to tell you that he's done more with his life than I'll ever do with mine. But it's hard to see the road to the White House for a complete unknown in a large field of knowns.

Don't take my word for it, instead read this depressing story that he's actually telling people on purpose:

"I said, you know, part of my job is take tough questions," Moulton told the gathered business and political leaders. "You can ask even really difficult questions. And there was still silence. And then finally, someone in the way back of the room raised her hand, and she said, 'Who are you?' "

Yeah. Who are you?

15. Tim Ryan: 21.6 (Last week: 14th / 20.7)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

When you're talking to less than sixteen people in Iowa one week after your launch, you don't have too much to be excited about.

Ryan did get an interview on CNN, where he also talked to less than sixteen people.

He discussed his passion for the Dave Matthews Band, solidifying a key constituency in the year 1995.

Other headlines:

14. Tulsi Gabbard: 25.2 (Last week: 14th / 25.9)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Tulsi Gabbard torched Kamala Harris in fundraising!!!!! (Among Indian-American donors.)

No word on who won the coveted handi-capable gender-neutral sodium-sensitive sub-demographic.

She received a mostly false rating for her attack on the Trump administration regarding its new policy on pork inspections, a topic not exactly leading the news cycle. Being from Hawaii, the state which leads the nation in Spam consumption, she was probably surprised when this didn't go mega viral.

Other headlines:

13. Andrew Yang: 27.2 (Last week: 12th / 27.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Yang has a few go-to lines when he's on the campaign trail, such as: "The opposite of Donald Trump is an Asian man who likes math." Another is apparently the Jeb-esque "Chant my name! Chant my name!"

Yang continues to be one of the more interesting candidates in this race, essentially running a remix of the "One Tough Nerd" formula that worked for Michigan Governor Rick Snyder.

I highly recommend listening to his interview with Ben Shapiro, where Yang earns respect as the only Democratic presidential candidate in modern history to actually show up to a challenging and in-depth interview with a knowledgeable conservative.

But hidden in the Shapiro interview is the nasty little secret of the Yang campaign. His policy prescriptions, while still very liberal, come off as far too sane for him to compete in this Stalin look-alike contest.

Other headlines:

12. Jay Inslee: 30.4 (Last week: 11th / 30.4)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

If you read the Inslee candidate profile, I said he was running a one-issue climate campaign. This week, he called for a climate change-only debate, and blamed Donald Trump for flooding in Iowa.

He also may sign the nation's first "human composting" legalization bill. He can start by composting his presidential campaign.

Other headlines:

11. John Hickenlooper: 32.2 (Last week: 10th / 32.0)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

John Hickenlooper was sick of being asked if he would put a woman on the ticket, in the 0.032% chance he actually won the nomination.

So he wondered why the female candidates weren't being asked if they would name a male VP if they won?

Seems like a logical question, but only someone who is high on tailpipe fumes would think it was okay to ask in a Democratic primary. Hickenlooper would be better served by just transitioning to a female and demanding other candidates are asked why they don't have a transgendered VP.

Other headlines:

10. Julian Castro: 35.7 (Last week: 9th / 36.2)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Lowering expectations is a useful strategy when your wife asks you to put together an Ikea end table, or when you've successfully convinced Charlize Theron to come home with you. But is it a successful campaign strategy?

Julian Castro is about to find out. He thinks the fact that everyone thinks he's crashing and burning on the campaign trail so far is an "advantage." Perhaps he can take the rest of the field by surprise on Super Tuesday when they finally realize he's actually running.

Other headlines:

9. Kirsten Gillibrand: 38.1 (Last week: 8th / 37.8)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Gillibrand wants you to know that the reason her campaign has been such a miserable failure so far, is because she called for a certain senator to step down. The problem might also be that another certain senator isn't a good presidential candidate.

She also spent the week arm wrestling, and dancing at a gay bar called Blazing Saddle. In this time of division, one thing we can all agree on: Blazing Saddle is a really solid name for a gay bar.

Other headlines:

8. Amy Klobuchar: 45.1 (Last week: 7th / 45.5)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Klobuchar is attempting a run in the moderate wing of the Democratic primary, which would be a better idea if such a wing existed.

She hasn't committed to impeaching Donald Trump and has actually voted to confirm over half of his judicial nominees. My guess is this will not be ignored by her primary opponents.

She also wants to resolve an ongoing TPS issue, which I assume means going by Peter Gibbons' desk every morning and making sure he got the memo about the new cover sheets.

Other headlines:

7. Elizabeth Warren: 45.3 (Last week: 6th / 46.0)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Elizabeth Warren is bad at everything she does while she's campaigning. I don't really even watch Game of Thrones, and the idea that Warren would write a story about how the show proves we need more powerful women makes me cringe.

Of course, more powerful people of all the 39,343 genders are welcome, but it's such a transparent attempt at jumping on the back of a pop-culture event to pander to female voters, it's sickening.

We can only hope that when she's watching Game of Thrones, she's gonna grab her a beer.

Other headlines:

6. Cory Booker: 54.9 (Last week: 5th / 55.5)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Booker is tied with Kamala Harris for the most missed Senate votes of the campaign so far. He gets criticized for this, but I think he should miss even more votes.

Booker is also pushing a national day off on Election Day—because the approximately six months of early voting allowed in every state just isn't enough.

Of course, making it easier to vote doesn't mean people are going to vote for Booker. So he's throwing trillions of dollars in bribes (my word, not his) to seal the deal.

Bookermania is in full effect, with 40 whole people showing up to his appearance in Nevada. Local press noted that the people were of "varying ages," an important distinction to most other crowds, which are entirely comprised of people with the same birthday.

Other headlines:

5. Robert Francis O’Rourke: 60.2 (Last week: 4th /62.6)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

Kirsten Gillibrand gave less than 2% of her income to charity. The good news is that she gave about seven times as much as Beto O'Rourke. Robert Francis, or Bob Frank, also happens to be one of the wealthiest candidates in the race. His late seventies father-in-law has been estimated to be worth as much as $20 billion, though the number is more likely to be a paltry $500 million.

He's made millions from a family company investing in fossil fuels and pharmaceutical stocks, underpaid his taxes for multiple years, and is suing the government to lower property taxes on a family-owned shopping center.

He's also all but disappeared. It's a long race, and you don't win a nomination in April of the year before election day. If he's being frugal and figuring out what he believes, it might be a good move.

But it's notable that all the "pretty boy" hype that Bob Frank owned going into this race has been handed over to Mayor Pete. Perhaps Beto is spending his time working on curbing the sweating, the hand gestures, and the issues with jumping on counters like a feline.

Other headlines:

4. Pete Buttigieg: 62.9 (Last week: 3rd / 62.9)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

When we first put candidates in tiers earlier this year, we broke everyone into five categories from "Front Runners" to "Eh, no." In the middle is a category called "Maybe, if everything goes right," and that's where we put Pete Buttigieg.

Well, everything has gone right so far. But Mayor Pete will be interested to learn that the other 19 candidates in this race are not going to hand him this nomination. Eventually, they will start saying negative things about him (they've started the opposition research process already), and it will be interesting to see how Petey deals with the pressure. We've already seen how it has affected Beto in a similar situation.

The media has spoken endlessly about the sexual orientation of Buttigieg, but not every Democratic activist is impressed. Barney Frank thinks the main reason he's getting this amount of attention is because he is gay. And for some, being a gay man just means you're a man, which isn't good enough.

When you base your vote on a candidate's genitals, things can get confusing.

Other headlines:

3. Kamala Harris: 68.6 (Last week: 1st / 69.1)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

There are a couple of ways to view the Harris candidacy so far.

#1 - Harris launched with much fanfare and an adoring media. She has since lost her momentum. Mayor Pete and former Mayor Bernie have the hype, and Kamala is fading.

#2 - Harris is playing the long game. She showed she can make an impact with her launch, but realizes that a media "win" ten months before an important primary means nothing. She's working behind the scenes and cleaning up with donations, prominent supporters, and loads of celebrities to execute an Obama style onslaught.

I tend to be in category 2, but I admit that's somewhat speculative. Harris seems to be well positioned to make a serious run, locking up more than double the amount of big Clinton and Obama fundraisers than any other candidate.

One interesting policy development for Harris that may hurt her in the primary is her lack of utter disgust for the nation of Israel. There's basically one acceptable position in a Democratic primary when it comes to Israel, which is that it's a racist and terrorist state, existing only to torture innocent Palestinians.

Certainly no one is going to mistake Harris for Donald Trump, but a paragraph like this is poison to the modern Democratic primary voter:

"Her support for Israel is central to who she is," Harris' campaign communications director, Lily Adams, told McClatchy. "She is firm in her belief that Israel has a right to exist and defend itself, including against rocket attacks from Gaza."

Just portraying the rocket attacks as "attacks" is controversial these days for Democrats, and claiming they are responses to attacks indicates you think the Jeeeewwwwwwwws aren't the ones responsible for the start of every hostility. Heresy!

Someone get Kamala a copy of the 'Protocols of the Elders of Zion' before she blows her chance to run the free world.

2. Bernie Sanders: 69.2 (Last week: 2nd / 68.3)

CANDIDATE PROFILE

If Bernie Sanders hates millionaires as much as he claims, he must hate the mirror. As a millionaire, it might surprise some that he donated only 1% to charity. But it shouldn't.

It's entirely consistent with Sandersism to avoid giving to private charity. Why would you? Sanders believes the government does everything better than the private sector. He should be giving his money to the government.

Of course, he doesn't. He takes the tax breaks from the evil Trump tax plan he derides. He spends his money on fabulous vacation homes. He believes in socialism for thee, not for me.

Yes, this is enough to convince the Cardi B's of the world, all but guaranteeing a lock on the rapper-and-former-stripper-that-drugged-and-stole-from-her-prostitution-clients demographic. But can that lack of consistency hold up in front of general election voters?

If Bernie reads this and would like a path to credibility, clear out your bank account and send it here:

Gifts to the United States
U.S. Department of the Treasury
Funds Management Branch
P.O. Box 1328
Parkersburg, WV 26106-1328


Other headlines:

1. Joseph Robinette Biden Jr.: 78.8 (NEW)

Joe has run for president 113 times during his illustrious career, successfully capturing the presidency in approximately zero of his campaigns.

However, when the eternally woke Barack Obama had a chance to elevate a person of color, woman, or anything from the rainbow colored QUILTBAG, he instead chose the oldest, straightest, whitest guy he could find, and our man Robinette was the beneficiary.

Biden has been through a lot, much of it of his own making. Forget about his plagiarism and propensity to get a nostril full of each passing females' hair, his dealings while vice president in both Ukraine and China are a major general election vulnerability— not to mention a legal vulnerability for his children. But hey, win the presidency and you can pardon everyone, right?

His supposed appeal to rust belt voters makes him, on paper, a great candidate to take on Trump. The Clinton loss hinged on about 40,000 voters changing their mind from Hillary to Donald in a few states—the exact areas where victory could possibly be secured by someone named "Middle Class Joe" (as he alone calls himself.)

No one loves Joe Biden more than Joe Biden, and there's a relatively convincing case for his candidacy. But we must remember this unquestionable truth: Joe Biden is not good at running for president.

He's a gaffe machine that churns out mistake after mistake, hoping only to have his flubs excused by his unending charisma. But, will that work without the use of his legendary groping abilities? Only time, and a few dozen unnamed women, will tell.

Also, yes. Robinette is really his middle name.

If only Karl Marx were alive today to see his wackiest ideas being completely paraded around. He would be so proud. I can see him now: Sprawled out on his hammock from REI, fiddling around for the last vegan potato chip in the bag as he binge-watches Academy Awards on his 70-inch smart TV. In between glances at his iPhone X (he's got a massive Twitter following), he sips Pepsi. In his Patagonia t-shirt and NIKE tennis shoes, he writes a line or two about "oppression" and "the have-nots" as part of his job for Google.

His house is loaded with fresh products from all the woke companies. In the fridge, he's got Starbucks, he loves their soy milk. He's got Ben & Jerry's in the freezer. He tells everyone that, if he shaved, he'd use Gillette, on account of the way they stand up for the Have-Nots. But, really, Marx uses Dollar Shave Club because it's cheaper, a higher quality. Secretly, he loves Chic-Fil-A. He buys all his comic books off Amazon. The truth is, he never thought people would actually try to make the whole "communism" thing work.

RELATED: SOCIALISM: This is the most important special we have done

Companies have adopted a form of socialism that is sometimes called woke capitalism. They use their status as corporations to spread a socialist message and encourage people to do their part in social justice. The idea of companies in America using socialism at all is as confusing and ridiculous as a donkey in a prom dress: How did this happen? Is it a joke? Why is nobody bursting out in laughter? How far is this actually going to go? Does someone actually believe that they can take a donkey to prom?

Companies have adopted a form of socialism that is sometimes called woke capitalism.

On the micro level, Netflix has made some socialist moves: The "like/dislike" voting system was replaced after a Netflix-sponsored stand-up special by Amy Schumer received as tidal wave of thumb-downs. This summer, Netflix will take it a step further in the name of squashing dissent by disabling user comments and reviews. And of course most of us share a Netflix account with any number of people. Beyond that, they're as capitalist as the next mega-company.

Except for one area: propaganda. Netflix has started making movie-length advertisements for socialism. They call them "documentaries," but we know better than that. The most recent example is "Knock Down the House," which comes out tomorrow. The 86-minute-long commercial for socialism follows four "progressive Democrat" women who ran in the 2018 midterms, including our favorite socialist AOC.

Here's a snippet from the movie so good that you'll have to fight the urge to wave your USSR flag around the room:

This is what the mainstream media wants you to believe. They want you to be moved. They want the soundtrack to inspire you to go out and do something.

Just look at how the mainstream media treated the recent high-gloss "documentary" about Ilhan Omar, "Time for Ilhan." It received overwhelmingly bad ratings on IMDb and other user-review platforms, but got a whopping 93% on the media aggregator Rotten Tomatoes.

This is exactly what the media wants you to think of when you hear the word socialism. Change. Empowerment. Strength. Diversity. They spend so much energy trying to make socialism cool. They gloss right over the unbelievable death toll. BlazeTV's own Matt Kibbe made a great video on this exact topic.

Any notion of socialism in America is a luxury, made possible by capitalism. The woke companies aren't actually doing anything for socialism. If they're lucky, they might get a boost in sales, which is the only thing they want anyway.

We want to show you the truth. We want to tell you the stories you won't hear anywhere else, not on Netflix, not at some movie festival. We're going to tell you what mainstream media doesn't want you to know.

Look at how much history we've lost over the years. They changed it slowly. But they had to. Because textbooks were out. So people were watching textbooks. It was printed. You would bring the book home. Mom and dad might go through it and check it out. So you had to slowly do things.

Well, they're not anymore. There are no textbooks anymore. Now, you just change them overnight. And we are losing new history. History is being changed in realtime.

RELATED: 'Good Morning Texas' joins Glenn to get an inside look at Mercury Museum

You have to write down what actually is happening and keep a journal. Don't necessarily tell everybody. Just keep a journal for what is happening right now. At some point, our kids won't have any idea of the truth. They will not have any idea of what this country was, how it really happened. Who were the good guys. Who were the bad guys. Who did what.

As Michelle Obama said. Barack knows. We have to change our history. Well, that's exactly what's happening. But it's happening at a very rapid pace.

We have to preserve our history. It is being systematically erased.

I first said this fifteen years ago, people need clay plots. We have to preserve our history as people preserved histories in ancient days, with the dead see scrolls, by putting them in caves in a clay pot. We have to preserve our history. It is being systematically erased. And I don't mean just the history of the founding of our country. I mean the history that's happening right now.

And the history that's happening right now, you're a problem if you're a conservative or a Christian. You are now a problem on the left, if you disagree and fall out of line at all. This is becoming a fascistic party. And you know what a fascist is. It doesn't matter if you're a Democrat or a Republican or an independent. If you believe it's my way or the highway, if you believe that people don't have a right to their opinion or don't have a right to their own life — you could do be a fascist.

Christianity might seem pretty well-protected in the U.S., but that's not the case in many parts of the globe.

On Easter Sunday, suicide bombers made the news for killing 290 innocent Christians in Sri Lanka and injuring another 500. On Tuesday, ISIS claimed responsibility for the massacre. Of course, the Western world mourned this tragic loss of life on a holy day of worship, but we forget that this isn't an isolated incident. Indeed, Christians are discriminated at extreme levels worldwide, and it needs to be brought to light. And whenever we do highlight brutal persecutions such as the Easter bombings in Sri Lanka, we need to call them what they are — targeted attacks against Christians. Sadly, many of our politicians are deathly afraid to do so.

RELATED: Hey media, there is absolutely a war on Christians!

A 2018 Pew Research Center study found that Christians are harassed in 144 countries — the most of any other faith — slightly outnumbering Muslims for the top of the list. Additionally, Open Doors, a non-profit organization that works to serve persecuted Christians worldwide, found in their 2019 World Watch List that over 245 million Christians are seriously discriminated against for their religious beliefs. Sadly, this translates into 4,136 Christians killed and 2,625 either arrested, sentenced, imprisoned, or detained without trial over the year-long study period. And when it comes to churches, those in Sri Lanka were merely added to a long list of 1,266 Christian buildings attacked for their religion.

These breathtaking stats receive very little coverage in the Western world. And there seems to be a profound hesitation from politicians in discussing the issue of persecution against Christians. In the case of the Sri Lanka bombings, there's even a reluctance to use the word "Christian."

After the horrific Pittsburgh Synagogue and New Zealand Mosque shootings, Democrats rightfully acknowledged the disturbing trend of targeted attacks against Jews and Muslims. But some of these same politicians refer to the Sri Lanka bombings with careless ambiguity.

So why is it so hard for our leaders to acknowledge the persecutions Christians face?

Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, for instance, certainly did — calling the incursions "attacks on Easter worshippers." Understandably, the term confused and frustrated many Christians. Although, supporters of these politicians argued the term was appropriate since a recent Associated Press report used it, and it was later picked up by a variety of media outlets, including Fox News. However, as more Democrats like 2020 presidential candidate Julián Castro and Rep. Dan Kildee continued to use the phrase "Easter worshippers," it became clear that these politicians were going out of their way to avoid calling a spade a spade.

So why is it so hard for our leaders to acknowledge the persecutions Christians face? For starters, Christianity in democratic countries like the U.S. is seen differently than in devastated countries like Somalia. According to Pew Research, over 70% of Americans are Christian, with 66% of those Christians being white and 35% baby boomers. So while diverse Christians from all over the world are persecuted for their faith—in the U.S., Christians are a dominant religion full of old white people. This places Christians at the bottom of progressives' absurd intersectional totem poll, therefore leaving little sympathy for their cause. However, the differing experiences of Christians worldwide doesn't take away from the fact that they are unified in their beliefs.

By refusing to name the faith of the Sri Lankan martyrs, politicians are sending a message that they have very little, if no, concern about the growing amount of persecution against Christians worldwide.

Martyrs don't deserve to be known as "Easter worshippers." They should be known by the Christian faith they gave their lives for. Decent politicians need to call the tragedy in Sri Lanka what it is — a vicious attack on the Christian faith.

Patrick Hauf (@PatrickHauf) is a writer for Young Voices and Vice President of Lone Conservative. His work can be found in the Washington Examiner, Townhall, FEE, and more.