Stephen Moore 'Pork Barrel Congress'

GLENN BECK PROGRAM


BEGIN TRANSCRIPT

 GLENN: Stephen Moore from the Wall Street Journal, how are you, Steven?

MOORE: Hi, Glenn.

GLENN: How are things?

MOORE: A little poorer today after the budget passed yesterday.

GLENN: You know, this budget is -- what an outrage this thing is. Just loaded, loaded with pork. When are these guys ever going to get it?

MOORE: Well, we've got, first of all let's start with the fact that we now have America's $3 trillion, that's trillion with a T, dollar budget, something I never thought I would see in my lifetime.

GLENN: You know what, Stephen, I'm going to have to have you over at the house. A guy came up to me in line. I get some of the nicest gifts when I go out. Guy came up to me in line in Charleston and he handed me this big beautifully framed newspaper, the Charleston Observer, I believe it was, from 1795, and it's the front page of the newspaper and it's real. And he said, read the first two columns. And the first two columns was the federal budget in its entirety.

MOORE: Right. That's amazing. I'd love to get a copy of that.

GLENN: Oh, it's fantastic. It's fantastic.

MOORE: Hard to believe, you know. You look at what the budget was like in those early years because most of the things that the federal government spends money on today in my opinion, Glenn, are not even constitutional. I mean, let me give you a few examples of the things that your tax dollars are spent on in this budget. There's $700 million for a Minnesota bike trail, $113,000 for --



Stephen Moore

GLENN: Wait, wait, wait, wait. $700 million?

MOORE: For a bike trail.

GLENN: $700 million? Almost a billion dollars? Our embassy, which is the size of the national mall in Iraq was $750 million.

MOORE: Unbelievable. $113,000 for rodent control in Alaska.

GLENN: For what?

MOORE: Rodent control in Alaska.

GLENN: Leave the doors open in the back room. The rodents will freeze to death, Alaska.

MOORE: Then there's a million dollars for this energy project in the Louisiana Democrat William Jefferson. He is the one facing trial for bribery. He got in additional funds. And the amazing thing here is you may recall that when Nancy Pelosi, you know, said that she wanted to be speaker of the house so they could clean up the slop in Washington. Remember that last year? And that they were going to end all of this earmark spending. Well, it turns out there are just short of 13,000 of these special interest projects. I mean, we could go on and on for the full three hours that you are on going over these projects, but the point is that there are more pork projects than ever, it's cost the federal taxpayers about $15 billion a year and the waste goes on and on and on.

GLENN: Stephen, it's not just the Democrats that are doing this. The Republicans, right?

MOORE: Oh, yeah, it's Republicans, too. This is bipartisan, folks.

GLENN: So how do you stop that, Stephen?

MOORE: Well, I think one thing you have to do is I would have liked to see President Bush veto this budget. You know, the President has to be the one that guards the federal treasury and protects our pocket books and President Bush has agreed to sign this bill even though it has 13,000 of these projects.

GLENN: Why? Why?

MOORE: Why?

GLENN: Yeah.

MOORE: Because I think, well, for one thing he wanted the funding for Iraq and what the Democrats were doing was saying unless you give us our bike trails and our museums and post offices and parking garages, we're not going to give you the money to fund the troops.

GLENN: See, this is why, this is -- America would respect someone with a spine. They would respect somebody with a spine. Stand up against it. We don't negotiate with terrorists.

MOORE: I couldn't agree more. And that's what congress was doing. I mean, how despicable is that that they are basically saying unless you give us our pork spending so we can get reelected, we're not going to fund the troops, we're not going to give them, you know, the kinds of ammunition and the guns and the support that they need to fight this war. I mean, thaws outrageous.

GLENN: I had Ron Paul on TV last night for an hour and he said something, and I'm paraphrasing here, but I can't believe this is true. He said he wants to abolish the IRS. And I said, okay, so what do you replace it with? And he said, nothing. What? I mean, how do we raise taxes? And he said, if we abolish the IRS, if we eliminated the income tax, we would still as a government be taking in the same amount that we did ten years ago. Is that even possible?

MOORE: Well, you know, I'm all in favor of getting rid of the IRS. I mean, I would love to stick a stake right through the heart of the income tax system. I think I've always said the 16th amendment which passed in 1913 which authorized the income tax was the most evil act that has passed in 100 years. And I also think that if you didn't -- I mean, imagine that we didn't have any income tax in this country and we just had something like a sales tax. I mean, my God, it would be like rocket fuel for the U.S. economy and nobody could -- the Chinese, the Japanese, nobody could compete with us.

GLENN: Yeah. So you didn't answer the question. Do you know if that's true?

MOORE: Oh, is it true that if you eliminate the income tax --

GLENN: Yes. Just on all of the other taxes that we are taking in.

MOORE: Right.

GLENN: We would have the same amount of money as we did ten years ago. His was --

MOORE: Well, you have to include the payroll tax. If you kept the payroll tax, that would be true. But, you know, the payroll tax right now for most workers today, Glenn, is a bigger burden on most workers than the income tax is. So I'd like to see the payroll tax and the income tax eliminated.

GLENN: I love you, Stephen.

MOORE: I mean, I would get rid of these things. It's a 15% tax on the first dollar that you earn up to $100,000.

GLENN: But you are not -- first of all, they are going to expand that to no longer have any kind of cap to it.

MOORE: Right.

GLENN: And second of all, you can't stop if they keep spending like this. I mean, I did the story yesterday about how the deficit of promised spending used to be, four years ago, $26 trillion.

MOORE: Right.

GLENN: It's now $40 trillion something and that's just because of additional spending and because of the interest rate that we're paying.

MOORE: Right.

GLENN: It's just, it's compounding like crazy.

MOORE: If you look at these special pork barrel projects, the earmarks in the budget, there are something like 22 slices of bacon for every congressional district in America. We just can't afford this, folks. I mean, they are spending us to bankruptcy.

GLENN: How long do we have before the economy just cannot take it? How many more things do we have to put on the table before the table leg gives way? Or how much more time before it just kills us?

MOORE: I think that the debt and the overspending in Washington is already having a negative effect. I mean, the fact that the economy is slowing down, I think all the new taxes, all of the new spending is sending all of the wrong signals when you've got the rest of the world that's trying to get leaner budgets and lower taxes and the American government is growing every year. I mean, this budget is $3 trillion.

When I came to Washington, Glenn, in 1981 with Ronald Reagan, the federal budget was $500 billion. Today it's $3 trillion, six times bigger, six times bigger in just 25 years.

GLENN: It's unbelievable. It's absolutely unbelievable.

All right. This is the lead editorial in The Wall Street Journal today. Stephen, you know what I'd love to have you do is go through this budget and find some of the things in the budget and bring them to television tonight like the bike trail.

MOORE: Will do. You know that's going to be a hefty task because 3500 pages long.

GLENN: Do you also know what's buried in this omnibus bill is a taking apart of the border fence.

MOORE: Yeah, yeah.

GLENN: They did it again.

MOORE: Yeah.

GLENN: It's in there yet again and they have taken apart. We had the financing, we have the bill, it passed, it's law and I mean, have you read this part of it yet, Stephen?

MOORE: I'm about halfway through with it. I mean, it's unbelievable. There are 600 pages of these earmarks and you are right. The two things that they didn't fund was the border security and the war in Iraq.

GLENN: Unbelievable.

MOORE: Those are the things the Government is supposed to spend money on.

GLENN: Absolutely unbelievable. Steven, we'll talk to you tonight. Bye-bye.

Here's our number, 888-727-BECK. 888-727-BECK. He's going to take that apart and the real story tonight, but I'm leading tonight with this border mess where they are defunding the border fence. No longer double layered fence. It's in the bill. We'll tell you about it tonight, 7:00 Headline Prime.

END TRANSCRIPT

Most self-proclaimed Marxists know very little about Marxism. Some of them have all the buzzwords memorized. They talk about the exploits of labor. They talk about the slavery of capitalist society and the alienation caused by capital. They talk about the evils of power and domination.

But they don't actually believe what they say. Or else they wouldn't be such violent hypocrites. And we're not being dramatic when we say "violent."

For them, Marxism is a political tool that they use to degrade and annoy their political enemies.

They don't actually care about the working class.

Another important thing to remember about Marxists is that they talk about how they want to defend the working class, but they don't actually understand the working class. They definitely don't realize that the working class is composed mostly of so many of the people they hate. Because, here's the thing, they don't actually care about the working class. Or the middle class. They wouldn't have the slightest clue how to actually work, not the way we do. For them, work involves ranting about how work and labor are evil.

Ironically, if their communist utopia actually arrived, they would be the first ones against the wall. Because they have nothing to offer except dissent. They have no practical use and no real connection to reality.

Again ironically, they are the ultimate proof of the success of capitalism. The fact that they can freely call for its demise, in tweets that they send from their capitalistic iPhones, is proof that capitalism affords them tremendous luxuries.

Their specialty is complaining. They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They sneer at Christianity for promising Heaven in exchange for good deeds on earth — which is a terrible description of Christianity, but it's what they actually believe — and at the same time they criticize Christianity for promising a utopia, they give their unconditional devotion to a religion that promises a utopia.

They are fanatics of a religion that is endlessly cynical.

They think capitalism has turned us into machines. Which is a bad interpretation of Marx's concept of the General Intellect, the idea that humans are the ones who create machines, so humans, not God, are the creators.

They think that the only way to achieve the perfect society is by radically changing and even destroying the current society. It's what they mean when they say things about the "status quo" and "hegemony" and the "established order." They believe that the system is broken and the way to fix it is to destroy, destroy, destroy.

Critical race theory actually takes it a step farther. It tells us that the racist system can never be changed. That racism is the original sin that white people can never overcome. Of course, critical race theorists suggest "alternative institutions," but these "alternative institutions" are basically the same as the ones we have now, only less effective and actually racist.

Marx's violent revolution never happened. Or at least it never succeeded. Marx's followers have had to take a different approach. And now, we are living through the Revolution of Constant Whining.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.

Americans are losing faith in our justice system and the idea that legal consequences are applied equally — even to powerful elites in office.

Rep. Devin Nunes (R-CA) joined Glenn Beck on the radio program to detail what he believes will come next with the Durham investigation, which hopefully will provide answers to the Obama FBI's alleged attempts to sabotage former President Donald Trump and his campaign years ago.

Rep. Nunes and Glenn assert that we know Trump did NOT collude with Russia, and that several members of the FBI possibly committed huge abuses of power. So, when will we see justice?

Watch the video clip below:


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.

The corporate media is doing everything it can to protect Dr. Anthony Fauci after Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) roasted him for allegedly lying to Congress about funding gain-of-function research in Wuhan, China.

During an extremely heated exchange at a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Sen. Paul challenged Dr. Fauci — who, as the director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases, oversees research programs at the National Institute of Health — on whether the NIH funded dangerous gain-of-function research at the Wuhan Institute of Virology.

Dr. Fauci denied the claims, but as Sen. Paul knows, there are documents that prove Dr. Fauci's NIH was funding gain-of-function research in the Wuhan biolab before COVID-19 broke out in China.

On "The Glenn Beck Program," Glenn and Producer Stu Burguiere presented the proof, because Dr. Fauci's shifting defenses don't change the truth.

Watch the video clip below:

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.

Critical race theory: A special brand of evil

wal_172619/Pixabay

Part of what makes it hard for us to challenge the left is that their beliefs are complicated. We don't mean complicated in a positive way. They aren't complicated the way love is complicated. They're complicated because there's no good explanation for them, no basis in reality.

The left cannot pull their heads out of the clouds. They are stuck on romantic ideas, abstract ideas, universal ideas. They talk in theories. They see the world through ideologies. They cannot divorce themselves from their own academic fixations. And — contrary to what they believe and how they act — it's not because leftists are smarter than the rest of us. And studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country. Marx was no different. The Communist Manifesto talks about how the rise of cities "rescued a considerable part of the population from the idiocy of rural life."

Studies have repeatedly shown that leftists are the least happy people in the country.

Instead of admitting that they're pathological hypocrites, they tell us that we're dumb and tell us to educate ourselves. Okay, so we educate ourselves; we return with a coherent argument. Then they say, "Well, you can't actually understand what you just said unless you understand the work of this other obscure Marxist writer. So educate yourselves more."

It's basically the "No True Scotsman" fallacy, the idea that when you point out a flaw in someone's argument, they say, "Well, that's a bad example."

After a while, it becomes obvious that there is no final destination for their bread-crumb trail. Everything they say is based on something that somebody else said, which is based on something somebody else said.

Take critical race theory. We're sure you've noticed by now that it is not evidence-based — at all. It is not, as academics say, a quantitative method. It doesn't use objective facts and data to arrive at conclusions. Probably because most of those conclusions don't have any basis in reality.

Critical race theory is based on feelings. These feelings are based on theories that are also based on feelings.

We wanted to trace the history of critical race theory back to the point where its special brand of evil began. What allowed it to become the toxic, racist monster that it is today?

Later, we'll tell you about some of the snobs who created critical theory, which laid the groundwork for CRT. But if you follow the bread-crumb trail from their ideas, you wind up with Marxism.

For years, the staff has devoted a lot of time to researching Marxism. We have read a lot of Marx and Marxist writing. It's part of our promise to you to be as informed as possible, so that you know where to go for answers; so that you know what to say when your back is up against the wall. What happens when we take the bread-crumb trail back farther, past Marxism? What is it based on?

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism.

It's actually based on the work of one of the most important philosophers in human history, a 19th-century German philosopher named Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel.

This is the point where Marxism became Marxism and not just extra-angry socialism. And, as you'll see in just a bit, if we look at Hegel's actual ideas, it's obvious that Marx completely misrepresented them in order to confirm his own fantasies.

So, in a way, that's where the bread-crumb trail ends: With Marx's misrepresentation of an incredibly important, incredibly useful philosophy, a philosophy that's actually pretty conservative.

This post is part of a series on critical race theory. Read the full series here.