Glenn Beck: Polar Nonsense




The Stu Blog

Glenn Beck: Plasma's for Polar Bears

Insiders listen here to Stu's exclusive report on the Polar Bear live from the Arctic Circle.

CALLER:  Yeah, I'd like to know how I can get a hold of the information that you were talking about yesterday about the polar bears and the sea ice because my local news channel has jumped on the polar bear bandwagon.

GLENN:  Yeah, of course they have.

CALLER:  I'd like to be able to send them the information that you were talking about yesterday and write them a letter.

GLENN:  All right.  Stu, do you have the -- can you write something up or put some links in the newsletter today?

STU:  Sure, no problem.

GLENN:  Are you a free newsletter subscriber?

CALLER:  No.

GLENN:  Okay, just go to -- you have access to the Internet?

CALLER:  Yes.

GLENN:  Just go to the Internet, go to the front page of GlennBeck.com.  And it will say "Free e-mail newsletter."  And then type in your e-mail address and then you'll get the newsletter.  And if you just want it for today, you can unsubscribe just at the bottom of it.  But you just put that on there and then Stu will include it in today's.  Can you do it today, Stu in

STU:  I believe so, yeah.  I wrote a --

GLENN:  Yes or no?

STU:  Well, I don't have it confirmed yet.  You asked me eight seconds ago.

GLENN:  Did you not learn anything from Yoda?  There is no try.  Do or do not.  You are not going to try.  "Yes, Glenn, I'll do it."

STU:  The last "Star Wars" movie I saw was him going into the wilderness to hide for 50 years.  Great advice, Yoda.

GLENN:  Yes or no!

STU:  I believe so.  I believe that we can do this.  Yeah, we'll get it.

GLENN:  Dale, we'll get it for you.

STU:  If I can't do the thing I want to do which I would like to wait to confirm.  If I can't do that, I'll put something crappy in there.  How about that?

GLENN:  Hey, Joe?  Hang on just a second, Dan.  Is your office like this, Dale?

CALLER:  Definitely.

GLENN:  Joe, come over here for a second.

STU:  You know what's interesting is William Shatner didn't know the people on his staff who hated him.  You definitely do.

GLENN:  Well, they're all -- that's my staff.

STU:  It's your paycheck list.

GLENN:  Who hates you?  "My staff."

Joe, do you know who we have on the polar bear thing tonight yet?  Have you heard?  Because I wanted either an attorney that was going to talk about how this is going to be an absolute cottage industry, or I asked for somebody from the White House to tell me, give me their excuse on what were they thinking on this.  Do you know who we have yet?

JOE:  I'm not sure.  I spoke with Rodney George yesterday from Houston.  And he gave us a few names but I'm not sure.

GLENN:  What was his initial gut reaction to this?  Did you get a chance to talk to him about it?

JOE:  Just briefly.

GLENN:  You don't want to characterize?

JOE:  Not for him, have him speak for himself but he did give us a few names.

GLENN:  Okay, good.  We're going to cover this tonight.  We'll have more on it later on in the radio broadcast as well.  The polar bear thing, in case you don't know what we're talking about, a judge in California, what a surprise, said that the government had to decide whether or not they were going to be on the endangered species list.  If they put them on the endangered species list, it means that there's no drilling up in Alaska, there's no drilling up in the Arctic circle, there's no -- you can go after GM for not having cars that, you know, get 75 miles to the gallon, you can go after businesses and energy companies and everything else because of global warming.  The White House has decided that they were going to not make him an endangered species because how can you, because they've gone from 5,000 in 1972 to 25,000 in population.  So how do you call that an endangered species?  It's going the wrong direction.  They called them a what?  Threatened?

STU:  Threatened, yeah.

GLENN:  Threatened species.

STU:  They actually -- and this is what I was trying to -- I was talking to some people over at television yesterday about this is essentially -- the way I'm reading it is it's endangered light almost.  It's basically they are saying they put provisions in there specifically to protect these businesses and they have said -- they actually did say that they want to make sure that this is not taken as a way to legislate climate change.  So they put provisions in there to try to limit that, which is what they're trying to do.

GLENN:  Joe -- hang on.  Joe is an attorney.  He now works for us because that wasn't working out well for him.  But he -- no, I mean, he worked for the -- clerked for the Supreme Court and did work in the White House and everything else.  Come here.  Joe, give me just, as an attorney -- because this is the first question.  Because I got this news as I walked off the set last night, and the first thing I did and I is I looked at Joe and I said, Joe, it doesn't matter what anybody says; aren't there attorneys that are going to be up all night tonight having celebrations because this opens the door?  Now an attorney just has to kick down the door.

JOE:  That's 100% -- if we weren't concerned about that, they wouldn't have put the language into their statement saying, we're going out of away to say we're going to make this easy for business.  And why would they put that in there unless they were worried about --

GLENN:  A cottage industry.

STU:  There's no doubt they are frightened about it.  I mean, in the statement they said,


While the legal standards under the Endangered Species Act compel me to list the polar bear as threatened, I want to make clear that this listing will not stop global climate change or prevent any sea ice from melting.  Any real solution requires action by all major economies for it to be effective.  That's why I'm taking administrative and regulatory action to make certain the ESA isn't abused to make global warming policies.

GLENN:  This is really, really, really not a good thing.

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.